[MadeInTaiwan]

I think the banks will hold on much longer than most people expect.

I think it is the size of the defaults. If the losses are small, then the banks will be more willing to take a loss. However, the problem is so large that banks know selling will probably make them shut their doors. The choice is recognize the loss now and possibly shutter its doors, or take the drip drip drip of missed payments and hope/pray/wait for the market to rebound/stabilze enough.

Another possibility is that the banks are holding on to properties until they can build up enough reserves to be able to safely write off the losses.

Part of me wonders if this strategy will actually work. We end up a decade or more of low sales and high prices.

[MadeInTaiwan]

I think the banks will hold on much longer than most people expect.

I think it is the size of the defaults. If the losses are small, then the banks will be more willing to take a loss. However, the problem is so large that banks know selling will probably make them shut their doors. The choice is recognize the loss now and possibly shutter its doors, or take the drip drip drip of missed payments and hope/pray/wait for the market to rebound/stabilze enough.

Another possibility is that the banks are holding on to properties until they can build up enough reserves to be able to safely write off the losses.

Part of me wonders if this strategy will actually work. We end up a decade or more of low sales and high prices.

[MadeInTaiwan]

I think the banks will hold on much longer than most people expect.

I think it is the size of the defaults. If the losses are small, then the banks will be more willing to take a loss. However, the problem is so large that banks know selling will probably make them shut their doors. The choice is recognize the loss now and possibly shutter its doors, or take the drip drip drip of missed payments and hope/pray/wait for the market to rebound/stabilze enough.

Another possibility is that the banks are holding on to properties until they can build up enough reserves to be able to safely write off the losses.

Part of me wonders if this strategy will actually work. We end up a decade or more of low sales and high prices.

[MadeInTaiwan]

I think the banks will hold on much longer than most people expect.

I think it is the size of the defaults. If the losses are small, then the banks will be more willing to take a loss. However, the problem is so large that banks know selling will probably make them shut their doors. The choice is recognize the loss now and possibly shutter its doors, or take the drip drip drip of missed payments and hope/pray/wait for the market to rebound/stabilze enough.

Another possibility is that the banks are holding on to properties until they can build up enough reserves to be able to safely write off the losses.

Part of me wonders if this strategy will actually work. We end up a decade or more of low sales and high prices.

[MadeInTaiwan]

I think the banks will hold on much longer than most people expect.

I think it is the size of the defaults. If the losses are small, then the banks will be more willing to take a loss. However, the problem is so large that banks know selling will probably make them shut their doors. The choice is recognize the loss now and possibly shutter its doors, or take the drip drip drip of missed payments and hope/pray/wait for the market to rebound/stabilze enough.

Another possibility is that the banks are holding on to properties until they can build up enough reserves to be able to safely write off the losses.

Part of me wonders if this strategy will actually work. We end up a decade or more of low sales and high prices.

[MadeInTaiwan]

It is not just Domestic men having issues with Imports. Imports have issues with imports.

I have a cousin who is himself an immigrant. I heard stories about the need for him to serially make purchases from “back home”.

[MadeInTaiwan]

It is not just Domestic men having issues with Imports. Imports have issues with imports.

I have a cousin who is himself an immigrant. I heard stories about the need for him to serially make purchases from “back home”.

[MadeInTaiwan]

It is not just Domestic men having issues with Imports. Imports have issues with imports.

I have a cousin who is himself an immigrant. I heard stories about the need for him to serially make purchases from “back home”.

[MadeInTaiwan]

It is not just Domestic men having issues with Imports. Imports have issues with imports.

I have a cousin who is himself an immigrant. I heard stories about the need for him to serially make purchases from “back home”.

[MadeInTaiwan]

It is not just Domestic men having issues with Imports. Imports have issues with imports.

I have a cousin who is himself an immigrant. I heard stories about the need for him to serially make purchases from “back home”.

[MadeInTaiwan]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=MadeInTaiwan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
…Regardless of the mechanism, it is naive to believe that the Government will recover the amount of dollars they anticipate by enacting this change. People will react and adapt to the changes in a way that reduces the overall take of the government.

I don’t disagree that in the long run the removal of this subsidy would make the economy more efficient, it’s just that the reaosn for doing so (to generate more revenue for the Government) may not come to pass.[/quote]

I think government will recover the revenue. As capital allocation moves away from non-productive investment like housing and real-estate, it should move into more productive investments that will generate tax revenue. At least that is what I hope happens.

