• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Компании1940
      • Показать ещё
      Разное854
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы513
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации89
      • Показать ещё
      Люди279
      • Показать ещё
      Формат25
      Показатели171
      • Показать ещё
      Издания84
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы1
27 марта, 19:42

Freddie Mac: Mortgage Serious Delinquency rate declines in February, Lowest since June 2008

Freddie Mac reported that the Single-Family serious delinquency rate in February was at 0.98%, down from 0.99% in January.  Freddie's rate is down from 1.26% in February 2016.Freddie's serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 4.20%. This is the lowest serious delinquency rate since June 2008.These are mortgage loans that are "three monthly payments or more past due or in foreclosure".  Click on graph for larger imageAlthough the rate is still declining, the rate of decline has slowed. Maybe the rate will decline another 0.25 percentage points or so to a cycle bottom, but this is pretty close to normal.Note: Fannie Mae will report soon.

25 марта, 12:00

Фальсификации в США

Накануне праймериз в штате Южная Каролина американские избиратели, да и все, кто следит за этим увлекательным шоу, были сбиты с толку заявлением Республиканского Комитета штата Айова о том, что победа Митта Ромни в этом штате была провозглашена ошибочно. Подлинным победителем оказался ультраконсервативный бывший сенатор Рик Санторум. Дальше началась такая чехарда, что уследить за ней оказалось не по силам даже опытным политическим обозревателям ведущих американских изданий, […]

24 марта, 00:21

Republican Senator Hails Goldman Sachs As A Champion Of 'The Little Guy'

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); WASHINGTON ― Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) announced on Thursday that he is trapped in a Randian nightmare where members of Congress seek to “beat down” the virtuous organization Goldman Sachs ― a benevolent force in American democracy that goes to great lengths to “employ the little guy.” “I feel like sometimes I’m living a reality TV version of Atlas Shrugged,” Tillis declared at a Senate hearing. “There are a lot of people in this Congress that wanna just beat down job creators and employers ... People want to demonize Goldman Sachs. That’s an easy thing to do, right? Just beat up on a financial services institution. An institution that’s committed to, let me look at the general numbers here ― they have 36,500 employees. There’s probably a lot of little guys in there. They’ve contributed billions of dollars to nonprofits.” “Demonizing employers that employ the little guy isn’t looking out for the little guy,” Tillis concluded. Tillis was speaking at the confirmation hearing for Jay Clayton, President Donald Trump’s nominee to chair the Securities and Exchange Commission. Clayton is a top Wall Street attorney who helped Goldman Sachs with its 2008 government bailout. Tillis’ outburst appeared to be a response to earlier questioning from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), whom Tillis griped about in a previous hearing for highlighting a conflict of interest involving President Donald Trump and federal affordable housing programs. Under government ethics rules, Warren noted, Clayton would have to recuse himself from any enforcement actions the SEC takes against companies that he represented, or companies that his law firm Sullivan & Cromwell represents in cases before the SEC. That creates a scenario in which the agency’s two Republican and two Democratic commissioners are likely to deadlock about enforcement ― a common occurrence during the tenure of SEC Chair Mary Jo White, who was also a prominent corporate attorney before going into government. “Based on your personal client disclosures then, for half of your tenure as SEC chair, you would not be able to vote to enforce the law against several big banks, including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Barclays and UBS,” Warren told Clayton at the hearing. “Those banks have repeatedly violated securities laws in the past few years. But if they violate securities laws again in your first two years as SEC chairman, you can’t vote to punish them. And I think that’s a problem.” And indeed, Goldman Sachs has faced a long list of charges that it’s run afoul of the law. Last year, the bank agreed to pay $5 billion to settle charges that it defrauded its clients by selling them toxic mortgage-backed securities. It paid a $120 million penalty to settle charges that it manipulated foreign exchange markets. It paid a separate $36.3 million penalty to resolve charges that it accepted confidential regulatory information from the New York Fed and used it to get clients. In 2014, the company paid $3.15 billion to settle charges that it defrauded Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In 2012, the bank paid $12 million to settle “pay-to-play” campaign contribution violations involving the Massachusetts state treasurer, paid $22 million to settle charges that its research and sales teams were holding meetings that allowed them to improperly share insider information, and paid $1.5 million and $7 million to settle two other supervision problems. A member of Goldman Sach’s board of directors was sentenced to prison the same year for illegally tipping off a hedge fund manager to the company’s boardroom secrets. In 2010, the bank paid $550 million to settle charges that it defrauded its own clients by selling them mortgage-linked securities that were designed to fail, and which Goldman Sachs itself bet against. That just covers the years since the financial crisis. Prior to that, Goldman Sachs had settled charges that it had rigged the auction-rate securities market, cheated while managing initial public offerings, and illegally traded government bonds.  Goldman Sachs did not respond to a request for comment for this article.  “Any financial services executive or anybody in a financial services business that acts badly needs to suffer the consequences,” Tillis said Thursday. “But if we just make the American people think that they’re all bad, you are hurting the little guy.” Still, Tillis’ most grievous error at the hearing was one of literary interpretation. Tillis simply does not understand the book he referenced during his tirade. Atlas Shrugged is a novel about a railroad tycoon who has an affair with a married steel magnate before joining a clan of very bright rich people who go on “strike,” letting society collapse without their talents while they enjoy the ubermensch lifestyle in a peaceful valley. Atlas Shrugged is not a novel about all the charities supported by good-hearted corporations. Its heroes literally abandon society to chaos and destruction rather than deploy their talents for the public good. Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged, would not have approved of Goldman’s philanthropic work, because she believed all charitable activity fostered weakness and opposed it on principle. She literally wrote a book called The Virtue of Selfishness, which celebrates people who act in their own interests at the expense of their communities.   It’s not exactly an alien worldview on Wall Street. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

24 марта, 00:21

Republican Senator Hails Goldman Sachs As A Champion Of 'The Little Guy'

