NY Fed to Jersey: No jobs, no housing recovery

From HousingWire:

One in 10 NJ homeowners stuggle with mortgage payments: NY Fed

The workforce in New Jersey is one of the nation’s most educated, but residents remain entangled in a web of financial troubles with the state’s delinquent mortgage rate sitting at 10% percent.

Federal Reserve Bank of New York president William Dudley made that assessment while speaking to a New Jersey crowd Thursday. By Fed estimates, the unemployment rate in Jersey stands at 9.5%, while the number of mortgages 90 days or more past due or in foreclosure hit 10% back in March.

During the Great Recession, the state lost 250,000 jobs. The population of New Jersey is 8.8 million and 40% of its citizens are college graduates.

Dudley calls the jobs recovery in New Jersey “sluggish,” with the private sector experiencing only “moderate gains.” When you add state budget cuts and a reduction in state government jobs, the employment situation continues to look grim.

“Because the jobs recovery has been weak, there has been little progress in reducing unemployment,” Dudley said.

The median household income in New Jersey sits at about $68,000, with 9% of the state’s residents living below the federal poverty line.

While home prices have firmed in the past few months, borrowers are still carrying substantial debt levels. The average debt per person in New Jersey stands at $60,400, the Fed said.

Dudley said without job growth, the state’s housing and debt situation is unlikely to experience significant improvement.

This entry was posted in Economics, Housing Recovery, New Jersey Real Estate. Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to NY Fed to Jersey: No jobs, no housing recovery

  1. grim says:

    From the WSJ:

    New Round of Upheaval Reduces Home Buyers’ Urgency to Do a Deal

    Prospective home buyers are turning the stock-market turmoil and fresh worries about the economy into an opportunity to lower their offers on properties.

    Ryan Goodman just reduced bids on two homes in Barrington, Ill., “because the stock market sold off so much last week,” the 36-year-old risk analyst said.

    In July, Mr. Goodman and his wife offered $680,000 for a home listed at $800,000. While the seller later lowered the asking price to $750,000, the couple last week made a new offer of $650,000. “Unless we get a steal, we’re not going to buy any house,” he said.

    That dynamic threatens to put more pressure on home prices. “Buyers are going to use every point of leverage they can to get a lower price,” said Glenn Kelman, chief executive of real-estate brokerage Redfin Corp. “Sellers have to ask themselves how many people woke up this morning and said, ‘It’s a good day to buy a house.’ Far fewer than two or three weeks ago.”

    If a shaky economy chills housing activity, that also would make it harder for the Goodmans to sell the house they have lived in for nearly 10 years. Their home is on the market but after two dozen showings, has only netted what Mr. Goodman describes as a few “low-ball” offers.

    The couple had hoped to move before the school year begins, but that is looking unlikely.

    Mr. Goodman said he doesn’t have to sell his house before he purchases a new one. That isn’t the case for many “trade-up” borrowers, who can’t purchase a home until they find someone who will buy their house and leave them with enough money for their next down payment. That’s an important reason why housing demand remains weak.

    ew data out Thursday underscored the notion that a buyer’s market prevails in U.S. housing. Sales of previously owned homes fell 3.5% in July from June, the National Association of Realtors reported, even as mortgage rates have fallen to their lowest levels in more than 50 years. Some analysts say the Federal Reserve’s pledge last week to keep short-term interest rates near zero for two years could reduce any urgency for buyers to pull the trigger on a transaction.

    The Fed’s statement gave buyers “comfort that they are not missing out on low interest rates if they wait,” said John Burns, a home-building consultant in Irvine, Calif. That has tilted even more power toward home buyers, he said.

  2. grim says:

    From HousingWire:

    Housing market faces long, cold winter: Altos

    Low interest rates and a glut of inventory failed to substantially stimulate a weak housing market this summer, according to Altos Research.

    Based on summer statistics and shaky economic indicators, Altos is predicting a “long, cold winter” with nothing on the horizon to suggest improved housing market activity through the fall and winter.

  3. Confused in NJ says:


  4. Confused in NJ says:

    Bank of America Corp. is cutting 3,500 employees this quarter and working on restructuring plans that will ax several thousand more jobs, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times reported citing people familiar with the situation.

    The reports Friday said that the job cuts at the biggest U.S. bank by assets might exceed 10,000 or about 3.5 percent of its current work force.

  5. grim says:

    From the Daily Record:

    NJ jobs up as Wall Street sinks

    ew Jersey’s private sector employers added 3,900 jobs in July, the state said Thursday in a report that marked the sixth straight month of job gains for a labor market slowly recovering from a deep recession.