[/quote]

Interesting counterpoint. But in this case the capital allocation would shift from consumers to the Federal Government. Are you suggesting that the Federal Government makes more productive investments than private individuals ?[/quote]

What I suggest is that more productive investment allocation will lead to more sustainable growth. Goverment will collect more revenue because there will be more taxable personal income and coroporate profits. Hope that clears it up.

Government sometimes make more productive investments then private individuals. Internet which partially came out of DARPA is but one example. Basic science reasearch is another.

[MadeInTaiwan]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=MadeInTaiwan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
…Regardless of the mechanism, it is naive to believe that the Government will recover the amount of dollars they anticipate by enacting this change. People will react and adapt to the changes in a way that reduces the overall take of the government.

I don’t disagree that in the long run the removal of this subsidy would make the economy more efficient, it’s just that the reaosn for doing so (to generate more revenue for the Government) may not come to pass.[/quote]

I think government will recover the revenue. As capital allocation moves away from non-productive investment like housing and real-estate, it should move into more productive investments that will generate tax revenue. At least that is what I hope happens.

[/quote]

Interesting counterpoint. But in this case the capital allocation would shift from consumers to the Federal Government. Are you suggesting that the Federal Government makes more productive investments than private individuals ?[/quote]

What I suggest is that more productive investment allocation will lead to more sustainable growth. Goverment will collect more revenue because there will be more taxable personal income and coroporate profits. Hope that clears it up.

Government sometimes make more productive investments then private individuals. Internet which partially came out of DARPA is but one example. Basic science reasearch is another.

[MadeInTaiwan]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=MadeInTaiwan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
…Regardless of the mechanism, it is naive to believe that the Government will recover the amount of dollars they anticipate by enacting this change. People will react and adapt to the changes in a way that reduces the overall take of the government.

I don’t disagree that in the long run the removal of this subsidy would make the economy more efficient, it’s just that the reaosn for doing so (to generate more revenue for the Government) may not come to pass.[/quote]

I think government will recover the revenue. As capital allocation moves away from non-productive investment like housing and real-estate, it should move into more productive investments that will generate tax revenue. At least that is what I hope happens.

[/quote]

Interesting counterpoint. But in this case the capital allocation would shift from consumers to the Federal Government. Are you suggesting that the Federal Government makes more productive investments than private individuals ?[/quote]

What I suggest is that more productive investment allocation will lead to more sustainable growth. Goverment will collect more revenue because there will be more taxable personal income and coroporate profits. Hope that clears it up.

Government sometimes make more productive investments then private individuals. Internet which partially came out of DARPA is but one example. Basic science reasearch is another.

[MadeInTaiwan]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=MadeInTaiwan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
…Regardless of the mechanism, it is naive to believe that the Government will recover the amount of dollars they anticipate by enacting this change. People will react and adapt to the changes in a way that reduces the overall take of the government.

I don’t disagree that in the long run the removal of this subsidy would make the economy more efficient, it’s just that the reaosn for doing so (to generate more revenue for the Government) may not come to pass.[/quote]

I think government will recover the revenue. As capital allocation moves away from non-productive investment like housing and real-estate, it should move into more productive investments that will generate tax revenue. At least that is what I hope happens.

[/quote]

Interesting counterpoint. But in this case the capital allocation would shift from consumers to the Federal Government. Are you suggesting that the Federal Government makes more productive investments than private individuals ?[/quote]

What I suggest is that more productive investment allocation will lead to more sustainable growth. Goverment will collect more revenue because there will be more taxable personal income and coroporate profits. Hope that clears it up.

Government sometimes make more productive investments then private individuals. Internet which partially came out of DARPA is but one example. Basic science reasearch is another.

[MadeInTaiwan]

[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=MadeInTaiwan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]
…Regardless of the mechanism, it is naive to believe that the Government will recover the amount of dollars they anticipate by enacting this change. People will react and adapt to the changes in a way that reduces the overall take of the government.

I don’t disagree that in the long run the removal of this subsidy would make the economy more efficient, it’s just that the reaosn for doing so (to generate more revenue for the Government) may not come to pass.[/quote]

I think government will recover the revenue. As capital allocation moves away from non-productive investment like housing and real-estate, it should move into more productive investments that will generate tax revenue. At least that is what I hope happens.

[/quote]

Interesting counterpoint. But in this case the capital allocation would shift from consumers to the Federal Government. Are you suggesting that the Federal Government makes more productive investments than private individuals ?[/quote]

What I suggest is that more productive investment allocation will lead to more sustainable growth. Goverment will collect more revenue because there will be more taxable personal income and coroporate profits. Hope that clears it up.

Government sometimes make more productive investments then private individuals. Internet which partially came out of DARPA is but one example. Basic science reasearch is another.

[Author]

Posts