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); WASHINGTON ― Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) announced on Thursday that he is trapped in a Randian nightmare where members of Congress seek to “beat down” the virtuous organization Goldman Sachs ― a benevolent force in American democracy that goes to great lengths to “employ the little guy.” “I feel like sometimes I’m living a reality TV version of Atlas Shrugged,” Tillis declared at a Senate hearing. “There are a lot of people in this Congress that wanna just beat down job creators and employers ... People want to demonize Goldman Sachs. That’s an easy thing to do, right? Just beat up on a financial services institution. An institution that’s committed to, let me look at the general numbers here ― they have 36,500 employees. There’s probably a lot of little guys in there. They’ve contributed billions of dollars to nonprofits.” “Demonizing employers that employ the little guy isn’t looking out for the little guy,” Tillis concluded. Tillis was speaking at the confirmation hearing for Jay Clayton, President Donald Trump’s nominee to chair the Securities and Exchange Commission. Clayton is a top Wall Street attorney who helped Goldman Sachs with its 2008 government bailout. Tillis’ outburst appeared to be a response to earlier questioning from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), whom Tillis griped about in a previous hearing for highlighting a conflict of interest involving President Donald Trump and federal affordable housing programs. Under government ethics rules, Warren noted, Clayton would have to recuse himself from any enforcement actions the SEC takes against companies that he represented, or companies that his law firm Sullivan & Cromwell represents in cases before the SEC. That creates a scenario in which the agency’s two Republican and two Democratic commissioners are likely to deadlock about enforcement ― a common occurrence during the tenure of SEC Chair Mary Jo White, who was also a prominent corporate attorney before going into government. “Based on your personal client disclosures then, for half of your tenure as SEC chair, you would not be able to vote to enforce the law against several big banks, including Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Barclays and UBS,” Warren told Clayton at the hearing. “Those banks have repeatedly violated securities laws in the past few years. But if they violate securities laws again in your first two years as SEC chairman, you can’t vote to punish them. And I think that’s a problem.” And indeed, Goldman Sachs has faced a long list of charges that it’s run afoul of the law. Last year, the bank agreed to pay $5 billion to settle charges that it defrauded its clients by selling them toxic mortgage-backed securities. It paid a $120 million penalty to settle charges that it manipulated foreign exchange markets. It paid a separate $36.3 million penalty to resolve charges that it accepted confidential regulatory information from the New York Fed and used it to get clients. In 2014, the company paid $3.15 billion to settle charges that it defrauded Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In 2012, the bank paid $12 million to settle “pay-to-play” campaign contribution violations involving the Massachusetts state treasurer, paid $22 million to settle charges that its research and sales teams were holding meetings that allowed them to improperly share insider information, and paid $1.5 million and $7 million to settle two other supervision problems. A member of Goldman Sach’s board of directors was sentenced to prison the same year for illegally tipping off a hedge fund manager to the company’s boardroom secrets. In 2010, the bank paid $550 million to settle charges that it defrauded its own clients by selling them mortgage-linked securities that were designed to fail, and which Goldman Sachs itself bet against. That just covers the years since the financial crisis. Prior to that, Goldman Sachs had settled charges that it had rigged the auction-rate securities market, cheated while managing initial public offerings, and illegally traded government bonds.  Goldman Sachs did not respond to a request for comment for this article.  “Any financial services executive or anybody in a financial services business that acts badly needs to suffer the consequences,” Tillis said Thursday. “But if we just make the American people think that they’re all bad, you are hurting the little guy.” Still, Tillis’ most grievous error at the hearing was one of literary interpretation. Tillis simply does not understand the book he referenced during his tirade. Atlas Shrugged is a novel about a railroad tycoon who has an affair with a married steel magnate before joining a clan of very bright rich people who go on “strike,” letting society collapse without their talents while they enjoy the ubermensch lifestyle in a peaceful valley. Atlas Shrugged is not a novel about all the charities supported by good-hearted corporations. Its heroes literally abandon society to chaos and destruction rather than deploy their talents for the public good. Ayn Rand, the author of Atlas Shrugged, would not have approved of Goldman’s philanthropic work, because she believed all charitable activity fostered weakness and opposed it on principle. She literally wrote a book called The Virtue of Selfishness, which celebrates people who act in their own interests at the expense of their communities.   It’s not exactly an alien worldview on Wall Street. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Выбор редакции
22 марта, 21:13

США: индекс цен на дома FHFA в январе остался на прежнем уровне

По данным Федерального агентства по финансированию жилья (FHFA) индекс цен на дома в США, покупка которых осуществлялась с участием контролируемых государством ипотечных агентств Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac, в январе не изменился по сравнению с декабрем при ожидавшемся повышении на 0.4%.

Выбор редакции
22 марта, 20:22

США: индекс цен на дома FHFA в январе остался на прежнем уровне

По данным Федерального агентства по финансированию жилья (FHFA) индекс цен на дома в США, покупка которых осуществлялась с участием контролируемых государством ипотечных агентств Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac, в январе не изменился по сравнению с декабрем при ожидавшемся повышении на 0.4%.

