Warren goes for the throat

From HousingWire:

Sen. Warren accuses FHFA’s Watt: “You haven’t helped a single family”

What started as a dry, lame-duck session hearing on the Federal Housing Finance Agency in the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday, got heated when U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., went guns blazing after the FHFA director.

Warren, an outspoken progressive and a likely candidate for the 2016 Democrat presidential nomination, went on the attack during FHFA Director Melvin Watt’s first hearing before the committee, saying that he’s never done anything to help homeowners who are underwater and facing foreclosure.

“Five million families lost their homes during the financial crisis and millions more are still struggling,” Warren said, prefacing her questions to Watt. “According to the latest data from CoreLogic…another 5.3 million homeowners remain underwater on their homes. And people are continuing to lose their homes every day in foreclosure.

“We talk a little bit about the law here, now one of your duties under the law. One of your duties is to conserve the assets of Fannie and Freddie, but another duty given equal importance by Congress … is to implement a plan that seeks to maximize assistance for homeowners and take advantage of available programs to minimize foreclosures,” Warren said.

“The Treasury Department has found that principal reductions could save Fannie and Freddie nearly $4 billion and help half a million homeowners stay in their home,” Warren said. “It has been six years since Congress created FHFA and in all that time your agency has never, not once permitted a family to reduce its principal mortgage through Fannie or Freddie.”

A clearly frustrated Warren continued.

“I’ve asked about this repeatedly and you’ve said you’d look into allowing Fannie and Freddie to engage in principal reduction; you said it again today,” Warren said. “You’ve been in office for nearly a year now and you haven’t helped a single family, not even one, by agreeing to a principal reduction. So I want to know why this hasn’t been a priority for you. The data are there.”

Watt appeared a little shaken by the line of attack.

“It’s probably an overstatement to say it’s not been a priority,” Watt stammered. “It’s just a very difficult issue. …”

Warren cut him off.

“Chairman Watt, you have had a year to do that, you have known for five years before that what the problem was, we have two studies coming out showing that Fannie and Freddie could make money by doing this,” she said.

Watt stammered in response.

“We are going to have an answer sooner – it won’t be as long as it has been…” he said.

Warren interjected, “How many more people have to lose their homes before we get there?”

Watt said that he couldn’t or wouldn’t take responsibility for what happened in the five years before he assumed the director’s chair at FHFA.

“But you’ve been there a year,” Warren interrupted.

Warren again interjected.

“Indeed, how many families has it affected?” she demanded.

“It has affected a number of—”

Warren cut him off.

“This is not a program producing money for Fannie and Freddie but it is causing a lot of pain for families who were already victims,” she said.

This entry was posted in Foreclosures, Mortgages, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

92 Responses to Warren goes for the throat

  1. Essex says:

    Senator Warren = The Banks Worst Nightmare.

  2. 1987 Condo says:

    Saw that Revel deal went south, something about that powerplant….

  3. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    The banks will do what any business will do when attacked; they will adapt and adjust, and the end result will be the same. But this isn’t a real attack, this is kabuki theatre. Warren has done this before; it is just playing to her base.

    When actually forced to govern, someone like Warren would be forced to back down rather quickly lest the resulting backlash result in economic and social upheaval. In 2008, I (and many others here and elsewhere) said that the ESOTUS would have to throw his left wing under the bus and by most accounts, he did.

    Scary scenario would be if she actually believed it and surrounded herself with acolytes.

    I think I will float an over/under on the date when the first Senator refers to her in the Congressional Record as “Comrade Warren” or calls her “the senator from the People’s Republic of Massachusetts.” When I am back home, I routinely call Warren supporters “Comrade”.

  4. Juice Box says:

    Doesn’t the Fed own allot of the Fannie and Freddie junk MBS? They can afford to take a hit on principal reduction.

  5. Comrade Nom Deplume, a.k.a., JJ-Lite. says:

    [3] redux

    FWIW, once upon a time, State Street was the largest employer in Massachusetts.

    Today, it doesn’t crack the top ten unless you aggregate its joint venture with BFDS. And it is by far, the largest financial services employer in Mass. Fidelity doesn’t even appear on the list for the Metro Boston area and they used to be huge in Boston.

    So Warren doesn’t have to worry too much about upsetting the folks back home by going after banks and UHNW folks.

  6. BadGramMax (from yesterday, late) – LOL. Are you a racist? According to the below, you “defend the structure” you used, but your own link provides some interesting data. It appears the structure you defend is that of a whites only, red-stater. Your preference is duly noted sir.

    Who says this?

    Murray and Simon (2002) describe the rough boundaries as Western Pennsylvania, Eastern Ohio, Northern West Virginia, Central Indiana. Pockets of speakers might exist as far as Kentucky and Illinois. This construction is also attested in Scots English, which might be its historical source.

    According to Murray and Simon (1999), the need/want + V-en construction shows no significant sociolinguistic trends other than race, where they say that “whites favor the construction significantly more than blacks” (pp. 149). They found this to be nearly categorical with like + V-en in Murray and Simon (2002).

