The Housing Bubble

Yep. And until then stay in cash.

Thanks to the HBB’s klaxon horns of 2008, I took the bulk of my money out of stocks. It’s been cooling its jets in cash and Treasuries ever since.

Thanks, HBB.

Oh, and if given the choice, keep on working.

A steady job translates into a steady incoming flow of cash.

A pension translates to a PROMISE (likely an unfunded promise at that) of a steady incoming flow of cash.

A pension translates to a PROMISE (likely an unfunded promise at that) of a steady incoming flow of cash.

Yup, there’s gonna be a lot of unhappy campers out there. Colorado’s PERA is a bug flying into a windshield. There’s a movement to repeal TABOR here, the current tactic is to get it declared unconstitutional (since it’s a constitutional amendment, I don’t see how that can fly). As long as TABOR remains alive there is no chance that taxes can be raised make PERA solvent.

A job is also a “PROMISE (likely an unfunded promise at that) of a steady incoming flow of cash”. It too can end tomorrow.

“Thanks to the HBB’s klaxon horns of 2008, I took the bulk of my money out of stocks. It’s been cooling its jets in cash and Treasuries ever since.

Thanks, HBB.”

You do realize stocks are higher today than in 2008, right? From July 2008 to July 2012, with dividend reinvestment, the S&P500 returned 4.25% a year. That’s better than than treasuries and infinitely better than cash.

And treasuries pay interest which is taxed as ordinary income. Capital gains/dividends are taxed at lower rates.

HBB didn’t do much for you except lose you money with the “get out of stocks” type of advice.

So, what are you suggesting, that we should buy stocks?

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m saying selling in 2008 and going cash/treasuries wasn’t a great move.

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m saying selling in 2008 and going cash/treasuries wasn’t a great move.

I’m more interested in the return OF my money than the return ON my money.

“I’m more interested in the return OF my money than the return ON my money.”

OK fine. You would have the return OF your money and a bigger profit ON your money had you kept in stocks instead of going to cash/treasuries in 2008.

“You do realize stocks are higher today than in 2008, right? From July 2008 to July 2012, with dividend reinvestment, the S&P500 returned 4.25% a year. That’s better than than treasuries and infinitely better than cash.

And treasuries pay interest which is taxed as ordinary income. Capital gains/dividends are taxed at lower rates.

HBB didn’t do much for you except lose you money with the “get out of stocks” type of advice.”

Depends on when the stocks were sold. After a large drop, taking the loss - yes that could double the pain. But if she sold in or before August and missed her stocks dropping in half, even if she didn’t get back in at the 7000ish low she’s still better off. If you lost 1/2 your money in 9/2008 - 3/2009 you’d have to have a 100% return to get it back. At 4.25% a year we’re not there. If she sold at 14000 Dow she’s still ahead (on average) as the market is at 13000ish. Yes, knowing to buy at 7000 would have been nice. But not having any losses during the worst downturn in our lifetime? Priceless.

For those of us who still think another big correction is on the way, cash feels awfully nice.

It’s easy to realize anything with hindsight.

“OK fine. You would have the return OF your money and a bigger profit ON your money had you kept in stocks instead of going to cash/treasuries in 2008.”

Probably not. Unless you are contributing more to the account.

“If you lost 1/2 your money in 9/2008 - 3/2009 you’d have to have a 100% return to get it back. At 4.25% a year we’re not there. If she sold at 14000 Dow she’s still ahead (on average) as the market is at 13000ish. Yes, knowing to buy at 7000 would have been nice. But not having any losses during the worst downturn in our lifetime? Priceless. ”

You only lost money 9/08 - 3/09 if you were dumb enough to sell. If you held on and bought in between that time you’re sitting pretty today.

“Probably not. Unless you are contributing more to the account.”

If you had $10K in the S&P500 on July 31st, 2008 and you did nothing but reinvest your dividends back into the S&P500 until July 31st 2012, you’d have $11,811.

If you had $10,000 cash on July 31st, 2008 and kept that in cash earning the going rate on money (0.10%, 0.20% whatever it is) you’d have about $10,050 on July 31st 2012.

Getting out of stocks and into cash in 2008 was a bad move. No way around it. Now maybe you slept better at night in late 2008, early 2009, and that has some value I suppose. But on a purely ROI basis, it was a bad move.

“You do realize stocks are higher today than in 2008, right? From July 2008 to July 2012, with dividend reinvestment, the S&P500 returned 4.25% a year. That’s better than than treasuries and infinitely better than cash.”

Are you computationally challenged, or a liar? Just do the math!

Thirty-year Treasury yields
8/6/08 4.68%
8/6/12 2.65%

Suppose you bought $10,000 worth of Treasuries on 8/6/08 to yield 4.68%. The coupon you received every six months would be 2.34% of $10,000, or $234. The present value of $234 every six months for 30 years at 4.68% compounded semi-annually, with return of $10,000 at the end of the period is (drumrolls, please!) $10,000.

Fast forward to 8/6/12. You have already collected 8 coupon payments, or 8*$234 = $1,874, which is a conservative estimate of cumulative earnings (they would be higher if reinvested with interest). But at today’s yield rate of 2.65%, the value of 26 more years of $234 paid every six months plus return of $10,000 after 26 years is $13,797. Add that to your four years of accumulated coupon payments and you see the value of your investment has grown to $1,874 + $13,797 = $15,671, a gain of 56.71% over four years. The annualized gain is (1.5671^.25-1)*100% = 11.9%.

In summary, plain vanilla 30-year Treasurys kicked the stock market’s butt over the past four years. This math is not rocket science, but I guess endlessly flapping your jaw is a lot easier.

“You only lost money 9/08 - 3/09 if you were dumb enough to sell. If you held on and bought in between that time you’re sitting pretty today.”

