• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Conservatism: there are some people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Meanwhile over at truth Social, the former president is busy confessing to crimes.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

Fuck these fucking interesting times.

Battle won, war still ongoing.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

Everybody saw this coming.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Republicans in disarray!

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

“Can i answer the question? No you can not!”

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

It’s the corruption, stupid.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

After roe, women are no longer free.

The next time the wall street journal editorial board speaks the truth will be the first.

Within six months Twitter will be fully self-driving.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Second rate reporter says what?

They fucked up the fucking up of the fuckup!

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Bust like a bubble

Bust like a bubble

by DougJ|  May 11, 200912:00 pm| 117 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

A graph of the Case-Schiller housing price index since 2000.

You can see it’s still up 43% over nine years. That works out to about almost exactly 4% a year (compound interest, bitches). Not that bad.

Things just really went nuts for a little while there with the ownership society (though, no, I’m not blaming Bush).

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Private Crash Override and Sergeant Acid Burn
Next Post: Open Thread »

Reader Interactions

117Comments

  1. 1.

    Michael D.

    May 11, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    Oh look. There’s my house sitting right on top of that hill!

  2. 2.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    That works out to about almost exactly 4% a year (compound interest, bitches). Not that bad.

    I’m glad individual’s income has kept pace. The price of housing is quite reasonable–along with its property taxes.

  3. 3.

    Pooh

    May 11, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    Why not?

  4. 4.

    zzyzx

    May 11, 2009 at 12:23 pm

    I’m still amused that I bought my house in May 2003 and managed to use the paper equity of the bubble to refinance an 80/20 into a conventional 30 year fixed. I had no clue what I was doing but it turns out that I somehow timed it right and by staying conservative (didn’t pull out any of the faux-equity) I escaped the disasters of the era. It’s almost like I had a plan.

  5. 5.

    wasabi gasp

    May 11, 2009 at 12:24 pm

    Sullivan posted this video sometime in the last half of 2007. It was something of a wake-up call as I wasn’t paying close attention to the markets at the time. It eventually saved me a few bucks, but I really wish I fully listened to the queasy message that my stomach was giving me.

  6. 6.

    Bill H

    May 11, 2009 at 12:29 pm

    I bought my house in 1995, 40% down, and financed with a 30-year fixed. I refinanced once to get a bit lower rate, took no cash out but did roll the cost into the loan. So I now owe about 60% of the original purchase price, and about 40% of it’s current value on a 3019-year fixed at 5-1/8%. I am laughing at all of those brokers who laughed at me for not “taking advantage of the equity in my home” to live it up.

  7. 7.

    Ivan Ivanovich Renko

    May 11, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    @zzyzx: We did much the same thing (that was Jan 2003), with a zero-down-payment 30 year fixed… and from this graph it looks like we’re still up a bit.

    The slope of the curve is still pretty steep, though…

  8. 8.

    bago

    May 11, 2009 at 12:32 pm

    Word to your moms.
    I’ve come to drop bombs.
    MemoGate steps up.
    Double strength loose leaf moroccan mint tea kicks ass.

  9. 9.

    SpotWeld

    May 11, 2009 at 12:33 pm

    Anyone remember that anmation of historical housing prices represented as a rollercoater track? It was done in (ponders) 02? 03?

    It left off in the middle of a huge upwards climb.

    I’m curious to see if it ever got updated with the latest numbers.

  10. 10.

    ThatLeftTurnInABQ

    May 11, 2009 at 12:36 pm

    Oh look. There’s my house sitting right on top of that hill!

    So that’s what Ronnie Roo meant by “a shining city on a hill”.

    Everything that’s happened since 1980, it all makes so much more sense now.

  11. 11.

    Rex

    May 11, 2009 at 12:38 pm

    Does anyone know the calculation for determining compound interest over a period when you know the ultimate amount and the inception amount and the number of periods?

    Thanks in advance if anyone can help.

  12. 12.

    DougJ

    May 11, 2009 at 12:45 pm

    Does anyone know the calculation for determining compound interest over a period when you know the ultimate amount and the inception amount and the number of periods?

    Take the ultimate amount and divide by the inception amount. Call that M. Let n be the number of periods.

    Take the n-th root of M.

    That will give you the amount of interest you got per period.

    (I’m assuming that’s what you’re asking for.)

  13. 13.

    lovethebomb

    May 11, 2009 at 12:45 pm

    Yo, my crib’s paid for bitches. Been livin in my 24′ RV for 6 years. Suck on dat home boys!

  14. 14.

    Michael G

    May 11, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    (though, no, I’m not blaming Bush).

    I think you can, if you want. Bush certainly took credit for the housing bubble when it was seen as a good thing.

  15. 15.

    DougJ

    May 11, 2009 at 12:51 pm

    I think you can, if you want.

    It’s more Greenspan’s fault than anyone else.

  16. 16.

    douglasfactors

    May 11, 2009 at 12:51 pm

    Nice to see that housing prices have gone from obscene to merely ridiculous.

  17. 17.

    PeakVT

    May 11, 2009 at 12:53 pm

    though, no, I’m not blaming Bush

    What’s different with the housing bubble is that Bush wasn’t central to the f*ckup. Greenspan was. Bush certainly flogged home ownership all he could and promoted a culture of non-supervision throughout government. But Greenspan should have noticed the trends in lending and put the brakes on because the Fed is the organization most clearly charged with managing macro-level trends.

  18. 18.

    Xenos

    May 11, 2009 at 12:54 pm

    Expect it to overcompensate on the way down. I thought prices in Boston were unsustainably high in 2000, and since then we have lost thousands of jobs and seen the end of the Big Dig. I may never buy, given my bad attitude.

  19. 19.

    InflatableCommenter

    May 11, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    Im in AZ and AZ real estate has always been a roller coaster.

