« Thursday Links Open Thread »
February 26, 2009
Home Sales Falling, Condo & Foreclosure Auctions Rising
After a brief head-fake upward in December, the number of existing homes sold in January fell 5.3 percent in January; the January number was slightly higher than November and 8.6 percent lower than a year earlier. And the cheery news doesn't stop there: The median home price dropped to $170,300, the lowest level since March 2003. Given this backdrop, it's no surprise that condo developers are turning increasingly to companies that specialize in auctions to move blocks of unsold units, as The Times reports today; as the auction trend hits New York, Jonathan Miller of Miller Samuel predicts market-clearing prices 40 to 45 percent below the asking prices of a year ago. Meanwhile, sales volume is rising in some of the hardest-hit markets, a sign, theorizes Floyd Norris, that banks are getting more aggressive is their approach to foreclosure sales.
Home Sales and Prices Continue to Plummet [NY Times]
And Do I Hear $2 Million? No? [NY Times]
Foreclosure Sales Continue [NY Times]
Graphic from The New York Times
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/8591
Comments
I posted this a few days ago...
Actually we heard some interesting statistics today that the banks are pulling back from foreclosures. it has always been a widely held viewpoint that banks don't want to foreclose and even more so don't want to own the properties. What they are seeing is a clampdown by municipalities to extract fees/fines/taxes/etc out of the banks once they see a cash register that now owns the properties. The banks are pulling back on this and letting the bad loans stay. What has changed is that they are now able to package the bad loans and sell them to the government and other private entities. Yes, bad loans are being bought now in large numbers.
You will see this soon in the overall national foreclosure numbers and, although the actual number of people in arrears is not declining, the number of foreclosures will decline.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:13 AM
This is huge news. If auctions of condos begin, team bear will see there 40%+ drop in NY real estate. If the Times numbers are correct, 8,000 current condo units in NYC available, another 22,000 available by the end of next year, at the same time Wall Street is being significantly downsized...it is only a matter of time
Posted by: dcorreale at February 26, 2009 9:15 AM
I'm willing to bet that if Obama stopped talking and the news media was turned off, for lets say 1 month, everything would stabilize.
I think articles like those posted and the "doom and gloom" talk, from both the President and the media, are what's driving things down.
Of course home sales are down, everyone keeps saying the economy has a long way to fall and developers are freaking out and auctioning off units. Just as people bought on the way up to avoid getting "priced out", people are not buying now to avoid buying "before the bottom".
No media coverage and no announcements from the White House, a total media/topic blackout, and this problem will be resolved in 1 month.
.02
Posted by: christopher at February 26, 2009 9:16 AM
Need to focus on the data. This data is for single family homes that average $170,000 in price. If you think that's representative of anywhere close to NYC you've got your head up your ass.
As far as NYC is concerned its the condo market that is troublesome. First of all, many of these condos that are supposedly in the inventory are by no means near completion and the developers have halted construction or are bankrupt. Secondly, as we've seen here many times with threads on this, that or another specific development, the quality is no where near representative of what the asking prices had been. They are in fact, rubbish.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:22 AM
"What has changed is that they are now able to package the bad loans and sell them to the government and other private entities. Yes, bad loans are being bought now in large numbers."
Sell all the toxic crap to the American Tax Slave, Huh Dave? Private entities Dave and who is that??? The private entities have lost hugh amounts of money and they don't want to play anymore.
"This is huge news. If auctions of condos begin, team bear will see there 40%+ drop in NY real estate. If the Times numbers are correct, 8,000 current condo units in NYC available, another 22,000 available by the end of next year, at the same time Wall Street is being significantly downsized...it is only a matter of time"
No the time is NOW! Take a walk over to Williamsburg and look up. There are tons of Condos coming online this spring and this glut will have a Blast-Effect on Housing prices...
RIP Mutant Asset Bubble...
The What (Look like the Obama pixie dust is wearing off)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 9:24 AM
I too wonder if things would get better behind a media blackout on this topic. No one seems to be interested in doing anything about this except putting forth gloom and doom reports. News media thrives on the fear factor. I'm still waiting for someone, anyone, to put forth an alternative solution to the crisis instead of simply criticizing it and spouting random numbers. (Ok, the numbers may not be random, but to my uneducated eye they seem to be) I don't know if a total resolution would be had in a month, but I don't see how a blackout could be a bad thing.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at February 26, 2009 9:25 AM
I do agree the inventory numbers seems high...many in construction will not get finished, and many more will go rental for a few years. But on the other side, many in contract are walking
And the condo market is still part of the market, it will send waves across the coop and brownstone market, it is all about comparables. There is a select group that will never live in a condo, but most buyers are looking for the right space and the right location, regardless of whether it is a condo, brownstone, coop, townhouse or cardboard box
Posted by: dcorreale at February 26, 2009 9:26 AM
I'm guessing that Obama's announced plan to increase taxes on $250K plus earners, and cap state/city income deductions as well, in concert with the city's discussed plan to increase income taxes on $250K plus earners will be a double whammy on the disposable income of that group and will put downward pressure on prime brooklyn prices, which have been failry unscathed compared to non-prime.
Posted by: dittoburg at February 26, 2009 9:27 AM
"Sell all the toxic crap to the American Tax Slave, Huh Dave? Private entities Dave and who is that??? The private entities have lost hugh amounts of money and they don't want to play anymore."
What...if you don't know what you're talking about, please don't talk about it. For one thing, Goldman Sachs has been buying huge amounts of these mortgages and other paper. So have many smaller property related funds. The markets are definitely starting to move on this stuff.
You get the STFU Award today.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:29 AM
Even as I write the post above another article appears....
Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Distressed assets offer the best
investment opportunities this year as the global recession
deepens, billionaire hedge-fund manager John Paulson said.
“The decline in the market has created a very good buying opportunity,” Paulson, 53, whose New York-based Paulson & Co. oversees about $30 billion, said in a speech at a hedge-fund seminar hosted by Societe Generale and Lyxor Asset Management in Tokyo today. “Distressed opportunity in the U.S. is shaping up to be the best opportunity in a lifetime.”
Paulson said he’s focused on assets such as mortgages and debt from bankrupt companies, while in the equities markets he cited the utilities, consumer staples and pharmaceutical industries.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:33 AM
"What...if you don't know what you're talking about, please don't talk about it. For one thing, Goldman Sachs has been buying huge amounts of these mortgages and other paper."
