Economic Optimism Amidst a Fake Recovery

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Lets see, worst umemployment then we have had in years, and predicted to be getting worse... And up tick in the market and all is fine and we are heading to greener pastures......sooo all of this wothless money that Ben is printing and stuffing to the market is all good, never mind it is going to support inflation and sooner then later probably hyperinflation and the weakening of the dollar even more , and lowering the buying power of each of us. The uptick in the market, is simply Ben's money being spent, not the money og the comsumers.....Wells Fargo post record earnings 2 weeks agao, then last week they state they noeed BILLIONS more in bailout money..........hmmmmmm

Yea its all gettin better....Don't get me wrong, the market will rebound and recover, it always does, its just a few yrs off and it is going to get alot worse before it gets better....Remember barry tellin everyine that CAT was going to be able to "put people back to work" with the stimulis money........and what did they do, layoff more people and NOT rehire anyone.....it will get worse before it gets better, take a look at this article, by a respected writer living in Washington state, that writes from a libertarian perspective. And the Oracle is a well respect media scource also..........


The Year of ****eyed Economic Optimism Amidst a Fake Recovery

Politics / Recession 2008 - 2010 Apr 16, 2009 - 03:31 PM
By: Mike_Whitney

The Year of ****eyed Economic Optimism Amidst a Fake Recovery :: The Market Oracle :: Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting Free Website


"The foundations of our economy are strong" - Retail sales fell in March as soaring job losses and tighter credit conditions forced consumers to cut back sharply on discretionary spending. Nearly every sector saw declines including electronics, restaurants, furniture, sporting goods and building materials. Auto sales continued their historic nosedive despite aggressive promotions on new vehicles and $13 billion of aid from the federal government.

The crash in housing, which began in July 2006, accelerated on the downside in March, falling 19 percent year-over-year, signaling more pain ahead. Mortgage defaults are rising and foreclosures in 2009 are estimated to be in the 2.1 million range, an uptick of 400,000 from 2008. Consumer spending is down, housing is in a shambles, and industrial output dropped at an annual rate of 20 percent, the largest quarterly decrease since VE Day. The systemwide contraction continues unabated with with no sign of letting up.

Conditions in the broader economy are now vastly different than those on Wall Street, where the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones Industrials have rallied for 5 weeks straight regaining more than 25 percent of earlier losses. Fed chief Ben Bernanke's $13 trillion in monetary stimulus has triggered a rebound in the stock market while Main Street continues to languish on life-support waiting for Obama's $787 billion fiscal stimulus to kick in and compensate for falling demand and rising unemployment. The rally on Wall Street indicates that Bernanke's flood of liquidity is creating a bubble in stocks since present values do not reflect underlying conditions in the economy. The fundamentals haven't been this bad since the 1930s.

The financial media is abuzz with talk of a recovery as equities inch their way higher every week. CNBC's Jim Cramer, the hyperventilating ringleader of "Fast Money", announced last week, "I am pronouncing the depression is over." Cramer and his clatter of media cheerleaders ignore the fact that every sector of the financial system is now propped up with Fed loans and T-Bills without which the fictive free market would collapse in a heap. For 19 months, Bernanke has kept a steady stream of liquidity flowing from the vault at the US Treasury to the NYSE in downtown Manhattan. The Fed has recapitalized financial institutions via its low interest rates, its multi-trillion dollar lending facilities, and its direct purchase of US sovereign debt and Fannie Mae mortgage-backed securities. (Monetization) The Fed's balance sheet has become a dumping ground for all manner of toxic waste and putrid debt-instruments for which there is no active market. When foreign central banks and investors realize that US currency is backed by dodgy subprime collateral; there will be a run on the dollar followed by a stampede out of US equities. Even so, Bernanke assures his critics that "the foundations of our economy are strong".

As for the recovery, market analyst Edward Harrison sums it up like this:

"This is a fake recovery because the underlying systemic issues in the financial sector are being papered over through various mechanisms designed to surreptitiously recapitalize banks while monetary and fiscal stimulus induces a rebound before many banks' inherent insolvency becomes a problem. This means the banking system will remain weak even after recovery takes hold. The likely result of the weak system will be a relapse into a depression-like circumstances once the temporary salve of stimulus has worn off. Note that this does not preclude stocks from large rallies or a new bull market from forming because as unsustainable as the recovery may be, it will be a recovery nonetheless." (Edward Harrison, "The Fake Recovery", Credit Writedowns)

The rally in the stock market will not fix the banking system, slow the crash in housing, patch-together tattered household balance sheets, repair failing industries or reverse the precipitous decline in consumer confidence. The rising stock market merely indicates that profit-driven speculators are back in business taking advantage of the Fed's lavish capital injections which are propelling equities into the stratosphere. Meanwhile, the unemployment lines continue to swell, the food banks continue to run dry and the homeless shelters continue to burst at the seams. So far, $12 trillion has been pumped into the financial system while less than $450 billion fiscal stimulus has gone to the "real" economy where workers are struggling just to keep food on the table. The Fed's priorities are directed at the investor class not the average working Joe. Bernanke is trying to keep Wall Street happy by goosing asset values with cheap capital, but the increases to the money supply are putting more downward pressure on the dollar. The Fed chief has also begun purchasing US Treasuries, which is the equivalent of writing a check to oneself to cover an overdraft in one's own account. This is the kind of gibberish that passes as sound economic policy. The Fed is incapable if fixing the problem because the Fed is the problem.

