It’s Friday, and here’s what CBS News said about us on the fourth:
Beginning in 2005, hundreds of websites and blogs sprouted up warning about the housing bubble. At the time, these people were often viewed as doomsayers or cranks. Thoroughly vindicated, many of their sites are now de facto rallying points against Obama’s plan, purely on grounds of economic prudence.
The blog FlippersInTrouble, for instance, gives exhaustive data on the losses being racked up by speculators in Sacramento, which won’t help build sympathy for the beneficiaries of the bailout. HousingDoom.com, a site which began by looking at economic aspects of the bubble in 2006, is now saying, "What the market needs is more foreclosures." There is no obvious political pattern to the bubble bloggers. Some are freemarketeers. Others, such as those who run HousingPanic.com, are Democrats who see the bubble as one more failure of the Bush administration. Yet nearly all of the bubble sites, left, right, and center, are now lined up against the bailout.
Now that we’ve all come out against the bailout, does this mean that we aren’t considered doomsayers and cranks anymore?
This is an open thread, let us know what’s on your mind.
This site was absolutely right on and with lots of data to support it. I wonder if cbs agrees with Doom and others or if they support the bailout. 5 bucks say the latter
Unlike the MSM, bloggers of all political persuasions have demonstrated their aptitude and now have a proven track record concerning the housing bubble and subsequent collapse.
Actually, anyone can be a journalist. It requires no special talent but many of the housing bubble bloggers had extensive backgrounds in finance, accounting, economics or some other specialized field of knowledge. While MSM journalists wrote puff pieces on home ownership, the blogosphere resounded with warnings of impending doom.
Just as public school teachers are trained in technique but lack substantive background in most of the topics they teach, so too are mainstream journalists little more than pedantic scribblers.
Bloggers have now established themselves as the “go-to” source of authoritative information in their respective spheres. Declining readership of newsprint dailies is an indication of this development.
A sea change is upon us. The livelihood of MSM journalists is threatened! I look for them to demand new restrictions on entrants to the world-wide web, perhaps as an addendum to the newly-resurrected “Fairness Doctrine”.
malthus -
Thanks for the kind words. Ever since the early 1970s I’ve been inspired by Ivan Illich and his promotion of the possibilities for informal education and lifelong learning without professional management and control. However, that hasn’t stopped me from periodically bugging the guys who are paid to cover these issues for a living (Igor’s “mad,” but I’m just frustrated and mostly ignored
) CBC for one seems to be on a Richard Florida kick these days. George Stroumboulopoulos had him on Wednesday night, but he’s been popping up all over the Mothership.
i noticed a while back that the AZ Republic had got much thinner. then i realized on sunday the “career builder” is 4 pages. i beleive it was about 20 just two years ago. then i realized on saturday the real estate section is just a few pages too. i beleive it was three LARGE sections just a year or two ago. i guess they have no jobs to adv for and no real estate to write about since i also am guessing they have no revenue from the real estate sector. my last guess is that real estate was their largest source of revenue a couple years ago and they are in trouble??? (also chargin me 3 shiny quarters instead of 2 during the week now!)
Malthus-
I’m always surprised how often the MSM does use the material of bloggers. Sometimes they credit us, sometimes they don’t. Occasionally we hear from them. With their budgets slashed though, we are the cheaper alternative.
There’s another layer beyond that though. A number of the best stories that we do are a result of the work or readers, or silent contributors like L and M. My thanks to everyone who pitches in. With luck our politicians are dropping by now and again as well- maybe they’ll learn something!
Here is your next big story: The mortgage bailout plan (subsidy part) will not get off the ground as the servicers are nowhere near ready. It is important to recognize that there are really two plans: (1) the FNMA streamline refi which simply allows good borrowers that are less than 105%LTV in debt and have a two year payment history with their FNMA loan to refi at a lower market rate. This costs the taxpayer nothing, will be executed by exiting lenders and is good policy.
The second plan, the one with the subsidy, is not really that big. The plan will pay on average over a five year period $4,000 to the servicer, $5,000 (in principal reduction) to the borrower and about $8,000 towards mortgage payments, again assuming a full five years. The $8,000 is calculated by the 3.5% subsidy times the average American household income of $3,800 per month times 60 months.
Now comes the hard part: qualifying for this will be like jumping through a dozen flaming hoops. On top of this the servicers will be so backed up with applications that it will take years to work through. Each loan essentially has to be re-underwritten and processed with new data. Given that banks spend on average about $300 to underwrite a typical loan, what will be the break-even cost for the servicers? If they modify one in ten applications (doubtful) AND those mods stay current for three years then they may make their money back. But, if there are a huge number of denials, and remember a denial qualifies the borrower for money from the government to execute a short-sale, then the servicers will lose money. If fact, quite a few have said that they will not be staffing up to handle this unless they get paid per application, and not per successful modification. The ONLY lenders that have come out cheerleading this plan are the TARP-ladden banks. What else would they say? Stay tuned…
“does this mean that we aren’t considered doomsayers and cranks anymore?”
The early poll results from friends and relatives are not promising.
4 to 1: I am a nutcase preparing for a possible “Greater Depression.”
twist -
First a nuance. It wasn’t really CBS, but “The Weekly Standard”. The WS site dates the piece as Feb 28th, the same day as Barry’s Big Picture post “Rick Santelli’s Planted Rant?”
I find it most amusing, the thought that we could be part of a neo-con disinformation effort to hide some of Carl Rove’s more intriguing post-retirement activities.
Heaven forbid the downturn might result in some real populism.
“i noticed a while back that the AZ Republic had got much thinner. then i realized on sunday the “career builder” is 4 pages. i beleive it was about 20 just two years ago. then i realized on saturday the real estate section is just a few pages too.–AZSALUKI
Not only are newspapers getting thinner, they are disappearing. Even well-established publications such as the Rocky Mountain News are proving to be vulnerable. I expect to see new media and the economic downturn bury a few more MSM icons in the days to come.
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1883345,00.html
Except for the weather, the main stream media is useless (TV, radio and newspaper) half truths and misinformation. I believe more people are figuring this out.
Igor is right again “pathetic”