Yeah .20 cents on the Dollar Dave and Guess what dumbass! That "Paper" was brought first by School Boards, Pension Funds, 401K Funds, Madoff Scam Complex and other "Entities". GS is bottom feeding and passing the losses to the American Tax Slave!
You know something Dave, you are going to get yours... I can't wait!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end..
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 9:35 AM
It's getting bought What, that's what matters. Yes, probably $0.20 on the dollar. Tough shit. The market is starting to clear and that's all that matters. Try and think before you cut and paste.
If they don't want $0.20 on the dollar then they shouldn't sell it. Again, tough shit. That's how markets work.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:38 AM
The proposed tax increases on those making over 250K will suck more money from NYC to Washington, but have zero impact on places like Arkansas. And everyone of our dumbass Democratic Congressmen will be voting to suck the money out of NYC.
Posted by: Suburbandude at February 26, 2009 9:43 AM
Suburbanduse...I can't agree with you more. But, in fact, NYC will survive better than the rest of the country, reinvent itself, and, much to the chagrin of many posters, Wall Street will be back, faster than you can say "Asshat"
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:46 AM
Obama seems to be the one talking about solutions and keeping the public hopeful and realistic. The news media is really the group that has no incentive or will to shut up. Or to report anything positive.
Things won't correct themselves- the free market concept long ago changed from winnowing out the wheat from the chaff into the Wild West. People talk about capitialism and the free market as being the salvation of the country but it seems rather obvious that the original concept of "free market" has drastically mutated into a grab all the money and run market. Nothing works unless it obeys the groud rules- Wall St. and the Banks and the corporations grossly abused the concept, with help from Washington. The Republicans are the first to quiver under the table and label everything the government does as socialism. Yet one can hardly call the no-rules, special favors, greed wins market they operated as anything other than elitist, government aided and abetted greed.
(benson? benson? I know you're out there! :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 9:46 AM
Sorry, didn't mean to butcher your login.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:46 AM
They people buying at $0.20 will sell back in a year or two for double or triple.
They they'll take the profit and buy luxury homes and cars.
And then we'll start this whole process over again. And no one will remember '08/'09. It'll be the great recession of '12 brought on by the debt speculators of '09.
It's all pedantic. Stop talking about it, stop worrying about it, stop trying to stimulate it. Let it be. The market will correct itself far faster and far better than with any meddling from politicians and the fear mongering media.
Posted by: christopher at February 26, 2009 9:48 AM
"If they don't want $0.20 on the dollar then they shouldn't sell it. Again, tough shiit. That's how markets work."
Ok Dave lets apply that Logic over here.
The School Boards, Pension Funds, 401K Funds, Madoff Scam Complex and other "Entities" that brought that crap, who eats the difference?? Does the funds go to money heaven or what Dave, please explain that! Also does this applies to HOUSING PRICES???????!!!!! Maybe the Banks should start selling properties .20 cents on a dollar Assnut?????? What effect this will have on HOUSING PRICES DAVE, you retarded MOFO????!!!!!!!!
The What (Dave is sucking off Larry Kudlow)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 9:48 AM
I dunno- I think there were more than a few dumbass Republicans more than willing to suck everything out of the middle class and working poor.
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 9:49 AM
What.....you just don't get it do you. The assets have already been priced down to $0.20 on the dollar. If they don't get sold off the books and held by people that can take the risks they're going to ZERO.
The mortgages ARE being sold for $0.20 on the dollar. That's what's clearing the bad assets off the books of the banks.
I know what I'm talking about. You're just spouting crap. I think everyone here knows who the real MOFO is.
BTW, is that "code?"
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 9:56 AM
dave- fyi- I wasn't referring to you in my last post, just the GOP in general :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 9:59 AM
"What.....you just don't get it do you. The assets have already been priced down to $0.20 on the dollar. If they don't get sold off the books and held by people that can take the risks they're going to ZERO."
Yeah but those "Assets" was first brought at PAR! That "Equity" went to money heaven like all thing do in a Depression..
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 10:00 AM
I'm sure the federal taxes will be better spent than the NYC taxes - the NYC taxes going to preposterous Albany crap, slush funds employing council members relatives, etc. etc.
Posted by: dittoburg at February 26, 2009 10:00 AM
Ok, I haven't posted in awhile because it seems that the same people are singing the same song despite our current outlook. I've really enjoyed your post bxgrl- you seem to be the only person of reason on this board.
I left NYC for a cheaper destination to ride this out. At the end of the day, this downturn is about jobs and keeping deflation and soon inflation in check. If we can get companies to start hiring again, then things will work themselves out. Although, the stimulus plan has a lot of holes, what it will do is put money back in play, so employers can pick up on hiring. We just need to stop the bleeding on the job loses- because as far as I'm concerned prices in housing still need to drop to get us to a point where people aren't maxed out (more than 30% of income to housing-which was also one of the problems).
Posted by: 7andfive at February 26, 2009 10:01 AM
So much for the refreshing, rational discourse that occurred in the $500k Midwood house post yesterday... back to the same ol' same ol' unreadable "banter"
Posted by: tybur6 at February 26, 2009 10:08 AM
The rumors of the death of capitalism have been greatly exaggerated.
Posted by: lechacal at February 26, 2009 10:08 AM
Bxgrl;
What you wrote above is a campaign speech. When you want to debate on issues, let me know.
Trying to put things in perspective, please note this fact: the banking sector and the economy in the UK is in much more turmoil than here in the US. Please note that the UK has been ruled by the leftist Labor party for more than a decade. Are the members of Britain's Labor party closet Republicans?
What we are witnessing is a consequence of a new global capitalism, in which the old rules and regulations were ill-fit for the free flow of global money. If you want to try to make political hay out of it, be my guest. I'd be more interested in hearing someone figure out how we should move forward.
Going to the issue of NYC real estate and referring to dcorreale's post: there are 3,000,000 units of housing in NYC. I would like to know how the addition of 30,000 new units, 1% of the total, is going to cause a crash? I'll repeat my assertion: the NYC housing market is not Phoenix or Florida. We do not have an oversupply situation looming. What we do have is a bad economy, which will certainly affect pricing, but not to the degree of these other markets.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 10:09 AM
7andfive we have missed you.
What...you still don't get it. The losses are behind them. That's too bad but that's reality. You play in the kitchen you're gonna get burned sometimes. Grow up.
What has to happen now is that the assets have to be taken off the books of anything that wants to remain healthy.
You still don't really know what the hell you're talking about.
