The Housing Bubble

If they want those good manufacturing jobs so bad why dont they move to china?

Sending jobs overseas has nothing to do with the government, and everything to do with corporate greed. Remind me again why CEO pay went from 30X that of the lowest paid employee to more than 500X?

Because that’s what it costs to retain talent.

Doing God’s work isn’t cheap.

Romney Lies, why not call yourself “Liberal Lies”?

If you think that government “has nothing to do with” the sending of jobs overseas, you’re a mind numbed robot that willingly spouts the lies that you’ve been told.

Please open your eyes.

If a CEO did ever made 500x the lowest paid worker, apparently someone’s Board of Directors thought that he/she were worth it.

Government regulations carry a burdensome cost to business and no matter how many times you hear otherwise, they carry an immense cost.

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

The government only facilitated what the corporations wanted. They did not FORCE the corporations to move jobs overseas.

Tell us again, Lip?

The government only facilitated what the corporations wanted. They did not FORCE the corporations to move jobs overseas……..
What kind of statement is this? Is it just stupidity in the morning?
The purpose of corporations is to make profitable decisions. Usually that involves making and selling stuff, at a profit, not a loss. It is NOT the PURPOSE of a corporation to “provide jobs”.

The government here has been involved in way too much “force” with regulations about who should be hired, how much they should be paid, what hours and days they should work, what is “safe” and unsafe, achieving “racial balance”, investigating “discrimination”, etc. etc, etc, etc.
Government sticks it’s hand in everywhere. When they go too far, it usually makes for failing businesses and the liberals rejoice.
the GOVERNMENT establishes the environment in which businesses operate. If they provide an incentive to move jobs away from here (i.e. not placing trade restrictions or tariffs, or regulations by industry that apply to ALL), then you think the Corporate operators should allow their competitors to take advantage of better environments, but, by some sense of “do-gooderism”, they should keep operating here, at a loss, or very marginal profit, because, by your line of reasoning, the “corporations” should be doing what is best for the people, not best for themselves.
Oh, and by the way, GM, the company Obama “saved” does most of it’s business OUTSIDE the US. But that’s OKAY, so long as US autoworkers get to keep their benefits.
The rest of the Non-Union people can drop dead.

The cost of hiring an employee makes it economically beneficial to produce things outside the country.

You are correct. Until US workers live hand-to-mouth, work through their health problems until they keel over, drink water which can catch on fire, eat one bowl of rice a day, and live 2 families to a room in a decrapitating house, it will ALWAYS be too expensive to hire American workers. In fact why don’t we scrap wages entirely and just BUY our workers. Will that be enough for you?

/snark in case you didn’t notice.

“If a CEO did ever made 500x the lowest paid worker, apparently someone’s Board of Directors thought that he/she were worth it.”

The board of directors rubber-stamp is just plutocrats giving goodies to each other…

I wonder if there’s any published material anywhere that provides a correlation between taxes paid by X corporation and the number of federal government employees paid by those taxes?

It’d be interesting to see how many oxides are paid via Honeywell employee taxes, for example.

How many public dolers are, in reality, paid by Freightliner employees?

The purpose of corporations is to make profitable decisions

Yes, that is true. But what happens when that purpose collides with the public’s welfare?

It is profitable to dump toxic waste into the river instead of disposing it properly.

It is profitable to clear cut forests.

It is profitable to run your factory for maximum output regardless of your worker’s safety.

It is profitable to create products designed for planned obsolescence without a thought for the world’s overflowing landfills.

I could go on and on, but you get the picture.

The bigger philosophical and moral question is whether we want an economy and a society that is based on the profit motive, or as a species do we aim for something higher and more sustainable?

Perhaps corporations are only cutting off their noses to spite their faces when they refused to share gains in productivity among all workers. Many multinationals didn’t mind that soon American workers wouldn’t be able to purchase their products because they thought they’d be going in and capturing early market share among the growing Asian middle classes. Are we still sure that’s going to work out? Methinks that whole bet is a bit fuzzy. The labor forces of the US and western Europe were selling to the world on their ride up. The only market left for Asians to sell to is um…other Asians as the rest of us drift toward insolvency.

The cost of hiring an employee makes it economically beneficial to produce things outside the country.

If import duties were higher, the jobs would stay in the USA. Problem solved.

“The board of directors rubber-stamp is just plutocrats giving goodies to each other…”

+1 I like to Google these director’s backgrounds, and I notice that too often they worship at the same franchise.

aim for something higher and more sustainable

Sigh, commie talk.

