-
Welcome to the TSP Talk Forums forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, join our AutoTracker, and access many other special features. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. -
Please read our AutoTracker policy on the IFT deadline and remaining active. Thanks!
-
$ - Premium Service Content (Info) | AutoTracker Monthly Winners | Is Gmail et al, Blocking Our emails?
Find us on: Facebook & X | Posting Copyrighted Material
-
20% Off Annual Premium Subscriptions!*
Ends Jan 18... Click Here For More Information
* For new or current subscribers -
Join the TSP Talk AutoTracker: How to Get Started | Login | Main AutoTracker Page
-
The Forum works well on MOBILE devices without an app: Just go to: https://forum.tsptalk.com ...
Or you can now use TapaTalk again!
12%ayear's Account Talk
- Thread starter 12%ayear
- Start date
12%ayear
Well-known member
zimmy, I did this morning.
caymanbrac12
Member
The Judge and lawyer is my relative who I have been making ift's for. She is retiring with 42 and change and she has already transferred out her tsp money. The TSP board and ol' "Huey Long" can go F$#K themselves.
Greg
camper65
Member
Are you saying they should be "Fruitful, multiply and go populate the earth!!!" Welll-----I'd have to agree with you on that one!
Yesterday I received 2 letters that my request of removal from snail mail status granted ,1 from USPS and 1 from Fedex probably because I faxed in with 2 different fax #.I faxed last Wednes and I called and found out that they approved my request last Friday and rec the approving letters yesterday Wednesday.GL
12%ayear
Well-known member
Thats great news Zimmy. At least you are not in lala land like me.
12.. Did you call? I PM last nite. I post again in case anybody needs it.Thats great news Zimmy. At least you are not in lala land like me.
Fax:202-942-1676 or 202-942-1451
Phone# 202-942-1460
Forgot the whole thing,I just open the Fedex mail,they turned it down,
TSP monitored MB.
I did not p/u the mail yesterday,my husband usually taking care of the mail, he worked till midnite I had to take care my children.This morning he called that I have 2 letters from TSP.he opened one and told me that approved,when I got home and opened the fedex mail that overturned the approval after reading my posts in MB.
this is my last post.
this is my last post.
Asylum
Member
the simple solution is to make the board non viewable unless you are a registered user..
then you can add whatever layer of ID requirement then as a condition of membership you have to sign an agreement that posts within are private and if used outside the MB without permission, legal action can be taken.
then you can add whatever layer of ID requirement then as a condition of membership you have to sign an agreement that posts within are private and if used outside the MB without permission, legal action can be taken.
Asylum
Member
the key in the agreement... this is another item i am going to ask my federal judge pal since he was an intraweb atty in private practice.
12%ayear
Well-known member
The trillion-dollar mortgage time bomb
Risks are rising that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may need a government bailout that could cost far more than previous rescues.http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/21/news/economy/fannie_freddie/index.htm?postversion=2008042105NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Among the nightmares lurking around the corner for the already battered housing and credit markets would be a meltdown at mortgage financing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Although few are predicting an imminent need for a bailout just yet, credit rating agency Standard & Poor's recently placed an estimated price tag on this worst case scenario -- $420 billion to $1.1 trillion of taxpayer's money.
This dwarfs how much it cost to help banks during the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980's and early 1990's. That cost taxpayers about $250 billion in today's dollars.
S&P added that saving Fannie (FNM) and Freddie (FRE, Fortune 500) might cost so much that the federal government's AAA credit rating, the top possible rating, might even be at risk. If that was lost, then all federal government borrowing would become more expensive.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both help the mortgage market function by purchasing pools of loans and packaging them into securities.
So it is crucial for the mortgage industry for the two agencies to continue functioning smoothly.
The two companies are known as government-sponsored entities because they have Congressional charters, which implies that the federal government is behind them.
Fannie did not comment about the S&P report. According to a statement from Freddie, the firm said the S&P report was just "a scenario analysis, not a prediction" and added that "Freddie Mac remains a well capitalized company."
Victoria Wagner, a S&P credit analyst who worked on the report, said S&P isn't predicting that Fannie and Freddie would necessarily need a bailout at this time.
But she and other analysts are concerned about the impact more problems could have on the mortgage market since the two companies have become increasingly important to the health of the industry. Both companies are forecast to report more losses this year due to declining home prices and rising mortgage defaults.
Risks increasing
Wagner pointed out that at the end of January, 82% of all mortgages in the U.S. were backed by one of the firms, up from only 46% in the second quarter of 2007.
Fannie and Freddie primarily back so-called conforming loans, those made to borrowers with good credit and large down payments. But even limited exposure to subprime loans hasn't stopped them from running up huge losses as home prices tumbled and foreclosures soared.
And Fannie and Freddie's role in the mortgage and real estate markets is likely to grow, as Congress recently allowed them to back larger mortgages, up to $729,750, up from the previous limit of $417,000.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), which regulates both firms, also recently lowered the capital requirements for Fannie and Freddie in an effort to pump $200 billion more into the credit markets.
The new loan limits will increase the risks and losses for Fannie and Freddie, said Wagner and other experts.