I dare say I've PWNED you about 4-5 times already today and you're looking bad. That's gotta be embarrassing to you...PWNED so early in the morning by a fifty year old pompous white asshat.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 10:11 AM
Thanks 7andfive. Now I think we both need to find shelter quickly before the bombs begin falling on us :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 10:11 AM
benson...you're right about the UK banking system. Howver, last night they took the necessary steps to shelter the bad assets, which is why Lloyd's, RBS and others are up 25% or so today. The UK has taken the first really proactive move here.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 10:13 AM
Benson, a 1% increase in supply can have a significant effect on a market. It's not the total stock that matters, it's the comparison of supply and demand, which might be 20% of total stock on a particular day (JDS Uniphase stock in 1999 might be an example) or might be a fraction of a percent in a year. If only 5% of housing stock changes hands in a particular year in NYC, a 1% increase in total housing stock should be viewed as a 20% increase in market supply. For these purposes total stock is kind of irrelevant.
Posted by: lechacal at February 26, 2009 10:14 AM
benson- I do debate issues and ideas. The problem is you want to debate the same old republican talking points and I want to debate the whole issue of what's happening. So sadly, it's like 2 ships passing in the night.
I didn't write a campaign speech, I wrote exactly how I see it. My degree is in anthropology so maybe that gives me a different perspective. But at least when I disagree with you, I still do you the courtesy of not denigrating what you're saying. Be nice if you would do the same.
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 10:15 AM
"Going to the issue of NYC real estate and referring to dcorreale's post: there are 3,000,000 units of housing in NYC. I would like to know how the addition of 30,000 new units, 1% of the total, is going to cause a crash? I'll repeat my assertion: the NYC housing market is not Phoenix or Florida. We do not have an oversupply situation looming. What we do have is a bad economy, which will certainly affect pricing, but not to the degree of these other markets."
Eh Benson, I know you have a Pentium 1 Computer from 1999 but refresh your browser and read this story...
Owners of 133 Water Street Go Belly Up
http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2009/02/owners_of_133_w.php#comments
Yesterday, Bloomberg reported (and multiple outlets re-reported) that Water Street Realty Group LLC, the owner of the 52-unit rental building at 133 Water Street in Dumbo, filed for bankruptcy on Tuesday
Now go back to sleep...
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 10:19 AM
The stimulus package wont create jobs or get empolyers to hire. It's intended, and Obama has said this, to "stop layoffs". The great "job creation" line has become "saving jobs". Big difference.
You want companies to start hiring again? Tax breaks. You want people to start spending again? Tax breaks. And no $65 a check rebate/tax credit nonsense. If someone pays 25% tax, they get cut to the 20% bracket. Lop 5% off everyone's tax bracket and that'll get people to reinvest in the economy.
This stimulus package is just ego stroking and it's only hurting the overall economy in this country.
Put real dollars back into the hands of the employers, employees, and consumers in general and that'll be what works. Not tax credits, not pork projects. Straight up cash.
Posted by: christopher at February 26, 2009 10:19 AM
christopher is right. There doesn't seem to be any real "change." A flat tax rate would solve many problems quite quickly.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 10:22 AM
Wasn't the last 8 years about tax breaks- and we see how that worked out.
Posted by: 7andfive at February 26, 2009 10:30 AM
Bxgrl;
Aw come on. Look at your post - it really does read like a campaign speech. It might be satisfying to label this all the fault of "greedy" Republicans, but where is the talk of actual policy?? Where is the talk of doing a reality check with the facts on the ground, which is why I brought up the Labor Party and the UK?
Lechacal: point taken. Do you know what the annual turnover in the NYC market is? I don't know. I do think another factor that needs to be taken into consideration, however, is the still-strong demand. I live right near all the 4th Ave condos that are going up. Whether they stay condo or go rental, the key point is that they are all still occupied.
It's funny that mention JDSU, because I am intimately involved with that industry. I knew Jozeph D. Straus (the "JDS" of JDSU) personally.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 10:34 AM
Benson, total supply is completely irrelevant. It is all about inventory, and 22,000 I believe is 50% of current inventory. Something tells me that just might change the supply / demand dynamic a little?
Posted by: dcorreale at February 26, 2009 10:34 AM
Oh lord, the old tax cuts line.
Doesn't work, never did.
Accept that and move on.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 10:35 AM
Inventory had been inordinately low through 2004-2007...this is simply a return to normal so far.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 10:36 AM
Benson: I have no idea re: actual rate of turnover.
Posted by: lechacal at February 26, 2009 10:39 AM
Yes Dave, and thus a return to pre 2004 prices
Posted by: dcorreale at February 26, 2009 10:40 AM
Condos are dead. Long live the Brooklyn brownstone. Can't argue with the economics.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 10:42 AM
Snark;
Really?
The largest cut in tax rates was put in place by JFK in 1961, followed by 8 strong years of growth. The next largest cut in tax rates was put in place by Reagan in 1981, followed by 7 strong years of growth.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 10:42 AM
benson- I guess you can write whatever scenario you like. I did not blame everything on the republicans. In fact my response about them was in reply to someone else talking about "dumbass democrats." It seems however that the republican party is not about to take responsibility ofr the last 8 years and the bloating of the government or anything else. How does that work? In fact I haven't seen or heard reepublicans doing anyhting but bitch nd moan about Obama and the stimulus. Where was the bitching and moaning over Bush policies? Or shipping jobs offshore? Or the cost of the unnecessary War in Iraq? Or the use of waterboarding? Or the relaxtion of regulations on the financial markets? All I can say is that if Bobby Jindal is the face of the new Republican Party it looks to be the same as the old Republican Party- the one that didn't work out too well for us.
My intention in that post was nothing more than to talk about a concept as I see it- it's your problem if you can figure that out. You and I are not having the same conversation. It's the old Men are from Mars, Women are From Venus thing..
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 10:44 AM
Tax cuts??? Tax cuts are the answer to the economic crisis? Give me a break!
We have had nothing but tax cuts for eight years and where has it gotten us? The "stimulus" checks some of us received last year went straight into savings and did nothing to stop the downward slide.
In a crisis like this, only the government has the capacity to act forcefully to prevent further economic collapse. Private actors are simply not going to turn this thing around.
Benson, Dave, and others -- I suppose you subscribe to the quackery that says that Roosevelt caused the Great Depression???
It is universally acknowledged that the Depression was ended by the MASSIVE spending that accompanied the United States entry into WWII. What I hadn't known is that it seems that the economy had started to improve before then, but that FDR backed off stimulus spending in 1937, effectively choking off the recovery that was underway.
