The daily gossip: Kristen Stewart apologizes to everyone, and more

5 pieces of celebrity gossip — from Kate Middleton's stereotypically English pregnancy cravings to Kim Kardashian's slightly altered hairdo
1. Kristen Stewart apologizes to everyone for whatever they're mad at her about
If Kristen Stewart actually wronged you over the past year — we're talking to you, Robert Pattinson — you already got your apology back in June. But if you're one of the billions of earthlings who wasn't personally wronged by Stewart, the young actress would like you to know that she's very sorry anyway. "I apologize to everyone for making them so angry. It was not my intention," said Stewart in an interview with Newsweek, covering both fans who are upset that Twilight is over and critics who were forced to review the Twilight movies.
2. Kate Middleton having adorably English pregnancy cravings
Noted English pregnant person Kate Middleton has been experiencing some stereotypically English pregnancy cravings. "Kate has been craving scones with strawberry jam and clotted cream," says a source at Showbiz Spy. "And she washes it down with a cup of old-fashioned English breakfast tea." For now, Duchess Kate seems content with the high-tea staples — but her chefs might be well-advised to start preparing bangers and mash, and spotted dick.
3. Samuel L. Jackson insists he said "Fuh" on Saturday Night Live
Samuel L. Jackson may have landed himself in hot water when he dropped an F-bomb on last week's episode of Saturday Night Live, but he's already attempting to preempt an FCC fine by claiming he only said half of the word, reports Entertainment Weekly. "I only said FUH not FUCK!" insisted the actor on Twitter, a claim he repeated while visiting Jimmy Kimmel Live on Tuesday night. Anyone who wishes to hear Samuel L. Jackson utter an entire curse word need only watch a Quentin Tarantino movie for more than 20 seconds.
4. BREAKING: Kim Kardashian has bangs now
Today in Kim Kardashian developments: A slightly different haircut. The tabloid fixture arrived in LAX sporting a "new" 'do masterminded by celebrity stylist Chris McMillan. The far-from-startling look features "sideswept bangs and shorter locks," said an actual reporter at E! Online, who made the decision that Kim's marginally different hairdo merited an entire article. "We're loving this sassy look."
5. Taylor Swift and Harry Styles might elope, alleges unnamed source
Lovebirds Taylor Swift and Harry Styles have been spotted holding hands and enjoying meals together in public, as happy young couples are wont to do. But according to a source at Hollywood Life, the fact that the couple has enjoyed each other's company for a whole month can only mean one thing: Weddings bells. "Harry is totally in love. I can see them getting married in a week, just going for it!" speculates the anonymous source. The same source has predicted that Kim Kardashian will soon shave her head.

Read More..

