George SOROS-ROT, that convicted Confidence man and darling of all Liberal Fascist in Hollow-wood, Moveon.ugh and The Daily KOS-tra-nostra, that champion of liberal fascism, whose entire existences has been that of a confidence man, who seeks to manipulate world politics and currencies, in bets on countries misery, to satisfy his greed for his sole economic gain, regurgitates in self hope for prophesy:


George Soros Calls Current Market Crisis `Worst In 60 Yrs' –AFP

Dow Jones - January 22, 2008 9:46PM EST

LONDON (AFP)--The current crisis in the world financial markets is the worst "in 60 years", billionaire investor George Soros wrote in the Financial Times on Wednesday.

In his comment piece, Soros warned that while a global recession could be held off by strong growth rates in the developing world, the danger was that the resulting political tension from a rebalancing of international economic power could "plunge the world into recession or worse."

His remarks come a day after the U.S. Federal Reserve surprised observers by cutting interest rates by 75 basis points to 3.50%, providing some much-needed relief to battered financial markets that had suffered heavy losses in recent days.

"The current crisis is the culmination of a super-boom that has lasted for more than 60 years," Hungarian-born Soros wrote in the business daily.

"Although a recession in the developed world is now more or less inevitable, China, India and some of the oil-producing countries are in a very strong countertrend," he continued, in his op-ed titled "The worst market crisis in 60 years".

"So, the current financial crisis is less likely to cause a global recession than a radical realignment of the global economy, with a relative decline of the U.S. and the rise of China and other countries in the developing world.

"The danger is that the resulting political tensions, including U.S. protectionism, may disrupt the global economy and plunge the world into recession or worse."

(END) Dow Jones Newswires
01-22-08 2146ET
Copyright © 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

I will bet a mint, if truth be know, he was short on all markets yesterday and sold out today at a great profit at a cost of world instability.

Osama Bin Laden and even the doomocrats, Umama and Billary, are the not the greatest threat to the US and world stability. This self serving Faux socialist hack of a confidence man, George Soros, IS!!

The newspaper school of Dan Rather Journalism has a slippery elusive and very subjective definition of a Recession.

It simply defines it as follows:

Recession: The Newspaper Definition

The standard newspaper definition of a recession is a decline in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for twenty-four or more consecutive quarters. This definition is unpopular with most economists for two main reasons.

First, this definition does not take into consideration changes in other variables. For example this definition ignores any changes in the unemployment rate or consumer confidence, various economic indicators of financial measured activity and or industrial capacity and utilization. Second, by using quarterly data this definition makes it difficult to pinpoint when a recession begins or ends. This means that a recession that lasts ten months or less may go undetected, which is incorrect.

Lastly, all economies expand and contract in normal cycles as a % of GDP, thus any period of slowing under this definition is a recession without consideration, that positive, though lowering or low whole economic output is still widely inclusive of positive economic activity, thusy being more positive than negative as a part of a nations whole economy and its compenents.



Economist - define Resession as;

A recession is traditionally defined in macroeconomics as a [B]decline in a country's real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for two or more successive quarters of a year (equivalently, two consecutive quarters of negative real economic growth). However this definition is not universally accepted but has been a standard of most economists for ober 60 years.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession

A recession is defined (in economic terms) as two consecutive quarters (3 month periods) of declining GDP (gross domestic product). In financial terms, you can see a forthcoming recession observing the the interest rate yield curve of long vs short term loans. If this curve is inverted, 99% of the time, a recession is inevitable. The US currently has an inverted yield curve.

GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT: THIRD QUARTER 2007 (FINAL)
CORPORATE PROFITS: THIRD QUARTER 2007 (REVISED)

Real gross domestic product -- the output of goods and services produced by labor and property located in the United States – increased at an annual rate of 4.9 percent in the third quarter of 2007, according to final estimates released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the second quarter, real GDP increased 3.8 percent.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/g...newsrelease.htm


That is all!!

Agree completely. Soros is dangerous because so few know of this designs upon this country...........to turn it into a socialist existence. He's a dictator in sheep's clothing.

It don't matter. The die is cast. The MSM are guiding us into a recession or worse. The sheep among us are eating up the half empty glass demogogory. The libs are winning..................

Well, quite obviously, the US is in decline, and China and India are on the rise. That is fact. We must deal with it.