I sold in late 2007 and had my clients in cash when the market fell. No matter how you twist the numbers NOT taking a 50% loss was better than taking it and getting only 90% of you money back over the next 4 years.

Many of us sold BEFORE the crash and no matter how you look at it, it did make us safer in the longer. And smarter than those who play with numbers after the fact trying to justify how a huge loss is actually a good thing. The market was at 14,000 when I pulled out. It’s now at 13,172. Therefore my cash is still better. Of course, I’ve also been dollar cost averaging back in with new money into my retirement accounts so best of both worlds. But yeah, I’m sitting on some cash because I think there’s another storm coming. If you don’t you should be in stocks and heavily margined.

“The market was at 14,000 when I pulled out. It’s now at 13,172.”

According to EddieMath, that’s a capital gain.

Marie Antoinette thought the same thing.

How’d that work out?

Bill makes money by getting a check from a company that gets a check from the federal government that gets the money from your taxes.

At least Bill works for his govt cheese.

Comment by polly
2012-08-06 13:38:06

Bill makes money by getting a check from a company that gets a check from the federal government that gets the money from your taxes.

Aren’t you a govt lawyer?

Charlie, “it’s the hypocrisy, stupid.”

“Aren’t you a govt lawyer?”

Yes, and thank god we have such a brilliant gal working for us.

3. People who enjoy spreading disinformation on blogs.

Polly: A Government lawyer who wants more government control over you.

Bill: A government contractor who wants the government to downsize radically, even if it means his own job.

Vote.

Prv. 16:18

How the heck ‘intent to kill’ was necessary for a manslaughter conviction is baffling to me, yet it was apparently in the standard instructions to jurors for years.

Looking forward to the possibility of Obama winning the electoral college but losing the popular vote just for the apoplectic rage it will generate from the O haterz

Yeah - flashback to the Clinton wins.

Looking forward to the possibility of Obama winning the electoral college but losing the popular vote just for the apoplectic rage it will generate from the O haterz

Sorry Nanners but I’m solidly against the duopoly and that won’t change ever. Not now, not after the election, not ever.

In my experience every time someone says “I hate both parties” what they really mean is “I am a Democrat but too hip to assign labels to myself.”.

In my experience every time someone says “I hate both parties” what they really mean is “I am a Democrat but too hip to assign labels to myself.”

Because how could anyone agree with positions from both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul? Gotta pick a team and stay there, is that what you’re advocating?

Look Slithers….. it’s up to you to defend the party duopoly. You own it.

I hate both parties on the extreme/far ends. I, myself, am an issue-by-issue person and it lands me in the middle of the road.

In my experience every time someone says “I hate both parties” what they really mean is “I am a Democrat but too hip to assign labels to myself.”.

Then you haven’t been on HBB long enough. Those who hate both parties tend to be Ron Paul supporters. They see both platforms separate and hate them separately. To their credit, they think critically and are consistent.

Then there are those who think the two parties are the same, which is a different ball of wax. In my experience, what these folks really mean is “I really really wanted to hate Obama but I have to admit he hasn’t been the commie that I thought. I really really wanted to like Romney but he sounds like a piker. I really really want to like capitalist business but corps aren’t nice like they used to be now they’re so profit driven they’d feed us Upton Sinclare style pink slime just to hit this quarter’s numbers. I really really like the old Republican ethic of hard work cf Horatio Alger but even hard work doesn’t work anymore because the corps are cheaters and pay minimum wage or less for hard work. And I really want to hate government but I know that without gov regs corps will give me the Joshua tree-tment. So now I don’t know what to do except to hate on everybody.”

” Those who hate both parties tend to be Ron Paul supporters.”

And? Ron Paul’s support comes from college kids who want legalized drugs and are anti-war. They bought the Hopey Changey in 2008. But wait, the war is still on and pot is till illegal. Bummer dude.

So they went out and found the next messiah, Ron Paul. He’ll end the wars and legalize pot. Awesome!!

That’s your defense of the duopoly?

Go EddieTard!!!!!!!!!!!!

They bought the Hopey Changey in 2008.

Waaaaaaaait a second. Recently you claimed that Ron Paul supporters were de facto Obama voters as in, a vote for RP translates to a vote for BO. Now you say the typical RP voters won’t be voting for Obama as they look for the new messiah. Which is it?

“all formerly illegal, unjust wars became fully legal and just.”

As I recall, the protesters were more concerned with Iraq than Afghanistan, and to most, at least the latter seemed like a defensible military response. As for Iraq, Obama slowly wound things down there. I know that people like Sheehan wanted us out immediately, but I think even the most vehement protesters knew that wasn’t going to happen. So to answer the question of “where did all the protesters go?”, I’d say that they probably did cut O some slack, and his Iraq policy placated them just enough so that they had little to be angry about.

I’m surprised they’re not staging an Out of Afghanistan protest effort. That thing has been bloody and long.

Antiwar protesters weren’t too respectful of parties or incumbents in the 60s. What happened?

The draft ended.

??????????????????????????????

As for Iraq, Obama slowly wound things down there.

obama followed the Bush plan for getting out of Iraq to the letter. He changed nothing on getting out.

obama did almost double troops in Afghanistan ALL ON HIS OWN.

I’m surprised they’re not staging an Out of Afghanistan protest effort.

They are. It’s just a lot smaller.

“obama followed the Bush plan for getting out of Iraq to the letter”

The Bush plan? The one that by ‘07 was no longer perceived as doable? OK, I’ll go with that. Your question was “where are the protesters?” Those against the Iraq war, and probably most of those for it didn’t think that a withdrawal was in the cards anymore. We were stuck in a quagmire. We withdrew anyway, leaving your question answered.

I was thinking of offering them a room.

I think they already share one. But now they need a room with a view!

…and an industry employment collapse about every 25 years.

That said, oil jobs pay good. Very good. But only if you work directly for the big names. If you work for the smaller vendors, you might as well work for Wal Mart.

