NPR Planet Money wrote:In previous postwar recoveries, the number of jobs was about 7 percent above its previous peak by this point, on average.
In other words, if this had been a typical recession and recovery, the U.S. economy would now have roughly 10 million more jobs than it did at the previous peak. In fact, there are now three million fewer jobs.
I do, and I miss Tanta's real estate musings. Great site, but I liked it more a few years ago.Joe Shlabotnik wrote:Jack, do you read Calculated Risk? I've been a fan since Tanta was a member of the commentariat. Bill McBride is the real deal.
Agreed. I got as much from the comments during the height of the bubble and crash as I did from the postings. The comments are unreadable today IMO.JackofDiamonds wrote:I do, and I miss Tanta's real estate musings. Great site, but I liked it more a few years ago.Joe Shlabotnik wrote:Jack, do you read Calculated Risk? I've been a fan since Tanta was a member of the commentariat. Bill McBride is the real deal.
I've stopped going to the site all together, only read the posts through an RSS reader now.Joe Shlabotnik wrote:Agreed. I got as much from the comments during the height of the bubble and crash as I did from the postings. The comments are unreadable today IMO.JackofDiamonds wrote:I do, and I miss Tanta's real estate musings. Great site, but I liked it more a few years ago.Joe Shlabotnik wrote:Jack, do you read Calculated Risk? I've been a fan since Tanta was a member of the commentariat. Bill McBride is the real deal.
They're not talking about CDOs or CDSs here. CDOs are basically the equivalent to ETFs; they're roughly baskets of bonds, or baskets full of pieces of bonds. Mortgage or bond insurance is similar to a CDS, but a CDS is little more than a bet on whether somebody will go bankrupt. In theory these insurers can do underwriting, and unlike a straight bet, that really can add value by identifying fraud and the financial equivalent to pre-existing conditions. Of course "in theory" is doing a lot of the lifting here, because most (probably all) of the bond insurance industry stopped doing any kind of scouting and started to rely solely on spreadsheets. Spreadsheets are a lot faster and a lot cheaper than sending somebody to Florida and Arizona to verify that the houses with these mortgages are actually worth anything.pioneer98 wrote:Someone that knows more about the financial industry please explain why I shouldn't be terrified. They never say it in the article, but aren't we talking about CDO's and CDS's here? The stuff that caused the 2007/2008 meltdown? So is it a good thing or a bad thing that mortgage insurance is coming back? And have any rules been changed in regards to mortgage insurance since 2008?
MGIC raises $1.1 billion amid bets on mortgage insurance
MGIC Investment Corp. (MTG) raised $1.1 billion selling stock and bonds as the insurer bolsters the unprofitable unit that backs home loans.
MGIC sold $450 million in convertible senior notes and 135 million shares of stock for $5.15 apiece, the Milwaukee-based company said late yesterday in a statement. The shares slid 7.8 percent to $5.17 at 9:41 a.m. in New York. They closed at $5.34 on March 5, before MGIC said it was offering shares.
Chief Executive Officer Curt Culver, 60, is raising cash after a measure of risk relative to capital exceeded limits set by some regulators. MGIC is benefiting as investors bet mortgage insurers can sell profitable coverage as real estate prices rebound and the U.S. reduces its role in the housing market.
“There seems to be a broad consensus from both parties in Washington that the federal government needs to continue to reduce its role in the mortgage markets, making room for sources of private capital like the mortgage-insurance industry,” Mark DeVries, an analyst at Barclays Plc, wrote in a note.
Radian Group Inc. (RDN), the largest U.S. mortgage insurer, raised $689 million after commissions and expenses selling shares and notes last week. Shares of the Philadelphia-based firm have advanced 57 percent this year as MGIC has nearly doubled. Arch Capital Group Ltd. (ACGL) reached a $300 million deal last month to buy smortgage-insurance assets from PMI Group Inc. (PPMIQ)
MGIC’s ratio of risk to capital at its main insurance unit was 44.7-to-1 as of Dec. 31, the insurer said Feb. 28, when it reported fourth-quarter results. The measure exceeds the 25-to-1 risk limit set by some state regulators, after the insurer was unprofitable for six straight years. The shares traded for more than $70 in 2006.
Amazing.JackofDiamonds wrote:[/youtube]
Not to pick on you, but I see this all the time. Is the problem that businesses aren't hiring workers or is it that businesses don't need workers? It is weird to say: Businesses rolling in the dough (implying they are doing great), still aren't hiring workers (implying they are doing something wrong).robbotis wrote: These businesses rolling in the dough, still aren't hiring workers.
Can't someone feed data in a computer/create a robot to eliminate the CEO and assorted higher-up whores? Seems like more money is to be saved by cutting the top heavy expenditures.AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:Not to pick on you, but I see this all the time. Is the problem that businesses aren't hiring workers or is it that businesses don't need workers? It is weird to say: Businesses rolling in the dough (implying they are doing great), still aren't hiring workers (implying they are doing something wrong).robbotis wrote: These businesses rolling in the dough, still aren't hiring workers.
Demand/consumers push a business to hire more employees, not profits. Unless the argument is that a business ought to just hire people to do nothing because they can, then I don't get the argument.
Rather it seems the system, overall, has changed and businesses don't need as many workers. How do you bring those jobs back? I don't know.
But, it's tough to blame businesses in general for not hiring people they don't need.