The Housing Bubble

We could manage to do that if only we were offered the deal. It’s great to be too-big-to-fail when so much contagiously systemic risk is afoot!

Or as Mel Brooks once said: It’s good to be the King!

“Or to deliver a bag of cat turds”

Why with the cats? Always with the cats!?

Heck Muggy come around here at 7am…I’ll bet 20-30 people will pay you to pick up their DAWG turds…..hmm could be a new side business

Follow the turds, just $2 per pickup and keep your hands clean…

….Because rat turds are too small to collect. If it were me, I’d drop off a bag full of chickenshit. Ever smell the stench of henhouse? A little rain to mix with the urine and Wowww, what a nauseating wretched stink. Go with the chickens.

Until you have been downwind of a seal rookery you don’t know what real stench is.

I worked at a radio station in Holly Hill SC which was right next to a pig farm..

“It’s good to be the King!”

Most surprising insight I developed during the Great Recession: Just how much today’s Wall Street 0.1% class resembles yesteryear’s nobility, right down to the God-given right to make themselves whole by state-sanctioned systemic theft from the masses.

It’s GOOD to be the Banksta!

Or as in the college days, swim down from Ensenada… turns out their used to be a fishery there.. and we were body surfing in it.. EWWW.. Only once. Usually takes only one lesson to learn from.

My wife works at the local public library and they get a constant stream of out of town hobo types who arrive, get a library card so they can use the computers to job hunt on Craigslist. Then after a few weeks they disappear. The assumption is that they either found a job or gave up and moved onto the next town. The belief is that most move on as there is a sizable number of accounts that never get used again, not even for future job hunting.

You really don’t understand the “hobo” lifestyle. Most are not looking for jobs. The library is a nice place to get out of the weather for a while and to use the computers to network. It’s about checking with your buddies in other places and migrating with the weather to warmer climates as the winter comes on, then back as the summer approaches.
Many towns have good handouts and places to get free meals and places to stay. Many others have tried to run off the free-loaders. Rules and places change and you need to stay in touch with people you have met who can fill you in on what’s going on in Key West, Lauderdale, Atlanta, or Boston.
You go where the weather suits your clothes and where there’s a friendly church group that provides free hot food. The rest of your time can be spent panhandling for beer money or just killing time. While you’re working the “hobo” is sunning himself at the local beach. Public libraries are great places to get free internet access, and then network to where the next stop should be. That’s why the accounts go dead. They have moved on to the next stop on the circuit.

“You go… where there’s a friendly church group that provides free hot food.”

Sounds like an argument against the idea that private charity works better than government safety nets.

“the guy living in a cardboard box under the overpass is actually one of the least mobile individuals in society.”

I would argue that they are fairly mobile. With nothing to move, they can move along to somewhere else quite easily.

Now the “rubber tramps” (ones with a running set of wheels) are far more mobile than the “leather tramps” (ones with just a pair of boots on their feet), at least as long as they have gas money…

“I would argue that they are fairly mobile. With nothing to move, they can move along to somewhere else quite easily.”

I suppose there are mutually equilibrating forces between having more stuff, as wealthier households tend to have, and having the money and access to transportation and housing alternatives needed to relocate said stuff.

bill

You’d have to be loonie to move IKEA stuff from tampa to phoenix

But then here in NYC the amount of great high end furniture appliances dux beds you can get for free is amazing…of course its all located on a 5th or 6th floor walk up.

I did not move any IKEA stuff to Tampa. I got rid of that. I had all IKEA while I was working in the Washington D.C. area a few years ago. This time I’m doing something different - I’m renting all my furnishings as well as a car.

I came to Tampa with a suitcase and duffel bag. I’m going to leave with only a suitcase and duffel bag.

By the way, on December 17 in Phoenix as I left Best Buy, I got a call from a head hunter. He said my former supervisor on the west coast wants me back as a contractor and is willing to pay me a higher hourly rate.

And another consultant in Florida wants me to go 1099 with his company, again at a higher hourly rate.

But if I leave the client at this time on this project, they won’t hire me back. My work at this point is too critical.

Where abouts are you renting in Tampa, Bill?

In New Tampa .