Выбор редакции
22 марта, 17:17

США: индекс цен на жилья остался без изменений в январе

В январе цены на жилье остались на прежнем уровне в соответствии с ежемесячным индексом цен на жилье (HPI) Федерального агентства жилищного финансирования (FHFA). HPI отражает положительные ежемесячные увеличения с начала 2012 года, за исключением ноября 2013 года и января 2017 года, когда цены на жилье были равны месячным показателям. Ранее сообщаемое увеличение на 0,4% в декабре осталось непересмотренным. FHFA ежемесячно рассчитывает HPI с использованием информации о ценах продажи жилья от ипотечных кредитов, проданных или гарантированных Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac. С января 2016 года по январь 2017 года цены на жилье выросли на 5,7 процента. Для девяти подразделений переписи с поправкой на сезонные колебания цены с декабря 2016 года по январь 2017 года колебались от -2,0 процента в Восточно-Южном Центральном подразделении до + 0,6 процента в Тихоокеанском дивизионе. 12-месячные изменения были положительными: от +3,5 процента в Восточном Южном Центральном подразделении до + 8,3 процента в Горном дивизионе. Информационно-аналитический отдел TeleTradeИсточник: FxTeam

20 марта, 17:33

Housing: Upside and Downside Risks

In a note today, Merrill Lynch economist Michelle Meyer notes a few upside and downside risks for housing. A few excerpts: The housing market is being hit by several cross currents. On the upside, the warmer than-normal weather in the winter likely boosted housing activity over the past few months. The risk, however, is that this could be pulling activity forward from the spring. In addition, the general improvement in the economy and gain in consumer confidence could be underpinning housing activity. The NAHB homebuilder confidence index has climbed higher, reaching a new cyclical high of 71 in March. Clearly builders are optimistic. However, on the downside, interest rates have increased which weighs on affordability.There are also a variety of potential policy changes which can impact the outlook for the housing market. High on the list is financial market deregulation and its impact on the flow of credit. In addition, there seems to be renewed focus on reforming the mortgage finance system and bringing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac out of conservatorship. In addition, immigration reform could have significant impacts on the housing market over the medium term.emphasis addedCR note: If, later this year, the Fed starts to reduce their balance sheet, that might push up longer rates (and pushing up mortgage rates a little more). Another downside risk for housing is reduced foreign buying due to the strong dollar, U.S. political concerns, and capital controls in China.

20 марта, 10:53

Важнейшие экономические события недели

Еженедельный анонс главных экономических событий от Insider.pro.Ключевым отчетом недели будут продажи нового жилья в США. Среди других важных отчетов – продажи на вторичном рынке недвижимости.Понедельник, 20 марта10:00 Индекс цен производителей Германии за февраль. Прогнозируется рост на 2,9%.15:30 Индекс национальной активности ФРБ Чикаго за февраль. Значение индекса является взвешенным средним 85 различных индикаторов экономической активности в США.19:45 Выступление президента Немецкого федерального банка Йенса Вайдмана.Вторник, 21 марта02:30 Выступление президента США Дональда Трампа.03:30 Публикация протоколов заседания Резервного банка Австралии по денежно-кредитной политике.12:30 Индекс потребительских цен Великобритании за февраль. Прогнозируется ускорение темпов инфляции с 1,8% до 2,1% в годовом выражении.13:00 Выступление главы Банка Англии Марка Карни.14:00 Выступление президента ФРБ Нью-Йорка Уильяма Дадли.15:30 Розничные продажи в Канаде за январь.17:30 Объем долгосрочной программы по рефинансированию (LTRO) ЕЦБ.19:00 Выступление президента ФРБ Канзас-сити Эстер Джордж.23:30 Еженедельные запасы нефти по версии Американского института нефти (API). Среда, 22 марта02:50 Публикация протоколов заседания Банка Японии по денежно-кредитной политике.11:00 Заседание ЕЦБ, не связанное с вопросами денежно-кредитной политики.14:00 Индекс заявлений на покупку домов по ипотеке от Ассоциации ипотечных банкиров (MBA).16:00 Индекс цен на жилье FHFA за январь. Ранее этот индекс строился на основе данных госкорпораций Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac о секьюритизации ипотеки при повторных продажах частных домов. Сейчас также доступен расширенный индекс.17:00 Статистика о продажах на вторичном рынке недвижимости, подготовленная Национальной ассоциацией риелторов (НАР). В феврале прогнозируется падение продаж с учетом сезонных факторов до 5,55 млн с 5,69 млн месяцем ранее. Ключевым пунктом отчета станет изменение числа домов, выставленных на продажу по сравнению с аналогичным периодом прошлого года. Экономист Том Лоулер прогнозирует продажи в 5,41 млн с учетом сезонных факторов.В течение дня: Индекс заказов на проектные работы от Американского института архитекторов (опережающий индикатор ситуации на рынке коммерческой недвижимости).17:30 Изменение запасов нефти по версии Минэнерго США.23:00 Решение Резервного банка Новой Зеландии по процентной ставке.Четверг, 23 марта12:30 Индекс розничных продаж Великобритании за февраль. Прогнозируется рост на 2,6% в годовом выражении, против 1,5% месяцем ранее.15:30 Число первичных заявок на пособие по безработице в США. Согласованный прогноз — снижение показателя до 240 тыс. с 241 тыс. неделей ранее.15:45 Выступление председателя ФРС Джанет Йеллен на научной конференции по вопросам развития общества, Вашингтон, округ Колумбия.17:00 Продажи нового жилья в США за февраль. На графике представлены продажи нового жилья с 1963 года. Согласованный прогноз: увеличение показателя с 555 до 565 тыс. с учетом сезонных факторов.18:00 Индекс производственной активности ФРБ Канзаса за март.Пятница, 24 марта09:30 ВВП Франции за I квартал.11:30 Индекс деловой активности в производственном секторе Германии.13:30 Решение Банка России по процентной ставке.15:00 Выступление президента ФРБ Чикаго Чарльза Эванса.15:30 Заказы на товары длительного пользования в США за январь от Бюро переписи населения. Прогнозируется рост показателя на 1,5%.15:30 Индекс потребительских цен Канады за февраль.16:05 Выступление президента ФРБ Сент-Луиса Джеймса Булларда.17:00 Безработица и занятость по регионам и штатам за февраль от Бюро трудовой статистики.21:00 Число активных буровых установок в США от Baker Hughes.

