The Housing Bubble

Yep. Been running my own money at least that long.

HWY- from a thread yesterday; point ye browser at ebay #220763167037

Listing removed!

220763167037

Tankxs redrum!

Now eyes know, cool, something to explore for Mr. Cole (age 9 1/2) (Eyes try not to damage it too much ‘efor I toss ‘em the keys…)

Problems with that listing maybe: (nots in a hurry anyhoo)

Vehicle Specifics for 1999 Volkswagen Beetle-New 2DR CPE GLS:
Highlights:
Title Check: Issue found
Odometer Check: OK
Accidents: Issue found
Owners: 9

Big Bear, How are those San Diego housing prices working out for you now? I guess the bottom you called was a little off.Try again in another six months!

I never yet called a bottom; would guess some time after 2013, though…

Serial bottom caller I ain’t.

No she’s in VIRGINIA.

The area around the tidal basin is run by the National Park Service.

I’m neither pro-choice or pro-life. I do not have a vagina therefore it is none of my business. When women start talking of regulating my tool is when I develop an opinion on their plumbing.

So you support decriminalizing prostitution?

Like I said, I don’t support regulation of eyeballs, toes, arms or any other body part including genitals.

You wonder? Do you ever think?

So, eyes reckon all is not lost.

For many people, life is like a game of dominoes.

Life is like a roll of toilet paper, it goes faster
toward the end.

if it last a few weeks i guess it’s no biggie…six or even three months could be a biggie for some (most) people.

i know it’s just an evil corporation but my company still has 2 - 3 year IOU from Illinois.

Now I understand what made CAT stay. IOUs.

but my company still has 2 - 3 year IOU from Illinois

There must be some worried folks on the “Top-Floor$” losing sleep over that $cary $it-u-ashun. :-/

but my company still has 2 - 3 year IOU from Illinois

I don’t how it works ‘tat all (just heard HBB rumors)…but eyes was a thinkin,… couldn’t they use that as “Ill-junk collateral” at the Fed Inc. and get say maybe/perhaps .07 cents on the dollar$, in an emergency type $it-u-ashun?

So the paycheck based on this week’s time sheet would arrive? Good to know. I’ve never been through one of these things.

By the way, yesterday the media finally started to cover the tax return issue that I brought up a while ago. Seems that electronically filed can be processed and refunds issued even without people or without many people. It is paper filers (like me) who can’t be processed without non-essential employees. Glad I took care of things early.

We’re getting warnings to fill out the time sheets TODAY, so I guess so.

Yeah, we too got told to get our time sheets earlier than normal so that they could be approved before COB Friday.

We are required to turn them in on Wednesday of the second week even during normal times. Noon on Wednesday actually.

Polly — and that’s pretty crazy really. A week and a half STILL isn’t enough time to reconcile the timesheets and authorize a direct deposit? Don’ t they have, computers to do the math? I guess I just don’t understand.

Maybe my agency has to get them in earlier than your agency? We turn them in on Wednesday so they can be entered (local admins), reviewed by managers and finalized by late Thursday or maybe first thing Friday morning. Then we don’t actually get paid until 8 to 10 days later.

Now my co-workers who have been through this before are telling me that even if there is a shut down, we all have to come in to work on Monday to do an “orderly” shut down. Also to make sure that our computers are here and locked up and that the mucky mucks turn in their Blackberries. Maybe for 4 hours, maybe for 8. I’m finding this very disruptive.

“Although there may be a lapse in appropriations for the Federal government beginning this Saturday, the Department of Energy has some prior-year carryover funding that will permit continued operations for the immediate future … ”

I report to work on Monday.

Thank Zeus my current agency has a mostly automated system for timecards. When I was at FDA their process was turn in a spreadsheet. Very antiquated and prone to error.

I havent been told if I’m essential or not yet. I do work for an agency that will have several thousand people working through the “appropriations lapse”, but my spot is in the air.

Daycare will be open though! Whew.

But with a few exceptions*, they AREN’T really federal highways, nomenclature nonwitstanding. The Federal government provides highway funding to the states, and standards to which highways must conform if the states are to get said funding. But day to day operation is not done by the feds.

*and the Baltimore Washington PARKWAY may be one of them.

“But day to day operation is not done by the feds.”

If the money would stop flowing in the event of a shutdown, why would the degree to which the actual operation is localized matter?

A related case is that of federal contractors; many of these are small, locally operated businesses, which would potentially see their pay disrupted in the event of a federal government shutdown.

But really, highways could last without federal funds MUCH longer than any shutdown is ever likely to last.

“If the money would stop flowing in the event of a shutdown, why would the degree to which the actual operation is localized matter?”

It isn’t the localization that matters so much as the timing of the appropriation. If the state provides the people they should be willing to keep providing the people unless they think the funding will be cut. Getting the money this week vs. next week shouldn’t matter that much. And if the appropriation is actually done in advance (at the start of the fiscal year) or quarterly, then the money may already have been appropriated through the end of September or the end of the fiscal quarter.

