[denverite]

To reiterate what I think is the point of the post – BREAK UP the real estate MONOPOLY, again, BREAK UP the MONOPOLY. The MLS is a PROTECTED, UNREGULATED MONOPOLY.

[denverite]

To reiterate what I think is the point of the post – BREAK UP the real estate MONOPOLY, again, BREAK UP the MONOPOLY. The MLS is a PROTECTED, UNREGULATED MONOPOLY.

[denverite]

To reiterate what I think is the point of the post – BREAK UP the real estate MONOPOLY, again, BREAK UP the MONOPOLY. The MLS is a PROTECTED, UNREGULATED MONOPOLY.

[denverite]

To reiterate what I think is the point of the post – BREAK UP the real estate MONOPOLY, again, BREAK UP the MONOPOLY. The MLS is a PROTECTED, UNREGULATED MONOPOLY.

[denverite]

To reiterate what I think is the point of the post – BREAK UP the real estate MONOPOLY, again, BREAK UP the MONOPOLY. The MLS is a PROTECTED, UNREGULATED MONOPOLY.

[denverite]

First off, IMHO the majority of posts/articles on this site are thoughtful and without peer. There is also severe review, so very little rubbish is accepted. That being said, the primary focus is on local RE topics. My perspective, is a bit different. The local trends are valuable, but being a conceptually oriented person, macro economic evaluations provide much more intellectual stimulation, leading to even more macro/mid-level analysis. If economics is your bag, please consider Dr. Ravi Batra (prof @ MSU). He links macro economics with subordinate components.

I found the short article posted here most interesting and emailed a few friends.

Thanks,
Denverite

[denverite]

First off, IMHO the majority of posts/articles on this site are thoughtful and without peer. There is also severe review, so very little rubbish is accepted. That being said, the primary focus is on local RE topics. My perspective, is a bit different. The local trends are valuable, but being a conceptually oriented person, macro economic evaluations provide much more intellectual stimulation, leading to even more macro/mid-level analysis. If economics is your bag, please consider Dr. Ravi Batra (prof @ MSU). He links macro economics with subordinate components.

I found the short article posted here most interesting and emailed a few friends.

Thanks,
Denverite

[denverite]

First off, IMHO the majority of posts/articles on this site are thoughtful and without peer. There is also severe review, so very little rubbish is accepted. That being said, the primary focus is on local RE topics. My perspective, is a bit different. The local trends are valuable, but being a conceptually oriented person, macro economic evaluations provide much more intellectual stimulation, leading to even more macro/mid-level analysis. If economics is your bag, please consider Dr. Ravi Batra (prof @ MSU). He links macro economics with subordinate components.

I found the short article posted here most interesting and emailed a few friends.

Thanks,
Denverite

[denverite]

First off, IMHO the majority of posts/articles on this site are thoughtful and without peer. There is also severe review, so very little rubbish is accepted. That being said, the primary focus is on local RE topics. My perspective, is a bit different. The local trends are valuable, but being a conceptually oriented person, macro economic evaluations provide much more intellectual stimulation, leading to even more macro/mid-level analysis. If economics is your bag, please consider Dr. Ravi Batra (prof @ MSU). He links macro economics with subordinate components.

I found the short article posted here most interesting and emailed a few friends.

Thanks,
Denverite

[denverite]

First off, IMHO the majority of posts/articles on this site are thoughtful and without peer. There is also severe review, so very little rubbish is accepted. That being said, the primary focus is on local RE topics. My perspective, is a bit different. The local trends are valuable, but being a conceptually oriented person, macro economic evaluations provide much more intellectual stimulation, leading to even more macro/mid-level analysis. If economics is your bag, please consider Dr. Ravi Batra (prof @ MSU). He links macro economics with subordinate components.

I found the short article posted here most interesting and emailed a few friends.

Thanks,
Denverite

[denverite]

The late 1970’s illustrate some lessons that probably could be applied here. Authur Burns was the Fed chairman for most of the decade, 1970-1978. Inflation was rampant and wage increases lagged. It was called stagflation and it lingered for years. Nixon, Ford, and Carter all had magic bullets with funny names that supposedly would fix the problem (remember WIN (Whip Inflation Now) all five phases).

Getting back to the premise…Aurthur Burns kept interest rates relatively low for MANY years, with no success. He was succeeded by Paul Volker (A.K.A. Superman)in 1978. The first year of so of Volker’s chairmanship had pretty much the same policy as Burns’ et al. Then a funny thing happened. Mr. Volker actually bit the bullet. He raised interest rates until inflation was tamed (early 1980’s), and that was that. It wasn’t pretty but it worked. Previous posts speak eloquently to this period.

