SI
SI
discoversearch

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 Residential Real Estate Post-Crash Index-Moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (14391)3/29/2011 1:42:12 PM
From: bentway  Respond to of 119360
 
"I wish we could have stopped it back in 2003 or 2004 when it was obvious to everyone on the original housing bust thread."

I'd already nervously cashed out by then, selling my CA house for 5x it's mortgage value, with advice from this thread. I was a little early for catching the bubble peak, but not regretful now. Better a little early than forever late!



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (14391)3/29/2011 1:45:34 PM
From: bentway  Respond to of 119360
 
Libyan Rebels Aim to Revive Oil Exports

By CLIFFORD KRAUSS
nytimes.com
( Oil prices may correct soon. Or, Saudi Arabia could go, and Katy bar the door..)

HOUSTON — After seizing control of critical oil fields and terminals in eastern Libya over the weekend, Libyan rebels are now trying to sell oil in international markets, potentially raising hundreds of millions of dollars to buy weapons and supplies.

Oil industry officials, echoing claims made by a rebel leader, said Monday that they believed that Qatar had agreed to buy oil offered by the rebels and planned to ship it in leased tankers.

The Qatari government has not commented on the oil sales, but on Monday, Qatar became the first Arab country to formally recognize the legitimacy of the rebels as representatives of Libya. In addition, the recent military advances by the rebels were made possible by allied air support as well as critical logistical commitments from Qatar.

“There clearly appears to be some coordination, and money can buy you a lot,” said Michael A. Levi, a senior fellow for energy and the environment at the Council on Foreign Relations. “My guess is this will be more consequential for the conflict than for the oil markets.”

Over the last few days, the rebels have seized several towns with important oil installations that they said would enable them to produce and export crude. Although there is concern that the rebel advance may prove to be fleeting, oil traders responded to their victories by pushing down the price of most world oil benchmarks, albeit modestly.

On Monday, the price of the benchmark United States crude oil, West Texas Intermediate, fell by $1.48 a barrel, or 1.4 percent, to $103.92. The benchmark is 7.3 percent higher than it was a month ago, and 30 percent higher than a year ago.

Although the Libyan government faces global economic sanctions and asset freezes, an official at the Treasury Department said that the United States would not seek to block oil sales by the rebels if they could prove the money was not going to any Libyan government authority, the national oil company or the Qaddafi family.

“Everything owned by or controlled by the government of Libya is subject to sanctions,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because no official determination had been made about the proposed oil sales. “Anything that is not is not governed by U.S. sanctions.”

According to news reports, the rebels claimed they would be able to produce up to 130,000 barrels of crude a day, less than a tenth of what Libya exported before turmoil erupted last month.

But they also have access to millions of barrels stored in coastal oil terminals, which have been effectively closed to tanker traffic during the conflict. The rebels now control all five eastern oil export terminals, including Es Sider, Ras Lanuf and Zueitina, roughly two-thirds of the country’s export capacity and a majority of its production and refining capacity, according to a research note by the Eurasia Group, a consultancy firm.

Francois Gauthier, the Algeria country manager for the Italian energy company Enel, estimated that there could be as many as two million barrels of oil stored in just one rebel-controlled oil port, Tobruk, that could be exported quickly. At an estimated sale price of $100 a barrel, selling the oil in Tobruk could raise as much as $200 million, although the rebels would probably have to share the funds with Western oil companies that co-own the leases on the fields.

“It’s a lot of cash, but it won’t solve all of their problems over the long run,” Mr. Gauthier said.

Libyan oil is particularly valued on world markets because it is high quality, needs little refining and is particularly well suited for European diesel markets.

With allied planes and naval vessels patrolling the area, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi could be powerless to stop tankers from sailing into and out of Tobruk and other rebel-held ports. However, forces loyal to Colonel Qaddafi could still sabotage critical pumping equipment needed to transport oil from the fields to the ports.

The rebels already have their own oil company, Agoco, which is based in rebel-held Benghazi and broke away from the main national oil company early in the conflict. Agoco controls fields that represent 40 percent of the country’s 1.6 million barrels a day of output and operates an oil terminal and refinery in Tobruk.

Aside from a few refinery storage tanks, little of Libya’s oil infrastructure has been damaged in the fighting so far. The pumps, hoses, metering, docks and storage tanks at the ports are intact, and the oil fields are ready to be pumped by local oil workers, according to oil experts.

“It’s only a question of flipping switches,” said Michael C. Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research, a consultancy firm.

Details of the dealings between the rebels and the Qataris remain unclear, but several oil industry experts said the Qataris or the United Nations could place money from any Libyan oil sales in an escrow fund that would later reimburse Italian, French, Spanish and American oil companies that have investments in the Libyan oil fields. Those companies include Eni, Repsol, Total and Occidental Petroleum.

