The Housing Bubble

The Obama’s administration thinks it has no other choices. What else can they really do?

I guess they could start by acknowledging the futility of trying to turn back the clock, and then fervently strive to find the least-painful road forward to a sustainable recovery path. I know that is a lot to ask of politicians and the sort of economists who advise them.

PB,

The problem is when a politician tells the truth, the next election cycle voters will boot him/or her out.

Hence the need for true campaign finance reform.
JustSixDollars dotcom or org.
When the need to raise money to run for an office from local dog catcher to POTUS, then and only then will we have choices of people who have principles, not debts to lobbyists and corporations.

I worked for large corporations before and contract out to a small company. There is no way I would want to work for this small company as a direct hire. Too much politics and too few projects. So if you cannot get along with someone, you still have to see that person almost every day anyway. That person could be a manager. In large companies you can get away from mean spirited people.

In large companies you can get away from mean spirited people.

I guess I’ve not actively tried to move away from anyone - never have needed to. Personally, I prefer the lesser bureaucracy of small companies, and the ability to have control/a big impact. In a big company, the “box” you are put in is pretty specific because they have staff to do all the other ancillary things. In a small company, you get to do some stuff outside of your “realm” because there’s not already a huge department for it. I prefer that.

But that’s just me.

The Amish lifestyle level of society has plenty of room.

+1, BILA

Too many “small companies” are run by some kind of family oligarcy, with a “my way, or the highway” attitude. And their pay, benefits, hours, etc. etc. are typically not as good.

Larger companies also seem to do a better job of keeping toxic managers from ascending the food chain. Word gets around….

At one large company there was a toxic manager who was belligerant to many employees by micromanaging, making statements that could be misconstrued as threats (although we knew they were “figures of speech,” such as “I should get a gun and shoot you,” which is exactly what he told some woman. I reported him for his unwarranted harrassment behind my back about me. He got pushed out of the managerial role and his job was divided in two.

People like that are rare in the big corporations and don’t last long in managerial roles, but mostly because employees vote with their feet and go to other projects, and big corporations usually have tens of dozens of projects. In that same corporation there were corporate campuses in various parts of the city, so you did not have to stick around the people you did not like.

BiLA - You think people like that are more common in small companies? I’m not sure I’ve seen a correlation, but I haven’t worked enough places to really draw any conclusions. In the end, big company or small, you have to vote with your feet. Depending on the type of work you do and are interested in, transferring within the company may not be an option.

I only go where I am wanted. I haven’t had to look for a new engineering contract since 2002. Since then, I don’t contact head hunters. They contact me. I have a good network coast to coast.

so humble, Bill.

Au Contraire Bila
In large companies you can get away from mean spirited people.

And that part about “word getting around” from Xgsfixer.
Yes it does, but in big corps, you have politics on a major scale.
And the hiring amongst the truly talented doesn’t happen. It is ‘who you know’, not developing people from within that might really enhance new ideas and practices.
Seen it first hand. No developing of people who really know the particular field.

so humble, Bill.

I’m sorry, waitinginLA. It’s a fact. A fact does not mean one is not humble. And I am humble.

You mean it’s different this time?

I do think it is different. Each of the last recessions was “fixed” by loosening lending standards and showering business and consumers with debt.

This time, during the boom the lending standards were so unimaginably loose that we can’t possibly get backto them, let alone looser. So much debt was added, that we can’t pour enough debt on the economy to get consumers and (non-finaicial sector) businesses to take on more debt.

Look at the federal reserve Z1. Incomes and inflation up 50% since 1993. Per-husehold consumer debt up 180%. Business debt up 270%.

The “modis operendi” of ending a recession, will not work this time. We can’t loosen lending standards beyond where they were, not can we shower consumers and business with new debt.

We’re in full debt collapse mode now.

“We’re in full debt collapse mode now.”

Allow me…

POOF!

“Each of the last recessions was “fixed” by loosening lending standards and showering business and consumers with debt.”

Not really. Recessions end due to the natural business cycle. Expansions end on their own and recessions end on their own.
This recession will end on its own eventually too. Might be sooner, might be later. But it will end. I think by the end of this year with 2010 being one of those “jobless recovery” type years that the MSM loves to talk about (although won’t with Obama in office and just focus on GDP).

