Trader4 was right?? gensets vs. car inverters.....

Page 1 of 3  
Holy shit, I think he was.... but for the wrong reasons, of course. He was bitching about tripping over extension cords and fires or some other dumb shit (regarding car inverters), whereas the problems are really more fundamental.
So this protracted wrangling of mine, over car/battery inverters vs. trad'l gensets, has been solved: I ordered BOTH.... LOL But the "real working solution" seems to be a genset, in this case a tri-fuel.
The inverter thing *could* work, but from other recent threads, it seems that this strat just turns into a bear. I did order two inverters (1500 and 2500 W cobras) to experiment with, but not nec. for house power -- altho when I set it up, I'll screw around with that as well.
What I finally did was order one of these: http://www.generatorsales.com/order/Honda-16kw-Propane-Generator.asp?page=H04599 and one of these: http://www.napaonline.com/Catalog/CatalogItemDetail.aspx?R=EXH40001_0306020503
so's I can run the unit inside. The unit I ordered is actually a tri-fuel, but it has no gas tank, but can siphon from any container, which is pretty neat.
The total bill is $3K, MUCH more than I wanted to spend (PLUS my stolen $1K BlackMax -- goodgawd), but bottom line, this Sandy thing just spooked me big time, PLUS this being the 3rd major weather event around here in 1.5 years. I've lucked out in all three, but that's all it was, luck.
Now, this unit may not be for everyone, and here are some of the pro's/con's.
Like virtually all "affordable" units, this thing will sound like a goddamm lawnmower -- don't listen to those bullshit decibel claims. A true automotive muffler might help (either replacing the original, or placed in series with the existing) can help a bit, but a sound-proofed enclosure box is a better (albeit more troublesome) solution. If you want an intrinsically quiiet unit, quiet will double, triple the price at a given wattage, eg, the Honda EU series. Or buy an Onan.... lol But actually, you can find them on craig's list, rel. cheap. Just have yer fork lift ready..... . The above unit is a very compact unit, with no wheels, but then that's why God invented dolly's. Not that heavy for the wattage, about 240#.
You can make it fully automatic, like the Generac standby's, but to me that's just pita complexity, UNLESS it's for a second home or sumpn. Btw, you can get a 8 kW Generac (7 kW continuous, then de-rated for nat gas) for considerably cheaper ($1800-2000), but at half the watts of my unit. And the generac is a fairly big box (almost like a small storage shed, you can see them at HD), vs. the above unit, which is like a large suitcase. And generac reliability seems to be iffy. The above unit is Honder-powered.
Tri-fuel, imo, is Da Bomb, makes the unit very versatile, I can throw it on m'truck anytime, for whatever -- not for camping, tho, too noisy, unless you build a really good box. Car inverters would proly be better for camping, it would seem. But for long outages, natural gas is *by far* the best way to go, followed by propane, then gasoline.
15 kW is proly more than most people need, but I have sizable sq ft and a shop, so I figgered I might as well just take the plunge.
Vic Smith is very right about the cost/benefit/probability considerations, and no doubt I "overpaid" in this regard, but I really got spooked this time, and the utilities are telling people, flat out, they're not getting power 'til Nov 15...... at best. Holy shit.... Dat easily coulda been me. My rich fuckhead neighbors (bunches of them) were without power for a full week. The MAYOR is without power, in a city of 200,000++ ... !!!! I believe that like the Halloween snow storm, some people will be without power for a month.
So, I overpaid, probability-wise, but at least now I can sleep, and if shit happens, at least I'll be able to keep the shop going.. AND I got those inverters coming.... lol
Sam's club BlackMax (8750 peak, 7500 continuous) is a good unit, and the above site sells them, in both gasoline AND tri-fuel models. The BlackMax at Sam's is $1K, the tri-fuel from the above site is about $1500. You could modify the blackmax yourself with tri-fuel kits ($150-200, many sites, incl the above), but if I had it to do over, I'da ordered the tri-fuel version, pay the difference for peace of mind, no futzing around.
Before the blackmax walked, I tested it fairly extensively, with CNC machining equip, pyooters, compressors, you name it, wow, what a stable workhorse, very impressive. The only thing that made it really hiccup was starting a 5 hp rpc., whose hiccup I think I could have reduced by starting a 2 hp rpc first. But overall impressive.
So for half of what I paid, most people would do very very well with that modified blackmax (with the wheels, etc). Noisy tho, and doesn't have an "automotive type" muffler, like the one I just ordered, which means it will be more difficult to put another muffler on, but not super-difficult, just a pita. You would not, without some kind of custom adatper, be able to install that flex hose above, whereas on the unit I ordered, it (theoretically) clamps right on the muffler flange.
I believe the car inverter strat is workable, but the Q is how workable, AND at what risk to the car, alternator. After much flipflopping, I just decided to bite the $3K bullet. Oh, and another thing, in a real shit scenario like what we have now -- no power AND no gasoline!!! -- the car inverter fails as well, another consideration.
If you have a nat gas generator, AND an electric car, yer pretty much set. I was seriously contemplating trading in one vehicle for a Chevy Volt, but just too much dough, AND an interim solution is real simple: Just store oodles of gas. None of these electrics pay for themselves, vs. the economy gas equiv. The new Pruis C proly does tho, if you get the base model, $18k, 50+ mpg.... one forum was talking about 65 mpg.... which gives it, like, an 800 mile range!! Holy shit....
So, inyway, just the wranglings of another struggling home-moaner, taking it in the ass, along with the (w)hole of working Merka..... which of course will get lots worse, regardless of who wins today. I believe, tho, that Romney actually ENJOYS fucking the working class (since he made a career out of it at Bain), while Obama just accepts a fucked working class as "collateral damage". Still, we're fucked either way.
--
EA









Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that is the best answer.
you run the inverter with a car battery when you need a small amount of power for the TV or the modem for your laptop etc...
and you run the genny when its time to cool down the fridge or run the furnace or microwave etc. and charge up the car battery for the inverter.
you don't want to run the genny all night if you don't have to.
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

that is the best answer. ========================================== Indeed, when in doubt, waffling and/or the shotgun approach work, almost by definition. The shotgun solution can be a little 'spensive, tho. When I'm done (assuming I keep both inverters), all this will have cost *over* $4,000.... and that's with me doing all the installs.... Farming out all the installation work, you could *easily* double that.... goodgawd....
But you can "get by" with a 4,000 W tri-fuel (Honder powered), for under $1,000 from that same company, if you do the installation yourself. And if you take some chances on quality, proly half that. Of course, a plain ole budget gasoline generator can be had for half that again, a cupla hundred -- which is almost not worth it imo, but apparently a lot of people think otherwise, judging from the long lines of people with 1 gal gas cans....
you run the inverter with a car battery when you need a small amount of power for the TV or the modem for your laptop etc...
and you run the genny when its time to cool down the fridge or run the furnace or microwave etc. and charge up the car battery for the inverter.
you don't want to run the genny all night if you don't have to. ====================================================== Yeah, those were my thoughts as well, IF car inverter power is adequate even for that -- AND safe for the car/alternator. The inverters arrived last nite (1500, 2500 W), I'll be getting a Sears marine battery today hopefully, and start tryna put this together, on m'truck, then on the other car, see what happens. This inverter strat serves a variety of other purposes besides outage backup power, so this is not do or die.
Too bad, cuz with a little thought from a car maker, a really practical solution could be had, alternator/inverter-wise. But not for weeks at a time, like what some people endure with these widespread outages.
--
EA






Mark



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 06:13:34 -0500, "Existential Angst"

maybe I missed something but if you are buying the genset why bother with the car part at all? Why not just buy a couple deep cycle batteries and use the genset to charge them? Surely that would use less gas then running the car? The savings on gas would pay for the batteries. Charge the batteries during the high power genset use time and then use the batteries when you only need small around of power.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I'm picking up a deep cycle from Autozone in about an hour. The inverter will operate off that, and I will hook up a switch to let the car alternator charge that batt when driving, disconnect when using the inverter, sparing the car batt. I'll experiment with this as backup power, but mostly it will be used for 120V in the truck. Also, I'll have a spare batt for the truck! :)
--
EA



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 22:33:42 -0500, "Existential Angst"

Politics? Dood..evidently you dont understand symptoms of mental illness.
Of course you dont. You are one of those poor sad sickos.
Gunner
-- ""
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

As far as I can tell, full grown adults standing in a 100,000 capacity stadium, cheering some jerkoff rock'n'roll band OR some jerkoff sports team, or even just discussing professional sports, is the benchmark of mental illness. On par with religious fervor.
Rossiter should examine celebrity worship, religion, et al if he wants mental illness. I suspect he'd lighten up right away on libs. Seems like he has a bug up his professional ass. Figgers you'd cite some professional with an agenda.

well, not as poor as you, not by a longshot

well, pretty demoralized, living in this bankrupt junk culture...