Выбор редакции
17 марта, 22:35

Why Is Goldman On A Buying Spree For Delinquent Mortgages

Last year Goldman Sachs entered into a settlement with federal and state governments over its role in packaging and selling toxic mortgage-backed securities in the housing meltdown to unsuspecting buyers while subsequently turning around and shorting those very same securities.  As part of the settlement, Goldman agreed to provide $1.8 billion in homeowner debt relief to delinquent U.S. borrowers. The only problem with the settlement is that Goldman doesn't actually own any mortgage debt, they prefer to package it up into pretty little bundles, slap a AAA rating on it and sell it to pension funds for a fee instead. Of course, that's not a problem for Wall Street's vampire squid because they've found a whole other way to satisfy the entire $1.8 billion settlement without funding a single penny of that obligation in cash, in fact, they're making money on the scheme.  So, how does it work?  Well, the first step is to buy up billions of dollars worth of non-performing loans (NPLs) at massive discounts of up to 50 cents on the dollar.  Then, you negotiate mortgage modifications with borrowers that reduces their principle balance, of course by less than Goldman's initial discount on the original purchase, and allows them to start making payments again.  That principle foregiveness then gets counted towards Goldman's $1.8 billion mortgage relief obligation even though it actually cost them absolutely nothing because they acquired the debt at an even larger discount.  Finally, and this is the real beauty of the scheme, when the loans are performing again they can be packaged up and resold as AAA paper once again... Here's a quick example of how it might work on an individual mortgage: Lets assume a borrow has a $200,000 mortgage outstanding but isn't making payments.  Goldman then comes along and buys that mortgage for $100,000 from Fannie Mae.  Goldman then goes to the borrower and offers to reduce his mortgage balance to $150,000 if, in return, he'll agree to start making payments again.  That $50,000 debt reduction then gets applied to Goldman's $1.8 billion settlement obligation. And the coup de gras, once the loan is performing again, Goldman can sell it for $150,000, thus pocketing a $50,000 cash profit plus settling $50,000 of their obligation to various government entities.   As the Wall Street Journal notes today, to our great 'shock' nonetheless, Goldman has suddenly become the largest buyer of Fannie Mae's NPLs, having purchased $5.7 billion worth of unpaid loans over the past several months. Over the past year-and-a-half, the Wall Street giant has become the largest buyer of severely delinquent home loans from mortgage giant Fannie Mae. The firm has acquired nearly two-thirds of $9.6 billion in loans the agency has auctioned, representing unpaid loan balances of $5.7 billion, a Wall Street Journal review of government records shows.   In all, Goldman has spent roughly $4.5 billion on some 26,000 Fannie-owned loans, according to the government records. It has also been buying mortgages, in smaller size, from private sellers and Freddie Mac, Fannie’s sibling, according to county records, government filings and traders.   On Tuesday Goldman won the majority of loans at Fannie’s latest auction, its largest to date. The bank bought about 8,000 loans with unpaid balances of $1.4 billion.   Goldman has paid between 50 and 90 cents on the dollar for the loans, according to Fannie Mae records. Meanwhile, because Goldman is getting credit toward fulfilling the terms of its settlement, it can afford to pay more for delinquent loans than other competing bidders, which essentially means they've cornered an entire market. Just another beautiful Obama-era 'deal' for U.S. taxpayers...Obama gets to publicly take credit for 'punishing' the evil vampire squid of wall street all while privately tossing them a sweetheart deal...seems that Hillary isn't the only politician with conflicting 'public' and 'private' positions on key issues. h/t @davidschawel

Выбор редакции
16 марта, 02:00

Fed Rate Hike Leads to Market Gains Across the Board

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday announced it voted 9-to-1 to raise its benchmark rate known as the federal-funds rate by 0.25% to a range of 0.75% to 1%. The hike directly increases the cost of borrowing money.

14 марта, 11:30

#FannieGate: Fraud & Theft Funded ObamaCare

The Democrats secret weapon to stop ObamaCare repeal or reform is CBO (Congressional Budget Office) scoring showing poor people losing coverage without subsidies. But as InfoWars Washington Bureau Chief Jerome Corsi shows, the subsidies were never legally funded by Congress but rather by Obama robbing Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac investors in defiance of Congress, the judicial branch and the Constitution. Follow David on Twitter - https://twitter.com/libertytarian Help us spread the word about the liberty movement, we're reaching millions help us reach millions more. Share the free live video feed link with your friends & family: http://www.infowars.com/show Follow Alex on TWITTER - https://twitter.com/RealAlexJones Like Alex on FACEBOOK - https://www.facebook.com/AlexanderEmerickJones Infowars on G+ - https://plus.google.com/+infowars/ :Web: http://www.infowars.com/ http://www.prisonplanet.com/ http://www.infowars.net/ :Subscribe and share your login with 20 friends: http://www.prisonplanet.tv http://www.InfowarsNews.com Visit http://www.InfowarsLife.com to get the products Alex Jones and his family trust, while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation. [http://bit.ly/2dhnhbS] Biome Defense™ [http://bit.ly/2bnEj91] Bio-True Selenium™ [http://bit.ly/1WYw8jp] Vitamin Mineral Fusion™ [http://bit.ly/1QYBNBv] Joint Formula™ [http://bit.ly/1nNuR3r] Anthroplex™ [http://bit.ly/1ljfWfJ] Living Defense™ [http://bit.ly/1Iobcj2] Deep Cleanse™ [http://bit.ly/1DsyQ6i] Knockout™ [http://bit.ly/1Kr1yfz] Brain Force™ [http://bit.ly/1R5gsqk] Liver Shield™ [http://bit.ly/1cOwQix] ProstaGuard™ [http://bit.ly/1mnchEz3] Child Ease™ [http://bit.ly/1xs9F6t] WinterSunD3™ [http://bit.ly/1L3gDSO] Ancient Defense™ [http://bit.ly/1EHbA6E] Secret-12™ [http://bit.ly/1txsOge] Oxy Powder™ [http://bit.ly/1s6cphV] Occu Power™ [http://bit.ly/1rGOLsG] DNA Force™ [http://bit.ly/1nIngBb] X2 Survival Shield™ [http://bit.ly/1kaXxKL] Super Female Vitality™ [http://bit.ly/1mhAKCO] Lung Cleanse™ [http://bit.ly/1mGbikx] Silver-Bullet - Colloidal Silver™ [http://bit.ly/1xcoUfo] Super Male Vitality™ [http://bit.ly/1z5BCP9] Survival Shield - Nascent Iodine™ [http://bit.ly/1o4sQtc] Patriot Blend 100% Organic Coffee™ [http://bit.ly/1iVL6HB] Immune Support 100% Organic Coffee™ All available at - http://www.infowarsshop.com/ INFOWARS HEALTH - START GETTING HEALTHY BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE - http://www.infowarshealth.com/ Newsletter Sign up / Infowars Underground Insider : http://www.infowars.com/newsletter The Alex Jones Show © copyright, Free Speech Systems .LLC 1995 - 2017 All Rights Reserved. May use for fair use and educational purposes