Last week, the market shot up on news that Wells Fargo's first quarter net income rose 50 percent to $3 billion pushing the stock up 30 percent in one session. The financial media celebrated the triumph in typical manner by congratulating everyone on set and announcing that a market "bottom" had been reached . The news on Wells Fargo was repeated ad nauseam for two days even though everyone knows that the big banks are holding hundreds of billions in mortgage-backed assets which are marked way above their true value and that gigantic losses are forthcoming. Naturally, the skeptics were kept off-camera or lambasted by toothy anchors as doomsayers and Cassandras. Regretably, creative accounting and media spin can only work for so long. Eventually the banks will have to write down their losses and raise more capital. Wells Fargo slipped the noose this time, but next time might not be so lucky. Here's how Bloomberg sums up wells situation:

"Wells Fargo & Co., the second biggest U.S. home lender, may need $50 billion to pay back the federal government and cover loan losses as the economic slump deepens, according to KBW Inc.’s Frederick Cannon.

KBW expects $120 billion of “stress” losses at Wells Fargo, assuming the recession continues through the first quarter of 2010 and unemployment reaches 12 percent, Cannon wrote today in a report. The San Francisco-based bank may need to raise $25 billion on top of the $25 billion it owes the U.S. Treasury for the industry bailout plan, he wrote.

“Details were scarce and we believe that much of the positive news in the preliminary results had to do with merger accounting, revised accounting standards and mortgage default moratoriums, rather than underlying trends,” wrote Cannon, who downgraded the shares to “underperform” from “market perform.” “We expect earnings and capital to be under pressure due to continued economic weakness.”

What happened to all those nonperforming loans and garbage MBS? Did they simply vanish into the New York ether? Could Wells sudden good fortune have something to do with the recent FASB changes to accounting guidelines on "mark to market" which allow banks greater flexibility in assigning a value to their assets? Also, Judging by the charts on the Internet, Wells appears to have the smallest "ratio of loan loss reserves" of the four biggest banks. That's hardly reassuring.
A Game of Credit Cost Smoke and Mirrors at Wells Fargo? : HousingWire || financial news for the mortgage market

Paul Krugman takes an equally skeptical view of the Wells report:

"About those great numbers from Wells Fargo....remember, reported profits aren’t a hard number; they involve a lot of assumptions. And at least some analysts are saying that the Wells assumptions about loan losses look, um, odd. Maybe, maybe not; but you do have to say that it would be awfully convenient for banks to sound the all clear right now, just when the question of how tough the Obama administration will really get is hanging in the balance."

The banks are all playing the same game of hide-n-seek, trying to hoodwink the public into thinking they are in a stronger capital position than they really are. It's just more Wall Street chicanery papered over with vapid media propaganda. The giant brokerage houses and the financial media are two spokes on the same wheel gliding along in perfect harmony. Unfortunately, media fanfare and massaging the numbers won't pull the economy out of its downward spiral or bring about a long-term recovery. That will take fiscal policy, jobs programs, debt relief, mortgage writedowns and a progressive plan to rebuild the nation's economy on a solid foundation of productivity and regular wage increases. So far, the Obama administration has focused all its attention and resources on the financial system rather than working people. That won't fix the problem.

Deflation has latched on to the economy like a pitbull on a porkchop. Food and fuel prices fell in March by 0.1 percent while unemployment continued its slide towards 10 percent. Wholesale prices fell by the most in the last 12 months since 1950. According to MarketWatch, "Industrial production is down 13.3% since the recession began in December 2007, the largest percentage decline since the end of World War II"....The capacity utilization rate for total industry fell further to 69.3 percent, a historical low for this series, which begins in 1967." (Federal Reserve) The persistent fall in housing prices (30 percent) and losses in home equity only add to deflationary pressures. The wind is exiting the humongous credit bubble in one great gust.

Obama's $787 billion stimulus is too small to take up the slack in a $14 trillion per year economy where manufacturing and industrial capacity have slipped to record lows and unemployment is rising at 650,000 per month. High unemployment is lethal to an economy where consumer spending is 72 percent of GDP. Without debt relief and mortgage cram-downs, consumption will sputter and corporate profits will continue to shrink. S&P 500 companies have already seen a 37 percent drop in corporate profits. Unless the underlying issues of debt relief and wages are dealt with, the present trends will persist. Growth is impossible when workers are broke and can't afford to buy the things the make.

The stimulus must be increased to a size where it can do boost economic activity and create enough jobs to get over the hump. Yale economics professor Robert Schiller makes the case for more stimulus in his Bloomberg commentary on Tuesday:

"In the Great Depression ... the U.S. government had a great deal of trouble maintaining its commitment to economic stimulus. 'Pump- priming' was talked about and tried, but not consistently. The Depression could have been mostly prevented, but wasn’t.... In the face of a similar Depression-era psychology today, we are in need of massive pump-priming again.

