Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant[quote=flu]I never thought that a tax credit would have generatde so much demand…Boy was I wrong about that.[/quote]
As a practical matter, it didn’t. New home sales, even during the end of the tax credit period were dismal, still significantly lower (in number of units sold) than any time in the last 60 years, save for a handful of months. (Note, thats months, not years. A handful of months out of the last 720 months, probably longer.)
The market hasn’t responded sharply because it’s not news.
New home sales won’t move much until there is demand. There won’t be demand until there is a shortage of resale homes. Seems unlikely that will be any time soon, in most markets.
It’s all part of the puzzle. Working backwards here, there can’t (or won’t) be inflation unless there is a robust recovery, which probably can’t happen unless there is very healthy job creation. As a practical matter, there can’t be healthy job creation until there is an increase in new home construction spending. From that point backwards, see above.
Participant[quote=flu]I never thought that a tax credit would have generatde so much demand…Boy was I wrong about that.[/quote]
As a practical matter, it didn’t. New home sales, even during the end of the tax credit period were dismal, still significantly lower (in number of units sold) than any time in the last 60 years, save for a handful of months. (Note, thats months, not years. A handful of months out of the last 720 months, probably longer.)
The market hasn’t responded sharply because it’s not news.
New home sales won’t move much until there is demand. There won’t be demand until there is a shortage of resale homes. Seems unlikely that will be any time soon, in most markets.
It’s all part of the puzzle. Working backwards here, there can’t (or won’t) be inflation unless there is a robust recovery, which probably can’t happen unless there is very healthy job creation. As a practical matter, there can’t be healthy job creation until there is an increase in new home construction spending. From that point backwards, see above.
Participant[quote=flu]I never thought that a tax credit would have generatde so much demand…Boy was I wrong about that.[/quote]
As a practical matter, it didn’t. New home sales, even during the end of the tax credit period were dismal, still significantly lower (in number of units sold) than any time in the last 60 years, save for a handful of months. (Note, thats months, not years. A handful of months out of the last 720 months, probably longer.)
The market hasn’t responded sharply because it’s not news.
New home sales won’t move much until there is demand. There won’t be demand until there is a shortage of resale homes. Seems unlikely that will be any time soon, in most markets.
It’s all part of the puzzle. Working backwards here, there can’t (or won’t) be inflation unless there is a robust recovery, which probably can’t happen unless there is very healthy job creation. As a practical matter, there can’t be healthy job creation until there is an increase in new home construction spending. From that point backwards, see above.
Participant[quote=svelte]Yeah, that doesn’t exactly sound like someone with big cojones saying “i dare you to let me go”.
[/quote]
He will have resigned by the time we wake up tomorrow morning.
Participant[quote=svelte]Yeah, that doesn’t exactly sound like someone with big cojones saying “i dare you to let me go”.
[/quote]
He will have resigned by the time we wake up tomorrow morning.
Participant[quote=svelte]Yeah, that doesn’t exactly sound like someone with big cojones saying “i dare you to let me go”.
[/quote]
He will have resigned by the time we wake up tomorrow morning.
Participant[quote=svelte]Yeah, that doesn’t exactly sound like someone with big cojones saying “i dare you to let me go”.
[/quote]
He will have resigned by the time we wake up tomorrow morning.
Participant[quote=svelte]Yeah, that doesn’t exactly sound like someone with big cojones saying “i dare you to let me go”.
[/quote]
He will have resigned by the time we wake up tomorrow morning.
Participant[quote=Arraya]Well, I guess the 20 billion is a better deal than they get in Nigeria
Shell on Trial: Landmark Trial Set to Begin Over Shell’s Role in 1995 Execution of Nigerian Human Rights Activis…[/quote]
A better deal for who? Shell settled for $15.5 million.
And the $20 billion is only for compensation claims, not the cleanup. Not the fines, which could total as much or more.
Participant[quote=Arraya]Well, I guess the 20 billion is a better deal than they get in Nigeria
Shell on Trial: Landmark Trial Set to Begin Over Shell’s Role in 1995 Execution of Nigerian Human Rights Activis…[/quote]
A better deal for who? Shell settled for $15.5 million.
And the $20 billion is only for compensation claims, not the cleanup. Not the fines, which could total as much or more.
Participant[quote=Arraya]Well, I guess the 20 billion is a better deal than they get in Nigeria
Shell on Trial: Landmark Trial Set to Begin Over Shell’s Role in 1995 Execution of Nigerian Human Rights Activis…[/quote]
A better deal for who? Shell settled for $15.5 million.
And the $20 billion is only for compensation claims, not the cleanup. Not the fines, which could total as much or more.
Participant[quote=Arraya]Well, I guess the 20 billion is a better deal than they get in Nigeria
Shell on Trial: Landmark Trial Set to Begin Over Shell’s Role in 1995 Execution of Nigerian Human Rights Activis…[/quote]
A better deal for who? Shell settled for $15.5 million.
And the $20 billion is only for compensation claims, not the cleanup. Not the fines, which could total as much or more.
Participant[quote=Arraya]Well, I guess the 20 billion is a better deal than they get in Nigeria
Shell on Trial: Landmark Trial Set to Begin Over Shell’s Role in 1995 Execution of Nigerian Human Rights Activis…[/quote]
A better deal for who? Shell settled for $15.5 million.
And the $20 billion is only for compensation claims, not the cleanup. Not the fines, which could total as much or more.
Participant[quote=afx114]Also, Rachel Maddow gives the Oval Office presidential address on the oilspill that Obama should have given: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kax29CwH810.
That lesbian has more balls than Obama. I think I’m in love![/quote]
I adore Rachel Maddow. She is at least borderline brilliant, she is witty, she is direct. And her speech was good, maybe great, as she is an actor playing a role. It was a movie script speech.
But as a practical matter, Obama can’t pass cap and trade using reconciliation. The rules don’t allow for it. He can’t do it by executive order, the rules don’t allow for it. He just can’t do many of the things she suggested in her speech, without the help of congress. Real politic makes it impossible.
I too would have liked to have heard more force and determination from him. He could have done a whole lot better with the speech. But as far as what he can do to fix the problem, I’ve certainly seen no recommendations that are better than what’s being done. He did get BP to set aside $20 billion. That’s humungous.
-
AuthorPosts