Posted by: southbrooklyn at February 26, 2009 10:52 AM
Things were rather differnet when Reagan was president, don't you think? Bush gave us tax cuts and then proceeded to spend like he was Louis the 16th. Even my cat could figure out that less income and more spending = massive deficit. Simple concept. Since we would up with a massive national debt, one would understand the very simple idea: tax cuts did not work. There is no such thing as trickle-down economics and the increasing separation of haves and have nots has been much remarked upon. The middle class is slowly (or not so slowly) disappearing. Yet you keep touting Reagan. And Conservative ideas of fiscal managemnt. I understand conservatism and smaller government but seems to me the Republicans didn't get down the management thing very well.
Yet now they are all too happy to try to work against the new President and destroy anything he tries to do. Because the Republican party is all about keeping power- not doing what is good for the rest of the country. Why should I believe in or trust what they say now when their whole way of running the country was "do as I say, not as I do?"
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 10:54 AM
Tax cuts do work. As benson pointed out, JFK and Reagan, tax cuts come from both sides of the aisle.
And while Bush may have spent against traditional conservative metrics, his 8 year spending and debt has been surpassed by Obama in 30, give or take, days. In addition, Bush inherited a recession brought on by the dotcom collapse and then Sept 11. No bailouts, and we rebounded.
As for Jindal, he is basically the Republican version of Obama. However, Jindal has experience running a government (and his tax cuts on LA have seen that state grow faster than ever seen before).
Posted by: christopher at February 26, 2009 10:55 AM
Bxgrl;
Where to begin? Let me try.
You talk about "shipping jobs overseas". I work in the manufacturing sector, for a Japanese company. In that line of work, I travel sometimes to Malaysia, where alot of electronic "contract manufacturers" are now located. When you go there, you see that these factories are making things for American, European and Japanese companies, in the same building!! In other words, the outsourcing of manufacturing to low-cost SE Asian countries is a global phenomenon, irrespective of the party in power in the Western economies. So, it might make for a great campaign speech to say that "we're going to stop shipping jobs oversea", but the reality of economics is different. I remember that when I was a kid all the governors of the northeast states used to rail that "we're going to stop the exodus of manufacturing jobs to the the South". Nothing but political BS, just like to talk of "stopping the flow of jobs to China" (the current favorite whipping boy). Remember how 15 years ago Japan was the whipping boy?
You speak about the relaxation of regulations on Wall Street. Please be specific. Which regulation, and how did it cause this problem? How does it compare to the UK and their policies,where the same melt-down ocurred?
I'm not trying to put anybody down. What I'm trying to say is that we now live in a gloablized economic world. Nothing is going to stop it, and it is a GOOD thing, as it raises the standard of living in formerly poor countries. These hack politicians can rail all they want in their attempts to garner votes, but they are creating false dichotomies and issues.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 10:57 AM
Surpassed by Obama for very different reasons. The economy is crashing and burning, millions of people are losing jobs and homes, and you're still living in the 1980s-90s. When did you stop noticing the world has drastically changed?
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 10:59 AM
Benson,
You conveniently left off the Bush tax cuts, followed by what looks to be a near collapse of the United States Financial System.
I agree with Snark.
Posted by: 11217 at February 26, 2009 10:59 AM
"These hack politicians can rail all they want in their attempts to garner votes, but they are creating false dichotomies and issues."
I would have to say that from your perch at the top of globalization you probably can't see what life is really like here on the ground. Iraq was a false dichotomy that has cost us billions- is that part of the globalization you are so fondly speaking of?
(out now- off to try to get work.)
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 11:01 AM
11217;
Again I'll ask: how did the Bush tax cuts cause the collapse of the British banking system?
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 11:03 AM
In fact, because of the globalization that has benefitted developing Asian nations, those countries are in far better stead than they ever were. They are consuming more "western" consumer goods (toothpaste comes to mind at the very low end) and their economies are in far better position to withstand things than they were back in the 1990s with all of the Asian currency devaluations. This will have a positive knock-on effect to the developed world as we inch out of the recession.
As a barometer, Asian stock markets (developing) are doing far, far better than the developed world Y-T-D. Some, in fact are up between 2 and 24 percent.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 11:03 AM
Benson,
Glad to see I'm not the only one on the internet (or in this city for that matter) that is gaga for Obama.
I'll buy you a beer with my Obama stimulus tax credit ;)
Posted by: christopher at February 26, 2009 11:09 AM
passes ball.... rest of players have started fistfight over something unrelated to game.... ball comes to rest out of bounds
sighs, goes back to work. will try again tomorrow.
Posted by: lechacal at February 26, 2009 11:11 AM
I can't help but pull myself out of retirement to note that the NYT article states clearly that the peak of the NYC market was 1st quarter 2008 - whenever I said this in the past, many jumped at me to say oh no, peak was much earlier, despite my close following of the market and my own experience. Cuts of 40-45% are in line with Team Bear's long-standing predictions, and as the article states, the period of denial is now over. (and by the way, these cuts are happening in "prime areas" of Manhattan so the old "prime areas will be spared" argument" is not panning out).
Posted by: Miss Muffett at February 26, 2009 11:12 AM
I really don't want to get into a discussion with someone who doesn't even see how the failed policies and ideas of the past decade have come back to haunt us in a major way.
I agree with Bxgrl and think she stated things beautifully.
The Republicans are becoming relegated to a party of the South, and with each passing day, including sticking Jindal up to speak after Obama's speech is even further evidence of how incredibly desperate they are to regain relevance. I simply don't see it happening. I don't see a Republican resurgence anytime in the near future. And I'm quite happy about it.
I think you need to give Obama a chance and rally every single person in this country behind him if you want to come out of this. Whether you agree with him or not.
Republicans are SO quick to call people out for being un-American.
The true Un-Americans right now are the Republicans.
Posted by: 11217 at February 26, 2009 11:13 AM
Miss Muffett...he is "predicting" cuts of 40-45%. They aren't here yet, otherwise you would have pulled the trigger already!!!!!!
Many predictions don't come true.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 11:15 AM
> "sighs, goes back to work. will try again tomorrow."
returns to mount olympus.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 11:17 AM
benson- "Again I'll ask: how did the Bush tax cuts cause the collapse of the British banking system?"
I'll answer you by quoting your own words: "What I'm trying to say is that we now live in a globalized economic world."
