[The OC Scam]

[quote=CONCHO]Explain to me how unemployed people will:

A. Pay rent.

B. Pay mortgages.

C. Get loans.

D. Buy houses.

Silly kewp, once home prices start going up again then everyone will be working full-time as a house flipper/real estate speculator! They can just buy homes using NINJA 120% loans and live off of MEW while waiting for the proceeds from their first flip to come in. Haven’t you learned anything from the past 8 years?[/quote]

Oh God I hope your right!! If not I’m going to start buying ITEX money (www.itex.com to learn more)

[The OC Scam]

[quote=CONCHO]Explain to me how unemployed people will:

A. Pay rent.

B. Pay mortgages.

C. Get loans.

D. Buy houses.

Silly kewp, once home prices start going up again then everyone will be working full-time as a house flipper/real estate speculator! They can just buy homes using NINJA 120% loans and live off of MEW while waiting for the proceeds from their first flip to come in. Haven’t you learned anything from the past 8 years?[/quote]

Oh God I hope your right!! If not I’m going to start buying ITEX money (www.itex.com to learn more)

[The OC Scam]

[quote=CONCHO]Explain to me how unemployed people will:

A. Pay rent.

B. Pay mortgages.

C. Get loans.

D. Buy houses.

Silly kewp, once home prices start going up again then everyone will be working full-time as a house flipper/real estate speculator! They can just buy homes using NINJA 120% loans and live off of MEW while waiting for the proceeds from their first flip to come in. Haven’t you learned anything from the past 8 years?[/quote]

Oh God I hope your right!! If not I’m going to start buying ITEX money (www.itex.com to learn more)

[The OC Scam]

[quote=CONCHO]Explain to me how unemployed people will:

A. Pay rent.

B. Pay mortgages.

C. Get loans.

D. Buy houses.

Silly kewp, once home prices start going up again then everyone will be working full-time as a house flipper/real estate speculator! They can just buy homes using NINJA 120% loans and live off of MEW while waiting for the proceeds from their first flip to come in. Haven’t you learned anything from the past 8 years?[/quote]

Oh God I hope your right!! If not I’m going to start buying ITEX money (www.itex.com to learn more)

[The OC Scam]

[quote=CONCHO]Explain to me how unemployed people will:

A. Pay rent.

B. Pay mortgages.

C. Get loans.

D. Buy houses.

Silly kewp, once home prices start going up again then everyone will be working full-time as a house flipper/real estate speculator! They can just buy homes using NINJA 120% loans and live off of MEW while waiting for the proceeds from their first flip to come in. Haven’t you learned anything from the past 8 years?[/quote]

Oh God I hope your right!! If not I’m going to start buying ITEX money (www.itex.com to learn more)

[The OC Scam]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=OC Scam]But seriously what makes you think the Treasury will not default on those bonds at some point soon? Maybe you think the AMERO will save us?[/quote]

I’m not sure how someone who owns the printing press defaults on bonds denominated in dollars. The fed, can always add more dollars to their ledger and then spend them buying treasuries, which gives the treasury dept money to spend. I fail to see why or how they would default as long as they continued to do that. That’s the beauty of a fiat currency. Those who control the printing presses can make as much of it as they want.

If by default, you mean to imply that at some point in time the fed will not be able to get anyone to take the dollars they drop out of the helicopter, then I suppose you could call that a default. But I don’t see that happening anytime soon. China and lots of other foreigners are still buying up dollars to manipulate their currencies, and I don’t think that game ends anytime soon.

Or maybe you mean by default that at some point deflation will cease to be a concern, and inflation will come back, and then the fed will have to face the music. I could easily see that happening, but just not any time soon.

If by default, you mean the traditional definition, ie. the treasury simply refuses to pay back the bonds they have issued, I don’t see why they would do that. Care to explain what they would gain by doing that?

XBoxBoy
[/quote]

I was concerned before about the treasury being able to sell bonds to the already over sold world. But I am more concerned as of late, referring to the debate concerning treasury bonds defaulting and legitimacy of UStreasury bonds. I have recently been reading about the failures to deliver UStreasurys to be a precursor to a actual default and that maybe we are seeing a redux of counterfeit issuance of USTBonds in order to satisfy unprecedented demand.

Could the failures to deliver USTreasurys, as shown in the alarming graphic below, be a precursor to actual default?

[img_assist|nid=9825|title=US treasury settlement failure|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=50]

[The OC Scam]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=OC Scam]But seriously what makes you think the Treasury will not default on those bonds at some point soon? Maybe you think the AMERO will save us?[/quote]

I’m not sure how someone who owns the printing press defaults on bonds denominated in dollars. The fed, can always add more dollars to their ledger and then spend them buying treasuries, which gives the treasury dept money to spend. I fail to see why or how they would default as long as they continued to do that. That’s the beauty of a fiat currency. Those who control the printing presses can make as much of it as they want.