14 марта, 01:22

When Is Regulation Excessive?

President Trump believes that Federal regulation is excessive and has directed that task forces be set up at each Federal agency to supervise and monitor the process of finding regulations to cut. To my knowledge, he has not provided any guidance to the agencies on how to do this, so I decided to do it for him in this article.  Step 1: Define the Objective: Counting the number of regulations is useless, what matters is whether the objectives of regulation are being achieved. Regulation is excessive when it does not accomplish its objective, or when the cost of accomplishing the objective through regulation is excessive, or when there is an alternative to regulation that is less costly. The objectives vary from agency to agency. My interest is in financial regulation. This includes the market for home mortgages, which I will use for my illustrations. The agencies with regulatory responsibilities in this market include HUD/FHA, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I will illustrate with two objectives, both of which are designed to empower the “little guy.” 1.    Reduce barriers to effective mortgage shopping. 2.    Reduce mortgage transactions costs. Step 2:  Identify Remediable Deficiencies The major focus of the agencies in assessing their regulations should be to identify the major deficiencies that are preventing their objectives from being realized.  For the mortgage-related agencies, Step 2 would include the following deficiencies bearing on the two objectives cited above. 1.  Lender control of appraisals makes them non-portable and lengthens transaction periods, both of which impede the ability of borrowers to shop effectively. 2.  The cost of title insurance paid by borrowers is excessive relative to the costs incurred in assessing the validity of titles. Step 3: Assess Existing and Alternative Regulations I will illustrate with the two objectives and deficiencies cited above. The Difficulty in Shopping: The core problem potential borrowers face in shopping for a mortgage is that critically important information bearing on its price, including the value of the property, is not available to them until after they have applied for a loan and paid for an appraisal. For a borrower to withdraw at this point in order to begin again with another lender is difficult, costly and time-consuming, so few do it. Relevant Existing Regulations: The regulations applicable to appraisals are a major source of the problem. While borrowers pay for appraisals, the regulations place responsibility and control with lenders, who order them after a borrower has applied. This lengthens the period the borrower must wait for the information needed to shop, and it also means that the borrower who withdraws from the process must pay for a new appraisal and wait out the results once again. A Better Regulatory Approach: If regulations obliged lenders to accept an appraisal ordered by a borrower from any approved appraisal management company, the borrower would at last have the capacity to shop for the best deal. With an appraisal in hand, the shopper could invite multiple lenders to make a firm offer at a specified date and time. Making appraisals portable is one of the simplest and most effective ways to empower consumers. Bringing that about would require replacement of one set of regulations with another set. The Excessive Price of Title Insurance: Assuring good title is necessary for an effective housing and mortgage market, but title insurance is not necessary for that purpose. Denmark has a reliable system of recording titles but no title insurance. Relevant Existing Law: Existing law allows lenders to shift to the borrower the cost of title insurance that protects the lender. This prevents the efficient application of existing technology that would reduce the cost of assuring good titles to a small fraction of the cost of title insurance. The problem is that lenders have no financial incentive to shift to a more efficient system – in fact, many have a financial interest in the title agencies to which they refer customers. A Better Regulatory Approach: If the law required lenders to pay for title insurance themselves, passing the cost to the borrower in the price of the mortgage, lenders would have an incentive to drive down the cost rather than to share in the revenue. The result would be a precipitous decline in the cost of title insurance, and eventually the replacement of the industry with an automated system open to all market participants. If this new and very simple regulation applied to mortgage insurance as well as title insurance, which should be the case, it would make a large set of existing regulations obsolete. These are the regulations that apply to referral fees, which deal with such weighty matters as whether a birthday present from a title agent or a mortgage insurance salesperson, to a lender, constitutes a prohibited referral fee. Good riddance. Concluding Comment The President says he wants to reduce the number of regulations.  I interpret that to mean that he wants to replace regulations that are directed toward worthy objectives but don’t work with regulations that do work, and I have given some examples. Regulations that ought to be scrapped rather than replaced will be discussed in another article.   For more information on mortgages or to shop for a mortgage in an unbiased environment, visit my website The Mortgage Professor -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

