The only reason that banks do this is because government bail-out programs have made it more profitable to let it rot than to sell it -- primarily, this was accomplished with the suspension of mark to market during the crisis.
Basically, these properties were all allowed to sit on bank's books as though they were worth whatever was paid for them rather than their actual value (because if all of the banks had been forced to write down all the property on which they lost >50% of their investment, they would all have been insolvent)
Heh, which basically means they were insolvent. They probably still are. And yet their executives probably think the poor are a bunch of moochers, suckling at the government teat!
You realize the government (and hence the taxpayers) made lots of money off the bailout? The bailout was a loan that turned out to be a great investment. It was not a gift. Also, several banks were forced to take money at that time that they didn't need or want. Wells Fargo was very unhappy about this in particular. I'm tired of hearing the implication that the banks somehow got something for free. They paid a lot for that bailout - the interest they paid essentialy paid for the auto manufacturers bailout.
It's not nearly that simple. Yes, the initial loans were paid back. But there were myriad programs for buttressing the banks, some of them secret. The Fed still won't disclose how much and to whom they lent money. The Fed engaged in massive quantitative easing for years, which basically translates into free money for the banks. They also maintain a zero interest rate policy which is another huge subsidy to the banking industry. They can do things as mundane as borrow for free and turn around and buy Treasury bonds. Sure, it's only.25%, but you can make it up in volume. The banks literally have a money machine, which is the only reason they can still be in business.
Honestly? I'd rather it collapsed. I think it would have woken up the majority of America in a way that it desperately needed.
That's partly why they didn't let it collapse. Not only did they save a handful of connected companies, they avoided the blame for the downturn being directed at those responsible. If Goldman Sachs, AIG, BoA and whomever else had been put into receivership, their shareholders wiped out and their bondholders clipped, it would have caused immediate and obvious pain. It would have caused people to sit up and notice and demand to know how we got into this situation. The PTB can't have that because it would have exposed the shenanigans they engage in to make so much money.
I have had an empty apartment sitting around for a couple of years because I'm sure as hell not going to rent it out under current "renters' protection laws". It's better just to let it appreciate and then eventually sell.
As long as it appreciates faster than the interest on your loan.
I'm about to rent a luxury apartment (resort style, costs about $1100 a month, has gym, two large pools, tons of other amenities) and one of their requirements is that your income has to be at least 3 times what the rent costs.
So, you expect the broccoli will let you live forever? Or just drop-dead some day without a need for anyone to change your diaper?
Actually yes, that is the goal. Not to live forever, of course. But maintaining health into old age, and avoiding "lifestyle" diseases, is part of the reason I work out and try to eat healthily. Besides, being physically fit makes life easier (not that I'm some triathlete, but I think I'm in better shape than most people my age). I enjoy a little bit of ice cream here and there and still love chocolate. I just don't eat the entire pint or bar in one sitting. I hit the gym twice a week and pay attention to what I eat, that's all. It's not really a big deal, you just have to be mindful.
Nope, not a law at all. Healthy food can be quite delicious. But you can't get it out of a bag or a can. Doritos taste good because they are chemically engineered to be that way, and then focus-grouped to refine the flavor. Fruits, vegetables and legumes are the way they are. It up to the person to combine them in a tasty way.
I don't think Americans eat the way they eat primarily because of the flavor of the food. It has more to do with ease, convenience and price.
Yeah, I just turned down a job offer that sounded remarkably like this. And they could not understand why I *want* to work remotely, and on a flex schedule.
Nor could they understand why I do *not* want to work for control freaks. Bet you can't, either.
Isn't it nice that not everyone has to work for Shawn Anderson? He said his employees appreciate the schedule. You would not. That's fine. It doesn't make him wrong or a control freak. It's almost as if different people have different wants and needs and should work for an employer that fits their situation. Strange, eh?
"We are a tired, stressed and overworked nation, which has many negative consequences for our personal health and the care of our children. As a nation, we work harder and longer than almost all of our competitors, and much of that work is uncompensated."
What do you expect when you allow business interests, almost exclusively, to have their voices heard and set the agenda? There is an attitude in this country that seems to hold that the population exists to be employees, rather than businesses existing to serve the population. Its upside-down. But it shows how far out of whack this country's priorities are.
Just want to mod you down for being a deadbeat Greek. Your country owes money, your country needs to pay money. Your poor and destitute can go suck ass as us freemarketer's are concerned.
I sincerely hope this is a joke or a poke at free marketers. Because otherwise... really?