It would be a shame if we are so overwhelmed by anger at the unfairness of it all that we do not take the positive measures needed to restore us to full employment. That would not just be unfair to the U.S. taxpayer. That would be unfair to those who are living in Hoovervilles...; it would be unfair to those who are being evicted from their homes, and can’t find new ones because they can’t find jobs. That would be unfair to those who have to drop out of school because they, or their parents, can’t find jobs.

It is time to face up to what needs to be done. The sticker shock involved will be large, but the costs in terms of lost output of not meeting either the credit target or the aggregate demand target will be yet larger." (Robert Schiller, Depression Lurks unless there's more Stimulus, Bloomberg)

A Year of ****eyed Optimism

"We are starting to see glimmers of hope across the economy." President Barack Obama, April press conference

Even though industrial production, manufacturing, retail and housing are in freefall, the talk on Wall Street still focuses on the elusive recovery. The S&P 500 touched bottom at 666 on March 6 and has since retraced its steps to 852. Clearly, Bernanke's market-distorting capital injections have played a major role in the turnabout. Former Secretary of Labor under Bill Clinton and economics professor at University of Cal. Berekley, Robert Reich, explains it like this on his blog-site:

"All of these pieces of upbeat news are connected by one fact: the flood of money the Fed has been releasing into the economy. ... So much money is sloshing around the economy that its price is bound to drop. And cheap money is bound to induce some borrowing. The real question is whether this means an economic turnaround. The answer is it doesn't.

Cheap money, you may remember, got us into this mess. Six years ago, the Fed (Alan Greenspan et al) lowered interest rates to 1 percent.... The large lenders did exactly what they could be expected to do with free money -- get as much of it as possible and then lent it out to anyone who could stand up straight (and many who couldn't). With no regulators looking over their shoulders, they got away with the financial equivalent of murder.

The only economic fundamental that's changed since then is that so many people got so badly burned that the trust necessary for consumers, investors, and businesses to repeat what they did then has vanished.... yes, some consumers will refinance and use the extra money they extract from their homes to spend again. But most will use the extra money to pay off debt and start saving again, as they did years ago....

I admire ****eyed optimism, and I understand why Wall Street and its spokespeople want to see a return of the bull market. Hell, everyone with a stock portfolio wants to see it grow again. But wishing for something is different from getting it. And ****eyed optimism can wreak enormous damage on an economy. Haven't we already learned this? (Robert Reich's Blog, "Why We're Not at the Beginning of the End, and Probably Not Even At the End of the Beginning")

If the purpose of Bernanke's grand economics experiment was to create uneven inflation in the equities markets and, thus, widen the chasm between the financials and the real economy; he seems to have succeeded. But for how long? How long will it be before foreign banks and investors realize that the Fed's innocuous-sounding "lending facilities" have released a wave of low interest speculative liquidity into the capital markets? How else does one explain soaring stocks when industrial capacity, manufacturing, exports, corporate profits, retail and every other sector have been pounded into rubble? Liquidity is never inert. It navigates the financial system like mercury in water darting elusively to the area which offers the greatest opportunity for profit. That's why the surge popped up first in the stock market. (so far) When it spills into commodities--and oil and food prices rise--Bernanke will realize his plan has backfired..

Bernanke's financial rescue plan is a disaster. He should have spent a little less time with Milton Friedman and a little more with Karl Marx. It was Marx who uncovered the root of all financial crises. He summed it up like this:

"The ultimate reason for all real crises always remains the poverty and restricted consumption of the masses as opposed to the drive of capitalist production to develop the productive forces as though only the absolute consuming power of society constituted their limit." (Karl Marx, Capital, vol. 3, New York International publishers, 1967; Thanks to Monthly review, John Bellamy Foster)

Bingo. Message to Bernanke: Workers need debt-relief and a raise in pay not bigger bailouts for chiseling fatcat banksters.


By Mike Whitney

Email: [email protected]
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
I know Barrons and (i can't believe i am using citi group here, lol) Citi Group are just a couple of no nothing groups that are not worthy, but here is their prospective on this "up tick or Rally in the market:

BARRON'S
SATURDAY, APRIL 18, 2009
By ALAN ABELSON
Don't Bank on It - Barrons.com

DON'T BANK ON IT

The banks have been the spark plug of this powerful stock-market rally, but past may not be prologue. Goldman's missing month.

THE AMAZING RANDI. WE'D NEVER HEARD OF THE CHAP UNTIL last week, when we were indulging in an old habit that began way back when we were a copy boy (the journalistic equivalent of a galley slave) and took to passing some of the grudgingly little downtime allotted to us poring over the obituaries. Our interest was not born solely of innate ghoulishness, but nurtured also by the fact that an obit provides a highly compressed and often fascinating biography of those noteworthy souls who have recently departed from the ranks of the quick.

In this instance, the subject was not the Amazing Randi, but John Maddox, a British editor of considerable renown who transfigured a stuffy magazine named Nature into a scintillating science journal. Mr. Maddox, by all description an unflaggingly imaginative and energetic editor broadly versed in the sciences, was graced with a flair for the unorthodox and a sharp nose for bamboozle.

Back in the late 1980s, he published a piece by a French doctor claiming remarkable qualities for an antibody he had studied, but only on the condition that an independent group of investigators chosen by Mr. Maddox monitor the doctor's experiments. Among the investigators he chose was the Amazing Randi (né James Randi), a professional magician whose knowledge of science may have been limited but whose knowledge of hocus-pocus was peerless. The poor doctor's goose was cooked.