    Fabius Maximus says:
    November 20, 2014 at 12:23 am
    #140 ExPat

    PARTICIPIAL – of, relating to, or formed with or from a participle

    I will take the criticism that “regulation” would have been a better choice, but I will still defend the structure I used. I understand the regional point you make but disagree with it. http://microsyntax.sites.yale.edu/needs-washed While I might be Irish, the structure is valid.

    As for you getting bent out of shape on Regional Idioms, I will ask if you have you been living in Boston too long?

  7. [1] Essex. Yeah, you don’t want to get her back on the warpath. She might bake some muffins.

    http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/pow-wow-chow-cookbook/

    Senator Warren = The Banks Worst Nightmare.

  8. grim says:

    4 – I can see Watt moving forward on a HARP 3 approach that allows the GSEs to refinance underwater non-GSE loans.

    Although the window for this is quickly closing.

  9. I think everyone who has a mortgage should get a flat $25K voucher that they can use to pay their mortgage. If you don’t have a mortgage there will be a short grace period during which you are invited to go out and get one.

  10. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [6] expat,

    I don’t know if he is displaying grandiosity or simply trying to bait you. Since it doesn’t pay to debate with crazy people and azzholes, I decided I wasn’t going to do it.

    In any event, you are learning, as I have, that it is pointless, as we learn at the 3:00 minute mark. Ride on, sir.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhRUe-gz690

  11. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    [6] expat,

    Besides, I’d be careful. He might go nucular on you.

  12. Toxic Crayons says:

    I’ll vote for Elizabeth Warren in 2016 or whoever promises to give me the most free sh1t.

  13. [11] Nom – LOL. Or, as the less inbred say to the more inbred in WV, he might just go home and cry to his Aunt Mom.

  14. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Something to chew on as I drive to Cherry Hill . . .This is from a left wing commentator who is clearly in the Warren camp:

    “It should be obvious that if you foreclose on your voters, cut their pay, and legalize theft of their wealth by Wall Street oligarchs, they won’t be your voters anymore. Somehow, Democratic activists continue to operate as if policy doesn’t matter to voters, or that policy evaluation is a Chinese menu of different stuff, some of which you like and some of which you don’t, as in “Oh I’ll take a pro-choice moderate, with a bailout, and gay rights. And a Pepsi”. But that’s not how it works – voters’ lives get better, or they don’t. And under Obama, stuff has gotten worse. Obama’s economic policies have made economic inequality sharper than it was under Bush, due to his bailout of banks and concurrent elimination of the main source of wealth of most Americans, home equity. With these policy choices, Obama destroyed the Democratic Party and liberalism – under Obama’s first two years, the fastest growing demographic party label was “former Democrat.” Liberalism demands that people pay for a government, but why should anyone want to pay taxes for the terrible governance Obama has implemented?

    We saw Democrats lose elections badly in 2009 and 2010 because of this dynamic. They didn’t self-correct, instead doubling down on Obama. Then, in Illinois and Maryland in April, liberal labor-backed candidates were absolutely wrecked in primaries. I noted at the time in a piece titled “Why Is the Left Slice of the Democrats Getting Crushed?” that this is a consequence of Obama’s policies and a general discrediting of liberalism. In Wisconsin, the stage was much more high-profile, but the dynamics were the same. This quote could just as easily apply to either contest.

    “I’m flabbergasted. I’m embarrassed. This is the biggest screw-up electorally that I’ve ever been involved in,” said one progressive activist still sorting through the wreckage. . . .”

    Interestingly, this wasn’t written this month. It was written in 2012.

  15. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Oh, and a final, final, thought, in the form of a very succinct explanation of a topic that comes up from time to time, and points to the impact of regulation and policy risk as well as normal market factors . . .

    “Mortgage rates vary from state to state for several reasons.

    First, there are economic factors that make lending riskier in some areas than others — Nevada, Florida, Michigan and Arizona went through this recently. Borrowers in those states had to come in with larger down payments, higher credit scores and additional fees.

    Second, there are state laws that make lending more expensive in some states than others — states with recourse, for example, allow lenders to recover additional money from borrowers who default if the foreclosure sale doesn’t net enough to pay off the mortgage. This is more desirable for lenders. States without recourse make it riskier and more costly for mortgage lenders, and so they pass on that cost in the form of higher rates.

    Then, there is the amount of competition for business. When there are more lenders competing for business, costs go down. Some states like Hawaii make it very difficult for lenders to come in and compete for business. Consequently, borrowers there pay a lot more.

    The types of mortgages preferred by borrowers in a state also influence average costs — for example, in heavily rural states, more homeowners might get USDA mortgages, and states with more military bases might have more VA loans. These loans often have lower APRs because there are no risk-based pricing adjustments, mortgage insurance is either not required (VA) or very low (USDA), and with USDA loans people with lower incomes can qualify for lower subsidized interest rates. On the other hand, expensive markets attract more jumbo financing, which is usually more costly.

