Now that it’s clear that millions of Americans have been or are about to be evicted from their homes through no fault of their own, and that many of the foreclosure documents were forged by banks, no one should buy a foreclosed home.
Eviction of the Vulture
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
35 Comments. Leave new
So in a market like Lansing, Michigan, where 25% of the homes on the market are foreclosures…that pretty much kills the housing market recovery thing even more…..great…..it gets better!!!
I really can’t wait to see what solutions the Republicans have in mind.
The goal is to remove the US housing stock from the ownership of those who are not landed gentry by birth. Some members of the middle classes have tried to get in and buy homes for pennies on the dollar. These purchases must be declared invalid and the monies forfeited, so all the housing stock will end up where it belongs: owned by the gentry and rented to the lower
and middleclasses.I really can’t wait to see what solutions the Republicans have in mind.
Prosecute anyone who forged documents?
Michael, you make no sense. Here’s the deal: the real estate market is headed for a nose dive that will make 2008 look like small potatoes. Not that you will ever hear that from Bernanke, or they Keynesian court economists. All the while Ohbummer will keep on pretending “recovery” is on the way.
On the other hand, Germany, which solemnly ignore Dr. Krugman’s admonitions, and tightened its belt, is on its way to real recovery.
The housing market is nothing compared to the real disaster awaiting us. we are currently monetizing our own debt. If we keep this up, eventually hyperinflation will rear it’s ugly head. Or you can just ignore it, and rant about “teabaggers”.
If we’d do a proper Keyensian stimulus instead of wasting money on non stimulatory things like reducing taxes on the already obscenely wealthy, the economy would recover just fine, and we’d improve our infrastructure to boot. In fact, the economy would recover so much we’d be able to stop monetizing our debt.
But as that would be actually good for the country, the Republicans and their uninformed supporters will never allow it to happen.
As for Germany, their “recovery” is already slowing, and will likely die next year. Austerity would be twice the disaster over here that its turning out to be over there.
Keyensian economics. Its been proven time and time again to be the only set of economic policies that works to benefit every9one, not just a tiny section of the already obscenely wealthy.
Whimsy, we’ll see about that next year, but if you are a true Keynesian, you’d have forgotten it by then. Of course, it’s been working wonders for the US now!
Oh, one other thing: it’s really telling when you commies use language like “obscenely wealthy.” To my mind, extreme poverty is what’s obscene rather than wealth per se. Then again, you’re concerned about obliterating wealth and making everyone equally poor, instead of allowing everyone to prosper.
We haven’t even tried a TRUE Keyensian policy. The Republicans have so corrupted the debate that we can’t even pass a recovery that doesn’t contain wasteful, non-stimulatory tax cuts.
And those hoarding too much extreme wealth is just as obscene as (and one of the leading causes of) extreme poverty. The rest of your comment is specious nonsense.
I really can’t wait to see what solutions the Republicans have in mind.
Prosecute anyone who forged documents?
Right, Route…hold your breath for that one…no really, please do….when I look delusional up in my dictionary….it says US 395 on Rall’s blog
Aggie,
How would a rise in house prices equate to recovery? If the goal of the economy is meeting material needs, then lower housing prices would be a good sign. The gentleman holding a rat in Mr. Rall’s cartoon looks like he could use some low cost housing. If you’re buying a house to live in it, low prices are good. If you already own a house that you plan to live in, price of a new one is irrelevant. People bemoaning money lost on houses are just sore losers who willing played and lost a Bourgeoisie game.
Whimiscal,
Rich people hoarding wealth is not the problem. No wealthy person is really swims in a vault of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck. The problem has more to do with the rich using their control of wealth to direct economic activity overseas. All that’s left in the US are opportunities for the heirs, the very talented, and the super specialized or some combination of the three.
But as that would be actually good for the country, the Republicans and their uninformed supporters will never allow it to happen. Republicans cannot do anything. Democrats control congress.
Aggie,
The Republicans cannot prosecute anyone. The Justice Dept is held by Democrats. This is not problem waiting for a solution. There are currently existing laws regarding fraud and forgery.
To my mind, extreme poverty is what’s obscene rather than wealth per se. Then again, you’re concerned about obliterating wealth and making everyone equally poor, instead of allowing everyone to prosper.
I believe wealth (like everything) is subject to the laws of physics. It cannot be created or destroyed, as your economic sophists would have us believe.
But I am but a child of the enlightenment.
oops. bottom paragraph was mine. the one above is Bucephalus’
Oleg,
Wealth can be created and destroyed. If wealth could not be created, the world would be no more wealthy than it was 200 years ago.
it isn’t
Actually there is. One of the ways wealth is created is through the Bank Multiplier Effect. Depending on the current regulations, a $100 deposit can become $500 in lent money. The Multiplier Effect works great as long as currency (root: current) keeps moving. Once money freezes things begin to fall apart. That’s where we are right now.
