<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Shiller: Expect 5 Years of Stagnant Home Prices</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/</link>
	<description>Macro Perspective on the Capital Markets, Economy, Geopolitics, Technology, and Digital Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 23:17:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DiggidyDan</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221563</link>
		<dc:creator>DiggidyDan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 23:21:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221563</guid>
		<description>@LB and Thor:

The truest happiness he said, lay in working hard and living fugally. Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer–except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs.

“Comrades!” cried an eager youthful voice, “attention, comrades! We have glorious news for you. We have won the battle for production! Returns now completed of the output of all classes of consumption goods show that the standard of living has risen by no less than twenty per cent over the past year.. . .”

“Under the spreading chesnut tree
I sold you and you sold me:
There lie they, and here lie we
Under the spreading Chestnut Tree.”

See: http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/10-for-tuesday/#comment-203094

Welcome to Red October, The Second Worst W America has Ever Seen&#153;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@LB and Thor:</p>
<p>The truest happiness he said, lay in working hard and living fugally. Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer–except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs.</p>
<p>“Comrades!” cried an eager youthful voice, “attention, comrades! We have glorious news for you. We have won the battle for production! Returns now completed of the output of all classes of consumption goods show that the standard of living has risen by no less than twenty per cent over the past year.. . .”</p>
<p>“Under the spreading chesnut tree<br />
I sold you and you sold me:<br />
There lie they, and here lie we<br />
Under the spreading Chestnut Tree.”</p>
<p>See: <a href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/10-for-tuesday/#comment-203094" rel="nofollow">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/08/10-for-tuesday/#comment-203094</a></p>
<p>Welcome to Red October, The Second Worst W America has Ever Seen&#8482;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shnaps</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221509</link>
		<dc:creator>Shnaps</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 22:05:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221509</guid>
		<description>@tm2mc your bank doesn&#039;t have to market their REOs on their website, they can certainly sit on them and lose more money via holding costs, taxes, etc. for as long as they want to.  But they would be in clear violation of accounting rules if they hadn&#039;t realized the loss at the time the property was taken as an REO asset. About a year ago, the FDIC &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2008/fil08062a.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;reiterated guidance&lt;/a&gt; on how to account for REOs (or as they call it, ORE ).  The key point being &lt;/b&gt;you are supposed to realize the hit between your loan balance and the fair market value of the property the day you take title&lt;/b&gt;.   So letting your REO inventory sit around in a declining /stagnant market only results in further loss.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@tm2mc your bank doesn&#8217;t have to market their REOs on their website, they can certainly sit on them and lose more money via holding costs, taxes, etc. for as long as they want to.  But they would be in clear violation of accounting rules if they hadn&#8217;t realized the loss at the time the property was taken as an REO asset. About a year ago, the FDIC <a href="http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2008/fil08062a.html" rel="nofollow">reiterated guidance</a> on how to account for REOs (or as they call it, ORE ).  The key point being you are supposed to realize the hit between your loan balance and the fair market value of the property the day you take title.   So letting your REO inventory sit around in a declining /stagnant market only results in further loss.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mannwich</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221483</link>
		<dc:creator>Mannwich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:24:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221483</guid>
		<description>@Douglas:  And just as I figured - all those &quot;free-loader&quot; states are red states.  Of course they are......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Douglas:  And just as I figured &#8211; all those &#8220;free-loader&#8221; states are red states.  Of course they are&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mannwich</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221482</link>
		<dc:creator>Mannwich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:23:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221482</guid>
		<description>Exactly Douglas.  Thanks for the link.  I figured &quot;flipspiceland&quot; wouldn&#039;t provide me with any actual data or links to support his assertions.  Why do that when you can just make shit up?  FOX News does it all the time and it seems to work just fine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly Douglas.  Thanks for the link.  I figured &#8220;flipspiceland&#8221; wouldn&#8217;t provide me with any actual data or links to support his assertions.  Why do that when you can just make shit up?  FOX News does it all the time and it seems to work just fine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Douglas Watts</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221467</link>
		<dc:creator>Douglas Watts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:02:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221467</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Boston and Mass. generally aree better off because that dead politician Teddy Kennedy like his sycophantic succubus in West Va., Byrd, have swiped money from the rest of the Country’s taxpayers.