    The bottom line? Studies show that rates can vary by .25% to .50% between lenders on any given day, and that’s a lot more than the relatively minor differences between average rates in different states. The only way to know if your offer is a good one is to get several mortgage quotes from competing lenders. In addition, a Stanford University study found that getting four mortgage quotes instead of one or two saved people a median of $2,664 on a $200,000 mortgage”

    This is about a year old and I don’t think it is outdated. Also, the variance in the form of 0.25 to 0.5 seems to have been a constant over time. The real interesting feature is variability among lenders and the point about getting multiple quotes is an important lesson. FWIW, that final point seems to muddle the message since it isn’t clear if that state variance is for a single lender or an aggregate of lenders in a state, or the result of fluctuations in rates and disparities between lenders. I think it is the former but as succinct as this was, the writer could have made that point better.

  16. jj says:

    Underwater Homeowner is like Baked Alaska

  17. Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:

    Too good not to come back and post . . .

    “Citigroup Managing Director Shawn Miller was found Tuesday in the bathtub of his luxurious Greenwich apartment in New York City with his throat cut, authorities said Wednesday.

    The police are investigating the incident, but they are “pretty sure it’s homicide,” a New York Police Department spokesman told CNBC.”

    They are only “pretty sure”. Something tells me that the door is still open for suicide, which seems to be a contagion among oligarchs these days.

    OK, really going to work now.

  18. Libturd in Union says:

    Warren is part Cherokee, Hilary is part Jew, Biden’s plane got shot down, yet the dumb sheep keep on contributing. Baa.

  19. “She wanted her some liver pudding.”

    More from FabMax’s Yale reference on how to speak weller than average:

    http://microsyntax.sites.yale.edu/personal-datives

  20. Toxic Crayons says:

    Oceanfront homeowners on LBI sue over town taking their property for dunes

    LONG BEACH TOWNSHIP —In the ongoing battle over how far government can go to build protective beach dunes in New Jersey, a group of oceanfront homeowners in Long Beach Township has sued the town over what it says is an illegal taking of property as a major beach replenishment project nears.

    The homeowners, mostly in the affluent section of Loveladies, contend the town based its actions on a law that doesn’t apply to their situation and took portions of their property without their knowledge.

    Long Beach Township, on the cusp of getting a long-awaited beach replenishment work, has fought with and cajoled residents for the past several years to sign over easements for the work. These takings represent some of the last pieces needed for the project to start.

    “These are permanent takings and they’re pretty substantial takings,” said attorney William Ward, who represents the six sets of homeowners.

    Ward says the town relied on the Disaster Control Act to take the parcels when it should have followed the requirements of the Eminent Domain Act. He said the Disaster Control Act, adopted after the Great Storm of 1962 sliced Long Beach Island in half, only applies immediately after a disaster – not two years later.

    “There’s no emergency right now,” he said.

    Long Beach Township Mayor Joseph Mancini said he couldn’t discuss the pending litigation and he referred questions to the state and to Paul Fernicola, the Red Bank attorney representing the town in these cases.

    Fernicola did not return a call for comment. Lee Moore, a spokesman for the state Attorney General’s Office, which is overseeing the acquisition of easements in the state for dune projects, said he can’t talk about the case.

    In the past, Gov. Chris Christie and state Environmental Protection Commissioner Bob Martin have said the state will do whatever it needs to obtain the necessary easements so that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can start beach replenishment this winter in Ocean County. They have said a continuous dune is crucial to preventing destruction in future storms like the damage inflicted by Hurricane Sandy in October 2012.

    Moore said that on Long Beach Island, all the easements have been obtained either by property owners voluntarily donating them or by the towns taking them under the Disaster Control Act.

    Statewide, there are fewer than 350 easements left to obtain and those are primarily in northern Ocean County, from the Manasquan Inlet to the Barnegat Inlet, Moore said.

    But the residents in this suit, filed Nov. 5, said they didn’t even know their easements were taken until they received a letter from the township last month. That was after the town on Oct. 6 adopted a resolution authorizing the takings and after the town had already recorded ownership of the easements with the Ocean County Clerk’s Office, Ward said.

    Among his clients are Shanin Specter, who is the son of late U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania, and the younger Specter’s prominent law firm partner, Thomas Kline.

    Ward said that by using the Disaster Control Act, the town is bypassing all the safeguards built into the state’s eminent domain law protecting property owners.

    Under eminent domain procedures, the agency taking the property has to provide the property owner with an appraisal for the value of the tract and then make an offer to purchase it. There has to be a period of good-faith negotiations and if there is no resolution, the matter goes to court. In the meantime, the agency has to put into Escrow the amount of money anticipated to be spent for the easement purchase.

    If there is an agreement over how much the property owner will be paid for the easement under the state’s eminent domain law, a deed is issued to the agency taking the parcel, Ward said. But when there is a dispute, the agency files a declaration of taking and that filed document gives the agency title to the easement, he said.

    Under the Disaster Control Act, the agency automatically gets the deed to the tract in dispute and does not have to pay for the easements.

    In these cases, Ward said, the sizes of the pieces taken are “significant,” ranging from nearly a third of an acre to three-quarters of an acre. And the value is notable, he said. One of the oceanfront property owners in the suit, Tina Carolan, pays $50,000 a year in taxes, he said.

