Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389521April 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389727
patientrenter
ParticipantUse 20% if it makes you feel better, pri!
I used 2% because it’s a reasonable number for growth net of inflation. Arguably higher or lower, but I think it’s in the ballpark. And the additional inflation element of growth doesn’t provide you with any real wealth.
April 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389778ParticipantUse 20% if it makes you feel better, pri!
I used 2% because it’s a reasonable number for growth net of inflation. Arguably higher or lower, but I think it’s in the ballpark. And the additional inflation element of growth doesn’t provide you with any real wealth.
April 28, 2009 at 9:35 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389919ParticipantUse 20% if it makes you feel better, pri!
I used 2% because it’s a reasonable number for growth net of inflation. Arguably higher or lower, but I think it’s in the ballpark. And the additional inflation element of growth doesn’t provide you with any real wealth.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Under the administration’s new program, the interest rate on second mortgages will be reduced to 1% on loans where payments cover interest and principal and to 2% for interest-only loans. The government will subsidize the rate reduction, with the money going to the mortgage investor.
———————-Can’t the servicers lower the rates to 1% (or even 0%!) all by themselves? Why does the govt (that’s us, the taxpayers…again) have to subsidize anything? These are the lenders’ loans, and it’s up to them to modify them however they see fit. They can reduce principal or lower rates without any govt assistance.
Can somebody please explain again WHY we (taxpayers) need to do this?[/quote]
Quit chattering and hold that bent over position.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Under the administration’s new program, the interest rate on second mortgages will be reduced to 1% on loans where payments cover interest and principal and to 2% for interest-only loans. The government will subsidize the rate reduction, with the money going to the mortgage investor.
———————-Can’t the servicers lower the rates to 1% (or even 0%!) all by themselves? Why does the govt (that’s us, the taxpayers…again) have to subsidize anything? These are the lenders’ loans, and it’s up to them to modify them however they see fit. They can reduce principal or lower rates without any govt assistance.
Can somebody please explain again WHY we (taxpayers) need to do this?[/quote]
Quit chattering and hold that bent over position.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Under the administration’s new program, the interest rate on second mortgages will be reduced to 1% on loans where payments cover interest and principal and to 2% for interest-only loans. The government will subsidize the rate reduction, with the money going to the mortgage investor.
———————-Can’t the servicers lower the rates to 1% (or even 0%!) all by themselves? Why does the govt (that’s us, the taxpayers…again) have to subsidize anything? These are the lenders’ loans, and it’s up to them to modify them however they see fit. They can reduce principal or lower rates without any govt assistance.
Can somebody please explain again WHY we (taxpayers) need to do this?[/quote]
Quit chattering and hold that bent over position.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Under the administration’s new program, the interest rate on second mortgages will be reduced to 1% on loans where payments cover interest and principal and to 2% for interest-only loans. The government will subsidize the rate reduction, with the money going to the mortgage investor.
———————-Can’t the servicers lower the rates to 1% (or even 0%!) all by themselves? Why does the govt (that’s us, the taxpayers…again) have to subsidize anything? These are the lenders’ loans, and it’s up to them to modify them however they see fit. They can reduce principal or lower rates without any govt assistance.
Can somebody please explain again WHY we (taxpayers) need to do this?[/quote]
Quit chattering and hold that bent over position.
Participant[quote=CA renter]Under the administration’s new program, the interest rate on second mortgages will be reduced to 1% on loans where payments cover interest and principal and to 2% for interest-only loans. The government will subsidize the rate reduction, with the money going to the mortgage investor.
———————-Can’t the servicers lower the rates to 1% (or even 0%!) all by themselves? Why does the govt (that’s us, the taxpayers…again) have to subsidize anything? These are the lenders’ loans, and it’s up to them to modify them however they see fit. They can reduce principal or lower rates without any govt assistance.
Can somebody please explain again WHY we (taxpayers) need to do this?[/quote]
Quit chattering and hold that bent over position.
April 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389125Participant[quote=pri_dk]
…..Even a very small rate of consistent earnings growth will yield huge payouts in the long run.
Wall Street analysts do lie. But figures do not.
[/quote]pri_dk, if the average company pays a dividend of 2% a year, in an economy growing at 2% a year, what should the average investor buying stocks for $1,000,000 now expect to earn 30 years from now?
April 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389391Participant[quote=pri_dk]
…..Even a very small rate of consistent earnings growth will yield huge payouts in the long run.
Wall Street analysts do lie. But figures do not.
[/quote]pri_dk, if the average company pays a dividend of 2% a year, in an economy growing at 2% a year, what should the average investor buying stocks for $1,000,000 now expect to earn 30 years from now?
April 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389597Participant[quote=pri_dk]
…..Even a very small rate of consistent earnings growth will yield huge payouts in the long run.
Wall Street analysts do lie. But figures do not.
[/quote]pri_dk, if the average company pays a dividend of 2% a year, in an economy growing at 2% a year, what should the average investor buying stocks for $1,000,000 now expect to earn 30 years from now?
April 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389648Participant[quote=pri_dk]
…..Even a very small rate of consistent earnings growth will yield huge payouts in the long run.
Wall Street analysts do lie. But figures do not.
[/quote]pri_dk, if the average company pays a dividend of 2% a year, in an economy growing at 2% a year, what should the average investor buying stocks for $1,000,000 now expect to earn 30 years from now?
April 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM in reply to: What do folks think about the stock market these days? #389789Participant[quote=pri_dk]
…..Even a very small rate of consistent earnings growth will yield huge payouts in the long run.
Wall Street analysts do lie. But figures do not.
[/quote]pri_dk, if the average company pays a dividend of 2% a year, in an economy growing at 2% a year, what should the average investor buying stocks for $1,000,000 now expect to earn 30 years from now?
Participantdavelj, my budget for a home is less than 15% of my net worth. Why? Because I am so conservative that the other 85% of my savings is “spoken for” – all used to pay for all my other living expenses. I try to live within my investment income. Earned income goes to increase my investments, which produce more income, and that allows me to spend more (eventually). So it’s actually very hard for me to substantially increase my material living standards. Getting a few hundred thousand for free in a legally sanctioned, government-supported, scam that I am paying for anyway could dramatically increase my total housing budget.
I will have to skip describing the regulatory bodies I must give background info to. I am reasonably known in my segment of my industry, and I enjoy the anonymity of this board.
Valuing acquisition targets: I just couldn’t imagine our CEO caring if my credit score was good when I gave him the estimated value for an acquisition target, so that’s why I raised that example. Bad attempt at humor. I don’t normally do acquisition valuations, but this one would have been on the front page of the WSJ if Mr Geithner had approved it. (I liked this decision of his, since I didn’t think we should buy the target.)
Anyway, I want to remain anonymous, so I will have to quit giving any more info that could be clues. I still would buy a house using borrowed money provided by a hare-brained govt scheme to support home prices, as long as it was easy and I had no liability. The recent events really have altered my view of the prevailing morality in our population and their institutions, and what I should do about it. All that quick dumping of the moral hazard issue, in ways that just happened to work nicely for the people doing the dumping? Well, since they don’t much care about moral hazard, I know they won’t mind my little addition to it.
-
AuthorPosts