    Boom and bust, over and over again. If you live here long enough you just get used to it. I figure on a 7-year cycle but this particular bubble is bigger than the typical one so it’s going to take longer to cycle it out, sell off the inventory and stabilize prices. I see a good two more years to reach that point.

    Over time, over a period of at least two cycles of boom and bust, AZ real estate is a decent investment. Short term, know your market, plan for the worst case and have a plan B and a plan C in your pocket. And then have a plan D too.

    Even after the huge boom and bust of the middle 2000’s houses in the neighborhood here would sell today for about 190% what they went for ten years ago.

  20. 20.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 12:56 pm

    @Michael D.: If its on the hill, how come it’s underwater?

  21. 21.

    Rex

    May 11, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    DougJ,

    Thanks! I dug around a bit and found the nth root calc for my HP and tested it. This one had evaded me for a long time. Much appreciated.

  22. 22.

    Walker

    May 11, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    That works out to about almost exactly 4% a year (compound interest, bitches). Not that bad.

    Except that corrections always overshoot. This will go lower. Especially with the CRE and option ARM wave about to hit.

    I have been sitting around mulling a purchase for a while, and I am convinced prices will go lower. Especially since the major employer in the area (my university) will be doing very little hiring over the next 2 years.

  23. 23.

    The Other Steve

    May 11, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    It’s even crazier then that. You have to take the same chart back 30-40 years.

    It’s been insane since like 1997. I bought my first house in 1998, and flipped into a new home in 2004. Glad I did, but we’ll probably want to move again in the next 5 years or so.

    Then again, I keep thinking if I just want more space I could accomplish that by renting a storage unit for $150/month. Probably cheaper then a mortgage.

  24. 24.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 12:59 pm

    @PeakVT:

    But Greenspan should have noticed the trends in lending and put the brakes on because the Fed is the organization most clearly charged with managing macro-level trends.

    From an administrative perspective, Greenspan and Bernenke certainly dropped the ball. That said, they were getting prodded by the investment/savings mega-financial super stores to keep selling the snake oil.

    At the end of the day, you can track the people who deserve the biggest blame by sorting on the size of their paychecks.

  25. 25.

    Steeplejack

    May 11, 2009 at 1:00 pm

    @Rex:

    Does anyone know the calculation for determining compound interest over a period when you know the ultimate amount and the inception amount and the number of periods?

    If I understand you, it sounds like you are trying to calculate the interest rate, not amount, from the starting and ending amounts of money? I say that because calculating the interest amount is much simpler.

    If you have Excel at hand, I think the RATE function will get you what you want, albeit with some doinking around. I do not have Excel at hand, or I would be more specific.

    . . . A quick trip to the Google got this: “How to Compute the Periodic Annual Interest Rate in Microsoft Excel.”

    If you want calculator-fu or pencil-and-paper-fu, I will back away slowly while not making eye contact.

    Edit: Or what DougJ said at 12. My specialty as a systems analyst is overcomplicating problems and then solving the wrong one anyway.

  26. 26.

    Walker

    May 11, 2009 at 1:01 pm

    @The Other Steve:

    It’s been insane since like 1997.

    Bubble Blog conventional wisdom is that prices will revert to 1998+inflation.

  27. 27.

    The Other Steve

    May 11, 2009 at 1:03 pm

    Except that corrections always overshoot. This will go lower. Especially with the CRE and option ARM wave about to hit.

    I think it’ll go down a bit, but not much.

    We’ll see if it levels off through summer.

  28. 28.

    Robertdsc-iphone

    May 11, 2009 at 1:05 pm

    I’m curious & almost totally ignorant on home prices and the whole industry, but I have a question.

    If you buy a house, move in, pay your mortgage, and just live normally, what does it matter if the value of the home goes up or down? As I see it, the rise and fall of the value has what effect, if any, on your daily living cycle?

    Call me Phil Gramm, but isn’t this a psychological thing? I don’t get it.

    Please help an uninformed poster out.

  29. 29.

    Church Lady

    May 11, 2009 at 1:07 pm

    Housing prices are still too high when compared to historical norms. Except in periods of high inflation, housing appreciates at a slower pace than the approximate 4% per year you calculate. There’s still a lot of excess in prices, particularly on the coasts.

    Our saving grace is that we live in a place that didn’t really share in the bubble and we’ve owned our home for so long that we’re still ahead.

  30. 30.

    r€nato

    May 11, 2009 at 1:08 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone: commie.

  31. 31.

    The Other Steve

    May 11, 2009 at 1:08 pm

    BTW. This is sad… US soldier attacks fellow soldiers, kills 5

  32. 32.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 1:09 pm

    It’s more Greenspan’s fault than anyone else.

    It’s more the fault of a flawed unfettered markets philosophy. Greenspan supposedly now realizes the flaw. But Rush Limbaugh, his 14 year old protege’ and the rest of the Right keeps trudging along with it.

  33. 33.

    InflatableCommenter

    May 11, 2009 at 1:10 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone:

    Well, it matters if ….

    – you want to sell, or need to sell, anytime in the near to mid term future (say, your job requires a relocation)
    – you are interested in a second mortgage to pay for needed improvements or maintenance on the property (you live in AZ, and your AC system implodes)
    – you are concerned about the fate of the neighborhood, which becomes more vulnerable in a sagging market
    – you have any financial plan that is tied to home equity directly or indirectly

    That kind of thing.

  34. 34.

    JohnR

    May 11, 2009 at 1:14 pm

    I’m just a simple-minded guy, but doesn’t your post hinge on the assumption that the drop in home prices has just stopped? If, in fact, home prices continue going down, then it seems to me that picking this point is no better than picking any other arbitrary point (like, say, sometime last year) and writing a post on how prices have actually increased A Whole Lot.
    Me, I’d want to wait until things bottom out before I set pen to paper like this, but then you’re the Boss. The Big Cheese. The..