    “They’ve taken title to all these properties…and haven’t gone through eminent domain,” Ward said. “We’re hoping a judge will say that’s improper.”

    MaryAnn Spoto may be reached at mspoto@njadvancemedia.com. Follow her on Twitter @MaryAnnSpoto. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

  21. LOL – ABC, NBC, CBS will not carry Obama’s speech tonight, but Univision will (they’ll translate it too):

    http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/19/media/networks-and-obama-speech/

  22. Anon E. Moose says:

    Condo [2];

    Check out the NJ.com story. The story itself doesn’t say much, but I had to laugh at “Sponsored by: Borg@t@”

    http://www.nj.com/atlantic/index.ssf/2014/11/company_drops_bid_to_buy_atlantic_citys_revel_c asino.html

    Drop the space to fix the link.

  23. [21] “The White House declined to comment on the speech scheduling process, but the administration may have honed in on Thursday night because of Univision’s planned telecast of the Latin Grammys.
    The live telecast attracts an unusually high number of viewers to Univision, just like the English-language Grammys do, and Univision agreed to set aside about ten minutes for Obama’s address.
    Telemundo, the country’s other prominent Spanish-language broadcaster, will also carry it live.”

  24. joyce says:

    Comrade,
    Last night and today…

    Why do you continue to tell everyone how you don’t engage with certain people here and neither should they… when the exact opposite is true? It’s really silly.

  25. joyce says:

    Fabius,
    From yesterday… good job agreeing with “right wing nut” Karl Denninger. I know you prefaced you’re paragraph by saying you disagree, but it appears you didn’t read/understand his position. He’s posted on NN several times; his opinion is abundantly clear.

  26. chicagofinance says:

    Ex-Pat…… Don’t waste your time….he is a sawed-off Irish anti-semitic dwarf hypocrite troll…..

    The Original NJ ExPat Asian Hipster says:
    November 20, 2014 at 8:52 am
    “She wanted her some liver pudding.”

    More from FabMax’s Yale reference on how to speak weller than average:

    http://microsyntax.sites.yale.edu/personal-datives

  27. chifi – I know, but sometimes I find an easy-to-wind-up toy laying around and I can’t help myself;-)

    Ex-Pat…… Don’t waste your time….he is a sawed-off Irish anti-semitic dwarf hypocrite troll…..

  28. [27] Speaking of which, where is that dirty tampon thrower today?

  29. Ragnar says:

    joyce,
    Thanks for post 130 yesterday regarding net neutrality. It made sense and concretized the issues, without dismissing grim’s dislike of the current “last mile” providers.

  30. Michael says:

    Agree, thanks for the share.

    Comrade Nom Deplume, who needs to stop screwing around and get back to work says:
    November 20, 2014 at 8:29 am
    Something to chew on as I drive to Cherry Hill . . .This is from a left wing commentator who is clearly in the Warren camp:

    “It should be obvious that if you foreclose on your voters, cut their pay, and legalize theft of their wealth by Wall Street oligarchs, they won’t be your voters anymore. Somehow, Democratic activists continue to operate as if policy doesn’t matter to voters, or that policy evaluation is a Chinese menu of different stuff, some of which you like and some of which you don’t, as in “Oh I’ll take a pro-choice moderate, with a bailout, and gay rights. And a Pepsi”. But that’s not how it works – voters’ lives get better, or they don’t. And under Obama, stuff has gotten worse. Obama’s economic policies have made economic inequality sharper than it was under Bush, due to his bailout of banks and concurrent elimination of the main source of wealth of most Americans, home equity. With these policy choices, Obama destroyed the Democratic Party and liberalism – under Obama’s first two years, the fastest growing demographic party label was “former Democrat.” Liberalism demands that people pay for a government, but why should anyone want to pay taxes for the terrible governance Obama has implemented?

    We saw Democrats lose elections badly in 2009 and 2010 because of this dynamic. They didn’t self-correct, instead doubling down on Obama. Then, in Illinois and Maryland in April, liberal labor-backed candidates were absolutely wrecked in primaries. I noted at the time in a piece titled “Why Is the Left Slice of the Democrats Getting Crushed?” that this is a consequence of Obama’s policies and a general discrediting of liberalism. In Wisconsin, the stage was much more high-profile, but the dynamics were the same. This quote could just as easily apply to either contest.

    “I’m flabbergasted. I’m embarrassed. This is the biggest screw-up electorally that I’ve ever been involved in,” said one progressive activist still sorting through the wreckage. . . .”

    Interestingly, this wasn’t written this month. It was written in 2012.

  31. homeboken says:

    (1) Essex – So if you took a loan you couldn’t afford (regardless of what bank made that loan) then we should just forgive it, because you happen to be in the lucky bunch that over-borrowed?

    I paid off my student loans, which sucked big time, I didn’t borrow when free money was being given away. And now, because I have done the proper/agreed upon things, I am being penalized for some sh!thead that over-borrowed and won’t pay back?