Accounting matters.

Can anyone tell me why I-97 from Annapolis to Baltimore is an INTERSTATE highway?

it was s’posed to be a spur…

Well they should have! Bags fly free!

Civil airlines participate in CRAF, or Civil Reserve Air Fleet. All the US majors do so, as well as ATA, World, and possibly some others.

Southwest has no ETOPs certified planes, so they cannot fly overseas.

Two government workers could. They would need to be 12s or 13s and a few grades up the chain, but it could work. Not great if one wants to stop being a fed and take a risk starting a business or something, but there are a number of couples like that.

Lobbyists. Defense contractors.

There’s your buyers.

Townhouses anywhere near the beltway are rare for under $600k. I had some near my old place that were selling for just under $2 million. They were nice, but we’re not talking brownstones on the upper east side.

“Now the political class are desprately trying to maintain stock prices…”

Makes sense, doesn’t it, as members of the political class are generally in that top 1% of the wealth distribution?

What I don’t get is why our ‘independent’ central bank appears to be so actively involved in the (politically motivated) effort to prop up the stock market. Is that part of their jobs/inflation mandate?

“Now the political class are desprately trying to maintain stock prices (where the well off hold most of their wealth) despite the decline in real wages for the bottom ~85% of wage earners.”

The same type of thing happened at the local level during the housing bubble. The local politicians already owned, so they didn’t give a damn about renters that were being thrown out of apartments for fly-by-night shoddy condo conversions or the worse alternative of overpaying to buy in the biggest real estate bubble in history. That they were getting a sizable chunk of campaign cash from these same developers gave them even less reason to be concerned about the needs of ordinary workers.

I thought “outsourcing” meant to private contractors and “offshoring” was to other countries.

Good summation of the local dynamic, SDGreg. I was going through my neighborhood photos and notes from 2005-6 the other night and that’s exactly what was going on around us at the time. The local pols benefitted handsomely from the bubble and they’ll be amongst the vultures as this bottoms.

Sorry montana, I think that the offshorers co-opted the outsourcing term to make themselves look better.

Ya see, even J6P can connect “off” and “shore.” Off+shore means China to them. But, “out” and “source”? Not so much. J6P may not know what it means to “source” something.

“What I don’t get is why our ‘independent’ central bank appears to be so actively involved in the (politically motivated) effort to prop up the stock market.”

What’s politically motivated about it? That’s where the rich keep most of their money. Who do you think the Fed woks for?

r

‘Unions and Democrats’

I disagree. Who pushed NAFTA through? Who allowed China into the WTO, even though they have no labor rules, no environmental restrictions? The answer is Republicans and Democrats.

‘Last year the Dem House passed a bill which would eliminate tax breaks for offshoring’

That was political posturing, IMO. A real challenge to this would be a vote to withdraw from the WTO. Scrap NAFTA. We need this issue to be front and center every day, every election cycle. Not a bill here and there. The fact is both parties, but notably the Democrats, have abandoned the working class in favor of multinational corporations. Need proof? Just go to buy something and look at where it’s made.

As for unions, remember a few years ago when they started courting illegal aliens in the US? I don’t doubt that there are people in unions and even both political parties that stand up to the globalists. But if so, they are a quiet minority.

Last year the Dem House passed a bill which would eliminate tax breaks for offshoring, and give that money to small businesses who hire. Republicans filibustered it in the Senate.

eco mentions this daily (several times, usually). I’ve read the text of the bill, but haven’t had time to really dig into the sections of internal revenue code the bill amends to fully understand it.

Could you (or someone else) please elaborate on these points:

1) What tax breaks are currently in place for corporations who move jobs out of the US

2) What are the exact changes encompassed by this bill. Not just those that support your (or anyone else’s position), but every element of the bill.

I’d love to take everyone’s comments at face value, but the reality is people are biased and make summaries that don’t include or represent all the facts. I’d love to understand the facts of this bill.

TIA!

I remember when NAFTA was signed by Clinton. Ford, Carter, and Bush showed up.

I remember Perot debating VP Gore on CNN on NAFTA. (great sucking sound of jobs heading South).

I remember the special deals Clinton made with both sides to get votes (and failed to deliver on most).

I look forward to dodging Mexican trucks on I-35.

Actually Unions were against NAFTA and GATT from the start. Not all unions had to take a stand (Teachers, for instance unless you are gonna export your kid every day to Saltillo to go to school).

Just because you didn’t see a 30 second commercial on it didn’t mean it didn’t happen. People don’t take Unions seriously, and dismiss them as greedy SOBs. The only thing they wanted to be greedy about were keeping good paying jobs in the US.

But keep revising history. I can see Mexico from my house!

