Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktVital Statistics:
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1416.0 | 0.3 | 0.02% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2588.6 | 6.9 | 0.27% |
| Oil (WTI) | 87.84 | -0.2 | -0.26% |
| LIBOR | 0.311 | 0.000 | 0.00% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 80.26 | 0.055 | 0.07% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 1.60% | -0.01% | |
| RPX Composite Real Estate Index | 191 | -0.2 |
Markets are flattish on a morning with no major news. For the time being, the stock market will react to every new development in the talks. The S&P dropped 7 points yesterday after Boehner came out and cited no progress on the talks. Expect a bumpy ride in the stock market until we reach some sort of resolution. In economic news, Personal income was flat in October and Personal Spending was down .2%. Both numbers were lower than forecast, and were probably affected by Hurricane Sandy.
Obama’s opening demand on the fiscal cliff is basically: new spending, and $1.6 trillion in new taxes. McConnell apparently laughed in Geithner’s face when he presented it. So basically here is the bid / ask: Higher tax rates and lower deductions on the rich, and increased spending vs the Romney Tax Plan. In other words, zero at par.
Business Week has a piece on the shadow inventory. They make a point I have been making that the shadow inventory is getting picked over. They fear that once this glut of houses in disrepair hit the market, they will depress pricing. My point is that they are already on the market, basically going for almost nothing. Just for fun, I looked at some place on Zillow. There are over 2,200 homes in Detroit for $15,000 or lower. 177 in Toledo, OH. 118 in Stockton, 31 in Harrisburg. How are you going to depress these markets further? How many will ever sell? The only thing left is to write them down to zero (which probably has already happened) and move on.
Filed under: Morning Report |
All Things in Moderation 
For the time being, the stock market will react to every new development in the talks.
To underscore that point, there’s this passage from Brent’s WaPo link:
“Financial markets, which in recent weeks have been optimistic about the prospects of a deal to replace the cliff with a less traumatic deficit-reduction plan, were whipsawed by Thursday’s declarations. The Dow Jones Industrial Average took a nose-dive during Boehner’s 11:30 a.m. news conference, dropping nearly 60 points in eight minutes. It closed up nearly 37 points, or 0.3 percent. ”
Whee!
LikeLike
” My point is that they are already on the market, basically going for almost nothing.”
That’s a pretty good theory. For a while in St Paul they were bulldozing houses in severe disrepair. The lots are probably worth more now.
LikeLike
The lots are probably worth more now.
This, along with Brent’s comment, seem right on to me. It’s been a long time since anyone wanted to live in Detroit. For the most part, the people moving into Detroit cannot afford to live anywhere else or they are living in one of the nicer areas. This is true of the young, artistic types that have moved into the city recently. Many people pretend to be moving to Detroit out of some charitable impulse, but if it certainly helps that rent is cheap. The abandoned houses have been around forever and are just part of the landscape. There is nothing, including a rebounding economy, that will result in a bounce back in certain areas of Detroit. Turning the areas into farmland makes the most sense to me.
LikeLike
Can is kicked again:
“German Lawmakers Back Latest Round of Aid for Greece
By MELISSA EDDY
Published: November 30, 2012
LikeLike
Grover Norquist in the libertarian vs authoritarian Republican debate.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/in-defense-of-grover-norquist/
LikeLike
JNC- I’m 33 and I’ve yet to see a libertarian aspect to the Republican party. What I saw from 2001 through 2010 was a President and Congress who spent like crazy without paying for any of it. The author goes back to Reagan to find such a Republican leader, but even Reagan seems like a dubious choice. From my perspective, the libertarian Republican party is as much of a myth as Loch Ness. So the authoritarian bend and lack of fiscal responsibility leads me to a preference for the Democratic Party. However, as the author points out, Obama has not exactly been a great civil liberties candidate. Uggghh.
LikeLike
The author acknowledges that.
“The kind of low tax, minimal spending, limited government Norquist advocates hasn’t actually existed or been promoted within the GOP for a very long time.”
Having said that, a lot of Reagan’s original critique of government in the 1960’s and 1970’s was from the libertarian side.
http://reason.com/archives/1975/07/01/inside-ronald-reagan
LikeLike
Tom Goldstein at SCOTUSblog makes the case that the DOMA cases discussed in conference today may be the most important cases that these 9 Justices will ever decide.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/11/history/
LikeLike
I think DOMA is the only matter they might hear. Assume the law of marriage is not addressed by the Constitution but is left to the states except where an invidious discrimination with no rational basis is alleged and proved. I think this Court can assume that there is a rational basis for discriminating against homosexual marriage, and thus not overturn state prohibitions or state permissions. But can it allow the federal government to then fail to recognize a marriage justified under state law?
At some time in the future I think a hypothetical Court might decide that there is no rational basis for discriminating against a homosexual marriage, but, frankly, there is a rational basis, tenuous as it may seem. As we know, a rational basis doesn’t have to be more than a single small element of immutable fact.
I think the states will render this core issue moot in ten years. I think the Court will wait. But on DOMA, states’ place in the federal system seems to demand that Congress cannot treat a marriage lawful within a state as unlawful or unrecognized by the federal government. Or so it seems to me.
Then, later, we will come to the point where MA recognizes homosexual marriage but TX says it is against public policy, and a MA marriage comes before a TX divorce court, that has jurisdiction because one MA spouse and the adopted minor kid live in TX. When the TX court dismisses the divorce action because it says it cannot adjudicate a marriage that is against the public policy of TX, what is the recourse? I suspect the TX court would sever the custody matter and hear it as a matter of interstate compact law, but are there constitutional implications? Not now. I think the Court will strive mightily not to overstate any DOMA decision so that states are still free to decide these issues for themselves.
LikeLike
As I understand it, DOMA allows states not to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states which seems to be a straight up violation of Full Faith and Credit.
They can toss DOMA on narrow grounds if they want.
LikeLike
yes, but:
full faith and credit has an exception for public policy. Thus TX does not have to recognize a NV gambling debt, enforceable in NV, to the point it can look behind a NV judgment on the debt and not enforce it.
I am addressing the point that I think the Supremes will be careful to allow the states to use their public policy arguments as an exception to FF&C.
LikeLike
Mark – I believe such a case has already come before Virginia courts. Ah, here we go:
http://www.fredericksburgfamilylaw.com/blog/2012/08/international-kidnapping-at-issue-in-heated-child-custody-dispute.shtml
If marriage is a state matter and federal tax law recognizes marriage, then DOMA is a serious incursion on states’ rights. Well, that and it has an idiotic name. It’s more like the DOGALMA (Disregarding of Gay And Lesbian Marriages Act).
BB
LikeLike