If by default, you mean to imply that at some point in time the fed will not be able to get anyone to take the dollars they drop out of the helicopter, then I suppose you could call that a default. But I don’t see that happening anytime soon. China and lots of other foreigners are still buying up dollars to manipulate their currencies, and I don’t think that game ends anytime soon.

Or maybe you mean by default that at some point deflation will cease to be a concern, and inflation will come back, and then the fed will have to face the music. I could easily see that happening, but just not any time soon.

If by default, you mean the traditional definition, ie. the treasury simply refuses to pay back the bonds they have issued, I don’t see why they would do that. Care to explain what they would gain by doing that?

XBoxBoy
[/quote]

I was concerned before about the treasury being able to sell bonds to the already over sold world. But I am more concerned as of late, referring to the debate concerning treasury bonds defaulting and legitimacy of UStreasury bonds. I have recently been reading about the failures to deliver UStreasurys to be a precursor to a actual default and that maybe we are seeing a redux of counterfeit issuance of USTBonds in order to satisfy unprecedented demand.

Could the failures to deliver USTreasurys, as shown in the alarming graphic below, be a precursor to actual default?

[img_assist|nid=9825|title=US treasury settlement failure|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=50]

[The OC Scam]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=OC Scam]But seriously what makes you think the Treasury will not default on those bonds at some point soon? Maybe you think the AMERO will save us?[/quote]

I’m not sure how someone who owns the printing press defaults on bonds denominated in dollars. The fed, can always add more dollars to their ledger and then spend them buying treasuries, which gives the treasury dept money to spend. I fail to see why or how they would default as long as they continued to do that. That’s the beauty of a fiat currency. Those who control the printing presses can make as much of it as they want.

If by default, you mean to imply that at some point in time the fed will not be able to get anyone to take the dollars they drop out of the helicopter, then I suppose you could call that a default. But I don’t see that happening anytime soon. China and lots of other foreigners are still buying up dollars to manipulate their currencies, and I don’t think that game ends anytime soon.

Or maybe you mean by default that at some point deflation will cease to be a concern, and inflation will come back, and then the fed will have to face the music. I could easily see that happening, but just not any time soon.

If by default, you mean the traditional definition, ie. the treasury simply refuses to pay back the bonds they have issued, I don’t see why they would do that. Care to explain what they would gain by doing that?

XBoxBoy
[/quote]

I was concerned before about the treasury being able to sell bonds to the already over sold world. But I am more concerned as of late, referring to the debate concerning treasury bonds defaulting and legitimacy of UStreasury bonds. I have recently been reading about the failures to deliver UStreasurys to be a precursor to a actual default and that maybe we are seeing a redux of counterfeit issuance of USTBonds in order to satisfy unprecedented demand.

Could the failures to deliver USTreasurys, as shown in the alarming graphic below, be a precursor to actual default?

[img_assist|nid=9825|title=US treasury settlement failure|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=50]

[The OC Scam]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=OC Scam]But seriously what makes you think the Treasury will not default on those bonds at some point soon? Maybe you think the AMERO will save us?[/quote]

I’m not sure how someone who owns the printing press defaults on bonds denominated in dollars. The fed, can always add more dollars to their ledger and then spend them buying treasuries, which gives the treasury dept money to spend. I fail to see why or how they would default as long as they continued to do that. That’s the beauty of a fiat currency. Those who control the printing presses can make as much of it as they want.

If by default, you mean to imply that at some point in time the fed will not be able to get anyone to take the dollars they drop out of the helicopter, then I suppose you could call that a default. But I don’t see that happening anytime soon. China and lots of other foreigners are still buying up dollars to manipulate their currencies, and I don’t think that game ends anytime soon.

Or maybe you mean by default that at some point deflation will cease to be a concern, and inflation will come back, and then the fed will have to face the music. I could easily see that happening, but just not any time soon.

If by default, you mean the traditional definition, ie. the treasury simply refuses to pay back the bonds they have issued, I don’t see why they would do that. Care to explain what they would gain by doing that?

XBoxBoy
[/quote]

I was concerned before about the treasury being able to sell bonds to the already over sold world. But I am more concerned as of late, referring to the debate concerning treasury bonds defaulting and legitimacy of UStreasury bonds. I have recently been reading about the failures to deliver UStreasurys to be a precursor to a actual default and that maybe we are seeing a redux of counterfeit issuance of USTBonds in order to satisfy unprecedented demand.

Could the failures to deliver USTreasurys, as shown in the alarming graphic below, be a precursor to actual default?

[img_assist|nid=9825|title=US treasury settlement failure|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=50]

[The OC Scam]

[quote=XBoxBoy][quote=OC Scam]But seriously what makes you think the Treasury will not default on those bonds at some point soon? Maybe you think the AMERO will save us?[/quote]

I’m not sure how someone who owns the printing press defaults on bonds denominated in dollars. The fed, can always add more dollars to their ledger and then spend them buying treasuries, which gives the treasury dept money to spend. I fail to see why or how they would default as long as they continued to do that. That’s the beauty of a fiat currency. Those who control the printing presses can make as much of it as they want.