1) What tax breaks are currently in place for corporations who move jobs out of the US

Does tax code send U.S. jobs offshore?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-03-20-corporate-tax-offshoring_N.htm

…it’s true. “The U.S. tax system does provide an incentive to locate production offshore,” says Martin Sullivan, a contributing editor to Tax Notes, a non-profit publication that tracks tax issues….

…At issue is the U.S. tax code’s treatment of profits earned by foreign subsidiaries of American corporations. Profits earned in the United States are subject to the 35% corporate tax. But multinational corporations can defer paying U.S. taxes on their overseas profits until they return them to the USA — transfers that often don’t happen for years. General Electric, for example, has $62 billion in “undistributed earnings” parked offshore, according to recent Securities and Exchange Commission filings. Drug giant Pfizer boasts $60 billion. ExxonMobil has $56 billion…..

“If you had two companies in Pittsburgh that both were going to expand capacity and create 100 jobs, our tax code puts the company who chooses to put the plant in Pittsburgh at a competitive disadvantage over the company that chooses to move to a tax haven,”…

…The Democrats, saying the United States has overlooked the costs to working Americans in its rush to embrace globalization, have vowed to eliminate any tax incentive for further offshoring….

….the U.S. takes in less annual revenue from corporate taxes, measured as a percentage of economic output, than almost all other major economies. Part of the explanation for that shortfall is the allowance for corporations to postpone taxes on foreign income.

I’m not revising history. There was congressional opposition to NAFTA at the time too. But what matters, IMO, is where is the opposition to globalism now?

2) What are the exact changes encompassed by this bill. Not just those that support your (or anyone else’s position), but every element of the bill.

Republicans block ending offshore jobs tax breaks

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/28/us-usa-democrats-offshore-idUSTRE68R40I20100928

Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bill on Tuesday to end tax deductions enjoyed by companies that close their U.S. plants and move overseas….

….”Why in the world would millions of Americans who are losing their jobs be subsidizing operations that are closed up, and the cost of doing that, and sending jobs overseas?” Michigan Democratic Senator Debbie Stabenow said….

…..The bill also takes on a hot tax topic known as “deferral,” the ability of companies to defer taxes on income earned abroad.

…..President Barack Obama’s budget aims to sharply curtail that practice. The bill would repeal deferral for companies that close or cut a business in the U.S. and start or expand overseas with the intention of importing goods for sale in the United States…..

Hi drummin, I admit I don’t know the bill . I vaguely remember that setting up a new office can be tax-deducted, even if that’s a call center in India. That’s the tax break they wanted to get rid of. But I don’t know much else. Do you know the bill number?

Just because you didn’t see a 30 second commercial on it didn’t mean it didn’t happen.

So did these union members vote against the congresspeople/president that passed NAFTA? Or did they just talk about being against it but not take any real action? Did these folks support and vote for Perot? (I’d guess not)

It’s easy to say you disagree with something. It’s a bit more difficult to back your words with real action.

“But what matters, IMO, is where is the opposition to globalism now?”

Nowhere. While other countries jealously protect their markets, USA J6P has been brainwashed into believing that unless the US has 100% open markets that the 4 riders oif the Apocalyse will appear. He drives his imported car/truck while lamenting the loss of American jobs, wearing his imported clothes and shoes,while driving to his retail job where he sells/warehouses imported goods, and just doesn’t make the connection.

I admit I don’t know the bill

I think it would benefit everyone here who talks for/against this bill (and the politicians involved) to read and understand what was really voted on, and what the side-effects might be (no bill is ever as simple as a one-line summary). Informed discourse and all that.

The name/number of the bill is as follows. I’ll post a link in a separate message:

S. 3816 [111th]: Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act

and a link to the bill’s text:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-3816

He drives his imported car/truck while lamenting the loss of American jobs

While your point about clothes, shoes and such is valid, the reality is the home country of a car manufacturer isn’t a great representation of where most of the work is done or where the jobs are.

Many foreign cars are manufactured here, and many ‘american’ cars are manufactured elsewhere, or sourced from parts made elsewhere.

I think a lot of the disconnect between government workers and private sector workers these days arises from a general sense by government workers that their jobs are safe from off-shoring, and to a great extent they are.

But the world is more complicated that that, and as it turns out off-shoring private sector jobs reduces taxable income here in the US which in turn reduces tax revenue for ALL sectors of government. Now things get complicated as previously protected government jobs are at risk from falling tax revenue. To be sure, just like an individual can “live on credit” for a while until lenders take notice of their ever growing credit card balances, so can governments, and so far borrowing has worked well. So well in fact that government wages have risen substantially over the past 5 years while revenues have fallen.

What cannot last forever will not last for ever. This is not my opinion or any negative reflection on unions or government workers, but just easy math.

The fact is that we are now required to compete with cheap offshore labor, and are waking up to the harsh reality that the worth of a human for a days labor is shockingly low.