Yes, the democrats are going to wint this time, because your lot failed so miserably, Your bush sack of sheit is indeed the worse president in history. He should resign in shame but he is a shamless murderer so he doesn't care. Your Xian morality is another empty sack of sheit and the world knows it.

Hey TQ;

TQ--->



To paraphrase Mark Twain, "The rumors of America's death have habitually, in doom mongering expectations, been greatly exaggerated, once again!"


That is All!!

Who said death? Decline is not the same as death. Is Portugal dead? Is England dead? Is Rome dead? Is Mongolia dead? Is Turkey dead? Is Cambodia dead? All old empires, all no longer empires. How can you be so arrogant as to not realize America will have the same fate?

You speak as usual in your customary mantra of doom and gloom, always in the present tense of America’s demise. Yet, when confronted, jingo in retreat,into the unknown future tense, jus pos, your zealous propensity for doom mongering, hey comrade TQ.

Your pessimism, even in these sullied examples about dead empires, lament death as if it were not inclusive of change, and change, as if it were inclusive of death. When the facts do not suggests America is remotely an empire nor similar in its existence as exampled. Only its zealots of demise and doom presume such inanity.

Nor does anyone suggest, this other jingoism of yours, that others somehow do not appreciate change is a part of existence, presumed by you unknown of by all, but you.

Unlike your intended ill-omened doom mongering which zealously distorts your kismet of distorted historical context, onto the boundaries of extremism, we all know America has a fate, what none of us know , except you of course, is what that fate will be or be like.

Optimism is never supercilious my overly dejected friend of doom. However, as is transparently clear, a doom monger, like yourself, would not acumen that in capability would he, Comrade TQ?



THAT IS ALL!!

traitor, I see your Alzheimers is coming along nicely.

Indeed, obviously vastly more improved than yours, in either its disloyalty to all you are, as little as that may be, and your dementia of despair of the soul.
My wellness is a proven inclination to have the courage, knowledge, and substance to state unambiguously my position and unlike you, not rely on regurgitating other’s ideological Jingoism’s and rhetoric of doom and gloom, bred in a fallacy of dreams and urban utopian myths that helix from this ideology of despair and foreboding you clamor incessantly, TQ?


That is All!!

DFTT.

The USA is still the super power, but the times are rapidly changing. What will be the federal deficit this year, if honestly declared: maybe 500 billion? There is a subprime crisis, and house prices are weaker, and the dollar is in the toilet. Gasoline ain't cheap. The glass is not full. But it is still a great country, by far the strongest.

[Currently there are at least 6 "reality: shows on cable about Flipping houses, ya think Non-owner occupied housing speculators, like the dot com speculators, the oil Futures speculators, who most experts agree, are adding 30% to the price of oil, are in any way a not a significant part of the so called millions of poor sub-prime suffers, who "so called unknowingly" signed ARM loan rates at a 9% or no interewst ballon loans, on houses they knew up front they could not qualify for normally, when the going rates where less than 5% at the time, did not know anything when values fell below what they owed and re-financing was not an option anymore. Surely you gest.

Did some people get outrighted ripped off, yes! Will those that defrauded them pay, yes they will. But the ripped off are more likely at rates equal to all the"truely" innocent people in prison, a number so small in comparison to media and political hype about prisoons and sub-prime, that if one waved a magic wand over all prisons and the truely innocent went free automatically, one would scarely notice their numbers being absence.

Income to House values in most of the US are way out of balance and are in desperate need of being de-speculated onto a plain where housing is once again affordable and for living, not speculating and investing for retirement.

http://www.mortgagebankers.org/files/Bulle...urce/59253_.pdf


January 31, 2008 > Mortgage Bankers Association

Myth:

Borrowers who qualify for prime loans only end up with subprime loans if lenders deceptively steer them into such loans.

Reality:

Many borrowers who might qualify for prime loans knowingly select subprime loans for reasons that include:

A desire to put little or no money down.

A desire to not have to document income, either to speed up the deal or to defraud the lender.

A desire to take out a larger loan than the borrower could qualify for under prime terms.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


January 30, 2008 > Mortgage Bankers Association

Myth:
Bankruptcy is an easy process that consumers should use.