    The state’s unemployment rate remained steady at 9.5 percent. Hiring by private employers was somewhat offset by cutbacks in the public sector, which lost 2,100 jobs in July.

    Over the six-month period from January to July, the state’s economy added 47,800 jobs, an average of nearly 8,000 per month.

    “It’s feeling a bit more positive,” said Jim White, marketing manager for Bedrock Concrete Corp. in Sayreville, which is working on the reconstruction of the Dover Mall site at Routes 37 and 166 in Toms River. “Is the economy still in a tight mode? Absolutely. But it’s definitely better than it was two years ago, when we had no work.”

    The state also said that it had revised its June employment figures to show an increase of 8,800 jobs. Preliminary figures had indicated only 1,700 jobs were added in June.

  6. grim says:


    Rutgers University economist James W. Hughes said the state will need to add more than 60,000 jobs a year for the next three or four years simply to make up for the jobs lost during the downturn.

    But Hughes said the steady improvement in the state’s labor market is cause for optimism.

    “It’s nice to have a string of very good months,” Hughes said. “This year is a very good year so far.” Hughes said New Jersey is on pace to have its best job growth year since 1999.

  7. freedy says:

    Let’s see in NJ ,the Welfare State, we have lots of new Walgreens, CVS,Subways,lots of new Banks,mostly asian ,lots of new Chinese foods joints, lots of landscaping,lots of retail,

    Manufacturing ,out of the question.

  8. Kettle1^2 says:


    what was the median income for the jobs lost and what is the median income for the jobs being created. Unfortunatly the peoples debt doesn’t automatically decrease along with the income from their new job

  9. Buh-bye, BAC. Enjoy the dirt nap in your mass grave, along with Dexia.

    The stench of death is full-on now. Time for the ultra-violence to start.

  10. freedy says:


    and how many will be on the welfare,s8,food stamp programs in NJ?
    oh,don’t forget the free meds as well

  11. 3b says:

    #1Mr. Dudley says prices have firmed in the last few months? Well fromm my perspective asking prices have dropped more in the last few months than in the last couple of years. I remember Dudley, he used to do the economic round up every morning back in the day at GS.

  12. 3b says:

    #6 New Jersey is on pace to have its best job growth year since 1999.

    I find that vey hard to believe.

  13. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    Barry is gonna have to pull an awfully large rabbit out of the hat now.

    Perhaps that is why he is staying on the Vineyard. He knows the game is over.

    I think it’s time to start a new tracking poll: What are the odds that Barry does a Johnson and tells the country, that’s it, I don’t want another term? I figure that if things get worse (and we can pretty much assume they will), the TPTB on the left are gonna pressure him to step aside and let Hillary take a shot.

    Remember, you heard it here first, on NJREREPORT.

  14. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [129] [last thread] deb

    “And I am no defender of Obama’s, but he was never named Soetoro. I can assure you schools use stepfathers’ names all the time for convenience (they routinely did it to my kids, because it was MY name) but there is no evidence this was ever Obama’s legal name.”

    Either you are entirely too sensitive about names, or you object to the personal attack on the president. I am going with the latter.

    Yes, that is a personal attack on the president. It was a tactic or custom, or standard, whatever you want to call it, that I can trace all the way back to the left’s treatment of Johnson, then Nixon, then Ford. It abated somewhat under Carter since the right was doing the criticising and had not developed the keen combination of hubris and satire perfected by the pundits on the left, and had no critical mass, but it arose eventually.

    The left’s disrespect for the person of the president returned to full flower, directed at Reagan, and has pretty much not abated since. One need not dig very deep to find the rather unflattering things that the left directed at W.

    So to the extent that the left complains about the right disrespecting Obama personally, and want to know who started it, they need only travel to the nearest reflective surface.

  15. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    Damn, guess I am behind the curve after all. Tingly was postulating this very thing nearly a year ago.


  16. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    Finally, I was wondering when someone was gonna call BS on Warren Buffett:


    It had occurred to me that Buffett need not have worried about his taxes going up much should his call to tax-the-rich (more) be heeded. As Laffer points out, there is no tax on unrealized cap gains. Laffer suggests that (heck, read it yourself).

    Further, as I point out, there is no tax on muni interest, and Buffett did not call for higher taxes on cap gains or dividends. Or for expanding the definition of taxable estate to get at trusts and other dispositions.

    So if Obama “soaked the rich” through the single device of a higher top end marginal rate, how badly does that hurt Buffett? Given where his income derives, and his ability to control realization to some degree, I suspect that he isn’t hurt much, and will never pay the same effective tax rate that I do.

  17. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    okay, one more for the zeitgeist.