“And the response for the moaners/whiners … moaning/whining that in 15 years the jobs won’t be there anymore.”

If the job is a project orientated job then after the project is completed the job won’t be there anymore. You cannot get around this fact. The only way to keep working in a career that is project orientated is to keep landing projects. If there are no projects to land - or if the jobs are not offered to you because you have been selected out for some reason, such as age - then you don’t get to work.

It is what it is.

A Petroleum Engineer is a ChemE with a specialty. That person will still have a ChemE degree after the boom, and a decade or two of project/process management experience. An experienced ChemE can land a good job in almost any industry in any kind of economy.

BTDT.

“BTDT”

Been There, Done That? How about everyone else, have they been there and done that?

How tough is it for one to successfully be there and do that? From what I have seen it’s sorta tough; Not everyone is able to make the transition.

For some reason I seem to know of a lot of ex-engineers.

An experienced ChemE can land a good job in almost any industry in any kind of economy.

You have to know how to sell yourself. And, speaking as the offspring of a ChemE who had a great deal of difficulty doing such selling after he became a consultant, it’s not THAT easy.

Buffett talks of the concept of a “moat” when he considers buying a stock or a company. He uses the term a moat to serve as a metaphor for protecting intrusions from the outside that may jeopardize the future success of the enterprise.

I think the term should also apply to career choices: A question that should be asked is just what are the dangers waiting down the road that may jeopardize one’s employment?

You do realize that 100k+ is the exception? The RARE exception. Right?

And that those jobs are a tiny percentage of the actual number of engineering students. And engineering students are but a fraction of the total number of college students?

Right? You do know this?

And you do know this is a rhetorical question, right?

OK, there are two kinds of people who excell in engineering school; the masochist and the exhibitionist. The later, I think, are more successful at jumping horses.

$100K starting salary isn’t that rare. My first year out I made $70K (with bonus). That was 15 years ago, which adjusted for inflation is around $100K. You think it’s an exception because you surround yourself with doom and gloom types all day long who think everyone is making $7/hr.

Or maybe I use, you know, real numbers.

Less than 20 percent of American households earn more than $100,000.

http://www.naceweb.org says those jobs ARE rare.

The next time you travel the world, try not taking the company jet and limo service to the Four Seasons.

An event that occurs 20% of the time is not rare. And if you break that down to households with college degrees it’s much higher than 20%. It’s not rare whatsoever for a household with 2 wage earners, college degree and working in a professional field to earn $100K+.

You need to get out a little more. Not everyone is starving, despite what you read here every day.

OK, there are two kinds of people who excell in engineering school; the masochist and the exhibitionist. The later, I think, are more successful at jumping horses.

I didn’t excel, I just survived. The useful thing that I’d learned in the army was that you can brute force your way through almost anything if you don’t give up, and it worked. But I did seem to take to microprocessor programming in assembly and C and that lead directly to where I am now…

A better speller than I as well.

The other (and bigger problem, IMHO) issue is that, of the people who go to college, a small fraction have the mental horsepower or determination to get through a science/math/engineering degree. Sure, if you promised every chem E graduate a 100K job, more people would probably become chem E majors. But would more people graduate? I’m not sure that number would be significantly higher than it is today; if you graduate with an engineering/comp sci/math degree with a good GPA from a reasonably good school, getting a 100K a few years out (and perhaps directly out of college if you’re a real star) isn’t difficult at all.

The difficult thing is getting through those types of degrees with a good GPA. I was a comp sci major in college; we started my freshman year with about 500 people in the program, and about 100 of us finished with comp sci degrees. The attrition rate on engineering degrees is shockingly high; it’s hard work, and, frankly, some people just aren’t cut out for it. There is also a group of people who have the mental capacity but quickly realize that they’d rather work at MCD for the rest of their lives than spend another day doing computers/engineering/etc. Or that’s what they think when they are 20 years old and all their friends are partying 5 nights a week while they toil away in a lab all night long. (I, BTW, am a corner case, I love computers and enjoyed those long nights in the labs. Most people in these fields are there “for the money” more than for the love of the technology).

I have 3 open positions right now for people with comp sci degrees and 5-10 years of experience (and some certifications) that all pay north of 100K. They aren’t easy to fill, especially when you require English as a first language. I’ve hired 2 over the last few months, and had 2 others back out (they got better offers). Both of them had comp plans that were worth about 150K (salary + bonus + profit sharing), benefits, and a great 401K plan. I spoke to one of the candidates, the position he took was going to get him close to 200K in gross income year one. And that’s really the tip of the iceberg, go into sales in these fields (any of them) and the numbers get really stupid; my BIL works in sales of a software product that helps companies design new chemicals (typically pharmaceutical drugs). He’s 35 years old, and, I would guess (I don’t know for sure) he’s going to bring home 500K+ this year. CE degree, very personable, English as a first language.

One position we recently hired (not on my team) was a high school graduate (no college) with about 15 years of consulting experience and a CCIE (look it up, it’s the big daddy Cisco certification); he’s going to make 160 or so this year. So, it’s possible to make well into the 100s without a college degree at all, assuming you have the mental capacity to pass some very difficult tests (most people do not).

“The next time you travel the world, try not taking the company jet and limo service to the Four Seasons.”

ROFL. If you think that’s what a 100K income “gets you” you need to come over and see what the reality looks like. I’m not saying it’s terrible, it’s not at all. But, “the company jet and the Four Seasons” is more like 10M income, not 100K.

Or if not walkable to stores 1 car, we always had 2 growing up my father was a bricklayer so he had to drive to remote dirty job sites no need to ruin a new car…And all the NYC commuters had a station car to sit all day at the train lot.

They start with instilling a certain culture. KIP, Children’s Storefrong in Harlem… All the good ones will tell you that their succes comes only if they manage to instill a certain culture at the school.