Billy Mac, you’re right on the money. I’d add one other thing that the rich can do, and do quite often: buy favor from politicians left and right to keep competition at bay. This is way more anti-social than the mythical hoarding of gold coins in the Money Bin.
I believe wealth (like everything) is subject to the laws of physics.
Angelo, you can probably start your own school of economics, at odds with all others, be it Austrian, Chicago, Keynesian, Marxian what have you. Let me sum it up thusly: even though we live in a limited universe, with limited resources (for arguments’ sake: the universe is quite big), human creativity and imagination is not so limited. And that’s how wealth is created: through human inventiveness.
Another way wealth is created: I purchase goods from various companies. I assemble those goods and sell the end product to businesses at a higher price. I’ve made a profit for myself and provided a product and service businesses can use to increase their profits.
Buceph, Its not really a new idea. I think mercantilism covers it. The emphasis on physics is my own, though I doubt I’m alone in today’s science-obsessed world. So call this neomercantilism, if you like. Or perhaps Physical Economics. Better yet, Real Economics.
I’m okay with inventiveness and creativity, but I will never attempt to operate ouside the laws of physiscs when it comes to things in the physical world (eg. economic wealth).
US395,
Right, or a socialist work program that that takes taxes and pays workers to build roads (eg. US Route 395). It seems like wealth is being created, but, infact, it’s all a lie. It’s a big imaginary bubble that has a nasty tendency to pop. Profit is not an act of creation, it is an act of appropriation. Taxation and redistributive action is also neither creation nor destruction. Appropriation is the name of the game.
Welcome to Real Economics. I am your instructor. Any student caught engaging in physical sophistry will receive an F.
Right, or a socialist work program that that takes taxes and pays workers to build roads (eg. US Route 395). It seems like wealth is being created No, it doesn’t seem like wealth is being created. And taxation is not the same as wealth creation or profit.
Would you not consider your namesake road a form of wealth? Perhaps your father or grandfather was one of the guys who was able to support his children on the US 395 project in the 20s.
Oleg, you seem to be focused on my user name. So I’ll take the bait. Taking money from one taxpayer and giving it to another does not create wealth. It transfer’s wealth.
A+
congratulations. You synthesized what I posted in your own words. Taxation and redistribution is not wealth creation. Wealth only changes form. It cannot be created or destroyed. The total wealth in a closed system (eg. The Real World, the Universe) remains constant.
I know what you are thinking. “I can think of some instance where wealth is being created”. There are still people who insist that perpetual motion machines exist. Those people have more of a case than you, because they can point to the sun and say “Sure, it’s not creating energy, but it might as well be”. Unfortunately, this kind of reasoneering will not work for an believer of modern economics because his concept of wealth is based on comparative advantage.
Angelo, economics is not physics, and it’s not a ‘hard’ science, no matter how deluded Keynesians and monetarists seem to be. Transformation of raw materials may not increase the total mass of the final product (quite the contrary), but it increases its value. Value is not measureable by our senses, as you probably know. Good luck getting your “theory” through academia, though, if you ever want to pursue a career in economics. Which I would strongly advise against.
oleg,
I gave you examples of where wealth is created. Building roads is not one of them.
Here is another way wealth is created. Tom purchases a home for $500,000. in two years, hos home is appraised at $750,000. He takes out a 2nd for $250,000. $250,000 of wealth has been created.
Highway, Highway, Highway- You’re more clueless than you look. Democrats haven’t controlled Congress since Early 2010.
So Republicans and their clueless, uninformed supporters (some of whom have a (D) after their name) decided that crashing the country instead of actually trying to solve the country’s problems was their route back to political power.
McConnell even admitted it, saying the Republicans most important goal was “to make sure Obama is a one term President”. Says a lot about what Republicans value, and it’s not the country.
bucephalis,
Economists are more like theologians than scientists. They’re seekers of truth, but they’re only concerned with determining the logical conclusions that follow from their beliefs. They don’t care to determine whether their beliefs accurately describe anything in the real world. There are Austrian, Keynesian, Marxist, classical, and many other flavors of economists who all see the world completely differently. This state of affairs can’t be compared to science; physicians don’t believe in different forms of Germ theory and competent mathematicians don’t have radically different notions of how calculus works.
The truth seeking process of economists is OK for determining what happens when you leave this world, but its horrible for making predictions about what happens on it. We’re in an economic recovery because we made a burnt offering of trillions of dollars on the altar of supply side economics. Damn the actual data, we followed the dictates of our sitting economic priesthood, so the rains must come.
Democrats haven’t controlled Congress since Early 2010. huh? Last I checked the D’s out number the R’s. The Republicans don’t have the numbers to crash anything.
“Here is another way wealth is created. Tom purchases a home for $500,000. in two years, hos home is appraised at $750,000. He takes out a 2nd for $250,000. $250,000 of wealth has been created.”
change the word ‘created’ to ‘shell-gamed’, and you’ll still pass.
You can call it whatever you like. That $250,000 still spends.
too true.