Mr. Maddox's engaging inspiration got us to thinking, gee, wouldn't it be great to have an Amazing Randi handy to help uncover the voodoo that has caused investors virtually en masse to suspend disbelief. We're referring, of course, to their marvelously revived tendency to slip on their rose-colored glasses, which for so long had been gathering dust on the shelf, when viewing corporate fortunes or the economy at large.

Take for example, dear old Goldman Sachs , which has enjoyed a mighty burst of enthusiasm among Street folk that has sent its shares sprinting to the vanguard of this smashing stock-market rally; an enthusiasm, moreover, that has spilled over to other banks and their financial kin. No argument, the firm has handsomely outperformed its few surviving rivals, none of which is blessed with Goldman's deft trading skills or tight Washington connections.

Goldie reported earnings of $1.8 billion for the first quarter. In doing so, it got a lucky boost from its switch from a fiscal year ending November to a calendar year. The shift came in response to statutory fiat, as part of Goldman's change to a commercial bank, a prerequisite to gaining eligibility for all those lovely billions in loans and guarantees the government has been showering on banks.

That $1.8 billion in March-quarter profits was a heap more than its analytical followers expected, and, as intimated, a sparkling demonstration of Goldman's vaunted trading agility (from what we can gather, it made a bundle in part by timely shorting bonds). The switch in its fiscal year took December out of the first quarter and made it an isolated, stand-alone month, relegated to an inconspicuous assemblage of bleak figures far in the rear of the company's 12-page earnings release.

As it happens, Goldman lost some $780 million in December, a tidy sum that obviously would have taken a lot of the gloss off its reported first-quarter performance. And, who knows, it might have even drained some of the zing that the surprisingly good results lent the stock.

But, in any case, the very next day, the spoilsport credit watchers at Standard & Poor's threw a bit of cold water on the shares by venturing that, in light of the soggy economy and unsettled capital markets, it would be "premature to conclude that a sustained turnaround" by Goldman was necessarily in the cards.

The financial sector, as even the most cursory spectator of the investment scene doubtless is aware, has provided the crucial spark to this powerful bear-market rally. And, in particular, the return from the very edge of the abyss by the banks in the opening months of this year has revived fast-swelling bullish sentiment.

The question naturally arises: How did the banks, so many of which seemed to be slouching toward extinction, get their act together to the point where they were in the black in January and February?

In search of an answer, we turned up an intriguing explanation for this magical metamorphosis by Zero Hedge, a savvy and punchy blog focusing on things financial. Not to keep you in suspense, Zero Hedge fingers AIG , that repository of financial ills and insatiable consumer of taxpayer pittances, as the agent of the banks' miraculous recovery.

But not quite the way you might think. As Zero Hedge explains, AIG, desperate to hit up the Treasury for more moola, decided to throw in the towel and unwind its considerable portfolio of default-credit protection. In the process, the badly impaired insurer, unwittingly or not, "gifted the major bank counterparties with trades which were egregiously profitable to the banks."

This would largely explain, according to Zero Hedge, why a number of major banks actually, as they claimed, were profitable in January and February. But the profits, it is quick to point out, are of the one-shot variety, and, ultimately, they entailed a transfer of money from taxpayers to banks, with AIG acting as intermediary.

Lacking any deep familiarity with the arcana of credit swaps and the like, we can't swear to the accuracy of this analysis. But shy of conjuring up the Amazing Randi and have him unveil the truth, it strikes us as plausible -- and easily as persuasive as many of the various explanations we have come across for the surprising and rather mysterious turn for the better by the banks.

If by chance it proves out, it just might act as a sobering influence, and not just on the financial sector.

FRANKLY, WE'RE AS BORED WITH THIS BEAR market as anyone. And we fully understand, after a year of brutal pummeling, the frantic hopefulness with which investors respond to the inevitable bounce, especially when it's as robust as this one has been.

And we understand, too, their eagerness to grasp at the flimsiest hint of recovery and to strain to put a good face on every twist and turn of the economy, no matter how ugly. But we fear -- as some tunesmith crooned long ago -- wishing won't make it so.

There's nothing obviously wrong when investors, confronted by what seems to be a sold-out market and tired of sitting on their hands, decide to take a fling on a bear-market rally. And it certainly has been rewarding for virtually anyone who a month or so ago did just that. But an awful lot of folks don't have the time, the discipline, the nimbleness or the spare cash for that sort of hit-and-run investing.

And the danger resides in being carried away by a momentary spate of quick gains and turning a blind eye to the riskiness of the market, which now is a heck of a lot greater, if only because the advance has carried price/earnings ratios to elevated levels -- something above 20 on the Standard & Poor's 500 -- or to the critical negatives in the economy.

David Rosenberg of Bank of America/Merrill Lynch (we can't believe we said the whole thing) last week offered some worthwhile observations on the stock market and the economic landscape that just happen to buttress our own reservations.

He points out that the two groups that paced the sharp upswing were financials and consumer cyclicals, in which there are, respectively, net short positions of 5 billion and 2.7 billion shares. Which strongly suggests that not an insignificant part of the rally has been provided by shorts running for cover.

