Nov282012
Neighbors stealing from neighbors: HELOCs make a comeback
When people are victims of theft, they usually work to remedy the situation so the theft doesn’t happen again. If a thief breaks into someone’s house, the homeowner installs better locks or alarm systems to avoid a future loss of property or worse. However, when the crime is more complex than breaking-and-entering, or when the government is the facilitator of the crime, it can be much more difficult for the victims to protect themselves, but it’s just as necessary.
The Big Steal
I have written that Moral hazard is the central issue in the housing bust. My reasoning is simple. If we let bankers and borrowers get away with stealing from taxpayers, both of those groups will work hard to do it again. So how exactly did they steal from us?
When bankers make bad loans, they are supposed to lose money. The fear of loss is the only thing that compels bankers not to take excessive risks like the ones that brought down the economy in 2008. If bankers know they can look to the US taxpayer to bail them out and absorb their losses, bankers have every incentive to take wild risks to generate private profits. The US taxpayer shares some portion of these profits through taxes, but it assumes 100% of the liability for losses, not a particularly good deal for taxpayers.
So far, the US taxpayer has absorbed about $150 billion in losses through the GSEs. Plus, through the variety of loan modification and short sale incentive programs, we have paid investors and bankers billions for their worthless securities. For example, we now pay second lien holders $6,000 to sign off on a short sale. Since these securities are subordinate to an underwater first mortgage, they have no value at all. Paying these investors — who ostensibly knew the risks — $6,000 from the treasury for their worthless second mortgage is a government bailout of an investor’s bad decision. Theft.
Dodd-Frank to the rescue?
The general public widely believes the Dodd-Frank bill corrected the mistakes of the credit bubble which fueled the housing bubble. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Nothing in the new law protects taxpayers from future bailouts. The too-big-to-fail banks have gotten larger. There is little or no oversight of the types of complex financial instruments such as credit default swaps that created the mispricing of risk that resulted in a credit bubble. And most importantly, there are no restrictions at all on the kinds of loans lenders can underwrite or the loan-to-value ratios they can cover with debt.
Restricting loan types, DTIs and LTVs
In The Great Housing Bubble, I proposed a series of regulatory changes that really would have prevented the next housing bubble.
Loans for the purchase or refinance of residential real estate secured by a mortgage and recorded in the public record are limited by the following parameters based on the borrower’s documented income and general indebtedness and the appraised value of the property at the time of sale or refinance:
- 1. All payments must be calculated based on a 30-year fixed-rate conventionally-amortizing mortgage regardless of the loan program used. Negative amortization is not permitted.
- 2. The total debt-to-income ratio for the mortgage loan payment, taxes and insurance cannot exceed 28% of a borrower’s gross income.
- 3. The total debt-to-income of all debt obligations cannot exceed 36% of a borrower’s gross income.
- 4. The combined-loan-to-value of mortgage indebtedness cannot exceed 90% of the appraised value of the property or the purchase price, whichever value is smaller except in specially sanctioned government programs.
The only way to ensure lenders can’t provide the air to inflate another housing bubble is to restrict the types of loans offered to verify they amortize, and restrict loan-to-value ratios to ensure people can afford to repay the loans, and restrict the loan-to-value ratio to make certain borrowers have equity, and more importantly, confirm borrowers don’t have incentive to become Ponzis.
The Texas example
Texas did not have a housing bubble. The reason was simple. In the Texas constitution, lenders are not allowed to loan beyond an 80% loan-to-value ratio. Without access to HELOC money, Texans saw no purpose in running up house prices. Expensive homes did not provide them spending money, and in Texas, the higher home value also increases their property taxes, so higher home prices actually cost them more money. The incentives in Texas are the opposite of what they are here in California, so we endure bubble after bubble, while Texas enjoys stable home prices and relative affordability.
federal reserve encourages Ponzi theft
Ben Bernanke is determined to reflate the housing bubble and expand consumer spending from what he calls the “wealth effect.” In reality, the wealth effect is an illusion. What we really have is the “Ponzi effect.” When house prices go up, people are not encouraged to spend their savings, they are encouraged to take on more debt. The increase in consumer spending is largely a result of increased borrowing, which is a benefit to the member banks of the federal reserve. Since our current system is set up to bail out the banks when they get in trouble, when the Ponzis take this free money the federal reserve wants them to have, the US taxpayer will end up paying off the bills of these Ponzis when the Ponzi scheme collapses yet again.