Why thank you I like getting screwed, we really should set up a NYC HBB brunch you pick the place … unless you want to show us you culinary skills….

all cash makes you less attractive because they make more on the financing (i’ve heard)

you should know the invoice price of what your buying and go from there

“…all cash makes you less attractive because they make more on the financing…”

Their problem, not mine. I plan to pursue four deals at four separate dealers and pick the one that gives me the best discount. Any of the dealers who don’t want a shot at my cash will summarily eliminate himself from contention.

“(remember “subprime will be contained to $200 bn” during Summer 2007?).”

I remember it well and fondly; the sheer ridiculous shocking stupidity of that statement inspired my handle…

Mrs. RAL personally knows two people that haven’t made a payment in 2 years or more. One is her boss.

“One is her boss.”

Awesome!

“One is her boss.”

Lead by example.

Where’s my freakin credit card bailout…i am so slighted by OHBahhma

Bravo!

Somebody STOP HIM!!!!

That’s incorrect. Raising taxes in a depression, or even a mere recession, is the opposite of Keynesianism.

“….late thirties or early forties……”

Being almost 60 and having an 18 year old in the house is guaranteed to put the parents in an early grave.

And who is that early 40s guy going to marry? A 25 year old?

She’ll be 40 when you are almost 60. The old fart will find his wrinkled azz in Divorce Court, just in time to split half of his net worth at the same time he’s going to need it most.

I’ve been divorced for 7 years, and I’m only now getting to a financially secure point again (true, getting laid off/shut down twice since 2004 hasn’t helped).

One nice thing about having daughters. They have explained to me, in no uncertain terms, that a fifty something dating/sleeping/marrying someone in their 20s/early thirties is too gross to even contemplate. Any woman that does it is a golddigger, in their opinion, and from direct observation.

I say 40 should be the self-imposed age limit of a man becoming a father. I did not mean 49.

If I wanted to be a father, I would adopt or become the substitute dad of a kid whose mother I live with. The health risk to the unborn by fathering after 40 is too severe and it is unfair to the life you bring into the world if the odds are greater for the kid having autism, Down’s syndrome, bipolar/schizophrenia, or some other defect. It’s a big financial burden.

The upside to adoption is this: the older the child that you adopt, the more likely the health issues have been revealed, if any.

It’s all pure ego and emotion for someone to pass on his genes. That is more the province of men who were born into wealth so that they could easily afford to become fathers when they are young.

When I was a teen, I hoped to become a father at age 20. I also wanted to get a brand new Porsche 9/11. But I hand no money for either. Not even $1,000 at the age of 30.

“Young men should not become fathers until their late thirties or early forties.”

“Father” by almost everyone’s definition = Male who sired and raises a child.

Anyone else is a “step-father”

“…..substitute dad of a kid whose mother I live with…..”

For starters, the kid is not going to consider you as “Dad”. Especially if you are just shacking up. Even more especially, if the “real” Dad is still in the picture. You will just be the “guy who my mom is shacking up with”.

None of my kids call the ex-wife’s new hubby as “Dad”. Or “step-dad”.

Besides, where are all of these single mommies going to come from, if all of the 18-35 something guys take your advice, and stop turning themselves into “Dads”?

And God forbid anyone has kids that become a “financial burden”.

“Kids” and “Financial Burdens” are two terms that are inseperable.

It cuts both ways. To see this, contemplate an America where everyone is over 65, because nobody had any children and no children came here from other places. It wouldn’t be a very stable society with nobody of working age, would it?

you have just described Japan and the majority of the western nations 15 years from now.

“you have just described Japan and…”

I know that; it was Japan I primarily had in mind when I posted.

Wouldn’t it be wiser for America to learn from Japan’s mistakes rather than to repeat them? We should increase subsidies for economically viable parents who want to start families before it is too late for us.

I think it is hard to predict what technological changes may emerge in the next 50 years which may shift the timing of your prediction. I note that Malthus had no inkling about the future advances in medicine and agricultural production which would obliterate his assumption that human population growth would stay linearly constrained by the supply of arable land.

Depends on what you mean by ‘top quality’. The prime breeders probably go early, if that’s what you mean.

Getting married in your 40’s often means settling for the leftovers from those who did not get married in their Twenties (or settling for being spouse number two - or maybe a higher number).

With the added bennie that you get to raise some other dude’s kids for him!

Survey:

How many HBB people here quit their careers to take care of just one of their ailing parents?

crickets…

Actually, one of my sisters cares for my mother. She does work, but it has a huge impact on the rest of her life. The rest of us chip in to help her out financially. The only reason my mother doesn’t live with us is because she hates the winters.