But would expect nothing less from the land of fruits and nuts.

aim for something higher and more sustainable

But would expect nothing less from the land of fruits and nuts.

I’m sure that plenty of people said the same to the abolitionists.

Ending slavery was not profitable. Yet another example of friggin’ government interfering with our god-given right to make a buck.

TL,

The fact that the Republicans blocked the changing of the tax law isn’t the main reason many of our jobs have gone overseas. They have been gone for many years.

The reason the jobs left is very simple. It is economically cheaper to manufacture things in other countries or other states.

If you look at which states are going better and which are stuggling, you might find a correlation between the costs of government regulation and taxes, the costs of labor, etc.

South Carolina Boeing factory turns sour for Obama

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/64199.html#ixzz2A9MzrTO9

Why is this story important?

Because SC is a right to work state and they can build a jet much cheaper.

The reason the jobs left is very simple. It is economically cheaper to manufacture things in other countries or other states.

All to quench the thirst of the shareholder.

Shirts made in China shouldn’t cost $70.

Ending slavery was not profitable. Yet another example of friggin’ government interfering with our god-given right to make a buck.

And they seized this private property at gunpoint!

Sure the deficit plumped up, O added the 2 Bush wars to it, you cant keep them off the books forever.

Taking over at the beginning of a great depression (that started on the previous guy’s watch) will hurt your numbers, too.

The real wildcard is can the pensions be modified through BK ?? If you are a corporation then the answer I believe is yes…But, the hurry is still out on the pensions…PERS’s is threatening lawsuit…Bondholders are threatening the same…It could disrupt the entire bond market…It may need to go all the way to the Supremo’s…

dave….probably the only fair way is every gets the same cut…bondholders get say 75% of whats owed and you get 75% of your monthly pension….I think the supremes will have no choice but to go that way.

“can the pensions be modified through BK ??”

For a corp. defined benefit pension plans get taken over by the Pension Benefits and Guaranty Corp as trustee. http://www.pbgc.gov/
But I think that is private pensions only, not sure about public ones, unless they pay into the program.

“For a corp. defined benefit pension plans get taken over by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp as trustee.”

The PBGC covers pensions at pennies on the dollar, so the retirees whose pensions get taken over by the federal government are screwed, though I suppose it beats getting nothing…

are screwed, though I suppose it beats getting nothing…

In my experience, it usually does.

I don’t see how insolvent cities can continue to fund pensions. It could potentially completely consume a muni’s revenues which would bring life to a screeching halt. The PTB understand this, so unless the Feds fully bail out the pensions, which I doubt they will or even can, then the retirees will be getting pennies on the dollar.

Naw. Couldn’t be.

Consumer Reports Oct. 2011 issue rated 6500W wind turbines (what you’d need to power an electric dryer). At $11,000 installed with an expected lifetime of 20 years use, that’s a lot of money to dry your blue jeans.

Indeed, and most clothes will last longer if you hang-dry them, so it’s frugal in more ways than one.

I know it doesn’t work well in extremely humid parts of the world - I recall visiting friends in New Orleans and finding my shower towel was still soaking wet 24 hours after I last used it - but certainly in California there’s no need for an electric dryer most of the year.

I know (line drying) doesn’t work well in extremely humid parts of the world -

The clothes can smell bad unless you have a lot of direct sun. I love my gas dryer.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to individually hang socks on a clothes line?

Could we get a govt program to “help” govt control our lives?

We’re already there.

A young lady I know who has children from multiple fathers has a social worker tracking her various “dad-children” visitations. They also give her a free data phone in addition to other benefits.

The real cause of the price rises is NOT the government aid, not directly. It’s the businesses who use the government help to raise the price on needs even more to what the market will bear. …..
You are SLowly catching on. It’s a stain, I know. You just need to get past the McGOvern Do-gooder aspect of government, and realize that ALL the things the government sticks its hand into become MORE expensive do to graft, corruption, regulations (don’t hire the best, provide “diversity”), and more importantly INCOMPETENT administration, whereby people game the system.

did you miss the recent report of the TSA where a person who I wouldn’t allow in my front door was given a badge and an x-ray machine to screen the luggage of law abiding citizens, and “relieving” them of some $800k of their possessions. that is Government at work.
I think he got 2 or 3 year sentence for stealing more than most people will earn in a lifetime.