How many students were kicked out or dropped out? How many had parents who cared enough in the first place to get them into the school?

I applaud their success, but I don’t think you can draw the conclusion that unions are the problem.

Does it scale?

The Heritage Foundation is a known neocon core group and about as credible as PETA.

Is there anything in the paper that is untrue? If so, what?

All of it.

This has been another series of simple answers for simple minds.

Yeah - because only huge government programs have ensured the prosperity of America.

It has NOTHING to do with personal liberty and economic freedom.

Yep - Just bigger and bigger government programs.

But it does not seem to be working for obama…

Yes, the New Deal programs and their like have proven to be very successful, haven’t they?

Nice straw men. Too bad they do nothing to refute my point.

India has been implementing New Deal type programs for the past 40 years. How’s that working out?

How’s that working out?

Apparently rather well. Aren’t they the ‘I’ in BRIC?

That was a while back. You could say that India has “decoupled” from the other BRIC nations.

You could say that India has “decoupled” from the other BRIC nations.

How so?

With its average annual GDP growth rate of 5.8% over the past two decades, and reaching 6.1% during 2011–12,[197] India is one of the world’s fastest-growing economies.
wikipedia

“How so?”

In the original context in which the acronym was used, which isnthe stock martket. India’s market has tanked.

More broadly, there is already talk of them having trouble replacing some of their sovereign long-term debt, a la Ireland, Greece, Spain, etc. Their housing bubble is finally starting to burst. Basically, what we dealt with in 2007. Not exactly the picture of health right now, but some people are still optimistic.

“About one-third of the lowest income households had either LCD or plasma TVs. ”

Do they ‘own’ them, or are they still paying the credit card bill on them?

Best Buy no longer sells CRT TVs.

Or rent-to-own?

I bought a 19″ tube t.v. in 1994 for $250. It finally conked out on me about 6 months ago at which time I replaced it with a 24″ LCD t.v. for under $200. Owning this t.v. does not mean I am wealthy.

“Owning this t.v. does not mean I am wealthy.”

Nobody ever said you were. However calling someone who owns an LCD TV - even a $200 one - “poor” is ridiculous. That’s the point.

Agreed. Some people seem to think that all flat panel TVs cost $1000 or more.

I am certainly not saying that the EITC people are all living high on the hog. What I am saying is if you give an uneducated, lazy person 4-5k dollars in spending money they will spend it….and probably not in a manner that would be in their best interest.

The rich take full advantage of all of the loopholes and so do many of the “poor” people.

Tried living on less that 20k lately?

Get back to us on that… if you survive.

My friends who get the EITC “use” most of it to off set the FICA taxes on their small business income. If there is money that actually comes in as a check, it almost always goes to fix the car that is broken as often as it is fixed.

The rich take full advantage of all of the loopholes and so do many of the “poor” people.

Mmmhmm

“That’s some fine living, high on the hog, land of milk and honey, earning that “sweet spot” income of $17,000/year that qualifies for the maximum EITC of $5,700, isn’t it? And don’t forget those truly lucky Lucky Duckies getting $1,200/month of disability. It’s not wars or bailouts bankrupting this country, it’s the non-producer parasites!”

There are 50 million people on food stamps and 50 million on disability. Do the math on how much that costs. And that’s before a single EITC check is mailed out or before a single EBT card is swiped.

Food stamps and school lunches ~ 100B
SS disability ~ 130B

That’s about 6% of the total federal budget

Contrast that with the F-35 program, which is expected to cost a total of 1.5 trillion

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

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/08/12/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812

You’re right, it IS the non-producers, but not the ones who live in the ghettos…

“Food stamps and school lunches ~ 100B
SS disability ~ 130B

That’s about 6% of the total federal budget

Contrast that with the F-35 program, which is expected to cost a total of 1.5 trillion
”

230B for food stamps and disability is per year. Over how many years is the F-35 program? Leave it to a leftist to distort numbers. Answer: OVER 50 YEARS

Nice try.

Didn’t even feel the breeze, did you?

There are no poor people in America. There are people who have less than others. But compared to the billions of people in the rest of the world who literally don’t have a pot to piss in, every single American is filthy rich.

If there is one thing I can’t stand about the average American is how he/she doesn’t appreciate how good he/she has it.

There are no poor people in America.

Take away Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, public schools, etc- ie take away the New Deal programs and their descendants- and we’d have world-class poverty again. Just like we used to, back in the good old days.

I saw hundreds of people living under the bridges in LA… and many other cities in this country

I’ve seen the poor living in entire apt buldings with no water or sewer because the landlord was breaking the law and they couldn’t afford to move out.

I’ve seen people DIE in this country because they were too poor to get medical treatment.

And then I see evil people like you who have no clue.

make that: I’ve seen personal acquaintances and friends die because they were too poor to get medical help.

Someone living under a bridge has more going against him than getting less than $2,000 a month, in my experience. You cannot solve everything with money, though it might ease some things.

BTW, a healthy person can live pretty high on $1,200 a month, if the right choices are made. Get real sick without care though and it’s game over, like in previous days.

make that: I’ve seen personal acquaintances and friends die because they were too poor to get medical help.

That very thing almost happened to me in 1985. I had an untreated infection that got really bad over a weekend. And I didn’t have the money to pay an ER up front because I didn’t have insurance.

I made it to a doctor’s office early the following week. Cyst (where infection was) got lanced, and it was septic.

I was very lucky.

So now the threshold for being poor has gone from $20K a year to living under a bridge. Interesting.

“make that: I’ve seen personal acquaintances and friends die because they were too poor to get medical help.”

That’s pure BS. Walk into any ER in the country and the poorest of the poor - even bridge dwellers - will get treated.

“renewable energy resources…”

Does that mean that a wind turbine generates enough energy to build another wind turbine from scratch? If not, then it’s not so renewable.