  35. 35.

    gopher2b

    May 11, 2009 at 1:14 pm

    So that’s what Ronnie Roo meant by “a shining city on a hill”.

    Everything that’s happened since 1980, it all makes so much more sense now.

    Yeah, because life in 1978, 1968, 1958 was SO MUCH better.

  36. 36.

    gnomedad

    May 11, 2009 at 1:16 pm

    I can see the Great Depression from my house!

    (Not sure what I mean by that, frankly.)

  37. 37.

    Roger Moore

    May 11, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    @Zifnab:

    From an administrative perspective, Greenspan and Bernenke certainly dropped the ball. That said, they were getting prodded by the investment/savings mega-financial super stores to keep selling the snake oil.

    Sure, but the whole point of having an organization like the Fed is that they’re supposed to have the balls to say no. If they give in to pressure from the financial industry, they might as well not exist. We could let the industry (mis)manage itself and cut out the middle man.

  38. 38.

    Michael D.

    May 11, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone:

    If you buy a house, move in, pay your mortgage, and just live normally, what does it matter if the value of the home goes up or down? As I see it, the rise and fall of the value has what effect, if any, on your daily living cycle?

    You are right; it doesn’t really have an effect. My house is worth $50k less than I paid for it a few years back – but my mortgage is still the same, next year my property taxes will probably go down a little.

    The problem for people who bought homes is that many of them – myself included – bought homes as investments. I was going to live there for about 5 years and sell it at a profit.

    The problem for banks is that the house I bought for $250k is now only worth $200k – so their asset is not worth what they have invested in it. I put $15k down on the house, so I now owe $235. So the bank has $235 invested in a property that only is worth $200 – or something like that. The other issue the banks have is people who say “Hmmm, my house is worth a LOT less than what I paid for it. Time to mail the bank the keys a cut my losses.”

    If you bought a house to live in forever, then you probably are fine.

  39. 39.

    Church Lady

    May 11, 2009 at 1:17 pm

    @The Other Steve:

    That’s just horrible. And sad.

  40. 40.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone: If you buy your home at a housing bubble “peak” you’ll be paying a much fatter mortgage than you would during a dip. So, with the wave of ups and downs, your mortgage can vary hundreds or thousands of dollars a month depending on when you buy. That’s a big deal in one’s living cycle.

    If you buy a house “low” in a high-demand area like New York City or San Fransisco, and your house suddenly quadruples in price, you could be looking at an early retirement. If you buy a house “high”, and the price crashes with the market, and the small business you work for goes under, and you have to move across town or across state or across the country to re-employ yourself, you’re sitting on a note worth hundreds of thousands of dollars more than the house you can no longer afford to live in.

    So it’s kinda a big deal, in regards to standard of living.

  41. 41.

    AnotherBruce

    May 11, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    Call me Phil Gramm, but isn’t this a psychological thing? I don’t get it.

    Please help an uninformed poster out.

    If you can afford your mortgage payment and like the place that you live, and are no hurry to move someplace else, it probably doesn’t matter much what the market value of your house is.

    But if something changes, say you lose your job, or get another job that pays more but you would have to move, it could start to matter in a hurry if you are making too large a mortgage payment per the market value of your house. In one case, you will have trouble keeping your house, in the other case, you will not be able to sell your house and not take a financial hit.

    Gah, blockquotes.

  42. 42.

    DecidedFenceSitter

    May 11, 2009 at 1:19 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone:

    No it doesn’t. But you get into situations like mine. My wife and I got married in 2002, bought a house in 2003 for 140K. In the intervening years, houses when as much as 270-290K on our block; however, currently, they are down anywhere from 50-70K thanks to the foreclosure market.

    The problem is that my wife and I are divorcing. And what to do with the house came up – we can’t sell, we’re drastically underwater. We can’t refinance, we’re drastically underwater.

    So we’ve worked a couple of agreements with each other (thankfully it was an amiable divorce), and I should be able to get along just fine – but I’m stuck here in this house probably for the next several years until prices rise.

    And heavens help me if I lose my job.

  43. 43.

    Punchy

    May 11, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    Does anyone know the calculation for determining compound interest over a period when you know the ultimate amount and the inception amount and the number of periods?

    Thanks in advance if anyone can help.

    It’s whatever the bank claims it is, divided by most likely 3 or 4.

  44. 44.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    @Roger Moore:

    We could let the industry (mis)manage itself and cut out the middle man.

    We could. And under avid Ayn Rand libertarian enthusiast Greenspan’s management, we did.

  45. 45.

    PeakVT

    May 11, 2009 at 1:22 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone: The wealth effect. The more assets people believe they have the more they spend. If somebody sees the paper value of their $150K house go to $300K, they buy more flatscreens and SUVs and save less cash. Now that people have seen that home go from $300K to $180K – after a $50K HELOC has been added on top of the original mortgage – they are spending less and saving more.

    We’ve also had a second stock bubble pop (nowhere near as big the tech bubble but stocks were overvalued nonetheless) and a commodities bubble pop, so most people’s nominal net worth is really hurting right now.

    The fact that people are going to have to save a lot more than they have – especially those who are (or were) planning on retiring soon – is why the recovery is unlikely to be robust.

  46. 46.

    KG

    May 11, 2009 at 1:23 pm

    Sweet:

    The Justice Department’s new antitrust enforcer vowed today that the Obama administration would be much tougher on mergers and companies that abuse their power, linking lax Bush-era policies to other regulatory failures that she said helped spark the deep recession.

  47. 47.

    Punchy

    May 11, 2009 at 1:25 pm

    If you buy a house, move in, pay your mortgage, and just live normally, what does it matter if the value of the home goes up or down? As I see it, the rise and fall of the value has what effect, if any, on your daily living cycle?