    I guess the Chinese are UNC fans.

  18. schabadoo says:

    Unless Obama doesn’t have the stomach for another term, it wouldn’t make sense. He has a good chance of having a Tea Party favorite as a potential opponent–Bachmann/Perry/Palin/etc. Or you get Romney, who’s disliked by the loudest group in his own party and has his own healthcare baggage.

    GOP’s best bet is to run their ‘unnamed opponent’ used in polling…

  19. toomuchchange says:

    #14 – Comrade Nom Deplume

    “And I am no defender of Obama’s, but he was never named Soetoro.”

    Maybe she feels like I do: I don’t like attacks below the belt. I find the Soetoro, the Barack Hussein Obama, the Bojangles, etc. stuff very distasteful and objectionable.

    Names that focus on his race and the fact that his mother married two Muslims, one from Africa and one from Indonesia, have nothing to do with what he does: they strike at the heart of what he is, which of course he can do nothing about.

    So what if he’s half black? So what if he lived in Indonesia? So what about the Muslim relatives? None of those things have anything to do with what things are so bad in the country right now, or why he’s been such a disappointment.

    Personally I wish he wouldn’t run again.

  20. Morpheus says:

    Ok nom…I will take the bait. As an observer of politics since Ford was president, the level of vitrol directed at a president increased exponentially when Clinton became president.

    Regarding Reagan, I did not see the level of vitrol directed at Reagan from left as compared to the vitrol directed at Clinton from the right. I will admit that even if I disagreed with his policies, I never really disliked the man. The running joke at the time was that ronnie believed he was acting in the role as the president. No matter how amusing that joke was, you respected still respected the office. All in all, ronnie was an OK bloke. Could be because of his humble beginnings, I always believed that he could relate to the common man.

    As a member of the left, the only president I really disliked was “bush the younger”. That faux cowboy really irritated me. I believe that there is an Texas expression that described bush as “all hat, no cattle.” Even then, the movie “death of a president”( I believe that was the title) was incredibly disrespectful. Again, even if I disliked that man, he was still the president of the United States and the office was entitled to respect.

    Now before we get into the classic argument of right v. left, let us all remember this: These politicians do not give a S–t about you or I. Likewise, they are all selling us down the river.

    On a happy note, family will return today from a 3 week vacation in Taiwan. Much explaining will have to occur regarding recent purchase of rifle and ammo.

    BTW….will complete the range portion of the my NRA course this saturday. R U up to a GTG at a range? U, me, clot and rest of the “usual suspects”?

  21. Juice Box says:

    Schabadoo – Achillie’s Heel for most men is their ego. He is going to have to crash and Burn, since I don’t think the DNC leaders have the cahones to ask him to step aside.

  22. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [21] morpheus

    Perhaps because I am older, and was in college during Reagan’s first term, I recall the very high level of vitriol directed at him. Even Tip O’Neill, famously photo’ed pounding down beers with Reagan, took some cheap shots at him. I think that the overall level of hatred and vitriol from the left rivaled, if not surpassed, that directed at W. Of course, there was no internet back then, so you have to throw that out. But Op-ed pages, editorial cartoons, and public speakers savaged Ronnie just as much as they did W, and to the same degree of lowness.

    And lest you think that the backlash against W started early because of the disputed election, I can tell you that Reagan was vilified by the left before he took office, even before he was a candidate.

    I have a book of cartoons by Paul Szep, an ed cartoonist for the Globe at home. These stemmed from the 70’s, and the portrayals of the right and of Reagan (when he first ran for President) were just as nasty as anything drawn depicting W in the ‘OOs.

    IMHO, the reason that the left was so able to quickly go into attack mode versus W, which happened well before Florida, was that they were experienced and the apparatus was in place. Smearing the opposition is very much old hat to the left; the right only got better at it under Clinton (they sucked at it under Carter).

  23. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [19] schabadoo

    I need only quote one of your favorite political operatives to say what will make or break Obama:

    “It’s the economy, stupid.”

  24. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [20] TMC

    I never used Soetoro. I don’t even know where it comes from. Ignorance on my part perhaps, but just too lazy to google it.

    As for vitriol and disrespect for the office of the president, I reiterate that this isn’t new to Obama or W, or even Clinton or Reagan. In truth, it goes back to the beginning. Respect for the office that rises to a level of piety is actually a recent phenomenon.

  25. Sterling Grey Matters says:

    A little Dilbert office “humor” that reflects the sentiments of many on this board – It’s a couple of weeks old so maybe this was already posted.

    BTW – the strip was brought to my attention this morning by CNBC who spent a quick minute discussing the implication of Alice’s request for protein bars.