    Does it personally hit my pocket? No. But I can not understand anybody defending that reneging on an agreement should be rewarded if not expected.

  32. Toxic Crayons says:

    31 – surprised you haven’t posted that one yet…it’s a bit outdated. He’s also now facing charges that he beat up a woman over at the hospital.

  33. joyce says:

    outdated?

  34. Toxic Crayons says:

    Ya the herald published two maybe 3 more articles about it.

    One of them had a timeline of the events in the “exposure” accusations put together after they interviewed one of the victims.

  35. Toxic Crayons says:

    Really is the wierdest thing….The cop must have known he would be on the dashcam….

  36. joyce says:

    Investigation began 2-3 weeks ago

  37. Fabius Maximus says:

    #6 ExPat

    Me talk purty, you for coffee!

  38. Fabius Maximus says:

    #26 chi

    Burn the brand baby!

  39. Essex says:

    32. “I” am not into government largess on the part of the taxpayer. Wall Street got a bailout. No one asked me if we should save the Banks. We just saved them. Now, as a result they are bigger, more consolidated and more of a pain in the ass to the consumer than ever.

  40. Essex says:

    I’m one of the lucky ones (for now) our household earnings have been stable. We are expecting a windfall. I’m just not impressed with anything that has come out of DC. The GOP is simply obstructionist, falsely-pios, and definitely on the side of the wealthy. No question. The liberal party had a chance and took it. They sided with the GOP on education and Wall Street. The stock market has rallied, but for most people out there –you got nothing in the way of progress over the past 8 years.

  41. Libturd in Union says:

    Essex,

    No one is stopping anyone from joining an investment club and figuring out how to take advantage of a system that is weighted for the top.

  42. joyce says:

    Any talk ANY … of the two parties being different, or holding out hope, or well on this one issue, or this time is different … is lunacy.

  43. chicagofinance says:

    It is better than fantasies of burning Jewish babies in ovens like you…..

    Fabius Maximus says:
    November 20, 2014 at 12:11 pm
    #26 chi Burn the brand baby!

  44. anon (the good one) says:

    @ReutersUS:
    Two children were killed in a shooting at a home in a quiet New Jersey town: http://t.co/K3PCOUeEjj http://t.co/pQs4VJwTl0

  45. chicagofinance says:

    I still have to say that I disagree about the last mile part. Influence peddling, extortion, implicit bribery issues aside, I have seen first hand the difficulty of surmounting the “last mile”. It is inherently cumbersome, deliberate, idiosyncratic and whimsical. Yes there is a ostensible monopoly/duopoly, but again something that was hard won, expensive in money and effort, and took years to put in place, is being hijacked by free-riders (i.e. Netflix et al.)………..I was at AT&T when it purchased TCI Cable (the whole entity is now embedded in Comcast). The amount of work that was done going municipality by municipality to novate contracts to the new owners was stunning………yes there is a theoretical argument here about equity, fairness and free-markets, but it kind of papers over a lot of mess…….as I said, it is not a black & white argument……

    joyce says:
    November 19, 2014 at 8:53 pm
    I vaguely remembered him writing something very long and in depth a while back. I think it hit on various points being made by several people here. I understand the ‘last mile’ part of the issue a lot better some of the finer technological aspects so I’m glad the last section of his letter touched on that.

    Chicagofinance says:
    November 19, 2014 at 7:28 pm
    thank you for posting

    joyce says:
    November 19, 2014 at 6:19 pm
    The Net Neutrality Debacle: A Submission To The FCC*

  46. jj says:

    Briss-kit

    chicagofinance says:

    November 20, 2014 at 1:30 pm

    It is better than fantasies of burning Jewish babies in ovens like you…..

    Fabius Maximus says:
    November 20, 2014 at 12:11 pm
    #26 chi Burn the brand baby!

  47. chicagofinance says:

    As I was saying…..

    Despite all the off-the-field issues, including its handling of the Ray Rice assault case, the NFL says viewership numbers show that the masses are still very interested in watching games on television.

    [+] EnlargeMurray

    Steven Bisig/USA TODAY Sports
    The 30-23 victory by DeMarco Murray and the Cowboys over the Seattle Seahawks on Oct. 12 was watched by 30 million people — tops among all TV shows since the season began, according to the NFL.

    NFL games make up 28 of the top 30 TV shows since the season started Sept. 4, the league announced Thursday. The only shows in the top 30 that weren’t NFL games were Game 7 of the World Series on Fox (12th-most watched) and an NCIS show on CBS (27th).

    The most-watched game was the matchup between the Dallas Cowboys and the Seattle Seahawks on Oct. 12, watched by 30 million people.

    Among the top 15 most-watched NFL games this season, the team that has been featured the most is the Denver Broncos, who have been on one-third of those broadcasts. The Cowboys, Seahawks and San Francisco 49ers have appeared four times each.

    An NFL game has topped the weekly viewership charts in all of television for all 11 regular-season weeks this year, the NFL said.

    The only recent competition for the NFL is AMC’s “Walking Dead,” which has beaten NBC’s “Sunday Night Football” in the ratings in the 18-to-49-year-old demographic for three straight weeks.