13 марта, 16:23

Atlanta Fed Selects Raphael Bostic As New President

The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta has selected Raphael Bostic as its new president, replacing Dennis Lockhart after his retirement last month.  In a statement by Thomas A. Fanning, chairman of the board of the Atlanta Fed, he said Raphael W. Bostic will become the 15th president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta effective June 5, 2017. Bostic, 50, succeeds Dennis Lockhart, who retired from the Atlanta Fed on Feb. 28, 2017. The appointment was jointly approved by eligible directors of the Atlanta Fed's board of directors, all nonbankers by law, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C. Bostic was a senior economist on the Fed board in Washington from 1995 to 2001, working in the monetary and financial studies section. He is currently a University of Southern California professor with expertise in urban development, and was assistant secretary at HUD for policy development and research during the Obama administration. Oddly, Bostic has no prior experience at Goldman Sachs, as the bank now appears more focused on the executive branch. Bostic has a doctorate in economics from Stanford University and a BA from Harvard University. More details from the press release: Atlanta Fed Names Bostic New President and Chief Executive Officer Bostic is currently the Judith and John Bedrosian Chair in Governance and the Public Enterprise at the Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California (USC), a position he has held since 2012. "We are very pleased that Raphael will join the Atlanta Fed as its president and chief executive officer," said Fanning, who is also chairman, president and chief executive officer of Southern Company. "He is a seasoned and versatile leader, bringing with him a wealth of experience in public policy and academia. Raphael also has significant experience leading complex organizations and managing interdisciplinary teams. He is a perfect bridge between people and policy." From 2009 to 2012, Bostic served as assistant secretary for Policy Development and Research at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In that Senate-confirmed position, Bostic was a principal adviser to the secretary on policy and research, with the goal of helping the secretary and other principal staff make informed decisions on HUD policies and programs, as well as on budget and legislative proposals. Bostic arrived at USC in 2001. There, he served as a professor in the School of Policy, Planning and Development. His work spans many fields, including home ownership, housing finance, neighborhood change and the role of institutions in shaping policy effectiveness. He was director of USC's master of real estate development degree program and was the founding director of the Casden Real Estate Economics Forecast.  He served the Lusk Center for Real Estate as the interim associate director from 2007 to 2009 and as the interim director from 2015 to 2016. Bostic worked at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors from 1995 to 2001, serving as an economist and then a senior economist in the monetary and financial studies section, where his work on the Community Reinvestment Act earned him a special achievement award. While working at the Federal Reserve, he served as special assistant to HUD's assistant secretary of policy development and research in 1999, and also was a professional lecturer at American University in 1998. Commenting on his selection, Bostic said, "The Reserve Banks are vital contributors to our nation's economic and financial success. I'm excited about the opportunity to work with the Bank's well-respected staff in advancing the excellent reputation this organization has built over many years. In my role as president of the Atlanta Reserve Bank, I also look forward to confronting the challenges the Federal Reserve faces in today's increasingly global and rapidly changing economy." Bostic was born in 1966 and grew up in Delran, New Jersey. A high school valedictorian, he graduated from Harvard University in 1987 with a combined major in economics and psychology—disciplines he believes are intimately interrelated. After a brief stint in the private sector, Bostic earned his doctorate in economics from Stanford University in 1995. Bostic serves as a board member of Freddie Mac, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy and Abode Communities. He is a fellow of the National Association of Public Administration, vice president of the Association of Public Policy and Management, a member of the board of trustees of Enterprise Community Partners, and a research advisory board member of the Reinvestment Fund. As president of the Atlanta Fed, Bostic will lead one of the 12 regional Reserve Banks that, with the Board of Governors, make up the Federal Reserve System, the nation's central bank. The Atlanta Fed is responsible for the Sixth Federal Reserve District, which encompasses Alabama, Florida and Georgia and portions of Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee. As its key functions, the Atlanta Fed participates in setting national monetary policy, supervises numerous banking organizations and provides a variety of payment services to financial institutions and the U.S. government. Bostic will have overall responsibility for these functions and will represent the Sixth Federal Reserve District at meetings of the Federal Open Market Committee, the policymaking body within the Federal Reserve that sets monetary policy for the nation.

Выбор редакции
09 марта, 11:15

Why U.S. New Home Sales Are Stalling

Previously, in looking at the total market cap of the new homes sold in the United States, we found that the market for new homes in the U.S. began to noticeably decelerate after September 2016. Since market capitalization is the product of both new home sale prices and the quantity of new home sales, to find out why that outcome is happening, we first looked at the trailing twelve month average of new home sale prices. The following chart shows the most recent major trends in median new home sale prices in the period from July 2012 through January 2017. In this chart, we see that after having risen at a relatively slow pace in the months from August through October 2016, they briefly dipped in November 2016, before rebounding to rise at a somewhat faster pace than they had in the months preceding November 2016. But since the market cap was falling from October 2016 onward, that combination can only mean that the number of new homes being sold was falling more sharply than their sale prices were rising. And sure enough, we do see that after spiking in July 2016, the number of new home sales was rising slowly up to November 2016, after which they dropped sharply in December 2016. Before we continue, we should note that the most recent three months of data shown in the charts above are still subject to revision, so the price and quantity data for new home sales during the months of November 2016, December 2016 and January 2016 may all change during the next several months. Back to the topic at hand, one obvious candidate to consider that could potentially explain what we see in both the price and quantity data for new home sales is mortgage rates. The following chart shows how the average interest rates for conventional 30-year have changed from month to month from July 2012 through January 2017. In December 2016, the average 30-year fixed interest rate mortgage in the U.S. rose by 0.43 points to 4.20% from the previous month, which just happened to be nearly three-quarters of percentage higher than where it had bottomed in July and August 2016. But that is not the only factor behind the stalling of the new home market in the U.S. Let's next update our chart showing the relationship between the trailing twelve month average of median new home sale prices and median household income, which we'll do for the period from December 2000 through January 2017. In this chart, we can confirm the generally rising growth trend for median new home sale prices, but we also see a slowing growth trend for median household income in the latter half of 2016. The following chart shows just median household income in both nominal (current dollar) terms and in real (constant January 2017 U.S. dollar) terms. Here, we see that both real and nominal median household income in the U.S., after having risen rapidly in 2015, began to decline through the first four months of 2016. Afterward, both nominal and, to a lesser extent, real median household income rose slowly through November 2016. Then, in December 2016, both nominal and real median household income declined. January 2017 saw the nominal median household income rise, but after adjusting the household incomes in previous months for inflation, we find that in real terms, median household income fell again in January 2017. The final chart we'll share today will look at the median household income data again, but this time, measured as the year over year growth rate for the nominal and inflation-adjusted data. Since we only have the monthly median household income data back to December 2000, we'll show the year over year growth rates from January 2001 through January 2017. Measured year over year, we see that the growth rates of both nominal and inflation-adjusted median household income in the U.S. began to sharply decline after March 2016. As of December 2016, the year over year growth rate of the inflation-adjusted median household income had fallen significantly into negative territory for the first time since early 2012. So, the slowing market cap for new homes in the U.S. in the latter part of 2016 is a consequence of the combination of rising new home sale prices, substantially fewer new home sales (which is likely contributing to the rising prices), rising mortgage rates, and slowing or falling household income growth. With that kind of negative momentum, is it any wonder that the Fed has sharply reduced its nowcast for GDP growth estimates in 2017-Q1? Data SourcesU.S. Census Bureau. New Residential Sales Historical Data. Houses Sold. [Excel Spreadsheet]. Accessed 8 March 2017. U.S. Census Bureau. Median and Average Sales Prices of New Homes Sold in the United States. [Excel Spreadsheet]. Accessed 8 March 2017. Freddie Mac. 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgages Since 1971. [Online Database]. Accessed 8 March 2017. Sentier Research. Household Income Trends. [PDF Document]. Accessed 2 March 2017. Note: All data is converted to be in terms of current (nominal) U.S. Dollars.U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers - (CPI-U), U.S. City Average, All Items, 1982-84=100, Not Seasonally Adjusted. [Online Database]. Accessed 8 March 2017. National Bureau of Economic Research. U.S. Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions. [Online Database]. Accessed 8 March 2017.