How do you feel about having your tax dollars paying off the debts of Ponzis and paying the bonuses of the bankers who facilitated their theft?
Home Equity Loans Make Comeback Fueling U.S. Spending
By Kathleen M. Howley – Nov 26, 2012 5:55 AM PT
Home equity lines of credit that fueled a spending spree during the U.S. property boom are back.
After six years of declines, lending for so-called Helocs will rise 30 percent to $79.6 billion in 2012, the highest level since the start of the financial crisis in 2008, according to the economics research unit of Moody’s Corp. Originations next year will jump another 31 percent to $104 billion, it projected.
This is good news? Bankers are enabling Ponzis to make a profit, and the US taxpayer is at risk for another bailout. Is stimulating the economy in this way worth the cost? If so, then everyone should buy a house and join in the looting.
Lending tied to real estate is reviving as record-low mortgage rates spur the housing recovery while an improving job market makes it easier for people to borrow. A rise in home equity lines is in turn helping the economy, fueling purchase of goods like televisions and refrigerators. Consumer spending, the biggest part of the economy, accelerated to a 2 percent annual rate last quarter from a 1.5 percent pace in the prior period.
Taking on long term debt with taxpayer backing to purchase short-term consumer goods is both imprudent and stupid. When lenders know they can pass these losses on to taxpayers, it’s highway robbery.
“If house prices continue to rise, home equity lending will keep rising,” said Mustafa Akcay, a Moody’s Analytics economist in West Chester, Pennsylvania. “Lenders have been worried about the ability of consumers to pay back their loans, and as the economy improves, that concern is easing.” …
Bullshit. Lenders are quite confident the US taxpayer will cover any of their losses.
‘Positive Impact’
“People will spend more of their equity,” said Chris Christopher, an economist at IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Massachusetts. “It won’t be as much as they spent when prices were gaining at a rapid pace in 2005 and 2006, but it should have a positive impact on consumer spending.”
Yippee! The Ponzis are spending again. Perhaps we should throw a parade in their honor.
The revival in Helocs comes as lenders … are still coming to grips with bad loans made during the housing boom that ended in 2006. … Banks charged off — or declared worthless — $4.5 billion of equity loans in the third quarter, the most in two years, according to Federal Reserve data.
I can see why banks want to get back into that business…
Americans had used their homes like credit cards to go on spending sprees during the 2000 to mid-2006 real estate boom, tapping their equity to buy cars, televisions and luxury cruises. Consumers used about $677.3 billion, or about $113 billion a year, from home equity loans for consumer spending, according to a 2007 paper by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Fed economist James Kennedy.
I can’t believe nobody sees the problem with this.
Added Margins
Typically, the margins banks add to the prime rate might start at around 2 percentage points, what banks would call prime plus 2. Borrowers are approved for an amount they can use in full or just tap when they need, often drawing on Helocs with credit cards or checks. Rates for Helocs vary with location and credit scores.
Private profits and public losses. Of course lenders will want to make those loans.
Wary Lenders
“Having been chastened by the downturn, lenders are wary,” said Keith Gumbinger, vice president of HSH.com, a mortgage-data firm in Riverdale, New Jersey. “If a home goes underwater and the owner stops paying a Heloc, that lender may get nothing back because the collateral is gone.”
Unless they get a bailout — which they will. We currently pay lenders $6,000 each for their worthless HELOCs. Why would it be any different next time around?
During the housing boom, lenders often would approve lines of credit that exceeded home values. One popular type of Heloc was a 1-2-5 loan that allowed the main mortgage combined with the home equity loan to total 125 percent of a home’s value.
“The memory of the housing boom and the correction will make folks a lot more conservative,” Khan said. “That means only getting the amount of loan they absolutely need, and spending it in a more sensible way.”
The memory of the bailouts will remedy any concerns lenders have about future losses on bad loans. The memory of the housing bubble will fade in a nanosecond.
I surrender
I give up. Nobody seems to care that greedy lenders are enabling foolish Ponzis to spend their home equity on trinkets and useless crap. Anyone who exercises the slighted bit of restraint is a fool. The prudent will get none of the benefit and end up paying all of the bills. Apparently, everyone is okay with that because politicians are under no pressure to change the system. Perhaps I should stop fighting it.
Everyone should buy a house as soon as possible and go Ponzi.
There are millions that want a lifestyle their income can never give them. They will always turn to HELOC money if it’s available.