There is no such thing as "good weight". People like Michael Clarke Duncan still die "young" from heart problems. The strain on the heart for pumping blood is related to the mass pumped through, not the percentage of it that's "fat". Arterial constriction/hardening through lipid action is a separate issue, but for general heart failure, and a variety of heart diseases, there's nothing that indicates there's "good" weight, just that any added is harder.
There is certainly good weight. As with many things, it is a matter of degree. Michael Clarke Duncan was a bit of an extreme case, at 6' 5" and 315 lbs. The thing about muscle weight is that you have to work to get it, as opposed to fat weight where you just have to eat. Building muscle also strengthens the cardiovascular system while eating pie does not. So I would still agree that everyone should do some sort of weight training. You don't have to get huge, just put some muscle on your frame. It strengthens your joints and bones as well.
Having a decent baseline of strength makes life easier, helps prevent injury and will carry you into old age as a healthier person. You don't need or want to get as big a Dwayne Johnson or whomever. You can't get that big without a huge commitment, and steroids and hormones anyway. What I'm talking about are people like Jack Lalanne. He was strong and fit his whole life and lived well into his 90's. He wasn't a bodybuilder, but he was strong and healthy. He was also an extreme case, but he set an example that people would do well to follow.
Make the wrong deals or don't make the right promises, and media will find out who you were fooling around with, or have dick-picks exposed (not claiming that what happened to a certain politician, just an easy example). Are you foolish enough to believe that the IRS targeting certain groups of people is purely coincidence?
This is what happened to Elliot Spitzer in my opinion. He was aggressively going after Wall Street crime when the revelations about his paid-for love life came about. I'm not saying he wasn't having sex with prostitutes. But come on, lots of powerful men have sex with prostitutes.
This is how most bills are written. That is not a cynical but rather purely factual statement.
And you're okay with that? The point isn't that it is unusual, the point is that it is anti-democratic and contrary to the interests of the general population.
I think the problem isn't so much a lack of skills, but instead grossly overcharging for those 'skills' when there are obviously plenty of other people willing to do the work for cheaper, and now trying to enlist the U.S. government as a de facto union or protection racket scheme to keep the wage rates artificially inflated and lock out competition. This is simply the free market at work, as we've seen in manufacturing and a hundred other professions over the last 35 years. It needs to happen, and it will.
The Free Market doesn't exist, but thanks for playing. Markets are defined by governments (laws, regulations, contract enforcement, redress of grievances, etc.).
You can pretend to know something about me if you want, but actually I'm only part of the problem for people who are afraid of competition. And no, I don't get paid less than the employees - I get paid more. Always. Because I'm good.
How nice for you. I guess we should all just become superstar consultants and we wouldn't have a problem. Can everyone be in the top 5%? I'm thinking that's not possible.
You come off as pretty arrogant; basically telling people that if they didn't suck so much and were more awesome like yourself, they wouldn't care if people were trying to undercut their wages by making them compete with desperate people willing to settle for much less, because companies would just throw money at their awesomeness. I'm glad companies throw money at your awesomeness, but you seem to have an advanced or rare skill set making your example inapplicable to many other situations.
Why should this be illegal? Protectionism creates a selective advantage for the protected workers but makes the workers complacent and makes the company less competitive over time.
I'm a freelance tech worker, and I neither have nor want protection from foreign workers. I compete and add more value.
This should be illegal because, as far as I understand the law says H1B's are supposed to be for workers with skills not found in the local population. However, these workers seem to be doing the same job as Americans, seeing as they are being trained by the Americans they are replacing. So I don't see how these people can claim to have some special skill set.
No thanks. Big government is the problem, here. It's used by the wealthy to enslave the rest of us with our own money spent against our will.
You are mostly correct, but the problem isn't being controlled by the "wealthy". Most of the problem are wealthy, but not all. I'll give you a hint. They control the media, hollywood and ironically they have a hook in their nose.
Slashdot Mirror
The only reason that banks do this is because government bail-out programs have made it more profitable to let it rot than to sell it -- primarily, this was accomplished with the suspension of mark to market during the crisis.
Basically, these properties were all allowed to sit on bank's books as though they were worth whatever was paid for them rather than their actual value (because if all of the banks had been forced to write down all the property on which they lost >50% of their investment, they would all have been insolvent)
Heh, which basically means they were insolvent. They probably still are. And yet their executives probably think the poor are a bunch of moochers, suckling at the government teat!