    One comment on the Dilbert site brought a smile to my face – “Alice must not realize Dogbert lives with Dilbert. I am sure Dogbert has superior weapons.”


  26. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [20] tmc

    There has always been some speculation that he would not run again, or that he wouldn’t care that much if he lost. But as the piece on Tingles noted, there are dems that clearly wishes he wouldn’t run again.

    Consider this: If he were so weakened that the GOP would almost walk to the White House with their pick (Schab, it’s because no voter is as smart as you, okay? Go with that), then they have to get him to abdicate. If he didn’t, the Dems would have to consider whether to put someone up against him to avoid losing the WH. Problem there is twofold: First, they savage him themselves, letting the GOP save its powder, and second, they impliedly admit that the last 4 years were a mistake.

    So, for me, a leading indicator that Obama is done is whether a prominent democrat (No Fabius, Kucinich is not a prominent democrat), announces his or her candidacy.

    Flame away.

  27. Painhrtz - Salmon of Doubt says:

    Nom as you know, those of us that still possess a lick of common sense know the economy is sinking faster than a torpedoed liberty ship. Il Duce for all intents and purposes should be f*cked as far as re-election goes, but the idiot Waricans can’t let go of their Neocon ideals and will snatch defeat from the jaws of vicotry with their rogues gallery of stupid.

    don’t like Ron Paul, hello Gary Johnson who is RP with good looks, effective record as a governor, self made man, and doesen’t stammer when defining issues. Why hasn’t he been in debates can’t have too many real conservatives in the race (He and Ron Paul)?
    Oh that is right because the idiot waricans want to keep crushing cavemen with million dollar cluster bombs.

  28. Anon E. Moose says:

    Nom [24];

    I’m convinced that it was the August 2008 market crash that sealed the deal to put O in office. Wall street giveth, Wall Street taketh away!

  29. hughesrep says:


    Johnsons position on weed and gambling disqualify him any chance with the GOP.

    The moral majortiy wackjobs that control that side of the “big tent” would never allow it. He can’t get through the Iowa, SC or FL primaries.

  30. Juice Box says:

    re #28 and # 29 – The two dominant groups Wall St and the MIC are busy fighting each other for a larger slice of the ever shrinking pie. That is where we are headed since neither group can survive without being firmly attached to the teat.

    O could shut down the wars and wall st if he really wants to win the next election. All he needs is the cajones to do it. He has the ego, however his fatal flaw outside of his ego is perhaps the fact that he needs everyone to like him and of cource horrible execution on the details. The DOJ can accomplish allot but they aren’t being used properly and he could have everyone home for Christmas if he wanted to.

    Not so sure his choices to run the DNC was the right one either since he needs a pitbull and not a puppy dog.

  31. Morpheus says:

    23: man you are old! collecting SS yet? Just kidding, Ok…I was in college during late part of Reagan’s second term. still dont remember the level of vitrol that u attest. although…..there is much of the 80’s i do not remember. they were a lot of fun!

  32. Happy Renter says:

    [20] “I find the Soetoro, the Barack Hussein Obama, the Bojangles, etc. stuff very distasteful and objectionable.”

    Aw, poor libs. Why can’t they laugh about “Willard M. Romney” or “John McSame” without having to hear “Barack Hussein Obama” or “Barack Hu-same Obama” in return? I found the Bush-as-Hitler stuff ads from MoveOn.org very distasteful and objectionable too. Oh well. I guess that comes with the territory of being Chimp-in-Chief.*

    “Names that focus on his race and the fact that his mother married two Muslims, one from Africa and one from Indonesia, have nothing to do with what he does”

    Two? I guess I haven’t been following the personal story of The One closely enough. I have no idea what “Soetoro” means or where it comes from. I guess it’s some Muslim thing? But really, when your name is Barack Hussein Obama, I don’t think bringing “Soetoro” into the mix does any harm. Heck, if you ask me, Soetoro sounds like an upgrade.

    “they strike at the heart of what he is, which of course he can do nothing about”

    The heart of what he is? A shady Chicago empty-suit politician? Oh, you mean black. Well for starters, he can drop the fake accent he puts on when he wants to up his street cred with fawning libs. And his chumminess with racebaiters like Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton don’t help, nor did his choice of “churches” and “preachers”. But most importantly, he supports policies that discriminate against other people for what they are, “which of course they can do nothing about,” so, tough.