Up yours, Bill.

Way up yours Colorado

Both my parents are dead. My dad had 24/7 care from the VA because of his war-connected disability. He was blind. You were blessed that you did not have a parent who was blind. Alpha slop or Oxide made fun of this fact of me weeks back and whichever one did it I can never forgive and wish that one to rot forever.

Realistically old siblings will take care of each other until the last surviving siblings with no kids has to have a designated power of attorney - maybe a nephew or niece who hopefully is ethical enough to carry out the wishes.

I was the power of attorney for my aunt. With the help of an older cousin, we set up our aunt in an assisted living facility while I consulted with an attorney as to how to use the irrevocable trust to provide funds for our aunt.

Bill,

I at least compromised/limited my career to help my aging parents. Not everything is black and white.

Me too, Blue. And in the end, I worked and helped out for my sister’s inheritance with my good natured heart. Idiot, I am. Now I’m paying the consequences of changing my career ladder to help my father and my incubator. My sister has been a irresponsible twit.
Heart Meet Brain

How many HBB people here quit their careers to take care of just one of their ailing parents?

I believe that’s just what anycdj did. I recall that being mentioned.

I also have a friend/acquaintance who did just that recently.

Blue Sky read my post below. I flew back and forth between Tucson and Fresno when my dad had terminal illness (six months left to live). Years before that I lived 250 miles from my parents’ when my mom had terminal illness (only one month to live since the diagnosis).

Certainly you don’t have to “quit” your job, but you are not there 24/7. Realistically you have agents take care of the parent at least five, perhaps six days a week and you visit every weekend you can get to be sure the agents are doing what they should do.

I visited my aunt often in her assisted living home, paid her bills, made sure she was getting the best care. But I could not be there every day for her. I would stop by after work, maybe every two or three days. My driving would be 70 miles those days.

My point is that from the perspective of the sick parent, someone they know personally is there perhaps 14% of the time. 14% versus zero.

Another point to ponder: If you have siblings, chances are they are mostly around your age. By the time you or one of them get any age related illness, you all will likely be retired as well, so you won’t necessarily have “no one to care for you.”

“How many HBB people here quit their careers to take care of just one of their ailing parents?”

It could be a tough call for a middle class child between limiting available income to care for an ailing parent by ‘quitting one’s career’ versus freeing up the personal time needed to care directly for an ailing parent.

“How many HBB people here quit their careers to take care of just one of their ailing parents?

crickets…”

Yet another argument against ending Social Security and Medicare and going back to the ‘good old days’ when families cared for their own.

I at least compromised/limited my career to help my aging parents.

And moved far away for my spouse’s.

“Is this realistic or is this mostly a fantasy?
…
My dad had terminal cancer and had nurses 24/7 a day in his house. I flew from Arizona to see my dad every weekend I could get while working 50 hour weeks…”

Much to your credit, it was realistic in your case.

To me, “care for” means providing food and lodging. Instead of moving to live with parents, it may mean moving the parents.

Nursing care is beyond the scope of the obligation, unless one has nursing training.

My grandmother built a mother-in-law suite onto my parents’ house when her husband died. Twenty years later, she moved into a nursing home when my mother became physically incapable of providing care for her.

Everyone’s circumstances are different. I would not want my children to jeopardize their future to care for me. I would hope that they could provide a spare room and that I could contribute to household maintenance.

I agree with the point on a personal level.

My point is that societies run into problems if too many households make the individually rational choice to avoid the expense of raising a family.

Exhibit A: Japan.

“societies run into problems if too many households make the individually rational choice”

The paradox of rationality. It’s a lot like the paradox of thrift.

Japan has a shortage of people?

“Japan has a shortage of people?”

No. Just a shortage of young people, which will soon, if not already, morph into a smaller population size and less global economic influence.

There is a tension between the global overpopulation problem and a nation’s need to repopulate in order to sustain its economic productivity. A nation which collectively falls on its sword by limiting births in a (futile) unilateral effort to solve the global population problem runs the risk of aging its workforce to the point of eliminating itself from the future mix of economically viable nations.

“The nursing care tour for an elderly parent is truly life-altering.”