  48. FKA 2010 Buyer says:

    http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/law_students_sue_harvard_over_its_fossil_fuel_investments/

    Law students sue Harvard over its fossil fuel investments

    An activist group that includes three law students has sued Harvard University in Massachusetts state court over its fossil fuel investments.

    In a complaint (PDF) for declaratory and injunctive relief that was filed Wednesday in Suffolk County Superior Court, the Harvard Climate Justice Coalition alleges “mismanagement of charitable funds” by the president and fellows of Harvard College, as well as others, according to the Harvard Crimson.

  49. anon (the good one) says:

    @DougKass:
    Knowlege@Wharton weighs in on net neutrality

    “At present, Hundt said, Obama’s statement does not have “tremendous economic significance for any of the content companies or any of the Internet service providers.” That is because at the moment these firms are not “basing their business plans on [Internet access] discrimination. But you just want to be careful to make sure … that if somebody gets an unchallenged monopoly position in Internet service, or builds a tremendous vertical integration business — where content and conduit are combined — that you could step in and protect the little guy against the powerful.”

    “You want to … make sure you … protect the little guy against the powerful.”

    If Obama’s view prevails, it would mean ISPs could not slow speeds for specific groups or as a way to somehow make their own services more attractive. The President came out in favor of “the strongest possible rules”to preserve net neutrality, which in effect means treating the Internet as a public utility.”

  50. Libturd in Union says:

    “You want to … make sure you … protect the little guy against the powerful.”

    Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal think tank, named in a new report 25 major American corporations whose CEOs were paid more last year than their firm’s total U.S. income tax bill. Of those business elites, 10 have substantive ties to Obama — including some who have official economic policy advisory positions in his administration — according to a HuffPost analysis of the report.

    BAA!

  51. Libturd in Union says:

    Hey Anon,

    Rah! Rah! Shish boom baa!

  52. Not ChiFi says:

    Re#46

    My fear regarding net neutrality is that whoever has the advantage will kill new technology.

    Up to about 2 yrs ago I kept an eye on Clearwire, the regional Wi-Max provider. They were making progress in my area. Although performance was subpar, their plans were competitive on prices with the cable companies for what you were getting. The killer issue was that they would throttle high speed internet at 2.5GB, making it useless for home use.

    All of the sudden, Clearwire was bought by Sprint, and they killed off the Wi-max service.

  53. clotluva says:

    What I think is interesting with the net neutrality issue is the spin being applied to make the average consumer fear that ISPs are scheming to sell bandwidth to the highest bidding content provider – thereby pushing their preferred content while hiding content of others – when in reality, the issue appears to be cost-shifting that is being imposed by the bandwidth-intensive business models of the likes of Netflix and Facebook.

    What is particularly interesting is that ISPs and their cable parents are among the most loathed businesses in the world, and yet now they are being out-slimed by their younger – but equally rapacious – competition.

    In all likelihood, whatever solution is put in place will benefit the consumer the least – but in the meantime, we get to see a heck of a sh!tshow.

  54. homeboken says:

    So what does this statement mean? “We” bailed out the banks and your solution to that is that “We” should know bail out the borrower as well? Do you have even the most basic understanding of how finance works? If the lenders were forgiven (bailed out)} and the borrowers are forgiven (as you suggest) then who pays?

    Essex says:

    32. “I” am not into government largess on the part of the taxpayer. Wall Street got a bailout. No one asked me if we should save the Banks. We just saved them. Now, as a result they are bigger, more consolidated and more of a pain in the ass to the consumer than ever.

  55. homeboken says:

    before I get scolded by the grammar cops from yesterday – know = now

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  56. clotluva says:

    54. Cont.

    And let’s of course not forget Google has a huge stake in this, as the de facto arbiter of the open internet (and collector of massive amounts of data and ad revenue). They also own YouTube, which I’d bet is a bandwidth hog.

    My guess is that they are hugely behind a lot of the fear mongering regarding changes to the status quo. “Don’t be evil” (and don’t mess with our business model!)

  57. Essex says:

    I’m pulling for a bull market just like anyone. I always have. I’m heavy on one big swiss outfit. Big life changing cash. Keeping my fingers crossed. We’re at a 52 week high. Just a few more months….

  58. Libturd in Union says:

    Sounds like you are gambling and not investing.

  59. Libturd in Union says:

    Novartis?

  60. jcer says:

    The issue with net neutrality is the providers don’t want to sell by the byte, the issue is theoretically they are selling the end consumer a limitless pipe and then want to restrict it by collecting money on the other end. The issue is simple so many of the people paying the bills aren’t using netflix and facebook and if they paid per byte would have much cheaper service which is something the cable companies desperately don’t want. The end state is tiered service with caps, rather than selling based on speed and the premise of “Unlimited” data. If that is how this goes they’ll lose because instead of $50 per month for basic internet, it’ll be more like $15 and the users who really are using all of the data will pay. Without net neutrality the attitude is rob Peter to pay Paul because Paul is your customer and makes the decision to use your service and Peter is making crazy internet money. That adds a complication to internet businesses that should not be. We need it to be fairly simple so that we do not create more defacto monopolies, lets not turn the internet into the phone system or cable and allow innovation to dictate winners and losers. The most innovative service with the best features should win not the established player who has made the deals with the common carrier and now has an advantage because their stuff works while the competitions is slow. Without net neutrality there is no transparency, the internet should be a free market not one with hidden variables that will determine the success or failure of a service, site, or application.