WHEN SCIENCE DOESN'T COUNT

When the press reported that Adam Lanza had Asperger's syndrome (part of the autism spectrum disorders) and other unspecified personality problems, the autism community swung into action in a way that is totally understandable. The Associated Press' headline: "Experts: No Link Between Asperger's, Violence."
The vast majority of autistic people are not violent. Autistics like Temple Grandin, the professor who helped create humane strategies for the meat industry, remind us that many people with high-functioning also go on to live full, rich lives of value to themselves and others.
Grandin also reminded us that, for austic people, "The principal emotion experienced by autistic people is fear.
If you cannot read people's social cues, it's hard to tell who is a threat and who is not. If you live in a world with social rules created by "neurotypicals" that make no sense, anxiety and fear are natural, perhaps inevitable, responses.
But the suggestion that science has demonstrated there is no link at all between autism and aggressive violence is questionable.
Google "autism" and "aggression" and you will suddenly be treated to a counter world the formal autism community claims does not exist: desperate mothers seeking help or respite from the violent behavior of large, aggressive, beloved autistic boys (and a few girls).
In the name of love and absent decent institutions for these troubled young adults, we are permitting a silent epidemic of domestic terrorism against women that we would not tolerate under any other banner.
These are mothers. Many are willing to sacrifice their lives, if necessary, to keep their beloved sons out of institutions that would terrify them.
Consider an essay by novelist Ann Bauer. She believed passionately that autism is a beautiful, mysterious neurodifference. She wrote essays about her fierce love for her son Andrew and his beautiful mind. Then in 2009, she wrote another essay, "The Monster Inside My Son," after learning about Trudy Steuernagel's murder by her 18-year-old autistic son, Sky:
"I'm exhausted and hopeless and vaguely hung over because Andrew, who has autism, also has evolved from sweet, dreamy boy to something like a golem: bitter, rampaging, full of rage. It happened no matter how fiercely I loved him or how many therapies I employed."
Ann is an "official writer," but on the Web there is heartbreak galore
One mother of an 11-year-old with high-functioning autism:
"Over the last year he has evolved into a violently tempered child who seems to 'snap' when things (don't) go his way. He is at a point now that he has pulled knives on us and our other child and has threatened to kill us. ... I have no idea what to do and I'm in tears daily."
Another mom:
"He has bitten me, tried to strangle me, tried to sit on my younger son to crush him when he was an infant (18 months old) talked of shooting us, shooting our younger son in the eye with a bow and arrow, punched himself in the face so he got a black eye, threw large objects at us like our baby's sit-and-spin, kicked my husband in the groin area, aggressed toward babies in the park, punched me and my younger son while I was driving etc. ... This is the short list."
Yet another:
"I have spent the entire evening feeling so alone. Thanks for all your stories. I am recovering from my son's outburst this evening. The bruises from the last one were just starting to heal. He has autism, and at 13, he is over 6 feet tall and 200 pounds. There are pieces bitten out of my arms and hands, and my breast and stomach are full of red bruises. His much smaller twin brother tried to get him off of me and got bit in the process. I sent him out of the room so he would not get hurt any further. My husband left us and a divorce is in the works."
Enough anecdotes.
The 19th European Congress of Psychiatry abstracts included one study of "autism and violence." Researchers in Morocco handed out questionnaires to families being served by handicapped centers. They found that 43.3 percent of families in this sample reported problems with aggression.
According to another recent study, "The prevalence of and risk factors for aggression were examined in 1,380 children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Prevalence was high, with parents reporting that 68 percent had demonstrated aggression to a caregiver and 49 percent to non-caregivers."
The human cost of denying the relationship between autism and aggression is simply unacceptable. Mothers need to know they should not allow themselves to be hit, beaten, bitten or threatened in their own homes. And a mother like Liza Long, who is afraid enough to have developed a "safe plan" for her younger children in the event their brother goes berserk, needs to know her first obligation, her very first one, is to protect those siblings and give them a safe home.
We need to give them better options than generalized overcrowded psych wards, jail and permitting violence against mothers.

Read More..