As to the added debt, a lot of that debt has been written off already and doesn’t exist anymore. Which is what caused Fannie, Freddie, Lehman, Wachovia, WaMu, AIG, etc to fail.

Government must stop tinkering around in areas it does not belong. Also house prices must be allowed to fall to their appropriate levels before the recession will end.

One interesting thing to do is compare the stock market dips in 1929 and 1933 with the dips in 2001/2002 and this March 9. Could be an encouraging sign because the stock market went up 8 or 9% per year after the 1933 low, despite 19% unemployment in the FDR recession of 1937.

I would never buy a house built between 2001 and now. The Chinese drywall issue is one thing. The shoddy construction from day laborers is another reason. A house built between 1997 and 2001 would be okay, I suppose.

“I do think it is different”

Agreed. And it is “different this time” because the out and out failure of supply side economics aka crony capitalism has not been fully revealed yet. The only damage seen is on the surface.

Don’t you mean the Hoover recession of 1937? FDR did nothing wrong during his 12 years in office. Like Obama will do nothing wrong for 8 years and it will still be Bush’s fault in 2015.

As to the added debt, a lot of that debt has been written off already and doesn’t exist anymore.

KJ, not so fast. The rest of america is really financially without funds and loaded with debt.
It is different this time. The previous times weren’t global.
The scum/banks of WS probably have written off all debt, no one else has been able to, and pay bills-food/utilities,rent/gas etc. Basic stuff.
I have many colleagues whose spouses have lost their jobs, have decided to stay in etc. Lots and lots of cutting back and that is JUST to pay bills. Not even to save.

What are the Banks or real estate lenders talking about when they bring up “moral certitiude or certainty”, in reference to not allowing mortgagors to use the current value of the house, to establish the basis for a mortgage?

Why are these derivatives still being sold? These ARE weapons of financial destruction.

Nice find.

Nursery Cryme

In 1997, I decided that I was going to retire at 62. I did.
As a boomer, I have looked forward to retirement for a long time. Way back in 1990, I looked at the world from a 1967 price standpont. This, with some good advice from my dad, ” never pay someone for what you can and should do yourself”, I have retired very comfortably.
I haven’t purchased a new car since 1970. I don’t own a cell phone, I don’t have cable.
I do have lake frontage, two boats, a Harley, two snowmobiles and two Dodge trucks. i do not use credit cards…period.
I’ve owned four lake homes, 9 houses and three hobby farms, all of which I either built myself or remolded from the ground up and made big bucks in profits when sold.
I do all my own auto work,including body work.
Everytime I make a purchase, I ask myself, what the 1967 cost would have been. Then I shoot for it. Theres always some fool that has to sell. I never compulsive buy. if i don’t get it at my price, I don’t buy.
So here Iam retired living comfortably, far removed from the I gotta have it now crowd, with everything paid for.
Bottom line here is the choices we make. if you want to run with the crowd, theres a price to pay. In most boomers cases, its the never be able to retire price.
To bad, so sad!

Bill —

Excellent point! We boomers are going to be too busy steadily working through the duration of what would have been our retirement years to have much time to spend, spend, spend like the previous generation of hard-vacationing, Winnebago-driving retirees did before us. With the boomer generation sidelined, who will fuel the consumption recovery that top policymakers so desperately crave?

Terry, did you pay the 1967 cost of the computer you just used to post that message of yours? LOL

Except one thing. You boomers have what we and and 30 somethings don’t….the numbers to vote yourselves a nice retirement, paid for by us. Step 1 is removing the SS cap on the “rich” because God forbid we let that ponzi scheme fail. Then lower the definition of rich and finally increase the rate itself. SS will run out, but not before you all get what you are “entitled” to.

It also doesn’t hurt your cause that the political class today is made up almost exclusively of boomers who will be looking out for their own interests.

“You boomers have what we and and 30 somethings don’t….the numbers to vote yourselves a nice retirement, paid for by us.”

Votes will not suffice to enable the squeezing of blood out of turnips.

Boomers have it all. At least it feels like that sometimes. Where I live, the boomers bought houses for three times their salary and today are trying to sell them for ten times the local salary, so they can get more money and move away somewhere.

