Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ild who wrote (46755)	12/7/2005 9:12:19 AM
From: Ramsey Su	Respond to of 110194

ild, full doc loans and no doc loans were quite different in the old days. W-2s, or tax returns for the most recent 2 years are the most typical documentation supporting income. As you can imagine, many types of borrowers may not fit into this picture. So the no doc loans were born. The original safe guards were plenty and sound, the most important of which was probably LTV had to be 80% or lower. These were the Alt-A loans that were typically big money makers for lenders with probably better performance history than the conformings. Comparing today's low/no doc loans to those of yesteryears is definitely an apple vs orange exercise. There should be very difference in interest rates between a conforming and an no doc loan. It is the LTV and other standards that needs to be tightened.

To: ild who wrote (46755)	12/7/2005 10:19:25 AM
From: redfrecknj	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

I'd argue that most of these so-called banks are really just dressed up marketing operations, selling loans they don't back, with nothing but an empty safe in the office just to give the appearance of security and stature.

To: ild who wrote (46755)	12/7/2005 10:59:29 AM
From: ild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Date: Wed Dec 07 2005 11:46 trotsky (HoldGold, 9:04) ID#248269: Copyright © 2002 trotsky/Kitco Inc. All rights reserved " Summary: Whatever happens, it is good for gold!!!" this theory is bound to shipwreck you one of these days. but it's still instructive that you have put this out there. it really is just a roundabout way of saying 'gold is in a bull market' - in a bull market, all news are bullish, even those that would normally considered to be bearish. conversely, in a bear market, not even the most bullish looking fundamental developments can stop the bear from unfolding. this is also why fundamental analysis is so limited compared to technical analysis. technical analysis is ultimately the analysis of the market's psychology - and market psychology is THE most important 'fundamental' of any market. all other metrics are secondary, although it is of course of great value to be able to forecast future fundamental developments to support one's long term views. in connection with gold, this would for instance be the recognition of the fact that the central banks will continue to print wagon-loads of fiat money in order to keep the global debt-berg from collapsing. it's an exercise in futility, but it sure is good for gold.