WE KNOW HOW TO STOP SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

In the wake of a monstrous crime like a madman's mass murder of defenseless women and children at the Newtown, Conn., elementary school, the nation's attention is riveted on what could have been done to prevent such a massacre.
Luckily, some years ago, two famed economists, William Landes at the University of Chicago and John Lott at Yale, conducted a massive study of multiple victim public shootings in the United States between 1977 and 1995 to see how various legal changes affected their frequency and death toll.
Landes and Lott examined many of the very policies being proposed right now in response to the Connecticut massacre: waiting periods and background checks for guns, the death penalty and increased penalties for committing a crime with a gun.
None of these policies had any effect on the frequency of, or carnage from, multiple-victim shootings. (I note that they did not look at reforming our lax mental health laws, presumably because the ACLU is working to keep dangerous nuts on the street in all 50 states.)
Only one public policy has ever been shown to reduce the death rate from such crimes: concealed-carry laws.
The effect of concealed-carry laws in deterring mass public shootings was even greater than the impact of such laws on the murder rate generally.
Someone planning to commit a single murder in a concealed-carry state only has to weigh the odds of one person being armed. But a criminal planning to commit murder in a public place has to worry that anyone in the entire area might have a gun.
You will notice that most multiple-victim shootings occur in "gun-free zones" -- even within states that have concealed-carry laws: public schools, churches, Sikh temples, post offices, the movie theater where James Holmes committed mass murder, and the Portland, Ore., mall where a nut starting gunning down shoppers a few weeks ago.
Guns were banned in all these places. Mass killers may be crazy, but they're not stupid.
If the deterrent effect of concealed-carry laws seems surprising to you, that's because the media hide stories of armed citizens stopping mass shooters. At the Portland shooting, for example, no explanation was given for the amazing fact that the assailant managed to kill only two people in the mall during the busy Christmas season.
It turns out, concealed-carry-holder Nick Meli hadn't noticed that the mall was a gun-free zone. He pointed his (otherwise legal) gun at the shooter as he paused to reload, and the next shot was the attempted mass murderer killing himself. (Meli aimed, but didn't shoot, because there were bystanders behind the shooter.)
In a nonsense "study" going around the Internet right now, Mother Jones magazine claims to have produced its own study of all public shootings in the last 30 years and concludes: "In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun."
This will come as a shock to people who know something about the subject.
The magazine reaches its conclusion by simply excluding all cases where an armed civilian stopped the shooter: They looked only at public shootings where four or more people were killed, i.e., the ones where the shooter wasn't stopped.
If we care about reducing the number of people killed in mass shootings, shouldn't we pay particular attention to the cases where the aspiring mass murderer was prevented from getting off more than a couple rounds?
It would be like testing the effectiveness of weed killers, but refusing to consider any cases where the weeds died.
In addition to the Portland mall case, here are a few more examples excluded by the Mother Jones methodology:
-- Mayan Palace Theater, San Antonio, Texas, this week: Jesus Manuel Garcia shoots at a movie theater, a police car and bystanders from the nearby China Garden restaurant; as he enters the movie theater, guns blazing, an armed off-duty cop shoots Garcia four times, stopping the attack. Total dead: Zero.
-- Winnemucca, Nev., 2008: Ernesto Villagomez opens fire in a crowded restaurant; concealed carry permit-holder shoots him dead. Total dead: Two. (I'm excluding the shooters' deaths in these examples.)
-- Appalachian School of Law, 2002: Crazed immigrant shoots the dean and a professor, then begins shooting students; as he goes for more ammunition, two armed students point their guns at him, allowing a third to tackle him. Total dead: Three.
-- Santee, Calif., 2001: Student begins shooting his classmates -- as well as the "trained campus supervisor"; an off-duty cop who happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day points his gun at the shooter, holding him until more police arrive. Total dead: Two.
-- Pearl High School, Mississippi, 1997: After shooting several people at his high school, student heads for the junior high school; assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieves a .45 pistol from his car and points it at the gunman's head, ending the murder spree. Total dead: Two.
-- Edinboro, Pa., 1998: A student shoots up a junior high school dance being held at a restaurant; restaurant owner pulls out his shotgun and stops the gunman. Total dead: One.
By contrast, the shootings in gun-free zones invariably result in far higher casualty figures -- Sikh temple, Oak Creek, Wis. (six dead); Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va. (32 dead); Columbine High School, Columbine, Colo. (12 dead); Amish school, Lancaster County, Pa. (five little girls killed); public school, Craighead County, Ark. (five killed, including four little girls).
All these took place in gun-free zones, resulting in lots of people getting killed -- and thereby warranting inclusion in the Mother Jones study.
If what we care about is saving the lives of innocent human beings by reducing the number of mass public shootings and the deaths they cause, only one policy has ever been shown to work: concealed-carry laws. On the other hand, if what we care about is self-indulgent grandstanding, and to hell with dozens of innocent children being murdered in cold blood, try the other policies.

Read More..

Zero dark lashes

Zero Dark Thirty is a movie that makes you feel insignificant, not even a bit player in the meaningful world. This is especially true for those of us who have lived and breathed the subjects of intelligence, special operations, the Bin Laden raid and counter-terrorism after 9/11.  Oh, to be the ultimate fly on the wall. What's so great, to me, about the entirety of the chase for Osama Bin Laden is that thing fell together, people made choices, and it worked. The end result was something to laud. It's rare that the system works! And what a redemption story for the intelligence community.
The context of everything else that happened: Iraq, Islamic blowback, the manipulation of public opinion, the endless counter-terrorism scares, is literally seconded to a television screen in Mark Boal's script. For all the controversy about the information the Pentagon allegedly helped provide Boal with, it is quite clear that his story has a perspective, and it ain't the Department of Defense's.  Zero Dark Thirty is about the heroic profession of the intelligence operative, and that profession's effort to be significant again after its major failure: the institutional blindness that allowed the 9/11 hijackers to slip through the net. (Iraq, to me, is a political failure more than an intelligence one.)
From the looks of it, the CIA gave Boal access to virtually everything. I know something of the look and feel, of the tiny details (like the types of folders used to hold dossiers), of the way that verbs are used. But Boal literally knows what Leon Panetta said to his chief of staff, Jeremy Bash, as the two descended in the director's private elevator after hearing the CIA's first presentation of its evidence that the tall guy walking around in Abbottabad was Osama bin Laden.
Boal has been criticized for a choice he made: to play up the information gleaned from torturing detainees. Boal's script is far subtler. One of the detainees does indeed give up the name of bin Laden's courier, but several other prisoners had done so already, and the critical pieces of the puzzle come from detainees in foreign custody who either do or don't identify the courier in a way that matches the assumptions made by the heroine, Maya, a CIA case officer played by Jessica Chastain. Maya clearly disagrees with the torture but eagerly uses its fruits; there is very little in the way of rumination about the propriety of what "Dan," the CIA officer who ran the torture program, was actually doing. He did it, and then, when things got hot, the CIA stopped doing it. Director Kathryn Bigelow portrays the torture graphically. it is, literally, disgusting, and shameful. There's no flinching from the reality of what actually happened.
One scene late in the film is telling. Kyle Chandler, playing a character who is a composite of the Pakistan Chief of Station and the head of the Al Qaeda division in the agency's Counter-Terrorism Center tells a figure clearly meant to represent Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan that the surety that the "national security adviser" character wants cannot be obtained because the CIA can't go back to the detainees anymore.  "You'll find a way," the foil replies. And indeed, the CIA does, by marshaling evidence that the man protected by the high walls of the compound cannot be a drug dealer, because, really, how can a drug dealer not do all the things that the mysterious man doesn't do?
Boal's take is precisely correct: the CIA by and large believed that the detainees provided reliable evidence AND that the torture techniques were valuable. He also provides enough information for us to evaluate that claim independently, and indeed, someone completely new to the subject can conclude that the torture didn't actually get the CIA anything but a bunch of false leads and a black eye. It is certainly true that the Obama White House, as compacted into the persona of the Brennan character, mistrusted the CIA because of its association with and defense of the torture program.
But to make the film a film, a vehicle to convey emotion and character, Boal has to give us a point of view, and that point of view is derived from his best sources, which very clearly were in the CIA.
Zero Dark Thirty is not a movie about the killing of Osama bin Laden. It is not a movie about the Naval Special Warfare Development Group SEALs who captured him, or the DevGru commander who planned the raid, or Admiral William McRaven, who has gotten the most credit for it.
It is a movie about a major institution seeking redemption and a CIA analyst seeking to justify her life's work and avenge the deaths of her own colleagues. Torture is part of that story.

Read More..

Diagnosing the Home Alone burglars' injuries: A professional weighs in

Ever wondered what a blow torch to the head would actually do? Read on
Since its debut in 1990, Home Alone has become as much a part of the Christmas cinematic ritual as It's a Wonderful Life. But unlike that uplifting tale about the good of mankind, Home Alone tells a rather unsettling Christmas story of a precocious 8-year-old who, accidentally abandoned by his family, is forced to defend his home from two dimwitted burglars. Kevin McCallister (Macaulay Culkin) turns his family's home into a veritable funhouse of torturous booby traps that so-called Wet Bandits Marv (Daniel Stern) and Harry (Joe Pesci) hilariously stumble through, and the transformation of a suburban Chicago home into a relentless injury machine is nothing short of spectacular. But it does require quite a suspension of disbelief. Can a man really be hit square in the face with a steam iron and walk away unfazed? What kind of permanent physical damage would a blow torch to the head really do? To answer these questions and officially dissolve the Home Alone's Hollywood magic, I spoke with my friend Dr. Ryan St. Clair of the Weill Cornell Medical College. Enjoy.
The injury: BB gun to the forehead
SEE ALSO: 5 reasons The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is a disappointment

The set-up: Marv and Harry try to sneak into the McCallister home by sweet talking Kevin from the back door. Kevin, meanwhile, points his BB gun through the doggie door and directly at Harry's groin — and shoots. When Marv goes to investigate the source of Harry's pain, he is met by the same BB gun, which is fired at extremely close range to his forehead.
SEE ALSO: WATCH: The new Man of Steel trailer
The doctor's diagnosis: "Classic air-powered projectile weapons typically have muzzle velocities of 350 feet per second or less. A BB fired at close range from such a weapon could break the skin, but will not penetrate the skull, and is unlikely to penetrate Harry's scrotum, especially through fabric."
**
The injury: Iron to the face
SEE ALSO: The 2013 Screen Actors Guild nominations: 5 surprises

The set-up: Thwarted by the BB gun at the back door, Marv runs around to the basement stairwell — which Kevin has deliberately iced. Once he has stumbled his way down into the dark basement, Marv grabs for what he thinks is the light bulb cord. It's actually a rope attached to a steam iron that is propped up on the laundry chute door. The heavy iron comes plummeting down and smacks Marv in the face.
SEE ALSO: 7 awful Christmas movies that flopped
The doctor's diagnosis: "Let's estimate the distance from the first floor to the basement at 15 feet, and assume the steam iron weighs 4 pounds. And note that the iron strikes Marv squarely in the mid-face. This is a serious impact, with enough force to fracture the bones surrounding the eyes. This is also known as a 'blowout fracture,' and can lead to serious disfigurement and debilitating double vision if not repaired properly."
**
The injury: Handling a burning-hot doorknob
SEE ALSO: Hyde Park on Hudson: Does Bill Murray shine as FDR?

The set-up: While Marv is getting an iron to the face, Harry tries to enter the home through the front door. The first attempt doesn't go well, as the stocky burglar slips on the icy steps and falls to the ground, landing with a thud on his back. Easing up a second time with the help of the railing, Harry makes it to the front door, reaches for the doorknob — which we see is literally burning red — and grasps the searing handle, the pain of which forces him once again down the icy steps.
SEE ALSO: The 25 films added to the National Film Registry in 2012
The doctor's diagnosis: "If this doorknob is glowing visibly red in the dark, it has been heated to about 751 degrees Fahrenheit, and Harry gives it a nice, strong, one- to two-second grip. By comparison, one second of contact with 155 degree water is enough to cause third degree burns. The temperature of that doorknob is not quite hot enough to cause Harry's hand to burst into flames, but it is not that far off... Assuming Harry doesn't lose the hand completely, he will almost certainly have other serious complications, including a high risk for infection and 'contracture' in which resulting scar tissue seriously limits the flexibility and movement of the hand, rendering it less than 100 percent useful. Kevin has moved from 'defending his house' into sheer malice, in my opinion."
**
The injury: A blowtorch to the scalp
SEE ALSO: WATCH: The epic new Star Trek Into Darkness teaser

The set-up: Unable to get through the front door, Harry returns to the back. He kicks his foot through the doggy door to disarm a potential BB gun threat, delicately taps at the doorknob to test its temperature, and, finding it cool, opens the back door — only to unknowingly arm a blowtorch that fires at the top of his head.
SEE ALSO: 10 ways the entertainment industry is being sensitive to the Connecticut massacre
The doctor's diagnosis: "Harry has an interesting reaction to having a lit blowtorch aimed directly at his scalp. Rather than remove himself from danger, he keeps the top of his skull directly in the line of fire for about seven seconds. What was likely a simple second-degree skin burn is now a full thickness burn likely to cause necrosis of the calavarium (skull bone)." That means the skin and bone tissue on Harry's skull will be so damaged and rotted that his skull bone is essentially dying and will likely require a transplant.
**
The injury: Walking barefoot on Christmas tree ornaments
SEE ALSO: WATCH: The trailer for Tom Cruise's new sci-fi blockbuster Oblivion

The set-up: After surviving the iron to the face, getting his shoes and socks peeled off by tar, and stepping onto a 3-inch nail, Marv abandons the basement entrance and enters the home through a conveniently opened window. Without looking down, however, and still barefoot, Marv jumps in, putting his full weight on a dozen pointy ornaments littered on the wood floor.
SEE ALSO: The 10 worst-reviewed movies of 2012
The doctor's diagnosis: "Walking on ornaments seems pretty insignificant compared to everything else we've seen so far. If I was Marv, I'd be more concerned about my facial fractures."
**
The injury: Paint can to the face
SEE ALSO: The 2013 Golden Globes nominations: Winners and losers

The set-up: Although severely injured, both the burglars are finally inside the house, and have forgone their looting plan for one of revenge. Hearing the taunts of Kevin's pre-pubescent voice, they scamper into the foyer only to slip dramatically on scores of Micro Machines, landing, once again, on their backs. Kevin cruelly mocks them from the top step: "You guys give up yet? Or are you thirsty for more?" Marv and Harry scramble up the staircase, where they are met by a speeding paint can attached to a rope. Harry manages to duck and evade the first hit, but Marv gets a paint can square in the face. Harry continues up the stairs but is hit by a second paint can. Both burglars end up back on the ground floor.
SEE ALSO: Why Jon Stewart almost quit The Daily Show
The doctor's diagnosis: "Assuming the paint can is full (roughly 10 pounds) and the rope is 10 feet long, Marv and Harry each take a roughly 2 kilo-newton hit to the face. That is easily enough to fracture multiple facial bones, and is probably going to knock you out cold. Also, I wouldn't expect either of the Wet Bandits to walk away from this with all of their teeth."
**
The injury: Shovel to the back of the head
SEE ALSO: Where Homeland can go from here: 4 theories

The set-up: Kevin eventually lures the Wet Bandits through his house of injurious horrors, across the street, and into a neighbor's house. But Marv and Harry have clued into the fact that following the little tyke has provided them nothing but pain. They enter the neighbor's house their own way and meet little Kevin at the top of the basement steps. They hang him by his sweater from a hook on the back of a door and outline all the ways in which they will pay him back for the pain he caused, beginning with biting "every one of these little fingers, one at a time." Just before Harry can take the first bite, Kevin's elderly neighbor saves the day, coming up behind the burglars and hitting each one over head with his shovel, knocking them out cold.
SEE ALSO: 6 superhero franchises that deserve to be rebooted
The doctor's diagnosis: "Seriously? At this point, Marv and Harry have both suffered potentially crippling hand and foot injuries. Harry has proved to be nearly impervious to burns, and both managed to retain consciousness after taking a flying paint can straight to the face. Suddenly, a frail elderly man appears and weakly slaps them in turn with a flimsy aluminum Home Depot snow shovel. And, somehow, this is too much for them, and they collapse. This movie was way more believable when I was 8."

Read More..

First Person: I Repaid My Student Loans While Still in College

*Note: This was written by a Yahoo! contributor. Do you have a personal finance story that you'd like to share? Sign up with the Yahoo! Contributor Network to start publishing your own finance articles.

The first two years of my college experience was spent at a community college. My tuition was covered, but I took out a loan for $20,000 to cover living expenses. Upon transferring to a costly four-year university I received a hefty scholarship, which covered most of my expenses. Still, my loans were at $11,500 per year. The day of my graduation, I received the coveted diploma and a not-so-coveted array of bills for my student loans.

However, the difference between other students and myself was the large sum of money lingering my savings account that I started four years prior. Let me explain how I managed to pay off my bills on the same day that I graduated from college:

Federal Loans Only

The first goal during my college career was to stay away from private student loans because they are nightmares. Trust me, I know. I took out a $5,000 private student loan in my first year of college and watched it as it was passed around from lender to lender and the interest rate jumped around, ranging from 8% to 20%. Not to mention the compounding of interest that increased the loan nearly $1,500 in eight months. Needless to say, I paid that off with every dime that I had to give to it by taking on a job. Please, if you can avoid them, do not take out alternative loans.

The government offers student loans at wonderful interest rates and the government will pay the interest of the loan while you are pursuing your education.

Monthly Payments While in School

Let's evaluate my loans. During years one and two, I took out $7,500 for each year. My plan was to get a job that I could take the money that I would need to pay off the loan in one year and pay it into a high-interest savings account. That meant that for years one and two, I paid $625 into my savings account each month. During years three and four, I took out $11,500 per year, which meant that I had to contribute $960 each month to the savings account. This may seem like a lot of money, but at the time I was single and still didn't have my daughter (until the fourth year), so it was easy to have all of my expenses paid, get a job on the side and contribute all of that money into a savings account.

At the end of the four years, I had contributed $43,000 to my savings account and earned about $1,000 in interest on the money.

On the day of my graduation I was able to pay off my student loans and never had to pay a cent of interest. If you are financially capable to do this, then I suggest that you do it. All it takes is finding extra income through a part time job or funding. You will save thousands of dollars in interest if you can manage this. If you cannot afford to pay the monthly payment, then pay half of it or pay what the interest would be on the loan. That way you can make a lump sum payment at the end of your college education.

Read More..

Home market being held back by wary first-timers

WASHINGTON (AP) — This should be a great time to buy a first home. Prices have sunk to 2002 levels. Sellers are waiting anxiously as homes languish on the market. Mortgage rates are their lowest ever.

Yet the most likely first-time homeowners, especially young professionals and couples starting families, won't buy these days. Or they can't. Or they already did, during the housing boom. And their absence helps explain why the housing industry is still depressed.

The obstacles range from higher down payments to heavy debt from credit cards and student loans. But even many of those who could afford to buy no longer see it as a wise investment. Prices have sunk 15 percent in three years.

"I've looked for a home, but the places we can afford with the money we have are not that great," says Seth Herter, 23, a store manager in suburban St. Louis. "It also doesn't seem smart anymore to buy with prices falling. Buying a home just doesn't make sense to us."

The proportion of U.S. households that own homes is at 65.1 percent, its lowest point since 1996, the Census Bureau says. That marks a shift after nearly two decades in which homeownership grew before peaking at 70 percent during the housing boom.

The housing bubble lured so many young buyers that it reduced the pool of potential first-timers to below-normal levels. That's contributed to the decline in new buyers in recent years.

In 2005, at the height of the boom, about 2.8 million first-timers bought homes, according to the National Association of Realtors. By contrast, for each of the four years preceding the boom, the number of first-timers averaged fewer than 2 million.

Still, the bigger factors are the struggling economy, shaky job security, tougher credit rules and lack of cash to put down, said Dan McCue, research manager at Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. The unemployment rate among typical first-timers, those ages 25 to 34, is 9.8 percent, compared with 9 percent for all adults.

"The obstacles facing first-time buyers are big, and it's changing the way they look at home ownership," McCue says. "It's no longer the American Dream for the younger generation."

First-timers usually account for up to half of all sales. Over the past year, they've accounted for only about a third.