If by default, you mean to imply that at some point in time the fed will not be able to get anyone to take the dollars they drop out of the helicopter, then I suppose you could call that a default. But I don’t see that happening anytime soon. China and lots of other foreigners are still buying up dollars to manipulate their currencies, and I don’t think that game ends anytime soon.

Or maybe you mean by default that at some point deflation will cease to be a concern, and inflation will come back, and then the fed will have to face the music. I could easily see that happening, but just not any time soon.

If by default, you mean the traditional definition, ie. the treasury simply refuses to pay back the bonds they have issued, I don’t see why they would do that. Care to explain what they would gain by doing that?

XBoxBoy
[/quote]

I was concerned before about the treasury being able to sell bonds to the already over sold world. But I am more concerned as of late, referring to the debate concerning treasury bonds defaulting and legitimacy of UStreasury bonds. I have recently been reading about the failures to deliver UStreasurys to be a precursor to a actual default and that maybe we are seeing a redux of counterfeit issuance of USTBonds in order to satisfy unprecedented demand.

Could the failures to deliver USTreasurys, as shown in the alarming graphic below, be a precursor to actual default?

[img_assist|nid=9825|title=US treasury settlement failure|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=100|height=50]

[The OC Scam]

[quote=stockstradr]Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said…(see post above)

Of course the Fed IS planning (or already implementing) actions to bring mortgage rates down to (or below) 4.5% on 30-year fixed.

Paulson isn’t an idiot (although he acts like one); he understands that a promise to America for rates of 4.5% on 30-year fixed would bring the already slow-as-molasses home market to a standstill, as potential homebuyers stalled purchases and waited for the promised 4.5% loans.

So Paulson made the only statement that wouldn’t get him fired. He lied and said they weren’t targeting 4.5%
[/quote]

Basically if Paulson says “We are not planning for 4.5 % on 30 year” then he means “We are planning for 2.5% on 30 year”?

[The OC Scam]

[quote=stockstradr]Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said…(see post above)

Of course the Fed IS planning (or already implementing) actions to bring mortgage rates down to (or below) 4.5% on 30-year fixed.

Paulson isn’t an idiot (although he acts like one); he understands that a promise to America for rates of 4.5% on 30-year fixed would bring the already slow-as-molasses home market to a standstill, as potential homebuyers stalled purchases and waited for the promised 4.5% loans.

So Paulson made the only statement that wouldn’t get him fired. He lied and said they weren’t targeting 4.5%
[/quote]

Basically if Paulson says “We are not planning for 4.5 % on 30 year” then he means “We are planning for 2.5% on 30 year”?

[The OC Scam]

[quote=stockstradr]Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said…(see post above)

Of course the Fed IS planning (or already implementing) actions to bring mortgage rates down to (or below) 4.5% on 30-year fixed.

Paulson isn’t an idiot (although he acts like one); he understands that a promise to America for rates of 4.5% on 30-year fixed would bring the already slow-as-molasses home market to a standstill, as potential homebuyers stalled purchases and waited for the promised 4.5% loans.

So Paulson made the only statement that wouldn’t get him fired. He lied and said they weren’t targeting 4.5%
[/quote]

Basically if Paulson says “We are not planning for 4.5 % on 30 year” then he means “We are planning for 2.5% on 30 year”?

[The OC Scam]

[quote=stockstradr]Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said…(see post above)

Of course the Fed IS planning (or already implementing) actions to bring mortgage rates down to (or below) 4.5% on 30-year fixed.

Paulson isn’t an idiot (although he acts like one); he understands that a promise to America for rates of 4.5% on 30-year fixed would bring the already slow-as-molasses home market to a standstill, as potential homebuyers stalled purchases and waited for the promised 4.5% loans.

So Paulson made the only statement that wouldn’t get him fired. He lied and said they weren’t targeting 4.5%
[/quote]

Basically if Paulson says “We are not planning for 4.5 % on 30 year” then he means “We are planning for 2.5% on 30 year”?

[The OC Scam]

[quote=stockstradr]Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said…(see post above)

Of course the Fed IS planning (or already implementing) actions to bring mortgage rates down to (or below) 4.5% on 30-year fixed.

Paulson isn’t an idiot (although he acts like one); he understands that a promise to America for rates of 4.5% on 30-year fixed would bring the already slow-as-molasses home market to a standstill, as potential homebuyers stalled purchases and waited for the promised 4.5% loans.

So Paulson made the only statement that wouldn’t get him fired. He lied and said they weren’t targeting 4.5%
[/quote]

Basically if Paulson says “We are not planning for 4.5 % on 30 year” then he means “We are planning for 2.5% on 30 year”?

[Author]

Posts