Coal, oil, gas may produce energy at a higher ratio to energy required to extract them than wind, but we invite you to come visit and enjoy breathing our Brown Cloud of air pollution along the Front Range resulting partly from the burning of the former three…

Thanks for the invite, but I drove across that part a few months ago and took it in, so to speak. The obvious solution is to have your “renewables” manufactured downwind.

Wow, so it’s up from 14% to 17% in one year.

Meanwhile, the national average for renewable energy is about 3%, according to the article.

Does that mean that a wind turbine generates enough energy to build another wind turbine from scratch? If not, then it’s not so renewable.

And coal fired plants just grow out of the ground by themselves?

FWIW, the newer turbines can generate a lot of juice. Some can generate over 7 Mega watts of electricity.

Hey, don’t get offended. I’m just exploring the idea that putting up windmills makes the usage of coal go up, not down, but not necessarily in Colorado. If the day comes that these things get built on private property without subsidy and have a payback, I’ll be happy. Until then I’m skeptical. Since some of the subsidy comes out of my wallet, I think that is reasonable.

Besides, the things are extra ugly, especially on the high plains and on the shores of Lake Ontario. And they kill birds.

Hey, don’t get offended. I’m just exploring the idea that putting up windmills makes the usage of coal go up, not down

Like I said before, it also takes energy to build a coal plant, which actually has more components: Furnaces to burn the coal, heat exchanges systems, steam turbines, scrubbers to clear particulates from the exhaust,etc.

And it also takes energy to mine and transport the coal. And the waste coal has to be disposed.

What was interesting in the article was that Exel Energy seemed quite pleased with its turbines. Utilities in Colorado have been mandated to switch to a certain percentage of renewable energy (20% IIRC). When they legislation passed they kicked and screamed, but now are actually way ahead of schedule.

I am exploring the idea of building my own small wind turbine (when and if we get this house).

Gray water system for the backyard.

Gray water system for the backyard.

In San Francisco? When do you need to water, during a two-day dry spell?

According to wiki, San Francisco has 21 inches of rain per year.

Seattle gets 2-3 times as much, in a single month.

I know from my Bay Area friends that water rationing happens out there.

“According to wiki, San Francisco has 21 inches of rain per year.
Seattle gets 2-3 times as much, in a single month.”

Seattle gets 40-60 inches of rain a month? You might want to re-check that. If that were true, the city would be under about 10 feet of water right now.

“but now are actually way ahead of schedule….”

Why I wonder. Interested in more details. What is their incentive? Do they get to charge more immediately upon installing the turbines? Feed in tarrif?

20% of installed capacity or a steady 20% of generation?

For reference, Denver gets 16 inches per year. Vegas gets about 4 inches per year. DC area get about 37 inches per years. New England gets about the same.

Worked for Mitt Romney.

Worked for Mitt Romney.

That and being born into a rich and well-connected family.

As opposed to Obama who went to an exclusive prep school in Hawaii while being raised by his grandmother, a bank vice president.

FWIW, all bank branch managers are “vice presidents”. From her wiki biography, that is exactly how she was described. In other words, she was middle class.

Also, from Wikipedia:

“In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, and with the aid of a scholarship attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979.”

Yeah, he came from a wealthy family, just like Romney.

it gave the vampire squids another 7-8 years to suck blood form the economy.

I am of the opinion that you are absolutely correct.

C’mon boys…… GE was packing crates full of manufacturing equipment headed for Mexico and Japan back in 1981.

Makes you wonder what they are doing now to ensure that they will get their vigorish over the next decade or so.

Makes you wonder what they are doing now to ensure that they will get their vigorish over the next decade or so.

Trying to ‘privatize’ Social Security and Medicare.

You would be wrong, it began in the 1980s and the S&L disaster was the first attempt to hide it.

When is it a bad decision to buy something you can afford and then circumstances beyond your control change the equation?

Should one always live life fearful of bad luck?

Prudence is certainly a worthy trait, but there is fine line between it and prudish.

Should one always live life fearful of bad luck?

I say heck no!

I mean, come on. I get around by bicycle, and, yes, I’m very much aware that each ride could be my last. Guess that’s why I tend to live life at a pretty high intensity. I know it can end — just like that.

There are many many people paying more in rent than they can afford. In the places where there are jobs, shelter can cost close to 45-50% of your income, whether you rent OR own.

It’s not really a great idea to pay more for rent than you can afford either!

Try it, I dare you.

Well it depends if you have a job. If you don’t have a job and can choose where you live, $20K is very doable. I know, because I lived very well on $24K a year, and that was with a $300 car payment, single in my own $700 apartment, paying COBRA insurance and regular car insurance.

So you can live very cheap with a roommate ($400), if you’re young so you don’t need health insurance (cross fingers) ($0), buy the cheapest food at Meijer ($150), and own a beater car outright with the least possible legal car insurance ($50). Add up that and other stuff like phone utilities etc, and yes you can live on about $15K take-home pay. Barely. But for how long?

“I was laid off after 50. Not fun.”

We need a new law. Nobody 50+ shall ever be laid off. Lifetime employment for one and all. Even if you have no value to offer an employer, you must be kept on the payroll. It’s for the children and grandchildren.

Who pays EddieTard to spew vicious contumely and lies on the HBB all day long?

Business
Global recession

German jobs saved by short-time working subsidies, says IMF

• Job losses much worse in UK’s and US’s flexible labour market
• British unemployment to hit 9.3% in 2010

Larry Elliott in Istanbul
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 1 October 2009 08.46 EDT

Unemployment: Selly Oak Jobcentre in Birmingham

Unemployment in Britain and the US has risen much faster than in Germany, where state subsidies have safeguarded jobs, says the IMF. Photograph: David Sillitoe

Demands by British trade unionists for the government to copy the German system of job subsidies to keep skilled workers employed were given a boost today when the International Monetary Fund released its latest overview of the global economy.