But those Dems were in the minority, shut out by a majority party who was voted in because they screamed God Guns Abortion Mom and Apple Pie.

It’s politics. If the Ds knew those things were important to a critical group of voters, whey did they let the Rs own those issues?

He drives his imported car/truck while lamenting the loss of American jobs, wearing his imported clothes and shoes,while driving to his retail job where he sells/warehouses imported goods

(Some USA J6P’s gets filled with “TrueAnger™” while drinking his low-cost American name brand beer (A.) owned by a Canadian Inc. (b.) owned by a Belgium Inc. and tuning in their critical thinking antennae to listen with fear&loathing distortionville Australian-Quasi-American Faux News Inc.)

Hows do eyes know this? I’ve witnessed it.
(in fact, eyes can go to a certain “bidness” after 4pm today for a Yell!/Scream!/Holler! refresher inoculation course.

Their Hyena “laughing” solution? rope / tree / (non-Hawaiian) person

Did I mention like Rash Limpbaughs ideas too…all of ‘em

I think it would benefit everyone here who talks for/against this bill (and the politicians involved) to read and understand what was really voted on, and what the side-effects might be (no bill is ever as simple as a one-line summary). Informed discourse and all that. drumminj

So what are you implying? That because we don’t know every minute detail of the bill that the grand concept is unknown or in doubt?

Is this a common blog tactic to throw in red herrings to cause doubts in issues that go against your ideology?

For example: The other day many were saying that we should tax the rich more. You came out saying that how can we tax the rich when we can’t even come up with a definition of what constitutes “rich” therefore by implication, the whole concept of taxing the rich more is a non-starter. Well it is not.

Now this issue and the title of the article I posted above is:

Republicans block ending offshore jobs tax breaks

It’s a simple concept to understand. Not hard. I posted 2 articles above describing what happened. That we all don’t understand every single minor detail on how it might affect every specific company’s complicated tax situation does not undermine our general understanding of the subject and its consequences.

The bottom line:
Republicans blocked ending tax breaks to companies that offshore jobs.

‘Republicans blocked ending tax breaks to companies that offshore jobs’

So where were the senate Dems or the president? Let’s be honest, trying to pass one bill in the house, and then mentioning it every time this comes up isn’t doing anything to even stop globalism, much less reverse it. Show me a major push by the Dems as a whole to repeal NAFTA, get us out of the WTO, and then I’ll agree they can claim to be advancing the cause of working people (and not just those in unions). Anything short of that is political posturing, as I said before.

I don’t know what the problem and fuss is with all this off-shoring thing. For the last 10 years all I have been hearing is how we (America) have entered into the new age of a service economy. It was great for all until the bubble popped and now everyone wants to go back for a do-over.

‘the new age of a service economy’

It’s been more than 10 years that this has been going on. The idea that we could sell each other houses (or cars, etc) as a basis for the economy never really worked. But the situation felt more stable than it was because half the country was using their house as an ATM.

I don’t expect a do-over. It may be too late to turn this thing around, but it’s gotta be tried, IMO. We should negotiate our trade deals on a country by country basis, if it makes sense for us. For instance, we shouldn’t have open trade borders with countries that have pay scales like Mexico or China, or that spend no effort on environmental matters. If we do, we can not compete, and we end up in this race to the bottom.

When you think about how we went from being the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor, obviously more was going on than “free trade” agreements. But trade issues are a great place to start.

BTW, something I’ve been thinking about; going way back to the US becoming the “worlds economic engine”, ie we borrow and spend and buy the worlds stuff, it seems to me the biggest curse all along has been this US$ “worlds reserve currency” thing. If that hadn’t been the case, a lot of this baloney would have never lasted long.

I don’t know what the problem and fuss is with all this off-shoring thing.

Maybe you’re a former government worker, maybe retired or maybe you have a job that was untouched by, or benefited from off-shoring.

It was great for all until the bubble popped

The time-revealed contradictions and implications in that simple statement partially illustrate “what the problem and fuss is with all this off-shoring thing.”

…trying to pass one bill in the house,…isn’t doing anything to even stop globalism, much less reverse it. Show me a major push by the Dems as a whole to repeal NAFTA, get us out of the WTO, ….Anything short of that is political posturing, as I said before.

I agree with all of that. The Democrats betrayed the people they were supposed to stand for. Because of that, the Democrat’s structural “sins” might be equal to those of the GOP’s.

But I do think Democrats trying to pass a bill that would end tax-breaks for off-shoring was at least a start in the right direction.

And sometimes political posturing is fine because it gets people talking about the issue which can then embolden action for needed change.

“But what matters, IMO, is where is the opposition to globalism now?”

Nowhere. In fact, in a perverse twist, as profit-hungry shareholders through our 401(k)s, might we be at the point where we’re actually becoming DEPENDENT on globalism-derived profit?

Rio,

Part of the reason to dig into these bills is to verify that they will do what is claimed. Let’s face it, we get lied to very often. TARP was sold as aid to main street via wall street.