Government assures that crime pays. Oh, and yes, the perpetrator was a “minority”, so we don’t want to show that he should have gotten AT least 10 years for the dereliction of duty for working a Transportation “SECURITY” Agent.
Heavens no.
“Government” is the PROblem, not the solution.

At least McGovern woke up. Some people here are still in a dreamland where government is good and more government is better.

Government is a necessary evil that must be limited, or else we pay not only with our tax dollars but eventually with our freedom.

Unfortunately I don’t see either of the two main parties advocating less government.

that ALL the things the government sticks its hand into become MORE expensive do to graft, corruption, regulations

Bunk. This is not true in all areas. Canada provides health coverage to all it’s people for way less than America’s private system and gets better results.

Also the government VA health care provides health care for way less money than BlueCross does for the same quality procedures.

I’ve read that many private government contractors are way more expensive than the government workers they have replaces. You’re brainwashed. Think for yourself. It’s fun.

private government contractors are way more expensive than the government workers

Invisible hand of the free market, baby!

Do you really want to call VA health care quality?

Have you already forgotten about Walter Reed?

I don’t think Diogenes or Bill are the ones who are brainwashed.

Do you really want to call VA health care quality?

Of course. On the whole, the VA provides quality healthcare and even outstanding care in some areas. Here’s some stats even the brainwashed would approve of.

How the VA Outpaces Other Systems in Delivering Patient Care

VA Delivers Higher Quality of Care

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9100/index1.html

Using indicators from RAND’s Quality Assessment Tools system, RAND researchers analyzed the medical records of 596 VA patients and 992 non-VA patients from across the country. The patients were randomly selected males aged 35 and older.

Based on 294 health indicators in 15 categories of care, they found that overall, VA patients were more likely than patients in the national sample to receive recommended care. In particular, the VA patients received significantly better care for depression, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. The VA also performed consistently better across the spectrum of care, including screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. The only exception to the pattern of better care in VA facilities was care for acute conditions, for which the two samples were similar.

VA Changes Helped Improve Performance

The VA has been making significant strides in implementing technologies and systems to improve care. Its sophisticated electronic medical record system allows instant communication among providers across the country and reminds providers of patients’ clinical needs. VA leadership has also established a quality measurement program that holds regional managers accountable for essential processes in preventive care and in the management of common chronic conditions.

Walter Reed wasn’t VA. It was for people still in the service. Run by the military, not the Veteran’s Administration. Also, they closed it.

Government “help” has made domestic job creation affordable.

“People do NOT wonder why they can’t find a job. They know the reasons full well. They see their jobs going to China. They see the advent of computers sending jobs to India. They see business owners hiring undocumented labor so can they skimp on both wages and workplace safety. They see companies with record profits storing those profits as digits in the stomach of the Bottomless Stockholder Maw rather than spending their profits to hire more people. They see banks making CDS bets on somebody else’s transaction with funny money but then being bailed out with real wage money.”

This has been going on for a very long time.
When it was only the blue-collar jobs, like apparel and textiles, people seemed less concerned as it was the “uneducated” who could somehow be blamed for their own situation.
Once the white-collar jobs starting leaving too then it got more notice.

First they came for the Jews…

“First they came for the Jews…”

Why?

Jews are good luck.

An easier way to make little guys pay less than big guys is to not tax little guys at all. End the income tax. Collect needed gov’t revenues 100% from business and import tariffs. Free the resources of the IRS from looking at Joe poverty and let them focus on corporations.

I would be interested in knowing what organizations oppose the mesure and who is funding the opposition….

There is a marijuana decriminilization measure on the Colorado ballot…

Similar measure here, which allows for “personal use” without a license.

Chatter here as well that a portion of the BO vote will go to Johnson for this reason, putting OR’s electoral vote in question.

Are you suggesting that a 3rd party candidate could upset the election results, i.e., a vote for someone like Ron Paul, at this stage of the game is a vote for Obama?

i’ve seen many posts here about how folks were going to vote for a 3rd party because they didn’t like either.
THough a Ron Paul supporter, I have said that this makes Obama a likely winner.
You have 2 choices: Obama or Romney.
Any other vote dilutes the votes of the likely winner.

The happy news from your report is that Obama has a vote-taker in Oregon, a leftist stronghold.
Good for Romney.

The insinuation (from the right) was that there are enough “legalize it” folks out there who might be more likely to vote for Gary Johnson, who has come out in favor of “legalizing it,” thus removing votes from the Obama column. I personally don’t think there are enough of them to do so to make a difference.