The high priced markets where homeowners and buyers need larger loans are now the ones seeing steep home price declines. And the default rates on larger loans are greater than the smaller loans that had previously been the core of their business.
"I don't think the message is a bailout is necessary or imminent," Wagner said. "But they're facing this increased role at a time that their own credit performance is suffering from the rifts in the housing and mortgage markets. They're both projecting much higher losses than we've seen in some time."
Some see bailout as more likely
But other experts expect that declining home values will force more borrowers who have a Fannie- or Freddie-backed loan to stop making payments in the coming months, rather than continuing to make payments on a home now worth less than their loan balance.
Rising job losses may also make it difficult for other borrowers who formerly had good credit to stay current on their mortgage payments.
"The real fundamental problem is real estate prices have been falling and they might fall substantially more," said Robert Shiller, a Yale University economist who argued for years that a bubble was forming in real estate prices. "OFHEO and Fannie and Freddie never considered the possibility of a massive real estate correction."
Some economists suggest that if investors start to see problems in the performance of loans backed by Fannie and Freddie, they'll dumping them. And that would force the federal government to step in.
"I would say there's at least a 50-50 chance of some sort of bailout. I'm not saying it will necessarily cost $1 trillion, but they'll need some kind of help, and it very well could happen this year," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research
Investors are signaling growing concern as well. The yield premium for securities backed by Freddie and Fannie compared to the yield on Treasury bills has grown to about 2.25 percentage points from 1.7 percentage points at the beginning of the year. That's a sign that the investors see a greater risk of Fannie and Freddie running into bigger problems.
And OFHEO, in its annual report this week, said that while Fannie and Freddie have made progress clearing up accounting problems that had dogged both firms, they remain "a significant supervisory risk."
The agency added that since current home price declines are without precedent, the firms will have a difficult time correctly pricing the risk of the mortgages they're backing.
But Jaret Seiberg, financial services analyst for policy research firm Stanford Group, said Fannie and Freddie ultimately should be able to weather the storm though simply because there is no question that the government would bail them out.
So there shouldn't be a crisis of confidence about their future in the way that there was for investment bank Bear Stearns before the Fed stepped in and agreed to back $29 billion in potential losses so JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) could buy Bear Stearns (BSC, Fortune 500).
"What has allowed Fannie and Freddie to continue to operate when the private mortgage-backed security market dried up is their implicit government guarantee," said Seiberg.
First Published: April 21, 2008: 3:51 AM EDT
A gift from the Beltway
The next bailout: Homeowners
Risks are rising that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may need a government bailout that could cost far more than previous rescues.http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/21/news/economy/fannie_freddie/index.htm?postversion=2008042105NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Among the nightmares lurking around the corner for the already battered housing and credit markets would be a meltdown at mortgage financing giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Although few are predicting an imminent need for a bailout just yet, credit rating agency Standard & Poor's recently placed an estimated price tag on this worst case scenario -- $420 billion to $1.1 trillion of taxpayer's money.
This dwarfs how much it cost to help banks during the savings and loan crisis of the late 1980's and early 1990's. That cost taxpayers about $250 billion in today's dollars.
S&P added that saving Fannie (FNM) and Freddie (FRE, Fortune 500) might cost so much that the federal government's AAA credit rating, the top possible rating, might even be at risk. If that was lost, then all federal government borrowing would become more expensive.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both help the mortgage market function by purchasing pools of loans and packaging them into securities.
So it is crucial for the mortgage industry for the two agencies to continue functioning smoothly.
The two companies are known as government-sponsored entities because they have Congressional charters, which implies that the federal government is behind them.
Fannie did not comment about the S&P report. According to a statement from Freddie, the firm said the S&P report was just "a scenario analysis, not a prediction" and added that "Freddie Mac remains a well capitalized company."
Victoria Wagner, a S&P credit analyst who worked on the report, said S&P isn't predicting that Fannie and Freddie would necessarily need a bailout at this time.
But she and other analysts are concerned about the impact more problems could have on the mortgage market since the two companies have become increasingly important to the health of the industry. Both companies are forecast to report more losses this year due to declining home prices and rising mortgage defaults.
Risks increasing
Wagner pointed out that at the end of January, 82% of all mortgages in the U.S. were backed by one of the firms, up from only 46% in the second quarter of 2007.
Fannie and Freddie primarily back so-called conforming loans, those made to borrowers with good credit and large down payments. But even limited exposure to subprime loans hasn't stopped them from running up huge losses as home prices tumbled and foreclosures soared.
And Fannie and Freddie's role in the mortgage and real estate markets is likely to grow, as Congress recently allowed them to back larger mortgages, up to $729,750, up from the previous limit of $417,000.
The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO), which regulates both firms, also recently lowered the capital requirements for Fannie and Freddie in an effort to pump $200 billion more into the credit markets.
The new loan limits will increase the risks and losses for Fannie and Freddie, said Wagner and other experts.
The high priced markets where homeowners and buyers need larger loans are now the ones seeing steep home price declines. And the default rates on larger loans are greater than the smaller loans that had previously been the core of their business.