While the impact of the worst recession since the second world war has been to push up joblessness in every continent and every country, the IMF reported big variations between countries.

America’s flexible labour market has not prevented an increase of five percentage points in the unemployment rate, which at close to 10% is at its highest level since the early 1980s.

In Germany, by contrast, the sharp contraction in industrial output has led to – so far at least – a rise of only three-quarters of a point in the jobless rate.
…

We aren’t talking about England. dammit.

We aren’t talking about a ban, either.

The NRA has managed to shoot down every Democratic/liberal/whatever-name-you-want-to-pin-on-it attempt to put some kind of regulation on this.

To me, it’s time for the NRA/gun nutz to offer a solution. Besides “price we have to pay” speeches, and concealed carry laws.

How about a few cents a round to cover hospital costs associated with intentional/accidental firearm deaths/injuries.

Just like the banksters, the NRA has privatized the benefits, and the costs have been socialized.

Typical leftist thinking….there must be a fix for every problem and the govt will find a way.

Sorry to break the news to you buddy, some problems can’t be fixed. How many guns were used on 9/11? How about in Oklahoma City? How many people did Ted Bundy kill with a gun? Answer is 0 in all 3 cases.

Crazy/evil people who want to kill a lot of people will find ways of doing it with or without guns.

“The NRA has managed to shoot down every Democratic/liberal/whatever-name-you-want-to-pin-on-it attempt to put some kind of regulation on this.”

LOL. The funniest new regulation I heard about was limiting the purchase of 1000 bullets in any 5 day period. Sounds great huh? Except the Colorado guy had been planning his escapade for 4 months. Ooops. OK how about 500 bullets in 30 days. Yeah that’ll stop the next attack. Well sure, if it weren’t for that whole fake name/address thing that anyone with $20 and a fake ID can get a PO Box. OK, ok, ok….then we ban PO boxes and fake IDs. Wait fake IDs are already illegal. Then we’ll ban PO boxes, yeah that’s the ticket.

“Crazy/evil people who want to kill a lot of people will find ways of doing it with or without guns.”

I think we can all agree on that, but GSfixr wasn’t talking about taking anyone’s guns away.

Everytime I used to drive into Mexico from San Diego, the first sign you see is “Firearms are illegal in Mexico”.

Seems to be working out great for them down there.

I have to agree with the first 4.

Number 5 however, was started by Bush.

And none of these would have made any difference in Colorado or Wisconsin.

The day I have to carry a gun around 24/7/365, is the day I need to start thinking about bailing out of this Effed up country.

Back to the Future, circa 1868. Except in this case, the settlers are more whacked out than the Indians.

Why should the asking price be lower than three dollars if you are willing to pay three dollars?

“Why should the asking price be lower than three dollars if you are willing to pay three dollars?”

But it’s so unfair. Think of all the poor children who can’t afford to eat mellon at $3. We need a new law that says no mellon can be sold for more than $1.50. Then all the children will have access to an unlimited supply of mellons.

You mean I alone determine the market price? I’m flattered.

You certainly helped determined the market price for that one cantaloupe. You did this by buying it.

Geez, you document some anecdotal inflation, and everyone gets on your case.

On one hand we bitch and moan about “land whales” and their pudgy children. They we say “tough beans” when the healthy food they should be eating is unaffordable, while at the same time decrying their poor eating habits.

Whatever.

But it’s so unfair. Think of all the poor children who can’t afford to eat mellon at $3. We need a new law that says no mellon can be sold for more than $1.50. Then all the children will have access to an unlimited supply of mellons.”

They get SNAP cards to buy mellons no worries

I don’t know if SNAP food stamps are more for poor people or farmers or just to give the government something to control

Who - other than those buyers and sellers who are actually at the point of sale - are in the best position to determine just what the current price of cantaloupes should be?

Who should set these prices if not them?

“Who should set these prices if not them?”

Government. Government always knows best and is always best quipped to make decisions for the masses.

“I don’t know if SNAP food stamps are more for poor people or farmers or just to give the government something to control”

Every new SNAP recipient is a new Democrat for life voter.

Every new SNAP recipient is a new Democrat for life voter.

White rednecks don’t vote Democrat, but they damn sure will take some food stamps, disability, or whatever else is available, all the while b!tching about big government.

Excuse me, I know some white rednecks very well who would never vote anything but Democrat. Do you know a lot of people who refuse to cash a government check or do not complain about the government?

SNAP is about keeping people from overthrowing the government as well as simple humanitarianism.

“You mean I alone determine the market price? I’m flattered.”

Well, at the very least, you’re contributing to a cantaloupe bubble. Why buy a cantaloupe for $3 today when you can get it for $2 later?

I know some white rednecks very well who would never vote anything but Democrat.

Not many. It’s the demographic he does the worst with. Those you know are living in a time warp. Even the most remote backwood ‘hollers’ here in Kentucky joined the Reagan Revolution (the Great Scotch-Irish party switch).

“But it’s so unfair. Think of all the poor children who can’t afford to eat mellon at $3. We need a new law that says no mellon can be sold for more than $1.50. Then all the children will have access to an unlimited supply of mellons.”

No. We need to let big banks and their greedhead CEO’s fail miserably, instead of bailing them out so they can, in turn, blow massive commodities bubbles at the expense of every human being just looking to get a bite to eat at a reasonable price. Imbecile.

What’s good for Big Oil is good for America.

Gas is virtually free in Venezuela. It’s somewhere in the 10 cent/gallon range. By the logic here, their economy should be booming.

That’s it? Venezuela?

You go EddieTard!

Switch cars over to CNG Compressed Natural Gas, start tapping into our vast natural gas reserves and the money stays in the USA. This creates jobs for US Citizens directly in the drilling related industries and indirectly within closely related servicing industries.

