Latest news with #1971
Time of India
05-07-2025
- Time of India
After 54 years, D.B. Cooper hijacking mystery deepens as FBI releases unseen case files
The FBI has released a 398-page case file on the 1971 D.B. Cooper hijacking, providing new details but no definitive answers. The documents include hundreds of tips, false leads, and suspect profiles—ranging from a man in a wheelchair to a fraudster who impersonated Cooper in an extortion attempt. Forensic analysis of Cooper's tie revealed rare industrial metals, suggesting he may have worked in aerospace or electronics. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The 1971 Hijacking What the Newly Released Files Reveal Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Titanium Clue and Occupational Theories The McCoy Theory The FBI has released a detailed 398-page case file related to the D.B. Cooper hijacking , shedding light on one of America's most baffling criminal cases. Despite the extensive documentation and decades of investigation, the identity of the hijacker remains unknown, more than 50 years after the daring mid-air November 24, 1971, a man using the alias "Dan Cooper" boarded Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 305 in Portland, Oregon. Shortly after takeoff, he handed a note to a flight attendant, claiming he had a bomb in his briefcase. The suspect demanded $200,000 in cash and four parachutes. Upon landing in Seattle, he released 36 passengers in exchange for the ransom and then ordered the flight crew to take off again, this time heading toward Mexico the plane was flying at a low altitude between Seattle and Reno, Cooper opened the rear stairway and parachuted into the night, carrying the money with him. He was never seen or heard from again. A media error during early reporting referred to him as 'D.B. Cooper,' a name that became etched into public to the NY Post, the newly declassified FBI documents outline numerous leads and suspects the agency pursued. One noteworthy tip described a suspect who used a wheelchair. However, agents quickly ruled him out, with a note in the file stating plainly that a person confined to a wheelchair could not have carried out such a significant name in the documents is Donald Sylvester Murphy. In 1972, Murphy impersonated Cooper in an elaborate hoax intended to extort $30,000 from a former Newsweek editor. He altered currency to match the serial numbers from the ransom bills and even dressed to resemble the sketch of the hijacker. He was eventually arrested and convicted of files also mention dozens of other suspects, including pilots, parachutists, and Boeing employees. Many of these individuals were investigated, with agents showing their photographs to witnesses. However, the majority were ultimately eliminated from the inquiry, and no concrete leads intriguing detail found in the files is the examination of a tie left behind by the hijacker on the plane. Forensic analysis revealed over 100,000 microscopic particles on the tie, including rare industrial metals like unalloyed titanium, bismuth, and strontium sulfide. This discovery led investigators to speculate that Cooper might have worked in industries such as aerospace or electronics, possibly even with access to Boeing not covered in the latest file release, speculation has long surrounded Richard McCoy Jr. Less than five months after Cooper's hijacking, McCoy carried out a similar crime involving a parachute escape and ransom demand. He was captured two days later and sentenced to 45 years in prison. Despite the similarities, the FBI ruled him out in the Cooper case, citing mismatched physical descriptions and an alibi placing him in later, McCoy's children publicly claimed he was D.B. Cooper, stating they waited until their mother's death to speak out. They pointed to a parachute allegedly found in her storage and other circumstantial evidence. Still, this claim does not appear in the newly released documents, and the FBI has maintained its FBI officially closed the Cooper investigation in 2016 due to a lack of new credible evidence. The latest document release, while rich in detail and previously unseen tips, offers no breakthrough in solving the mystery. Cooper's identity, fate, and the whereabouts of the ransom money continue to puzzle law enforcement and true crime enthusiasts alike.
