Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Water Cooler / Re: Presidential Elections
« Last post by irvinehomeowner on Today at 09:30:14 AM »
I dunno... in the end I think people will see how crazy it would be to have Trump as POTUS.

I'll call it now... Trump will not win.

(Disclaimer: I didn't think Obama would win 8 years ago either)
Water Cooler / Re: Presidential Elections
« Last post by morekaos on Today at 09:26:57 AM »
Clinton has serious issues. She's a typical politician, just on steroids due to her State Dept position and her husband being a former two-term President. If the Republican party were reasonable, they'd have found a way to nominate a Romney type (Kasich) and might actually be leading in the polls today.

Yes and no. A more conventional candidate (ie Bush, Walker) would still get steamrolled, however, because it's Trump news like this that would ordinarily kill Hillary's candidacy is tolerated.  This is why I keep insisting that this can go either way and it wouldn't surprise me.
Business Insider is a tabloid/clickbait website, no? These aren't "shadow banks" in the sense we think about such creditors in China. The mortgage originators are simply non "banks" (depository institutions). They're regulated by the states, the CFPB and many other federal agencies, just like banks. The mortgages they make are subject to the same laws, regulations, and underwriting guidelines as the banks.

The loans originated by these mortgage lenders are subject to ATR/QM. If the lender doesn't verify the borrower's real income and ensure the borrower has the reasonable ability to repay the real mortgage payment, the borrower has recourse (statutory damages totaling up to three years’ finance charges and fees, actual damages, court costs, and attorney’s fees).
Economy & Finance / Re: REAL WEALTH MANAGEMENT
« Last post by Bullsback on Today at 09:19:04 AM »
If you look at my chart above, you can see that short term we will hit 3% on the 10 year UST and will continue downward within the T-Bond channel. In terms of fixed income, I like the AAA corporate bonds. Let me explain... Between mid 1931 and late 1931, the highest quality long term government bonds spiked briefly from 3.15% to 4.3%. During that time, your government bonds would have temporarily gone down about 10% in value, but your interest would have remained the same. At the same time, AAA corporate bonds spiked from 4.4% to 5.45%, going down in value about 15% (and muni bonds jumped from 3.75% to 5.3%, going down more like 25%. Then, after those minor setbacks into late 1931, all such bonds appreciated strongly as rates fell to the lowest levels to that era, into 1940-1941.

Bonds values go up when interest rates fall (in this case from deflation in prices), and the longer the term of the bond, the more you gain. For bondholders in the 1930s and early 1940s, deflation became their friend, and the constant interest payments accumulated on top of that. The same will hold true during present time and it is good that you and I see eye to eye that the US Dollar will only get stronger from here. Once we move into a deflationary season from 2016 and beyond, total returns with interest on government bonds were 78% from 1930 - 1941. Thanks to their higher yields, returns on AAA corporate bonds were even better, at 118% for that same period.

Hopefully what I am saying makes sense to you.

One other question, Panda, why is holding fixed income trad a sound strategy in a presumed raising rate environment (which you are predicting)? 
I agree with you that when rates go down bond values go up, but I thought you were projecting rates to go up in your initial comments (unless I had misread / misinterpreted something when I read through). That is where I was fundementally confused and where I struggle.  I can't see any reasonable scenario where rates go up (clearly something totally unexpected could happen, probably more driven by an environmental type issue (major national disasters / terrorist attacks / giant hackings / political unrest / war) very much in the near term. 
Water Cooler / Re: Presidential Elections
« Last post by Perspective on Today at 09:17:09 AM »
Clinton has serious issues. She's a typical politician, just on steroids due to her State Dept position and her husband being a former two-term President. If the Republican party were reasonable, they'd have found a way to nominate a Romney type (Kasich) and might actually be leading in the polls today.
Water Cooler / Re: Presidential Elections
« Last post by morekaos on Today at 08:59:08 AM »
The sleeze equivalency is staggering...

The pay-to-play Clinton Foundation

We have a former president and a prospective future president selling access, the appearance of access and the Clinton aura to Wall Street giants, governments such as Saudi Arabia and Germany, tycoons from several nations, multinational corporations and more. The foundation has collected $2 billion since its 2001 founding. Since then, the Clintons have also amassed more than $150 million in speaking fees, often from the same donors.

These special interests are not giving money because the foundation is such an effective charitable organization; a 2013 New York Times investigation made it seem chaotic. They are not paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to hear shopworn speeches because they expect to obtain profound insights. They want the Clintons’ help, and they’re willing to pay for it.