Boomers enjoyed a life of high-paying manufacturing jobs, cheap college tuition, inexpensive or provided health insurance, and employer-provided pensions.

Call me pouty, but when it takes a graduate degree to be able to rent a house from a boomer, all while paying for their SS benefits and health care, and maybe clearing a couple hundred bucks to save at the end of the month…well, it sucks.

Call me pouty,

Yer pouty! Yes, you are! And you know what? Call ME: ‘Pouty II’.

*pouts *

So here I am retired living comfortably, far removed from the I gotta have it now crowd, with everything paid for.

As I’ve said before; I like a story with a happy ending.

Pouty 3!

Ben, I understand you feel you hear the same thing over and over, but you’re attacking claims that I never made.

Yes, taxes may hardly cover the interest on ‘the bill’, but that doesn’t mean that taxes aren’t increasing as a result of the bust/bailouts, regardless of what portion of the bill it covers.

I never made any claims of expectations of “investment-grade returns”. In fact, the point I made was that the purchasing power of the money is decreasing…which is true (measured in pretty much anything other than housing and stocks). I didn’t say I’m not getting the 10% a year I want. I’m simply saying that my savings, money - which is supposed to be a stable store of value - isn’t so much.

I am diversified (to the degree that I can be at this stage - I need to keep pretty liquid since I’m drawing down my savings at the moment, and might need it - not a time to take “risks” with it due to currency fluctuations, etc), and I’m doing what I can to *not* be a part of the system I despise. I can’t avoid paying taxes - I’ll just end up in jail. But I pay cash when I can to avoid giving bankers a % of each transaction, and to the degree that I’m comfortable I keep cash out of banks - I have no cash with the “big 19″.

In the end, someone is paying for this. The banks, to some degree. The depositors to another. The taxpayers as well, foreign holders of US debt, and future US taxpayers. I don’t think it’s wrong for someone to speak up and say “hey, why should I have to pay?” even if we’re only paying for a fraction of the total bill.

‘I don’t think it’s wrong for someone to speak up and say “hey, why should I have to pay?” even if we’re only paying for a fraction of the total bill.’

I agree with Ben. So long as cross-border diversification is legally an option, why not let your money vote with its feet?

Does that mean one shouldn’t also speak up? I feel like y’all are attacking the ultimate strawman here. Sure, I can vote with my dollars, and I am to the extent I am comfortable with (I’m sure I can be criticized for that).

But does that mean I can’t also speak out against policies I think are wrong/unfounded/unfair? Or are we no longer allowed to exercise our voices - only our dollars?

I think Europe has insured deposits as well.

I’m all for a limited insured amount, and well regulated banks. My guess is that this guarantee does help the economy. That’s why the FEDS extended it to money market funds. You want some stability in the system, not a bunch of bank runs which is what you would get in an uninsured system as soon as banks started to fail. It would be the economic equivalent of an atomic bomb, once withrawls and fears reached the critical mass BOOM.

I’m totally against insuring banks against failure. I think there should be a limit on the size of banks and that they should be broken up if they get above a certain size. There should be no such thing as too big to fail. The whole idea of these CEO’s making 10’s-100’s of millions off of the US tax payer, and the protections we give to bond holders and less so stock holders makes me want to puke.

I’m not saying bail us out, just give us some breathing room

Here’s my point, aNYCdj….I’d like some “breathing room” as well. I’m drawing down my savings at a rate of about $2k/month. I’d like some money to help cover living expenses as well. But if we all get some, then who pays for it?

Who determines who doesn’t deserve the “help”, and who we should take from? What authority do they have?

The only reason I have the savings is because I “sacrificed” at some point, and chose to put the money in the bank rather than eat out, take a trip, buy a new car, etc (not saying you did any of those things..just speaking of my own actions here). So, because I sacrificed in the past, I don’t deserve help now?

It’s not personal, it’s simply that any sort of program like that would be inherently “unfair”. Yes, there are plenty of unfair policies in play at the moment..but that doesn’t make it okay to institute one more, ya know?

If you are drawing down savings is this due to unemployment? Is so you can - and should - get handouts from the govt…ui benefits, medicare, all sorts of goodies are out there for the “unfortunate”.