My stability has been called into question. But in this reality, instability is a pretty natural/normal response to social insanity.. Sorta like your PTSD, or whatever happened to you after you were discharged. Mebbe you'n'me should get audited by a reputable Scientologist, eh?? LOL
--
EA




>
> Gunner
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:26:35 -0500, "Existential Angst"

Your Denial and Transference is noted with much sadness.
As you say...full grown adults..mentally ill.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sbm83xoV8g


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXp3ksU3QoE

Gunner
-- ""
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 01:38:39 -0500, "Existential Angst"

What..you didnt like stadiums filled with Leftwingers cheering on their home team to be appropriate?
Just goes to show how mentally twisted you really are.
Shrug
Gunner
-- ""
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gunner wrote:

If they could think, there wwould be a lot less chance for them to be in that situation. :(
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 16:44:54 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"

That old friend..is most certainly true indeed! Well done!!
-- ""
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 08:03:48 -0500, "Existential Angst"

LOL. Lots of crabby old farts this morning. They still haven't figured out they might be dead before Obama leaves office. And that if Romney was in, they still might be dead. And it wouldn't make a dimes worth of difference in how dead they are. Better to just have a beer and set up the generator or inverter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Wed, 7 Nov 2012 09:13:24 -0500, "Existential Angst"

(Amazon.com product link shortened)
http://mystarbrite.com/startron/content/blogsection/4/208/lang,en /
http://www.amsoil.com/storefront/ast.aspx
http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product_11151_10001_1180575_-1
You never pay attention do you?
Gunner
-- "
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Almost certainly fabricated right-wing nonsense: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/carville.asp
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree. It's absolute rubbish:
http://www.ijreview.com/2012/10/19581-james-carville-80-of-democrats-politically-clueless /
This author reached out to Mr. Carville's office about the blistering quote and received the following response:
Mr. Becker,
Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Apparently the quote was falsely posted by an unknown user to a quotations website called thinkexist.com. We have contacted the website and asked them to take the quote down. James Carville never said these words, and this quote in no way belongs to James Carville.
Liar, liar pants on fire. (-: What I find remarkable is that Americans are finally catching on to how much of the information being cited as gospel by the right turns out to be utter BS and punished them at the polls for their mendacity.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 7 Nov 2012 23:34:55 -0500, "Robert Green"

Looks like Carvelle is running from an off hand remark thats catching up to him.
<VBG>
And its not Bush's fault either!!
Gunner
-- ""
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

Democratic
cally-clueless/
quote
way
are
by
their
Looks like Gunner's the one running here, trying to escape a fraudulent post that doesn't pass the most basic smell test. James Carville has too many enemies for a quote like that not to be picked up and beaten to death by legitimate media, left and right. Legitimate media here is defined as having assets they don't want to lose in a libel suit and editors that won't post something so out-of-character without absolute confirmation. God only knows where you found this bit of propaganda but nothing very legit shows up in Google. Not so for true quotes like Romney's 47% election-losing gem. You can find that on legit sites all over the internet. Or Akin's rape quote.
Maybe if you had a video of Carville saying what you allege it would be provable but only ranters showed up in my search, not Carville. Considering every idiotic thing any politico says nowadays ends up on YouTube, that's another clue your alleged quote is bunk. Screwed by your puppetmasters again. Don't you hate that? (-:

Crashing the economy was Bush's (and Congress's) fault but spreading BS that doesn't pass the smell test was probably not. That's your job. You can't even spell Carville's name right. That was my first clue this was a phony attribution. Why would we believe anything else you claim about this fraudulent quote? Do you think Carville doesn't know how to spell his own name?
Since the quote above fails to be found anywhere reliable, let's find a quote on a site that actually has money to pay a libel judgment if they publish false information and lose a lawsuit. The real James Carville:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/21/opinion/carville-republican-disaster/index.html?hpt=hp_bn9
"At any rate, let's talk a minute about Mitt. He was your guy -- he was methodical, meticulous, married once. He has completely blown himself up over an issue that everyone knew was coming. Have you had a chance to look at John McCain's research operation on Mitt? Wow. And let me assure you, that thing has been supplemented, expanded, and annotated. God only knows about the Obama people -- they've got a billion dollars! And how about my friends over at American Bridge (the Democrat-leaning political action committee)? Clearly Mitt is merely in the beginning of this tax-return, financial-disclosure, Cayman Island (and God only knows what else) fiasco."
Doesn't sound at all like the guy in your made-up quote, does it? Epic fail. Thanks for playing.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What specific acts did Bush take during his term that caused the collapse? And why is your list so limited and yet contains Bush, with Congress as an after thought?
Glass-Steagall, for example was repealed under the Clinton administration. The community re-investment act was passed back in the days of Carter. The govt has heavily incentived investing in homes for decades. Mortgage interest is deductible, real estate taxes are deductible, and when you sell your home at a profit, it's generally tax free. Bush had nothing to do with any of that. In fact, all those powerful government incentives to speculate on homes are still in place. It leads to what economists call a misallocation of resources. Then when it blows up in a speculative bubble, it's just Bush and Congress's fault? I will give you credit for at least including Congress, where every other Dem, with Obama leading the way, just blames it all on Bush.
In fact, there is a long list. In addition to the above, I would place a lot of the blame on the FED and Greenspan. It's their job to track the economy and they have thousands of employees doing exactly that. Anyone could see that real estate had gone up way too far, too fast. Did the FED believe those homes in Las Vegas and Miami really were worth double what they were worth just a few years earlier? Yet, they ignored the housing bubble and kept interest rates very low. Whether the wall street derivatives blew up or not, you still would have had a recession and severe decline in housing prices. It just made it worse.
You also have players involved like Fannie and Freddie, both creations of Congress decades ago and heavily supervised by Congress. Yet they thought it was peachy keen to keep buying mortgages on houses that had gone up drastically in a bubble.
I'd also add all the homeowners, who bought houses on the fantasy that you can't lose, they always go up. Particularly the homeowners who were buying houses highly leveraged, that they could barely afford. Or those buying them just to flip them, cash in and profit. Many of them were as greedy as the wall street geniuses who were creating derivatives to sell the mortgages. You can add in all the shyster appraisers who knew better, all the firms handling mortgage applications who just wanted to make a buck and pass it on, etc. The list is long and it will happen again. It's part of human nature. And it will happen again, probably more frequently, as the moral level of the country has continued to decline and greed of all has increased.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

What specific acts did Bush take during his term that caused the collapse? And why is your list so limited and yet contains Bush, with Congress as an after thought?
Glass-Steagall, for example was repealed under the Clinton administration. The community re-investment act was passed back in the days of Carter. The govt has heavily incentived investing in homes for decades. Mortgage interest is deductible, real estate taxes are deductible, and when you sell your home at a profit, it's generally tax free. Bush had nothing to do with any of that. In fact, all those powerful government incentives to speculate on homes are still in place. It leads to what economists call a misallocation of resources. Then when it blows up in a speculative bubble, it's just Bush and Congress's fault? I will give you credit for at least including Congress, where every other Dem, with Obama leading the way, just blames it all on Bush.
In fact, there is a long list. In addition to the above, I would place a lot of the blame on the FED and Greenspan. It's their job to track the economy and they have thousands of employees doing exactly that. Anyone could see that real estate had gone up way too far, too fast. Did the FED believe those homes in Las Vegas and Miami really were worth double what they were worth just a few years earlier? Yet, they ignored the housing bubble and kept interest rates very low. Whether the wall street derivatives blew up or not, you still would have had a recession and severe decline in housing prices. It just made it worse.
You also have players involved like Fannie and Freddie, both creations of Congress decades ago and heavily supervised by Congress. Yet they thought it was peachy keen to keep buying mortgages on houses that had gone up drastically in a bubble.
I'd also add all the homeowners, who bought houses on the fantasy that you can't lose, they always go up. Particularly the homeowners who were buying houses highly leveraged, that they could barely afford. Or those buying them just to flip them, cash in and profit. Many of them were as greedy as the wall street geniuses who were creating derivatives to sell the mortgages. You can add in all the shyster appraisers who knew better, all the firms handling mortgage applications who just wanted to make a buck and pass it on, etc. The list is long and it will happen again. It's part of human nature. And it will happen again, probably more frequently, as the moral level of the country has continued to decline and greed of all has increased.
==================================================== You almost got a few things right, this time. You must have taken notes on my old posts. Why you fellate Big Inurance is beyond me. You should proly read more of my posts, take notes.
Btw, re your previous incoherence, ObamaCare is not Obama's Care -- it wadn't his oh-riginal intention -- The Pubic Option was his original intention. ObamaCare is actually Big Insurance Care (heh, and Big CongressCare), which is the result of Karen Ignagni's 36" strap-on pounding Obama's epiglottis, with a lot of pushing-help from 500 members of Congress.
Ackshooly, you made some half-decent points, which I notice happens occasionally when you are not in hysterical-bitch mode. There's about 500 anti-depressant/anti-anxiety chill-pill type drugs out there, I'm sure some combo will work well for you on a more regular basis. Keep up the good (albeit sporadic) work.
--
EA












Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Considering
<What specific acts did Bush take during his term that caused the collapse?>
Easy fella, I responded to Gunner's gratuitous "It's not Bush's fault."
But if you want a real answer, Bush's tax cuts decreased revenue and his two wars increased expenses. That's a pretty damn simple way to pump up the debt. Recent surveys show people believe that's exactly what happened. So do I.
Bush pursued the free-marketer's goal to deregulate Wall Street which helped build the housing bubble and allowed financial institutions to pursue risky trades unchecked. In fact, Bush's minions, Greenspan, Levitt and Rubin were claimed to be dead set against regulating derivatives, something that might have blunted the severity of the collapse.
Instead, they preferred to let the market "sort it out" while they kept ratcheting the cost of money down to unheard of lows. People took the nearly free money and bought dumb things. The ride down was very rough and plunged the nation into the Great Recession.
The SEC declined to regulate CDS's even though NY's Eliot Spitzer had been after AIG for quite some time for selling what was basically insurance without a license. He was concerned that they sold "swaps" without the proper reserves that various agencies require of insurers. When AIG was forced to pay off on this insurance, they got caught in the death spiral of insufficient reserves and Uncle Sam stepped in. Lots of that bailout money, as I am sure you know, when to banks in Europe. The SEC was asleep at the switch. Bush starved that agency in an attempt to reduce their effectiveness and it worked. The SEC should have grown in proportion to the market it was designed to regulate, but it didn't. Bernie Madoff flourished and the CDO/CDS mess exploded nearly collapsing the economy.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/31/paulson-plan-aims-to-temper-regulation /
The Bush tax cuts - over 50 percent of which benefited the richest 5 percent of American taxpayers - cost well over $2 trillion in lost revenue over the decade after they were enacted. Ten years later, Bush's tax cuts are still considered by many (like me) to be the most important reason for the increase in the national debt. The ten year experiment has been a failure.
The myth that tax cuts for the wealthy creates jobs in *America* may finally die the death it deserves this year in Congress. There's no mechanism in any of the tax cuts that require those benefiting from the break to invest in America or American jobs. It's clear from the steady loss of jobs in the US that the cuts failed to do what was claimed. So why give the top earners a break if, after the 10 years "test" period incorporated in the law to make it palatable (and passable), the jobs never materialized?
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will end up costing the country trillions of dollars. This is pretty simple macroeconomics. Cutting government revenue while spending vast sums on two 10 year wars had the predictable result: It exploded the deficit and evaporated the surplus accumulated under Clinton. Now the deficit is priority one for the party that ran up war debts, spent at least another trillion on intel and security upgrades and God knows what on the Part D drug plan. Pretty soon, we ended up to our eyeballs in debt, especially with so many people unemployed from the crash making claims on the federal and state social safety nets.