    It matters for property taxes, I think. Or maybe not.

  48. 48.

    Michael D.

    May 11, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    @PeakVT:

    The fact that people are going to have to save a lot more than they have – especially those who are (or were) planning on retiring soon – is why the recovery is unlikely to be robust.

    My budget includes:

    – Mortgage

    – Utilities

    – Beer

    – Mac & Cheese

  49. 49.

    KG

    May 11, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    ideally, the value of your home gradually increases, maybe slightly outpacing inflation, so that when you retire, you can sell your house, move into a smaller place and have a nice little nest egg on which to live out your years. But that’s a long view thing – minimum 20 years. Day to day, week to week, much like the Dow Jones, it shouldn’t really matter.

  50. 50.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    @KG: And now the DOW is down 117 points. Coinkydink? Johan Goldberg thinks not.

  51. 51.

    The Other Steve

    May 11, 2009 at 1:33 pm

    And now the DOW is down 117 points. Coinkydink? Johan Goldberg thinks not.

    This is clearly Obama’s fault.

  52. 52.

    KG

    May 11, 2009 at 1:33 pm

    @Zifnab: well, Goldberg is a tool of the oligarchy, so he’s going to think/say/do some very stupid things.

  53. 53.

    Dennis-SGMM

    May 11, 2009 at 1:34 pm

    @KG:
    That may be the first time I’ve ever seen the word “lax” used as a euphemism for “nonexistent.” The only difference between the Wall Streeters during the Bush years and the guy in the ski mask holding up a liquor store is scale.

  54. 54.

    Dennis-SGMM

    May 11, 2009 at 1:37 pm

    Jonah Goldblob thinks – not.

  55. 55.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 1:42 pm

    I think it’ll go down a bit, but not much.

    -Precrash stock market advisers 2006

  56. 56.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 1:43 pm

    The only difference between the Wall Streeters during the Bush years and the guy in the ski mask holding up a liquor store is scale.

    And the bonuses. And the goldplated hookers. And the…etc.

  57. 57.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 1:44 pm

    @Zifnab:

    Erin Burnett said on Morning Joe this morning that the market is going down today because Obama’s stimulus package is working too slowly into the economy. And that we should be more like China whose stimulus is already paying dividends. Does anyone see the irony in that? Heh.

  58. 58.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 1:44 pm

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    The only difference between the Wall Streeters during the Bush years and the guy in the ski mask holding up a liquor store is scale that the Wall Streeters got to be on the cover of Fortune 500 then and now.

    Please, I WISH the only difference was scale. This was most atrocious because it was all legal.

  59. 59.

    Roger Moore

    May 11, 2009 at 1:46 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone:

    If you buy a house, move in, pay your mortgage, and just live normally, what does it matter if the value of the home goes up or down? As I see it, the rise and fall of the value has what effect, if any, on your daily living cycle?

    It makes very little difference as long as everything stays the same, but it makes a big difference if something changes. You might lose your job and have trouble making your payments. In that case, equity gives you a cushion. Or if something good happens that makes you want to move- a transfer to a new city, a bigger house for a bigger family, etc.- you can easily sell the old house without having to get the bank’s permission. If you owe more on your house than it’s worth, you don’t have those options. Those kinds of changes happen far more often than we tend to think- especially people losing their jobs or needing to move for job reasons during a recession- so widespread negative equity is a big problem.

  60. 60.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 1:49 pm

    @Alan: Erin Burnett is clearly a freak’n commie.

  61. 61.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 1:53 pm

    @Zifnab:

    It’s obvious the Chinese/communist model is more efficient than our system. Oh and Obama’s a commie! Take that Dems.

  62. 62.

    The Grand Panjandrum

    May 11, 2009 at 1:54 pm

    @Zifnab: @Zifnab:

    Erin Burnett is clearly a freak’n commie.

    A thrill just went up Tweety’s leg.

  63. 63.

    Cat Lady

    May 11, 2009 at 1:57 pm

    @Alan:

    I think the market’s going down today because everyone ate too many sweets on Mother’s Day. Makes more sense than Erin Burnett’s made up shit.

    I can haz CNBC job now plz?

  64. 64.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 2:04 pm

    And that we should be more like China whose stimulus is already paying dividends.

    Well yes, they also shoot people caught stealing from the people/government mind you.

    Hmmmm.

  65. 65.

    ChrisS

    May 11, 2009 at 2:05 pm

    You can see it’s still up 43% over nine years.

    So you’re saying that sensible, long-term investing is kinda paying off, a little.

    Glad I did, but we’ll probably want to move again in the next 5 years or so.

    Not to single you out, but why do people feel the need to up and move every 5 years because they run out of room for “stuff”?

    A friend of mine is trying to sell a perfectly decent house in a not-so-hot location (and increase his commute by an hour) because his stay-at-home wife doesn’t want to raise their 1-year old in a city neighborhood (which is perfectly fine except for the school, which matters not for at least four more years).

    I don’t get that. Maybe I just hate moving more than the average person.

  66. 66.

    Mike G

    May 11, 2009 at 2:08 pm

    no, I’m not blaming Bush.

    It is the fault of the unregulated-markets-uber-alles ideology that crony-capitalist Bush certainly did nothing to slow down. A philosophy that is predominantly Repig, though certainly with some Dem players.

    Greenspan is probably the single individual mostly to blame, closely followed by Phil Gramm (R-TX-Asshole), the hired tool blocking all regulation of these financial time bombs. Not to mention his wife, who morphed from “managing” the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to the “audit board” of Enron before it imploded. Between them the Gramms have probably cost the US economy over a trillion dollars, and like good little right-wing psychopaths admit to no blame whatsoever. They deserve to rot in the worst jail on earth.

  67. 67.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 2:11 pm

    Phil Gramm (R-TX-Asshole)

    Redundant.

