San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

Just be patient and let Obama work his magic. I have a feeling that Obama is going to be just like Clinton (without the occasional third-party BJ) -- he's going to shrink the government, fairly apportion the tax burden in order to bring in more government revenue, and bring peace and prosperity back to this once great nation that has been torn nearly asunder by President Chimpy.

Chimpy

I agree. Right-wing partisans incorrectly attempt to associate Obama with liberal-lefties. Not true.

Obama is our generation. Conservative on fiscal and foreign policy, more so than today's republican party, which is a joke.

LOL, are you serious? You must be kidding. Democrats for smaller government?

There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans anymore except the type of animal that represents them.

Obama for smaller Gov. RIGHT! Same as he is gonna cut spending like he promised in the last Debate right?

"The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has found that both Obama and McCain are proposing combinations of tax and spending policies that would increase the federal deficit. It found that in 2013, Obama’s proposals would produce a net deficit increase of $286 billion, while McCain's major policies would produce a net deficit increase of between $167 billion and $259 billion. In talking to CNN, CRFB President Maya MacGuineas estimated that McCain's deficit increase would fall midway between the extremes of that range, at $211 billion." -Factcheck.org

I know gandoff and breeze and the rest wont listen to this, but those of you saying that Republicans are entirely to blame and Democrats, ANY democrat, is better are no better than the red state blindmen you so hate. Policies matter, not the letter after your name, and frankly our two choices have nearly the same polices. So our choice is bad policies or exactly the same bad policies in a little different wrapper. WOW! whata choice.

We already have an option: The Libertarian Party.

You should read today's WSJ article on the Greenspan's legacy revisited. It discusses how today's mess could have been prevented since the 1990s when several smart voices called for some regulation or oversight of the derivatives markets and hedge funds. At the very least, those voices wanted transparency if not regulation.

Transparency is key because no one knew (as we know today) that some players like Bear Sterns, etc., were leveraged 30-to-1 so it's no surprise that a minor accident would bring the whole system down. Huge obligations in the trillions but tiny reserves? Insurers selling insurance against defaults without being properly capitalized? Yes, all that happened, but the worst part is that no adult was in charge.

But back in the 1990s Clinton's Treasury (Rubin, Summers) and Greenspan forcefully resisted any talk of overisght. Even as the LTCM collapsed in 1998 threatening to bring the whole financial system down!

Today's problem is bipartisan. Fannie & Freddie, with their muddy accounting, and outrageous salaries and bonuses paid to its executives, had congressmen of both parties in their pockets. Similarly, hedge funds and derivatives dealers stopped any attempt at reform through lobbysts.

This is not a failure of free markets; it's a failure of regulators asleep at the wheel, it's a consequence of cronyism, and a result of special interest lobbysts at their worst.

Check out your phone book and look for the Libertarian Party local chapter. You can ask questions without committing yourself. It's time we stop the Republicrats and Demoblicans from selling the people's interests to special interests.

DWCAP and cooprider don't 'get it'. There's not any money left to spend. It's all spent. Nothing but debt to the tune of $200-300K per family in America. We're collectively broke, and the bills are coming due. We're nationalizing the banking system to keep the thing afloat.

This little whine about "Obama's a liberal" and "liberals tax-n-spend" is time-warp horseshit from the 1980s. It's pathetic. We have ENORMOUS ISSUES before us. The world is now different. Time to return to responsible governance.

Obama / Biden '08.

Spoken like a true drone. Some of us actually see them for what they are... 2 sides to the same coin. It's time for a REAL change.

asia, Barr or Nader or Ron Paul (who I like) are just not practical 'protest candidates' right now. It's either McCain/Palin or Obama/Biden. Saying Obama and McCain are the same is untrue. There are consequential differences on energy, foreign policy and the economy.

The suggestion that voting for Obama is going to bankrupt the federal coffers is outlandish. The deficit stands currently at $10T. At what point did you realize we might already be insolvent? In the news today, Obama says the USA can't afford McCain's "Buy everyone a house mortgage plan." Which candidate is presenting a responsible fiscal position? It's actually Obama.

Drone? Nope. I've considered the issues carefully these past few years. This is the first election in my life where I've advocated a position on the candidates.

Obama is a better choice because of his positions on energy, foreign policy and the economy. He is ten times more capable, presidential and ready to lead than old-man McCain with his dementia and brain cancer. Don't even get me started about Caribou Barbie.

