[LA_Renter]

Peter Schiff: Low Rates, Big Problems

http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=117292&t=01000420523245711617

“Government and mainstream economists have erroneously concluded that the key to reversing the financial free fall can be found in stopping the plunge in home prices. (I would offer the corollary that the key to reducing injuries in auto accidents is to suspend the laws of inertia). But to accomplish the improbable task of re-inflating the housing bubble, the government appears ready to announce a coordinated plan to push down mortgage rates to just 4.5%. Of course, this is precisely the wrong solution to the housing crisis, but when it comes to bad ideas our government has been remarkably consistent.”

“The most obvious problem is that the Government has no money. All it has is a printing press. So the more money it provides for cheap mortgages, the higher the inflation tax will be for all Americans. Higher inflation will cause the difference between where rates should be and where the government sets them to grow wider, and the entitlement to become more costly to provide.

Assuming $5 trillion in mortgages are refinanced at 4.5% in an environment where the unsubsidized rate would have been 10%. The annual cost to the government in such a scenario would be $275 billion. But the subsidy will have to be provided in perpetuity, as the minute it is removed, mortgage rates would surge and housing prices would plummet. Of course, the mere existence of the subsidy will continue to create demand for mortgage credit, which the government will be forced to provide by printing even more money. This would set into place a self perpetuating spiral of rising inflation and mortgage demand, with practically 100% of mortgage money being provided by the government. Ultimately the whole scheme would collapse, as run-away inflation would completely destroy what would be left of our shattered economy.”

If they do this keep an eye on those gold mining stocks.

[LA_Renter]

Peter Schiff: Low Rates, Big Problems

http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=117292&t=01000420523245711617

“Government and mainstream economists have erroneously concluded that the key to reversing the financial free fall can be found in stopping the plunge in home prices. (I would offer the corollary that the key to reducing injuries in auto accidents is to suspend the laws of inertia). But to accomplish the improbable task of re-inflating the housing bubble, the government appears ready to announce a coordinated plan to push down mortgage rates to just 4.5%. Of course, this is precisely the wrong solution to the housing crisis, but when it comes to bad ideas our government has been remarkably consistent.”

“The most obvious problem is that the Government has no money. All it has is a printing press. So the more money it provides for cheap mortgages, the higher the inflation tax will be for all Americans. Higher inflation will cause the difference between where rates should be and where the government sets them to grow wider, and the entitlement to become more costly to provide.

Assuming $5 trillion in mortgages are refinanced at 4.5% in an environment where the unsubsidized rate would have been 10%. The annual cost to the government in such a scenario would be $275 billion. But the subsidy will have to be provided in perpetuity, as the minute it is removed, mortgage rates would surge and housing prices would plummet. Of course, the mere existence of the subsidy will continue to create demand for mortgage credit, which the government will be forced to provide by printing even more money. This would set into place a self perpetuating spiral of rising inflation and mortgage demand, with practically 100% of mortgage money being provided by the government. Ultimately the whole scheme would collapse, as run-away inflation would completely destroy what would be left of our shattered economy.”

If they do this keep an eye on those gold mining stocks.

[LA_Renter]

Peter Schiff: Low Rates, Big Problems

http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=117292&t=01000420523245711617

“Government and mainstream economists have erroneously concluded that the key to reversing the financial free fall can be found in stopping the plunge in home prices. (I would offer the corollary that the key to reducing injuries in auto accidents is to suspend the laws of inertia). But to accomplish the improbable task of re-inflating the housing bubble, the government appears ready to announce a coordinated plan to push down mortgage rates to just 4.5%. Of course, this is precisely the wrong solution to the housing crisis, but when it comes to bad ideas our government has been remarkably consistent.”

“The most obvious problem is that the Government has no money. All it has is a printing press. So the more money it provides for cheap mortgages, the higher the inflation tax will be for all Americans. Higher inflation will cause the difference between where rates should be and where the government sets them to grow wider, and the entitlement to become more costly to provide.

Assuming $5 trillion in mortgages are refinanced at 4.5% in an environment where the unsubsidized rate would have been 10%. The annual cost to the government in such a scenario would be $275 billion. But the subsidy will have to be provided in perpetuity, as the minute it is removed, mortgage rates would surge and housing prices would plummet. Of course, the mere existence of the subsidy will continue to create demand for mortgage credit, which the government will be forced to provide by printing even more money. This would set into place a self perpetuating spiral of rising inflation and mortgage demand, with practically 100% of mortgage money being provided by the government. Ultimately the whole scheme would collapse, as run-away inflation would completely destroy what would be left of our shattered economy.”

If they do this keep an eye on those gold mining stocks.

[LA_Renter]

Peter Schiff: Low Rates, Big Problems

http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=117292&t=01000420523245711617

“Government and mainstream economists have erroneously concluded that the key to reversing the financial free fall can be found in stopping the plunge in home prices. (I would offer the corollary that the key to reducing injuries in auto accidents is to suspend the laws of inertia). But to accomplish the improbable task of re-inflating the housing bubble, the government appears ready to announce a coordinated plan to push down mortgage rates to just 4.5%. Of course, this is precisely the wrong solution to the housing crisis, but when it comes to bad ideas our government has been remarkably consistent.”

“The most obvious problem is that the Government has no money. All it has is a printing press. So the more money it provides for cheap mortgages, the higher the inflation tax will be for all Americans. Higher inflation will cause the difference between where rates should be and where the government sets them to grow wider, and the entitlement to become more costly to provide.