03 марта, 12:34

Blockchain-ипотека как стимулятор потребительского спроса

Развитие рынка нецелевых кредитов под залог жилья могло бы снять часть долговой нагрузки с населения. Помочь в этом могут современные технологии

03 марта, 02:31

Fannie Mae: Mortgage Serious Delinquency rate unchanged in January

Fannie Mae reported that the Single-Family Serious Delinquency rate was unchanged at 1.20% in January, from 1.20% in December. The serious delinquency rate is down from 1.55% in January 2016.This ties last month as the lowest serious delinquency rate since March 2008.These are mortgage loans that are "three monthly payments or more past due or in foreclosure".  The Fannie Mae serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 5.59%.Click on graph for larger imageAlthough the rate is declining, the "normal" serious delinquency rate is under 1%.  The Fannie Mae serious delinquency rate has fallen 0.35 percentage points over the last year, and at that rate of improvement, the serious delinquency rate will not be below 1% until later this year.Note: Freddie Mac reported earlier.

Выбор редакции
14 января 2014, 08:56

Профицит бюджета США в декабре достиг рекорда

  Профицит бюджета США в декабре стал рекордным на фоне более высоких налогов на заработную плату, выплат со стороны Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac, а также снижения уровня безработицы. Доходы превысили расходы в прошлом месяце на $53,2 млрд по сравнению с дефицитом на уровне $1,19 млрд в декабре 2012 г., свидетельствуют данные Минфина США. Экономисты, опрошенные Bloomberg, ожидали показатель на уровне $44 млрд. В 2013 г. безработица в стране сократилась на 1,2 процентного пункта до 6,7%, и это самое сильное падение в годовом выражении с 1983 г. Укрепление экономики и увеличение налоговых поступлений позволили сократить дефицит страны в прошлом финансовом году, закончившемся 30 сентября, более чем наполовину: до $680,3 млрд по сравнению с рекордным показателем в $1,42 трлн в 2009 г. "Мы продолжаем видеть улучшение экономических условий, которое в настоящее время отражено в сокращении бюджетного дефицита", - отметил экономист Wells Fargo Securities LLC Майкл Браун. Доходность 10-летних казначейских облигаций снизилась до 2,83%, приблизившись к самому низкому уровню за месяц.  Доходы бюджета составили $283,2 млрд в прошлом месяце по сравнению с $269,5 млрд в декабре 2012 г. Расходы составил $230 млрд по сравнению с $270,7 млрд в прошлом году. В течение первых трех месяцев текущего финансового года дефицит составил $176,3 млрд, тогда как с октября по декабрь 2012 г. показатель составлял $293,3 млрд. Платежи в казну от Fannie Mae и Freddie Mac выросли за год примерно на $34 млрд.