Yes, drawing down due to being unemployed. And yes, I’m collecting UI, but that’s not a gov’t handout (well, the extra $25/month is and the emergency extended benefits are).

Unfortunately, I expected this to be “temporary” and am paying quite a bit in rent for a month-to-month lease, expecting to move once I get a job nailed down. Sadly, this “temporary” arrangement keeps dragging out. It’s a ‘luxury’ I can afford at the moment, though, so I guess it’s okay.

er, $25/week, not month.

How’s it not a handout? It’s the very definition of a hand out. Lose job, ask govt for money, get money.

Because the “government” isn’t paying for it - my former employer is. Unemployment insurance is administered by the government, but is paid for by the company.

There’s certainly an argument there that it’s a business “tax” like any other, but my understanding of UI is that it’s fundamentally different. It’s not like food stamps.

Unemployment insurance is administered by the government, but is paid for by the company.

It’s paid for by the company, but indirectly by the employee as well — unemployment insurance, healthcare packages, 401K matches and so on are priced in by employers and most certainly impact the compensation one receives as an employee.

And of course the employer 1/2 of social security. Despite what most people think, employees pay the full 12.4% themselves indirectly.

It’s paid for by the company, but indirectly by the employee as well

Yes, I agree…hence my stance that it’s not a “government handout”, as KJ claims above

By that logic - then the government doesn’t pay for anything, because all money comes from either corporations or individuals. That’s kind of like, if you worked for GE, saying that your weekly grocery bill isn’t paid by you it’s paid by GE.

The fact that the money goes into a general government pool of money, to be given to specific individuals based on specific circumstances, means the government is paying for it. Unemployment checks don’t come to you from your company - they come to you from the government.

packman - I see your point, and yes, from one perspective it all boils down to that.

However, there is a difference between, say, food stamps and FDIC insurance, no?

To me, unemployment insurance is like FDIC..it’s paid for via premiums from the companies involved, not the general population. Yes, in the end, it’s the consumers who pay for EVERYTHING, but if you take it to that extreme, then it’s really not worth talking about.

Yes true, but IMO the concept of “government handout” still applies. The government is taking from the general populace, and giving back only to the needy. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”

Not good IMO, at least from an overall perspective. If you’re on the receiving end it’s great, and there’s nothing wrong with receiving (as I believe you are). Who I have a problem with is the government creating the programs in the first place.

Insurance is a great thing, but I feel very strongly it should be optional - not forced on us by the government. That includes health care, FDIC, unemployment, corporate bailouts, etc. It all boils down to the fact that they’re mandatory insurance. Mandatory insurance paid for by a huge pool of insured, with government as the actuary, lends itself to massive abuse in the form of excessive risk-taking and fraud.

It would be funnier if it weren’t true.

Don’t remove THAT part, I might need it!

failed threatened to sue

Recounting that incident made me see so much red that I could not type right…

but he threatened to sue the department and the chair overturned my decision.

What a candy-as*s chair you had. Disgraceful.
My aunt was on the school board of a high school in Provo, Utarr a couple years ago and they had a similar situation, they wouldn’t graduate a student and the parents came in threatening to sue, threatening to claim discrimination because they were Hispanic— and I am happy to report that the board and the school didn’t cave at ALL.
The response was, to paraphrase: “Where was all this interest in your student when the school sent home notice after notice, (bilingual), and called incessantly, (bilingual) trying to get your student to appear, and on the rare days he did appear, assist in his own education? And got absolutely no response? We aren’t even sure your kid can freakin’read, in any language. We will not give him a diploma, so sue away.”

They didn’t sue. Too bad, as I imagine it’d be pretty easy to prove the kid couldn’t read, and probably amusing as well to witness.

I wonder where the kid is now? Probably in jail, or else a realtor.

“Probably in jail, or else a realtor.”

+100

There is certainly no exaggeration to any of your stories. I’ve met many people who had degrees and I would have sworn they were lying. And maybe some of them were.

I once lost a job to someone who was supposed to have the proper credentials, yet who utterly and completely crippled the process/system he was supposed to be so good at, to the point where the process stopped and the company was going to lose it biggest customer. (eventually did) Even worse, management decided to keep them.

