No, isn't that apparent? Remember, I don't have a "party" - they are both bad, but the democrats are worse lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Printable View
No, isn't that apparent? Remember, I don't have a "party" - they are both bad, but the democrats are worse lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Pardon me, but if you listen to Kudlow for a short amount of time his political views are very
apparent. Anyway...
You say "they are both bad" but many of your political positions are completely aligned with
the Republican Party. Remember Schiff was a Republican Senatorial candidate. He is a politician.
Ron Paul is running in the Republican Party.
So what did you think of the 2005 Krugman article and the other one of all the pundits who got it wrong?
Is there some reason you wont answer my questions? lol
And if he (Schiff) is wrong in the next 3 years on the Dow (1,400) and or gold (12,000) will you FINALLY acknowledge his failings and FINALLY hold him accountable for all that he has gotten wrong?
You didnt comment on his incorrect stock market predictions from 2002. And you didnt comment on his incorrect predictions from 2008. Or 2011 for that matter. You can run but you cant hide.
So what did you think of the Krugman article from 2005? Those are his words. :)
Very hard to get you to answer questions on Schiff and Krugman. Lmfao
I quess that 2005 Krugman article left you speechless. Didnt expect it huh?
Sorry to rock your world. :)
Have a great day.
Yes, I had to work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
No, if Schiff is wrong about the collapse of the dollar, I will chalk it up to hyperbole like I already said - he has plenty of people who agree with him as I have pointed out.
You haven't commented on his "dead on" prediction for housing in 2006, even though you were using the same clip to argue with John about Laffer - quite the opportunist you seem to be - Mr. Chameleon. He called it 100%. Every gory detail was 100% accurate. Uncanny.
How do you feel about Krugman pumping up the housing bubble?
And what about all those favorable reviews of the Schiff book that I sent you at my own expense. I'm a man of my word - unlike you. It seems as if you're the only one who thought it was no good. Hmmmm, could it be that you are a closed minded leftist ideologue (spelled correctly thank you)?
We have spoken about Schiffs right call on housing (though i believe like with most things he predicts them for many years before they come to fruition) MANY times already. Its interesting that you want to talk about that one call but REFUSE to address ALL the many bad calls i have shown he has made. You would have a lot more credibility if you were able to acknowledge how often he has been wrong.
I produced A Krugman article from 2005 where he talked about and diagonosed the housing bubble. You asked me to produce one and i did and then you completely ignore it. What you posted was a right wing biased INTERPRETATION of Krugman's words over some years.
Those "favorable" reviews were meaningless. Mostly people who are followers of his. Why in the world do you think those are impressive? As I said before what i find much more meaningful is just how bad his track record on the economy over the years has been. I quess as usual you come at things from such a right wing rigid ideological viewpoint that you are not even willing to acknowledge facts. Sad. You have lost credibility in my eyes and i am sure others.
As i said before:
Is there some reason you wont answer my questions? lol
And if he (Schiff) is wrong in the next 3 years on the Dow (1,400) and or gold (12,000) will you FINALLY acknowledge his failings and FINALLY hold him accountable for all that he has gotten wrong?
You didnt comment on his incorrect stock market predictions from 2002. And you didnt comment on his incorrect predictions from 2008. Or 2011 for that matter. You can run but you cant hide.
This is Krugman from 2005. It literally took me 2 minutes to find it.
That Hissing Sound
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: August 8, 2005
This is the way the bubble ends: not with a pop, but with a hiss.
Housing prices move much more slowly than stock prices. There are no Black Mondays, when prices fall 23 percent in a day. In fact, prices often keep rising for a while even after a housing boom goes bust.
So the news that the U.S. housing bubble is over won't come in the form of plunging prices; it will come in the form of falling sales and rising inventory, as sellers try to get prices that buyers are no longer willing to pay. And the process may already have started.
Of course, some people still deny that there's a housing bubble. Let me explain how we know that they're wrong.
One piece of evidence is the sense of frenzy about real estate, which irresistibly brings to mind the stock frenzy of 1999. Even some of the players are the same. The authors of the 1999 best seller "Dow 36,000" are now among the most vocal proponents of the view that there is no housing bubble.
Then there are the numbers. Many bubble deniers point to average prices for the country as a whole, which look worrisome but not totally crazy. When it comes to housing, however, the United States is really two countries, Flatland and the Zoned Zone.
In Flatland, which occupies the middle of the country, it's easy to build houses. When the demand for houses rises, Flatland metropolitan areas, which don't really have traditional downtowns, just sprawl some more. As a result, housing prices are basically determined by the cost of construction. In Flatland, a housing bubble can't even get started.