  68. 68.

    Punchy

    May 11, 2009 at 2:19 pm

    OT:

    Your stupid-ass media:

    Headline:

    Gates Recommends McCrystal for Top Command in Afghanistan

    Literally, directly below:

    Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates asked for the resignation today of the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David McKiernan, and recommended that the critical job go to veteran Special Operations commander Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

    You can’t even get his fucking name correct? Doesn’t MSNBC have editors? Are they all on meth?

  69. 69.

    TR

    May 11, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    OT, but a poll on Peter Gerety’s joke about soldiers shooting Pelosi.

    “The complaints are PC fascism” is currently ahead

  70. 70.

    tripletee (formerly tBone)

    May 11, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    @KG:

    Goldberg is a tool of the oligarchy

    Also redundant.

  71. 71.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    “The complaints are PC fascism” is currently ahead

    I see the 101st Keyboard brigade is hard at work over there.

    Another Great Victory for the Redstate Strike Force.

    Also this is good news for McCain.

  72. 72.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    @TR:

    “The complaints are PC fascism” is currently ahead

    Sure, today it’s all “That comment was tasteless and completely off-base”. Tomorrow? 6 million Jews in an oven. Slippery slope, folks. Now just sit down, shut up, and let me publically indulge my wingnut fantasies or I’ll accuse you of fomenting a military dictatorship a second time.

  73. 73.

    Martin

    May 11, 2009 at 2:52 pm

    McKiernan is out.

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say that carpet bombing weddings has been determined by Obama to be an unproductive strategy.

  74. 74.

    Beauzeaux

    May 11, 2009 at 3:04 pm

    Does anyone know where I might find a similar graph comparing average home prices with average incomes?

  75. 75.

    Roger Moore

    May 11, 2009 at 3:06 pm

    @Martin:

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say that carpet bombing weddings has been determined by Obama to be an unproductive strategy.

    What is he thinking? Doesn’t he know that every strategy is a good one as long as the POTUS says that it’s good? By admitting that bombing weddings is anything less than the best possible strategy for making friends in Afghanistan, he’ll make the situation there infinitely worse.</Cheney>

  76. 76.

    Punchy

    May 11, 2009 at 3:08 pm

    @Martin: I’m guessin the local civys haven’t taken too kindly to the grotesque and indiscriminate white phosphorus burns either.

  77. 77.

    Martin

    May 11, 2009 at 3:17 pm

    Does anyone know where I might find a similar graph comparing average home prices with average incomes?

    I don’t know where to look, but you should be looking at median prices vs. median incomes. Property values don’t scale with income except in rare cases, so you get a guy like Warren Buffet who earns somewhere in the vicinity of 100,000x the median income but he only owns one house. Even a guy like Tiger Woods who has an absurdly expensive house still has far less of his income dedicated to it than most people.

    But I’d be interested in seeing a graph like that.

  78. 78.

    Dennis-SGMM

    May 11, 2009 at 3:29 pm

    This Week’s Savior of the Republican Party:
    Actor Gary Sinise

    Nicolle Wallace, a top adviser to George W. Bush and John McCain’s presidential campaign, is adding a few names to the list of Republicans who might lead the GOP out of the wilderness.
    Top among them? Actor Gary Sinise.
    Wallace, writing on The Daily Beast, said she first heard the idea from a fellow Republican.
    “The natural strengths that an actor brings to politics would come in handy to anyone going up against Obama in 2012,” she wrote. “We will need an effective communicator who can stand toe to toe with Obama’s eloquence.”

    C’mon Republicans, speak the name that’s really in your hearts: Rush Limbaugh 2012!

  79. 79.

    joe from Lowell

    May 11, 2009 at 3:37 pm

    You know what would be a great name for a band?

    “The Pwnership Society”

  80. 80.

    AnneLaurie

    May 11, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    If you buy a house, move in, pay your mortgage, and just live normally, what does it matter if the value of the home goes up or down? As I see it, the rise and fall of the value has what effect, if any, on your daily living cycle?
    You are right; it doesn’t really have an effect. My house is worth $50k less than I paid for it a few years back – but my mortgage is still the same, next year my property taxes will probably go down a little.

    The problem for people who bought homes is that many of them – myself included – bought homes as investments. I was going to live there for about 5 years and sell it at a profit.

    Once the tech bubble popped, the Robber Baron side of the Republican Golden Triangle pushed up the noise level on housing as the ‘perfect investment’, with concommitant financial trickery to get as many people into the homeowner category as possible. In the short term, as people like James Kunstler have been pointing out (shrilly), this created millions of jobs building new housing, selling stuff to the patsies who bought those houses, and writing new & inventive forms of semi-fraudulent mortgages to get money from the patsies.

    In the slightly longer term, the ramping up of home “values” as “investment” disguised the fact that wages were stagnant even as productivity increased. It wasn’t supposed to matter that the income of the statutory Every-voter was actually trickling downward even as the Top Percentile’s income shot upwards… sure, you might not have a pension any longer, and one medical crisis could destroy your credit forever, but hey! Your house has gone up in value by 60% over the last 18 months!

    The impetus was for people to treat their own personal household spaces the way their financial masters were treating them — as unlimited sources of short-term gratification. People assumed that a condo in Miami or Las Vegas could be sold at a 500% profit to fund the retirements that Social Security wasn’t going to cover. People assumed that “only going up” home values would give them a safety net if a family catastrophe (illness, job loss, divorce) forced them to sell, since wages weren’t rising nearly as fast as inflation so nobody could afford to save. And, yeah, people watched the way their “betters” — Alan Greenspan, Dubya Bush, Bernie Madoff — acted as though the end of the next fiscal quarter was as far forward as anybody could reasonably plan, and started bleeding *equity* with complicated second mortgages, ‘flipping’, etc. to finance the ‘necessary luxuries’ which our incomes wouldn’t cover but to which we felt entitled.