Been there / done that. Fortunately my parents are proactively exploring alternatives, and including their kids in the process.

and including their kids in the process

Wish more parents did that. We have the name of the lawyer and I think a key to a file cabinet. That’s all the input we have from the 80 year old parents. We have had our own personal dealings with that lawyer at their reference. Neither my husband or I were comfortable with the way that went. The way they’re setting this up, we really hope that what they intend to pass on actually gets passed on. My mother in law has even written her own obituary. I keep reminding her for fun we’ll still have editing rights. Knowing her she’ll send it in just before passing.

FWIW, based on what I have read on this blog, Florida is a surreal state, teeming with “deadbeats” driving BMW’s and living rent free and with fraudsters left and right.

Palmster, apology accepted but not needed — I was vague and I think you read fast and made a presumption. FWIW, I love/hate Florida, that’s true and so I should GTFO, but my comment was more about the entire insurance/private/public/industrial complex that has this whole state FUBAR’d.

If you recall, I’ve been pretty consistent about saving bottom-calling specifically for a period when the insurance hot potato settles in FL. Buying prior to this moment would be a mistake, IMHO. I also can say, without any political leaning, that waiting to see what Gov. Scott does is important. He has made it clear he is willing to make unpopular decisions — what this usually means is the citizens (no pun intended) pay more.

I hear the NY upstaters complain about taxes all the time, and they’re right, they’re high, but at least upstaters have cleared roads and decent schools. In Florida, you get raked over the coals for insurance, and then… denied when something does go wrong? But then these people get six figure checks for cracks. Why do you get for high insurance premiums? Awful insurance.

I’ve love to leave, but I am trapped because the unions in the NE make it very hard to transfer in. I would teach in NYC, but can’t afford the housing there.

How many states have been destroyed by transplants? FL is certainly one. How about:

Parts of NY
VT
NH
DE(partially destroyed)
ID
CO
AZ
NV

Florida can blame itself though — it sells itself as paradise and that’s what people expect. But yes, NYC equity locusts have for sure destroyed quite a bit up there.

I would add NC and TN to your list.

It’s hard to say that those states were destroyed by transplants. In many of them, such as FL, NV and AZ, the in-migration has been so large that the majority of the adult population was born out of state. For some of those states, you might have to go back over 100 years to find a time when that not the case.

Florida’s entire history as a state is based on fraud.

Florida’s entire history as a state is based on fraud.
+1
I was actually born there in the mid 60’s.
I remember canals and snakes. My parents let me walk to the South Florida Fair alone when I was 10 and 11. came back when my ten bucks ran out.

Keynes, Rand, like I said the other day, everybodys a spin master these days.

I was just trying to point out that it used to be commonly understood that booms were followed by a bust. From that you can go a lot of directions about policy.

I can’t remember when this started to get disconnected (cue alpha sloth - say something about Ronald Reagan - quick!) but recession became another evil that government must destroy. This ignores that basic truth we used to understand.

But here’s one problem; the Keynes thing about punchbowls assumes that it gets taken away. The whole resolution is botched if the central banks bring even more punch to the table every time it gets low. How do you drink your way out of a 30-40 year money-printing/spending binge?

Cong. Kucinich calculated that this country is spending $30 million an hour on wars. The past few years the US govt has borrowed $48,000 for every man, woman and child. I don’t think we’ve lacked for deficit spending, and I don’t see how more is going to help.

“Wow, I had no idea Rand was an economist. Although I did hear a rumor that Greenspan hung out with her, back in the day.”

She was an ‘economist’ as much as she was a ‘philosopher’. (She was, in truth, a writer of historical romances, who got taken way too seriously by way too many people, including Greenspan, who was a friend and follower of hers to the end.)

wikipedia
In the early 1950s, Greenspan began an association with famed novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand.[37] Greenspan was introduced to Rand by his first wife, Joan Mitchell. Rand nicknamed Greenspan “the undertaker” because of his penchant for dark clothing and reserved demeanor. Although Greenspan was initially a logical positivist,[44] he was converted to Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism by her associate Nathaniel Branden. He became one of the members of Rand’s inner circle, the Ayn Rand Collective, who read Atlas Shrugged while it was being written. During the 1950s and 1960s Greenspan was a proponent of Objectivism, writing articles for Objectivist newsletters and contributing several essays for Rand’s 1966 book Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal including an essay supporting the gold standard.[45][46] Rand stood beside him at his 1974 swearing-in as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers. Greenspan and Rand remained friends until her death in 1982.[37]
____

“the Keynes thing about punchbowls assumes that it gets taken away. The whole resolution is botched if the central banks bring even more punch to the table every time it gets low.”

