[barnaby33]

hipmatt, the inflation has already occurred. Unless congress tries to “monetize” the bad debt, the deflation underway will continue.

If they do that, the govt cost of borrowing rises, and that is not something that congress will risk.

Josh

[barnaby33]

hipmatt, the inflation has already occurred. Unless congress tries to “monetize” the bad debt, the deflation underway will continue.

If they do that, the govt cost of borrowing rises, and that is not something that congress will risk.

Josh

[barnaby33]

hipmatt, the inflation has already occurred. Unless congress tries to “monetize” the bad debt, the deflation underway will continue.

If they do that, the govt cost of borrowing rises, and that is not something that congress will risk.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Chris, we certainly agree on rampant manipulation. Friday was a textbook perfect example. Unfortunately I am not heading down the path of technical analysis as fast as maybe I should; which means I wasn’t aware of a pattern breaking down. I do know that in lay terms it was setting up to be an awful accelerating sell-off into the close. Somebody seemed to be defending key levels on several stocks I am very short.

Ultimately the trading systems you are talking about get at the heart of the manipulation. When that fails the system fails. I hope/fear we are getting quickly to the point where the markets cannot be defended, at least in so obvious a fashion and we get a *needed* correction.

Stock prices are highly manipulable, but credit markets aren’t, or at least aren’t any more. Thats why they are locked up. People with real money don’t want to play because they’ve been lied to. First by the non-bank credit creation, now by the FED and the banks. Until a crash occurs and the crap comes to light nothing will unlock those markets. All of which implies that the stock market is pretty much guaranteed to go down.

The major crashes are always credit driven. In a fiat system they always will be. The powers that be will paper things over until they can’t.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Chris, we certainly agree on rampant manipulation. Friday was a textbook perfect example. Unfortunately I am not heading down the path of technical analysis as fast as maybe I should; which means I wasn’t aware of a pattern breaking down. I do know that in lay terms it was setting up to be an awful accelerating sell-off into the close. Somebody seemed to be defending key levels on several stocks I am very short.

Ultimately the trading systems you are talking about get at the heart of the manipulation. When that fails the system fails. I hope/fear we are getting quickly to the point where the markets cannot be defended, at least in so obvious a fashion and we get a *needed* correction.

Stock prices are highly manipulable, but credit markets aren’t, or at least aren’t any more. Thats why they are locked up. People with real money don’t want to play because they’ve been lied to. First by the non-bank credit creation, now by the FED and the banks. Until a crash occurs and the crap comes to light nothing will unlock those markets. All of which implies that the stock market is pretty much guaranteed to go down.

The major crashes are always credit driven. In a fiat system they always will be. The powers that be will paper things over until they can’t.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Chris, we certainly agree on rampant manipulation. Friday was a textbook perfect example. Unfortunately I am not heading down the path of technical analysis as fast as maybe I should; which means I wasn’t aware of a pattern breaking down. I do know that in lay terms it was setting up to be an awful accelerating sell-off into the close. Somebody seemed to be defending key levels on several stocks I am very short.

Ultimately the trading systems you are talking about get at the heart of the manipulation. When that fails the system fails. I hope/fear we are getting quickly to the point where the markets cannot be defended, at least in so obvious a fashion and we get a *needed* correction.

Stock prices are highly manipulable, but credit markets aren’t, or at least aren’t any more. Thats why they are locked up. People with real money don’t want to play because they’ve been lied to. First by the non-bank credit creation, now by the FED and the banks. Until a crash occurs and the crap comes to light nothing will unlock those markets. All of which implies that the stock market is pretty much guaranteed to go down.

The major crashes are always credit driven. In a fiat system they always will be. The powers that be will paper things over until they can’t.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Chris, we certainly agree on rampant manipulation. Friday was a textbook perfect example. Unfortunately I am not heading down the path of technical analysis as fast as maybe I should; which means I wasn’t aware of a pattern breaking down. I do know that in lay terms it was setting up to be an awful accelerating sell-off into the close. Somebody seemed to be defending key levels on several stocks I am very short.