Assuming $5 trillion in mortgages are refinanced at 4.5% in an environment where the unsubsidized rate would have been 10%. The annual cost to the government in such a scenario would be $275 billion. But the subsidy will have to be provided in perpetuity, as the minute it is removed, mortgage rates would surge and housing prices would plummet. Of course, the mere existence of the subsidy will continue to create demand for mortgage credit, which the government will be forced to provide by printing even more money. This would set into place a self perpetuating spiral of rising inflation and mortgage demand, with practically 100% of mortgage money being provided by the government. Ultimately the whole scheme would collapse, as run-away inflation would completely destroy what would be left of our shattered economy.”

If they do this keep an eye on those gold mining stocks.

[LA_Renter]

Peter Schiff: Low Rates, Big Problems

http://caps.fool.com/blogs/viewpost.aspx?bpid=117292&t=01000420523245711617

“Government and mainstream economists have erroneously concluded that the key to reversing the financial free fall can be found in stopping the plunge in home prices. (I would offer the corollary that the key to reducing injuries in auto accidents is to suspend the laws of inertia). But to accomplish the improbable task of re-inflating the housing bubble, the government appears ready to announce a coordinated plan to push down mortgage rates to just 4.5%. Of course, this is precisely the wrong solution to the housing crisis, but when it comes to bad ideas our government has been remarkably consistent.”

“The most obvious problem is that the Government has no money. All it has is a printing press. So the more money it provides for cheap mortgages, the higher the inflation tax will be for all Americans. Higher inflation will cause the difference between where rates should be and where the government sets them to grow wider, and the entitlement to become more costly to provide.

Assuming $5 trillion in mortgages are refinanced at 4.5% in an environment where the unsubsidized rate would have been 10%. The annual cost to the government in such a scenario would be $275 billion. But the subsidy will have to be provided in perpetuity, as the minute it is removed, mortgage rates would surge and housing prices would plummet. Of course, the mere existence of the subsidy will continue to create demand for mortgage credit, which the government will be forced to provide by printing even more money. This would set into place a self perpetuating spiral of rising inflation and mortgage demand, with practically 100% of mortgage money being provided by the government. Ultimately the whole scheme would collapse, as run-away inflation would completely destroy what would be left of our shattered economy.”

If they do this keep an eye on those gold mining stocks.

[LA_Renter]

Here is Louise Yamada from that same episode.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27829390

I watched Louise early in the year on CNBC and she made a convincing case for a major worldwide market downturn from a technical perspective and was dead on. In all honesty I hope she is wrong here. Basically she is saying next support levels are S&P 600 if that doesn’t hold we could see 400. Everything….EVERYTHING….is falling right now.

[LA_Renter]

Here is Louise Yamada from that same episode.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27829390

I watched Louise early in the year on CNBC and she made a convincing case for a major worldwide market downturn from a technical perspective and was dead on. In all honesty I hope she is wrong here. Basically she is saying next support levels are S&P 600 if that doesn’t hold we could see 400. Everything….EVERYTHING….is falling right now.

[LA_Renter]

Here is Louise Yamada from that same episode.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27829390

I watched Louise early in the year on CNBC and she made a convincing case for a major worldwide market downturn from a technical perspective and was dead on. In all honesty I hope she is wrong here. Basically she is saying next support levels are S&P 600 if that doesn’t hold we could see 400. Everything….EVERYTHING….is falling right now.

[LA_Renter]

Here is Louise Yamada from that same episode.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27829390

I watched Louise early in the year on CNBC and she made a convincing case for a major worldwide market downturn from a technical perspective and was dead on. In all honesty I hope she is wrong here. Basically she is saying next support levels are S&P 600 if that doesn’t hold we could see 400. Everything….EVERYTHING….is falling right now.

[LA_Renter]

Here is Louise Yamada from that same episode.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27829390

I watched Louise early in the year on CNBC and she made a convincing case for a major worldwide market downturn from a technical perspective and was dead on. In all honesty I hope she is wrong here. Basically she is saying next support levels are S&P 600 if that doesn’t hold we could see 400. Everything….EVERYTHING….is falling right now.

[LA_Renter]

I just knew this thread was going to reappear. I guess the S&P in the 600’s isn’t so far fetched now. Roubini was also off his timing of the recession by over a year. I guess Mr Market plays by Mr Market’s rules.

[LA_Renter]

I just knew this thread was going to reappear. I guess the S&P in the 600’s isn’t so far fetched now. Roubini was also off his timing of the recession by over a year. I guess Mr Market plays by Mr Market’s rules.

[LA_Renter]

I just knew this thread was going to reappear. I guess the S&P in the 600’s isn’t so far fetched now. Roubini was also off his timing of the recession by over a year. I guess Mr Market plays by Mr Market’s rules.

[LA_Renter]

I just knew this thread was going to reappear. I guess the S&P in the 600’s isn’t so far fetched now. Roubini was also off his timing of the recession by over a year. I guess Mr Market plays by Mr Market’s rules.

[LA_Renter]

I just knew this thread was going to reappear. I guess the S&P in the 600’s isn’t so far fetched now. Roubini was also off his timing of the recession by over a year. I guess Mr Market plays by Mr Market’s rules.

[Author]

Posts