Reality:

It is apparent that groups such as the Center for Responsible Lending and some Members of Congress advocate that people enter into bankruptcy rather than focus on other more effective and less burdensome ways to help consumers. They fail to understand the very real and severe consequences for consumers who declare bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy stays on a consumers' credit report for 10 years, making it difficult to acquire future credit, especially in a tighter credit environment.

Bankruptcy makes it more difficult for borrowers to get credit cards, buy a home, car or hazard insurance and in some cases, obtain employment.

Bankruptcy costs consumers about $3,000 in attorney and court fees.

Finally, nearly, two-thirds of bankruptcy repayment plans fail and repayment plans do not take into account new expenses that an individual incurs, such as unanticipated health related costs or emergencies.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


January 30, 2008 > Mortgage Bankers Association
Myth:
Congress should reform the bankruptcy laws to help troubled borrowers.

Reality:

An MBA analysis demonstrates that rates on mortgages will rise at least 1.5 percent for future homeowners and anyone looking to refinance if bankruptcy legislation (H.R. 3609) is enacted. In fact, MBA recently launched the Bankruptcy Resource Center where individuals and policymakers can go to see how much the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage would increase at the state and county levels.


http://www.mortgagebankers.org/MortgageMythsandRealities.htm




Source: Mortgage Bankers Association
Date: 1/30/2008

________________________________________
Washington, D.C. (August 30, 2007) - Defaults on mortgages where the owner does not live in the house are a major driver of the defaults in four of the states with the fastest rising rates of seriously delinquent loans, according to data released today by the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA).

As of June 30, 32 percent of prime mortgage defaults in Nevada were on non-owner occupied properties, along with 24 percent of subprime loans. In Florida, the non-owner occupied shares were 25 percent for prime loans and 14 percent for subprime loans. Nevada and Florida are facing the fastest increases in delinquent loans in the country.

In Arizona, 26 percent of prime loan defaults were non-owner occupied and 18 percent of subprime loans. In California, the rate was 21 percent of prime defaults and 15 percent of subprime. Arizona and California are also among the states facing the fastest increases in delinquent loans in the country.

In contrast, in the rest of the country, non-owner occupied homes accounted for only 13 percent of prime defaults and 11 percent of subprime defaults.

"Defaults are on the rise in most parts of the country, but it should be recognized that it is not always the case of a homeowner losing his or her home but is often the case of an investor gambling on a continued increase in home values and losing that gamble," said Doug Duncan, MBA Chief Economist and Senior Vice President of Research and Business Development.

"California, Nevada, Arizona and Florida were among the states with the fastest home price appreciation over the last five years. This rapid price appreciation attracted both speculators and home builders, a volatile combination that lead to an over-supply of homes that was beyond the capacity of the local populations to support. When this over-supply became apparent and prices began to fall, many of these investors simply walked away from their mortgages," Duncan said.

Defaulted mortgages are defined as those 90 days or more past due or in foreclosure. The MBA will be releasing its next National Delinquency Survey results in the coming weeks.

While details of 2006 mortgage originations will not be released until later in September, the share of non-owner occupied loans of all loan defaults closely parallels the share of those loans originated in 2005 as shown in the following tables:



Prime Loans

Percent of prime defaults due to non-owner occupied loans as of June 30, 2007
Share of prime home purchase loan originations for non-owner occupied properties in 2005, based on HMDA

Nevada 32% 29%
Arizona 26% 29%
Florida 25% 32%
California 21% 14%
All other states 13% 15%
Total US 16% 17%

Subprime Loans

Percent of subprime defaults due to non-owner occupied loans as of June 30, 2007
Share of subprime home purchase loan originations for non-owner occupied properties in 2005, based on
HMDA

Nevada 24% 14%
Arizona 18% 14%
Florida 14% 15%
California 15% 7%
All other states 11% 10%
Total US 12% 10%

Source: MBA


http://www.mortgagebankers.org/NewsandMedi...enter/56535.htm

Follow up data:

Speculator’s impact on Mortgage Crisis;

Roughly 20% of all mortgage fraud is “Occupancy fraud”, despite applicants signing and affirming on 4 pages of most loan documents, they are Occupants and not investors.

Historically, generally the ratio of investors claiming to be occupants on their loan documents is about 1 in 10, in the last 5 years that ratio as changed to 1 in 4.

Historically below are some reality facts about home lending.

