wleebrown
November 14th, 2007, 01:32 PM
I used to reformat my CF card when I put it in the camera. But I started getting card read errors from Lightroom, when in fact the files were readable. This may have been strictly a Mac issue, but once I stopped reformatting the card each time the errors stopped occuring.
Just my $0.02 worth on formatting.
Blessings,
Lee
Just my $0.02 worth on formatting.
Blessings,
Lee
wallpaper funny quotes school. funny quotes for school
mlghyd
08-10 11:15 PM
Any updates on the EAD and 245 rule
mpadapa
08-09 02:30 PM
bump
2011 funny quotes school
sundarpn
04-14 04:45 PM
Hey all,
I have exactly 1.8 yrs left on my h1b. My 6th year starts March 2008.
I am in a permanent job now and my labor (EB3) priority date is Aug 2006.
I-140 with Nebraska has been pending for the last 6 months. (yes I am going to pay 1K and get it converted to premium )
I have another new job offer (permanent) from a company in bedford, boston.
The problem is the new company (like most big companies) will not start GC processing immediately. They may start after 3 months or after 6 months per policy. No commitments. :confused:
So Questions:
1. If the new employer submits labor after my 6th year starts, what are my options? (is it a risk?). In my experience with companies ( I am talking non desi, non consulting companies) it takes 6 months or more to get Perm labor filed.
2. I may not be able to port PD from my current employer as my I140 is still pending and if I give my notice, they will very well cancel it before it gets approved. (Even if I convert to premium now, it will take 3 weeks to get approval and I doubt if the new employer will wait). besides I am doubtful if I can get a copy of the 140 approval.
3. Another option I can think of is forget this offer.
Stick to my current employer, get I140 approved, get my 3 yr H1b extension and then try to switch when I have 3 more years. Is this even a practical / realistic option?
Appreciate any opinions.
I have exactly 1.8 yrs left on my h1b. My 6th year starts March 2008.
I am in a permanent job now and my labor (EB3) priority date is Aug 2006.
I-140 with Nebraska has been pending for the last 6 months. (yes I am going to pay 1K and get it converted to premium )
I have another new job offer (permanent) from a company in bedford, boston.
The problem is the new company (like most big companies) will not start GC processing immediately. They may start after 3 months or after 6 months per policy. No commitments. :confused:
So Questions:
1. If the new employer submits labor after my 6th year starts, what are my options? (is it a risk?). In my experience with companies ( I am talking non desi, non consulting companies) it takes 6 months or more to get Perm labor filed.
2. I may not be able to port PD from my current employer as my I140 is still pending and if I give my notice, they will very well cancel it before it gets approved. (Even if I convert to premium now, it will take 3 weeks to get approval and I doubt if the new employer will wait). besides I am doubtful if I can get a copy of the 140 approval.
3. Another option I can think of is forget this offer.
Stick to my current employer, get I140 approved, get my 3 yr H1b extension and then try to switch when I have 3 more years. Is this even a practical / realistic option?
Appreciate any opinions.
more...
gc28262
08-27 06:37 PM
Use FOIA form to get a copy of your I-140 approval notice. It is a slow process. Can take upto a year to get the document.
USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
kondur_007
07-30 07:32 PM
I am stuck out side of US for my name check for last 9 months when I applied for my H-1. I have approved I 140. is there any way I can file my I 1485 and Advance parole or any thing to get back into US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
I am sorry for what happened to you my friend.
This is what I would suggest:
1. Contact your attorney in US and consider options.
2. File for CP if your PD is current. Basically, it means that USCIS will send your I 140 to DOS to assign to your consulate who will then process your GC (by interviewing just like they do with any other visa). Catch 22 in your situation is that they need name check even for CP. So doing CP may not be a whole lot helpful in getting to US earlier; however, it is something you can do and if your name check is cleared, you might get GC sooner and you will not have to file AOS. Your attorney would be further able to guide you about this.
3. If you have contacts in US, ask them to contact local congressman and that may be helpful to get the name check done sooner.
Good Luck.