A big reason is tougher lending standards.

Lenders are demanding more money up front. In 2002, the median down payment for a single-family home in nine major U.S. cities was 4 percent, according to real estate website Zillow.com. Today, it's 22 percent.

And one-third of households have credit scores too low to qualify for a mortgage. The median required credit score from FICO Inc., the industry leader in credit ratings, has risen from 720 in 2007, when the market went bust, to 760 today.

Homes in many places are the most affordable in a generation. In the past year, the national median sale price has sunk 3.5 percent. Half the homes listed in the Tampa Bay area are priced below $100,000.

The average mortgage rate for a 30-year fixed loan is 4 percent, barely above an all-time low. Five years ago, it was near 6.5 percent. In 2000, it exceeded 8 percent.

When the economy eventually strengthens, the housing market will, too. More people will be hired. Confidence will rise. Down payments won't be so hard to produce.

The question is whether first-time buyers will then start flowing into the housing market. That will depend mainly on whether they think prices will rise, said Mark Vitner, senior U.S. economist at Wells Fargo.

"It's a guessing game as to when things will turn around," Vitner said. "But until they do, you won't see young people buying homes."

Read More..

U.S. Housing Market Still On Life Support

With each passing year, the former Oracle of the Fed, Alan Greenspan, is reminded that there really was a housing bubble and lowering interest rates to record lows just matters worse.  Nearly four years after the housing market peak in 2007, record low mortgage rates are no match for falling incomes and 9% unemployment.

The Case-Shiller Home Price Index, released on Tuesday, showed that nation wide home prices did not register a significant change in the third quarter of 2011, with the U.S. National Home Price Index up by only 0.1% from its second quarter level. Home prices are down 3.9% across the board and are now back to their first quarter of 2003 levels.

From August to September, housing prices have fallen the most in Atlanta, with a 5.9% decline, followed by Tampa Bay and San Francisco, both with a 1.5% drop in housing prices.

Boston, New York, Washington and Los Angeles remain the most expensive cities in the lower 48 states.

"The plunging collapse of prices seen in 2007-2009 seems to be behind us," says David M. Blitzer, Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Indices. "Any chance for a sustained recovery will probably need a stronger economy."

Read More..

U.S. Housing Market Still On Life Support; Prices At 2003 Levels

With each passing year, the former Oracle of the Fed, Alan Greenspan, is reminded that there really was a housing bubble and lowering interest rates to record lows just made matters worse.  Nearly four years after the housing market peak in 2007, record low mortgage rates are no match for falling incomes and 9% unemployment.

The Case-Shiller Home Price Index, released on Tuesday, showed that nation wide home prices did not register a significant change in the third quarter of 2011, with the U.S. National Home Price Index up by only 0.1% from its second quarter level. Home prices are down 3.9% across the board and are now back to their first quarter of 2003 levels. The market consensus was for a 3% decline year over year.

From August to September, housing prices have fallen the most in Atlanta, with a 5.9% decline, followed by Tampa Bay and San Francisco, both with a 1.5% drop in housing prices.

Boston, New York, Washington and Los Angeles remain the most expensive cities in the lower 48 states.

"The plunging collapse of prices seen in 2007-2009 seems to be behind us," says David M. Blitzer, Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Indices. "Any chance for a sustained recovery will probably need a stronger economy."

Read More..

Rate on 30-year fixed mortgage falls to 3.98 pct.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The average rate on the 30-year fixed mortgage hovered above its record low for a fourth straight week. But cheap mortgage rates have done little to boost home sales or refinancing.

Freddie Mac says the rate on the 30-year fixed loan fell to 3.98 percent from 4 percent the previous week. Seven weeks ago, it dropped to a record low of 3.94 percent, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The average rate on the 15-year fixed mortgage edged down to 3.3 percent from 3.31 percent. Seven weeks ago, it too hit a record low of 3.26 percent.

Rates have been below 5 percent for all but two weeks this year. Yet this year could be the worst for home sales in 14 years.

Read More..