That’s exactly the problem. Demand for free money from consumers is infinite. It’s the suppliers of money that are supposed to make the determination as to whether or not the borrower will repay the loan or if they are a Ponzi. As long as the suppliers are backed by government insurance, they will be less discriminatory about who they lend to, and the US taxpayer will end up paying the losses caused by the Ponzis.
Why do you think enablers and hucksters — government or banking, those foxes — are ever going to guard the henhouse? Have they ever?
Maybe it’s time for a little community and personal judgment. When our neighbor, good friend, or even son borrows foolishly and gets foreclosed upon, stop placing empathy for his present pain above all other considerations (such as his future welfare and self-respect), and stop suggesting “someone” should help him out (How about the government?! Isn’t that free money anyway?!) Let us start saying You fucked up. Now own it, stop whining, and get to work digging yourself out.
Ever think that maybe the conservatives are right? That a refusal to judge and condemn unethical and foolish behaviour in your friends, neighbors and family, however well-intentioned and easier in the short run, has extremely destructive consequences in the long run?
Anyway, this is the world we chose on November 6, when we voted for the guy who feels our pain rather than that nasty ol’ unsympathetic billionaire who might’ve insisted loans must be repaid, stupidity and greed should be suffered to experience their natural consequences, and the printing press on L Street should not be used to rob the thrifty of their savings to bail out the cynical and clueless.
Well said. I know watching the housing bubble deflate and seeing how everyone reacted has certainly made me more conservative. I even had a post picked up by a tea party blog the other day.
You’re really ignorant if you think Romney would have done any of those things. His housing plan was identical to Obama’s, his hedge fund a major beneficiary of said printing press, and his campaign heavily funded by BANKERS!
But hey..at least he was the most electable candidate, right?
I tried to warn you.
Obushma, Obamney… no matter
”Once the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” –Ben Franklin
The Looters Are in Control
The takers have voted to take control over the producers.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-11-19/looters-are-control
That rant is a bit too far to the Right for my taste. It’s one thing to prevent theft of our money via private contracts, but it’s quite another to be opposed to all forms of regulation.
“Texas did not have a housing bubble. The reason was simple. In the Texas constitution, lenders are not allowed to loan beyond an 80% loan-to-value ratio.”
Image if they tried to pass a law in California like that? NAR, CAR, and the Too Big Too Fail banks would lobby for so hard again it. And Frankly, I think most Californians want to only put down 3.5%
Right now, nobody involved in the system in California wants to see a change. It would take federal government regulatory intervention to prevent Californians from stealing from the US Treasury.
And why would that happen? The bulk of the Federal Democratic representation hails from New York and California. California is the major money machine for Democratic Presidential candidates. The Federal government, at least in Democratic hands, loves California.
The only good news there is that the Republicans hold the House of Representatives.
“in Texas, the higher home value also increases their property taxes”
This needs to happen in CA. You pay your prop 13 taxes, or if the amount of debt secured by the property is over the prop 13 value, the total debt resets it to the higher amount.
This way the borrower will think twice and there is some payment for making the system less stable for increasing leverage.
Not perfect, but a start.
That would be a big improvement. It would be squarely aimed at the imprudent. People who don’t HELOC themselves into oblivion are rewarded with lower property taxes. Those that want to spend the free money face increasing costs. Ultimately, this would force the Ponzis to pay the cost of their own bailout as they all contribute more in property taxes due to their own behavior.
Some elements of this idea already exist.
Property taxes are, of course, a big component of the overall cost of home ownership.
But add into the mix other costs such as increased maintenance, insurance, HOA, and similar costs.
Even if these costs total a few percentage points of total purchase price/year, that’s a lot of cash money to float especially if we consider top tier (>>$1mm) homes.
the problem is hardly regulatory; it is monetary.
very low interest rates drives institutional money further out on the risk curve – subprime, euro debt, etc. we have a central planning problem. they are over regulating / distorting the markets, not the opposite. remove the backstopping of losses; capital markets would self regulate mortgages toward plain vanilla products. let the stupid fail.
Amen. I wish these government manipulations would end too.
First-time homebuyers notably absent from real estate market
The share of distressed properties is shrinking and home prices are rising, but first-time homebuyers aren’t benefiting from the improvements, according to findings from a survey.