But in the Zoned Zone, which lies along the coasts, a combination of high population density and land-use restrictions - hence "zoned" - makes it hard to build new houses. So when people become willing to spend more on houses, say because of a fall in mortgage rates, some houses get built, but the prices of existing houses also go up. And if people think that prices will continue to rise, they become willing to spend even more, driving prices still higher, and so on. In other words, the Zoned Zone is prone to housing bubbles.
And Zoned Zone housing prices, which have risen much faster than the national average, clearly point to a bubble.
In the nation as a whole, housing prices rose about 50 percent between the first quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2005. But that average blends results from Flatland metropolitan areas like Houston and Atlanta, where prices rose 26 and 29 percent respectively, with results from Zoned Zone areas like New York, Miami and San Diego, where prices rose 77, 96 and 118 percent.
Nobody would pay San Diego prices without believing that prices will continue to rise. Rents rose much more slowly than prices: the Bureau of Labor Statistics index of "owners' equivalent rent" rose only 27 percent from late 1999 to late 2004. Business Week reports that by 2004 the cost of renting a house in San Diego was only 40 percent of the cost of owning a similar house - even taking into account low interest rates on mortgages. So it makes sense to buy in San Diego only if you believe that prices will keep rising rapidly, generating big capital gains. That's pretty much the definition of a bubble.
Bubbles end when people stop believing that big capital gains are a sure thing. That's what happened in San Diego at the end of its last housing bubble: after a rapid rise, house prices peaked in 1990. Soon there was a glut of houses on the market, and prices began falling. By 1996, they had declined about 25 percent after adjusting for inflation.
And that's what's happening in San Diego right now, after a rise in house prices that dwarfs the boom of the 1980's. The number of single-family houses and condos on the market has doubled over the past year. "Homes that a year or two ago sold virtually overnight - in many cases triggering bidding wars - are on the market for weeks," reports The Los Angeles Times. The same thing is happening in other formerly hot markets.
Meanwhile, the U.S. economy has become deeply dependent on the housing bubble. The economic recovery since 2001 has been disappointing in many ways, but it wouldn't have happened at all without soaring spending on residential construction, plus a surge in consumer spending largely based on mortgage refinancing. Did I mention that the personal savings rate has fallen to zero?
Now we're starting to hear a hissing sound, as the air begins to leak out of the bubble. And everyone - not just those who own Zoned Zone real estate - should be worried.
E-mail: krugman@nytimes.com
As I told you (and I am a man of my word) I will continue to post Schiff's bad economic predicitons until you acknowledge them.
SCHIFF IS A DOOMSDAY PREDICTOR (i dont think he is ever not predicting doomsday scenarios. He has been very wrong in the past.
Just look back at his past record.)
Here again are some of his most recent and obviously mistaken predictions.
Schiff predicted hyperinflation for 2011
Schiff predicted a catastrophic stock market collapse in Jan. 2011.
Schiff predicted interest rates on 10 year bonds would rise to 6% in 2011
Schiff has predicted that gold will rise to $12,000 and or the Dow will fall to 1,400
within 3 years.
Siriusly Wrong has called his last prediction "BOLD". OH BOY!
From Wikipedia:
In a 2002 interview with Southland Today, Schiff predicted that the economic downturn triggered by the bursting of the stock market bubble would lead to a bear market likely to last "another 5 to 10 years."[35][36] In November 2002, US stocks began a bull market uptrend which held steady for at least five years,[37] until reversing course in 2008, when the Dow, NASDAQ, and S&P 500 began a decline to less than half of their peak 2008 values,[38] followed in 2009 by the Dow climbing 61% from its low point over the following year.[39] After interviewing Schiff in 2009, journalist and finance author Eric Tyson, referenced various Schiff predictions during the 2000s and stated that "On all of these counts, Schiff wasn't just wrong but ended up being hugely wrong.
Or this? There is that same goddamn hyperinflation prediction year after year after year. One of those decades he will be correct. lmfao
http://investingcaffeine.com/2009/09...as-no-clothes/
12 Ways Schiff Was Wrong in 2008
Wrong about hyperinflation
Wrong about the dollar
Wrong about commodities except for gold
Wrong about foreign currencies except for the Yen
Wrong about foreign equities
Wrong in timing
Wrong in risk management
Wrong in buy and hold thesis
Wrong on decoupling
Wrong on China
Wrong on US treasuries
Wrong on interest rates, both foreign and domestic
I am against increase the tax because this depression decrease the already people purchasing
power .This tax bad impact on the people life style and they fell to difficult situation.
Thanks for sharing information on this topic.
lincoln square homes