Yes, taking the punchbowl away is Keynesian, and was done successfully for 50 years. Until Reagan(!) fired(!) Volcker(!), and hired Rand-loving, monetarist Greenspan(!). Then we began to experience the never-ending punchbowl. And here we are.

“She was, in truth, a writer of historical romances, ”

Make that philosophical romances- a rather unique genre, and one that fortunately hasn’t continued to be popular.

‘here we are’

On that we can agree. My question was what do we do now? Given all the deficit spending we’ve had the past few years, is more of it the answer to the current situation?

“My question is what do we do now?”

A question that will be addresed by the same PTB folks that got us in trouble in the first place.

IMO one’s focus should be on what one can do for himself (a micro view) rather than what the PTB should do on his behalf (a macro view).

“Should do” and “will do” are two quite different things.

The PTB have placed their own interests ahead of the interests of those who have given to them their powers and one should not expect this to change. This means one should try to understand what forces drive PTB policies and take appropiate action on his own rather than wait for action to be taken on his behalf.

Given all the deficit spending we’ve had the past few years, is more of it the answer to the current situation?

It depends on what we define as being an “answer”. Theoretical economists might suggest that the bitter medicine be taken and that eventually (after many years, if not decades of austerity) things will be sorted out.

Politicians see the world through a different lens. Austerity can be not only unpopular, it can be dangerous, even leading to revolts. For them, kicking the can down the road is a much more palatable option, one that is much easier to sell to their constituents than the bitter pill of austerity.

Regardless of who emerges victorious in 2012 I believe that the deficits will remain. The only thing that will change is where they are spent.

Perhaps if Ron Paul were to win and have a cooperative congress we might get this austerity across the board, but I think that this is very unlikely to happen.

“…but recession became another evil that government must destroy.”

Post-WWII ‘germ theory’ of economic control?

“How do you drink your way out of a 30-40 year money-printing/spending binge?”

Judging from experiences with alcoholism in my personal circle, rehab is the only option. However, both of those I know who did this ended up dying just a couple of short years later of alcohol-related causes.

My feeling is that technology has created a situation where a small number of people can create all the goods needed by the majority of the population. This of course leads to a downward spiral.

There are 4 major things that gov has had to combat deflation.

1. Blowing bubbles - we’re at the end of that
2. spread the wealth - ie globalization, this worked for a while but now workers are paid so little that they can’t consume the products they make, it is concentrating wealth now rather than spreading it around.
3. New products and technology that get people to spend - I think we are nearing the pinnacle of this. Sports gear, computers, TV’s can only get marginally better and it won’t spur people to dump their old technology.
4. War

Productivity has risen faster and faster making it harder to offset it’s deflationary effect. A deflationary spiral caused by productivity increases is quite a bit different from one caused by business cycles, because it’s permanent. if it takes 100 people to produce goods for 100 people you have full employment. If it takes 80, then next year you will find only 80 employed, the year after that you will find 64 employed, the year after that you will find 51 and so on assuming no gov intervention and that you allow unemployed people to starve to death.

The only card the gov can play now is creating jobs, or stimulating consumption of services. War probably falls in this category. The problem of course is this only works in an isolated system. If the US creates a million jobs paving streets, much of the money will end up in China. In an isolated system that money would circulate creating other jobs and increasing the tax base.

In local news

I’ve seen an uptick in retail vacancy and going out of business sales. It is probably true that most companies planning to go out of business do so after Xmas, but the number of vacant retail sites seems awfully large to me.

“My question was what do we do now?”

You know my answers already. The peeps need money. Rejigger the tax system so it favors the middle class, not the overclass, make it more difficult to offshore jobs, make it more difficult to employ illegals, institute a national health care system that is affordable, reliable, and encourages job mobility, entrepreneurship, etc.

Basically reverse the Reagan Revolution.

And yes, deficit spending in the short-term, as stimulus. It’s less expensive than large-scale deflation.

Oh and deficit spending with that Keynesian twist- we pay it back when the times are good, thus acting as a break on the expansion.

We Keynesians like it …mellow…

Oh and deficit spending with that Keynesian twist- we pay it back when the times are good, thus acting as a break on the expansion.

