Read it again, this time read all of it, then restate it and make sure to blame me for not making it clear enough.

11/1/2010 9:08:34 PM

Ok troll, I'll entertain your sick fantasies. Since you are slow, this is what was stated

Quote :

"It's the potential double counting of mortgages, the allegations that shitty MBSs were created specifically to profit off their blowup via CDS, and a potential forced mark to market event because of all of this."

Specifically

Quote :

"because of all of this."

That is, because of the fraud wrought by robosigners. Multiple state Attorney's General and countless bloggers agree with labeling what has been done as fraud.

It was in response to this

Quote :

"Robo-signers really only sped up foreclosures, they didn't really cause them,"

Whoa dude. Dropping the knowledge on us here.

Quote :

" so they aren't nearly the root of the problem,"

As best I can tell, no one said it was.

Quote :

" just companies cheating to cut corners to deal with the large number of foreclosures and shrinking of staff."

Well, this is where you have your terminology in a clusterfuck. There is cutting corners, which implies negligence but perhaps not fraud, and then there is cheating. The last part about shrinking staff is completely off base as a new cottage industry of law firms popped up specifically to skim their portion of this housing debacle, but this isn't really important. What is important is that affidavits were signed attesting to knowledge of the foreclosure proceedings where those that actually signed them had no knowledge because they had hired untrained underlings (the robos) to do the filling in of the blanks.

I've essentially made the same point that is alluded to though distinctly seperated at your very link

Quote :

"Second, "Foreclosure-Gate" is primarily about "robo-signers". Some people are trying to conflate other sloppy procedures, cost cutting and even MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems) into "Foreclosure-Gate". This is just confusing readers. All of the servicers who have put foreclosures on hold have done so either because they had "robo-signers" or because they wanted to verify that their processes did not use "robo-signers" (or anything similar). There are valid questions about MERS and other "cost cutting" measures - although most reports I've seen are grossly misinformed - but unfortunately it takes time to get that right (I'll write about that at a later date). "

Because it wasn't just dumbasses that couldn't afford their loans (the same people that aren't going to look at the paperwork and certainly not challenge a foreclosure) and it was people who treated default like a business case, we learned of this whole robosign process...which when followed further down the rabbit hole revealed other fraud in the system (possible double counting of mortgages), touched on by CR over a year ago among plenty of other bloggers
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/10/mers-v-kansas.html


I can imagine it's tough to apply all the reading you've done on monetary and economic systems to present day dynamic events which don't really fit in neat boxes. But does us all a favor and stop acting like you're some gift to the discussion here. Everyone is trying to stumble their way through some entertainment and maybe learn something. If you're gonna troll, go back over to 4chan.

11/1/2010 9:51:33 PM

Quote :

"with labeling what has been done as fraud"

That's not the issue. I never took the argument that it was or was not fraud, although that seems to be what you are trying to prove. I asked you to read what I said, not what you said.

Quote :

"As best I can tell, no one said it was."

Again, failure to read.

Fraud has been rampant throughout the housing crisis and banking industry, but any attempt to actually prosecute that fraud will lead to collapse of the system.
- d357r0y3r
Previous page

Quote :

"There is cutting corners, which implies negligence but perhaps not fraud, and then there is cheating. The last part about shrinking staff is completely off base as a new cottage industry of law firms popped up specifically to skim their portion of this housing debacle, but this isn't really important. What is important is that affidavits were signed attesting to knowledge of the foreclosure proceedings where those that actually signed them had no knowledge because they had hired untrained underlings (the robos) to do the filling in of the blanks."

You've more or less just restated my argument with the term "cheating".

Quote :

"does us all a favor and stop acting like you're some gift to the discussion here"

I've never acted as such.

11/1/2010 10:06:10 PM

Nice try. I never said that this fraud was the root the problem. I said that, if prosecuted, it could be a trigger that leads to another bank crisis. The banks are only barely staying "solvent" because we have 0% interest rates. If faced with the possibility having to forfeit what could amount to billions in home loans, or worse, what do you think will happen? TBTFs will either being failing again or the Federal Reserve will intervene. I know you don't believe the latter is a problem, but I assure you it is.

11/1/2010 11:55:57 PM

^^ more trolling, is your life this sad?