In the most recent Campbell/Inside Mortgage Finance HousingPulseTracking survey, the first-time homebuyer share for home purchases was found to be 34.7 percent in October. The figure is a decrease from 37.1 percent in June and the lowest share in the survey’s three-year history.
The decrease coincides with a significant rise in purchases for non-distressed properties.
HousingPulse data revealed the share of purchases for non-distressed properties rose to 64.7 percent in October, an increase from 55.7 percent in February. The October share for non-distressed property purchases was also the highest level HousingPulse has recorded.
While non-distressed property purchases have increased, first-time homebuyers have become less active in the non-distressed property market.
The share of non-distressed property home purchases from first-time homebuyers is down to 33.6 percent in October from 38.7 percent in June.
The survey highlighted two key factors to explain the decrease in non-distressed property purchases from first-time homebuyers.
One has to do with higher prices for homes that are not in distress.
The second reason is the lack of available financing for first-time homebuyers. The lack of options leave many first-time homebuyers dependent on FHA for financing since FHA loans require a lower downpayment and have less strict underwriting requirements.
However, changes earlier this year added to the cost of obtaining an FHA loan and the cost is expected to increase further.
“Fifty percent of first-time homebuyers use FHA financing, but FHA insurance premiums are increasing and underwriting is becoming more strict,” said Thomas Popik, research director for Campbell Surveys. “Private mortgage insurance has started to fill the gap, but the long-term status of private mortgage insurance is in question pending the publication of the Qualified Residential Mortgage regulation resulting from Dodd-Frank.”
The survey involves responses from about 2,500 real estate agents across the country.
Price rally running out of steam
Home prices rose just slightly over the month of September, demonstrating a 0.1 percent increase from August, according to Lender Processing Services’ Home Price Index, which analyzes home prices in more than 15,500 ZIP codes each month. The September Home Price Index stands at $205,000, according to LPS.
The modest increase lines up with the latest S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index, which came in under economists’ expectations.
While the 0.1 percent increase is slight, LPS does report more significant change on a yearly and year-to-date basis. Home prices have risen 3.6 percent from last September and 4.9 percent over the year thus far.
States experiencing the largest increases in September include Arizona (1.1 percent), Washington, D.C. (1.1 percent), Georgia (0.8 percent), Delaware (0.7 percent), and Maryland (0.7 percent).
States experiencing the greatest decreases in prices over the month include Massachusetts (-0.7 percent), Connecticut (-0.7 percent), Illinois (-0.6 percent), Vermont (-0.4 percent), and Rhode Island (-0.3 percent).
With Arizona topping the list of states with the greatest monthly price increases, one of its metros, Phoenix, topped the list of metros with the greatest price increases, according to LPS’ data. Home prices in Phoenix rose 1.3 percent in September.
Phoenix was followed by Ocean Pines, Maryland (1.1 percent), Sacramento, California (0.9 percent), Atlanta (0.8 percent), Baltimore (0.8 percent), Prescott, Arizona (0.8 percent).
Metros with the greatest price declines in September include Bridgeport, Maryland (-0.9 percent), Worcester, Massachusetts (-0.7 percent), Norwich, Connecticut (-0.8 percent), Hartford, Connecticut (-0.8 percent), Torrington, Connecticut (-0.7 percent).
While prices are showing improvement nationally, they remain 22.8 percent below their June 2006 peak of $265,000.
Wouldn’t that imply folks are moving to the big cities mostly? Although people I know from Sacramento (my manager) never want to go back. Wild horses couldn’t drag me to Phoenix. Buying gas in North Vegas I felt like I was taking my life in my hands, worse than Pomona. Does that mean I’m getting old? Now stay off my lawn.
I feel your sentiments, Irvine Renter. I am surrendering too. Call it a responsibility STRIKE.
I have always considered myself prudent and responsible, which was why I didn’t jump in the 2002-2006 runaway housing market like many of my contemporaries did. I’ve earned an 800-810 credit score, and Equifax tells me the only thing preventing my score from going higher is that I’ve never had a home mortgage loan. ???
Now 6 years after the housing peak, sure, there’s a bust… but have I really been better off financially paying my bills and rent in full and on-time? From every angle, as a renter, small business owner, and hard worker, I am being undermined. Housing bubbles propped by the government backed bad loans. QE’s never ending. 87 trillion in national debt including SS and Medicare future liabilities already incurred, and every sign of every tax increasing because Washington has to justify how we will get out of debt. Inflation continuing rampant every year. I’ve finally said enough. I might as well spend my dollars now, because saving them will only allow me to spend maybe 20 to 50 cents of each saved dollar later, if that. Maybe a few things I buy will keep their value, but perhaps it’s time to simply capitulate, give in to the system, cajole whatever money I have into the absolute minimal down payment for a home, and get in the “game”.
