Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
davelj
Participant“spousal support”… “alimony”… or as some now refer to it:
vaginamoney (n): A term for alimony that was coined by radio personality Tom Leykis. Vaginamoney is “payment for a vagina that you no longer have use of.” Ex-wives who demand vaginamoney, according to Mr. Leykis, are prostitutes who expect ongoing monetary compensation for sexual favors provided in the past.
Participant“spousal support”… “alimony”… or as some now refer to it:
vaginamoney (n): A term for alimony that was coined by radio personality Tom Leykis. Vaginamoney is “payment for a vagina that you no longer have use of.” Ex-wives who demand vaginamoney, according to Mr. Leykis, are prostitutes who expect ongoing monetary compensation for sexual favors provided in the past.
Participant“spousal support”… “alimony”… or as some now refer to it:
vaginamoney (n): A term for alimony that was coined by radio personality Tom Leykis. Vaginamoney is “payment for a vagina that you no longer have use of.” Ex-wives who demand vaginamoney, according to Mr. Leykis, are prostitutes who expect ongoing monetary compensation for sexual favors provided in the past.
ParticipantI think the “official” jobs numbers are no better than the “official” inflation numbers that we’re force-fed.
First of all, I know there’s been a huge push over the last couple of years of people into the “no longer seeking work” category. Technically, these people are not unemployed where the stats are concerned.
Second, the “birth/death model” has been adding lots of jobs over the last year to sectors which are obviously shrinking. That’s currently reversing – even in the stats – but it’ll take several more months for that statistical illusion to get reversed.
Third, there’s the “realtor phenomenon.” I read recently that less than HALF of all those with real estate licenses in southern California actually recorded a sale in 2007. Half. Are those people still counted as employed? I’m betting that many of them are.
As with the inflation stats, I’d just take what the “official” number is and add 100 – 200 basis points. That’ll probably get you in the ballpark of reality.
ParticipantI think the “official” jobs numbers are no better than the “official” inflation numbers that we’re force-fed.
First of all, I know there’s been a huge push over the last couple of years of people into the “no longer seeking work” category. Technically, these people are not unemployed where the stats are concerned.
Second, the “birth/death model” has been adding lots of jobs over the last year to sectors which are obviously shrinking. That’s currently reversing – even in the stats – but it’ll take several more months for that statistical illusion to get reversed.
Third, there’s the “realtor phenomenon.” I read recently that less than HALF of all those with real estate licenses in southern California actually recorded a sale in 2007. Half. Are those people still counted as employed? I’m betting that many of them are.
As with the inflation stats, I’d just take what the “official” number is and add 100 – 200 basis points. That’ll probably get you in the ballpark of reality.
ParticipantI think the “official” jobs numbers are no better than the “official” inflation numbers that we’re force-fed.
First of all, I know there’s been a huge push over the last couple of years of people into the “no longer seeking work” category. Technically, these people are not unemployed where the stats are concerned.
Second, the “birth/death model” has been adding lots of jobs over the last year to sectors which are obviously shrinking. That’s currently reversing – even in the stats – but it’ll take several more months for that statistical illusion to get reversed.
Third, there’s the “realtor phenomenon.” I read recently that less than HALF of all those with real estate licenses in southern California actually recorded a sale in 2007. Half. Are those people still counted as employed? I’m betting that many of them are.
As with the inflation stats, I’d just take what the “official” number is and add 100 – 200 basis points. That’ll probably get you in the ballpark of reality.
ParticipantI think the “official” jobs numbers are no better than the “official” inflation numbers that we’re force-fed.
First of all, I know there’s been a huge push over the last couple of years of people into the “no longer seeking work” category. Technically, these people are not unemployed where the stats are concerned.
Second, the “birth/death model” has been adding lots of jobs over the last year to sectors which are obviously shrinking. That’s currently reversing – even in the stats – but it’ll take several more months for that statistical illusion to get reversed.
Third, there’s the “realtor phenomenon.” I read recently that less than HALF of all those with real estate licenses in southern California actually recorded a sale in 2007. Half. Are those people still counted as employed? I’m betting that many of them are.