Ultimately the trading systems you are talking about get at the heart of the manipulation. When that fails the system fails. I hope/fear we are getting quickly to the point where the markets cannot be defended, at least in so obvious a fashion and we get a *needed* correction.

Stock prices are highly manipulable, but credit markets aren’t, or at least aren’t any more. Thats why they are locked up. People with real money don’t want to play because they’ve been lied to. First by the non-bank credit creation, now by the FED and the banks. Until a crash occurs and the crap comes to light nothing will unlock those markets. All of which implies that the stock market is pretty much guaranteed to go down.

The major crashes are always credit driven. In a fiat system they always will be. The powers that be will paper things over until they can’t.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Chris, we certainly agree on rampant manipulation. Friday was a textbook perfect example. Unfortunately I am not heading down the path of technical analysis as fast as maybe I should; which means I wasn’t aware of a pattern breaking down. I do know that in lay terms it was setting up to be an awful accelerating sell-off into the close. Somebody seemed to be defending key levels on several stocks I am very short.

Ultimately the trading systems you are talking about get at the heart of the manipulation. When that fails the system fails. I hope/fear we are getting quickly to the point where the markets cannot be defended, at least in so obvious a fashion and we get a *needed* correction.

Stock prices are highly manipulable, but credit markets aren’t, or at least aren’t any more. Thats why they are locked up. People with real money don’t want to play because they’ve been lied to. First by the non-bank credit creation, now by the FED and the banks. Until a crash occurs and the crap comes to light nothing will unlock those markets. All of which implies that the stock market is pretty much guaranteed to go down.

The major crashes are always credit driven. In a fiat system they always will be. The powers that be will paper things over until they can’t.

Josh

[barnaby33]

So you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?

First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.

I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?

All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.

Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.

Josh

[barnaby33]

So you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?

First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.

I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?

All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.

Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.

Josh

[barnaby33]

So you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?

First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.

I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?

All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.

Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.

Josh

[barnaby33]

So you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?

First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.

I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?

All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.

Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.

Josh

[barnaby33]

So you cherry pick one area (one of the more desirable) to make your point, but then back track and agree me in the end, whats a boy to do?

First off San Diego will not be saved by CV and its environs. You’ll note in my original post, I asked bugs to name names on areas where this 70% figure is true. Finally distress DOES breed afford-ability; they are two sides of the same coin. If prices were lower there wouldn’t be REO’s.

I think we can all pretty safely agree that SD is not Detroit. This means that there is always a price greater than zero at which ANY property here can be sold. Now given that as my axiom, I posit the corollary if an REO exists, it does so only to the extent that it was not affordable. Thats why it became an REO. The distress happened prior to the foreclosure. Foreclosure is just a way for the bank to dictate the terms. Are you telling me that the bank kept the price the same as the seller who lost it?

All of which is really tangential since the whole point I made was that on a macro level distress breeds lower prices as lenders don’t want to hold houses and will in most cases keep cutting the price till it sells.

Rot always starts at the outside and works in. Temecula is North county later this year and central SD next year.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Why are you surprised, much less sickened? This seems pretty normal. I love that he is 40 and only has (or had) 20k in savings! Now thats lack of foresight.

Of course I shouldn’t point the finger, my girlfriend is rounding the corner on 38 and has zero savings except her house. Imagine being in love with someone who’s worse off than the person that sickens you, man that hurts.

Josh

[barnaby33]

Why are you surprised, much less sickened? This seems pretty normal. I love that he is 40 and only has (or had) 20k in savings! Now thats lack of foresight.

Of course I shouldn’t point the finger, my girlfriend is rounding the corner on 38 and has zero savings except her house. Imagine being in love with someone who’s worse off than the person that sickens you, man that hurts.

Josh

[Author]

Posts