(PS: Just like it says in above post, you can not apply 485 while outside US)
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
I am sorry for what happened to you my friend.
This is what I would suggest:
1. Contact your attorney in US and consider options.
2. File for CP if your PD is current. Basically, it means that USCIS will send your I 140 to DOS to assign to your consulate who will then process your GC (by interviewing just like they do with any other visa). Catch 22 in your situation is that they need name check even for CP. So doing CP may not be a whole lot helpful in getting to US earlier; however, it is something you can do and if your name check is cleared, you might get GC sooner and you will not have to file AOS. Your attorney would be further able to guide you about this.
3. If you have contacts in US, ask them to contact local congressman and that may be helpful to get the name check done sooner.
Good Luck.
(PS: Just like it says in above post, you can not apply 485 while outside US)
more...
vjkypally
11-14 09:16 AM
bump
2010 funny quotes school. funny
tnite
08-09 10:45 PM
Thanks to all for their prompt reply on my situation. I am in NJ/NY area. And considering short term course during the period of Jun 2008 to October 2008. Which is almost 3 months. Any one have any idea if any kaplan center or community college provide courses or I20 in summer session?
Getting job in university and some non profit organization is another good option. If we consider that, we can apply for H1 anytime? Please advise some more in this option.
Yes marriage is another option, but only 50% is in my hand for this option.
Please please guys, get me some way out of this situation.
Oh, since my H1 has been denied, can I file for 'Motion to ReOpen'? How long USCIS take to decide on MTR and what are my chances there.
The best option for you is go back to a community college to bridge the gap. Motion to reopen will take a long time.
Getting job in university and some non profit organization is another good option. If we consider that, we can apply for H1 anytime? Please advise some more in this option.
Yes marriage is another option, but only 50% is in my hand for this option.
Please please guys, get me some way out of this situation.
Oh, since my H1 has been denied, can I file for 'Motion to ReOpen'? How long USCIS take to decide on MTR and what are my chances there.
The best option for you is go back to a community college to bridge the gap. Motion to reopen will take a long time.
more...
hebron
06-21 10:58 AM
Hi Guys,
Have a question about porting from EB3 to EB2 suing the experience I gained from my current employer. Can I fall back to my existing EB3 application if I file EB2 labor and I-140 and these get denied? Please suggest and I am also not sure if the requirement that job descriptions have to be 50% different cam be met. Software Engineer and Principal software engineer jobs have same SOC and DOT codes.
Job description when I was hired: (software engineer): Understand client requirements, design, document and develop object-oriented software solutions; debugging and code review, unit tetsing code for all logic and flow, participates in the test review thorugh test review and analysis. Experience require 2-4 years.
My current job description: (Principal Software engineer): Designs, modifies, develops, writes and implements software programming applications. Coordinates work teams - Provides technical support to project team members and co-ordinate with technical team and Quality assurance team. Provide consultation and expertise in a variety of the field's concepts, practices, and procedures on complex projects. Extensive experience and judgment required to plan and accomplish goals. Experience required is 8-10 years.
Have a question about porting from EB3 to EB2 suing the experience I gained from my current employer. Can I fall back to my existing EB3 application if I file EB2 labor and I-140 and these get denied? Please suggest and I am also not sure if the requirement that job descriptions have to be 50% different cam be met. Software Engineer and Principal software engineer jobs have same SOC and DOT codes.
Job description when I was hired: (software engineer): Understand client requirements, design, document and develop object-oriented software solutions; debugging and code review, unit tetsing code for all logic and flow, participates in the test review thorugh test review and analysis. Experience require 2-4 years.
My current job description: (Principal Software engineer): Designs, modifies, develops, writes and implements software programming applications. Coordinates work teams - Provides technical support to project team members and co-ordinate with technical team and Quality assurance team. Provide consultation and expertise in a variety of the field's concepts, practices, and procedures on complex projects. Extensive experience and judgment required to plan and accomplish goals. Experience required is 8-10 years.
hair Include funny quotes at school; funny quotes about school. funny quotes pre
chanduv23
01-04 12:01 PM
Looks promising
more...
ashkam
11-17 02:53 PM
using AP with H1B will not affect your h1b status in anyway.