He also points out that the Russell 2000 small-cap index is up 36% since the March low, and has outperformed the S&P by some 980 basis points. As David says, "the last time it pulled such a massive rabbit out of the hat" was in the stretch from late November to early January, and the major averages proceeded to make new lows two months later.

Another amber light he spots is investor confidence. Over the past five weeks, he reports, Rasmussen, which takes a daily reading, has seen its investor-confidence index surge 32 points, an unprecedented climb in so short a span. This could be, he suspects, a "fly in the ointment for a sustained equity-market rally."

David has four markers that will signal to him that the economy is finally making the turn and starting an extended expansion. The first is home prices. The second is the personal-savings rate. Marker No. 3 is the debt-service ratio, and No. 4 is the ratio of the coincident-to-lagging indicators of the Conference Board.

Aggregating those four markers, he calculates that we are roughly 44% of the way through the adjustment process. That is a tick up from where we were last month. However, the improvement, he laments, has been very modest and very slow.

We should add that he also stresses that it's critical for both the economy and the market that payrolls stop shrinking. All the talk about jobless claims "stabilizing" is so much poppy****, he snorts. That number of claims, he notes, is still consistent with monthly payroll losses of around 700,000. As with industrial production, which is also in a vicious slump, employment must stop falling before a recession typically ends.

"Call us when claims fall below 400,000," he says, which is his estimate of "the cut-off for payroll expansion/contraction."

Until then, he warns, "the recession will remain a reality. Rallies will be brief, no matter how violent, and green shoots are a forecast with a very wide error term attached to it."
__________________
I've always wondered what the 1920's and 1930's were like, but I never wanted to see it from the German perspective.....
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Tell all of these people the econimy is getting better...oh yea, theres only a problem when you are unemployed, its not a problem when your neighbor is unemployed...even thugh more people are unemployed then we have seen in decades........

Jobless Rate Climbs in 46 States, With California at 11.2%


By STU WOO and SUDEEP REDDY

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/...zkxODc3Wj.html

California and North Carolina in March posted their highest jobless rates in at least three decades, as unemployment increased in all but a handful of states during the month, the Labor Department said Friday.

California's unemployment rate jumped to 11.2% in March, while North Carolina rose to 10.8%, the highest for both since the U.S. government began a comprehensive tally of state joblessness in 1976.

The state-by-state employment figures showed only a few states avoiding the deterioration seen nationwide. Unemployment rose in 46 states during the month, and 12 states plus the District of Columbia posted unemployment rates in March that were significantly higher than the 8.5% nationwide figure the government released earlier this month.

The chief economist for California's finance department, Howard Roth, said the state's unemployment rate hasn't been this high since reaching 11.7% in January 1941. The highest level on record in California is 14.7% in October 1940, he said.

California lost 62,100 jobs in March, with Florida next at 51,900 jobs lost, Texas at 47,100 and North Carolina at 41,300, according to the federal figures.
California, the nation's most-populous state, has been hit particularly hard by the housing-market crash. That led to major job losses in the construction and financial industries. "We did it bigger in terms of the housing bubble," Mr. Roth said. "You pay for that by falling farther."

Still, the latest figures offered a "glimmer of hope," he said. March losses were about half the 114,000 jobs shed in February, a sign that the pace of decline in California's job market may be slowing.

Most economists expect job losses across all U.S. nonfarm employers to continue in April at or near the rapid pace seen in March, when 663,000 jobs disappeared.

California exemplifies the troubles across America. Teresa Nelson, a 54-year-old public-interest lawyer, has sought work at government or nonprofit agencies since last summer. She has applied for 20 jobs and landed five interviews. "I have a lot of qualifications, lots of experience, but people assume I need a higher salary," said Ms. Nelson, who lives in the San Francisco Bay area. "It's been frustrating."

The federal report showed 48 states and the District of Columbia posted payroll declines in March. Only Mississippi and North Dakota had slight gains of about 300 jobs.

Among states, North Carolina experienced the largest month-over-month percentage drop in payroll employment, about 1%. It was followed closely by Idaho, Minnesota and Washington state, each losing about 0.9%.

Eight states have already seen double-digit unemployment rates, which are calculated on a different survey than payroll numbers. As the economy deteriorates, and job hunters face difficulty finding new work, economists expect joblessness to top 10% nationwide by late 2009 or early 2010.

Michigan, battered by turmoil in the auto industry, reported the highest unemployment at 12.6%. Oregon followed at 12.1%, then South Carolina at 11.4%.
Only North Dakota and the District of Columbia saw unemployment rates decline for the month. Rates remained flat in Georgia, New York and Rhode Island.
Write to Stu Woo at [email protected] and Sudeep Reddy at [email protected]

Yeap its gettin better..........
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Yeap alot of positive good stuff goin on!! Barry was going to fix the housing market as soon as his "stimulis' was passed, so we now have record foreclosures and a gov prediction of more... then we also have more crap put on the bankers that can and are willing to leand money, but can't because of the new FED fees and add on and changes to the laws... I mean a good credit worthy customer has 25% down payment ($200,000.00 on a $800,000.00 loan for a 2nd condo he wants) and he is turned down ........yeap it all good and gettin better....