Americans recieve royalty checks from the natural gas, which helps fuel the economy….

Yeah, and just wait until 100 million dipShit US Americans start blowing themselves (and everyone in the immediate vicinity) up in CNG explosions.

I’ve this argument with Albequerque Dan. I am in favor of electric cars because you can use any fuel to make the electricity — be it CNG, oil, wind, beeswax, geothermal, nuclear what have you.

And what happens when it takes 20 years to switch over the refueling infrastructure so that you’re never more thn 50 miles or so from a CNG station? That’s probably exactly when we’ll hit Peak CNG and we’re back to square 1 with a new fuel and a new refueling infrastructure. It may seem like there’s a lot of natural gas… until 100 million people start driving cheaply with it. We’ll use it up PDQ.

No can do.

There is no shortage of oil in the US. Switching to natural gas will do nothing. The problem is no matter how much oil (or natural gas) we have, private companies control it, and owe nothing to the general population. Profit$ are deliciou$, and $hould be pur$ued at all co$t$. (Prop$ to Hwy50!)

Your faulty premise is: cheap gas = healthy economy.

I told you Venezuela has virtually free gas. Please explain why Venezuela’s economy isn’t on fire.

C’mon Tard.

Explain why inflated commodity prices are good for people.

Go on now… Get talking.

“Your faulty premise is: cheap gas = healthy economy.”

The premise was that expensive gas = bad for economy. Big difference. An economy can be healthy while still having to deal with things that are bad for it. And vice-versa, as in Venezuela.

I’ll agree that very expensive gas would lead to investment in domestic sources like natural gas, which is good. But that’s a long-term thing.

Hilarious how the “SUVs are evil, we need everyone to drive a Prius” crowd is complaining about $4 gas. It’s your utopia guys. $4, $5, $10 gas. No more SUVs, everyone takes the bus. No more McMansions in the burbs, everyone lives in inner city tenements.

Celebrate it!

Would you care to explain how rising gas prices are good for the economy?

ANSWER the question you coward.

If its so damn risky, why is their share of the national wealth steadily growing?

Meanwhile, if you are a serf, the capital gains from your 401K/IRA will be taxed as regular income.

“It’s good to be the King!”

“….there’s more risk than if one’s income is from a salary……”

Obviously, you’ve never worked for a company who has filed Chapter 11.

Or one that pocketed 3 months of payroll deductions before filing Chapter 11.

Including payroll deducted life insurance premiums. I guess it was a good thing the guy died, before his family found out that the life insurance premiums weren’t being paid, and his life insurance policy went poof.

And people who earn money use up their time to do it.

Capital investments can easily be diversified, reducing the risk. But you only have 24 hours in a day and some of it has to be used for sleeping, eating and getting from your residence to work. I’d say that people who devote the time they have to one job, are taking on a heck of a lot of risk. If that employer goes belly up, they may have devoted years of their life to becoming an expert in a job that doesn’t exist anymore and to skills that don’t easily transfer to another position. Now, they get something out it presumably (the current salary and benefits) but all the rest - advancement, connections, retirement money, etc can be lost.

Yeah, but we do know when contempt is being dripped upon us.

“Capital Market Experts” = 21st Century Flim Flam man.

Do you really not understand how this all works? I know most Americans are clueless, but I didn’t think they were that clueless.

Dude, your arrogance is getting old real fast.

Dude, if you think you did well by buying treasuries and cash in 2008 my arrogance is fully justified.

Dude, your arrogance is getting old real fast.

Without it there would be no conflict or discussion and the bits would only get 150 posts/day.

Who do you think hires “the working class”?
People who risked their own capital to start a business.

But let’s punish these people by increasing the dividend tax rate so they earn less from their businesses.

Who do you think works?
People who go to work every day.

But let’s punish these people by making them pay higher tax rates than people who have so much money they don’t have to work for a living.

Mr Smithers ,,,,Investors are parasites . I think we should go back to the barter system of trading shells for hides to level out the playing field ..he he he .

You know who hires the working class? The working class does, anytime they buy food at the store or tires at Wal-Mart or get their dry cleaning done, or any one of a thousand economic activities.

Don’t believe me? Fine. Have customers stop buying stuff and see if the “rich” people still create jobs. It’s customers who create jobs, not the rich.

And as for where they go for “captial,” the money they borrow is borrowed into existance, just as Darrell in Phoenix says.

And those higher taxes on capital gains? You know where that goes? Government will take that money and spend it on Social Security payments, or Medicare, or on contractor jobs, or on buying its own products, be it a syringe for a lab or an F-16. And guess what? The senior citizens and the medical workers and the lowly $100K contractors will actually spend that money, which creates more jobs.

From a job creation standpoint, its FAR better to give the money to the government than to rich people. The rich will just buy one yacht and hide the rest in the Cayman Islands.

‘Who do you think hires “the working class”?’

The government — you know, the same outfit that bailed out Megabank, Inc back in Fall 2008?

“Dude, if you think you did well by buying treasuries and cash in 2008 my arrogance is fully justified.”

Your math is way off, looser!

But who is it that buys most of the goods produced by the ownership society. That’s right the worker. The problem we have now is that the worker has no money. Technology and competing slave labor are driving down demand. The credit bubble was used to prop up demand and it has now popped. This problem won’t go away for the elite. It’s called a vicious circle. More poor people buying fewer goods that require fewer people to produce creating more poor people. Eventually you reach the tipping point and then people become employed as security guards and soldiers or they take to a life of crime and steal from the rich. My guess is we could come up with a better more productive way to keep people employed but we won’t because the elite class crave power and money over all else.

The sequence happens in business and in countries.

The creators take pride in creating the company/ country. They re invest what they earn work 24/7 eventually though the parasite class works it’s way into leadership. They immediately increase their take leaving less and less to support the country / company and it implodes or dies a slow death. The parasites have had control over our country for some time.