So you don't see how what Bush did here in the States didn't affect the rest of the world? That's the meaning of globalization, benson. Effects are up and down, left and right and diagonally.
And fyi- I blame neither China, Japan, Korea, The South- I blame the corporations and the government entities that gave them the incentives and tax breaks to go elsewhere, leaving behind decimated communities and worker. Call me crazy, but if globalization means American workers lose everything, I think it sucks. I pay taxes here. I live here, I spend my money here. I care about the poor all over the world. But making Americans live in poverty is not going to make life better for villages in China.
Millions of jobless in America means those villages in China will eventually lose theirs because the demand for the products they produce will evaporate. It's already happening. So what happens to them now? They go back to living like they did before? And until world politics becomes more humane and intelligent, economic globalization has not and will not do anything for those places that are the worst- Darfur, e.g. Haiti for another.
Globalization is for corporations and ceos. When things go south, they still have nice cushions to fall back on. They've socked away money. They have pensions and good investments. Not so the average guy in any country. SO globalization? Oh, right.
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 11:18 AM
The "anti-Republican, they ruined everything & Democrats will save the world" stuff is getting a bit ridiculous. Especially within a government that has multiple branches including the House and Senate.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 11:20 AM
> "And while Bush may have spent against traditional conservative metrics, his 8 year spending and debt has been surpassed by Obama in 30, give or take, days."
Nice work discrediting yourself in a single sentence.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 11:20 AM
guys 20c on the dollar is not right. you are off by an order of magnitude. it's more like 2 cents on the dollar. the toxic assets have almost all stopped paying coupon and they're in a built-in run-off phase that's set up to avoid a fire sale of the underlying assets.
I'm talking about CDOs made up of mortgages. these are generally what people mean when they talk about toxic assets. if we ever get to the bar i will literally show you a mark-to-market report. the only reason they have any value at all is that people are buying them to cover shorts.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 11:21 AM
Bxgrl;
Hmmm...I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree! I think that globalization has been a force for good, despite the bumps in the road. Gotta get some work done today! That's it for me today.
Snark;
Mount Olympus comment is VERY funny.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 11:22 AM
Bxgrl said: "The Republican party is all about keeping power- not doing what is good for the rest of the country."
That sums it up in one sentence.
Another nice summary is watching Jindal gets all whiny about spending public funds on natural-disaster monitoring! (A role that is exceptionally appropriate for government, and would not be taken care of by the private sector). And this guy is from Louisiana, of all places!
The Republicans' disregard for the average American citizen is mind-blowing. Oh, yeah, tax cuts for the rich is THE ANSWER. Just keep giving even more to the super-rich, and taking even more from the middle class, and things will be even more wonderful than they are now! Why not start another war, while we're at it.
Posted by: Paul C at February 26, 2009 11:23 AM
joe....the price doesn't actually matter. The 20 cents was a good reference point. You are in fact right. Many assets are going for 2 cents. All that matters is that they get sold. The losses are already on the books. Any light at the end of the tunnel in getting things off the books is just that, not an oncoming train.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 11:25 AM
dibs- I don't think the dems will save the world but I am still waiting for the Republicans to stop talking like Obama is the anti-christ and how they can regain power. I want to hear them talk about how to fix this realistically, not ideologically. And I want them to talk about what their constiutents need,not what the Party needs.
And now I really do have to get going!
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 11:25 AM
"We have had nothing but tax cuts for eight years and where has it gotten us? "
Actually the economy was going gangbusters. The subprime crisis was not caused by tax cuts. Not to say tax cuts will help us now, but to look at the economy today and identify the cuase as the tax cuts is just plain daft.
"Bush gave us tax cuts and then proceeded to spend like he was Louis the 16th"
Excellent simile!
Posted by: dittoburg at February 26, 2009 11:30 AM
dittoburg- last post til later, but please repost the name of the book you mentioned the other day about the guy who buys the house in Brooklyn?
Posted by: bxgrl at February 26, 2009 11:37 AM
The 1970's novel about an asshat who buys a crumbling mansion in a crime-ridden area of brooklyn and then sinks his life into restoring it??
A Meaningful Life by L. J. Davis
Posted by: dittoburg at February 26, 2009 11:40 AM
dibs -- I'm not just pointing out a technicality. the price matters -- someone was arguing that the sales were an indication of a bottom. they are not. they are for people who were short (and correct) to deliver to their counterparty to cover the short. people pay about 2c on the dollar for that, after they made maybe 50c on the downside.
these are closed pools of assets. it's not like buying GE stock at 10 bucks and hoping it goes to 30. once the money's gone from the pool, it's gone.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 11:42 AM
sorry I'm late. Here's my take on the republicans. How do you knit together a party with:
a) good ol' boys
b) bible thumpers
c) very rich people
d) people who don't like mexicans
e) military families
and deliver any kind of cohesive message to them, without falling back on a darkly cynical appeal to people's basic, shameful self interest?
oh wait. they won twice in a row with that.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 11:53 AM
Ive been saying that you can't argue with the few remaining cheerleaders. Just give it a few more months and they'll just simply disappear. You can just feel the panic in somebody like Dibs whossoooo desparately trying to make feeble, ignorant positive commentary. Its humorous but sad at the same time...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 11:56 AM
Glad you could add something to the discussion cornerbodega. What would we do without that insightful mind of yours. You're humorous but sad at the same time.
Cleanup on aisle 2.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 11:59 AM
Joe the bummer;
You seem like a reasonable person. Do you really believe that? Does it really help politics in this country to paint the other side as a caricature? How about a conteat of ideas, rather than caricatures?
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 12:01 PM
by the way, the answer is you deliver to the rich people, and you lie to the others.
the tax cuts didn't do anything because they didn't change anyone's spending habits.
now we're in a position where they will, because it's a different recipient and a different economic situation. if you lower the witholding on the paycheck of someone making 50K or less, it's getting spent. if it goes to pay a mortgage instead, that's also a good outcome.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 12:02 PM
Dave, question: Are the big banks taking these sales as usable benchmarks for their Level 3 Assets?
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 12:07 PM
ps I love the idea that, even though every major bank is insolvent, and the average American household is now deeply in the red, the problem is the media.
pps How did the Great Society and Vietnam contribue to 60s prosperity? How did reagan's defense build up and unprecedented peacetime deficits contribute to 80s prosperity? What passes for commentary on this board is really staggering.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 12:11 PM
"Dave, question: Are the big banks taking these sales as usable benchmarks for their Level 3 Assets?"
And Whuh ask Dave what happens when the Banks put those Level 3 assets back on the books????