Loan to value (LTV) - Loan amount divided by property value). Most lenders believe borrowers with a low loan-to-value ratio (70% or greater equity) have a lower probability of a foreclosure than a borrower with a high loan-to-value ratio (!0% equity or less). Thus the higher the risk the higher the rate and the more difficult it is traditionally, until lately, to get a loan.

VA loans typically are 100% with debt qualifiers

Conforming loans range from FHA type at 97% to 80%. Any loan with an LTV over 90% requires the borrower to pay for extra Mortgage insurance premiums above and beyond insuring normal PITI for benefit of the lender against the traditionally risk on loans likel;y defaulting with LTV’s over 70%.

Debt to Income Ratio - Housing Expense

Your housing expense ratio is a debt to income ratio measuring the percentage of your income that covers housing payments. Housing payments consist of pretty much everything in your monthly payment – principal, interest, taxes, and insurance (PITI).

Lenders set certain limits on where they want your debt to income ratios. For example, they might say they want your housing expenses to be less than 28% of your gross monthly income.
Example

Assume you earn $3,000 per month (gross, or before taxes), and your lender wants your debt to income ratio to be below 28%

3000 x .28 = 840

Your lender wants you to spend $840 or less per month on housing expenses.
The ratio affects your buying power...

Your debt to income ratio is a simple way of showing what percentage of your income is available for a mortgage payment after all other continuing obligations are met. The ratio is one of the many things a lender considers before approving your home loan.

You may see conventional loan debt limits referred to as the 28/36 qualifying ratio. Those numbers refer to two percentages that are used to examine two aspects of your debt load.

The First Number, 28%

This number indicates the maximum percentage of your monthly gross income that the lender allows for housing expenses. The total includes payments on the loan principal and interest, private mortgage insurance, hazard insurance, property taxes, and homeowner's association dues. (Often referred to by the acronym PITI.)

The Second Number, 36%

This number refers to the maximum percentage of your monthly gross income that the lender allows for housing expenses plus recurring debt.

Recurring debt includes credit card payments, child support, car loans, and other obligations that will not be paid off within a relatively short period of time (6-10 months).

Debt to Income Example

Yearly Gross Income = $45,000 / Divided by 12 = $3,750 per month income

$3,750 Monthly Income x .28 = $1,050 allowed for housing expense

$3,750 Monthly Income x .36 = $1,350 allowed for housing expense plus recurring debt.
Not All Loans Are the Same

FHA loan ratios are typically 29/41, allowing a higher debt load for both housing expenses and recurring debt.

• For the above example, FHA would allow $1087 for housing and $1538 for housing plus recurring debt.

• For a VA loan, the debt to income ratio should not exceed 41% of your monthly gross income.
In the example above with a 28% housing expense of $1,050 Would allow a buyer to qualify, given a 6% loan at 30 years for a loan of 340,000 considering ONLY P & I (principle and Interest) of course less Taxes and Insurance escrow) Thus in all likelihood the borrow could afford, with good credit , a $280,000 to $300,000 home.

Now in states like those in the Northeast, Florida, California were the median housing prices start at over 600,000, the borrower under exact circumstances needs an income of at minimum $90,000. In the US the median income for a family of 4 is less than $45,000. Thus any bail out of the high valuation and appreciation states would be for that 1% of Americans that have a median income of $90,000 or more.

Occupancy fraud is very concentrated in just few states who happened to have extraordinary rates of housing appreciation as compared to most other states by wide and extreme margins.

These states are California, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, Ohio, New York, Connecticut and Florida.

Now here comes the Congressional Calvary to the rescue. One to Make it easier on themselves and their “rich brothers and sisters by raising the current Freddie Mac lending limit from $417,000 to $730,000 increasing for the rich The People’s guaranteed loan by 75%.

Thus as lending money is tightening and difficult to obtain, we are giving those few in fewer states, whose homes have appreciated many times the rest of America more of the money for each loan. For Example financing (1) new maximum loan of $730,000 in California takes enough money to finance 4 to 5 less expenses houses in that vastly larger part of America that has not speculated themselves out of the market like these state mentioned above.

Let’s look at how these few high speculator states have fared. Over the last 5 years, the US housing index has increased by 46.9% to $220,800 or at a fair rate of 8% per year. Affectingly related was that the Consumer Price Index averaged only 2.8% increases giving all a net increase of 5.2% per year which roughly equates that every American gained in net of inflation and prices some $70,000 in wealth over that 5 year period.