An aide says he once arranged for $50 million in payments for Bill Clinton

A close aide to Bill Clinton said he arranged for $50 million in payments for the former president, part of a complicated mingling of lucrative business deals and charity work of the Clinton Foundation mapped out in a memo released by WikiLeaks on Wednesday.

“Rightly or wrongly,” Band said, because other fundraisers couldn’t deliver, he and Kelly pushed their clients to donate to the foundation; he also lined up speaking and consulting deals for Bill Clinton. In some cases, it worked the other way, with Teneo winning consulting contracts from foundation donors.

One example, he said, was Laureate International University, the for-profit international school that donated more than $1.4 million to the Clinton Foundation and was paying Bill Clinton $3.5 million a year to serve as “honorary chancellor.”

The company paid Clinton more than $17 million before the relationship ended last year, as Hillary Clinton was launching her presidential bid.
Sports / Re: NBA 2016-2017
« Last post by irvinehomeowner on Today at 08:26:43 AM »
It's good to see D'Angelo unfettered by Byron.

And Kelly... err... Jordan Clarkson was probably the best free agent they signed over the summer. :)
This article seems misleading. It doesn't really matter who originates the loan as long as it meets the underwriting requirements. At the end of the day, these mortgages are still being underwritten to the standards of the gov't entity (FHA) that insures the loans. Fannie/Freddie won't buy unless that's the case. And from personal experience, it is not easier to get a loan through a "shadow" bank such as Quicken Loans.
Economy & Finance / Re: REAL WEALTH MANAGEMENT
« Last post by Panda on Today at 06:27:11 AM »
I found this interesting article today on Yahoo Finance by Grant Cardone. What do guys think? Is it wise to maximize your 401K contribution with your employer?

Self-made millionaire: Don't put money in your 401(k)

After graduating from college, Grant Cardone was broke and swimming in $40,000 of student debt, he writes in his new book, "Be Obsessed Or Be Average."

By 30, he'd made his first million. Since then, the 58-year-old has built five companies and a multi-million dollar fortune.

The self-made millionaire refuses to play by anyone else's rules, particularly when it comes to saving money.

"I would never, ever invest money in a 401(k)," Cardone tells CNBC. "Why would I go to work, have my employer give me another $6,000 a year, and then take that money and send it off to Wall Street, where I can't even touch it for 30 years? I wouldn't do that."

The popular retirement plans are "traps that prevent people from ever having enough," Cardone writes on his website. "The 401(k) is merely where you kiss your money away for 40 years hoping it grows up."

Rather than focusing on saving, focus on earning — you can't save your way to millionaire status, he says.

"Wall Street is telling you to invest little bits, early. They don't believe in your ability to earn money," Cardone tells CNBC. "People need to show the ability to produce more revenue — not invest it — first. People get rich because they produce revenue, not because they make little investments over time."

And don't just focus on earning — focus on earning big, says Cardone. "Keep stacking that paper until you have a hundred grand in the bank. I know this is very unrealistic for a lot of people, but the reason it's unrealistic is because you've been conditioned to think small."

Grant is promoting saving the money you earn, but counter to most advice, he says to put the money in a good old-fashioned savings account — where your money is accessible at a moment's notice — until you have at least $100,000. Then, you can start investing.

"Put your saved money into secured, sacred (untouchable) accounts," he writes on Entrepreneur. "Never use these accounts for anything, not even an emergency. ... To this day, at least twice a year, I am broke because I always invest my surpluses into ventures I cannot access."

It's important to note that the median retirement savings for all families in the U.S . is just $5,000, and the median for families with some savings is $60,000, according to the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). And many families have zero saved. Employer-sponsored retirement plans are meant to help address this and are a good option for many people. But of course, to Grant's point, they won't help you get rich quickly or invest in opportunities today.

He's not the only self-made millionaire to encourage this kind of thinking. After studying wealthy people for more than 25 years, self-made millionaire Steve Siebold found that rich people set their expectations high and aren't afraid to think big.

After all, as he writes in "How Rich People Think," "No one would ever strike it rich and live their dreams without huge expectations."
Creative financing setup the last housing collapse. Pricing has risen steadily since it bottomed in late 2011 which lead to very high prices result in Shadow Banks. The tight financing of traditional banks created and funnel a new method of getting loans for the sky high home prices.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

Talk Irvine Links

[Recent Posts]
[FAQ / Rules]

Site Supporters

Related Links

Recent Posts