US home foreclosures jump 24% in first quarter; housing starts fall 10.8%

the associated press
US home foreclosures jump 24% in first quarter; housing starts fall 10.8%

Thursday, April 16th 2009, 11:03 AM

The number of American households threatened with losing their homes grew 24 percent in the first three months of this year and is poised to rise further as major lenders restart foreclosures after a temporary break, according to data released Thursday.

New U.S. housing starts fell in March, adding a blow to hopes that the housing market would recover soon. The Commerce Department said housing starts fell 10.8 percent to 510,000 units (seasonally adjusted), the lowest on record since 1959, according to Reuters.

The big unknown for the coming months, however, is President Barack Obama's plan to help up to 9 million borrowers avoid foreclosure through refinanced mortgages or modified loans. The Obama administration expects its plans to make a big dent in the foreclosure crisis. But it remains to be seen whether the lending industry will fully embrace it, despite $75 billion in incentive payments.

The faltering economy is causing the housing crisis to spread. Nationwide, nearly 804,000 homes received at least one foreclosure-related notice from January through March, up from about 650,000 in the same time period a year earlier, according to RealtyTrac Inc., a foreclosure listing firm. During the quarter, Ohio was the state with the seventh highest number of homes seeing foreclosure activity with about 31,600 receiving at least one filing, up 1 percent from a year earlier.

In March, more than 340,000 properties were affected nationwide, up 17 percent from February and 46 percent from a year earlier. Ohio had 12,600 homes receiving foreclosure notices during the month, 12 percent more than during March 2008.

Foreclosures "came back with a vengeance" last month and are likely to keep rising, said Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac's senior vice president for marketing.

Nearly 191,000 properties completed the foreclosure process and were repossessed by banks in the quarter. While the number was down 13 percent from the fourth quarter of last year, it is expected to rise through the summer and then possibly taper off.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the big mortgage finance companies, together with many banks had temporarily halted foreclosures in advance of Obama's plan. Now armed with the details about which borrowers can qualify, the mortgage industry has begun foreclosing on ineligible borrowers.

The Treasury Department has signed contracts with six big loan servicing companies - including Citgroup, Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase. Many have already started processing loans as part of the government's "Making Home Affordable" plan.



"We need to get the long-term solutions for these folks," Shaun Donovan, Obama's housing secretary, said in an interview.

In the coming months, Donovan said, there are still likely to be increased foreclosures, especially from vacant houses, second homes and those owned by speculators. None of those properties will qualify for a loan modification. However, he remained optimistic that overall foreclosures could start to decrease this summer.

But even industry executives who emphatically support the plan emphasize that it's success isn't guaranteed.

"The effectiveness of the plan overall obviously is going to depend on the level of industry participation," said Paul Koches, general counsel of Ocwen Financial, which collects loan payments on subprime loans.


Many borrowers and consumer groups claim the modifications offered by the lending industry don't do enough to help cash-strapped homeowners, despite more than a year of public prodding from regulators. Fewer than half of loan modifications made at the end of last year actually reduced borrowers' payments by more than 10 percent, data released last month show.

Plus, the lending industry has been swamped by the unprecedented wave of calls from distressed borrowers. "You can't wave a magic wand and make the loans suddenly modified," Sharga said. "They're all individual transactions."

In RealtyTrac's report, Nevada, Arizona, California and Florida had the nation's top foreclosure rates. In Nevada, one in every 27 homes received a foreclosure filing, while the number was one in every 54 in Arizona. Rounding out the top 10 were Illinois, Michigan, Georgia, Idaho, Utah and Oregon.


Mortgage industry changes throw new hurdles in borrowers' way

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are tacking on extra fees for many loan applicants, while some lenders are going even further in tightening underwriting rules.


By Kenneth R. Harney
8:59 PM PDT, April 18, 2009
Los Angeles Times
Mortgage industry changes throw new hurdles in borrowers' way - Los Angeles Times

Reporting from Washington --
Mortgage rates and house prices are down -- which sounds great for buyers and refinancers. But mortgage industry underwriting and appraisal changes taking effect this month are putting new hurdles in the way of borrowers and loan officers.

Take Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's add-on fees for loans purchased after April 1. In some cases, applicants are being hit with extra fees of 3% to 5% because of the type of property they want to buy or refinance, their credit scores or the size of their down payment.

Some major lenders who sell loans to Fannie and Freddie are going further -- tightening underwriting rules beyond what either corporation requires. For example, as of April 6, Wells Fargo, one of the country's largest mortgage originators, imposed a new minimum FICO credit score of 720 -- up from the previous 620 -- on all conventional loans purchased through its wholesale system that have less than a 20% down payment. It also began requiring a total debt-to-income ratio maximum of 41% -- down from the previous 45%.

Fannie Mae now has a mandatory fee of three-quarters of a percentage point on all condominium loans, no matter how high the applicant's credit score. For a once-popular interest-only condo loan with a 20% down payment and a borrower credit score of 690, Fannie imposes the following ratcheted sequence of add-ons: one-quarter of a percentage point as an "adverse market" fee; 1.5% for the below-optimal credit score; three-quarters of a percentage point for the interest-only payment feature; and the same because the property is a condo. The total comes to 3.25% extra, which can be paid upfront or rolled into the loan.