  81. 81.

    Comrade Kevin

    May 11, 2009 at 3:50 pm

    @Punchy:

    You can’t even get his fucking name correct? Doesn’t MSNBC have editors? Are they all on meth?

    MSNBC? The article you linked to is from the Washington Post.

  82. 82.

    AnneLaurie

    May 11, 2009 at 3:50 pm

    I swear the third paragraph in #80 was block-quoted in preview! And what the heck happened to my ‘edit’ function?

  83. 83.

    kay

    May 11, 2009 at 3:56 pm

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    It’s just that “matching the moment”, as a cure-all, is tricky.

    They can’t just slot someone in now and “match the moment” in 2012, or they would have nominated Romney, and had someone coherent on hand when the financial system imploded.

    I think they don’t want to 1. compromise, or 2. do any hard work, to rebuild the Republican Party. Obama didn’t appear magically, as a Presidential candidate. What preceded Obama? Howard Dean, statehouses, governors, internet fundraising, the complete implosion of Bush’s Presidency, a riveting primary with two strong candidates…

    It’s so lazy to look for a silver bullet individual. Who are we kidding? Had there been no Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton would be President.

  84. 84.

    jibeaux

    May 11, 2009 at 4:04 pm

    @Robertdsc-iphone:

    It also ties people down in unproductive ways. See, e.g., Detroit. Economy’s a mess, no jobs, people are underwater on their mortgages but they can’t move anywhere a job might be found because of said mortgages. Their options are to default and take the 7 year hit to their credit; sell at a loss for which you’d have to be prepared to cut a check at closing; or to stay put, doing the best they can, probably without a job or with their job in jeopardy. In the voice of Fozzy Bear, you can’t live withyourhouse, you can’t live without it…

  85. 85.

    dmv

    May 11, 2009 at 4:06 pm

    OT, but just wondering if anyone saw this:

    NRCC: Sessions Standing By Claim That Obama Has Secret Plot To Kill Economy

    The crazy train is still whippin’ right along, it appears.

  86. 86.

    Zifnab

    May 11, 2009 at 4:07 pm

    @AnneLaurie:

    acted as though the end of the next fiscal quarter was as far forward as anybody could reasonably plan, and started bleeding equity with complicated second mortgages, ‘flipping’, etc. to finance the ‘necessary luxuries’ which our incomes wouldn’t cover but to which we felt entitled.

    Well, shit. That Hummer doesn’t pay for itself.

  87. 87.

    Dennis-SGMM

    May 11, 2009 at 4:11 pm

    @kay:
    Her other two picks were generals Odierno and Petraeus. The line about eloquence is to me a sign that they’re still not grappling with the fact that they lost because their ideas are in no way resonant with more than 20% of America. You can be the most eloquent person in the world and you’ll still run out of ways to say “Tax cuts.”
    It’s like they fished out a ’61 DeSoto that fell through the ice during the Reagan years and their answer is “A coat of paint and she’ll be good as new.”

  88. 88.

    Brachiator

    May 11, 2009 at 4:13 pm

    @Beauzeaux:

    Does anyone know where I might find a similar graph comparing average home prices with average incomes?

    This might scare you (U.S. Home Prices vs. Median Incomes).

    You might also try something basic like a google search of “home prices graphs” to see what turns up.

    By the way, a good blog for housing related analysis is Calculated Risk.

    Tanta, one of the founders, was absolutely on the mark with respect to the looming financial disasters related to the housing bubble. Although she passed away recently, others are keeping up the good work.

  89. 89.

    Punchy

    May 11, 2009 at 4:20 pm

    MSNBC? The article you linked to is from the Washington Post.

    Even my rants are full of errors. I need a beer or three.

  90. 90.

    kay

    May 11, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    @Dennis-SGMM:

    I read it. HRC wasn’t eloquent. Her defining characteristic is not eloquence, but competence, and familiarity with policy. My eyes glazed over listening to her, but I saw the appeal.

    The policy she was espousing was boiler-plate modern-Democrat, and had the magical-voodoo-hypnotist Barack Obama not appeared on the scene, she wouda beat McCain. Is that in doubt? It shouldn’t be.

    How do they explain that away? HRC, if anything, is a more traditional Big Gubmint Democrat than Obama. Why were people voting for her? It wasn’t eloquence.

  91. 91.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 4:28 pm

    @Cat Lady:

    I think the market’s going down today because everyone ate too many sweets on Mother’s Day. Makes more sense than Erin Burnett’s made up shit.
    I can haz CNBC job now plz?

    She suggested a little skepticism that today’s decline is Obama’s fault. But nonetheless did Wall Street’s bidding. I also read at Huffington Post that Pete Sessions thinks Obama is conspiring to dissolve our capitalistic system. And Rush Limbaugh found an audio clip of Howard Dean saying we’ve had too much capitalism. And that Dean wants to regulate it out of existence. Coordinated attack against the governing party or just a typical RW day? You make the call… :)

  92. 92.

    Wile E. Quixote

    May 11, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    @gnomedad

    I can see the Great Depression from my house!
    (Not sure what I mean by that, frankly.)

    Dude, if you could see Russia and the Great Depression from your house you could use your experience in foreign policy and economics to become a Republican vice presidential candidates. Oh, and if you had tits too.

  93. 93.

    dmv

    May 11, 2009 at 5:00 pm

    @Alan:

    My link here was to a story about that. They asked for a “clarification” of what Sessions meant, and they basically didn’t back off his claim. Nutjobs.

  94. 94.

    binzinerator

    May 11, 2009 at 5:41 pm

    @Michael D.:

    My budget includes:
    – Mortgage
    – Utilities
    – Beer
    – Mac & Cheese

    Damn. Just add daycare at $25k/yr and that’s my budget too!

    ps. Fucking blockquoting. Hate it.

    edit: hey looks like adding bold tags inside the blockquote make it work across lines.