11/2/2010 7:01:40 AM

Quote :

"I never said that this fraud was the root the problem."

I never said you did. I simply said they weren't. You did however state that they were substantial enough to cause the "system to collapse", which my article seems to disagree with.

Quote :

"more trolling"

Have my responses ever been less than sincere? What would make you think they are? Are you that closed off to the world that you have trouble believing that people have different opinions than you?

11/2/2010 5:39:35 PM

Quote :

"Have my responses ever been less than sincere"

Yes.

Quote :

"What would make you think they are?"

Wtf responses. If you aren't trolling, you're being purposefully vague in your responses which does nothing for the debate.

Case in point, your reply to destroyer.

You nearly often quote other users, make a thin reference to something, wait for the other user to make a reasonable argument to the vague argument you made, then proceed to pick apart that users argument. It's not outright strawmen you set up, but it might as well be. Ultimately, the debate degenerates into semantics, eg the most recent discussion with Lonesnark about political/econ systems and arguing about Soviet History.

11/2/2010 5:48:39 PM

Quote :

"Wtf responses."

I've been making the same kind of responses for years now.

Quote :

"If you aren't trolling, you're being purposefully vague in your responses which does nothing for the debate."

How so? What part of it was not perfectly clear?

Quote :

"the most recent discussion with Lonesnark about political/econ systems and arguing about Soviet History"

That was no fault of mine, he kept trying to force me into defending a political system he misrepresented.
And If you feel I don't make specific claims, ask me to clarify, but don't just say that I'm "vague", state what you want clarified.

11/2/2010 6:54:12 PM

Quote :

"What part of it was not perfectly clear?"

You in effect said that foreclosures have nothing to do with foreclosures. Or, a part of the banking industry has nothing to do with the banking industry.

When called on this, you play semantic games, claim you're misunderstood, etc.

Look, you win the troll of the board award. Wear it with pride.

11/2/2010 9:04:32 PM

Quote :

"You in effect said that foreclosures have nothing to do with foreclosures. Or, a part of the banking industry has nothing to do with the banking industry."

I'm pretty sure I made this clear, but it seems you're trying to misrepresent me. I was stating that the current robosigner fraud could not cause a "collapse of the system".

If you need something else explained, or if you think I'm backpedaling anything, post it and I will expand.

[Edited on November 2, 2010 at 9:56 PM. Reason : ]

11/2/2010 9:55:20 PM

Quote :

"I was stating that the current robosigner fraud could not cause a "collapse of the system"."

That may have been what was in your head, but like any true troll, it's way easier to post short one line comments in response to bigger blocks of text and let the other side get all huffy and puffy than to lay your argument out in the first place.

What you quoted of me you simply didn't comprehend what you read.

Here we are, having the exact same conversation I said we'd have - an argument on what Kris actually said, and not what he meant, and how everyone else isn't understanding what he said and what he meant were really the same thing It's deja vu all over again.

11/3/2010 7:15:36 AM

Alright enough of that argument

Bill gross speculating on a 20pct decline in the dollarn guess its getting a little more mainstream...

Schiff is just a god of econ I don't know how he does It sometimes

11/3/2010 7:26:04 AM

Common sense and a basic understanding of Austrian economics. His book "How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes" is probably the simplest explanation of why savings, underconsumption, investment, and economic growth are all connected.

11/3/2010 11:19:12 AM

Quote :

"to lay your argument out in the first place."

I did lay it out clearly, however, just like in this thread and others, you failed to read it.

Quote :

"an argument on what Kris actually said"

I don't think we are, and if we are, it's already over, you can check the thread for what I've written. The reason we are having this discussion is because you're a cock jockey who won't stop riding my nuts instead of actually having a real argument.

Quote :

"Schiff is just a god of econ I don't know how he does It sometimes"

He is a broken clock, only right twice a day. You should invest some money in europac if you're that confident in him, or you could get a better return by putting it under your bed and just flushing 3% of it a year down the toilet.

I still wonder if he's trying to outdo his father's record on screwing his followers out of money. I think he's on the track to get there thanks to retards like ^ and ^^.