Part B to that insinuation (from the left) was that Obama should come out in favor of “legalizing it” thereby negating the effect of the potential Johnson voter.

Read Woodward’s book. He paints a picture of Republican leaders who were actually spending a lot of time trying to reach a compromise on the debt ceiling, and a lot of actions taken by Obama that implied lack of political experience in negotiating a big deal. He also specifically notes your quote from McConnell as only a soundbyte from the whole interview (in October 2010, well before the debt negotiations–NOT on the “brink of default”, and not even after the Republicans took the House). Here is a more complete quote:

“McConnell: The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.

NJ: Does that mean endless, or at least frequent, confrontation with the president?

McConnell: If President Obama does a Clintonian backflip, if he’s willing to meet us halfway on some of the biggest issues, it’s not inappropriate for us to do business with him.

NJ: What are the big issues?

McConnell: It is possible the president’s advisers will tell him he has to do something to get right with the public on his levels of spending and [on] lowering the national debt. If he were to heed that advice, he would, I image, [sic] find more support among our conference than he would among some in the Senate in his own party. I don’t want the president to fail; I want him to change. So, we’ll see. The next move is going to be up to him.”

Remember, prior to the election in 2010, Obama’s mantra (from Rahm) was “F-em”, we’ve got the votes. BTW, based on the book, I think McConnell is partially right on the fact that Obama might have problems getting huge support from the Dems on a budget deal. There was a strong implication that there was a group of Democrats as hell bent on NOT cutting any entitlements as the Tea Party was on not raising revenue.

Ultimately both Boehner and Obama were taking unpopular positions in the hope that each could get enough of the middle to make a deal. Boehner didn’t expect to bring along the far right, I don’t think Obama expected to bring along the far left.

The story behind the debt ceiling negotiations strongly support the view that the Republicans were trying to meet Obama halfway (including putting revenue on the table).

What ultimately scuttled the deal was somewhere between a demand and request (Obama remembers it as a request, Boehner as a demand) that the revenue side of things needed to be increased by 50% over and above what they had previously agreed (going from $800B in revenue to $1.2T in revenue).

The impetus for this request was that the “gang of six” announced their plan during the Boehner/Obama negotiations suggesting $1.2T of revenue. At least one quote in the book noted a fear from the Obama Administration side that he would look “weak” if he made a deal for less than $1.2T. So, Obama first had a staffer suggest the increase to $1.2T, then had a conversation personally with Boehner (which they remember differently). Clearly though they had been talking about $800B for a while, and the $1.2T (whether it was a suggestion, or demand) was new…and communication was poor enough that the deal blew up. Boehner thought he could get support for $800B if it came along with real cost cutting, but couldn’t do $1.2T. $800B could be sold as “tax reform”, $1.2T could not.

To be sure, neither side comes out looking great in the book, but there is a strong implication (and plenty of examples) that Obama made missteps (political and communication) during the negotiation.

Everyone has their pet issues that they care most about this election…mine is debt/deficit. If we can’t get on the right path, the Fed will print like there is no tomorrow, and one POTENTIAL outcome is inflation that crushes the poor/middle class (those without assets). If I throw out all the rhetoric, and ask myself one simple question:

“Who has the experience, and is more likely to make a deal (any deal) that will put us on a path to debt/deficit stability?”

I answer Romney.

Obama had a chance to make a big deal when there was enough pressure that he could have gotten many to make the uncomfortable vote (not voting for the Boehner/Obama deal would have been equivalent to voting FOR a US default). Given the backlash on the debt ceiling debacle, I don’t think he will have that same kind of pressure again (he let the crisis go to waste, so to say).

Romney is a business/numbers guy with experience working with Democrats in a legislative setting. I think he has a better chance of getting something done–with Ryan as a running mate, he certainly has someone who understands the math.

When you have NOTHING in your record to run on (and the last four years have been a train wreck) you try to destroy the other guy.

So much for hope and change.

DOW 6625 2009
DOW 13,000 2012

That’s a lot of “nothin’!

I will pass your regards to the 20% unemployed/underemployed and the record 42 million citizens on food stamps.

Because we all know that high stock prices is the best sign of a great country and a healthy economy…

Because we all know that high stock prices is the best sign of a great country and a healthy economy… ??

Do you really think wall street gives a rats a$$ about the unemployment rate….

“Do you really think wall street gives a rats a$$ about the unemployment rate….”

Absolutely.