    *(Before you hypervenilate, thank the Dems for that one too: http://bushchimp.homestead.com)

  33. JC says:

    Nom 27: Even if the Dems were to offer an alternative, which isn’t going to happen, where the heck is the Dems’ farm team? Dennis Kucinich isn’t a viable alternative, and his district is being reapportioned out of existence. Donna Edwards isn’t known, Franken could never be taken seriously, Bernie Sanders is old and not even a Democrat. What the Dems have left are blue dog DINOs and hacks like Chris Van Hollen and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. It’s worse than the Mets.

  34. me@my.other.job says:

    Lolo Soetoro, also known as Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo or Mangundikardjo, (EYD: Lolo Sutoro was the Indonesian stepfather of Barack Obama,

    his step father’s last name.


  35. me@my.other.job says:

    Some Brouhaha that he allegedly got financial aid under the name “Barry Soetoro”


  36. Painhrtz - Salmon of Doubt says:

    Nom, I remember the Reagan with Bonzo the Chimp policy cartoons they used to publish occasionally. Seriously though the morons we have had in charge the last 11 years make me miss slick Willie. Hell even Bush the older was at least decent with foreign policy whe he wasn’t vomiting on Japanese politicians. His moron son, and the current dim bulb can’t do anything right whether it be abroad or at home.

    Hughs, and that is my problem with the Republicans. you can have liberty as long as it it the non morally objectionable kind that we approve of. The lunatic fringe has been wagging that dog for far too long now

  37. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    CNBC running story on diamonds as portable wealth. Wondered when MSM would wake up to that.

    Anyone remember ‘Marathon Man’?

  38. Juice Box says:

    Where we may be headed after Jackson Hole. The banksters promised another 100 Trillion in new credit at the WEC in January, the issue up until now has been how to finance it.

    The Fed has been studying expanding the repo market and the recent entry of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the Reverse Repo Counterparty list are strong evidence they will start using it for QE3. Banks hold 1.7 Trillion in reserve with the Fed. This money can be used to create the worldwide inflation the Keynesians want (just read Krugman’s column) since theoretically it could fund nine times that amount of government debt, or $18 trillion which can be expanded again perhaps to $30 Trillion. Successful expansion and development of the repo market in this way is an obvious and more powerful solution than extending direct quantitative easing which we have told won’t happen.

    There is always a back door folks.

  39. Libtard in Union says:

    Why do you all even care about who the next president will be??? Unless you’re an executive at a pretty well to do corporation or a Wall Street banker, it absolutely doesn’t matter who gets elected. When will the populace understand this? It pains me to watch the sheep get rounded up by the collie. The collie in this case, being the circus barkers of each party. Our government responds to the lobbyist dollar and absolutely nothing else! This is why Glass–Steagall is no longer, why the Dems opened the floodgates to cheap mortgages and the Repubs appeased their buddies down on Wall Street. The income gap has grown steadily since 1980. Why is that? Because both parties are fleecing the 99.9% of us. And we sit back idly popping the bon-bons and watching the Real Housewives of bumfcuk. Anyone who claims otherwise is unequivocally full of sh1t. Our leaders could physically defecate on our constitution and they wouldn’t even feel any pressure to step down. The constant lying by ALL of leaders and complete disregard for conflict of interest (Friends of Mozillo loans for example) will continue to worsen until the 99.9% of us stop buying the bovine turds they continue to feed us. Yet the sheep continue to take every spare opportunity to blame the other party. If there is this much ‘blame the other team’ fodder to support this much media and it’s own industry (revenue through advertising), how can you guys continue to think that your party has any more decency than the one you are opposing? You know what would be beautiful? Not having to listen to this tit-for-tat all day long. I can’t even read the newspaper anymore! Saw on the 10pm news (where the reporters wear street clothes apparently) last night that Christie and Cuomo have come up with a compromise for the PA on their toll increases that the PA immediately approved of. What a complete pile of bullkrap. This whole thing was a giant steamy pile of propaganda. Was it ever different? Or were we always fleeced?

  40. schabadoo says:

    Schab, it’s because no voter is as smart as you, okay? Go with that

    They have to run somebody. The current list is a hoot.

  41. grim says:

    38 – I tried on a $750,000 custom made diamond watch once, can’t event remember the carat count, but the entire thing was studded.

    Asked by buddy, who is a jeweller, who his clientele is. He told me that the watch looks so fake, you can walk righ through customs and nobody would even think to stop you. Made sense to me, same kind of clientelle that like the value density of the 500 euro note. I really think the whole point of the 500 euro was to become the defacto standard in elicit paper money movement, debasing the 100usd.

  42. BC Bob says:

    “I’m convinced that it was the August 2008 market crash that sealed the deal to put O in office. Wall street giveth, Wall Street taketh away!”


    What market crash in 8/08? The S&P’s were 1,300 in early Sep, 08′, sub 700 in 3/09. Are you saying that the electorate was anticipatory, knew the crash was coming?

  43. Happy Renter says:

    [42] “the watch looks so fake, you can walk right through customs and nobody would even think to stop you”

    Creativity; no boat required.

  44. BC Bob says:

    United States will “take care of” its debt “very closely.”

    Joe Biden

    That’s open for interpretation.

    [Edit] Biden cont’d; But don’t F with our Hoyas.


  45. spyderjacks says:

    #38: “Is it safe?”

  46. Anon E. Moose says:

    Nom [14];

    Eddie Murphy from “Comming to America”:

    Saul: A man has the right to change his name to vatever he vants to change it to. And if a man vants to be called Muhammad Ali, godammit this is a free country, you should respect his vishes, and call the man Muhammad Ali!

    Morris: His mamma call him Clay, imma call him Clay.


  47. Anon E. Moose says:

    Bob [43];

    My mistake, it was not August of ’08… It was October. I should have known that the populous would have forgotten all about August by the time November came around.

    October 2008 Stock Market Crash

    Although history may state the actual market crash occurred on Monday, October 6, 2008, the market experienced eight consecutive trading days of negative movement starting on October 1, 2008. The table below shows the decline of the Dow Jones Industrial Average from October 1st through October 10th.

    Date DJIA Close Point Change % Change
    October 1, 2008 10,831.07 -19.59 -0.18%
    October 2, 2008 10,482.85 -348.22 -3.22%
    October 3, 2008 10,325.38 -157.47 -1.50%
    October 6, 2008 9,955.50 -369.88 -3.58%
    October 7, 2008 9,447.11 -508.39 -5.11%
    October 8, 2008 9,258.10 -189.01 -2.00%
    October 9, 2008 8,579.19 -678.91 -7.33%
    October 10, 2008 8,451.19 -128.00 -1.49%

    During these eight trading days, the DJIA would drop a total of 2,399.47 points or 22.11%. The market would rebound sharply on Monday October 13, and rise 936.42 points, only to drop 733.08 points on Wednesday of that same week.

    October was shaping up to be a volatile month, as investors began reacting to the worrisome credit market news that started back in March 2008.

  48. wtf says:

    (16) “Buffett did not call for higher taxes on cap gains or dividends.”

    wtf are you talking about? This is a quote from his op-ed:

    “I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate. ”

    And leave it to you to reference a clown like Laffer.

  49. 3b (18)-

    BAC = Lemon Bros. redux

  50. Libtard in Union says:


    Marathon Man is my all time favorite film. And not just because I’m a hebe.

  51. box (39)-

    Sounds to me like something’s being jammed in through the back door.

    “There is always a back door folks.”

  52. lib (51)-

    William Goldman used to live in the building where the import co. I worked for in the ’80s was located. He used to come in 2-3 days a week and start telling stories. He is one of the coolest people walking the planet.

  53. Libtard in Union says:

    I could only imagine he is Clot.

  54. danxp says:

    anyone subscribe to streethauthority.com?

    is it worth the $40/yr subscription for 12 issues? just saw their website and their “10 forever stocks” presentation… only they never tell you what those forever stocks are… unless you subscribe…

  55. Sterling Grey Matters says:


  56. scribe says:

    Where is JJ?

    We need a good Friday afternoon JJ story.

  57. schabadoo says:

    Yes, that is a personal attack on the president. It was a tactic or custom, or standard, whatever you want to call it, that I can trace all the way back to the left’s treatment of Johnson, then Nixon, then Ford

    Listing personal attacks on presidents starting after JFK?

    Too much.

  58. Happy Renter says:

    [40] “Why do you all even care about who the next president will be?”

    Because I don’t want a government or a President that sanctions discrimination against my children because of who they are and things they cannot change, while Chairman O’s silver-spoon fed spawn get preferential treatment for their hue.


    The rest of what you say may be true, and it is all going to shite, but you either make no choice at all, or you choose the lesser of two evils.

  59. Libtard in Union says:

    Making a choice for the lesser of two evils, I agree, is better than not making a choice at all. But to see that your apple is perfect because it only has 4 worm holes in it, when mine has five and then to blame the end of the world on this insignificant difference is pretty damn infantile.

  60. Libtard in Union says:

    see = say.

    Sorry! I’m just to Busy working thanks to the wonderful job creation skills of both Barry and the Chimp.

    See how stupid this is?