I know it sounds like Atlas Shrugged a bit, but this is only the natural reaction to what is going on, no?
Yes, it is natural, and it does come right out of Atlas Shrugged. Ayn Rand must be enjoying a great I-told-you-so from the grave.
I am going to write a post for tomorrow suggesting just what you said. Right now, the best way to game the system is to buy a property with a minimum down FHA loan because it minimizes risk and maximizes return on investment if prices go up.
There certainly doesn’t seem much reason to save now. The government keeps incentivizing everyone to spend, and with our ever-expanding entitlement programs, the need to save to ensure one’s own well being are constantly diminished.
Ayn Rand wondered what would happen if the producers stopped producing. I wonder what would happen if all the savers in the world stopped saving?
I am in the same boat….I feel like a chump. Work hard, save, spend well below my means. For what? Putrid investment returns, ever increasing taxes. I am about to throw in the towel too.
IR – are you sure FHA financing is the way to go if one has 20% save?. It has gotten quite expensive and will only get worse.
The cost of an FHA loan are quite high, but as Perspective points out below, there are many advantages of going with an FHA loan. The ones I am going to focus on tomorrow is the stoploss protections and the high return on investment if prices go up. Those benefits may outweigh the costs.
An additional benefit I failed to mention, is that the FHA has a policy of not seeking deficiency judgments (when they’re available). So if you refi into an FHA in CA, there’s an added benefit. However, starting in 2013, CA law allows a “continuous purchase money” character to remain. i.e. If the refi after 2012 refinances only the remaining principal from the purchase mortgage, no deficiency is available. If any cash is taken in a cash-out refi, then that amount is subject to a deficiency judgment.
Go 3.5% down FHA. Pay the MI. Save the rest of your down payment in Physical, tangible items with an emphasis on gold. Make sure your monthly payment is comfortably affordable.
There are additional benefits to going with an FHA. There are many programs to help you if your income declines, including forbearance. There’s also a streamline refi that allows a quick refi with no appraisal or income checks. The MI is expensive on a 30-year loan (1.25% soon to be 1.35%), but worth the cost if you’re a marginal buyer maximizing your purchasing power and stretching your budget (and therefore can reasonably anticipate using many FHA homeowner aids).
Dave
I feel you sentiment exactly.
Our instant gratification culture along with our big bother Federal Government enabler has pushed us all to the sheer edge of the volcano looking down.
Like a bad dream in which we are all running with steel shoes into the wind.
But somehow I still keep thinking I can beat the [government] dealer.
I keep thinking, ‘There must be some way to outsmart these SOB’s’ .
A hard problem indeed.
Feels a little like trying to reverse engineer the formula for Coca-Cola or finding that little thread to predict the future outcome of Lotto.
Quote for the day:
Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future.” -Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate
You will love tomorrow’s post on gaming the system with FHA loans.
Trading most of your dollars for tangible items is the best way to stop them from debasing your savings. Oh, and gold.
The FHA is really gaming the system. With public approval in the FHA, it will allow the banks keep the property price high, while loan money at the inflated price. It the prices goes up, the “buyer” will benefit without extra government cash infusion. If the market goes down, the govt will cover the FC cost (receivables, late fee, FC fees, attorney’s fee, etc.). It’s a win-win for the banks and a loss-loss for the taxpayers. That’s all okay because the government is here to care for you. That feeling is all that counts today.
Slave Ant
I am looking forward to said post tomorrow… because right now I’m literally looking to invest every possible dollar I can scrape up into real estate. It’s like a duplicitous world where down is up, wrong is right, etc. just by the simple fact that somehow real estate prices are not plummeting right now. Wages are still depressed, unemployment high, GDP is stagnant, CPI and goods’ true cost-of-living prices are skyrocketing, and people and businesses are still outflowing en masse from California. Yet somehow in real-life, California and especially OC real estate isn’t declining– the same way it wouldn’t drop in my magic make-believe-land. So if fantasy is actually becoming reality, then I guess now is the time to buy real estate assets because they are so inherently sacred that if they somehow collapsed again we’re all screwed anyway. And even if they did, then I stand with my hand out screaming at everyone else that is isn’t fair and I deserve to have my lost equity replaced!