Ker-Boom!!!!!!
" I love the idea that, even though every major bank is insolvent, and the average American household is now deeply in the red, the problem is the media."
It's always someone else fault...
The What (Obama is going to buy me a Pony)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 12:26 PM
benson -- yeah, it is a characature, but I do really believe that they lied horribly about a wide range of things.
Even while lowering the living standard of the working class, they won votes back with gun control, abortion, and a new fear that people (in tenessee?) were the targets of terrorists, and somehow lumped border control into that same fear-mongering, to win more votes at the "politically affordable" expense of a new wave of racism. They drastically de-stablized the middle east, blowing off 50 years of the UN process, and earning the wrath of nearly the entire world, muslim and non-muslim, in the process.
the basic party line economically was that you are supposed to lower taxes and reduce spending. but they increased spending, enriching themselves and their friends, and they only lowered taxes meaningfully for the rich. Plus, they underfunded regulators, leaned on the fed to back their policies, and let tax dodgers go.
They bullied the media to support them, denying them (or threatening to deny them) resources if they did not comply, resulting in our PRIVATE media coming out far more conservative than britain's state-owned media. not a coincidence.
Anyone who disagreed was labelled an anti-patriot, including a lot of people (e.g. John Kerry) who sacrificed greatly for this country. That was really sad.
I think the republicans did a lot of damage to a what under Reagan was a reasonably good thing, and they were very cynical in the process.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 12:28 PM
The idea of a media block is irrational. Would you buy at asking price without asking someone where they think prices are going? Buy for only ONE reason now. You want to live there for nearly the rest of your life AND you can AFFORD it. Depending on rising values is GONE and probably will not return in the next 30 years, when another generation of fools will emerge and those of us in nuring homes will say, See history repeats itself. Madoff will be long dead and the next scam will emerge.
Posted by: Iknow at February 26, 2009 12:33 PM
Given the comments pro/con on the bush tax cuts, and political leanings aside, I am interested to know what people think is a reasonable amount of taxes for a person to pay? 30% of income? 40%? 50%?
Posted by: jnjnjn2 at February 26, 2009 12:40 PM
Joe;
I think the only thing I've learned from your comments, Bxgrl's and Whuh's is that there is no point in debating these issues on this site. It just seems to devolve into derision and caricature, kind of like a cable TV foodfight. I go back to my original comments to Bxgrl, and it applies to your post: is this a campaign speech (or a cableTV foodfight) or a discussion of the real issues?
You speak about the plight of the working class. This is a phenomenon in all the Western economies,with the shift of manufacturing to SE Asia. Has not this same phenomenon ocurred in the UK, where the Labor party has been in control for many years? The same phenomenon is happening in Japan. How is this a "Republican" issue?
When folks want to believe that folks of good will can have an opposing viewpoint, I'll return. Until then, sayonara!
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 12:41 PM
I like how Dibs now cheerleads for "Brownstone Brooklyn". As if his ghetto property is included in what everybody else considers Brownstone brooklyn. Hhahhahahaha
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 12:42 PM
cornerbodega, you're a complete idiot. Some of the finest brownstone blocks in all of brooklyn are in Bed Stuy. Get you're sorry ass out there to see. just because you can't afford anything is no reason to denegrate. Bitterness and sour grapes are really showing, as well as a lack of knowledge about Brooklyn.
I'll bet you live in the Bronx. Lots of slimy cornerbodegas there!!!
Can you actually add anything to ANY thread here???
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 12:49 PM
You're missing the bigger picture of freeing up the markets, Whuh.
What...you and Whuh look like you're having a fun reach around today!!!!! Bet neither one of you gets a handful though.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 12:51 PM
Christopher/Insertsnappy
I couldn't agree more with your statements about the media.
When the whole "Junk Bon" SavingsNLoan crisis came aboutin the 80's - the only media outlets able to report were the 6pm news and local/national newspapers - that's it. We didn't have news cable shows on 24/7 reporting the horrors of the economy.
I sit in my office and can watch CNBC or CNN all day if I wish and be totally bombarded with this panic or I can sit all day on the INTERNET(something we also didn't have in the 80's) and scare myself $hitless if I choose.
I agree if the media would just STOP TALKING ABOUT IT on every level we would probably be much better off and let the markets just do what the normally do and correct themselves.
Posted by: gemini10 at February 26, 2009 1:00 PM
benson -- to be honest I'm just very bitter about the bush admin and wanted to vent. I didn't read all of your comments before I posted.
I agree with you on globalization and think protectionism is an awful idea and very cheap politics. Workers should re-train themselves, as I will have to when my low-grade wall street job is gone.
I can actually point to specific regulation/policy, if you want to debate it. I don't think tax cuts for the rich can "cause" any kind of crisis, but they do create a sub-optimal structure.
here's an example: class mobility used to make this country great. repealing the estate tax hurts that, because it causes a sort of aristocracy to re-emerge. with that kind of wealth reinforcement, we'll go back to the days when new money was considered "vulgar", and top jobs were given to people with the right family names. that's bad for all of us, because talent can't move to where it's most productive.
there. I'm being constructive.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 1:00 PM
I feel the tension in dibs. How long can the delusion go on!?
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 1:02 PM
Dave --Do your investors in your "hedge fund" know how you spend your day? In all seriousness, I think making witty gibes like your previous one for eight hours on a RE blog ought to be disclosed, don't you?
As usual, you don't seem to grasp the actual problem. Of course some smart vultures (and no one is smarter than Paulsen) are going to swoop in and buy distressed securities, and god bless them. This hardly "clears the market," as the vast majority of such securities are staying off balance sheet, keeping the big banks zombies. I know you're basically a light-bulb changer, Dave, but at least make some attempt to understand what you read in the FT.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 1:03 PM
I hear the stupidity in cornerbodega. I hope he's not allowed to reproduce.
Answer the question about knowing anything about Brownstone Brooklyn.
No, I thought not.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:06 PM
Glad to get a peep at you financial acumen, Whuh. Doesn't matter whether things are off balance sheet or not. I'm sure I've read my FT far earlier in the morning than you have.
