We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Why Canadians might want to consider retiring in the USA (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Warmer weather and year-round golf are pretty attractive (well, I don't golf, but...)

But look at the current advantage in changing housing markets:

Image


Yikes!

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
That's cause the US is socialist.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Maybe buy a home down south, and ship it north?
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Salguod Nairb
View Profile

Room 101
0 Posts

Profile of Salguod Nairb
I will be retiring to the Philippines. Their housing cost doesn't even make the chart, and that is with a pool.
We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness...
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
In fact, in a certain sense, landmark, it is. The US housing market was greatly expanded, with many new buyers brought into the market, and the prices of housing units rising at a wild pace of 25% a year or more in some markets, and a glut of new homes being built on spec, because of government policies that compelled banks to create mortgage products that would enable them to make loans to people who in ordinary banking business would never qualify for them. 70% of the bad loans emanated from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Image


The Bush administration attempted to rein in this reckless and spendthrift socialism but was thwarted again and again by Congress. Look here at Congress in action way back in 2004:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yga7TlsA-1A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM

Somebody should write a book about it.

Oh.

They have:

http://www.amazon.com/Reckless-Endangerm......6&sr=8-2

Quote:
At the center of the drama is Fannie Mae, a private company that used its special government backing to dominate the mortgage market and become the nation's second-largest debt issuer, after the U.S. Treasury itself. Encouraged by politicians to expand home lending -not least to minorities and to households with few assets- the company ignored reasonable standards of underwriting and piled up fugitive profits almost as fast as it increased risk to taxpayers.

The disaster is now measured in the hundreds of billions of dollars. As for the borrowers who were supposedly to benefit from Fannie's mortgage-industrial complex, Ms. Morgenson and Mr. Rosner write that home ownership "put them squarely on the road to personal and financial ruin."

The disaster would not have been possible, the authors make clear, without the early efforts of James Johnson, Fannie Mae's chief executive in the 1990s and one of the Beltway's most connected figures - at one time or other the chairman of the Brookings Institution and the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts as well as a member of Goldman Sachs's board of directors.

As an assistant to Vice President Walter Mondale, Mr. Johnson had little background in financial markets. When he was chosen to head up Fannie Mae, in 1991, he quickly grasped that the key to Fannie's success, and to his own astronomical bonuses, was persuading Congress to maintain Fannie's implicit government backing while preventing any bank-style regulation to interfere with the company's operation.

That Fannie and its cousin, Freddie Mac, had been created by the government to provide a secondary market for mortgages allowed them to borrow more cheaply than potential competitors. Investors around the world assumed?correctly, as it turned out?that the U.S. government would bail them out in a crisis and therefore viewed investing in Fannie and Freddie's debt as almost as safe as buying Treasurys.


And don't forget who directly benefited from that mess, including Jamie Gorelick - one of the leftists whose disastrous policymaking (she created the "wall" that separated CIA from FBI anti-terrorist data) left us at the mercy of Osama Bin Laden -- she walked away from Fannie Mae with $26 million - and Barney Frank - whose paramour was an executive employed at Fannie Mae while Frank was in charge of the committee regulating it.

Whether you want to call it socialism, crony capitalism, or fascism, it was government policy that created the mortgage mess in the US.
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Or you could take advantage of this generous offer from our Government (pending) http://robertreich.org/post/11881926504
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Source of the illustration in my previous comment:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis......-It-.htm
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
It is my understanding that houses are free in Oz. They just fall from the sky.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Futureal
View Profile
Inner circle
1638 Posts

Profile of Futureal
Interesting. An old friend from college has just moved from Idaho to Canada, I'll send him your graph Smile
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
Woaland, you rarely disappoint.

I see, so a private company, Fannie Mae caused this. I'm with you, curse those private companies!

And since socialism causes housing busts, that must mean Canada is not as socialist. Perhaps after you move there you can ask them to rescind your health care options.
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4817 Posts

Profile of gdw
Landmark, are you serious with your emphasis on it being a "private" company?
A private company that was only able to do what it did because of the involvement of the government.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
In a fascist or National-Socialist system, State control of the economy is achieved, and the subordination of all economic activities to the dictates of the State assured, without the State actually taking formal possession of the means of production, as in Marxist socialism and Marxist-Leninist communism. In fascist and National-Socialist systems, the directors of large enterprises revel in wealth more openly than socialist or communist directors do, but the elite in all of these socialist systems always enjoys a luxurious life far beyond the means of the common working man.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are legally private entities, but they have a very special privileged status conferred upon them by Congress, and their leadership is intimately bound up with the ruling political elite of the Democratic Party. They traded on the appearance that they were in fact guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the United States, and for all intents and purposes, they were. They profited from laws that were crafted specifically to benefit them. They put into action the political program of the elite.

Were the United States to be completely brought under the aegis of a State-socialist system, you would come to see this sort of thing in every corner of the economy. And the results would be no different here than they were in every other economy set up on such terms.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
Agreed. But because it was private, it did not have the same conditions of oversight that a public agency would be subject to.

Woland wrote: "Whether you want to call it socialism, crony capitalism, or fascism, it was government policy that created the mortgage mess in the US."

Uhh, words mean things. Crony capitalism. Not socialism. Crony capitalism. That's kind of been the whole point of the Occupy movement if you haven't noticed. And before you go into the partisan stuff--it's been with every ruling party as any defense contractor knows.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
One man's crony capitalism is another man's socialism.
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4817 Posts

Profile of gdw
Crony capitalism IS essentially national socialism/ fascism. Or maybe it's sort of the inverse, where the corporations control the economy/production via the government. Either way it is only enabled by the government.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
I have to comment on the Fannie Mae being a private company thing.

Fannie Mae was a financial services corporation (a GSE) created by the United States Congress in 1938. Between 1954 and 1968 it was a "mixed-ownership corporation" (the government and private investors each had a stake). It has been publicly traded since 1968. (It was delisted from the NYSE in 2010 but it still trades on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board).

I don't know that it was ever a "private" company. In most of our lifetimes, it was fully publicly traded.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
You are right, gdw, but be careful about the definition of "corporation" in corporatism or fascism; when fascists describe "corporations," they are referring to all of the organic bodies that comprise groups of people organized along economic lines, and labor unions, guilds, and professional associations are among them, along with the companies that we call "corporations" in our legal system. The main thing, however, is the subordination of all of these entities to the State.

A publicly traded company is not a "privately held" company, balducci, but it is still considered to be "private" in common speech, and distinguished from a governmentally owned entity. FNMA had a particular, peculiar status as almost a public utility, and certainly traded on it s appearance as an arm of the government. The use of the term "Federal" in its name, for example, certainly implied that it was an official organ of the United States.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On 2011-10-25 22:12, Woland wrote:
One man's crony capitalism is another man's socialism.

I guess you're that one man.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
You don't think that the rulers of socialist countries enjoy luxuries undreamed of by the working man?
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
You don't think that the rulers of capitalist countries enjoy luxuries undreamed of by the working man?
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Why Canadians might want to consider retiring in the USA (0 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL