<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Honest Corruption</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.traderslog.com/honest-corruption/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.traderslog.com/honest-corruption/</link>
	<description>Online Trading Community for Stocks Futures and Forex Traders</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 07:21:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jonathan yates</title>
		<link>http://www.traderslog.com/honest-corruption/comment-page-1/#comment-2571</link>
		<dc:creator>jonathan yates</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Aug 2011 01:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.traderslog.com/?p=12650#comment-2571</guid>
		<description>This is an article that everyone should read.  I believe that the Federal Reserve is maintaining a low interest rate policy, in large part, to protect the value of its $3 trillion balance sheet, which in large part consists of the mortgage backed securities discussed in this article.

Where I disagree is that the program did not work.  The housing market in the US is in shambles.  Low interest rates are not that effective: the average home price is $220,000 so a 1% lower rate is not going to lower it that much (about $240).  Would you take on the risk/expense of a house for $200 a month?  I do not think so.  

The program has been a disaster as it has increased commodity prices and led to more M&amp;A activity, which is counterproductive, as proved by studies.

If the program had worked, home sales would be booming.  They are not: according to a recent Morgan Stanley report, home ownership in the US is the lowest in more than 50 years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is an article that everyone should read.  I believe that the Federal Reserve is maintaining a low interest rate policy, in large part, to protect the value of its $3 trillion balance sheet, which in large part consists of the mortgage backed securities discussed in this article.</p>
<p>Where I disagree is that the program did not work.  The housing market in the US is in shambles.  Low interest rates are not that effective: the average home price is $220,000 so a 1% lower rate is not going to lower it that much (about $240).  Would you take on the risk/expense of a house for $200 a month?  I do not think so.  </p>
<p>The program has been a disaster as it has increased commodity prices and led to more M&amp;A activity, which is counterproductive, as proved by studies.</p>
<p>If the program had worked, home sales would be booming.  They are not: according to a recent Morgan Stanley report, home ownership in the US is the lowest in more than 50 years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