BTW...my time is spent in Asia. That happens at night, get it??? If you pay attention you might learn something.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:11 PM
benson -- here's another specific tax thing. maybe dibs could weigh in:
Hedge fund managers can domicile their companies in the Cayman Islands to avoid corporate tax on their profits. Then, they can pay themselves in shares of their own company, deferring tax until they finally sell the shares and take a capital gain. They become billionaires, but only pay income tax on the nominal salary that they pay themselves out of the management company.
fair? no. ok under bush? yes. (to be fair it was OK under Clinton too). Obama is about to swipe it down.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 1:16 PM
yep Joe, salaried people in the 120-200K range pay the highest percentage of their income in tax of any group, those earning more generally using various legal means to reduce their liability.
Posted by: dittoburg at February 26, 2009 1:20 PM
joe....the majority of hedge funds don't bother with this strategy. Actually most hedge funds do have an offshore component (usually referred to as the NV as opposed to the domestic LP) but its to accomodate clients who want that. Most hedge funds operate the partnership or LLC onshore. Even hedge fund managers, as skanky as many people think they are, don't bother with this type of stuff to shelter income. It becomes a regulatory and IRS nightmare for one thing. just not worth it.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:22 PM
Joe;
Well, now you've brought up an issue we can agree on. I can agree to closing down this loophole. If Obama does away with it, I'll support him.
Regarding the issue of social mobility: I'm not sure anybody has the answer yet as to how to restore social mobility, in the face of gloablization. I think we can agree on the need for lifetime worker re-training. As far as the estate tax, I can't agree with you. First, I don't think its repeal will result in social stratification. Please note that none of the current-day Vanderbilts are millionaires. Never underestimate the power of wealthy heirs to dissipate money! Secondly, and more importantly in my mind, I'm opposed to it from a moral/philospophical reasons: the money has already been taxed once, via the income tax. It just does not seem to be fair to take a double dip into the money, simply because someone has passed away.
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 1:25 PM
"My time is spent in Asia. That happens at night, get it??? If you pay attention you might learn something."
No no no! Letting Chinese men shove Chopsticks up your Ass doesn't mean "learning something"
"Hedge fund managers can domicile their companies in the Cayman Islands to avoid corporate tax on their profits. Then, they can pay themselves in shares of their own company, deferring tax until they finally sell the shares and take a capital gain. They become billionaires, but only pay income tax on the nominal salary that they pay themselves out of the management company."
Here comes the pitchforks and torches..
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at February 26, 2009 1:28 PM
Go to hell What. You act like a child too many times. Take Whuh and cornerbodega with you. None of you can add anything to a discussion.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:36 PM
Dave --Did you just say it doesn't matter whether Level 3 assets stay on or off balance sheet? You may need to re-read your FT.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/data?pid=avimage&iid=iotLcq3doU6I
Dave, can we get a straight answer out of you --do you manage other people's money, and if so, what kind of vehicle is it?
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 1:37 PM
Dave, it's just so easy to get your goat, it's almost no fun anymore.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 1:38 PM
benson, that's fair, but the way I look at it, we're not taxing the same person twice, we're taxing his heir on money the heir did NOT earn.
I thought Anderson Cooper was a Vanderbilt, and quite well off...
What about "President Ford"...
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 1:41 PM
hey what, if I end up with a pitchfork, it'll be because I pulled it out of my own ass.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 1:43 PM
"No no no! Letting Chinese men shove Chopsticks up your Ass doesn't mean 'learning something'"
ROTFLMMFAO
***Bid half off peak comps***
Posted by: Brownstones Half Off at February 26, 2009 1:44 PM
Joe;
You're right about Anderson Cooper. I'm trying to reconcile this fact with another I read recently in the NYT. It talked about an anual reunion of Vanderbilt descendants (about 140) and noted that not one of them was a millionaire. Maybe Anderson and his mom don't attend???
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 1:48 PM
Its long only accounts and long/short. Other people's money here since 1993. Started buying Asia in since Jan 1. Annualized 10 Year Returns are +11.96% vs. -0.79% for the S&P5000 and +3.34% for the Russell 2000
What is it that you do Whuh?
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:51 PM
"Dynastic wealth, the enemy of a meritocracy, is on the rise. Equality of opportunity has been on the decline. A progressive and meaningful estate tax is needed to curb the movement of a democracy toward plutocracy."
- Warren Buffet
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 1:52 PM
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
- Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 1:53 PM
BHO, envious of the size of a chopstick are you????? That's sad. I bet you have a pit bull too.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 1:53 PM
Poor dibs, you're so phony even the other members of team bull starting to feel bad for you. So you blew it all speculating in the ghetto. Move on...
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 2:03 PM
Snark;
I look at Buffet's comments with a jaundiced view. Please note that it is in HIS interest, as an uber-wealthy acquirer of assets, to see estates broken up to pay an estate tax. Did you happen to see the congressional hearings where he argued for the estate tax? Sitted next to him were 2 or 3 proprietors of small family businesses (manufacturers and farmers) who could barely contain their anger at a guy like Buffet arguing that their life's work needed to be broken up and taxed away. I highly recommend the videotape of that hearing for all interested. THAT is a lesson in democracy.
As far as Jefferson: his aversion to an industrialized economy is well-known. I don't think his comments are viable in this regard.
By the way, from what wealthy family did Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Jacl Welch and Meg Ryan come from?
Posted by: benson at February 26, 2009 2:04 PM
$100 MM under management.
What is it that you do, Whuh????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:08 PM
Come on, don't be embarrassed.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:17 PM
agreed re buffett, he's an absolute hypocrite -if he really believed in what he said he wouldn't have an estate plan in which he will pay little or no estate taxes - granted he's giving most to charity but if he believed in what he said, he'd pay his share to the government
Posted by: jnjnjn2 at February 26, 2009 2:26 PM
dibs you are the client that I've been waiting for for a long time. how do I find you on bloomberg? I have some delicious sub-prime CDOs for sale, right in your price range of 20c on the dollar.
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 2:28 PM
I though buffet wasn't even going to hook up his own kids...
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 2:29 PM
joe...we don't dabble in that shit...that's why our 10 year numbers are so good.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:29 PM
i think i heard that too about the Buffett seed.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:32 PM
c'mon dibs, you don't want paulson to get all of it, do you?! I can part with it for 18. it's rated by S&P! (and made in America)
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 2:40 PM
It's a different paulson, BHO. Try and keep up.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:47 PM
Besides, its Geithner, not Geitner
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 2:48 PM
BHO, we mean john paulson, the hedge fund manager that made a bundle shorting mortgage securities. no relation...
gimme the benefit of the doubt -- I know who the treasury secretary is!
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at February 26, 2009 2:51 PM
You didn't finish answering the question, Dave --what is the name of the fund? It's not that I don't believe you...