Never once did they call me back or resolve the problem.

“Dilbert” is real.

Not all of ‘em. My mom now teaches school in rural Utarr, as did my gran, and they cared very much about their students and did everything they could to teach well and do right by the kids.

The situation for private colleges is identical. Bloated admin costs, and even MORE money pumped into student services/campus “life.”

I graduated high school 3rd in a class of over 300 and was voted most likely to succeed.

Went to Colorado State on a President’s scholarship, full ride.

Ended my freshman year kicked out of the dorms and with a 1.2 GPA. Dropped out (with a little encouragement).

As Joe Walsh would say, life’s been good to me.

Bet you were one of those repressed evangelical rural/suburban girls, who went Ape-$hit when she finally got out on her own?

Bet you were one of those repressed evangelical rural/suburban girls, who went Ape-$hit when she finally got out on her own?

Hahahaha! And skipped around in the wilderness writing novels and digging up dinosaurs and filming great films and stuff.
Jeeze, man, what’s the world coming to?

I did go back to school, after a couple of years off…

but I’ve never lived up to the most likely to succeed part…unless you count having lots of dogs and free time as being successful, I dunno.

…unless you count having lots of dogs and free time as being successful, I dunno.

A solid ‘A+’ fer you, missy.

Shoots, man! Is there another and more valid standard to be found?! No.
*flaps hand dismissively *

My sis make 40K per year as a teacher in North Carolina.

Cashing out: Unused sick time and vacations turning costly in South Florida

By Jennifer Gollan

South Florida Sun-Sentinel

Sunday, May 03, 2009

A former military man with a strong work ethic, C. William Hargett Jr. seldom took a sick or vacation day in more than 12 years as Pompano Beach city manager. When he retired in 2007, the city had to pay him $144,611.85 for 1,540 hours in unused time.

Hargett defended the city’s accrued time policy as a way to encourage good attendance and attract top talent.

Although Pompano Beach now faces a $4 million revenue shortfall, “when we did this deal, it was not 2009 and an economic recession,” he said. “That was what we agreed to.”

I really dont have a problem with this since I am pretty much the same at work, I am not good at doing hour lunches or vacations…so why not cash out when you leave?

——————————————
Hargett defended the city’s accrued time policy as a way to encourage good attendance and attract top talent.

“Hargett defended the city’s accrued time policy as a way to encourage good attendance and attract top talent.”

What kind of talent did they attract if

“Pompano Beach now faces a $4 million revenue shortfall”

What kind of talent? Why the usual kind, of course! Paid for FAIL!

Sheriff says he needs $35.6 million more to cover office’s costs
By JENNIFER SORENTRUE

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Thursday, May 01, 2008

With Palm Beach County commissioners facing their worst budget crunch in recent history, Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said Thursday that he will need an additional $35.6 million from them to run his office next year.

Most of the money is needed just to cover the increasing costs of salaries, benefits and health insurance, much of which is mandated by a union contract. Bradshaw’s $457.8 million budget proposal, a 9.6 percent increase from this year, does not include money for any new sheriff’s deputies.

“This budget reflects just what it takes to run the agency,” he said. “There is no growth in the law enforcement area.”

County budget officials had projected Bradshaw would ask for an additional $40 million in tax money next year, but the sheriff’s office is raising fees to offset $4.4 million of that increase.

County Administrator Bob Weisman said he is pleased that Bradshaw’s request is slightly lower than expected. But as voter-mandated property tax cuts continue to cap the county’s revenues each year, Weisman warned, it will become increasingly difficult for commissioners to continue to pay for large increases in the sheriff’s budget.

Palm Beach County Commissioner McCarty pleads guilty to federal corruption
Brian Haas, Sun-Sentinel
Friday, March 27, 2009

Former Palm Beach County Commissioner Mary McCarty teared up as her husband was sentenced to eight months in prison Friday for not reporting her crime.

But through those tears came a smile. His sentence was less harsh than expected.

McCarty, 54, probably won’t face such a lenient sentence, her attorney said. She pleaded guilty earlier in the day to conspiring to commit honest services fraud, admitting she illegally benefited from her position as a Palm Beach County commissioner. She will be sentenced June 4 and could face up to five years in prison, the third county commissioner in recent years to plead guilty to federal corruption.

Assistant U.S. Attorney John Kastrenakes listed what McCarty did, raising three key points: She voted to approve about a dozen county bond projects underwritten by her husband’s employers; she influenced the awarding of Delray Beach bond work to her husband’s employer; and she got free and greatly reduced hotel stays provided by Delray Beach-based Ocean Properties, which had business with the county.

In all, prosecutors say the couple made nearly $300,000 from the deals. Kastrenakes said McCarty conspired with former County Commissioner Warren Newell to hide their relationship with Ocean Properties. Newell is serving a five-year prison sentence for public corruption. The prosecutor said McCarty also “made materially false statements” to federal investigators about her relationship with the hotel chain.

Masilotti gets five years
By TOM DUBOCQ

Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Saturday, June 30, 2007

WEST PALM BEACH — “I am truly sorry. It’s my fault. I accept full responsibility.”

Soft as a whisper, a hunched and humbled Tony Masilotti apologized to a federal judge Friday who sentenced him to five years in prison. His crime: betraying the public’s trust for more than $9 million in cash and real estate during his eight years as a Palm Beach County commissioner.

Thank you

Good find.

“Everyone wants the services, but no one wants to pay the taxes!”

Oly Gal-
Wow, you live in paradise! I am a tree person myself. Nothing compares to Mother Nature, God’s art, provided for us to enjoy and protect. (The h*ll with organized religion). What Horton did to the forrest just pisses me off too. I agree about lining them up and…

Thanks. When I speak to you this helps me situate you inside my head, and also assists my positive wishes to locate you, there where you are.

Well, if it helps I live within walkng distance of this shopping center.

*immediately spits out joint *

No! That DOESN’T help. Jeeze. You know what, I can’t wait until you get you and your family back out into the country. Into a non-moldy blu-built house, of course.
I’m gonna count the days.

It was kind of an adventurous thing with the house.

Ummmm…yeah. I always attempt to look at it that way, too.
Hahahaha!
It’s either that, or go lookin’ for the hippie…

Oly,

I couldn’t resist this little ditty from television:

Green Acres is the place to be
Farm livin’ is the life for me
Land spreadin’ out so far and wide
Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside

New York is where I’d rather stay
I get allergic smelling hay
I just adore a penthouse view
Darling I love you but give me Park Avenue

The chores, the stores
Fresh air, Times Square

You are my wife
Good bye city life
Green Acres we are there

Lovely. I think I hear an angel singing…

PB - keep in mind the numbers went down quite a bit in the 1990-1997 period, back pretty much to inflation-adjusted norms. The main price gains were from 1997-2005 (9-year period). This is true nationwide but especially in SD, which experienced quite a drop in the early 90’s due mainly to Clinton’s military cutbacks (I would imagine, since SD has a huge naval base which contributes a lot to the local economy).

“T.O. has been invaded. We call it Van Nuys West! East Ventura County has a 3rd world feel, SFV creep, so to speak.”

Really thats interesting I grew up in that town. Back in the 1960’s it was wide open spaces, Movie sets and an airport which you can see in the movie “its a mad mad world” that was the TO airport.

I guess the earlist I could make it back to CA is July so I’d miss the JPL event, I worked there for a short time in the 1990’s. Contractor work. I would like to take a boat trip out to the channel Islands thats what all CA looked like way back in the Mission days.

Cactus
Calendar the JPL Open House for next year, if your within driving distance. Lots of kids activites too. Nice piece of property, isn’t it. Trees galore, as you know. The fire last year didn’t touch it, thank God!

T.O. has changed. I use to manage the town’s original mall in the 1980’s.

I haven’t been to Catalina Island, and I grew up in North Hollywood. Maybe someday. The fire last year (or the year before) did a lot of damage. I hope its grown/come back. Nothing worse than a barren island.

your s/b your’re - within driving…

For some of us, who sold and have been waiting out this market, renting is becoming less cost effective. If we buy at the end of this year (So Ca) and for argument sake, the house dips another $75K (unlikely that much), that’s 3 years of rent expense. Since ours will be a one check deal, figure around $800.00 a month for housing related expenses (property tax, utilities, insurance) we’ll need to shell out. We’re down big time income wise, so for us preserving our cash reserves is our thinking. We rent 3 climate control storage units and an apt. Our stuff includes a piano. Any feedback?

