Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis |
Posted: 04 Jun 2011 10:10 PM PDT Bill Gross says QE3 Unlikely Even as Job Growth Slows Pacific Investment Management Co.'s Bill Gross, manager of the world's biggest bond fund, said the Federal Reserve is unlikely to do a third round of quantitative easing even with the economy adding fewer jobs than forecast.Video I concur with Gross about the likelihood of QE3 in the near-term horizon and suggested the same thing in a recent interview on Market Ticker with Aaron Task. The key to that sentence is the phrase "near-term". Right now, the Fed does not want more froth in junk bonds, nor does it want higher commodity prices or $150 crude, especially since QE2 was a miserable failure in producing jobs or reviving housing. However, should the economy enter a sustained downturn, and if commodity prices plunge (giving the Fed some breathing room), it's a given the Fed will try something. Whatever the Fed tries will likely be good for gold. Please see Why I Continue to Like Gold for a video discussion. The problem with Gross's dividend stock play is that it is likely all stocks get hit in another sustained downturn. A 4% yield may be nice, but not if it comes at the expense of a 25% haircut in equity prices. With valuations stretched everywhere one looks, there is a lot to be said for waiting on the sidelines for better opportunities. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
Posted: 04 Jun 2011 11:02 AM PDT In Florida, a couple that paid cash for their home, and never had a mortgage was foreclosed on by Bank of America. It took 18 months to straighten out and Bank of America agreed to pay the legal expenses of the homeowners. When the bank did not pay the couple, they foreclosed on Bank of America. A Judge authorized a deputy to seize desks, copiers, and computers that could be sold to pay the expenses. Please consider Tables Turn: Deputies and movers show up at bank to seize property for homeowner The foreclosure nightmare started when Warren and Maureen Nyerges paid cash for a home owned by Bank of American in the Golden Gate Estates. They never had a mortgage whatsoever. But, the bank fouled it up and wound up issuing a foreclosure through their attorney.Sensational cases like this make all the headlines, but are statistically meaningless, with a bordering on zero percentage. That said, I side with the couple. Indeed I think suing for expenses only is a travesty of justice. Something like $100,000 would be more appropriate. It is preposterous that it would take 18 months to determine there was never a mortgage. Unfortunately, that is how fooked the system is. Alternatively, that is how fooked Bank of America is. Most likely, it's both. That said, two wrongs do not make a right. Letting people live in houses for years without payment is simply wrong. Either MERS is valid or not. Adding to the confusion, differing courts in differing states have ruled differing ways. Fixing the Structural Problems Sadly, I see little effort by anyone in proposing a solution to the mess. States Attorneys General want $17 billion in fines, but how do fines resolve the basic issues at hand? Are big fines justified? Why? How much? I discussed some of the key issues in Foreclosure-Gate Screw Tightens: Banks Face $17 Billion in Suits Over Foreclosures; Common Sense Says $5 Billion is Very Generous I failed to discuss one key issue: recording fees. Cities and counties may be entitled to back fees. I will leave that to the negotiators to decide. To arrive at $17 billion, one would have to do something like charge a $5,000 to $10,000 fine for every missed recording fee. If that math is correct, I find that proposal preposterous. Note: I did not do the math, I read the number in a couple places. I really do not care what the math is, I just want to see it. Once again, I do not object to huge fines for complete blatant stupidity as depicted by Bank of America in the above article. If there are more cases than I think, so be it. The Way Forward First we need to start with a realistic assessment of errors and a breakdown of how serious those errors are. In the above instance, it is clear there was a severe error, and an errors that should have been rectified in 2 days, not 18 months. I do not object to punitive fines in such instances. Second, we need to see a proposal as to what to do about MERS. Instead, I see cases like the above trumped up as if they are common, and I see people clamoring to give homes to people free and clear because of a messed up MERS and "show me the note" objections. The current focus is not on justice, but rather maximum punishment. Those who want the courts to conclude that MERS has clouded every title, better be careful of what they wish. Should that be the ultimate ruling, no one who owns a home that went through the MERS system will currently have a valid title. Want to sell your home? Sorry you can't. Want to buy a home? Sorry, you better not because the title will be clouded. This is serious stuff. If the MERS opponents get their way, Housing in the US would literally shut down. In their desire to punish banks and let people live in their houses for free, few have bothered to figure out the severe consequences on innocent parties who simply want to sell or buy a home. Punishing the banks to the maximum extent possible to slay the evil MERS dragon, consequences be damned, should not be the focus. Instead, we need to determine actual damages before sensible fines can be levied. Meanwhile, and far more importantly, we need to determine what we need to do to fix this mess, determine how to fix or scrap MERS, and do everything we can to get the foreclosure backlog behind us. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List |
You are subscribed to email updates from Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 |