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 2:59 PM
Whuh, you still there????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 3:00 PM
Sorry, Whuh, I'm not as stupid as you may believe. Besides, we're unregistered and can't take on a new client unless we become registered and unless you've got at least $5 MM to invest we're not really interested.
Now answer one question and tell us what you do.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 3:06 PM
For the sake of conversation should I just assume you're in sales?
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 3:15 PM
OK, so let me get this straight: You live in Bed Sty, and manage $100 m, and yet the fund is unregistered. You spend all day posting on a RE blog, then trade all night. Your minimum for new money is $5m, even though $100 m is a TINY fund. Very, very funny, Dave. My light bulb needs changing --can you come over?
Suffice it to say I don't reveal anything about myself on an anonymous blog; that's your trip.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 3:15 PM
I don't manage the whole $100 MM. Just the Asian portion. And yes, our minimum for new money is $5 MM.
I'll assume you work in the evenings too...maybe checkout at the Atlantic mall Target.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 3:30 PM
Benson, no family farmer has lost or will lose their farm because of the estate tax.
That's a rather shoddy piece of faux-populist bullhockey.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 3:45 PM
> "he's giving most to charity but if he believed in what he said, he'd pay his share to the government"
And the winner for best self-negating statement is...
Posted by: SnarkSlope at February 26, 2009 3:47 PM
Poor dibs, doesn't even know how embarrassing hes become. Losing money is one thing, but pretending to be somebody hes clearly not... really sad
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 3:47 PM
Dave, you're a hoot. Anyone with a real reputation to protect would not share the kind of info you do...you really are a sad case. Good luck, though you're such a big star in the hedge fund world, you surely don't need it.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 3:52 PM
Don't need to protect my reputation at all. I think its you who's unrealistic about a discussion on a blog. A quick review of all of your posts will show who's the real sad case. You really must be angry with yourself. You don't have to be a "big star" to be happy and prosperous, either.
Give cornerbodega a reach around. He sounds like he's particularly depressed today.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 3:57 PM
Angry at myself because I find you ridiculous? Whatever gets you through the night, Soros.
Posted by: Whuh at February 26, 2009 4:00 PM
Done here with the loons. Good night.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 26, 2009 4:02 PM
NYT article--Apartment Buyers Abandoning 6-Figure Deposits
"The real estate market in Manhattan has become so unnerving to buyers that some are forfeiting six-figure deposits rather than close on deals they have made. "
And no, it's NOT only in new condos, but in pre-war UES co-ops too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/realestate/01walk.html?emc=eta1
Posted by: bk14 at February 26, 2009 4:39 PM
"prosperous hedge fund manager" dibs who lives in Bed stuy, needs to rent part of the house to pay the mortgage, doesn't realize theres a crisis in nyc, yet manages millions of other peoples money. Hahahahahha
Posted by: cornerbodega at February 26, 2009 5:20 PM
Benson has some good posts here, but most of you are incredibly uninformed.
Bxgrl, I sympathize with what your wrote, even if some of it is a little whacky. They don't do pensions anymore really, and they certainly don't matter to CEOs. Anyway, I'm a firm supporter of the American System and believe the only taxes the federal government should charge are import tariffs.
Southbrooklyn, you take the cake though. It's actually universally acknowledged that World War II got us out of the Great Depression. Obama is making many of the same stupid mistakes Roosevelt did in attempting to delay the inevitable debt deflation that must happen.
The inflationary con game never works unless people are really motivated for something, and historically that has always been war.
One should always assume the news is a vehicle to prepare the populace for government action. Not a week goes by where I don't see a headline talking about how Mexico is essentially an anarchy.
Mark my words: Obama will invade Mexico. You think it takes a lot of troops and money to secure Baghdad? Policing Mexico will require several new armies to be created. Perfect!
Posted by: Polemicist at February 26, 2009 8:23 PM
Not to pile on here, but i think even a middle office worker at a real hedge fund or wall street desk would realize that DIBS is a complete fraud. My jaw drops in disbelief at some of the things I have read him post on here.
Posted by: streetwise at February 26, 2009 11:46 PM
"Mark my words: Obama will invade Mexico"- Polemicist
Wow- and you think I'm wacky???? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...gasp....gasp...ha ha ha ha ha
So, supporter of the American system- only taxes should be import tariffs. Hm..... unless you advocate anarchy I hardly think this will do much to support the American system you claim to love. By the way- where did I mention pensions?
Posted by: bxgrl at February 27, 2009 12:07 AM
Bxgrl:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_System_(economic_plan)
Read up on it... you may learn something. This country was built from nothing in a mere century when the American System was in full force, even with the economic inefficiencies of slavery and the destruction of the civil war.
As for Mexico, this isn't just my personal analysis. It is shared by a number of folks out there. You'll probably be surprised when it happens, but so are most people with any military action.
Anyway, I don't think you're wacky, just misinformed. These are the days to expect the unexpected.
Posted by: Polemicist at February 27, 2009 12:30 AM
I see we've got a nerw member of team loon...streetwise!!! Welcome. Now get back to your back office bank job.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at February 27, 2009 8:35 AM
Polemicist- you do know that WIKI is one of the sites that anyone can add to or edit, right? That's why professors are fighting to have it banned because too many students use it for research and much of it is inaccurate or heavily biased and editorialized.
Well, I must say going from wacky to misinformed must be a step up. However, just because I don't agree with you on almost everything hardly makes me misinformed. It makes me not in agreement with you.
Re US invading mexico. Most of the people talking about it are right wing nutjobs. However one person did write about a military "worst case" scenario in case of the total collapse of the Mexican government and he also went on to say they do not forsee such a collapse as imminent and what the military scenario does suggest is strengthening our military presence on our own border. Oh, and the very intellectually/morally/ethically challenged Phyllis Schlafly believes that Mexicans have invaded the US and want to take it over.
Thats the group you're looking to for guidance and information? The American System dates from the earliest days of the USA- times have changes, polemicist. Applying ideas from 200 years ago without understanding this basic fact is like a woman going to the beach in a "summer" victorian dress and landing among the bikinied. One last thing- I think its appalling that the only description you make of slavery is to label it economically inefficient. I can think of many things to say about slavery, but to simply define it as economically inefficient tells me quite a bit about the sort of person you are. Yo may be full of facts but I question the source and the interpretation of those "facts."
Posted by: bxgrl at February 27, 2009 9:46 AM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Piattini Ristorante
added November 23, 2009 12:00 PM in Bay Ridge -
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.