  61. Happy Renter says:

    [61] I’d stay it’s more infantile to argue on behalf of the guy with 20% more worms and pretend there is no difference; but to each his own. ;-)

  62. Happy Renter says:

    stay = say

    If only Soetoro and the Chimp hadn’t created this darn job, I would be able to concentrate on correct spelling in my posts!

  63. Libtard in Union says:

    I would like an apple that has no worm holes in it, but all the apples harvested by the two parties continue to be rotten. I think I’ll just have an orange instead. Now if enough people opted for the orange rather than the rotten apples, the apples would do a better job avoiding worms. Instead, you choose to promote the rotten apple with 20% less of an infestation than the other rotten apple.

    To each their own. :P

  64. Simply Ravishing HEHEHE says:

    They freed the West Memphis 3 – good day in America

  65. The Original NJ Expat says:

    Should we refinance into a 7/1 ARM?

    We have only $120K principal left on our $175K 5.75% 30 year FRM. We have resisted refinancing because we overpay our mortgage by so much that even refinancing into a 15 year fixed and making the same overpayment it seems like almost a wash as when you take into account the future value of out-of-pocket closing costs and the fact that our $1600 monthly payment is now going more than 50% to principal every month, the final difference in payoff dates is only a few months different in 2019. I thought about a 10 year fixed, but the rates don’t seem much lower than a 15. Today it occurred to me that if I can get 2.75% 7/1 ARM for $120K and continue to make our same $1600 payment we’ll be whacking about $1000 in principal a month instead of $800 and will pay off quicker than any of the fixed rate options. Is there a flaw in my logic?

  66. Simply Ravishing HEHEHE says:

    JJ’s at D’jais

  67. Dink says:


    Is the Firestone that you use the one on Bloomfield & Elm?


  68. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [49] wtf

    I stand corrected. Don’t know if I was looking at an abridged reprint or suffering caffeine withdrawal, but it was there.

    That said, I still think little of Buffett’s call since he has called for raising taxes on only a portion of his overall income and none of his accumulated wealth.

    And as for Laffer being a clown, the Laffer curve is well accepted in tax policy circles as a valid theory, even by the most liberal among us. The liberal wonks reject it, however, because, to them, tax policy is not primarily about maximizing economic growth, even it it would maximize revenues. It is about, inter alia, redistribution of wealth and creation of tax “equity” though there is a wide gulf of debate as to what is equitable.

    But stick to your Keynesian views. They’ve done real well for you so far, and it means more work for me.

  69. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [60] renter,

    I had to listen to that clip to understand why it was there. At first, I was, like, “Goodwin Liu??? Why is this here?” But I listened and got your point.

    Also, I could not help but note that Webb sounded positively republican in that speech. Guess he is getting some heat down in the Old Dominion.

  70. New in FL says:

    To my knowledge there has never been a demonstrated instance where a tax rate cut increased total tax revenue, which was the essence of the Laffer Curve. If you know of an exception I wish you would share it. Only the tax cut religious would still argue that the Laffer Curve is legitimate.

    Here is a discussion of the issue from a few years ago:


    “If there’s one thing that Republican politicians agree on, it’s that slashing taxes brings the government more money. “You cut taxes, and the tax revenues increase,” President Bush said in a speech last year. Keeping taxes low, Vice President Dick Cheney explained in a recent interview, “does produce more revenue for the Federal Government.” Presidential candidate John McCain declared in March that “tax cuts … as we all know, increase revenues.” His rival Rudy Giuliani couldn’t agree more. “I know that reducing taxes produces more revenues,” he intones in a new TV ad.

    If there’s one thing that economists agree on, it’s that these claims are false. We’re not talking just ivory-tower lefties. Virtually every economics Ph.D. who has worked in a prominent role in the Bush Administration acknowledges that the tax cuts enacted during the past six years have not paid for themselves–and were never intended to. Harvard professor Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2005, even devotes a section of his best-selling economics textbook to debunking the claim that tax cuts increase revenues.”

  71. Simply Ravishing HEHEHE says:


    Layoffs Watch ’11: RBS
    By Bess Levin

    inShareApparently the Queen has had to let some people go.

    FYI, cuts in FX at RBS today…sales staff was hit hardest.


  72. R Patrick says:

    68: Your putting your self in a situation from where you can pay a lot extra to where you have to pay extra. Just in case something happens with the job.

  73. Happy Renter says:

    [73] I agree. I respect Webb for taking a stand on principle there.

  74. Comrade Nom Deplume says:

    [74] FL

    To my knowledge, there hasn’t been an instance where it was actually tried without countervailing measures that negated the effect. Even the article you cite points out that Reagan’s tax cuts for the nonrich were money losers, suggesting that the top end cuts would have worked. The lower end “cuts” were primarily the elimination of tax expenditures. Even then, the article doesn’t point to revenues and whether they grew or not. I can look for it, but one thing that the left will counter with is that revenues grew because of gov. spending, not tax cuts, so they declare the theory invalid.