For all we know, this bill could have provided incentive to move the headquarters out too.

From Yahoo tech ticker

Our leaders first outsource our jobs and now debase our currency ( wealth ). Eventually I predict the Country will fraction into seperate states like the USSR

“More controversially, Romer lauds QE for helping to weaken the dollar. A weaker dollar makes U.S. goods more competitive overseas, boosting exports and GDP growth, and ultimately hiring. While that’s true, she seems to overlook the impact a weak dollar has on ordinary Americans in terms of falling buying power and punishment for savers and those living on fixed-incomes.

..

“So where were the senate Dems or the president?”

Voting for cloture so that they could have an up-or-down vote, Ben. But the Republicans filibustered it. If even one Republican had voted for cloture (he could have voted against the actual bill later), then that bill would have been LAW, and there would have been less outsourcing. If you ask me, that’s a major push.

But if you ask why the Dems aren’t doing major pushing? Because they are afraid to; because the balance of the Senate is so delicate. If even one or two Dems lose when they take that chance, then the Republicans will wreak havoc. Like they always do when they get into power. The newest batch hasn’t been in office four months and they’re already selling off state assets for a song (Walker) and dropping taxes on the rich again, and now privatizing Medicare (Ryan).

NAFTA was crafted by Bush 1 on a ‘fast track’ that didn’t quite make it in time (he even held a fancy symbolic head-of-state signing session). Clinton inherited it as a fait accompli, but was at least able to add amendments that strengthened environmental and labor regulations of all industries involved. A Republican majority in Congress passed it, with most Dems voting against.

Eventually I predict the Country will fraction into seperate states like the USSR

Good luck with that. The South is likely to split off from the North again. The Southern states are consistently shown to be the most dependent on federal funding. The South may not last as long as they did in the 1860’s.

(sez Oxide as she watches The Civil War yet again)

If a couple of Democrats voted with the Repubs, or if you can’t immediately produce every detail of the issue, then it doesn’t count, apparently.

“Which party or group has steadfastly opposed sending these jobs offshore for over 20 years?

Unions and Democrats.”

Dear Oxide,

Hey, did you hear about the last Presidential election? A DEMOCRAT one! And, the DEMOCRATS have held both houes of Congress for two years, with a SUPER majority! They can do anything they want!!

We just mention, because you seem so stupid, and apparantly have yet to hear it.

Thank you,

The People of Earth

Gosh Xiaoding, you’re wrong.

The Dems only managed to achieve PARITY for the last 2 years.

It was the Repubs who held the SUPER MAJORITY for almost 15 years before that.

And COMPLETELY controlled the government while this housing bubble thingy, fraudulent CDOs/securitzation and insider trading was happening.

Damn overpaid union janitors!

Where are you getting your ‘facts’, Xiaoding? Because you might want to cross-check them with reality.

Xiaoding,

Do you know what a “Blue Dog” is? Do you know who “Ned Lamont” is? Do you know what a “filibuster” is? Do you which party is “lockstep” and which party is “diorganized?” Democrats don’t act like Republicans. Or do you only know what Fox News told you?

Just so we’re dealing with facts, a graphical representation of who controlled the government, in terms of party, for the past few decades:

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/l/bl_party_division_2.htm

Looks like a ping pong match starting in 1979. The people bounce between Kang and Kodos. With expected results.

Dearest Oxide,

My, you have fine list of whiny excuses.

We have it on good authority, that, yes, indeed, a Democrat won the presidential election, in the USA, last time around. And, the Democrats also had a super majority, using it to pass Obamacare, for instance.

They also, could have done anything else, and no Republican could have stopped them.

thank you,

People of Earth

I would argue that there is slightly LESS justification for intervention into the rental market since the rental market is more efficient than the owner/occupier market. Any subsidy to renters will be converted into higher rents by landlords even more quickly than the homebuyer tax goosed house prices.

And the distortion would tent to go to the high end rentals. Because people on the low end don’t have close to enough deductible expenses to itemize so an additional deduction will get them nothing or very little. Though for a time it would allow innumerate people to think they will get a benefit and devote even more of their income to rent.

Agreed, Jim. Again, I forgot my sarcasm tags…

I think the objective is to prop up housing prices at almost any cost. Anything they can do to make life more miserable for renters (hence, turning a few of them into buyers) will be done. I certainly wouldn’t hold my breath anticipating any sort of relief.

The only way I see this happening would be as a ploy - as Jim points out - to quickly drive rent prices even higher; again making the purchase of a rental property more attractive.

I’d like to see more subsidy for renters

Mr. Bear makes landlords across the Nation,…smile

FWIW, Massachusetts has a tax deduction (non-itemized, and above the standard deduction) for rent paid. It is capped at a deduciton of $6,000 of rent paid over a year, with no income limit.

