Comments
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
JimRino Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 7:54 am
Rewarding Failure, allows Wall Street to afford to prop up the “Republican” party.
Failure rewarding failure..
Petey Wheatstraw Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:08 am
“3) Banks are carrying lots of housing inventory waiting for a better residential market to emerge 5 or 10 years down the road.’
The might as well be waiting for Jesus to come back.
From PA to GA there are thousands upon thousands of homes — new and previously occupied — being left to molder. I’ve driven the towns and back roads, and I’ve seen it all.
Every now and then, someone on the internets tubes will suggest that unoccupied houses be bulldozed in an act of “creative destruction.” In a sense, that’s already happening, only Mother Nature is being allowed to do very slowly what the dozer would do in a matter of minutes.
Recently nice/occupied homes missing shingles and/or siding due to weather. Windows broken and letting in the rain and snow. Downspouts eroding soil away from foundations. Gutters pulled down by the weight of rotting leaves. Trees, grass, and critters encroaching on lawns.
Inside, appliances and fixtures have been taken or simply trashed and left behind, along with anything the previous occupant didn’t want to move, including trash and rotten food. Walls have been smeared with food (and probably feces).
Many of these houses are REO, but not on the market. Many are already in such poor shape that they will never be sold. Even houses on large chunks of acreage (10+), the only value left is in the land, and any developments (well, septic, electric and other utilities — including the ubiquitous satellite TV dish), won’t find a buyer because the structures themselves have become a liability and a barrier to the sale of the property, as tear-down is required in order to replace a dangerous structure with a habitable one.
Extend and pretend has a result that the SEC can’t reverse.
SCTTD Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:20 am
John Hussman had somewhat scathing comments about status of FASB 157 and the Boards unwillingness to actually hold their constituents to a reasonable standard in this weeks commentary.
http://hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc110228.htm
Scroll down to the open letter to the Financial Accounting Standards Board section.
Alaric Investments Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:26 am
Surprising to think that anyone in the investment community believes that the banks are not intentionally “kicking the can down the road” – of course they are.
In fact, this is explicit government policy: is not a major reason for Federal Reserve’s negative real interest rates to help recapitalize the banks so that they will eventually be able to write off the remaining bad debt?
Also, by “going Sweedish”, do you mean a Mises-like clearing out? I would have thought that “going Sweedish” would conflict with the left of center agenda, no?
Mark E Hoffer Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:27 am
this: “1) Banks are slowly rebuilding their capital by borrowing from one branch of government and lending to another. This is a slow process, but its less well unerstood (and hence more politically acceptable) than merely giving Banks capital outright…”
as an explaination of: “…the arbitrage between the the Fed’s ZIRP policy and Treasury’s 10 year bonds…”
is complete, and utter B*******.
for further reading…
http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2009/08/77-reasons-to-audit-fed-and-end-fed.html
http://www.monetary.org/federalreserveprivate.htm
http://www.barefootsworld.net/banking-fed-quotes.html
Alaric Investments Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:28 am
SCTTTD –
Talk about scandalous accounting: remember that Buffet did not use mark to market accounting on a portfolio of publicly held securities and was able to get away with it with a mere verbal slap on the wrist from the SEC….
http://alaricinvestments.blogspot.com/2010/10/us-is-banana-republic-part-2.html
Shocking?
curbyourrisk Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:35 am
Mark…when you say that is B********…do you mean the act is B******, or you do not believe it?????
For the GSE’s….give me a call….I have a crap mortgage you have as well.
curbyourrisk Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:37 am
Forget going swedish. Let’s all go Iceland on their asses.
Collective middle finger to the banks….
constantnormal Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:43 am
“2) FASB 157 allows banks to carry all of these structured products made of bad mortgages on their books indefinitely.”
Indefinitely? Surely not forever … what happens when these toxic mortgages mature, and still have huge unpaid balances?
Don’t they have to be written down then, or can they continue to be carried on the books as “assets”, with a mountain of “good will” in the form of unpaid principal & interest, penalties, and fees?
Why do the banksters EVER need to work again, if they can mine nothingness in perpetuity?
KentWillard Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:44 am
I think the SEC’s focus is on the largely forgotten commercial real estate (perhaps construction too), not single family mortgages. Although commercial real estate prices have fallen almost as much as house prices, we haven’t seen the spike in defaults (yet?).
The bigger question is why the SEC is pushing this rather than the obvious regulators: OCC and FDIC. Would be interesting to know if all the SEC Directors support this action, or if it is a partisan choice.
constantnormal Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 8:52 am
Mary Shapiro is gonna get herself in a lotta trouble, if she’s not careful … this is what happens when the head of a regulatory agency is not a former bankster …
Mark E Hoffer Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 9:00 am
curb,
if I’m reading that, correctly, the GSEs aren’t involved in this statement: ““…the arbitrage between the the Fed’s ZIRP policy and Treasury’s 10 year bonds…”
and, to restate/try to clarify, this : “1) Banks are slowly rebuilding their capital by borrowing from one branch of government and lending to another. This is a slow process, but its less well unerstood (and hence more politically acceptable) than merely giving Banks capital outright…”
as an explaination of: “…the arbitrage between the the Fed’s ZIRP policy and Treasury’s 10 year bonds…”
is complete, and utter B*******.
or, differently, the idea that the FedRes is a ‘branch of Government’, akin to the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary is, quite, inane..