    A better comparator would be the Bush tax cuts. Those were pretty much pure tax cuts, albeit modest in real terms compared to TRA 86. I don’t have revenue (remember, it’s revenue, not spending) figures, but if you could track them down, we can parse them. They are subject to the same attack from the left regarding spending, but to me that doesn’t disprove the theory.

    Finally, I know that there are some on the board that hew to the tired canard so often repeated on CNBC that Clinton raised taxes and the economy boomed. But research demonstrated that the economy boomed for reasons other than tax hikes, and that it boomed DESPITE the taxes, not because of them. If the converse were true, we would not have Obama cutting payroll taxes or, as he puts it, refusing to raise taxes on people during a slowdown. By the liberal logic, a tax hike is just what the economy needs, but no one seems to be proposing them, except on the rich. Why is that?

    Now, if you want to model an economy in which you raise taxes and guage economic effect, I am sure that there are plenty of models. What you have to remember is that the Laffer Curve demonstrates “deadweight loss”, which is a staple concept in tax policy regardless of what some MSM journalist tells you. I know, I learned it from liberal professors.

    The premise is simple: If you raise a tax high enough, you distort behavior. The economists will tell you that it is merely an input cost applicable to the entire economy, but it isn’t. Not all economic actors will pay it (i.e., foreign companies), so you disadvantage those that do. As domestic actors scale back to avoid the tax, or go under because they cannot compete, revenue declines. Ask any state treasurer what happens when they make the state uncompetitive. Ask Maryland where its millionaires went.

    Now I wanted to find a decent chart, and I think I did (BTW, Krugman’s chart is similar but doesn’t cover the periods we need, and I know you revere Krugman).


    It shows only one decline in revenue growth, right after the Tech bubble burst and 9/11 happened. Pretty big drop off in revenues. But right after Bush tax cuts, revenues rose in real terms.

    So who’s right?

  75. Anarchy is the natural state of man. Until we accept and submit to the call of the wild, the chaos we inflict upon ourselves by trying in vain to establish order will drive us to extinction.

  76. scribe says:

    BC Bob,

    R. Patrick,
    Welcome back! How are you?

  77. Storm the Federal Reserve, Treasury and IRS. Sack them, hang the people working there, burn the buildings to the ground, then drink beer.

    This is the future of mankind.

  78. Post #81 makes no less sense than spending 1mm per bomb to blow up cavemen.

  79. Libtard at home says:


    Yes, but you have to watch them. They can be careless with the QC. Get the Firestone Credit Card ASAP as they rebate like 10% of the work and send coupons that are astonishingly amazing.

  80. Libtard at home says:

    Tax cuts might raise revenue (just as cutting the sales price on a product increases revenues, but not earnings), but since the top 2% pay 99% of the taxes, it certainly helps widen the income gap. Of course, the rich see no issue with the income gap as they can afford their own security detail. So lets keep cutting taxes until there aren’t any taxes collected whatsoever. Could you imagine what that would do for the free market economy?

  81. I’d be happy to pay any amount of taxes in return for services and programs that are worth the money.

    What we get are corruption, indolence, stupidity and lard-assed, entitled civil service drones. Shoot the whole scurvy lot, I say.

  82. I get to pay 10K/year in property taxes in order to fund a skool that would much rather indoctrinate kids instead of educate them.

    Education makes people dangerous to gubmint.

  83. chicagofinance says:

    “Why are you a clown?”
    “Because if I wasn’t a clown, I would be a murderer.”

  84. chicagofinance says:

    PlotIn 1937, a “Happy” clown is forcibly recruited to serve in the Spanish Civil War, where he massacres an entire platoon with a machete still in costume.

    In 1973, near the end of the Franco regime, the clown’s son, Javier, follows in his father’s footsteps to become a clown, but he is too miserable to be funny and is instead relegated to play the part of the Sad Clown. There he is repeatedly humiliated by the Happy Clown Sergio for the entertainment of others. Javier later falls in love with Sergio’s gorgeous acrobat wife, Natalia. A love triangle ensues between the three of them, and the two clowns engage in a horrific battle with one another.

  85. The Original NJ Expat says:

    #86 – Clot, your taxes are $9K not $10K.

  86. Simon Yeung says:

    Wow man!!!Thank you very much for the useful Real Estate info! I dug it carefully.
    Simon Yeung

    “Orange County Home Builders”

Comments are closed.