High unemployment = reduced wages (aka labor costs), ease of hiring skilled workers, weakened labor unions, and an opportunity to shed accrued pension and health care obligations and avoid taking on new ones.

It’s all good!

“Wall Street” doesn’t care where the DOW is as long as they can front-run where it’s going. Only the buy and hold people care…and base their spending decisions on how wealthy they feel.

When you have NOTHING in your record to run on (and the last four years have been a train wreck) you try to destroy the other guy.

Obama did a good job dealing with what he had to deal with. That’s why half of America supports him and why he might get re-elected.

unemployment for college grads is under 4% - study hard!

vote for the fiscal conservative = Obama!

http://www.jessejackson.org/allegedshakedowns.html

How about Al Sharpton? Jesse Jackson? Rachael Madcow ??

None started with a silver sppon in their a$$ and claimed how they made it…Besides, Madow has forgotten more than that fat toad ever new…

I think Obama blew that when he came out in the open with support for same sex marriage. Protestant Fundies don’t trust Mormons, but they are more afraid of gays.

they are more afraid of gays

Only the ones who dare to come out.

Meanwhile embracing the kind of down-low, public restroom glory hole, meth and escorts, behavior that is the hallmark of protestant fundamentalist republican “family values”.

I think Obama blew that when he came out in the open with support for same sex marriage. Protestant Fundies don’t trust Mormons, but they are more afraid of gays.

Be very afraid.

We get a toaster for every heterosexual we recruit. Yeah, we’re out there knocking on doors trying to convince people to join us.

Oh wait, never mind, that’s the religious folks who do that.

We get a toaster for every heterosexual we recruit. Yeah, we’re out there knocking on doors trying to convince people to join us.

A few weeks ago, one of my gay friends lamented the fact that he had failed to reach his monthly recruitment quota.

Where do I sign up? I am need of a new toaster and honestly I could use some attention….

“Meanwhile embracing the kind of down-low, public restroom glory hole, meth and escorts, behavior that is the hallmark of protestant fundamentalist republican “family values”.”

“We get a toaster for every heterosexual we recruit. Yeah, we’re out there knocking on doors trying to convince people to join us.”

“A few weeks ago, one of my gay friends lamented the fact that he had failed to reach his monthly recruitment quota.”

Thanks guys. I needed a few good laughs tonight and three in a row was a delight!

Good stuff.

Real issues or deliberate diversion from the mass theft?

Like GW, busted-out-of-the-Air-National-Guard-for-flying-it-in-from-Columbia coke dealer, or just your average DC mayor coke dealer?

campus version

Sure. 1898 to be precise.

Not “can”. DO move.

But it’s about like being on a large sailboat at dock. The 98% of the time movement is very gentle. Persistent, but gentle.

The other 2%… I love those days!

Yeah I never really understood it either. It’s a battle of wills, not principle. Give in to our bribes or you stay on our permanent S-list.

Exactly. If we wanted other countries to not have nooclear, we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran will get one sooner or later. So will Saudi Arabia and maybe one or two other Sunni countries in the ME. This will usher into a new peaceful ME IMO.

Let’s give them all 3-4 short range nukes, step back, and say ‘Work it out, knuckleheads!’

Step back to where?

Why shouldn’t Iran have nuclear weapons? You are dealing with people that have religious beliefs that encourage them to start a nuclear war so the Mahdi and then God will return to earth, would be my exhibit A. Obama does not get that and his supporters don’t seem to get it either.

where else have i heard that line of argument to hasten God’s will, i.e bring on the rapture… yeah right, the big fella upstairs has a timetable driven by mere mortals ! … that always cracks me up.

“Why should Iran not have nuclear weapons?”

They are religious zealots bent on world domination. The country is run by Twelvers waiting for the return of the Mahdi and a global caliphate. They are intolerant of other faiths and frequently state that all non believers should be killed.

I could go on, but you get the point. If they look like nuts, talk like nuts and act like nuts…Yep, they are probably nuts.

Also have to again ask the question: Why would the global communist/progressive movement align with such people?

+1

Awww…poor babies. $30K a year (for high school graduates) for doing nothing.

Relax, It’s WAY less than 30K for most. (You’ll be happy to know many of our parents and grandparents will have to eat dog food.)

Let’s wrap our heads around this math:
“The median Social Security payment amount was $15,701 in 2010….And over a third (36 percent) of people age 65 and older receive at least 90 percent of their income as a monthly Social Security payment.”