“The companies’ attitude may be ‘Don’t worry, we’ll settle up later,’ ” said Mr. Lynch, who has broad experience in international oil markets. “This is a good way for the companies to get on the rebels’ good side.”



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (14391)3/29/2011 1:55:54 PM
From: John Vosilla  Respond to of 119360
 
Actually prices starting to rise in select submarkets of FL.

Message 27260345



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (14391)3/30/2011 11:52:34 AM
From: Arran Yuan6 Recommendations  Respond to of 119360
 
Both of you two are astute observers, generous sharers, critical thinkers who handle steamy arguments in civilized manner. I learned so much from you, and very much appreciate your generosity.



To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (14391)4/5/2011 12:42:58 PM
From: stockman_scott1 Recommendation  Respond to of 119360
 
Why We Must Raise Taxes on the Rich
______________________________________________________________

By Robert Reich

05 April 2011 -- It's tax time. It's also a time when right-wing Republicans are setting the agenda for massive spending cuts that will hurt most Americans.

Here's the truth: The only way America can reduce the long-term budget deficit, maintain vital services, protect Social Security and Medicare, invest more in education and infrastructure, and not raise taxes on the working middle class is by raising taxes on the super rich.

Even if we got rid of corporate welfare subsidies for big oil, big agriculture, and big Pharma - even if we cut back on our bloated defense budget - it wouldn't be nearly enough.

The vast majority of Americans can't afford to pay more. Despite an economy that's twice as large as it was thirty years ago, the bottom 90 percent are still stuck in the mud. If they're employed they're earning on average only about $280 more a year than thirty years ago, adjusted for inflation. That's less than a 1 percent gain over more than a third of a century. (Families are doing somewhat better but that's only because so many families now have to rely on two incomes.)

Yet even as their share of the nation's total income has withered, the tax burden on the middle has grown. Today's working and middle-class taxpayers are shelling out a bigger chunk of income in payroll taxes, sales taxes, and property taxes than thirty years ago.

It's just the opposite for super rich.

The top 1 percent's share of national income has doubled over the past three decades (from 10 percent in 1981 to well over 20 percent now). The richest one-tenth of 1 percent's share has tripled. And they're doing better than ever. According to a new analysis by the Wall Street Journal, total compensation and benefits at publicly-traded Wall Street banks and securities firms hit a record in 2010 - $135 billion. That's up 5.7 percent from 2009.

Yet, remarkably, taxes on the top have plummeted. From the 1940s until 1980, the top tax income tax rate on the highest earners in America was at least 70 percent. In the 1950s, it was 91 percent. Now it's 35 percent. Even if you include deductions and credits, the rich are now paying a far lower share of their incomes in taxes than at any time since World War II.

The estate tax (which only hits the top 2 percent) has also been slashed. In 2000 it was 55 percent and kicked in after $1 million. Today it's 35 percent and kicks in at $5 million. Capital gains - comprising most of the income of the super-rich - were taxed at 35 percent in the late 1980s. They're now taxed at 15 percent.

If the rich were taxed at the same rates they were half a century ago, they'd be paying in over $350 billion more this year alone, which translates into trillions over the next decade. That's enough to accomplish everything the nation needs while also reducing future deficits.

If we also cut what we don't need (corporate welfare and bloated defense), taxes could be reduced for everyone earning under $80,000, too. And with a single payer health-care system - Medicare for all - instead of a gaggle of for-profit providers, the nation could save billions more.

Yes, the rich will find ways to avoid paying more taxes courtesy of clever accountants and tax attorneys. But this has always been the case regardless of where the tax rate is set. That's why the government should aim high. (During the 1950s, when the top rate was 91 percent, the rich exploited loopholes and deductions that as a practical matter reduced the effective top rate 50 to 60 percent - still substantial by today's standards.)

And yes, some of the super rich will move their money to the Cayman Islands and other tax shelters. But paying taxes is a central obligation of citizenship, and those who take their money abroad in an effort to avoid paying American taxes should lose their American citizenship.

But don't the super-rich have enough political power to kill any attempt to get them to pay their fair share? Only if we let them. Here's the issue around which Progressives, populists on the right and left, unionized workers, and all other working people who are just plain fed up ought to be able to unite.

Besides, the reason we have a Democrat in the White House - indeed, the reason we have a Democratic Party at all - is to try to rebalance the economy exactly this way.

All the President has to do is connect the dots - the explosion of income and wealth among America's super-rich, the dramatic drop in their tax rates, the consequential devastating budget squeezes in Washington and in state capitals, and the slashing of vital public services for the middle class and the poor.

This shouldn't be difficult. Most Americans are on the receiving end. By now they know trickle-down economics is a lie. And they sense the dice are loaded in favor of the multi-millionaires and billionaires, and their corporations, now paying a relative pittance in taxes.

The President has the bully pulpit. But will he use it?

*Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.