  61. Juice Box says:

    Humm just got my 2015 assessment, town raised it by 5.3%. I spoke two a few neighbors as well they also received even larger assessments. I gather Middletown is going to be messing with everyone in town this year. My neighbor appealed for 2014 and had his lowered by 70k this year and they put it right back and some for 2015.

  62. Juice Box says:

    I am all for getting millions more on the tax rolls. Somebody has to fund our wars.

  63. chicagofinance says:

    While you are at it…..let’s make Google give its search algorythms to Bing, Yahoo and various Chinese engines…….let’s also make Facebook give its user database to Twitter, Linked-In……I mean the market should be free without hidden variables…..

    jcer says:
    November 20, 2014 at 6:24 pm
    The issue with net neutrality is the providers don’t want to sell by the byte, the issue is theoretically they are selling the end consumer a limitless pipe and then want to restrict it by collecting money on the other end. The issue is simple so many of the people paying the bills aren’t using netflix and facebook and if they paid per byte would have much cheaper service which is something the cable companies desperately don’t want. The end state is tiered service with caps, rather than selling based on speed and the premise of “Unlimited” data. If that is how this goes they’ll lose because instead of $50 per month for basic internet, it’ll be more like $15 and the users who really are using all of the data will pay. Without net neutrality the attitude is rob Peter to pay Paul because Paul is your customer and makes the decision to use your service and Peter is making crazy internet money. That adds a complication to internet businesses that should not be. We need it to be fairly simple so that we do not create more defacto monopolies, lets not turn the internet into the phone system or cable and allow innovation to dictate winners and losers. The most innovative service with the best features should win not the established player who has made the deals with the common carrier and now has an advantage because their stuff works while the competitions is slow. Without net neutrality there is no transparency, the internet should be a free market not one with hidden variables that will determine the success or failure of a service, site, or application.

  64. ccb223 says:

    Amen.

  65. chicagofinance says:

    To be clear……I think Google is the only search engines worth a damn, with Bing being OK…….everything else is subpar…….so does Google have monopoly?

  66. Juice Box says:

    Re:67 – can you live without google should be the question. Same life not some 3rd world Baidu version.

  67. Juice Box says:

    Funny thing is Net Neutrality was perhaps Bill Clinton’s finest moment.

  68. chicagofinance says:

    It wasn’t so long ago Chuck Schumer was obsessing over the idea that the tax code was being abused for partisan purposes.
    Back in March 2012, he and six fellow Democratic senators wrote the IRS demanding more scrutiny for 501(c)4 groups who claimed they were involved in “social welfare” but were “devoted chiefly to political election activities who operate behind a facade of charity work.”
    Later, the IRS started singling out conservative organizations for special treatment and delay.
    But times have changed. Now we have a story in The New York Times about an individual deeply involved in politics who has a 501(c)4 that, as the Times puts it, appears to rank “among the most delinquent nonprofit organizations in the nation.”
    The individual: the Rev. Al Sharpton. His organization: the National Action Network, which has failed to pay payroll taxes over the years. Sharpton says this wasn’t intentional but stemmed from a dispute on how to classify some independent contractors.
    Nonetheless, Sharpton still flies first class and collects a nice salary from NAN as he zips between New York, Ferguson, Mo., and Washington, DC.
    As the Times also reports, it’s the “kind of practice by nonprofit groups that the United States Treasury’s inspector general recently characterized as ‘abusive’ or ‘potentially criminal’ if the failure to turn over or collect taxes is willful.”
    Considering how eager Sen. Schumer was to ensure 501(c)4’s weren’t gaming the tax system, we felt sure we would hear the senator thumping loudly for the IRS to take a hard look at the National Action Network.
    But a query to Schumer’s office went unanswered.

  69. joyce says:

    chicagofinance

    “Yes [the ‘last mile’] is a ostensible monopoly/duopoly, but again something that was hard won, expensive in money and effort, and took years to put in place,”

    It [the monopoly] never should have been up for the taking. They made a deal with the devil, who might now change the rules. I completely agree with others that whatever is done will not benefit ‘the people’ over the well-connected.

    “… is being hijacked by free-riders (i.e. Netflix et al.)”

    How is Netflix et al and the monopoly of residential providers related?

    “yes there is a theoretical argument here about equity, fairness and free-markets, but it kind of papers over a lot of mess”

    This seems just as glib, in reverse, as your recent comment #65 (which I agree with).

  70. Juice Box says:

    Access to the power grid or the railroads was never free.

  71. Juice Box says:

    I am more interested in how dot Com will be squashed from the feds monopoly of money.