Now look at these extremes over that 5 years:

LA + 107.9% to a median of $588,000 (21.58% per Yr) Calif Median Income $64,563*

Riverside +107.8% to 377,000 (21.56% per Yr)

San Diego +61.7 to $589,300 (12.34% per Yr)

San Francisco + 52% to $825,000 (10.4% per Yr)

San Jose +50.6% to $ 852,500 (10.1% per Yr)

Detroit -.9% to $142,000 (-.18% per Yr)

Columbus Ohio +13.4% to $151,600 (2.78% per Yr) Ohio Median Income $56,148*

Kansas City +20.2% to $157,000 (4.04% per Yr) Kansas Median Income $56,857*

Austin Tx +28.8% to $188,200 (5.76% per Yr) Texas Median Income $52,355

National Average +46.9% to $220,800 (9.38% per Yr) Median Income $48,201

Now that some comprehensive reality jus pos the media and Political hype about sub-prime.

• http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/medi...zeandstate.html


That is All!

Updating this economic thread--101that is. Unemployment rate is 6.1%. Yet Bush is still in office and had more time to deal with this using a GOP legislature.

1990 (1).................... 5.6 (D) Congress +® President

1991........................6.8 (D) Congress +® President

1992........................7.5 (D) Congress +(D) President

1993........................6.9 (D) Congress +(D) President

1994 (1)...................6.1 ® Congress +(D) President

1995........................5.6 ® Congress +(D) President

1996........................5.4 ® Congress +(D) President

1997 (1)..................4.9 ® Congress +(D) President

1998 (1)..................4.5 ® Congress +(D) President

1999 (1)..................4.2 ® Congress +(D) President

2000 (1)..................4.0 ® Congress +(D) President

2001.......................4.7 ® Congress +® President

2002.......................5.8 ® Congress +® President

2003 (1).................6.0 ® Congress +® President

2004 (1).................5.5 ® Congress +® President

2005 (1).................5.1 ® Congress +® President

2006 (1).................4.6 (D) Congress +® President

2007 (1).................4.6 (D) Congress +® President

2008:

January (3)............4.9 (D) Congress +® President

February...............4.8 (D) Congress +® President

March...................5.1 (D) Congress +® President

April......................5.0 (D) Congress +® President

May......................5.5 (D) Congress +® President

June......................5.5 (D) Congress +® President

July.......................5.7 (D) Congress +® President

August..................6.1 (D) Congress +® President

2008 Average………… 5.3%

Overall Average 1990 – 2008………5.13%

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea1.txt

The problem with a person with a narrow mind and a dishonest heart, are, the former is narrowed in his ability to deduce fact from fiction and later, willfully deduces fiction from fact.



THAT IS ALL!!

Thanks, Trader. Very insightful.

And, Bush's popularity is almost three times higher than his present Pelosi-Reid-led Democratic Congress. And, they were going "to do so much."

Here is one thing that you left out from your site, trader.

I appreciate the insinsere effort my friend.
But you proving what exactly, that in all those historical figures, your distort, were, by this ambigious one month dat point Kos rave about, somehow makes less accurate the other data I provided. of course that would be your wishfully desire proving only your willingness to distort, as a whole, a part, in drama queen fashions of distortions, now that is real my friend.

Household Data

(‘‘A” tables, monthly; “D” tables, quarterly)

There is nothing in this that changes any yearly or monthly % of unemployed figurfe I provided. It does not effect, as you so unreal wish it to imply, that the percentage of unemeployment data are not comparable many years back.

Quite the contrary, had you read the entire pdf and grasped what it was saying, it states from time to time methods changes were made to to reflect past data more comparibly to be reflected in each new refinement in nrecent years as they made them backwards as such in the many parts and methods especially the periods I provided.

You have not read the pdf for sure or you would have not used it.

If anything the lastest changes it cites makes the past and present % of employed data more accurate, not less.

Furthermore had you read the entire PDF you would have noted how frequently it stated how it went backward and adjusted data to fit each refinement as they occurred.

Sorry, but you are not being real and make it easy to deduce that. You stroke the Kos meter with a pin prick on a monthly point along a long line of monthly points and then you crow as if you have found Ureka and utopia in one false distortion as if a part is equal to a whole.

That is all