Any feedback?

Yeah. Why you buying in SoCal in the first place? What do you love about it sooooo much, that this’s the ONLY place you consider?
(Although I guess I should ask ‘what part of SoCal’.)

*Waves hand around head energetically in a spice-shakery sort of gesture, indicating the possible need for a total paradigm shift *

Actually I am too, renting three storage units. Most of my junk is in them and I travel light. This means I can rent smaller places at lower prices.

Consider getting rid of some of your furniture where you currently rent and if you can downsize so that you can pay less rent.

Also rents in my part of LA are coming down. I’m looking out the window and see for rent up and down the street and banners displaying deals on the apartment buildings.

See if you can stick to the next three years. LA prices have been stubborn, especially near the beach areas, but bear in mind that ALT-A resets and Option ARM resets have been very popular in California and the resetting peaks in a couple of years. Means more defaults, more foreclosures, and further price drops.

@Bill: Thanks. You may see some more high rise stuff do the repartment thing before long. Donald Sterling has been buying up properties for a couple of years now and operating them as rentals - you might want to keep on eye on what his company is offering. For me, I’m tied down by stuff, so I can’t be mobile and rootless. But I’m working on ways to lighten up on the stuff before I get too old to deal with it. It will take years to accomplish.

@AW: Sell the piano and buy a KX88 keyboard and a Kurzweil sound module. Have a storage sale. And I wouldn’t buy at the end of this year - I expect another leg down in prices when the Option ARM recasts set in, and that doesn’t really get going until 2010.

Bill,

I’m confused how moving a lot results in paying less tax to governments. You’re still paying income tax, property tax (even when you rent), sales tax, gas tax, car registration tax, etc.

Yes I still pay the taxes, but I get a huge tax break for working for a company at a location in under x amount of months. It’s a much, much larger tax break than a silly mortgage interest deduction.

On the other hand I have two rent payments per month and two utilities payments per month. It’s still darned worth it for those tax breaks.

I use one of the IRS publications and forms for my tax break. Perfectly legal, as it’s from the http://www.irs.gov website. I am a strong proponent of avoiding taxes and do not evade taxes. My career would be over with if I did that. In fact, I wish everyone was as diligent at avoiding taxes as I am. Then we’d starve out big government.

I lived in a building in Koreatown a few years ago. It was pretty nice, good managers, well-maintained. Sterling bought it and turned it into a dump. Ceased maintenance, harassed our wonderful managers, and jacked up rent 25%. He’s a notorious slumlord - stay well away from any of his buildings.

We bought a house in 2003 desperate to never live in that situation again. (We sold in ‘05 so we survived that mistake just fine.) In some way, it was Sterling that introduced me to the HBB.

Oy, ignore him, pass the bong, lady!

Oy, ignore him, pass the bong, lady!

Okayyyy…
*passes it over whilst speaking in the time-recognized breath-holding wheezy sort of smoke-puffy way *

Oly,
Any micro climate area in WA, where the sun actually comes out? I love the states or WA and OR, but I need some rays.

For the life of me, I have no idea why I want to stay in So Ca? It’s a 3rd world, over taxed, crowded and expensive cesspool. I’ve lived here since 1963. Maybe fear of the unknown, or maybe I am a self hater.

Speaking of bongs, I told my other half in the early 80’s to stop spilling the bong water on my new couch. It was tough explaning the stench to my parents.

A) Ron Paul is too old,
B) He’s anti choice although I think he is in favor of leaving that issue up to the states and not the federal.

Other than that, I think he needs to be listened to carefully on the economic/banking/gold topics. He belongs in Congress.

Other than that, I think he needs to be listened to carefully on the economic/banking/gold topics. He belongs in Congress.

I think you accurately portray his positions. One thing that stands out to me is the fact that he doesn’t feel the need to legislate all of his personal beliefs. Even though he’s pro-life, he doesn’t believe it’s the fed govt’s place to dictate that. I may feel he’s misguided (I think it’s a civil rights issue for the mother), I’m of the opinion you have to respect someone who has the integrity to draw that boundary.