It was a huge help when I was in a three-bedroom, dodgy rental where my share of the rent btween me and two strangers was $500 and I wasn’t making nearly as much as I do now. At the higher end it doesn’t do much good, and it doesn’t get doubled if you’re married.

“Any subsidy to renters will be converted into higher rents by landlords even more quickly than the homebuyer tax goosed house prices.”

Doesn’t that depend on the elasticities of rental supply and demand? I would think the supply side of both the rental and purchase housing markets could get very elastic if the GSEs ended their taxpayer-funded inventory squeeze, as there would be so very many vacant units twisting in the wind. In this case, much of the subsidies could accrue to households, as any landlord who tried to raise their rent would be unable to find a tenant, thanks to so many other vacant units to choose from.

BTW, I recently mentioned that the SD rental market is near a decade-long high of five percent vacant units, up from around one percent vacant in the late-1990s.

I suppose that depends on the exact form of the subsidy. But I don’t think simply handing renters more money does little to change supply OR demand. Should just shift the curves higher.

I agree with Jim. If there’s a national subsidy, it probably won’t matter in Youngstown Ohio. But in a place like DC, that subsidy will just be slapped on, and renters will be “invited” to find a cheaper place. Of course, no place will be cheaper because they all raise rates together. They can afford a few empty units if they raise the price on everyone else.

Of course, no place will be cheaper because they all raise rates together.

Naw, (a.) they hate each other (B.) that would be ‘UnProfessional” conduct un-becoming of a caring landlord. (c.) also, ” UnEthical” conduct un-becoming of a concerned landlord. (d.) there has to be a (d.),…has to be…I’m thinkin’, I’m thinkin’…

“So long as the Democrats claim to be the party of the poor and the oppressed, shouldn’t they do something to help all the former FBs who are tomorrow’s renter class cope with their misfortunes?”

I’ll go out on a limb and predict that most every ‘right’ renters have, was passed by Democrats, with most Repubs opposed.

Lots of federal jobs were created in the aftermath of the Fall 2008 financial crisis to offset what otherwise might have looked considerably more like a reenactment of the Great Depression.

I think that was the census. Constitutionally mandated. They are gone now.

Maybe Skye is thinking farther back to the enactment of lots of regulations — labor and environmental. The gov hired lots of folks to enforce the regulations, but the companies went overseas to where there were no regulations. Or maybe the government had to hire workers to administer the resulting increase in welfare rolls?

Oxy, I can’t elaborate on it too much as I didn’t consider it in depth. My thought is that globalization showed the US worker to be marginally uncompetitive, thus the steady loss of jobs to other markets. In response we should have focused on leaner management and increased productivity and reducing the burdens on the worker bees so that they could find a lower wage survivable. Instead we bloated management (government), making the worker even less competitive since he has to pay for that on top of his own living expenses.

Like most things it was a trifecta. We also increased the worker bee’s indebtedness and blew our national coin away on every luxury and excess and corruption a society could dream up.

I remember in the 80’s, when Japan was ravaging our automotive market and other areas of our manufacturing. There alarms were being sounded by many about the long term implications. We partied on like cocaine addicts. Recovery will be painful.

“Is it any mystery that off shoring of jobs coincided with an explosion of government workers?”

Yet private federal contractors outnumber federal workers and have a higher average salary.

Blue Skye, the American is ~2.5 times more productive (as of my last research 2 years ago) than any other worker in the world, has less time off and the most expensive medical care.

That the American worker is not competitive is a BIG FAT LIE who’s sole purpose is to make the very person the lie is going screw over, accept their fate of a lower standard of living while the 1%ers continue to see triple digit increases in their income.

Japan was killing us because corporate management would not make the changes needed, such as designing products that could compete and modernizing plants. This began in the 1960s.

I know. I was working in many large factories in the 1970s and 80s. Most places were using equipment from WW2 for crying out loud!

Hell, I was at a large heavy industry plant just a few years ago. Same thing. Half the equip was 50 years old!

“Modernization” is dirty word in the boardroom. It means “the capital outlay will destroy my stock value.”

eco,

Define productive. In the early 80s I ran 80 hives of honey bees. Just a little sideline cattle operation, but the Chinese came on the market with honey by the barrel at 1/3 the price of cane sugar! Sure, my equipment was “outdated” and so was theirs. I only needed about 25c an hour to justify my “farming”. I couldn’t make my operating costs. They were desperate in those days, to bring some $$ into their country to prime the pump. We heard rumors that Chinese workers might be paid $1/day. Cut cane or die kind of stuff.

If you mean that the American worker produces more than everybody else, great. If you mean that he produces more based on what you pay him, I do wonder!

If you mean that the American worker produces more than everybody else, great. If you mean that he produces more based on what you pay him, I do wonder!

It doesn’t matter. America should protect American jobs. The globalization B.S. is B.S.

buddy of mine is doing tax work for them…but tax folks are usually the ones to turn off the lights when a company goes bust.

And if they choose the right country, they can actually get healthcare.

And if they choose the right country, they can actually get healthcare.

Universal health-care is only available in every other western, industrialized country in the ENTIRE WORLD.

Except of course it is not available in “exceptional” USA.

Because of freedom and stuff.

“But to a real degree, banks got out of the actual business of RE lending awhile ago.”

It must be very hard for private lenders to compete with government sponsored lending operations which use federal tax dollars to subsidize operating at perpetual losses.

It must be very hard for private lenders to compete with government sponsored lending operations which use federal tax dollars to subsidize operating at perpetual losses. And yet during the bubble, they did. In fact the during the bubble, the percentage of loans securitized by F+F, as opposed to the percentage bought and turned int CMBSs went down. OTOH during the bubble the taxpayer support for F+F was merely implicit.

“And yet during the bubble, they did.”

True dat. So long as their catastrophic losses due to making $700K loans to Central Valley strawberry pickers with $30K in household income are reimbursed by the Federal Reserve’s free too-big-to-fail bailout insurance program, I suppose private lenders can always lend profitably.

“And yet during the bubble, they did.”

It also helps when the value of the collateral is rising at an unprecedented pace. For some strange reason, now that U.S. residential real estate appears to be in perpetual crash mode, only the government seems interested in making home loans.

if you want to buy a building

What are the advantages of buying into manufacturing startups in this economy?

Is google a manufacturing type company?

Hey, where did all those commerical for lease signs go?

A friend who is into manufacturing startups advised me that if you want to buy a building these days, expect to pay 13% interest, have 50% down and pay it off in less than 10 years (confirmation from other sources welcome).

How’d you like to have that reality for your mortgage market?

Imagine what such conditions would do to housing prices. (Hint: Prices would be crushed bigtime.)

Wow

In the right place I’d make that loan in a minute. 13% with 50% down.

BINGO.

That’s as close to “free” money as I’ve ever seen.

Back in the late 1990s, a friend was trying to involve me in local Democratic Party politics. So she took me to an organizing meeting.

My friend wasn’t exactly a spring chicken, and that was pretty much the default state of the meeting room. I think I was the only person there who was under 60.

At one point, a guy was going on at great length about the growing numbers of registered Independents in our state. (I was one then. I still am today.)

The guy was down on the Indies because, from his perspective, we didn’t stand for something. I’ll never forget how he said the words “stand for something.” They came out sounding like a plea.

I know, Rio. It is crystal clear where they want to take us as a country. The EPA, though, has only been around a few decades and just look at the turnaround its standards have accomplished. That’s what I was ranting about above.

Slim, in today’s political world, many independents don’t commit to the Dems precisely because they don’t seem to stand for anything. But I know I’m preachin’ to the choir here.

“fascist, anti-American, greedy”

Add control freaks and you just summed up the union leadership and the so called “progressives”.

“fascist, anti-American, greedy”
Add control freaks and you just summed up the union leadership and the so called “progressives”.

I’ve been thinking on how the corporatist, fascist right likes to label liberals “subversive” and “anti-American” whereas it is they who are those.

For example: The policies espoused by Rush, Beck and Hannity have been proven to harm the majority of Americans and only benefit the top 1%. We now have 30 years of cause and effect proof. Trickle down, supply-side, lowering rich’s taxes, offshoring, busted unions, globalization, crony-capitalism, TBTF and “free-market” B.S. claptrap has hammered America hard. Unless you are rich.

When 1% of America advances 20% tread water and the rest decline the people who support policies causing that are the ones who are anti-American.

Dangerous fascists like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh are subversive because they systematically attempt to undermine the government and political system that, in the past benefited the majority of Americans. Why they are subversive is because they do it under the guise of false patriotism and professed love for their country while the policies they promote harm the majority of Americans.

Unless you only care about the rich, it is those on the far-right who are anti-American.

“Add control freaks and you just summed up the union leadership and the so called “progressives”.”

Sounds like a rebuttal from my little brother when I was 8. “Nu-uh” “Ya-huh” Not attacking you. Just thought that the argument was rather a weak one.

Progressive America never existed, it has and always will be a pipe dream unless instituted by force. Only committed revolutionary idealists would volunteer for a Progressive American way of life, the poor would run for the hills if they new what truly awaits them under Progressive rule. Look at Cuba, how are the poor doing? How about the poor and unconnected in the Soviet Union, what kind of “progress” did they make? What new technology, innovation, scientific and medical breakthroughs came out of those utopian societies?

“Sounds like a rebuttal from my little brother when I was 8. “Nu-uh” “Ya-huh” Not attacking you. Just thought that the argument was rather a weak one.”

As an argument, maybe. As a statement, I think it was strong enough to induce the predictable rebuttals.

““fascist, anti-American, greedy”

Add control freaks and you just summed up the union leadership and the so called “progressives”.”