On top of these extra fees, borrowers are now starting to get hit with two sets of cost-raising appraisal rule changes. Fannie and Freddie have begun requiring all appraisers to complete an extra "market condition" report that includes detailed statistical analyses of local sales and pricing trends -- above and beyond the regular appraisal data. Many appraisers are charging an extra $45 to $50 for the time required to complete the form. Home buyers and refinancers can expect to pay the higher fees.

On top of that, beginning May 1, Fannie and Freddie are refusing to fund loans with appraisals that do not follow a set of new rules known as the Home Valuation Code of Conduct. Among the procedural changes: Mortgage brokers no longer can order appraisals directly, but instead must allow lenders or investors to use third-party "appraisal management companies" to assign the job to appraisers in their networks.

How does that affect the consumer? Consider the notification one Connecticut brokerage firm recently received from a major lending partner: Starting April 15, all good faith estimates provided to applicants must indicate a flat $455 charge for appraisals arranged through the appraisal management company. The broker previously charged $325. Consumers will now have to pay the appraisal fee upfront -- before any inspection or valuation is completed -- using a credit card, debit card or electronic fund transfer.

What happens if the appraisal comes in low and the applicants can't qualify for the refi or purchase program they sought? Tough luck: They'll have just two choices: Pay another $455 for a second appraisal -- with no assurance that it will solve the problem -- or cancel the application.

Jeff Lipes, president of Family Choice Mortgage Corp., which serves the Hartford, Conn., area, said the net effect of the underwriting, credit score and pricing changes was to "squeeze some people who are creditworthy by any reasonable standard out of the market."

For instance, as a result of the restrictions on condos, Lipes says "whenever we hear the word 'condo' [from an applicant], we shiver" because the deck is stacked against them. Even for prime borrowers with 800 FICO scores and 50% down payments, Lipes said, "I can't tell them that we're certain we can get you a mortgage."

A welter of recent rule changes from Fannie Mae has made some condo units in projects with commercial tenants or high percentages of investor units almost impossible to refinance.

In Naples, Fla., John Calabria, president of Bancmortgage Corp., said, "It has become such a nightmare to lend money" because of the layers of add-on fees, higher mandatory down payments and FICO scores. One high-income client sought to put down 25% ($200,000) to buy an $800,000 condo as a second home but couldn't because the minimum down payment on such a unit is now 30%.

"That's ridiculous," Calabria said. "Some of this just doesn't make sense."


LOL, "we are from the Government and we are here to HELP YOU......."

Even the bankers are wising up and realizing that they screwed up going to the fed for help.....they want out, by paying back their "TARP" funds ASAP, but the gov is being picky on who they will let off the hook.....Turbo Tim and barry still need to power to control the industry, and make sure their buddies at Goldman Sach are taken care of...........

Ok, i am done for now, got a new book that finally got here, Mark Levins new one.... Liberty &Tyranny.... its on top of the NYT best seller list and its only been out about a month, if that long......guess ill start to read that today........
 
Last edited:

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Who said it was getting better..? Not me...just pointing out that things are not so bad as some "experts" predict...There is always 2 sides to every coin..

Yes unemployment is still going to go up...
No the recession ain't over...
This week 1st quarter results and the "experts" will swamp us with more "details" .....there is no shortage of "experts"
How come the "experts" never get their pink slips?*LOL*
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Just to warn you OVM, we have yet to feel the impact of the price of the trillions being printed to cover the debts, they monetized some of the debt and it will not be nice when it hits us. The stock market means nothing, the optimism is waning with many who see no future (I was serious about the Suicide post in the other thread) and many are getting ready to get hit hard with a melt down. All of this is pointing to a serious meltdown in the near future, maybe 2 years out if not sooner.

I read that Detroit is no longer the worst place to live, it is some others place but Detroit area has 13.5% unemployment, if you combine the living unemployed, it climbs to 22% (meaning the city itself with the professional unemployed).

The "experts" are not saying a word any more, they have been wrong too many times and people are getting fed up with them. There was a poles done a couple weeks ago and it turns out that Bush was not to blame for all f this but the media - interesting when you think about it. The media has told us all last year how bad it is, they ignored the truth to get Obama elected and now they say either it is getting better or it will be worst but better by the end of the summer.

The people I talked to say maybe by 2011 we will be heading out of this if they stop spending now and don't move to Cap and Trade. But they also feel raising the interest rates to 5% is the best move for now. Obama is putting big business people in key positions to 'remake' our government, so it is FDR all over again. If you don't take things seriously now, kiss your work goodbye.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Anyone besides me remember Carter's "Stagflaition" and his malaize speech? Round two coming up. Layoutshooter
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Understood Greg....but you speak like the moneys gone and never seen again....

As in Citicorps they repaid 53 million back to the taxpayers after the 1st quarter....now as these companies make the turn around the long term liability will be reduced as the money is taken out of the picture....
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
OVM,
If you look at where the tarp money went to, how it was handed out and so on, I do expect not to see any of it in the future.

