Inflation – Has it arrived?

[sdrealtor]

“The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdrealtor]”The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.[/quote]

Sorry, I need to rephrase that.

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

Continued house price support is more for the benefit of middle-class and lower-middle-class consumer confidence. They need to resume spending so that the economy can grow.

As I said before, it’s about GDP growth rather than supporting asset prices. If the government could get out of housing and the economy could grow at 4%, it would be a no-brainer for policy makers.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdrealtor]”The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.[/quote]

Sorry, I need to rephrase that.

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

Continued house price support is more for the benefit of middle-class and lower-middle-class consumer confidence. They need to resume spending so that the economy can grow.

As I said before, it’s about GDP growth rather than supporting asset prices. If the government could get out of housing and the economy could grow at 4%, it would be a no-brainer for policy makers.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdrealtor]”The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.[/quote]

Sorry, I need to rephrase that.

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

Continued house price support is more for the benefit of middle-class and lower-middle-class consumer confidence. They need to resume spending so that the economy can grow.

As I said before, it’s about GDP growth rather than supporting asset prices. If the government could get out of housing and the economy could grow at 4%, it would be a no-brainer for policy makers.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdrealtor]”The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.[/quote]

Sorry, I need to rephrase that.

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

Continued house price support is more for the benefit of middle-class and lower-middle-class consumer confidence. They need to resume spending so that the economy can grow.

As I said before, it’s about GDP growth rather than supporting asset prices. If the government could get out of housing and the economy could grow at 4%, it would be a no-brainer for policy makers.

[briansd1]

[quote=sdrealtor]”The upper-classes don’t really care about house values. They care more about financial markets.”

Sorry dead wrong on that. Tell that to all the upside homewoners in RSF.[/quote]

Sorry, I need to rephrase that.

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

Continued house price support is more for the benefit of middle-class and lower-middle-class consumer confidence. They need to resume spending so that the economy can grow.

As I said before, it’s about GDP growth rather than supporting asset prices. If the government could get out of housing and the economy could grow at 4%, it would be a no-brainer for policy makers.

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1]

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

[/quote]

IMO people care about housing to the extent their net worth is tied to it.

Because most of the net worth of middle class homeowner is tied to housing, he surely cares a lot about it!

For upper classes it is optional. They do indeed have a choice to own a house such that it is not a big part of their net worth and if that is the case then they are not so worried and don’t change their lifestyle.

However this country has its selection of really expensive and exclusive houses! Even for upper classes those can make up a huge portion of one’s net worth. Add to that those who got swept in the hysteria to buy many more such houses as “investments” ! Those people do have sleepless nights and need to make lifestyle decisions!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1]

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

[/quote]

IMO people care about housing to the extent their net worth is tied to it.

Because most of the net worth of middle class homeowner is tied to housing, he surely cares a lot about it!

For upper classes it is optional. They do indeed have a choice to own a house such that it is not a big part of their net worth and if that is the case then they are not so worried and don’t change their lifestyle.

However this country has its selection of really expensive and exclusive houses! Even for upper classes those can make up a huge portion of one’s net worth. Add to that those who got swept in the hysteria to buy many more such houses as “investments” ! Those people do have sleepless nights and need to make lifestyle decisions!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1]

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

[/quote]

IMO people care about housing to the extent their net worth is tied to it.

Because most of the net worth of middle class homeowner is tied to housing, he surely cares a lot about it!

For upper classes it is optional. They do indeed have a choice to own a house such that it is not a big part of their net worth and if that is the case then they are not so worried and don’t change their lifestyle.

However this country has its selection of really expensive and exclusive houses! Even for upper classes those can make up a huge portion of one’s net worth. Add to that those who got swept in the hysteria to buy many more such houses as “investments” ! Those people do have sleepless nights and need to make lifestyle decisions!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1]

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

[/quote]

IMO people care about housing to the extent their net worth is tied to it.

Because most of the net worth of middle class homeowner is tied to housing, he surely cares a lot about it!

For upper classes it is optional. They do indeed have a choice to own a house such that it is not a big part of their net worth and if that is the case then they are not so worried and don’t change their lifestyle.

However this country has its selection of really expensive and exclusive houses! Even for upper classes those can make up a huge portion of one’s net worth. Add to that those who got swept in the hysteria to buy many more such houses as “investments” ! Those people do have sleepless nights and need to make lifestyle decisions!

[enron_by_the_sea]

[quote=briansd1]

The upper classes don’t depend on housing to resume and continue spending. In fact, they have powered through the recession already; and luxury brands recorded strong growth.

[/quote]

IMO people care about housing to the extent their net worth is tied to it.

Because most of the net worth of middle class homeowner is tied to housing, he surely cares a lot about it!

For upper classes it is optional. They do indeed have a choice to own a house such that it is not a big part of their net worth and if that is the case then they are not so worried and don’t change their lifestyle.