  72. Comrade Nom Deplume, at Peace With The Trolls says:

    [24] Joyce,

  73. Liquor Luge says:

    Hey Grim, how long will it be until my corner liquor store has Gentleman Grim NJ Whiskey?

  74. Liquor Luge says:

    …or Warsaw Lightning?

  75. Liquor Luge says:

    needs me some crunk juice…

  76. Michael says:

    Boom!!! Are they talking about wage inflation? Nothing for nothing, I have been beating this nail. Good to finally see some talk about wage growth.

    “Wall Street is already indicating that the next “story” to be embraced is a domestic consumption resurgence. Brisk increases in payrolls, low personal debt-service costs, crashing petroleum prices, an uptick in housing activity and a stronger dollar making imported goods more affordable are all lining up behind this tale.

    Retail stocks and home-construction names have both led the market in the month since the October global-growth scare market shakeout, hinting that the market is rotating in favor of this domestic revival idea.

    Meantime, if the capital markets maintain their current calm, count on big companies to continue indulging their quest for domination through deals. We’ve seen some $3 trillion in global mergers and acquisitions this year, and mature bull markets like this one are the venue for bigger and more audacious deals.

    If we are due for a stretch when obvious good news is truly good for stocks – a transition from a suspect, grinding rally to a “belief phase” – then consumer buoyancy (perhaps finally accompanied by some wage growth) and gaudy takeover headlines will likely be prominently featured. ”

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/after-two-years—relentless-rally–needs-a-new-story-to-keep-it-going-195633145.html

  77. Michael says:

    78- yes, I’m feeling good right now!!! Two days in a row, find evidence to support my theories that were laughed at. You def have to give me some credit. I was taking major heat for my positions and never left, stood my ground because I knew my thoughts were based on logic. Not regurgitated nonsense.

  78. Liquor Luge says:

    The problem is, you’ve been beating the nail into your skull.

    “Nothing for nothing, I have been beating this nail. Good to finally see some talk about wage growth.”

  79. Liquor Luge says:

    Vigoda > Mike Nichols

  80. Michael says:

    I must say…..I feel good!!!!!!

    Liquor Luge says:
    November 20, 2014 at 8:53 pm
    The problem is, you’ve been beating the nail into your skull.

    “Nothing for nothing, I have been beating this nail. Good to finally see some talk about wage growth.”

  81. Essex says:

    Diane Sawyer….what’s the over under on her rebound time….days? Weeks? Rawr!

  82. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    Michael’s daughter is back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_2Jfb1S8N0

  83. Liquor Luge says:

    This YouTube weed chick should be the official blog mascot.

    Also should be exhibit #1 in rebutting any argument that choom doesn’t do anything to your brain.

  84. Liquor Luge says:

    sx (84)-

    Scrawny, dried-out byatch. Put a fork in her; she’s done.

  85. Juice Box says:

    Michael stop driving down to p – town for your feel good.

  86. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    I just watched the President’s speech. Kind of a whiff, right?

  87. Essex says:

    87. Bite your tongue sir….

  88. Essex says:

    Thanks Christie you Pompous Assh*le

    (Reuters) – New Jersey’s economy showed more cracks on Thursday as the U.S. state with the second-lowest credit rating in the country reported 4,500 jobs lost in October and an upward tick in its unemployment rate.

    The latest bad news broke a streak of much-needed labor market improvement that had been slow but steady for the Garden State, and it came in advance of a planned $525 million state borrowing on Dec. 3.

    The unemployment rate rose by 0.1 percentage point to 6.6 percent in October. More than half of the jobs lost were in the private sector, particularly in construction, preliminary data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics showed.

    A spate of casino closures in Atlantic City, which has suffered from increased competition in nearby states, also weighed on the state in October, as they did in September, said New Jersey labor spokesman Brian Murray.

    Accommodation and food service jobs declined by 2,200 jobs in October, due in part to the closure of the Trump Plaza, he said.

    The state has now recovered only 48 percent of the jobs it lost during the 2007-2009 recession, far less than New York and nationwide, according to the left-leaning research group New Jersey Policy Perspective.

    Wall Street credit rating agencies have downgraded the state eight times because of its poor economic recovery and large public pension shortfalls. Governor Chris Christie, a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, took controversial actions – not putting the money into the pension system that the state was supposed to contribute – in the middle of a budget crunch this year.

    Christie has also repeatedly overestimated revenue projections and used onetime budget tactics, putting the state in hot water with rating agencies.

    New Jersey also has some unknown financial factors, including 14 Medicaid audits that could cost the state $407.5 million altogether. The state has disputed the findings and it is not clear when, if any, of the amounts would have to be paid back, according to bond documents.

    Facing these financial headwinds, New Jersey plans to issue $525 million of general obligation bonds next month. Most of the proceeds will be used for capital projects at New Jersey’s public and private colleges and universities to increase capacity.

    It is a long time coming. Voters approved borrowing up to $750 million two years ago.

    (Reporting by Hilary Russ; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

  89. You ought to be a part of a contest for one of the most useful websites
    on the net. I will highly recommend this site!

Comments are closed.