You realize the government (and hence the taxpayers) made lots of money off the bailout? The bailout was a loan that turned out to be a great investment. It was not a gift. Also, several banks were forced to take money at that time that they didn't need or want. Wells Fargo was very unhappy about this in particular. I'm tired of hearing the implication that the banks somehow got something for free. They paid a lot for that bailout - the interest they paid essentialy paid for the auto manufacturers bailout.
It's not nearly that simple. Yes, the initial loans were paid back. But there were myriad programs for buttressing the banks, some of them secret. The Fed still won't disclose how much and to whom they lent money. The Fed engaged in massive quantitative easing for years, which basically translates into free money for the banks. They also maintain a zero interest rate policy which is another huge subsidy to the banking industry. They can do things as mundane as borrow for free and turn around and buy Treasury bonds. Sure, it's only .25%, but you can make it up in volume. The banks literally have a money machine, which is the only reason they can still be in business.
Honestly? I'd rather it collapsed. I think it would have woken up the majority of America in a way that it desperately needed.
That's partly why they didn't let it collapse. Not only did they save a handful of connected companies, they avoided the blame for the downturn being directed at those responsible. If Goldman Sachs, AIG, BoA and whomever else had been put into receivership, their shareholders wiped out and their bondholders clipped, it would have caused immediate and obvious pain. It would have caused people to sit up and notice and demand to know how we got into this situation. The PTB can't have that because it would have exposed the shenanigans they engage in to make so much money.
I have had an empty apartment sitting around for a couple of years because I'm sure as hell not going to rent it out under current "renters' protection laws". It's better just to let it appreciate and then eventually sell.
As long as it appreciates faster than the interest on your loan.
I'm about to rent a luxury apartment (resort style, costs about $1100 a month, has gym, two large pools, tons of other amenities) and one of their requirements is that your income has to be at least 3 times what the rent costs.
Holy Hell, that's cheap! Where are you??
Avoid the processed food poison.
What a dashing tin foil hat you're wearing today!
Oy, it's not tinfoil hattery. Processed foods have been shown to be less nutritious and healthy. Man has yet to improve on nature in this area.
So, you expect the broccoli will let you live forever? Or just drop-dead some day without a need for anyone to change your diaper?
Actually yes, that is the goal. Not to live forever, of course. But maintaining health into old age, and avoiding "lifestyle" diseases, is part of the reason I work out and try to eat healthily. Besides, being physically fit makes life easier (not that I'm some triathlete, but I think I'm in better shape than most people my age). I enjoy a little bit of ice cream here and there and still love chocolate. I just don't eat the entire pint or bar in one sitting. I hit the gym twice a week and pay attention to what I eat, that's all. It's not really a big deal, you just have to be mindful.
Is this some kind of natural law?
Nope, not a law at all. Healthy food can be quite delicious. But you can't get it out of a bag or a can. Doritos taste good because they are chemically engineered to be that way, and then focus-grouped to refine the flavor. Fruits, vegetables and legumes are the way they are. It up to the person to combine them in a tasty way.
I don't think Americans eat the way they eat primarily because of the flavor of the food. It has more to do with ease, convenience and price.
Yeah, I just turned down a job offer that sounded remarkably like this. And they could not understand why I *want* to work remotely, and on a flex schedule.
Nor could they understand why I do *not* want to work for control freaks. Bet you can't, either.
Isn't it nice that not everyone has to work for Shawn Anderson? He said his employees appreciate the schedule. You would not. That's fine. It doesn't make him wrong or a control freak. It's almost as if different people have different wants and needs and should work for an employer that fits their situation. Strange, eh?
"We are a tired, stressed and overworked nation, which has many negative consequences for our personal health and the care of our children. As a nation, we work harder and longer than almost all of our competitors, and much of that work is uncompensated."
What do you expect when you allow business interests, almost exclusively, to have their voices heard and set the agenda? There is an attitude in this country that seems to hold that the population exists to be employees, rather than businesses existing to serve the population. Its upside-down. But it shows how far out of whack this country's priorities are.
Just want to mod you down for being a deadbeat Greek. Your country owes money, your country needs to pay money. Your poor and destitute can go suck ass as us freemarketer's are concerned.
I sincerely hope this is a joke or a poke at free marketers. Because otherwise... really?
london is the criminal financial capital of the world.
Kind of redundant, don't you think? ;-)
There is no such thing as "good weight". People like Michael Clarke Duncan still die "young" from heart problems. The strain on the heart for pumping blood is related to the mass pumped through, not the percentage of it that's "fat". Arterial constriction/hardening through lipid action is a separate issue, but for general heart failure, and a variety of heart diseases, there's nothing that indicates there's "good" weight, just that any added is harder.