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/inane
b_thunder Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 9:14 am
I bet the next budget will have SEC defunded even more than the wettest GOP dream would be.
But this time it will be courtesy of the Obama/Dudley/Geithner cartel.
wally Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 9:25 am
“Banks are carrying lots of housing inventory waiting for a better residential market to emerge 5 or 10 years down the road.”
A self-defeating act; they’ll be a drag on the very market they hope will improve.
curbyourrisk Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 9:42 am
Mark…my GSE comment was not related to your comment at all…..just something completely different.
As for the rst of your comment……… The FED RESERVE has been controlled by the government for some time…effectively making a exetnsion of a branch (or multiple branches) of government.
If you do not believe that the actions taken are not complicit in allowing the banks to mock america and fill their coffers at our expense, then you sorely are mistaken….
stopGOVTwaste Says:
March 3rd, 2011 at 10:03 am
stopGOVTwaste
stop_govt_waste@hotmail.com
68.205.104.52
2011/03/03 at 9:38 am
I thought the banks wanted defaults… so they can obtain the Credit Default Swaps, right?
Isn’t this why they tell people to stop making payments (must be 90 days late in order to receive assistance)?
With all due respect to Prof. Levitan, his comment is over the top. This opinion is by a presiding judge in a large circuit. He has responsibilities to his judges to help them figure out how to deal with cases where novel, complicated arguments and fact patterns are being presented. I don’t know him, or much about him other than his abreviated CV, but he is in a position where he has incentives to get it right more than to prove that he’s right. There is a difference, and it’s a difference between being on the bench and being an academic (no disrespect, Prof. Levitan). Judges get respect from their peers for being helpful in moving cases along. Professors get attention by being different.
If the judge is wrong, he has the case and the basic rules set up pretty well for an appeal and the issues will be pretty clear. I don’t know if addressed all the claims by Ms. Congress, but I don’t think he needed to. The choice of law and enforceability of the note issues were pretty fatal.
This paragraph of Prof. Levitan’s seems almost entirely incorrect:
“Perhaps the most important thing to note about the opinion is what isn’t there. There was no consideration of the chain-of-title issue in the opinion. Let me repeat, the court said nothing about whether there was proper chain-of-title in the securitization. Instead, the court avoided dealing with it. That means that this ruling isn’t grounds for sounding the “all clear” on chain-of-title. At best, it is grounds for arguing that homeowners won’t be able to raise chain-of-title problems. As we’ve seen with Ibanez, that’s clearly incorrect, and a closer look at the Congress ruling shows that it might be an Alabama special, not applicable elsewhere.”
Which chain of title? The security interest or the note? As for the note, the court essentially said ownership of the note doesn’t matter when a party has enforcement rights. Prof. Bloom said as much in his testimony.
As for homeowner defenses, I disagree with Prof. Levitan because this case clearly does allow them at an eviction trial, and as I said earlier, allows them a pretty broad path. I see this as a homeowner win, or at least homeowner-favorable.
As for applying Ibanez, the key fact in that case was that there was no prior assignment of the security interest before the foreclosure process began (and the court was extremely liberal about how that could have happened, but still found that it hadn’t – kind of a game over for USBank), and that USBank tried to fix it after the fact, which it couldn’t. This opinion is often egregiously misrepresented as requiring recorded assignments in Mass. – it explicitly does not. It is also cited as involving MERS. It definitely does not, but it may well be a very pro-MERS case in application.
As for the applicability, state district court decisions are hard to cite for authority anyway, and usually a sign that 1) you’re reaching for anything, anything (aka “as some court somewhere held”); or 2) that you’re not familiar with in-state authority. At the district court level, I can only remember one time that I cited out-of-state law (Maryland, and I did so very reluctantly having lived there), and I don’t remember ever having other state cites used against me. I have a strong bias against it unless it’s absolutely necessary. In practice, too much involves statutes that are not perfectly comparable to other states, for one. But, in the case I used, the issue was exactly what I was looking for, a mortgagee’s obligation after receiving a payoff demand for an odd-ball lien securing two notes, and the mortgagee only provided one account, leaving the other note/account unpaid when all was said and done. The court here followed it and held a payoff demand for a single lien requires all relevant account balances to be provided. That was sweet.
More important was that Prof. Bloom agreed that the law regarding notes and mortgages would be Alabama law, and that Alabama has an identical statute to UCC 3-301 for the rights of enforcement by note holders that makes ownership less important than ownership rights. Prof. Levitan calls this a side-step, but it looks like the judge could have cared less who the owner was. Either he’ll be upheld, or he’ll be made to look foolish on appeal. What Adam calls a “side-step” on 1) the applicability of NY law; and 2) whether ownership matters when enforcement rights is really the issue are clearly identifiable questions of law for de novo appeal (that is, the trial court’s opinion on the law doesn’t count for anything).