[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 6:45 PM. Reason : ]

11/3/2010 6:40:18 PM

Quote :

"I did lay it out clearly, however, just like in this thread and others, you failed to read it. "

I see no argument. I see a one line statement that even a retard can see is incorrect. Everything that followed that was you telling us you made the argument when you didn't and us arguing about that instead.

You set destroyed up a strawman, incorrectly labeled his argument, and just have generaly been a douche.

I'd love for you to tell me how robosigners won't lead to new problems for the banks. You can ignore the bill that was quickly written and vetoed that would protect the bnaks and countless professionals who think this will cause another setback for them if you'd like, but ffs support your statement.

[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 6:58 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2010 6:54:29 PM

Quote :

"I'd love for you to tell me how robosigners won't lead to new problems for the banks."

I'd love for you to quote where I said that.

11/3/2010 6:56:28 PM

This was my statement

Quote :

"It's the potential double counting of mortgages, the allegations that shitty MBSs were created specifically to profit off their blowup via CDS, and a potential forced mark to market event because of all of this. "

Since you apparently missed it, that is, the revealing of robo signers has made people take closer looks at the whole process from securitization through foreclosure and because of that we are finding instances of deficiencies (either by mistake or outright fraud) from the beginning.

You quoted that block and then replied:
robosigners have nothing to do with robosigners causing other fraud to be revealed.

Like I stated before, this is where you have an argument in your head and expect the rest of us to know what it is. When we guess wrong, we waste posts talking about that rather than actually getting a real argument out of you.

A true seasoned champion troll.

[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 7:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2010 7:29:45 PM

Can yall please just get a fucking room already?

11/3/2010 7:35:47 PM

No way, this is important. Kris needs to do a better job of articulating an actual argument and stop sending the thread off in bullshit tangents related to dumb debates about what he posted versus what he appeared to post (based on what he quoted/replied to).

11/3/2010 8:56:37 PM

How can you not see how far up in his ass you are in every goddamn thread?

11/3/2010 9:12:59 PM

It's 2 threads brah. And it's because he keeps doing the same shit over and over in both threads. Not just with me, but with others as well. They just kinda gave up when they realized they were being trolled to death.

11/3/2010 9:15:15 PM

But not you.

You will fight until the end.

Fighting the good fight.

11/3/2010 9:26:49 PM

I'm trying to reach a real understanding here. Kris apparently believes that what he has stated is being misunderstood. I believe I can plainly read what he is stating and his response to my response makes no sense.

Ultimately, the onus is on him to describe why he thinks that robosigners won't lead to bigger problems for the banks. So far, it's just a statement and then him bickering about what he stated or how he stated it or why what he stated isn't what he really stated or meant or intended or how everyone else but him is retarded.

[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 9:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2010 9:31:13 PM

Lol, a broken clock that's right twice a day?

How can you even begin to question someone who has had such stunning investing advice over the past decade?

Not only is he a God of economics, he actually knows how to translate that to investing success.

Unfortunately, I've only been following his advice since late 2008 when I became aware of him, but my returns are spectacular since then and I have to give ~80% of the credit to his advice (yes, I do follow a select few others opinions as well)

[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 10:16 PM. Reason : a]

11/3/2010 10:15:57 PM

http://selfinvestors.com/tradingstocks/news/peter-schiffs-euro-pacific-capital-down-40-70-in-2008/

Quote :

"Turns out, he was largely right on the US macro picture and called a US equity crash but believed global markets would not folllow due to decoupling and that the dollar would continue to crash. Rather than shorting US equities he shorted the dollar (with a bet on hyperinflation) and bought foreign equities and commodities. According to some of Schiff’s own clients, portfolios invested with Schiff were down anywhere from 40 – 70% last year. Ouch. (Shedlock posted an image of an actual Schiff portfolio)"

Other people he made negative gains for

http://piggington.com/anyone_used_euro_pacific_capital


[Edited on November 3, 2010 at 10:31 PM. Reason : .]

11/3/2010 10:27:16 PM

^you can find several other bad reviews elsewhere on the net, about the only place you can get good reviews is from schiff himself or from koolaid drinkers who don't have any money invested with him.