Good idea in theory, but what government actually does this? Instead, they spend like drunken sailors during the boom times, then scream bloody murder and make only token cuts when the bad times hit, resorting instead to additional borrowing, accounting tricks, and new taxes to keep the party going.

“Basically reverse the Reagan DE-evolution”

There. Fixed it.

“but what government actually does this?”

Every US president from FDR to, um, Reagan.

“…more than just a business cycle.”

I submit this statement understates the complexity of business cycles which drive economic activity. The standard view is the period of the business cycle is 10 years or so, with booms ended by short recessions before normal business activity picks up again. But there are longer, deeper wave length components which reflect far more pervasive shifts in the underlying climate for business, which drive the once-or-twice a century depressions which alter lives and destinies. The world went through one of these deeper, longer-period troughs in the 1930s, and we are currently experiencing another one.

Wiki offers up a good read about the Kondratieff Wave for those who are interested.

“it’s really clear that we’re in the trough.”

So we’ve bottomed?

Imagine you were stuck head-downwards in a toilet filled with rancid vomit from last night’s New Years’ Party.

That’s the trough.

You may think you have bottomed but then some drunken @sshole both puts the main cover down, and proceeds to take a very wet sloppy dump on your head.

That’s the bottom.

Do you understand the difference now?

PS :- The analogies are both graphic and exceedingly exact in as much as they relate to real-estate.

“So we’ve bottomed?”

A dead body tethered to a heavy weight and dropped over the side of a boat will soon bottom.

What if you use a compressor to continuously blow air into it?

Face in vomit=trough.

Poop on head=bottom.

Got it.

Very Confucian, really: If poop lands on head, bottom is near.

“…very wet sloppy dump on your head…”

That’s analogous to the capitulation phase of housing bubble collapse, after which everyone realizes that real is a terrible investment.

real estate is

Sorry about the omission — screaming wifey and sons distracted me.

“If poop lands on head, bottom is near.”

I think I just hurt myself laughing.

Confucius, indeed.

Yup. Basically anyone who can afford a house already has one. The few who can afford one but don’t own one are simply not interested.

The few who can afford one but don’t own one are simply not interested.

Maybe someone can explain that to both Congress and the Fed?

I know, I know maybe, perhaps when rainbow-colored pigs fly out of my @ss…

“Yup. Basically anyone who can afford a house already has one. The few who can afford one but don’t own one are simply not interested.”

Partially correct. I think there are quite a few who could afford it and are interested (including myself) but don’t dare buy because of the need to remain foot loose.

Rules and federal policies that change on a whim, regulations that aren’t enforced, and unknown “little” wildcards such as Obamacare make it impossible to understand what one should do.

So I keep renting.

“How many of the 27 million added could reasonably afford to live in a $500K+ McMansion tract home (or, in flyover country, $200K+)?”

My understanding is the newbies buy the little houses, and everyone else moves one step up the housing pyramid.

“Maybe someone can explain that to both Congress and the Fed?”

Why waste uttering pearls of wisdom on deaf ears?

“…pearls of wisdom…”

Here is a little long-term prediction for you all:

Much of what is discussed here in real time will be brought to light in high fallutin’ economics journal articles over the next several decades, dressed up as empirical research with stale data or as theoretical research with fancy economics models that serve to obscure the obvious.

“Much of what is discussed here in real time will be brought to light in high fallutin’ economics journal articles over the next several decades, dressed up as empirical research with stale data or as theoretical research with fancy economics models that serve to obscure the obvious.”

+1 You’re on a roll today, bear.

Obscuring the obvious is the main job of most professions these days.

“(Advice giving is like the fastest path to losing friendships.)”

Here is my sage advice:

The worst vice is advice.

Young kids can wreck a marriage. Hang in there - it gets easier as the kids get older and more independent, and then you have a little more breathing room to focus on each other and not give every ounce of energy to those bottomless pits of need that are our offspring.

+1. I forgot you had kids fairly recently, right Muggy?

I’ll second what sfrenter has posted.

We struggled for a while. Kid related stresses were getting the best of us and it’s my opinion that if you’re going to struggle w/something, it’s your spouse that’s going to see it. We were probably pretty close to calling it before we realized the problem wasn’t our relationship but stress management. We realized sometimes we had to help each other instead just sitting there being judgementally po’d the other person wasn’t dealing w/a situation like a seasoned professional. Everything got better and better from that point. Now it’s really good again. It sure did suck for a few years…yes years. But we didn’t let that vice like pressure destroy us. Neither one of us caused it. It just was. Now we’re on the other side. Things are good. We’re tighter than ever. Once you survive something like that you feel you can take on anything.