  95. 95.

    Alan

    May 11, 2009 at 5:48 pm

    @dmv:

    It’s amazing the lengths they’ll go to indirectly accuse Obama as anti-American/anti-capitalistic. I bet the $2 trillion savings the health insurance companies are proposing is nothing more than a plan to keep the industry riding the profit gravy train. This while transferring more risk onto the government. That’s the real American way. (chortle)

  96. 96.

    asiangrrlMN

    May 11, 2009 at 5:52 pm

    I personally hope Obama does dismantle the so-called free-market capitalist system we have as it has only benefited the top two percent or so. Then, we can work on cobbling together a system that will benefit a vast majority of Americans, not just the ‘go galters’.

    As for Sessions, all the GOP has is crazy. They have proven that they are loath to give that up.

  97. 97.

    Brachiator

    May 11, 2009 at 5:53 pm

    @kay:

    It’s so lazy to look for a silver bullet individual. Who are we kidding? Had there been no Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton would be President.

    Then I guess we should get down on our knees everyday and thank the goddess that Obama came along.

    More seriously, one could speculate endlessly — and pointlessly — over the possible outcome of a McCain/Hillary matchup. Both candidates ran doofus primary campaigns, and McCain went on to run a doofus general election campaign. And we don’t know who either candidate might have selected as a VP choice. Obama might still be in the Senate and we might never have heard of Sarah Palin unless we were travelin’ to Alaska.

    Does anyone know where I might find a similar graph comparing average home prices with average incomes?

    Turns out that the excellent Calculated Risk site has a very informative graph that looks at a housing price to median income ratio to measure housing affordability. The closer the number is to 1.0, the more affordable housing prices are. The entry for February 2009 can be found here.

    This index is a little cleaner than graphing housing prices and incomes independently.

    They asked for a “clarification” of what Sessions meant, and they basically didn’t back off his claim.

    Wow. Just wow.

    A spokesperson for NRCC chief Pete Sessions is not backing off Sessions’ surprising suggestion in an interview that Obama has a secret plot to kill the free enterprise system as part of a “divide and conquer” strategy to consolidate and hold power.

    So I guess the Republicans have drawn the line in the sand. Instead of re-examining and refining their core beliefs in the face of failure and rejection, they have decided to throw their whole hand in on the idea that Obama is The Other who secretly plans to subvert everything that represents “real America.”

    The GOP is calling for an ideological Civil War.

    Everybody better buckle up. This is going to be, as Cokie Roberts might say, “interesting.”

  98. 98.

    JenJen

    May 11, 2009 at 5:55 pm

    O/T, but Harold Ford is drivin’ me up a tree on Hardball right now. Tweety just handled him and his usual bullshit “this is why I voted in lock-step with what Dick Cheney wanted” shtick pretty well, I must admit.

    I have just never, ever, ever liked this guy.

  99. 99.

    asiangrrlMN

    May 11, 2009 at 5:59 pm

    @lovethebomb: Heh. This is funny.

    @Alan: Well, Greenspan sort of recognized the flaw of unfettered free markets, but not really. He thinks his biggest flaw is trusting that the markets would regulate themselves. In other words, unfettered free markets would work in a Randian world. Thanks, dumbass (that’s for Greenspan).

    P.S. We didn’t really have a true free-market system, or the “too big to fail” institutions would be gone by now.

  100. 100.

    That One - Cain

    May 11, 2009 at 6:03 pm

    OT: today is my birthday, I have joined the old farts club of 40 and above. :-)

    cain

  101. 101.

    terry chay

    May 11, 2009 at 6:05 pm

    @ChrisS: I have a friend who had a second child so they moved to a larger place last year after buying a place only four years before. They also cited the school system being better there as the oldest is now approaching that level.

    Given their social status and the volatility of the market, I think they could have planned better, but that’s just me.

  102. 102.

    kay

    May 11, 2009 at 6:10 pm

    @Brachiator:

    Well, we disagree. I don’t think Clinton’s choice for VP would have made a bit of difference, just like I don’t think Palin killed McCain’s chances.

    HRC would have won Florida and Ohio. They were ready to elect a Democrat, and it had nothing to do with “eloquence”. It had to do with the fact that it came home to them, hard, that Republicans hadn’t been working in their best interest, on the economy. Even Iraq was economic. People didn’t know why we rebuilding Iraq when our bridges were falling down.

    I credit Obama with a well-run campaign. I was an Obama delegate. I was on the Obama train early, at the state convention level, but I would have happily voted for HRC had she won the primary, and she would have won the general.

  103. 103.

    asiangrrlMN

    May 11, 2009 at 6:11 pm

    @That One – Cain: Happy birthday to you! Age is a state of mind.

    I think that during the bubble, Americans in general bought the idea that house prices would never fall again. This is the cultural pap that was being fed to us, and many swallowed it. Unfortunately, now these same people are dealing with the ramifications of that lie.

  104. 104.

    Dennis-SGMM

    May 11, 2009 at 6:23 pm

    @That One – Cain:
    Happy birthday! Old fartism begins at sixty, kid – I’m sixty-one. Time to go outside and yell at clouds.

  105. 105.

    Little Dreamer

    May 11, 2009 at 6:25 pm

    Things just really went nuts for a little while there with the ownership society (though, no, I’m not blaming Bush).

    Why not? Bush said “go shopping” and didn’t qualify if that was window shopping, or only the people who could afford to shop should shop – so people went out and started buying up property they couldn’t afford. I blame Bush, he started this mess.

    At least when someone approached me and told me I could buy a house and wouldn’t have to worry about qualifying, I just laughed in her face and turned to my then husband and said “NO!”.