In other words, they are heavily subsidized by the rest of us in the other 48 states.

And that’s the truth.&lt;/i&gt;
----

Err ... no. In federal dollars spent per dollar of taxes paid, in 2005 Massachusetts taxpayers received only 82 cents in federal funding for every dollar they contributed to the federal budget. Massachusetts is 40th among states in federal spending received per dollar of taxes paid by the state. The largest freeloaders on the federal weal are New Mexico ($2.03 received for every $1 contributed), followed by Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana and West Virginia.

Source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Boston and Mass. generally aree better off because that dead politician Teddy Kennedy like his sycophantic succubus in West Va., Byrd, have swiped money from the rest of the Country’s taxpayers.</p>
<p>In other words, they are heavily subsidized by the rest of us in the other 48 states.</p>
<p>And that’s the truth.</i><br />
&#8212;-</p>
<p>Err &#8230; no. In federal dollars spent per dollar of taxes paid, in 2005 Massachusetts taxpayers received only 82 cents in federal funding for every dollar they contributed to the federal budget. Massachusetts is 40th among states in federal spending received per dollar of taxes paid by the state. The largest freeloaders on the federal weal are New Mexico ($2.03 received for every $1 contributed), followed by Mississippi, Alaska, Louisiana and West Virginia.</p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mannwich</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221443</link>
		<dc:creator>Mannwich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:24:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221443</guid>
		<description>@flipspiceland:  Links and/or data to back up that assertion, please?  I&#039;m quite sure that states like MA and NY send far more to the Feds to dole out to other small states than they receive per capita, but I may be wrong.  Please prove me wrong with some facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@flipspiceland:  Links and/or data to back up that assertion, please?  I&#8217;m quite sure that states like MA and NY send far more to the Feds to dole out to other small states than they receive per capita, but I may be wrong.  Please prove me wrong with some facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: flipspiceland</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221438</link>
		<dc:creator>flipspiceland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221438</guid>
		<description>Boston and Mass. generally aree better off because that dead politician Teddy Kennedy like his sycophantic succubus in West Va., Byrd, have swiped money from the rest of the Country&#039;s taxpayers.

In other words, they are heavily subsidized by the rest of us in the other 48 states. 

And that&#039;s the truth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Boston and Mass. generally aree better off because that dead politician Teddy Kennedy like his sycophantic succubus in West Va., Byrd, have swiped money from the rest of the Country&#8217;s taxpayers.</p>
<p>In other words, they are heavily subsidized by the rest of us in the other 48 states. </p>
<p>And that&#8217;s the truth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: flipspiceland</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221432</link>
		<dc:creator>flipspiceland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221432</guid>
		<description>The metaphor is a huge mistake.


How is it possible that a bubble can only half- burst?

The search begins for a far more accurate descriptor because as is becoming quite clear, the bubbles have a lot more empty air to lose.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The metaphor is a huge mistake.</p>
<p>How is it possible that a bubble can only half- burst?</p>
<p>The search begins for a far more accurate descriptor because as is becoming quite clear, the bubbles have a lot more empty air to lose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: call me ahab</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-2/#comment-221429</link>
		<dc:creator>call me ahab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221429</guid>
		<description>Thor says-

&quot;I know this is an unpopular opinion but I think China is more dependent on us than we are on them. &quot;

?????

who said it&#039;s unpopular????  the whole decoupling nonsense is fanatsy-  and those who say EM are the place to be-  very high risk in that assumption</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thor says-</p>
<p>&#8220;I know this is an unpopular opinion but I think China is more dependent on us than we are on them. &#8221;</p>
<p>?????</p>
<p>who said it&#8217;s unpopular????  the whole decoupling nonsense is fanatsy-  and those who say EM are the place to be-  very high risk in that assumption</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thor</title>
		<link>http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10/shiller-expect-5-years-of-stagnant-home-prices/comment-page-1/#comment-221424</link>
		<dc:creator>Thor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/?p=39857#comment-221424</guid>
		<description>HCF - sorry, I&#039;m not so good with &quot;The Memory&quot;, I forget who I debate with :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>HCF &#8211; sorry, I&#8217;m not so good with &#8220;The Memory&#8221;, I forget who I debate with :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