I hope this is just one of those hurdles that actually makes you guys stronger, Muggy. Wishing you the best as you decide what you need to do.

Silent Treatment…..sometimes for a day or two. Arguing (talking things out, hahahahaha) just escalates the problem. Once it is out, it is out. Not talking has the effect of de-fusing the situation. Go for a walk. Eventually you will realize it probably was silly and not a relationship ending problem, provided you have not escalated it to a must win situation to maintain any shred of self worth.

Ummm …. at least that is what I have heard. Uh, yeah.

“Silent Treatment”

I wouldn’t suggest thinking of it that way, which has a negative connotation. I would rather suggest ‘Cooling-Off Period,’ which refers to the idea of two independent people engaging in their own separate activities for a while until they are emotionally capable of engaging in a constructive discussion.

This once again requires tongue biting as well as hand sitting.

I seriously advise people to understand the logic of a fight (as explained above.)

FPSS, I’m like you, and usually try to take this tact. However, life experience has shown me that most women don’t think linearly, and don’t problem-solve in that fashion. Sometimes you have to let the other person talk through the whole issue, then try to bring it back afterwards. It may be that “issue X” isn’t even the issue in the first place.

Got that right drummin.

I’ll never figure out how the color of a candy wrapper and the flight speed of an African sparrow has anything to do with what she didn’t like about the way I brushed my teeth.

(nor do I really care. life’s too short to put up with sociopaths))

“Situations …….not fixed at all…” = “It isn’t fixed the way I’d like, but it’s better than it was.”

This goes with the old saying: “Perfect” is the mortal enemy of “good enough”.

“Read the book “You Just Don’t Understand” by Deborah Tannen (I believe that is her name) for some insight.

Note that in my speech communication classes at U of Illinois, Deborah Tannen was portrayed as a hack (though we did read parts of her book). Most of these “popular science”/relationship communication books aren’t backed by real research.

The best book I’ve come across so far is “For better: the science of a good marriage”. It doesn’t tell you the *one right way* to do things. It’s basically a meta-study of what behaviors seem to correlate with healthy/successful relationships.

Language failed me, as I was the problem embodied.

I understand about Mars/Venus and how we use language differently and all that. But I really can’t listen to it any more even knowing all that. I need peace and I do what I need to in order to get it. I’ve told her that someday we may own a duplex :-).

polly, let’s play Jeopardy!

What is the “budget contraint”?

It did. This was the rule by which apartments would be rented.

If your income didn’t match, you were not going to get the apt.

Some of us don’t feel a need to talk about our past conquests in here.

Series I bonds purchased from November 1 to April 30 yield 3.06%. Those purchased from May 1 2011 to October 31 2011 yielded 4.6%. So those I-bonds purchased May through October are getting an effective annual yield of 3.8%.

That is your 4% and here is why:

All gains are deferred from taxation until redeemed, thus the tax savings are compounded. There are no state income taxes on savings bond income. Moreover, gains are tax free if used to finance education, including that of yourself. So the real gain can be higher depending on which tax advantage you qualify.

One catch: You can only buy $5,000 worth of electronic Series I bonds per year. Used to be able to buy paper bonds but they eliminated that this New Year.

Your better bet would be to invent a time machine so you could go back to the year 2002 when you could buy $30,000 worth of Series I bonds in electronic form and another $30,000 worth in paper form. I ran across a married couple on a blog and they bought $240,000 worth of Series I bonds between them in the late 90s to early 2000s. Their fixed rate is permanently above 3%. The variable rate of 3.06% now is in addition to that 3% fixed. They have been enjoying an average 6% annual gain. Sometimes more, sometimes a little less. Essentially they have about doubled the value of savings bonds to $480,000, earning $28,000 gain this year, roughly $2400 per month. Good grief, that would pay for rent on both my apartments with reasonable amount of change left over!

“That is the best point of four, and one with which I believe most men struggle mightily in the later stages of married life, after the initial passion and associated behaviors die down.”

It is a great point.

But I also think it’s ok to struggle against the decline and/or death of passion; why should that be ok?