The real issue here is that the Tax Payer's don't want to "invest" in anything. the mess was created by the politicians who were taking brides in the first place and who are still in power. There is a need to cover up mistakes and use tax payer's money to do so when the best course of action is to find out where the laws were not enforced, hang those who didn't enforce them and then do nothing else. The best way to gain confidence from the public is to hold people accountable.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
Agreed....someone put the watchdog asleep....it's ironic the same people that were supposed to watch the hen house have turned out to be the foxes...
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
OVM, you are not surprized are you? LOL. :p Layoutshooter

This kind of crap goes back a long way....but it has to be straightened out.....regardless of the blame game and finger pointing isn't going to get the job done....looks like we won't get our pound of flesh!
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
You are correct of course, but, we as a nation will continue to do nothing. We will accept European style rule and control over every aspect of our lives. We will, in effect, just continue to bend over and grab our ankles. Some will fight, most will not, and some will even reval in the loss of freedom. All in all it is a very sad state of affairs. Layoutshooter
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Ok i am not an accountant, but after I read OVM's thoughts on Citigroup repaying the tarp, that didn't ring right. (i am not saying OVM is wrong, it just didn't sound right from all that i read) My thoughts were that only Goldman had sold enough stock to repay tarp and the Gov was sitting on them as of yet because they don't want the money back yet..as long as the banks owe the gov, they have control, and the reason for not letting goldman pay it back early is there is a feeling the people will look at the other banks a "weak" , because they can't repay now....so i looked around and found that the general feeling is that neither Citigroup or BOA is in any position to repay tarp at this time...citigroup is still considered the weakest of the big banks.... ( but i will say that i think i heard on the radio that Goldman & Turbo Tim have made a deal..haven't seen it in writing yet)

Now when I read that the "booked" the 53 million and that had them showing a loss , along with other things...I took that as meaning they moved it from the "asset side" to the "debt side" all in one move so to show a one time loss and not spread it out. The reason i think that was done was because I think it is Morgan Stanley is taking over Citigroups loan group and they wanted the trap funds seperated....I could be totally worng, but from what I have read, thats how i see it.. no i am sure they did not pay back the tarp funds based on what i have read.

Now one other thing about the new fund "profits" for these banks, don't think for a moment that they did use the newly "revised or should i say "done away with "mark to market" to lower their exposure to loss on "toxic" real estate assets by simply inflating the values of those assetsthat they carried on their books, making them look more profitable then in the past when thay had to carry these assets at "current" market values, its all about "cooking the books!"

Here are 2 of the links on citigroup not being able to repay tarp yet.

And the last link has a few lines about why the gov doesn't want the money back yet...

Profit Solid, J.P. Morgan Aims to Repay TARP Funds - WSJ.com

Citigroup Inc., which has received some $50 billion in government aid, is also likely to get a boost from Wall Street trading when it reports earnings on Friday. It isn't clear if its results will be enough to push the bank into the black, particularly as it grapples with weak consumer operations around the globe. Even if it turns a profit, though, it is unlikely that Citigroup will be able to repay TARP anytime soon because its capital levels remain tight.

Is Goldman's rush to repay TARP premature? (Dealscape)

Bank of America Corp. (NYSE:BAC) and Citigroup Inc. (NYSE:C) are under pressure to repay TARP, and both banks' CEOs have said they hope to repay it as soon as possible. With that in mind, it is highly doubtful that those banks could or even should repay TARP until the economy stabilizes. Even though Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE:WFC ) has said it expects to report earnings of $3 billion and J.P. Morgan & Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) expects a profit, the repayment of TARP would not be easy to digest at this point in time due to their recent acquisitions of Bear Sterns, Washington Mutual and Wachovia, which are still being integrated.

Citigroup: Will Bank Comeback Mean Taxpayer Payback? - ABC News


But it's unclear exactly when the banks will be able to repay the TARP funds. Some experts have raised concerns that if some banks return the funds earlier than others, the latter will look weaker by comparison and will see their share prices fall once again.


There are hopes that the banks will get the green light to repay the money around May 4, when the government is reportedly expected to release the results of its "stress tests" -- evaluations designed to determine how much more government aid, if any, individual banks would need to survive a deeper downturn.

Some say the government is hesitant to take back the money because it's seeking to maintain more control over the financial sector.

"They want to keep the banks in their clutches, without question," banking consultant Bert Ely told the Wall Street Journal. "The bailout is giving the government leverage, and they don't want to give that up
."
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
After cutting out $1.3 billion to reset the conversion price of preferred stock issued in January 2008, paying another $1.3 billion in preferred dividends and booking a cost of $53 million related to participation in the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, Citigroup's profit turned into a net loss of $966 million.
isn't that a 53 million repayment?
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
and booking a cost of $53 million related to participation in the government's Troubled Asset Relief Program, Citigroup's profit turned into a net loss of $966 million.

I don't think so, I see that term "Booking" as a balance sheet move, nothing more...the funds came in from the fed, and were held as a asset to be loaned out (which not too many banks have done to begin with) now that it is time for quarterly reporting, and the morgan stanley deal for theie loan division, they needed to move that money to the debt side of the ledger that needs to be repaid sooner or later.. that is why the profit went to a loss, they have it listed as debt...i think the morgan stanlet deal prompted the move more then anything simply because of how it appears on the balance sheet as fund to be loaned , and since it appears morgan stanley is taking over the load dept, they didn't want those TARP funds there, because they don't want the entanglement with the fed....

Now as i said, i could be totally wrong, it's just how i see it...especially since no where can I find it said that anyone especially Citigroup as paid back the funds...all i have seen is that Goldman is in a position to repay...but thayt citi is not.....
 
Top