However this country has its selection of really expensive and exclusive houses! Even for upper classes those can make up a huge portion of one’s net worth. Add to that those who got swept in the hysteria to buy many more such houses as “investments” ! Those people do have sleepless nights and need to make lifestyle decisions!

[CA renter]

[quote=Arraya][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not[/quote]

Exactly, Arraya.

IMHO, if we want to know what’s coming, we have to pay attention to the “whisper propaganda.” That’s the stuff that starts coming out BEFORE anything really happens; oftentimes, you start hearing about “problems” or “plans” years before they actually do anything.

Before the downturn, even as prices were still rising, and all the ignorant sheeple were celebrating their newfound “wealth,” you heard “whispers” from within the Fed, or those tied to the financial industry/regulators that the govt would have to step in if housing prices fell. That’s why so many of us were warning and fretting about bailouts, even during the bubble. We knew that the banks (the financial industry) would be the beneficiaries of the bailouts, and that Joe Sixpack would end up taking the hit for it.

Now, we are getting the opposite. Lots of talk about fiscal restraint, and, “Gee, I guess not everyone should own a home, afterall.” We’re hearing about how down payments will have to be higher, and how the GSEs (and the govt, in general) need to get out of the mortgage market. We’re seeing the attacks on unions, because the PTB is trying to get the message out that, “there is NO money.” They are trying to show that we all will have to sacrifice in order to get our economy back on track (largely missing from those who have to sacrifice, will be the large financiers, but that’s another story).

Ultimately, what Joe Sixpack thinks doesn’t matter. The puppet politicians care even more about their financial masters, because they know that as long as their financiers are behind them, they can send whatever message out to the sheeple that “this or that” is necessary, and they have no choice, etc., just like they did with the bailouts. And the sheeple will have no choice but to choose between the puppet on the right hand, or the puppet on the left hand. Both puppets serve the same master.

At the end of the day, the people who have siphoned the nation’s wealth will still be rich, and they know that in order for them to get more, the reset button will need to be hit — asset prices crash, debt is destroyed, and the larger, multi-decade credit cycle can start anew. The sheeply have been wrung dry, and there is nothing left to get from them.

Much of the risk has been shifted onto the govt/taxpayers…the refinances and new home purchases over the past few years were mostly govt-backed. A lot of the debts being traded back-and-forth as various entities have gone under have been govt-backed. The past few years have been spent finding out where the risks are, and attaching a govt guarantee to them. Now, what could be done has been done. It’s time to hit the reset button; it’s time for the deflation, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Arraya][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not[/quote]

Exactly, Arraya.

IMHO, if we want to know what’s coming, we have to pay attention to the “whisper propaganda.” That’s the stuff that starts coming out BEFORE anything really happens; oftentimes, you start hearing about “problems” or “plans” years before they actually do anything.

Before the downturn, even as prices were still rising, and all the ignorant sheeple were celebrating their newfound “wealth,” you heard “whispers” from within the Fed, or those tied to the financial industry/regulators that the govt would have to step in if housing prices fell. That’s why so many of us were warning and fretting about bailouts, even during the bubble. We knew that the banks (the financial industry) would be the beneficiaries of the bailouts, and that Joe Sixpack would end up taking the hit for it.

Now, we are getting the opposite. Lots of talk about fiscal restraint, and, “Gee, I guess not everyone should own a home, afterall.” We’re hearing about how down payments will have to be higher, and how the GSEs (and the govt, in general) need to get out of the mortgage market. We’re seeing the attacks on unions, because the PTB is trying to get the message out that, “there is NO money.” They are trying to show that we all will have to sacrifice in order to get our economy back on track (largely missing from those who have to sacrifice, will be the large financiers, but that’s another story).

Ultimately, what Joe Sixpack thinks doesn’t matter. The puppet politicians care even more about their financial masters, because they know that as long as their financiers are behind them, they can send whatever message out to the sheeple that “this or that” is necessary, and they have no choice, etc., just like they did with the bailouts. And the sheeple will have no choice but to choose between the puppet on the right hand, or the puppet on the left hand. Both puppets serve the same master.

At the end of the day, the people who have siphoned the nation’s wealth will still be rich, and they know that in order for them to get more, the reset button will need to be hit — asset prices crash, debt is destroyed, and the larger, multi-decade credit cycle can start anew. The sheeply have been wrung dry, and there is nothing left to get from them.

Much of the risk has been shifted onto the govt/taxpayers…the refinances and new home purchases over the past few years were mostly govt-backed. A lot of the debts being traded back-and-forth as various entities have gone under have been govt-backed. The past few years have been spent finding out where the risks are, and attaching a govt guarantee to them. Now, what could be done has been done. It’s time to hit the reset button; it’s time for the deflation, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Arraya][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not[/quote]

Exactly, Arraya.

IMHO, if we want to know what’s coming, we have to pay attention to the “whisper propaganda.” That’s the stuff that starts coming out BEFORE anything really happens; oftentimes, you start hearing about “problems” or “plans” years before they actually do anything.