The take away I have on this case is that Judge Vowell’s circuit allows more defenses to eviction than I am used to seeing. (Minneapolis and St. Paul both have Housing Courts that are cattle calls, and while the judges diligently enforce procedure on noticing the defendant(s), compliance with the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009, naming all adult parties known who might have putuative independent possessory rights, etc., they do not throw the proceeding open very often to defenses like Ms. Congress’s and are almost always upheld on appeal, admittedly due in part to eviction appeals being exceedingly difficult and expensive if they’re not set up correctly).
What I don’t know is whether he and his judges figure “might as well” if the alternative is that they’re going to see waves of post-eviction quiet titles instead. A few Alabama practitioners perspective would help on this.
Also, it appears there were two trials on this and that makes untangling some of the procedure difficult. The judge says in the middle of page 7 that there was a “first trial.” I’m not sure what happened there or why there was a second trial. Yves?
So, yes. As a district court opinion, it isn’t legal precedent anywhere, just as any other district court anywhere opinion isn’t legal precedent anywhere – appeals courts review questions of law de novo. That’s not what Prof. Levitan said, and I’m pretty sure it’s not what he meant, either.
BenchCraft, LLC announced that it should debut its Concert Sequence, a brand new line of recliners with an integrated sound technique, at Substantial Position Market place on October 17-22, 2009. Concert Sequence recliners feature two built-in stereo speakers and also a subwoofer intended particularly to make a complete array of sound. It's tactile motors that will both vibrate with all the sound or be chosen independently as a massage product, and separate controls that enable for particular person changes to be produced on the volume, bass/treble, and also the tactile/massage function. The model, which will have a starting cost level of $699, may also comprise of a mini audio jack so users can connect to their a number of audio resources (i.e. iPods, MP3 gamers, cell phones, and many others.). To that conclude, Sinning mentioned that Berkline may also be introducing in decide upon motion
bench craft company reviews
furniture its new eCoupled technological know-how option--a wireless charging station for electronic devices this includes cell phones, MP3 gamers, and laptops. Formulated by Fulton Innovation, it eliminates the need for power cords by designing an electromagnetic conduit mixed with an intelligent management product that repeatedly monitors energy movement so several gadgets from distinctive manufactures can cost concurrently. eCoupled technological innovation is additionally protected for electronic gadgets simply because it gives only the quantity of power
bench craft company reviews
required to help keep a machine at peak power amounts, so there is certainly no threat of overcharging. Even while the quantity of devices compatible with this particular technology is restricted, Berkline expects that alot more and much more brands will move toward incorporating the ability to connect to the eCoupled perform
The Bench Craft Company gives no excuses for your really difficult operate and perseverance that they commit on their own to so as to maintain themselves since the leader in nationwide onsite golf course residence
bench craft company reviews
marketing. No excuses for delivering their consumers together with the most complete protection for their bench craft company reviews promoting dollar no matter whether it be locally or nationwide. No excuses for supplying golf program properties quite possibly the most seamless program for generating further revenue with the most non-intrusive way, whereas enhancing the level of quality for the facilities along with the practical experience of their golfers on their house. Bench Craft is committed to being the very best and also the most important at what they do, marketing on golf course bench craft company reviews venues.
In an age where by nobody
bench craft company reviews
desires to take duty for something, Bench Craft tends to make alone fully accountable for that achievements of their advertising clientele, which can be why their clientele and very well as Bench Craft constantly experience healthful growth prices and revenue margins. A agency won't be able to be any longer
bench craft company reviews
productive than their customer, so it can be target of Bench Craft to produce a number of that each client receives the top conceivable venue for presenting their users
bench craft company reviews
programs and services, whether or not it be locally or nationally. This commitment to top notch is what sets Bench Craft aside from its competitors, and dollar for dollar makes its advertising goods a lot of the most valuable with the sector.
The golf programs bench craft company reviews that Bench Craft Company will work in concert with, obtain services and merchandise at no expense. Bench Craft Company income group straight funds this process for every golf course by obtaining sponsors for every product or service. Nearby vendors and gamers inside neighborhood receive sponsorship priority and golf program management performs closely with Bench Craft to identify likely sponsors. Bench Craft’s hugely flourishing
bench craft company reviews
system delivers golf programs a totally free of charge alternative that also eliminates costs consequently of style alterations, course modifications, theft and vandalism.
As being a definite additional benefit, every single program is protected below a $3,000,000 liability policy. The organization can accommodate just about every single golf course. Furthermore, Bench Craft Company functions together with all branches in the Armed Forces, plus state, county and metropolis golf courses. This vary of golf courses supplies Bench Craft’s clients with all the most comprehensive protection of golf course properties within the Usa.
The ahead
bench craft company reviews
pondering Visionaries at Bench Craft Company designed a method that garners the interest and participation of not only its personal revenue workers, but the sponsors, golf course management in addition to the membership and patrons. There is only one Bench Craft Company, do not drop for rip off plots by imposters working a scam.
bench craft company reviews