Go with what roseball said ..................... 100% true
What you are saying is incorrect and not what roseball said at all. If you enter on an AP you will no longer be in H1B status. You will be in parolee status. However, you may continue to work on your H1B. Seriously folks, it's not that hard to understand.
Go with what roseball said ..................... 100% true
What you are saying is incorrect and not what roseball said at all. If you enter on an AP you will no longer be in H1B status. You will be in parolee status. However, you may continue to work on your H1B. Seriously folks, it's not that hard to understand.
hot funny quotes about school. funny quotes about school.
Lasantha
03-16 02:40 PM
My I-485 receipt notice does not have a PD on it either. Is that normal?
Hi Friends,
I have a confusing situation here. Hope someone can help me with this. This is a bit complicated so please bear with me.
I fall under ROW. My first LC was filed in Feb 2005 under RIR and it was in BEC for a long time. So my company filed another LC under PERM in March 2007 which was approved very quickly and I-140 was filed for that.
Then in April 2007 the first LC (PD Feb 2005) was approved and we filed an I-140 for that as well. This was converted to PP and was approved very quickly.
Then in June 07 when my Feb 2005 PD became current we filed for 485 based on that older LC. However in the receipt notice the Priority Date box was blank which I did not notice till yesterday.
My other I-140 with PD March 2007 was pending till Jan 2008 and was approved in mid January. On the same day it was approved I noticed a soft LUD on my pending I-485 which has nothing to do with that I-140.
Now my question is, is it possible that USCIS mistakenly linked my recently approved I-140 (PD Mar 2007) to the pending I-1485? Is that possible? The reason for this worry is the soft LUD that saw on my 485 as mentioned above and the fact that my 485 receipt notice does not have a PD printed on it.
Is there anyway that I can verify which PD is linked to my 485 by contacting USCIS? I have heard of INFOPASS, would that help? If so how can I get an appointment? If as I suspect , the 485 is now linked to the wrong PD, is it difficult to have it corrected? Please let me know.
Also is it common to have the PD box blank in the 485 receipt notice?
Thanks in Advance!!!!!
Hi Friends,
I have a confusing situation here. Hope someone can help me with this. This is a bit complicated so please bear with me.
I fall under ROW. My first LC was filed in Feb 2005 under RIR and it was in BEC for a long time. So my company filed another LC under PERM in March 2007 which was approved very quickly and I-140 was filed for that.
Then in April 2007 the first LC (PD Feb 2005) was approved and we filed an I-140 for that as well. This was converted to PP and was approved very quickly.
Then in June 07 when my Feb 2005 PD became current we filed for 485 based on that older LC. However in the receipt notice the Priority Date box was blank which I did not notice till yesterday.
My other I-140 with PD March 2007 was pending till Jan 2008 and was approved in mid January. On the same day it was approved I noticed a soft LUD on my pending I-485 which has nothing to do with that I-140.
Now my question is, is it possible that USCIS mistakenly linked my recently approved I-140 (PD Mar 2007) to the pending I-1485? Is that possible? The reason for this worry is the soft LUD that saw on my 485 as mentioned above and the fact that my 485 receipt notice does not have a PD printed on it.
Is there anyway that I can verify which PD is linked to my 485 by contacting USCIS? I have heard of INFOPASS, would that help? If so how can I get an appointment? If as I suspect , the 485 is now linked to the wrong PD, is it difficult to have it corrected? Please let me know.
Also is it common to have the PD box blank in the 485 receipt notice?
Thanks in Advance!!!!!
more...
house funny quotes for school; funny quotes about school. funny quotes for school
immi2006
10-21 11:48 PM
Husband + Wife - 1 Application
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
tattoo funny quotes about school. funny quotes about school.
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
more...
pictures funny quotes about school. funny quotes about school.
sujan_vatrapu
10-27 11:17 AM
You probably know what you are getting, but there are others who believe all the lies that FOX spreads - don't always look through the prism of your problems...