after thought?
Bush pushed those two wars and he pushed them hard. That's why Congress is in parentheses as a sort of unindicted co-conspirator. <humor alert> Do you think we would have been so deeply involved in AfRaq without Bush's initiative? I don't.
<I will give you credit for at least including Congress, where every other Dem, with Obama leading the way, just blames it all on Bush.>
Gee thanks, you don't know how much that means to me. <sarcasm alert>
<In fact, there is a long list. In addition to the above, I would place a lot of the blame on the FED and Greenspan. It's their job to track the economy and they have thousands of employees doing exactly that.>
And I did blame Greenspan - but Rubin and Levitt were involved, too, and they were part of Bush's administration. He could have throttled them back had he chosen to do so.
<Anyone could see that real estate had gone up way too far, too fast. Did the FED believe those homes in Las Vegas and Miami really were worth double what they were worth just a few years earlier? Yet, they ignored the housing bubble and kept interest rates very low.>
Absolutely. The administration, under Bush's direction, didn't see what was happening. Who gets the blame for that? The captain of the ship. In the reverse, R's seem happy to blame Obama for Fast and Furious and the deaths in Libya. If you consider Obama "at fault" for the actions of fairly low level members of his administration, the same kind of blame should attach to Bush for his economic advisor's bad decisions. Hoover had very little to do with the Great Depression but he certainly has taken the blame for it. Fair? Not really but that's how the cookie crumbles.
<Whether the wall street derivatives blew up or not, you still would have had a recession and severe decline in housing prices. It just made it worse.>
I agree. There was a perfect economic storm that hit us from a number of angles. A lot of it had to do with the Fed's cheap money policy. I guess not one of those brainiacs thought about what would happen when the rates got closer and closer to zero. Those reductions pumped up the economic stats but it was really not true growth - as you cogently pointed out the doubling of house prices didn't represent real equity - just the effects of lots of nearly free money and a bubble expanding like the Big Bang.
<You also have players involved like Fannie and Freddie, both creations of Congress decades ago and heavily supervised by Congress. Yet they thought it was peachy keen to keep buying mortgages on houses that had gone up drastically in a bubble.>
I completely agree. There's plenty of blame to go around but the basic flaws were spending money on wars while simultaneously cutting revenue. That's pretty much on Bush, I'm afraid. The Congress foolishly agreed to involve us in the disastrous AfRaq wars without a single care, it seems, about how to pay for them. They seem very concerned now, but I believe that's just political theater. The deficit, as it almost always does, as we recover. It will shrink when revenues pick up and claims for unemployment, etc. decrease. I fear that the sudden move to austerity is going to contract the economy and lead to another recession. It's going to be an interesting few months as Congress deals with sequestration. I hope the R's don't force another downgrade of the US's creditworthiness. That was unconscionable.
<I'd also add all the homeowners, who bought houses on the fantasy that you can't lose, they always go up.>
Wasn't me. I drive a 10 year old car and live in a house that's priced well below what I can afford. Why? Because I know things can change very quickly in this world and when I started out in the working world I watched people lose their houses during the 20% interest rates of the Carter era.
<Particularly the homeowners who were buying houses highly leveraged, that they could barely afford. Or those buying them just to flip them, cash in and profit. Many of them were as greedy as the wall street geniuses who were creating derivatives to sell the mortgages.>
Agreed. They were also part of the problem as well as banks and mortgage lenders who believed that they could repossess a house and resell it for even more if the lender defaulted. Outfits like Countrywide structured loans with very low initial payments that were almost guaranteed to default. But Countrywide didn't care - they passed that risk onto investors. The lenders didn't ever dream that there would be so many foreclosures that it saturated the market. Lots of those subprime loans were made knowing they would be sealed up in a bundle with good mortgages and sold to investors who really didn't know what they were buying.
<You can add in all the shyster appraisers who knew better, all the firms handling mortgage applications who just wanted to make a buck and pass it on, etc. The list is long and it will happen again. It's part of human nature. And it will happen again, probably more frequently, as the moral level of the country has continued to decline and greed of all has increased.>
Well, I'd like to figure out some way to learn from our disasters. Instead, the banks that were too big to fail became even bigger as they absorbed failed banks like WAMU. One problem that never seems to get addressed is that Wall Street's always one or two steps ahead of the regulators. We have a good reason to regulate the markets - it makes investments in the US even safer and judging by the money people invest here when there's trouble in their own countries, it's a good strategy.
I often wonder what would have happened if Bush and Obama both decided to let the chips fall where they may and didn't spend a nickel to bail anyone out?
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.