Before the downturn, even as prices were still rising, and all the ignorant sheeple were celebrating their newfound “wealth,” you heard “whispers” from within the Fed, or those tied to the financial industry/regulators that the govt would have to step in if housing prices fell. That’s why so many of us were warning and fretting about bailouts, even during the bubble. We knew that the banks (the financial industry) would be the beneficiaries of the bailouts, and that Joe Sixpack would end up taking the hit for it.

Now, we are getting the opposite. Lots of talk about fiscal restraint, and, “Gee, I guess not everyone should own a home, afterall.” We’re hearing about how down payments will have to be higher, and how the GSEs (and the govt, in general) need to get out of the mortgage market. We’re seeing the attacks on unions, because the PTB is trying to get the message out that, “there is NO money.” They are trying to show that we all will have to sacrifice in order to get our economy back on track (largely missing from those who have to sacrifice, will be the large financiers, but that’s another story).

Ultimately, what Joe Sixpack thinks doesn’t matter. The puppet politicians care even more about their financial masters, because they know that as long as their financiers are behind them, they can send whatever message out to the sheeple that “this or that” is necessary, and they have no choice, etc., just like they did with the bailouts. And the sheeple will have no choice but to choose between the puppet on the right hand, or the puppet on the left hand. Both puppets serve the same master.

At the end of the day, the people who have siphoned the nation’s wealth will still be rich, and they know that in order for them to get more, the reset button will need to be hit — asset prices crash, debt is destroyed, and the larger, multi-decade credit cycle can start anew. The sheeply have been wrung dry, and there is nothing left to get from them.

Much of the risk has been shifted onto the govt/taxpayers…the refinances and new home purchases over the past few years were mostly govt-backed. A lot of the debts being traded back-and-forth as various entities have gone under have been govt-backed. The past few years have been spent finding out where the risks are, and attaching a govt guarantee to them. Now, what could be done has been done. It’s time to hit the reset button; it’s time for the deflation, IMHO.

[CA renter]

[quote=Arraya][quote=Rich Toscano][quote=CA renter]
Now, we are going to see an end to the govt intervention, as most of the risks that could be transferred to the public have been transferred. This was ALWAYS about saving the banks, and that job is done. Now, they will pull the plug, and allow the deflation to happen, IMHO.[/quote]

Why would they do that? That would just put the banks at risk of failure again, in addition to a host of other consequences that would ensure they aren’t re-elected or re-appointed.[/quote]

Well it depends on their perceived need and if the banks are sufficiently protected. Geithner did come out with his “white paper” after two years in the making – stating the NEED for higher down payments and interest rates. Now, obviously, if this was done it would be implemented at a strategic time for election and appointment purposes and probably with bipartisan support and big fan fare as a necessary evil or maybe not[/quote]

Exactly, Arraya.

IMHO, if we want to know what’s coming, we have to pay attention to the “whisper propaganda.” That’s the stuff that starts coming out BEFORE anything really happens; oftentimes, you start hearing about “problems” or “plans” years before they actually do anything.

Before the downturn, even as prices were still rising, and all the ignorant sheeple were celebrating their newfound “wealth,” you heard “whispers” from within the Fed, or those tied to the financial industry/regulators that the govt would have to step in if housing prices fell. That’s why so many of us were warning and fretting about bailouts, even during the bubble. We knew that the banks (the financial industry) would be the beneficiaries of the bailouts, and that Joe Sixpack would end up taking the hit for it.

Now, we are getting the opposite. Lots of talk about fiscal restraint, and, “Gee, I guess not everyone should own a home, afterall.” We’re hearing about how down payments will have to be higher, and how the GSEs (and the govt, in general) need to get out of the mortgage market. We’re seeing the attacks on unions, because the PTB is trying to get the message out that, “there is NO money.” They are trying to show that we all will have to sacrifice in order to get our economy back on track (largely missing from those who have to sacrifice, will be the large financiers, but that’s another story).

Ultimately, what Joe Sixpack thinks doesn’t matter. The puppet politicians care even more about their financial masters, because they know that as long as their financiers are behind them, they can send whatever message out to the sheeple that “this or that” is necessary, and they have no choice, etc., just like they did with the bailouts. And the sheeple will have no choice but to choose between the puppet on the right hand, or the puppet on the left hand. Both puppets serve the same master.

At the end of the day, the people who have siphoned the nation’s wealth will still be rich, and they know that in order for them to get more, the reset button will need to be hit — asset prices crash, debt is destroyed, and the larger, multi-decade credit cycle can start anew. The sheeply have been wrung dry, and there is nothing left to get from them.

Much of the risk has been shifted onto the govt/taxpayers…the refinances and new home purchases over the past few years were mostly govt-backed. A lot of the debts being traded back-and-forth as various entities have gone under have been govt-backed. The past few years have been spent finding out where the risks are, and attaching a govt guarantee to them. Now, what could be done has been done. It’s time to hit the reset button; it’s time for the deflation, IMHO.

[Author]

Posts