At least on the other news outlets, they bring 2 sides of opinions, unlike FOX - which only shows one side of the issues 25% of the time, and the host spews his/her talking points for the rest of the 75% of the show!
Having said that, I would much prefer for the news outlets (ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, NPR ..) to not only give 2 sides of the story, but actually do some investigative journalism and come to conclusions. Ask the tough questions and if all they get is talking points cut them off.........
Again you missed the point, main news media outlets have liberal views on issues, they don't bring conservative view but they say so, i watch CNN, CBS, listen to NPR, I am not saying FOX is the best but they are as good as the rest, agn my point is all the channels have left or right view (NONE have a centrist view), we should not discount FOX because they have conservative views,
in a recent survey more than half surveyed picked FOX as the most trusted new channel, if we think they are fools there is definitely something with us!
At least on the other news outlets, they bring 2 sides of opinions, unlike FOX - which only shows one side of the issues 25% of the time, and the host spews his/her talking points for the rest of the 75% of the show!
Having said that, I would much prefer for the news outlets (ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, NPR ..) to not only give 2 sides of the story, but actually do some investigative journalism and come to conclusions. Ask the tough questions and if all they get is talking points cut them off.........
Again you missed the point, main news media outlets have liberal views on issues, they don't bring conservative view but they say so, i watch CNN, CBS, listen to NPR, I am not saying FOX is the best but they are as good as the rest, agn my point is all the channels have left or right view (NONE have a centrist view), we should not discount FOX because they have conservative views,
in a recent survey more than half surveyed picked FOX as the most trusted new channel, if we think they are fools there is definitely something with us!
dresses funny quotes about school. Funny Quotes About School.
Foster2007
07-07 12:27 PM
Good idea. I gave highest rating. The video summarizes the issue for the candidates very well!!!
more...
makeup funny quotes comments. funny quotes about school. funny quotes about weed
optimist
07-31 10:58 PM
...And yes we intentionally put this warning after the start of ride. Otherwise you wouldn't have decided to ride on it.
This is so true :( Had we known that such a loooooooooong delay awaits us, we would have thought a million more times before putting our lives in a limbo :mad:
This is so true :( Had we known that such a loooooooooong delay awaits us, we would have thought a million more times before putting our lives in a limbo :mad:
girlfriend funny quotes for school; funny quotes about school. funny quotes for school
vxb2004
11-25 07:59 PM
vxb2004,
Was there any LUD on ur 485 after u sent AC21 Documents in Apr?.
KKtexas,
I had some soft LUD's in June...but the AC21 documents were sent in June!!
Was there any LUD on ur 485 after u sent AC21 Documents in Apr?.
KKtexas,
I had some soft LUD's in June...but the AC21 documents were sent in June!!
hairstyles funny quotes for school. funny
gimme_gc_asap
12-27 12:03 AM
Thank you. always good to hear some sane voices.
Please think:
A. WHY will ACLU assist us? Only because Ms. Singh is there?
B. WHY should Dr. Singh or Mrs. Gandhi assist us? We are trying to emigrate FROM India, NOT immigrate to India, after all.
C. Please do not formulate random "minority community" statements. It is kind of ironic to do so, given the fact that we, the EB immigrants, are usually parts of various minority communities in the U.S., and are desperately trying to make our case to the power structure here...
Please think:
A. WHY will ACLU assist us? Only because Ms. Singh is there?
B. WHY should Dr. Singh or Mrs. Gandhi assist us? We are trying to emigrate FROM India, NOT immigrate to India, after all.
C. Please do not formulate random "minority community" statements. It is kind of ironic to do so, given the fact that we, the EB immigrants, are usually parts of various minority communities in the U.S., and are desperately trying to make our case to the power structure here...
kumar26fl
09-22 11:53 PM
"Word-of-Mouth" seems to be the most effective way of campaigning! I had sent mails, and left voice to couple of my friends some time back. They became aware of IV, but not yet registered. Talked to them today, and got both of them registered. (kasas & aksrao).
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
Requested them to spread the word, "IV". I am sure they will read this thread and campaign for "IV".
Thanks
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
No comments:
Post a Comment