There is certainly good weight. As with many things, it is a matter of degree. Michael Clarke Duncan was a bit of an extreme case, at 6' 5" and 315 lbs. The thing about muscle weight is that you have to work to get it, as opposed to fat weight where you just have to eat. Building muscle also strengthens the cardiovascular system while eating pie does not. So I would still agree that everyone should do some sort of weight training. You don't have to get huge, just put some muscle on your frame. It strengthens your joints and bones as well.
Having a decent baseline of strength makes life easier, helps prevent injury and will carry you into old age as a healthier person. You don't need or want to get as big a Dwayne Johnson or whomever. You can't get that big without a huge commitment, and steroids and hormones anyway. What I'm talking about are people like Jack Lalanne. He was strong and fit his whole life and lived well into his 90's. He wasn't a bodybuilder, but he was strong and healthy. He was also an extreme case, but he set an example that people would do well to follow.
I use a 6-year-old Mac Mini.
It's slow.
I'm going to call Godwin on that string theory remark
You know who else was a multi-dimensional vibrating string? Hitler!
Make the wrong deals or don't make the right promises, and media will find out who you were fooling around with, or have dick-picks exposed (not claiming that what happened to a certain politician, just an easy example). Are you foolish enough to believe that the IRS targeting certain groups of people is purely coincidence?
This is what happened to Elliot Spitzer in my opinion. He was aggressively going after Wall Street crime when the revelations about his paid-for love life came about. I'm not saying he wasn't having sex with prostitutes. But come on, lots of powerful men have sex with prostitutes.
This is how most bills are written. That is not a cynical but rather purely factual statement.
And you're okay with that? The point isn't that it is unusual, the point is that it is anti-democratic and contrary to the interests of the general population.
Exactly. What, should we be creating international trade deals without consulting the industry leaders who will be affected?
Do you really think "consulting" is all that's going on here?
Lol, spoken like a true tool of your betters. Yessir, massa sir, those sure are some entitled po' people!
And another one. Stop gunking up our threads with your algorithm!
.1%, cops are in the .1%. Teachers, public unions, professors. Get real. More like 51% living off the other 49%, through the power of the gun.
This is the second time I have seen this exact post in this thread. It's a bot!
Is this serious? Did you just say "justified ethnic cleansing"? Or is my sarcasm meter borked?
I think the problem isn't so much a lack of skills, but instead grossly overcharging for those 'skills' when there are obviously plenty of other people willing to do the work for cheaper, and now trying to enlist the U.S. government as a de facto union or protection racket scheme to keep the wage rates artificially inflated and lock out competition. This is simply the free market at work, as we've seen in manufacturing and a hundred other professions over the last 35 years. It needs to happen, and it will.
The Free Market doesn't exist, but thanks for playing. Markets are defined by governments (laws, regulations, contract enforcement, redress of grievances, etc.).
You can pretend to know something about me if you want, but actually I'm only part of the problem for people who are afraid of competition. And no, I don't get paid less than the employees - I get paid more. Always. Because I'm good.
How nice for you. I guess we should all just become superstar consultants and we wouldn't have a problem. Can everyone be in the top 5%? I'm thinking that's not possible.
You come off as pretty arrogant; basically telling people that if they didn't suck so much and were more awesome like yourself, they wouldn't care if people were trying to undercut their wages by making them compete with desperate people willing to settle for much less, because companies would just throw money at their awesomeness. I'm glad companies throw money at your awesomeness, but you seem to have an advanced or rare skill set making your example inapplicable to many other situations.
Why should this be illegal? Protectionism creates a selective advantage for the protected workers but makes the workers complacent and makes the company less competitive over time. I'm a freelance tech worker, and I neither have nor want protection from foreign workers. I compete and add more value.
This should be illegal because, as far as I understand the law says H1B's are supposed to be for workers with skills not found in the local population. However, these workers seem to be doing the same job as Americans, seeing as they are being trained by the Americans they are replacing. So I don't see how these people can claim to have some special skill set.
No thanks. Big government is the problem, here. It's used by the wealthy to enslave the rest of us with our own money spent against our will.
You are mostly correct, but the problem isn't being controlled by the "wealthy". Most of the problem are wealthy, but not all. I'll give you a hint. They control the media, hollywood and ironically they have a hook in their nose.
Really? This tired crap?