Then you must also support Obama's push for another bailout. Most of the guys in Washington right now are in someone's pocket. So, I don't trust anyone of them. Obama is not even in office yet and he's already proposing more bailouts. I can only imagine how many more bailouts he'll propose when he actually get into office. Like DWCAP posted, Obama's plan will increase the net deficit even more so than McCain. Obama is also only one leg of a three legged chair. Do you think Obama will veto bloated stuff coming out of a Democrat controlled Senate and House when he voted w/ his Senate buddies 97% of the times? He will definitely bring change, I just don't like the change he's bringing. Remember, although this $850B bailouts where proposed by Bush, the majority who voted for it were Democrats.

When I vote Libertarian this year, I know my candidate won't win. I can only hope that my vote will actually count and give the Libertarian party enough vote to get public financing and be able to participate in the debate the next time around. In my view, we need REAL change and the 2 parties system is just not working anymore.

Obama may get elected. Once there he will try and talk his way through everything and get crushed. That's like some egomaniacal person thinking they can fix your marriage by talking to both people.. they're not thinking in terms of what's at stake, but that they're such an amazing communicator that they can fix it.

I think Obama is your typical con-artist.. they create an image and sell everyone on it by talking. Ever notice how Obama just rambles on when he answers a question. Never just an answer, but always trying way too hard to say something slick. If he was brief I might have respect for him, but I think he's super conceited - a snake in the grass.

Why do people keep needing the GOV to "save" us? I dont want the government to save me. I dont want the government deciding who deserves a house and who doesn't (read: has to pay inflated prices). And I dont want the government interjecting themselves into the private sector. They have a HORRIBLE record in all of that and the only reason they have not been tossed is that is called treason and technically punishable by death. (along with peoples appathy for anyone but those they know)

What I want the government to do is to maintain an army that can defend the nation if called on, provide basic public services like schools and police and fire and roads, and regulate markets such that orderly and fair markets exist. (plus little things like national parks, NASA, NIH, weather forecasting and maybe a few more.) Now regulating markets is the problem right now, and is alittle open to interpertation based on what side of the coin you are on. But everyone agrees that some regulations shouldnt have been deregulated and that regulators were asleep at the wheel for those that still exist. Rewrite sensable regulation based on sound economic fundamentals, Get some politicial seperation between politics and the regulators so they will "throw the flag" when needed and not 7 years too late, and stop bailing out bad companies with inept managment.

But Please stop trying to "save" me. All you are doing is makeing it harder to swim on my own.

It's a joke like professional wrestling. Get a grip people.

This is not about ideologies at this point its about the people having a say. If it is not apparent the economic/political entity has taken on a life of its own, you need to pay closer attention.

Check out on of the many bailout protests that was not covered by the media.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=096_12227...

DWCAP: "Why do people keep needing the GOV to "save" us? I dont want the government to save me. I dont want the government deciding who deserves a house and who doesn't (read: has to pay inflated prices)."

I agree 100%. It is true that risk in financial institutions was poorly regulated. Regulations should have thoroughly exposed all the risks. They didn't. If they had forced such disclosure, markets would have forced the companies taking too much risk to stop. In future, companies and industries that take on risks that rely on bubbles not bursting should be spotlighted immediately and continuously until the market exuberance causing the pressure comes to its senses.

I am convinced that a very big cause of the housing bubble was govt intervention in the housing market. Without a deduction for mortgage interest, without FNMA, Freddie Mac, FHA loans or loan guarantees, without govt pressure on banks to lend to poor risks, without any of a myriad other govt-backed programs to funnel more and more money into housing, the bubble would have been much smaller, and would have deflated much earlier and quicker.

With little or no govt involvement in the housing market, and with vigorous govt-required disclosure of financial risks, grounded on leaning against cyclical ups and downs, the housing bubble would have been innocuous.

Thanks for the objective comparison of deficit results. Interesting. I am curious how far out their projections go? My hope is some plan will work long term. No one has all the answers (and they are all politicians and will, to a greater or lesser extent, say what it takes to get elected).

My bet is, with Obama's focus on alternative energy development and education, his long term results will be far advanced beyon McCain's "buy every one a house" technique.

I don't know about you, but I much prefer McCain's solution on energy and education. He wanted to do all of the above for energy, which includes, wind, solar, nuclear, clean coal, natural gas, and of course, oil. His position on education is let the parents have choices and reward good teachers. I don't see anything wrong w/ that.