From a practical standpoint, though, last month my fellow business partners and I made a conscious decision to stop paying anything more than absolutely necessary on our 2.5% business loans (ie. interest-only). That freed up about an additional $4,000 a month that I can literally add into my salary and benefits, which I will pass through to buy something eventually I suppose. We were being prudent and attempting to de-leverage as fast as possible and paying additional principle. But when the Fed makes it extremely clear they don’t plan to raise rates until 2015 or later, and realistically I don’t see them raising anytime soon without causing utter chaos to the housing market, then why should I expect anything different? What else can I invest in in the next 2-3 years that would generate any kind of inflation protection than the sacred cow of real estate? The 2.5% in interest accruing is a pittance compared to the 50% or more I save by plowing said money into magic real estate, right?
They are sacrificing the dollar to save real estate. My advice is to purchase anything tangible and with inherent value. Real estate falls into this category, but will face future headwinds.
If savers stop saving, job creation stops dead in its tracks.
Jobs require CAPITAL and profit motive. Centrally planned ZIRP (Zero Interest Rate Policy) is gutting the economy for this very reason. Ayn Rand’s Mighty-Oak-Tree-Hollowed-Out-From-The-Inside analogy comes to mind. Savers are being disincentivized, capitalism grinds to a halt, collapse ensues, power grab begins. If I were a marxist (who disdain the individual and paying interest to a capitalist) looking to destroy a capitalist society; this would be the most effective way to accomplish it.
Many of the bloggers have noted their feelings of ‘throwing in the towel’ on saving and fiscal responsibility. Hello? They are forcing your hand via monetary policy – ZIRP. Zero Interest rate effectively places ZERO time value on your past productivity and savings, AKA HOURS of YOUR life. ZIRP is placing ZERO time value on your life and productivity as a human and individual. This explains these feelings we are having of ‘going galt’ and ‘shrugging the atlas’. And I havent even begun with NEGATIVE REAL INTEREST RATES. Any doubters? Keep that head buried in the blissful sand, obama’s got your back.
Slaves overseas and illegals at home do the production work. Cronies make the rules and provide enforcement. Printing provides the capital, not savings. Taxes don’t matter because debt can be used ad infinitum and will devalue buying power but billionaires will be just fine. The people in charge don’t need you any more.
I don’t think that’s right. Not morally — I mean I don’t think it’s smart. Look, the Gods Of The Copybook Headings are going to have the last word. Reality always bats last, and it doesn’t need to win any elections or polls to exert power.
The real trick, I think, is to suss out how the balloon finally pops, and then be prepared to profit from the collapse. That’s not hard in principle — there are ways to profit from any of the plausible scenarios, from recession to brutal inflation to a currency collapse. The only real problem is figuring out which one is going to happen, so you can gert prepositioned correctly.
That is, instead of joining the herd galloping gayly towards the cliff, ponder how you might set up a hamburger stand at the foot of the cliff. No reason to have mercy or especial sympathy for the herd — they’ve been 100% warned, and from here on out it’s their own choice.
REALITY ALWAYS BATS LAST.
Each ponzi will face his/her own financial atonement.
Like her or not, Ann Barnhardt sums it up for the average Joe:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WraPInMTGwU
You are experiencing the very same feelings many have felt when dealing with the initial phases of a collapsing currency, economy, and society.
Holding dollars is the same as continuing to carry the atlas. They can print indefinitely and they will. Due to this reality, they’ve got you by the balls. They can print away your savings, your capacity to produce, and thus your humanity. Shrug the atlas. Follow your gut because it is telling you the truth.
Tangible items are your only form of protection.
I’d like to add that the collectivists are completely to blame.
Have you watched ‘The Pianist”?
Whoops, my post above didn’t include my screen name, but rather my real name. Dave = David… who knew? 🙂
[…] Perspective says: November 28, 2012 at 9:28 am […]
[…] while Texas enjoys stable home prices and relative affordability. … Originally posted here: Neighbors stealing from neighbors: HELOCs make a comeback … ← Harrington Bank Mortgage Rates in North Carolina | SelectCDRates […]
[…] entertaining) Neighbors stealing from neighbors: HELOCs make a comeback – OC Housing News ————BofAML: Ocwen, Nationstar may develop mortgage lending platforms […]
[…] Perspective says: November 28, 2012 at 2:45 pm […]