I guess the point of all this is that inflation and loose monetary policy can persist for quite a while. FWIT, my personal opinion is that the impetus for change will come from either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or soverign wealth funds. In any case, I think a foreign body will be the driving factor. BB does not have the fortitude to go it alone.

[denverite]

The late 1970’s illustrate some lessons that probably could be applied here. Authur Burns was the Fed chairman for most of the decade, 1970-1978. Inflation was rampant and wage increases lagged. It was called stagflation and it lingered for years. Nixon, Ford, and Carter all had magic bullets with funny names that supposedly would fix the problem (remember WIN (Whip Inflation Now) all five phases).

Getting back to the premise…Aurthur Burns kept interest rates relatively low for MANY years, with no success. He was succeeded by Paul Volker (A.K.A. Superman)in 1978. The first year of so of Volker’s chairmanship had pretty much the same policy as Burns’ et al. Then a funny thing happened. Mr. Volker actually bit the bullet. He raised interest rates until inflation was tamed (early 1980’s), and that was that. It wasn’t pretty but it worked. Previous posts speak eloquently to this period.

I guess the point of all this is that inflation and loose monetary policy can persist for quite a while. FWIT, my personal opinion is that the impetus for change will come from either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or soverign wealth funds. In any case, I think a foreign body will be the driving factor. BB does not have the fortitude to go it alone.

[denverite]

The late 1970’s illustrate some lessons that probably could be applied here. Authur Burns was the Fed chairman for most of the decade, 1970-1978. Inflation was rampant and wage increases lagged. It was called stagflation and it lingered for years. Nixon, Ford, and Carter all had magic bullets with funny names that supposedly would fix the problem (remember WIN (Whip Inflation Now) all five phases).

Getting back to the premise…Aurthur Burns kept interest rates relatively low for MANY years, with no success. He was succeeded by Paul Volker (A.K.A. Superman)in 1978. The first year of so of Volker’s chairmanship had pretty much the same policy as Burns’ et al. Then a funny thing happened. Mr. Volker actually bit the bullet. He raised interest rates until inflation was tamed (early 1980’s), and that was that. It wasn’t pretty but it worked. Previous posts speak eloquently to this period.

I guess the point of all this is that inflation and loose monetary policy can persist for quite a while. FWIT, my personal opinion is that the impetus for change will come from either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or soverign wealth funds. In any case, I think a foreign body will be the driving factor. BB does not have the fortitude to go it alone.

[denverite]

The late 1970’s illustrate some lessons that probably could be applied here. Authur Burns was the Fed chairman for most of the decade, 1970-1978. Inflation was rampant and wage increases lagged. It was called stagflation and it lingered for years. Nixon, Ford, and Carter all had magic bullets with funny names that supposedly would fix the problem (remember WIN (Whip Inflation Now) all five phases).

Getting back to the premise…Aurthur Burns kept interest rates relatively low for MANY years, with no success. He was succeeded by Paul Volker (A.K.A. Superman)in 1978. The first year of so of Volker’s chairmanship had pretty much the same policy as Burns’ et al. Then a funny thing happened. Mr. Volker actually bit the bullet. He raised interest rates until inflation was tamed (early 1980’s), and that was that. It wasn’t pretty but it worked. Previous posts speak eloquently to this period.

I guess the point of all this is that inflation and loose monetary policy can persist for quite a while. FWIT, my personal opinion is that the impetus for change will come from either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or soverign wealth funds. In any case, I think a foreign body will be the driving factor. BB does not have the fortitude to go it alone.

[denverite]

The late 1970’s illustrate some lessons that probably could be applied here. Authur Burns was the Fed chairman for most of the decade, 1970-1978. Inflation was rampant and wage increases lagged. It was called stagflation and it lingered for years. Nixon, Ford, and Carter all had magic bullets with funny names that supposedly would fix the problem (remember WIN (Whip Inflation Now) all five phases).

Getting back to the premise…Aurthur Burns kept interest rates relatively low for MANY years, with no success. He was succeeded by Paul Volker (A.K.A. Superman)in 1978. The first year of so of Volker’s chairmanship had pretty much the same policy as Burns’ et al. Then a funny thing happened. Mr. Volker actually bit the bullet. He raised interest rates until inflation was tamed (early 1980’s), and that was that. It wasn’t pretty but it worked. Previous posts speak eloquently to this period.

I guess the point of all this is that inflation and loose monetary policy can persist for quite a while. FWIT, my personal opinion is that the impetus for change will come from either the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or soverign wealth funds. In any case, I think a foreign body will be the driving factor. BB does not have the fortitude to go it alone.

[Author]

Posts