video: a review of cnbc analysis

[LuckyInOC]

[quote=temeculaguy]There is an upside to this, if cnbc goes under we might finally get to see maria, erin and the other financial babes of cnbc in playboy. Add in the “stimulate the economy” headline on the cover and that edition will be suitable for framing. I may go frame shopping this weekend to beat the rush.[/quote]

I though that’s why STD’s was part of the ‘Stimulus’ package. They just didn’t clarify what kind of ‘Stimulus’, i.e. – we’re going to get screwed, but safely screwed…

Lucky In OC

[peterb]

Over last summer someone did a you tube video of all cramers call reversals. It was amazing. The guy contradicted himself 20 times in 3 weeks!! How can he still be on TV? Because people are stupid, that’s why.
I second TG’s call for the Playboy to do a “Bubble Girl” spread. That Erin is quite the looker.

[peterb]

Over last summer someone did a you tube video of all cramers call reversals. It was amazing. The guy contradicted himself 20 times in 3 weeks!! How can he still be on TV? Because people are stupid, that’s why.
I second TG’s call for the Playboy to do a “Bubble Girl” spread. That Erin is quite the looker.

[peterb]

Over last summer someone did a you tube video of all cramers call reversals. It was amazing. The guy contradicted himself 20 times in 3 weeks!! How can he still be on TV? Because people are stupid, that’s why.
I second TG’s call for the Playboy to do a “Bubble Girl” spread. That Erin is quite the looker.

[peterb]

Over last summer someone did a you tube video of all cramers call reversals. It was amazing. The guy contradicted himself 20 times in 3 weeks!! How can he still be on TV? Because people are stupid, that’s why.
I second TG’s call for the Playboy to do a “Bubble Girl” spread. That Erin is quite the looker.

[peterb]

Over last summer someone did a you tube video of all cramers call reversals. It was amazing. The guy contradicted himself 20 times in 3 weeks!! How can he still be on TV? Because people are stupid, that’s why.
I second TG’s call for the Playboy to do a “Bubble Girl” spread. That Erin is quite the looker.

[patientrenter]

CNBC’s shilling for the investment industry financial was shameless and despicable. So I have no problem with anyone calling them on it.

But all this talk of the unfairness of bailing banks vs homeowners is a case of “never mind the man behind the curtain”. Clearly most people are fooled by it, but where did most of the money go that is being lost today? Trillions are being lost, and maybe worldwide tens of trillions ultimately. Who gained those trillions? Professionals living off the flow of borrowed money into the housing industry benefited – senior private bankers, middle level private bankers, and junior employees of private banks; mortgage brokers, real estate agents, rating agencies; employees of the GSEs, their leadership, their lobbyists, and the politicians who protect the GSEs….

Is that all of the people who benefited? Well, no. The people who benefited the most are those who bought real estate before the boom. These are, by definition, the hundred million or more people who live next door. 90% of the value that is being lost today was gained in the first place by people who bought before the boom, not by the middlemen. How many people do you know who downsized during the bubble, and plan to use the gains to live comfortably in their retirement? Or refinanced above the 1995 value of their home, and used the money to enjoy big plasma TVs, or new cars, or swimming pools? These are the people who walked away with the bulk of the value that is being lost today. If they pissed it away unwisely, that is less reason to give them sympathy or bailouts, not more.

But it’s a lot more popular to preach that homeowners deserve a bailout. Stewart is funny, but his actual message is nothing more than cheap pandering populism.

[patientrenter]

CNBC’s shilling for the investment industry financial was shameless and despicable. So I have no problem with anyone calling them on it.

But all this talk of the unfairness of bailing banks vs homeowners is a case of “never mind the man behind the curtain”. Clearly most people are fooled by it, but where did most of the money go that is being lost today? Trillions are being lost, and maybe worldwide tens of trillions ultimately. Who gained those trillions? Professionals living off the flow of borrowed money into the housing industry benefited – senior private bankers, middle level private bankers, and junior employees of private banks; mortgage brokers, real estate agents, rating agencies; employees of the GSEs, their leadership, their lobbyists, and the politicians who protect the GSEs….

Is that all of the people who benefited? Well, no. The people who benefited the most are those who bought real estate before the boom. These are, by definition, the hundred million or more people who live next door. 90% of the value that is being lost today was gained in the first place by people who bought before the boom, not by the middlemen. How many people do you know who downsized during the bubble, and plan to use the gains to live comfortably in their retirement? Or refinanced above the 1995 value of their home, and used the money to enjoy big plasma TVs, or new cars, or swimming pools? These are the people who walked away with the bulk of the value that is being lost today. If they pissed it away unwisely, that is less reason to give them sympathy or bailouts, not more.

But it’s a lot more popular to preach that homeowners deserve a bailout. Stewart is funny, but his actual message is nothing more than cheap pandering populism.

[patientrenter]

CNBC’s shilling for the investment industry financial was shameless and despicable. So I have no problem with anyone calling them on it.

But all this talk of the unfairness of bailing banks vs homeowners is a case of “never mind the man behind the curtain”. Clearly most people are fooled by it, but where did most of the money go that is being lost today? Trillions are being lost, and maybe worldwide tens of trillions ultimately. Who gained those trillions? Professionals living off the flow of borrowed money into the housing industry benefited – senior private bankers, middle level private bankers, and junior employees of private banks; mortgage brokers, real estate agents, rating agencies; employees of the GSEs, their leadership, their lobbyists, and the politicians who protect the GSEs….