I just told you. They risk 8 hours a day of time. They risk years of study and money on an education to be a W-2. They risk their cars during the commute. They risk a comfortable retirement if they aren’t lucky in their career — if they are lucky enough to find a career. Many risk life and limb on the job.

What does a trader risk? A stray keyboard and carpal tunnel.

Job loss, foreclosure, financial ruin, alcoholism, suicide, etc.

What does a W2 risk

1. Working their entire life and not having enough to retire on or put their kids through school
2. One illness destroying their entire family.
3. A gov controlled by the elite that has them paying higher effective tax rates than the elite.
4. A gov controlled by the elite that bails out the elite and pays for it by taxing the working class via inflation, and a diversion of money from infrastructure medical care and retirement safety net that they’ve paid into.
5. A gov controlled by the elite that changes trade policy and tax policy to encourage the outsourcing of jobs increasing the chance of unemployment.

You are DFI if you don’t know that the W2 worker risks everday.

Seriously how much do these titans risk when they know they are going to get bailed out or when they are gambling with other peoples money. How much are they risking by off shoring labor and pocketing the change. What are they risking with insider trading or fat pay packages they create as CEOs in the you pat my back I’ll pat yours.

But the invisible army of government contractors will NEVER stop growing

Govt spending has more than doubled in the past 10-15 years

Yep. Two poorly planned and strategized wars and a depression brought on by trickle-down fraudonomics and an Ayn Rand libertarian Fed chairman are damn sure expensive.

8/01/2012 @ 11:30PM |

A Game-Changing Study Finds Half Of Global Warming Is Fictitious

The new analysis, conducted by a team of scientists led by temperature station expert Anthony Watts, shows government overseers are improperly reporting double the temperature increase that is occurring in the real world. Fully 92 percent of the overstated temperature rise results from erroneous and scientifically unjustified government “adjustments” to the raw temperature data.

The new analysis shows U.S. temperatures rose only 0.155 degrees Celsius per decade from 1979 through 2008 according to high-quality surface temperature stations. The 0.155 degree increase is substantially less than is claimed by government temperature overseers, and it is sufficiently moderate to rebut fears of an imminent global warming crisis. The U.S. temperature increase from 1979 through 2008 is even less worrisome when considering that temperatures over the oceans are warming at a slower pace than temperatures over land, and that global temperatures cooled during the 30 years prior to 1979.

The authors note global temperature trends are unlikely to be substantially different from the U.S. temperature trends analyzed in their new analysis.

Lead author Anthony Watts explained how government overseers overlook meaningful siting problems that add fictitious warming to the raw data.

““The USHCN is one of the main metrics used to gauge the temperature changes in the United States,” wrote Watts in a press release announcing the findings. “The first wide-scale effort to address siting issues, Watts, (2009), a collated photographic survey, showed that approximately 90% of USHCN stations were compromised by encroachment of urbanity in the form of heat sinks and sources, such as concrete, asphalt, air conditioning system heat exchangers, roadways, airport tarmac, and other issues. This finding was backed up by an August 2011 U.S. General Accounting Office investigation and report titled: Climate Monitoring: NOAA Can Improve Management of the U.S. Historical Climatology Network.”

The authors also explain how government overseers’ improper manipulation of the raw temperature data manufactures fictitious warming. According to the authors:

•Statistically significant differences exist between well-sited temperature stations and stations whose temperature data is influenced by encroaching urbanization, poor siting locations, and changes in nearby surface conditions that affect temperature readings.
•Government overseers of the raw data improperly adjust temperatures from poorly sited stations upward, and then add similar nonexistent warming to temperature data from well-sited stations.
• After government overseers improperly adjust the temperature readings from well-sited stations, they report three times as much warming from those stations as the raw data indicate.
•Urban temperature stations report more warming than semi-urban stations, which in turn report more warming than rural stations. These findings support skeptics’ claims that the urban heat island effect is substantially responsible for reports of rising temperatures.
The new paper throws cold water on this week’s sensationalist media coverage of claims by Cal-Berkeley professor Richard Muller that his research confirms United Nations temperature reports. Muller, who embarrassingly seeks media coverage by claiming to be a long-time global warming skeptic when in fact he has been pushing the myth of a global warming crisis for at least the past decade, bases his conclusions on the government-adjusted temperature reports that are debunked in the Watts paper.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/08/01/a-game-changing-study-finds-half-of-global-warming-is-fictitious/ - 99k -

It’s all good. We’ll be dead before half of Florida may or may not be underwater. Keep on burning that coal, oil, gas, cus everyone knows wind turbines and Toyota Prius are for sissies!

“Don’t be economic girly man” - Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

Not this again. This so called “study” is not a peer-reviewed study at all. It’s just some ex-tv weatherman’s opinion on his BLOG.

They wouldn’t even let this “study” be posted over at the super-conservative Catholic.com forum I also frequent. The moderator shut it down before it even got its first post because of the reasons I stated above.

You really are clueless.

If they go bankrupt, are you going to blame it on their $12/hour UAW workers?

————————-

Under the new deal, entry-level workers will receive “significant gains” in pay, with wages coming to $19.28 per hour over the term of the agreement.

All GM/UAW employees will also get a $5,000 signing bonus, up to $4,000 in “Inflation Protection,” and lump sum payments for “Quality” over the term of the agreement.

http://gm-volt.com/2011/09/30/uaw-ratifies-labor-contract-with-gm/

————————————-

The average wage per hour of the Detroit Three is $73.20

http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/19/gm-economy-autos-oped-cx_bm_1119mcgarvie.html

Over 70 dollars an hour??

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/12/auto-worker-salaries/

Just another example of trickle down bullsh!t that the right is so good at. If you say something enough times in different venues the uneducated will consider it fact.

Forbes shows it’s true collars as a BS producing machine instead of a news source.