OK. So if I’m parsing this correctly, your statement is: “Union leadership and progressives are fascist, anti-American, greedy and control-freaks.” And that is a statement, not an argument. Right? But as a statement, it is not true. And I shouldn’t need an argument against a statement. Right?

Is this really what you are trying to say? Your hyperbole makes a mockery of whatever you were trying to say.

“I came here for an Argument”

“Oh, but this is Abuse. You want the next door on your left.”

As a statement, it was so patently over the top and turned 180 degrees from reality that it indeed was strong enough to induce rebuttals.

As a statement, I think it was strong enough to induce the predictable rebuttals.

…that were strong enough to predictably rebut.

Progressive America never existed,

R i g h t………………

Progressives gave women the right to vote, civil rights, worker safety, worker’s rights and freed the slaves.

Maybe that’s why you don’t like them.

What new technology, innovation, scientific and medical breakthroughs came out of those utopian societies?

To compare mainstream American progressives to situations in Cuba and the USSR is ignorant or worse. It is also a tactic of right-wing, paid blog trolls.

“Progressive America never existed.”

Eisenhower would disagree. A Republican no less. Who was more progressive than even the current crop of leebruls.

Nick’s latest nutjobbery is so patently stupid that he joins the blogs exclusive club of stupidity only matched by a select few of other quacks like CrackHeadJim and JoeyTrollHolio.

“Nick’s latest nutjobbery is so patently stupid that he joins the blogs exclusive club of stupidity”

I consider that a complement coming from you. Thanks.

“paid blog trolls.”

I wish I could get paid for bringing left wing fascism to the light of day. Who should I talk to?

When someone is so stupid they enjoy being referred to as stupid, well… it speaks for itself.

I wish I could get paid for bringing left wing fascism to the light of day. Who should I talk to?

Left wing fascism? I think you’d have to talk to someone really confused, maybe the same guy looking for people to blog about right-wing communism.

Only if they had homes on said river, I suppose.

Rental of personal?

…and which part of the river they lived on. I would guess “upstream.”

Why they are subversive is because they…because they… systematically

…found a way to make million of dollar$ $ingle depo$it tran$action$ regularly, without $elling real e$tate.

Rash Limpbaughs / Glenbeckinstan

“Blah, blah, blah, …we care, we care about YOU! & America! we really, really do! Honest injun!”

BWAHAHAHicHAHAHicHAHAHAHAHicHAHAHic* (DennisN™)

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice….we won’t get fooled again.

One of my favorite W quotes, LOL.

Glad you got a chuckle out of my dysfunctional family tale, Awaiting!

“…dysfunctional family…”

Every family is dysfunctional in its own way. (Sorry, Leo!)

Not remodeling. Furnishing! $40k on furniture, egad.

If illegal guns are easy to obtain seems like it would be better if legal arms were available to law abiding citizens.

I agree.

I understood you Rio. I was really posting the crime numbers for the comment about being the same all over. What you describe is also true in the U.S. the mass killings tend to be in burbs while the high crime rates are in the inner cities.

It’s not about the deficit. It is a power struggle.

The Republicans have controlled the government in spite of being in the minority. God help us if they gain a super majority in the Senate and take the White House in the next election.

Ryan’s proposal’s for restructuring Medicare is the first step. They will promise the over 55 set that their Medicare will remain in place, but they will drop payments to providers to the point that no doctor or hospital will see Medicare patients. Medicaid has already seen this.

In 10 years, only the healthiest and the luckiest of the old or poor will remain.

“God help us if they gain a super majority in the Senate and take the White House in the next election.”

For Heaven’s sake, we haven’t had a sufficient chance to recover from the wreckage left behind by Shrub-Cheney. Another Republican presidency is all it would take to wreck the country for good.

much of the Republican cuts are ideological in nature and affect certain programs they hate in a large way.

Rather:

much of the Republican cuts are ideological in nature and affect (in a large way) certain programs that they hate.

I didn’t before and I still don’t have any respect for the Tea Farty. They are a joke. A bad one.

The only saving grace is that the Repubs thought they would swallow them only to find out is was a poison pills.

AZ Slim —

Is drumminj correct in the assumption that you are saying two wrongs make a right or simply that the Obama administration should take care because “look how it bit” the preceeding administration?

Regardless, there is certainly enough Charlie Foxtrot to go around…

MrBubble

Is drumminj correct in the assumption that you are saying two wrongs make a right or simply that the Obama administration should take care because “look how it bit” the preceeding administration?

Thanks for pointing this out. Upon re-read, it’s very possible I mis-interpreted Slim’s post. At this point I’ve been conditioned to expect the “repubs are evil and bush is the devil” attitude here, and I unfairly judged the intent of the comment.

At this point I’ve been conditioned to expect the “repubs are evil and bush is the devil” attitude here,

By whom drumminj?……..