Is that all of the people who benefited? Well, no. The people who benefited the most are those who bought real estate before the boom. These are, by definition, the hundred million or more people who live next door. 90% of the value that is being lost today was gained in the first place by people who bought before the boom, not by the middlemen. How many people do you know who downsized during the bubble, and plan to use the gains to live comfortably in their retirement? Or refinanced above the 1995 value of their home, and used the money to enjoy big plasma TVs, or new cars, or swimming pools? These are the people who walked away with the bulk of the value that is being lost today. If they pissed it away unwisely, that is less reason to give them sympathy or bailouts, not more.

But it’s a lot more popular to preach that homeowners deserve a bailout. Stewart is funny, but his actual message is nothing more than cheap pandering populism.

[patientrenter]

CNBC’s shilling for the investment industry financial was shameless and despicable. So I have no problem with anyone calling them on it.

But all this talk of the unfairness of bailing banks vs homeowners is a case of “never mind the man behind the curtain”. Clearly most people are fooled by it, but where did most of the money go that is being lost today? Trillions are being lost, and maybe worldwide tens of trillions ultimately. Who gained those trillions? Professionals living off the flow of borrowed money into the housing industry benefited – senior private bankers, middle level private bankers, and junior employees of private banks; mortgage brokers, real estate agents, rating agencies; employees of the GSEs, their leadership, their lobbyists, and the politicians who protect the GSEs….

Is that all of the people who benefited? Well, no. The people who benefited the most are those who bought real estate before the boom. These are, by definition, the hundred million or more people who live next door. 90% of the value that is being lost today was gained in the first place by people who bought before the boom, not by the middlemen. How many people do you know who downsized during the bubble, and plan to use the gains to live comfortably in their retirement? Or refinanced above the 1995 value of their home, and used the money to enjoy big plasma TVs, or new cars, or swimming pools? These are the people who walked away with the bulk of the value that is being lost today. If they pissed it away unwisely, that is less reason to give them sympathy or bailouts, not more.

But it’s a lot more popular to preach that homeowners deserve a bailout. Stewart is funny, but his actual message is nothing more than cheap pandering populism.

[patientrenter]

CNBC’s shilling for the investment industry financial was shameless and despicable. So I have no problem with anyone calling them on it.

But all this talk of the unfairness of bailing banks vs homeowners is a case of “never mind the man behind the curtain”. Clearly most people are fooled by it, but where did most of the money go that is being lost today? Trillions are being lost, and maybe worldwide tens of trillions ultimately. Who gained those trillions? Professionals living off the flow of borrowed money into the housing industry benefited – senior private bankers, middle level private bankers, and junior employees of private banks; mortgage brokers, real estate agents, rating agencies; employees of the GSEs, their leadership, their lobbyists, and the politicians who protect the GSEs….

Is that all of the people who benefited? Well, no. The people who benefited the most are those who bought real estate before the boom. These are, by definition, the hundred million or more people who live next door. 90% of the value that is being lost today was gained in the first place by people who bought before the boom, not by the middlemen. How many people do you know who downsized during the bubble, and plan to use the gains to live comfortably in their retirement? Or refinanced above the 1995 value of their home, and used the money to enjoy big plasma TVs, or new cars, or swimming pools? These are the people who walked away with the bulk of the value that is being lost today. If they pissed it away unwisely, that is less reason to give them sympathy or bailouts, not more.

But it’s a lot more popular to preach that homeowners deserve a bailout. Stewart is funny, but his actual message is nothing more than cheap pandering populism.

[EconProf]

Good points, patientrenter. In sorting out the winners and the losers, timing is everything.
The winners include those who bought well before the 2005-6 peak and still are ahead…that is did not engage in equity extraction to go on a consumption binge. The really big winners would be those few who sold out at the peak and became renters! These lucky or smart few can now live off their cash-out proceeds.
The biggest losers would be those who faithfully saved up their money for a big down payment and then bought at the peak. Not only is there net worth depleted, they now face higher taxes in order to pay for their reckless neighbor’s mortgage.

[EconProf]

Good points, patientrenter. In sorting out the winners and the losers, timing is everything.
The winners include those who bought well before the 2005-6 peak and still are ahead…that is did not engage in equity extraction to go on a consumption binge. The really big winners would be those few who sold out at the peak and became renters! These lucky or smart few can now live off their cash-out proceeds.
The biggest losers would be those who faithfully saved up their money for a big down payment and then bought at the peak. Not only is there net worth depleted, they now face higher taxes in order to pay for their reckless neighbor’s mortgage.

[EconProf]

Good points, patientrenter. In sorting out the winners and the losers, timing is everything.
The winners include those who bought well before the 2005-6 peak and still are ahead…that is did not engage in equity extraction to go on a consumption binge. The really big winners would be those few who sold out at the peak and became renters! These lucky or smart few can now live off their cash-out proceeds.
The biggest losers would be those who faithfully saved up their money for a big down payment and then bought at the peak. Not only is there net worth depleted, they now face higher taxes in order to pay for their reckless neighbor’s mortgage.

[EconProf]

Good points, patientrenter. In sorting out the winners and the losers, timing is everything.
The winners include those who bought well before the 2005-6 peak and still are ahead…that is did not engage in equity extraction to go on a consumption binge. The really big winners would be those few who sold out at the peak and became renters! These lucky or smart few can now live off their cash-out proceeds.
The biggest losers would be those who faithfully saved up their money for a big down payment and then bought at the peak. Not only is there net worth depleted, they now face higher taxes in order to pay for their reckless neighbor’s mortgage.

[Author]

Posts