Quote :

"I've only been following his advice since late 2008 when I became aware of him, but my returns are spectacular since then"

Shit you could have given your money to joey down syndrome and gotten spectacular returns since then, great time to invest. But this is real money, if you don't believe in the dollar, fine buy an international mutual fund or something, don't give your money to Schiff, you know who his father is right? He swindled a lot of people out of a lot of money (and even put some in prison) after he convinced them not to pay income tax. Wouldn't you think a bit of that crazy might have worn off on this obviously paranoid pessimist?

Quote :

"robosigners have nothing to do with robosigners causing other fraud to be revealed."

Where did I say this?

You keep on harping on me complaining that you misstate me, why would you deliberately do it again? You seem frustrated that I am sticking by the argument I made rather than the one you want me to make.

11/4/2010 12:16:06 AM

^^ sure, if you cherrypick one specific investor that invested at the exact wrong time then sure a few people have lost money. That's a pretty dumb way to evaluate someone's track record that's been crushing it for the past decade though.


^ uh, no. Contrary to your beliefs most people's portfolios were not up 65% in 2009 or 20% YTD in 2010.

I got those returns by going heavy in gold, commodities, and emerging markets particularly in asia and india where he told me to go.

Most of the rest of the gains can be attributed to Jim Rogers advice to buy commodities and in particular agriculture stocks.

The remainder is just due to reading how ridiculous AAPL's valuation was in late 2008 from a few balance sheet gurus.


You really can't discredit a guy who called metals to skyrocket, housing to crash, intl equities to explode, and domestic equities to underperform.

It just makes you look jealous of his abilities and all the money he's made over the last decade. I know you're a socialist that can't stand the thought of someone making money based on hard work and intelligence, but no need for blind hate.

[Edited on November 4, 2010 at 1:43 AM. Reason : add]

11/4/2010 1:38:59 AM

Quote :

"Where did I say this? You keep on harping on me complaining that you misstate me, why would you deliberately do it again? You seem frustrated that I am sticking by the argument I made rather than the one you want me to make."

God damn you're retarded.

1) I made a statement

2) You quoted that block of text

3) You said robosigners had nothing to do with that

It's that god damn simple.

Defend your statement about robosigners or stop responding.

Quote :

"I got those returns by going heavy in gold, commodities, and emerging markets particularly in asia and india where he told me to go."

So what you are saying is, you got lucky with when you started following Schiff because he has been pushing the same theme for...ever...and he finally got it right? Had you jumped into EEM when he started pushing the decoupling theme, you'd be either underwater or breakeven, or about the same as the S&P right now. A good market caller gets both the direction and timing right. Schiff has been abominal on the timing.

Btw, for reference, Ritholz got me out of the market literally days before it rolled over in Sept 08 and had I actually been listening to him (and not dick bags like Mish and Roubini) in March 09 I would have stayed in my FAS for more than a couple weeks.

11/4/2010 6:56:19 AM

Quote :

"Defend your statement about robosigners or stop responding."

I'll defend statements I've made, not statements you've made up.

Quote :

"You really can't discredit a guy who called metals to skyrocket, housing to crash, intl equities to explode, and domestic equities to underperform."

You can, if thats what he's been saying for over ten years straight and it's only happened once. Also you have to recognize the many years the exact opposite happened.

11/4/2010 12:55:21 PM

What the hell are you guys talking about?

Metals have gone straight up since 2001 which is the timeframe he's been saying to buy, foreign equities have gone straight up over the decade, he nailed the housing crash in the years leading up to the crash.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Go read some more bullshit technical analysis, talk about your broken clocks.

This guy has taken macro themes and exploited the shit out of them for ten years while nearly everyone else was losing their shirts

11/4/2010 3:04:39 PM

Quote :

"Pricing the S&P 500 has become in gold is all the rage and the WSJ just did an updated on this, so we figured we'd to the same. Since then, gold has rallied yet again and, while the S&P 500 has rallied over that period in dollar terms, in gold it is much less impressive. In fact, the S&P 500 has actually declined since September, if you value your portfolio in gold."

Not that gold is the be-all-end all but stock values are so ephemeral that it is good to look at them from a different perspective.

11/10/2010 8:59:34 PM

Gold isn't the greatest measure of stability:

11/10/2010 10:17:48 PM

Your chart certainly does prove that.