As with the inflation stats, I’d just take what the “official” number is and add 100 – 200 basis points. That’ll probably get you in the ballpark of reality.
ParticipantI think the “official” jobs numbers are no better than the “official” inflation numbers that we’re force-fed.
First of all, I know there’s been a huge push over the last couple of years of people into the “no longer seeking work” category. Technically, these people are not unemployed where the stats are concerned.
Second, the “birth/death model” has been adding lots of jobs over the last year to sectors which are obviously shrinking. That’s currently reversing – even in the stats – but it’ll take several more months for that statistical illusion to get reversed.
Third, there’s the “realtor phenomenon.” I read recently that less than HALF of all those with real estate licenses in southern California actually recorded a sale in 2007. Half. Are those people still counted as employed? I’m betting that many of them are.
As with the inflation stats, I’d just take what the “official” number is and add 100 – 200 basis points. That’ll probably get you in the ballpark of reality.
ParticipantFMT’s been a reckless actor for some time. I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t fail. There’s no franchise there worth saving. I’d also keep an eye on DSL, VNBC, CORS, BKUNA… the list goes on and on and on. In a moment of unintentional candor, the only intelligent thing Bernanke’s said in the last month was that he believed we could have 100-200 bank failures over the next couple of years. I think that’s a pretty good number. Plenty more shoes to drop that aren’t priced into the equity market.
ParticipantFMT’s been a reckless actor for some time. I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t fail. There’s no franchise there worth saving. I’d also keep an eye on DSL, VNBC, CORS, BKUNA… the list goes on and on and on. In a moment of unintentional candor, the only intelligent thing Bernanke’s said in the last month was that he believed we could have 100-200 bank failures over the next couple of years. I think that’s a pretty good number. Plenty more shoes to drop that aren’t priced into the equity market.
ParticipantFMT’s been a reckless actor for some time. I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t fail. There’s no franchise there worth saving. I’d also keep an eye on DSL, VNBC, CORS, BKUNA… the list goes on and on and on. In a moment of unintentional candor, the only intelligent thing Bernanke’s said in the last month was that he believed we could have 100-200 bank failures over the next couple of years. I think that’s a pretty good number. Plenty more shoes to drop that aren’t priced into the equity market.
ParticipantFMT’s been a reckless actor for some time. I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t fail. There’s no franchise there worth saving. I’d also keep an eye on DSL, VNBC, CORS, BKUNA… the list goes on and on and on. In a moment of unintentional candor, the only intelligent thing Bernanke’s said in the last month was that he believed we could have 100-200 bank failures over the next couple of years. I think that’s a pretty good number. Plenty more shoes to drop that aren’t priced into the equity market.
ParticipantFMT’s been a reckless actor for some time. I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t fail. There’s no franchise there worth saving. I’d also keep an eye on DSL, VNBC, CORS, BKUNA… the list goes on and on and on. In a moment of unintentional candor, the only intelligent thing Bernanke’s said in the last month was that he believed we could have 100-200 bank failures over the next couple of years. I think that’s a pretty good number. Plenty more shoes to drop that aren’t priced into the equity market.
ParticipantI was in Palm Springs week before last and I took note of several large strip malls between Murietta and Palm Springs. Whoa, it was ugly. I was driving through in the early evening and some of these places looked like ghost towns. Several see-through 6-8 story office buildings. That furniture-oriented strip mall near Moreno Valley – the one with like 8-10 different furniture stores – was almost completely empty. Maybe 15 cars. A couple of store fronts were already vacant. That area is already turning into a disaster area.
The construction loans are coming home to roost big time. There were some write-offs at year end. There will be more write-offs in 1Q. But 2Q is going to be the really ugly quarter because much of the junk underwritten prior to late-2006 (right before bankers got construction religion) will be coming off their interest reserves. There’s nowhere to hide once the interest reserve runs out. You gotta be selling plenty of units or it’s Bedtime for Bonzo. Lots of losses on the way.
And then there’s the CRE. It’s going to be ugly. I still don’t think it’s going to be as bad as the early-90s were closer to the coast, but it’ll still be plenty painful. And all of that crap near newer developments (almost regardless of where those developments are)… oh my. Disaster.
-
AuthorPosts