10 мая 2013, 06:16

Про MBS и ипотечные кредиты

Мы совсем как то эту тему забросили, а зря. Все же на этот рынок много завязано. О каких суммах идет речь? Объем ипотечных кредитов (для жилой недвижимости, коммерческой, сельскохозяйственной) составляет 13.1 трлн долл на конец 2012 года. Из этих 13.1 трлн более 9.4 трлн записано на домохозяйства. Под эти кредиты выпускали тоннами всякого MBS’осного шлака, процесс полностью остановился в 2008 году. Сейчас совокупный объем MBS составляет 7.54 трлн, т.е. почти 58% всех ипотечных кредитов было секьюритизировано. На пике зверства было под 70%. Из 7.54 трлн около 80% эмитировано Government-sponsored enterprises (GSE) всякие там fannie mae и freddie mac, остальное остальное на частные структуры. Причем стоит обратить внимание на то, что в 2009 году более 4.4 трлн дефолтных бумаг (!) было изъято из частных структур в пользу государственных. Не будь этого, то все рухнуло. Программа TARP, кредитование ФРС и QE здесь не учитываются.Как это было...Чтобы оценить тенденции и масштабы, то лучше всего на графике.Как видно, процесс сокращения ипотечных кредитов продолжается. Низкие процентные ставки не помогают, кредиты не берут. А выкуп MBS не помогает тем более, т.к. сам процесс выкупа не имеет ни малейшего отношения к способностям и желаниям заемщиков получать кредит. Все, к чему имеет отношение ФРС - это стимуляция дальнейшей активности бангстеров по секьюритизации ипотечных кредитов, но если нет роста кредитов, то и чисто теоретически не может быть никакого роста активности в MBS. Поэтому проблема не в предложении кредитов, т.е не в банках, а в спросе (заемщиках). Нет спроса на кредиты, а банки бы рады опять шарманку запустить.Максимум, что может получиться из этой безумной затеи ФРС - так это провоцирование отрыва башни у бангстеров . С тем, чтобы условия получения займов были столь простыми, что получить займ мог бы любой, кто имеет в активах хотя бы один чупа чупс и половину недопитой банки коки. Возврат к тому, от чего пришли. Ничего этих людей не исправит.Кто держит весь этот мусор?Разумеется больше всех у ФРС – 1 трлн на конец 2012 и 1.15 трлн в настоящий момент. Ни одна структура единолично столько не держит. Это 15% рынка на 2012, к концу 2013 будет держать все 20% рынка. Тем самым это означает, что ценообразование на этом рынке под полным контролем ФРС и дилеров. Проще говоря, вторичного рынка больше не существует.Почти 4.5 трлн у финансовых структур (1.6 трлн коммерческие банки, 350 млрд ипотечные трасты, 347 млрд страховые фонды, 223 млрд пенсионные фонды, 170 млрд у брокеров и так далее).Частный сектор (домохозяйства и корпорации) сократили вложения почти в ноль. Причем домохозяйства по каким то загадочным причинам начали скупать MBS тогда, когда они наиболее активно падали в цене. На тот момент (2007-2008) они были самым крупным покупателем на рынке, нарастив всего за 1.5 года объем MBS на 500 млрд до 1.02 трлн, а потом в период с 2009 по 2010 все продали, когда ФРС запустил QE1Я раньше вам говорил, но повторю. Эта операция была похожа на хорошо спланированный инсайд. Группа лиц инсайдеров и аффилированных лиц с ФРС примерно в конце 2007-середине 2008 знала, что будет неизбежный выкуп MBS со стороны ФРС для поддержания рынка и примерно тогда готовился план по банкротству Лемана. Учитывая, что бумаги продавались с дисконтом, то предположительно через частные счета и некоммерческие организации был проведен выкуп на 300-400 млрд бумаг, которые по рыночной цене не стоили и половину от номинала. А потом продавали по номиналу ФРС, заработав сотни процентов чистой прибыли. Также поступали и дилеры, но в отличие от юридических лиц, физиков и НКО никто проверять не будет, т.к. об этом никто даже не догадывается. Т.е. более, чем вероятно, что на инсайде смогли отмыть через мошеннические схемы более 150 млрд чистой прибыли.Основные выводы1. Роста кредитования нет.2. Эмиссии MBS нет, т.к. нет роста кредитования.3. Рынок MBS под полным контролем ФРС и дилеров. Еще никогда в истории одна структура не держала такую долю рынка. 15% на 2012 и 20% на конец 2013. Вторичного рынка больше не существует в свободном формате. Цены регулируются ФРС.4. ФРС частная лавочка бангстеров и инсайдеров, которая действует прежде всего в интересах бангстеров и инсайдеров.5. По множеству косвенных и прямых признаков, инсайд о вероятном запуске QE1 был еще в начале 2008 года. Много подозрительных теневых операций по переброски средств в НКО. Откуда у НКО пол триллиона баксов, которые выкупали это говно в момент острой паники и краха. По моим оценка отмыли не менее 150 млрд чистой прибыли.6. Когда MBS в объеме не увеличиваются, а ФРС выкупает под 40 млрд в месяц + когда ФРС монетизирует гос.долг США, то избыточная ликвидность абсорбируется на рынке акций. Реципиентом являются дилеры – те, кто работает с ФРС и получает ликвидность от ФРС. НЕ нужно питать иллюзий, что рост фондового рынка чем то фундаментально обоснован. Очередная гнусная операция по перекачки ликвидности и поддержанию рентабельности фин.сектора в условиях, когда активность клиентов спала на рекордно низкий уровень. Не будет QE = не будет роста рынка.7. Единственной хорошей новостью является то, что этот бардак выходит на финишную прямую. Когда они сосредоточили в руках почти всю возможную власть и активы, то прорыв этого чуда-юда неизбежен. Учитывая то, насколько все ухудшилось за последний год, то ждать осталось не так и долго. Еще никогда контроль над активыми не был столь тотальным и всеобъемлющим.Более детальная таблица держателей MBS

25 сентября 2012, 13:50

ФРС может расширить список выкупаемых активов

Федеральная резервная система может увеличить объемы и расширить список активов, выкупаемых в рамках проведения третей программы количественного смягчения. Об этом заявил президент Федерального резервного банка Сан-Франциско Джон Уильямс.Такие действия возможны в ответ на слабую реакцию экономики США на текущий формат стимулирования экономики."В отличие от наших прошлых программ по выкупу активов у этой нет заранее определенной даты завершения. Вместо этого она напрямую привязана к тому, что происходит с экономикой. Мы можем даже расширить наши покупки, с тем чтобы включить в них другие активы", - заявил Уильямс.Уильямс также отметил, что хоть и согласно мандату ФРС список бумаг, который может быть на балансе регулятора, ограничен, однако все еще есть возможность выкупа казначейских облигаций всех сроков обращения, долговых обязательств ипотечных агентств Freddie Mac и Fannie Mae.Помимо этого, Уильямс также ожидает продления сроков программы "Твист". "Я ожидаю, что мы продолжим эту программу в 2013 году, и я также думаю, что существуют сильные предпосылки для увеличения объемов или продолжения выкупа других активов в 2013 году, включая Treasuries с более длительными сроками обращения", - отметил Уильямс.По прогнозам представителя регулятора, ФРС удастся добиться снижения безработицы до 7,25% уже в 2014 г., поэтому программа выкупа активов будет завершена до конца 2014 г.