11/11/2010 9:06:09 AM

^what does that mean?

11/11/2010 5:42:39 PM

You said gold isn't the measure of stability, then posted a chart that shows gold responding rather predictably during periods where faith in the fiat currency is questioned.

Since you didn't actually qualify "stable", I'm sure you'll now define it to be whatever you need it to be to actually look like you know what you're talking about.

11/11/2010 5:59:34 PM

Quote :

"gold responding rather predictably during periods where faith in the fiat currency is questioned"

That doesn't explain the huge spike. Keep in mind it is inflation adjusted.

Quote :

"Since you didn't actually qualify "stable", I'm sure you'll now define it to be whatever you need it to be to actually look like you know what you're talking about."

Why don't you explain the things you say before worrying about me doing it?

11/11/2010 7:12:55 PM

Why don't you explain stability. Looking at the price of a commodity 30 years ago using todays dollars is a novel data point, but that is about it. I know folks in the 80s probably weren't going to use a hypothetical inflation number from 30 years into the future to value their holdings at the time.

11/11/2010 9:19:50 PM

Quote :

"Why don't you explain stability."

Seems fruitless,

Quote :

"Looking at the price of a commodity 30 years ago using todays dollars is a novel data point, but that is about it. I know folks in the 80s probably weren't going to use a hypothetical inflation number from 30 years into the future to value their holdings at the time."

True, you could say the same thing about pricing the S&P in gold.

11/11/2010 9:38:56 PM

It's almost pointless. Ratios actually respect the same technical patterns that individual securities do.

11/11/2010 9:44:09 PM

At the G-20, Obama's economic rhetoric is being squarely rejected, with major world leaders criticizing our deficit spending and loose monetary policy. This is all unraveling much quicker than I had hoped it would. The gig's up, and 2011 ain't looking good.

11/13/2010 9:03:17 AM

The world doesn't like it because it's bad for them, however its great for us

11/13/2010 11:38:42 AM

It's actually awful for us. Assuming you are right, though...so much for the new Obama era of international cooperation.

11/13/2010 11:48:24 AM

Quote :

"so much for the new Obama era of international cooperation"

That was before the recession. We have to get ours first.

11/13/2010 3:09:39 PM

That's a diabolical position to take, but I can't imagine you're oblivious to the economic reality of the situation. By flipping the bird to the world, we're undermining the dollar's status as the reserve currency. Sarkozy said exactly that. This 40 year experiment, where there is a globally accepted fiat currency backed by nothing but the guarantees of the U.S. government, is about to come to a spectacular end.

11/13/2010 4:09:15 PM

Quote :

"This 40 year experiment, where there is a globally accepted fiat currency backed by nothing but the guarantees of the U.S. government, is about to come to a spectacular end."

The bad thing about people who always say "the end is near" is that you can't ever completely disprove them. They'll die just like Aaron Russo, spouting doom until the end of time.

11/13/2010 6:00:33 PM

You are seeing these events take place and refuse to even acknowledge that something might be wrong with the global monetary order. You can call me a doomsayer, but you are obviously in denial.

11/13/2010 9:17:09 PM

I see small ups and downs happen, but I don't see the global financial meltdown you claim.

11/13/2010 9:22:45 PM

Those that don't see a meltdown coming are pretty much fully invested in the idea that the federal government in some fashion will prevent it. If we actually eschewed Keynesian theory midstream and implemented Austrian ideas with full disclosure, full mark to market, and austerity measures, we very much would get a nasty shock to the system. A very nasty shock.

I'd gladly welcome tossing the crooks of Wall Street out with that crash, reigning in the Fed, and getting back to some semblance of a real Free Market.

11/15/2010 6:35:35 PM

Yeah, the economy's bad, lets make it worse! Let's unlearn all the great things we've accomplished since 1907.

11/15/2010 11:25:06 PM

Kris, dude... just stop, really...

opinions are cool and all but you aren't correct here.

The dollar is crashing, period. Schiff already said it would happen and now it is.

Denying it all the way isn't going to stop it from happening, it just makes it incredibly annoying to read your posts and more dangerous because people like you make it harder to get the message out to the uninformed public

11/16/2010 1:13:12 AM