"I don't think the message is a bailout is necessary or imminent," Wagner said. "But they're facing this increased role at a time that their own credit performance is suffering from the rifts in the housing and mortgage markets. They're both projecting much higher losses than we've seen in some time."
Some see bailout as more likely
But other experts expect that declining home values will force more borrowers who have a Fannie- or Freddie-backed loan to stop making payments in the coming months, rather than continuing to make payments on a home now worth less than their loan balance.
Rising job losses may also make it difficult for other borrowers who formerly had good credit to stay current on their mortgage payments.
"The real fundamental problem is real estate prices have been falling and they might fall substantially more," said Robert Shiller, a Yale University economist who argued for years that a bubble was forming in real estate prices. "OFHEO and Fannie and Freddie never considered the possibility of a massive real estate correction."
Some economists suggest that if investors start to see problems in the performance of loans backed by Fannie and Freddie, they'll dumping them. And that would force the federal government to step in.
"I would say there's at least a 50-50 chance of some sort of bailout. I'm not saying it will necessarily cost $1 trillion, but they'll need some kind of help, and it very well could happen this year," said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research
Investors are signaling growing concern as well. The yield premium for securities backed by Freddie and Fannie compared to the yield on Treasury bills has grown to about 2.25 percentage points from 1.7 percentage points at the beginning of the year. That's a sign that the investors see a greater risk of Fannie and Freddie running into bigger problems.
And OFHEO, in its annual report this week, said that while Fannie and Freddie have made progress clearing up accounting problems that had dogged both firms, they remain "a significant supervisory risk."
The agency added that since current home price declines are without precedent, the firms will have a difficult time correctly pricing the risk of the mortgages they're backing.
But Jaret Seiberg, financial services analyst for policy research firm Stanford Group, said Fannie and Freddie ultimately should be able to weather the storm though simply because there is no question that the government would bail them out.
So there shouldn't be a crisis of confidence about their future in the way that there was for investment bank Bear Stearns before the Fed stepped in and agreed to back $29 billion in potential losses so JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) could buy Bear Stearns (BSC, Fortune 500).
"What has allowed Fannie and Freddie to continue to operate when the private mortgage-backed security market dried up is their implicit government guarantee," said Seiberg.
First Published: April 21, 2008: 3:51 AM EDTA gift from the Beltway
The next bailout: Homeowners
I wonder if their failure could be traced. Certified, return receipt would
keep them honest (one would hope) and if not, can they be held liable
as other 401k fund managers can (law passed not that long ago).
:suspicious:
12%ayear
Well-known member
The only way the economy will start to heal itself is with a stronger US DOLLAR. The Fed needs to start increasing interest rates ASAP. With a stronger dollar you will have lower oil prices. Real Estate is another story. Overbuilding and more sellers than buyers. The banks are not lending money out and buyers are afraid or do not meet standards. We need higher rates to fight inflation. Higher rates will also inspire CD rates.
hessian
Member
Hi 12%,
Others share your sentiment/concern - may be getting started (may also need some help as suggested):
"At 9:25 AM this morning, the Dollar started its move up. Also, its Relative Strength finally broke out of its consolidation in early trading this morning and shot up. The Dollar is now gaining the oomph needed for the upside move. I expect the strength to continue up and along with it, a rise in the Dollar." :worried:
http://stocktiming.com/Thursday-DailyMarketUpdate.htmSent my objection letter to the TSP Board requesting a reveiw/reconsideration...because I only had three IFT in February (the last going back to G fund). They agreed with my IFTs as presented....but they counted a final IFT on Feb 29 (which was the 4th IFT to them and which didn't take affect until March 1) and said that it was my fourth IFT for Feburary (which is BS caues it took affect in March...not February...but they didn't want to hear that or even acknowledge that). That made (to them) 4 ITFs in February.. so they locked me out. They didn't care that I was out of my home state until mid February and didn't get the letter until 3 IFTs were already made in February. They didn't acknowledge that the last IFT was effected in March. The AHoles just said that their decision was the final decision and there was no discussion...no appeal. They don't give a damn about fairness or about wht that decision did to us..they are just on some power trip...and are playing it for all it's worth. I just hope they get their just do in the end. I wish they were held personally responsible for all the loss that this stupid, irresponsible decision cost us in lossed profit on our money. I would love to see this go to a court trial. They would all loss their precious jobs.
Enough complaining..just wanted all to know that an IFT on the last day of the month counts for that month...and maybe for the next month too...when it takes affect...if it benefits the stupid Board.
Enough complaining..just wanted all to know that an IFT on the last day of the month counts for that month...and maybe for the next month too...when it takes affect...if it benefits the stupid Board.
12%ayear
Well-known member
IMO..the US DOLLAR will have some momo for a few days. Staying in the S FUND.
Steadygain
TSP Elite
This morning's report of Rising Dollar and Falling Oil made me wish I was high risk all the way.
Good job 12% - it's hard to say from one day to the next - but if the Dollar is really getting stronger that would be a big plus for the Markets.
Similar threads
- Article