  106. 106.

    asiangrrlMN

    May 11, 2009 at 6:32 pm

    @Little Dreamer: See, you have a good head on your shoulders. My best friend did the same thing. Her person told her she and her hubby were qualified for twice the house they wanted. She said no. She wanted to be able to carry the mortgage on one salary. Her husband got laid-off soon after, and she’s so glad they didn’t buy more house.

    I agree. W. saying go shopping without qualifying the statement was just idiotic. We are a country that doesn’t save. The last thing we needed at that point was to be told to go further into debt. Now, when we need to spend, most people can’t afford it.

  107. 107.

    Little Dreamer

    May 11, 2009 at 6:37 pm

    @Brachiator:

    The GOP is calling for an ideological Civil War.

    It’s not just ideological when they also throw out little soundbites about secession too. Civil War No. 2 is right around the corner.

  108. 108.

    Little Dreamer

    May 11, 2009 at 6:54 pm

    @asiangrrlMN:

    Isn’t it interesting how many people were approached to try to do things quite differently than they had always been done and how many took the bait?

    It was a feast of cheap credit with little to no qualifying and most people didn’t think twice about the consequences at all.

    One way to know if the market is correctly working, there are no credit salesman hunting down new business from every man and woman who passes them by on street corners.

  109. 109.

    2liberal

    May 11, 2009 at 7:29 pm

    @michaelD

    Oh look. There’s my house sitting right on top of that hill!

    yup. right next door to me.

  110. 110.

    TenguPhule

    May 11, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    “We will need an effective communicator who can stand toe to toe with Obama’s eloquence.”

    Or is willing to flash their tits at every debate.

    How long till the first Penthouse Pet VP nominee?

  111. 111.

    AnneLaurie

    May 11, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    Isn’t it interesting how many people were approached to try to do things quite differently than they had always been done and how many took the bait?

    It was a feast of cheap credit with little to no qualifying and most people didn’t think twice about the consequences at all.

    (John Kenneth) Galbraith’s Law: The four most dangerous words in the world are “This time it’s DIFFERENT.”

    “We” spent the last 8-or-30 years pretending this law had been repealed. And it worked as well as jumping off a building to prove the law of gravity had been repealed… those who jump from a taller building get a longer ‘free ride’, but they pay more at the inevitable conclusion too.

  112. 112.

    Little Dreamer

    May 11, 2009 at 7:51 pm

    “We” spent the last 8-or-30 years pretending this law had been repealed. And it worked as well as jumping off a building to prove the law of gravity had been repealed… those who jump from a taller building get a longer ‘free ride’, but they pay more at the inevitable conclusion too.

    Great point, thanks!

  113. 113.

    grumpy realist

    May 11, 2009 at 8:05 pm

    Heh. I’ve got a condo here in Chicago right now; has gone down in value a bit (can anyone explain to me why having the value of your property supposedly go down $25K means $29K gets cut off your house credit line? Silly bank panicking.) Figure that since I’m paying in mortgage what I would have paid in rent anyway that as long as I can sell the building for whatever capital I’ve put in it’s no skin off my nose…

    Oh, and I got the “you can purchase up to SOOO much!” thingie as well. Am glad I didn’t listen. Didn’t even give them a chance to put me in anything more complicated than a 15-year fixed. Figured that if I couldn’t understand the explanation, I didn’t want to do it.

  114. 114.

    robertdsc

    May 11, 2009 at 9:12 pm

    Thank you all for the info.

  115. 115.

    Comrade Mary, Would-Be Minion Of Bad Horse

    May 11, 2009 at 9:18 pm

    When I found out Gary Sinise was a Republican, I was sad. When I found out the first male RealDoll looked uncannily like him (well, above the neck only, as far as I know), I was queasy.

    Male RealDoll. Link SO not safe for work.

  116. 116.

    DPirate

    May 12, 2009 at 1:02 am

    Nothing to worry about. Plenty of places opening up for squaters nowadays. Think of all the free copper!

  117. 117.

    Chuck Butcher

    May 12, 2009 at 2:53 am

    Judas damn priest, I’ve been in the housing business for 35 years and it is this simple – a house is some place to live. If you try to make it something else you are due for a screwing. If you want to buy a bunch for rentals you’ve got investment properties – your home is not.

    You can get yourself real stupid playing at a bubble and maybe make money and maybe get your head handed to you, but that’s gambling and that’s how it goes. If the payments beat renting at a long term look, then buy one, if not – don’t.

    Homes work like this, if after paying property taxes, upkeep, insurance, and intrest you beat inflation you’ve done well. With rentals you try to have somebody else do that for you. Ideas of more are historically nonsense. If you figure you’re different – you’re wrong.

    A home should meet your needs, not some idea of the future markets. You will live in it. Yes, statistically you will sell it in 7 years so don’t be stupid in design. If you are thinking about building a house now is as good a time as you’ll probably see in some time – if your finances are solid and secure. Materials and interest are down and contractors are hungry. The market doesn’t mean shit in that case. If you’re an investor – well then you are an idiot. Pick something that historically produces returns.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Recent Comments

  • Gin & Tonic on War for Ukraine Day 396: The War Grinds On (Mar 26, 2023 @ 9:44pm)
  • Another Scott on Medium Cool – Agatha Christie & Dorothy Sayers, Part III (Mar 26, 2023 @ 9:43pm)
  • Gvg on Sunday Evening Open Thread: The GOP, Now A Full-Scale Mafia (Mar 26, 2023 @ 9:39pm)
  • Bill Arnold on Sunday Evening Open Thread: The GOP, Now A Full-Scale Mafia (Mar 26, 2023 @ 9:38pm)
  • zhena gogolia on War for Ukraine Day 396: The War Grinds On (Mar 26, 2023 @ 9:37pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!