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
History of monthly mortgage payments: Comparing costs then and now
In 1971, George Lucas released his first feature-length movie, the Baltimore Colts won Super Bowl V and the average 30-year mortgage rate was 7.54 percent. That rate is pretty close to what we're seeing today. Home prices back then, not so much. In 1971, the typical home sale price averaged $25,225, according to Census data, or about $195,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars in 2024. Last year, however, the typical home sale price actually averaged $418,975. Meanwhile, the median household income rose from around $10,300 annually in 1971 to roughly $80,600 in 2023. Over the years, a shifting combination of mortgage rates, home prices, incomes and inflation has made it ever more challenging to become a homeowner, and mortgage payments now take up much more of the typical budget. Here's a look at how they've increased over the years. The typical monthly mortgage payment has climbed dramatically in recent years, from about $1,100 in 2020 to double that — $2,207 — in 2024 (when not adjusted for inflation). When adjusted for inflation, the increase still works out to near an additional $800 a month. Home prices rose precipitously during the pandemic, from an average sale price of $328,150 in 2020 to $418,975 in 2024. At the same time, mortgage rates on 30-year fixed loans shot up. 'Today's homebuyer is financing $100,000 more than the buyer five years ago and doing so at a rate of 7 percent instead of 3 percent,' says Greg McBride, CFA, chief financial analyst for Bankrate. Similarly, mortgage payments rose 50 years ago, too. Between 1971 and 1981 — also boosted by prices and rates — the typical monthly mortgage payment went from around $1,100 to $2,650 in inflation-adjusted dollars in 2024. By 1981, the average sale price was $68,950, or about $238,450 in inflation-adjusted dollars in 2024. Monthly mortgage payments by year Year Average 30-year fixed mortgage rate Typical monthly mortgage payment 1971 7.54% $141.65 1972 7.38% $152.16 1973 8.04% $192.09 1974 9.19% $236.01 1975 9.05% $253.94 1976 8.86% $281.12 1977 8.85% $310.56 1978 9.64% $380.27 1979 11.20% $485.67 1980 13.74% $603.12 1981 16.67% $771.64 1982 16.06% $747.41 1983 13.24% $678.37 1984 13.88% $751.77 1985 11.85% $685.72 1986 10.39% $667.38 1987 10.40% $759.93 1988 10.38% $813.21 1989 10.25% $863.30 1990 9.97% $856.45 1991 9.09% $778.50 1992 8.27% $730.85 1993 7.17% $684.88 1994 8.28% $786.07 1995 7.86% $773.12 1996 7.76% $804.59 1997 7.57% $816.66 1998 6.91% $801.28 1999 7.46% $892.19 2000 8.08% $991.02 2001 7.01% $922.24 2002 6.57% $947.51 2003 5.89% $910.67 2004 5.88% $1,032.91 2005 5.93% $1,126.09 2006 6.47% $1,228.69 2007 6.40% $1,225.74 2008 6.23% $1,128.32 2009 5.38% $966.60 2010 4.86% $941.22 2011 4.65% $927.73 2012 3.88% $919.97 2013 4.16% $1,036.54 2014 4.31% $1,132.72 2015 3.99% $1,122.10 2016 3.79% $1,136.01 2017 4.14% $1,252.35 2018 4.70% $1,349.60 2019 4.13% $1,242.42 2020 3.38% $1,161.32 2021 3.15% $1,316.71 2022 5.53% $1,973.12 2023 7.00% $2,270.15 2024 6.90% $2,207.36 The other piece: incomes. From 1984 to 2021, the median household income went from $58,930 to $79,260, according to Census estimates. In that 37-year window, mortgage payments accounted for less than 20 percent of household incomes in all but five of those years. That changed in 2022, when both home prices and mortgage costs rapidly rose. That year, the average sales price was $432,950 and mortgage payments ate up around 31 percent of the $77,540 median household income. In 2023, that share increased to almost 34 percent. Currently, prospective homebuyers need an annual household income of nearly $117,000 to afford a median-priced home in the U.S., according to Bankrate's 2025 Housing Affordability Study. Mortgage payment share of monthly income by year Year Median household income Mortgage payment share of monthly income 1984 $58,930 15.31% 1985 $60,050 13.70% 1986 $62,280 12.86% 1987 $63,060 14.46% 1988 $63,530 15.36% 1989 $64,610 16.03% 1990 $63,830 16.10% 1991 $61,960 15.08% 1992 $61,450 14.27% 1993 $61,150 13.44% 1994 $61,800 15.26% 1995 $63,770 14.55% 1996 $64,710 14.92% 1997 $66,050 14.84% 1998 $68,470 14.04% 1999 $70,210 15.25% 2000 $70,020 16.98% 2001 $68,870 16.07% 2002 $68,310 16.64% 2003 $68,350 15.99% 2004 $68,250 18.16% 2005 $69,310 19.50% 2006 $70,080 21.04% 2007 $71,210 20.66% 2008 $68,780 19.69% 2009 $68,340 16.97% 2010 $66,730 16.93% 2011 $65,750 16.93% 2012 $65,740 16.79% 2013 $68,220 18.23% 2014 $67,360 20.18% 2015 $71,000 18.97% 2016 $73,520 18.54% 2017 $74,810 20.09% 2018 $75,790 21.37% 2019 $81,210 18.36% 2020 $79,560 17.52% 2021 $79,260 19.94% 2022 $77,540 30.54% 2023 $80,610 33.79% Other housing costs keep rising, too. Let's break down some aspects of homeownership: Property taxes: From 2019 to 2024, property taxes went up by 27 percent on average, according to CoreLogic. In some states, the increase has been much higher: Tax bills in Colorado and Georgia, for example, rose by more than 50 percent in the last five years. Homeowners insurance: As of July 2025, the national average homeowners insurance cost was $2,466 annually for a policy with a $300,000 dwelling limit, according to Bankrate data. 'Hidden' expenses: The typical single-family home costs more than $21,000 a year to own and maintain, according to Bankrate's 2025 Hidden Costs of Homeownership Study. Aside from insurance and taxes, those expenses include cable, energy and internet costs. Buyer's remorse: A full 16 percent of homeowners with at least one regret about their home purchase say their mortgage payment is too high, according to Bankrate's 2025 Home Affordability Report. The jump in mortgage payments in recent years isn't lost on me. In 2021, my wife and I bought a new house for our expanding family and work-from-home careers. After more than six months looking, we signed a purchase agreement and got a mortgage at 2.99 percent. We closed two weeks before our son was born, in early 2022. If the sale fell through, or we had decided to wait to buy until after our son arrived, that same home would've been completely out of reach for us later in the year. We would've been shopping for mortgages at rates close to 7 percent, and our payment would've increased by several hundred dollars a month. We're proof of the 'lock-in effect' that's keeping homeowners from moving and taking a new loan — especially one that'd double our monthly housing costs. Still, life happens. Incomes change, and the housing market does, too. 'In the absence of continually lower mortgage rates, home prices cannot rise faster than homebuyer incomes in perpetuity,' McBride says. 'After the outsized home price appreciation exiting the pandemic, most markets are likely looking at a very tepid pace of home price appreciation in the next few years as incomes, and the buying power of households, closes some of that gap.'
Wall Street Journal
01-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Wall Street Journal
‘Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print' Review: The Language of Liberation on HBO
'I do not agree with your last article,' wrote an early correspondent to the now 53-year-old Ms. magazine, 'and am canceling my wife's subscription.' For younger female viewers of 'Dear Ms.: A Revolution in Print,' such moments—and there are plenty—may be jaw-dropping. Older women will just smile. Maybe. No one will escape without feeling like they've taken a trip into something weirdly, even darkly, historical. Not historical enough, perhaps. While this nearly two-hour documentary triptych seldom exploits the comedy in people being quoted outside of their cultural moment, neither does it address the current perception that nearly everything Ms. magazine lobbied for is under attack by various factions governmental and/or religious. The ostensible motivation for this movie right now is the more than half-century of Ms., founded in 1971 by a group that included Gloria Steinem, Letty Cottin Pogrebin, Pat Carbine and first editor Suzanne Braun Levine, all of whom appear here. (The magazine, which first hit the newsstands in '72, is now online, published since 2001 by the Feminist Majority Foundation.) But the omissions seem odd: During a segment regarding the coinage of 'sexual harassment' and the ensuing battles over that issue, no mention is made of the 1991 Clarence Thomas–Anita Hill hearings, which seemed to be the pivotal event in that particular fight. The oversights seem a conscious effort to skirt political fire. No pun intended.
Irish Times
27-06-2025
- Business
- Irish Times
Like Nixon before him, Trump is weakening the dollar in a bid to correct the US's trade deficit
August 15th, 1971 was an auspicious day in global financial history. Then-US president Richard Nixon interrupted the evening broadcast of the US's most popular TV show – Bonanza – to announce the dollar (as a currency) was delinking from gold, a move that remade the global monetary system in an instant. The announcement effectively dismantled the Bretton Woods system that had prevailed since the end of the second World War. It had pegged the dollar to the value of gold (at $35 an ounce), with the rest of the world's currencies pegged at various (adjustable) rates to the dollar. Nixon's decision to detach the US currency from gold was driven by a simple anomaly in the global financial system. The US did not have enough gold to cover the volume of dollars in worldwide circulation. READ MORE [ Trump puts US dollar's role as dominant world currency up for grabs Opens in new window ] This meant the dollar was overvalued. It also meant the US was starting to run big trade deficits (on account of imports being cheaper and exports less competitive), something the country hadn't experienced since the 19th century. The overvalued dollar was also subject to speculative runs against it, which was undermining the country's foreign trading position. Without warning, Nixon jettisoned the Bretton Woods arrangement, ushering in a system of free-floating exchange rates that still prevails today. The move also exploded what many saw as the 'Marshall Plan mindset' whereby US economic interests seemed to chime with the economic interests of its allies in Europe and elsewhere. Despite the seriousness of the announcement, Nixon apparently fretted about the potential downside of alienating those addicted to the adventures of the Cartwright family, the fictional family upon which Bonanza was based. But his advisers convinced him that the announcement had to be decisive, reach the widest possible audience and go before the markets opened the following morning. Nixon, like Donald Trump, believed the overvalued dollar was hurting US exporters and workers and blamed the rest of the world for the US's predicament. As well as abandoning gold, he announced two other measures: a 10 per cent import tax (or tariff ), designed to force countries that had a trade surplus with the US to accept the adjustment; and a new system of price and wage controls aimed controlling inflation, which had begun to surge. The 'Nixon shock' – at it was called – was a unilateral attempt to devalue the dollar and rewire the US's trading relationships while maintaining US economic hegemony. The parallels with today and the so-called 'Trump shock' are striking. The Mar-a-Lago accord, the supposed blueprint to correct the US trade deficit through deliberate dollar weakening, is key to understanding Trump's disruptive economic agenda. The dollar has lost more than 10 per cent of its value against the euro, the pound and the Swiss franc since Trump came to office in January. Like Nixon, Trump believes the strong dollar has made local manufacturing uncompetitive, forcing the US to import more, leaving it dependent on foreign countries and lumped with big trade deficits. This has been amplified by what Washington sees as China 's unfair trade practices. Approximately five million 'well-paying blue-collar jobs' have been lost in so-called Rust Belt states, Trump's power base, since 2001, the year China joined the World Trade Organisation. Another problem feeding into this, in Trump's eyes, is the US role as global policeman and underwriter of European security, which leaves it with a large military expenditure, another driver of US deficits and debt. But where the Trump/Nixon comparison falls down is the country's current debt pile: $36 trillion and counting. This is tipping into an out-of-control zone and testing the limits of the US economy's reserve status. And it can't be simply blamed on the strong dollar or rigged trading relationships. It stems – in the main – from fiscal indiscipline, fuelled by several factors, including tax cuts under Trump's first administration. The 'forever wars' in Iraq and Afghanistan – estimated to have cost the US $8 trillion – similarly are not a function of the US's role as global policeman but part of the post-9/11 'neocon' agenda. In investment parlance, bonds hedge stock market risk. What that means in practice is that when stock markets drop, investors flee to safe-haven assets such as bonds. US bonds – known as Treasuries – are backed by the globe's strongest economy and are traditionally seen as the safest of safe securities. However, this relationship has begun to fracture. After Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariff announcement in April, stock markets nosedived but the yield on US bonds – essentially the US government's borrowing costs – which should have fallen as investors piled in, actually rose. Soured by Trump's tariff turbulence and his 'big, beautiful' tax Bill, which will add more debt to the pile, investors sold US bonds when, historically, they should have been buying them. In what was dubbed 'America's Liz Truss moment', the negative market reaction prompted an immediate U-turn in Washington. The US bond market used to be a boringly predictable segment of global financial markets, now it's a flashpoint. Like Nixon before him, Trump is attempting to use American economic might to bend the global economy to his will, but he is being hamstrung by the country's deteriorating financial situation.
Forbes
24-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Beyond The Shine: The Enduring Case For Gold In Your Portfolio
Alex Shahidi, JD, CFA®, CFP®, ChFC®, CIMA®, is a Managing Partner and Co-CIO at Evoke Advisors, and Host of The Insightful Investor Podcast. Gold's impressive performance in recent years has captured headlines, but its true story stretches much further back. Since 1971, when the U.S. came off the gold standard, the precious metal has delivered strong, competitive returns, nearly matching global equities over the long term, with annualized returns of 8.4% compared to 9.2% for global stocks, according to my personal calculations using Bloomberg sourced data. Notably, since the turn of the millennium, gold has significantly outpaced equities, delivering 10.1% annual returns versus just 5.9% for global stocks, by my calculations. This remarkable track record highlights gold's enduring value as an investment, especially in the modern era. Gold As A Portfolio Diversifier Gold's value as a portfolio diversifier is often overlooked. Its average correlation with equities since 1971 has been near zero based on my analysis, meaning gold's returns have often moved independently from stocks. Notably, I found that gold's best decades (the 1970s and 2000s) coincided with the worst decades for equities, and its worst decades (the 1980s and 1990s) aligned with the best decades for equities. According to my estimates, a balanced portfolio of 50% global equities and 50% gold, rebalanced annually, would have outperformed either asset class alone over the past five decades with less risk. My calculations show that during the seven major bear markets for global stocks since 1970 (defined as peak-to-trough declines of at least 20%), gold delivered positive returns in all but one instance, averaging a gain of 17%, with the only exception being a 9% decline in 2022. Gold As An Inflation Hedge Gold is a proven inflation hedge, particularly in environments marked by aggressive money printing and currency debasement. When government debt and fiscal deficits are high, as seen in many major economies today, fiat currencies—including the U.S. dollar—can come under pressure. In such times, gold's role as a store of wealth becomes even more valuable, helping investors protect purchasing power against inflation. Safe Haven In Times Of Crisis Gold often serves as a safe haven asset, providing stability during periods of economic uncertainty, geopolitical stress or major market corrections. This was evident during the global financial crisis (GFC), the Covid-19 pandemic and most recently in 2025, when gold's price rose as investors sought security amid market turmoil. Gold's ability to retain its value and even appreciate during such events underscores its importance as a stabilizing force in investment portfolios. Liquidity And Accessibility Gold is a highly liquid asset that is traded globally and accessible through various investment vehicles such as physical bullion, ETFs and mutual funds. This liquidity makes gold a practical choice for investors seeking both short-term and long-term exposure, and it can be bought or sold quickly in virtually any market environment. The fact that it doesn't produce any income can also make it tax-efficient when held over the long term. Central Bank Activity Central banks have become major players in the gold market, dramatically increasing their holdings from the previous decade. Central banks, particularly in emerging markets, are buying gold to diversify reserves, hedge against inflation and reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar. This sustained central bank demand could potentially provide consistent support for gold prices and could reflect a fundamental shift in global reserve management. Comparison With Cryptocurrencies While both gold and cryptocurrencies are seen as alternatives to fiat currencies, there are fundamental differences. Gold's demand is more diverse and less speculative, and gold has served as a store of wealth for thousands of years across cultures and civilizations. In contrast, cryptocurrencies have a much shorter track record, greater regulatory risk and more concentrated ownership, leading to much higher volatility. As a result, gold is generally considered a more reliable safe haven and stabilizer in portfolios. Risks And Considerations Despite its strengths, gold does have drawbacks. By my calculations, it has historically been about 25% more volatile than stocks, and its price can be unpredictable in the short term. After several years of strong returns, the risk of a near-term correction may be elevated. Gold also does not generate dividends, interest or revenue, making it difficult to value and assess whether it is over- or undervalued at any given time. Additionally, gold remains an unconventional holding for many institutional and high-net-worth investors, who may underestimate its historical returns and diversification benefits. As a result, including gold in a portfolio can set investors apart from their peers and may invite criticism during periods of underperformance. Final Thoughts Gold is more than just a shiny metal. With its surprisingly strong historical returns over the long run, high liquidity and strong central bank support, it can be a valuable portfolio tool that offers diversification, inflation protection and stability during market turmoil. While not a conventional holding for all investors, gold's unique attributes and proven track record make it worth considering as part of a well-diversified investment portfolio. The information provided here is not investment, tax or financial advice. You should consult with a licensed professional for advice concerning your specific situation. Forbes Finance Council is an invitation-only organization for executives in successful accounting, financial planning and wealth management firms. Do I qualify?