The 4 Most Important Sources of Retirement Income
March 22, 2012

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2012/03/22/the-4-most-important-sources-of-retirement-income

Most senior citizens have very small retirement incomes. The median income for those age 65 and older was $25,757 in 2010, according to a new Social Security Administration report. The most common retirement income level is between $15,000 and $19,999 annually, an income range that 12.6 percent of retirees fall into. Here’s where most retirees get their income from, and how much they are getting from each source:

[See 10 Important Ages for Retirement Planning.]

Social Security. Social Security is the most utilized retirement benefit, with 86 percent of people age 65 and older receiving monthly payments, SSA found. Some people delay claiming past age 65 in order to get bigger monthly checks. Almost all seniors who were age 80 and older in 2010 (92 percent) received a Social Security check. The median Social Security payment amount was $15,701 in 2010.

For most people, Social Security is the largest source of retirement income. The majority of retirees (65 percent) get half or more of their income from Social Security. And over a third (36 percent) of people age 65 and older receive at least 90 percent of their income as a monthly Social Security payment.

Hmmm, so you think people should not have a retirement? Or are you just being facetious?

No, there’s no hmmm…. about it.

What I am thinking is that retirement shouldn’t pay better than productive work.

That retired people think that’s okay simply shows their desire to promote and benefit from Ponzi.

And then they whine that 1.7 percent increase isn’t enough.

It should not only pay the same, but it should pay better.

Pensions are deferred wages and most employees also contribute to their pensions.

So you think they shouldn’t get a good return? Are you some kind of commie who pretends to be a capitalist? Like Mitt Romney?

What I am thinking is that retirement shouldn’t pay better than productive work.

Unless you are a CEO of a large corporation

Then it’s time we pay more for productive work.

What’s a “pension”?

beats me ??

I don’t know.

Are current retirees part of that 47%, who love living off the gov?

Let’s ask scdave, who can afford to tool around in an R.V. on the taxpayer’s dime.

Now that we know you don’t think deserve pension, you can now return to the 19th century and report you mission accomplished, Ebenezer.

Never mind that employees paid into those pensions well. Nope, never mind THAT fact.

“…people deserve pensions…”

“…people deserve pensions…”

+1 It’s a god-given right!

The underlying cause is too many humans. How do we fix that in a humane way? The only thing that comes to my mind is education that results in falling birth rates over time.

Agreed. Especially when you educate the women. Do that and your nation’s birth rate drops like a rock.

The underlying cause is too many humans. How do we fix that in a humane way? The only thing that comes to my mind is education that results in falling birth rates over time.

Teach abstinence! Take away all public funding for birth control! Make abortion illegal! Only allow marriage for procreating straight people!

The proposed new minimum would be 150 square feet

And equipped with book shelves just large enough to hold the “Little Red Book”, right?

Speaking as someone who has lived for extended periods in an 8′ diameter tipi, a camper shell, and a converted underground garage stall, I can tell you that all you need is a water source and shelter for a cook flame. A bathroom is really nice, but not entirely necessary depending upon the weather and one’s degree of desperation. (Of course, living in a hovelette requires an engaging outside environment to make it tolerable.)

But in my travels around this planet I’ve also found that even people who live alone in huge mansions tend to stick to about 800-1000 square feet of them and use the rest for storage, guest/staff activities, or display galleries they seldom visit.

So I’m wondering, is there a universal optimum per person square footage (what you’d choose if personal living space was your only concern) or is that simply a matter of necessity and acculturation?

My “dream house” a one-two bedroom apartment, attached to a 10,000-20,000 square foot hangar.

My “dream house” a one-two bedroom apartment, attached to a 10,000-20,000 square foot hangar.

And I would enjoy visiting people who live in such places. Sounds like a lot of fun.

400 acres in the desert $99,000
hanger on site.. priceless.

http://tinyurl.com/cq9cdek

From the priceless story:

And sitting on the bed and settee, as casually as you might toss a sweater, are two assault weapons.

“I use them on the badgers because they dig in my ground,” Mr. Zdarsky explains. “You cannot imagine the damage these badgers do.”

UhYup.

The reason the stock market is falling is because earnings are down because the economy is weaker than last year which was weaker than the year before. We are on the wrong track.

Proof of that is that the best economic time in the entire Obama presidency was the Summer of 2009 before his policies had time to impact the economy. The recession officially ended due to a normal rebound after a cyclical downturn. It is the recovery that has been abnormally slow.

The reason the stock market is falling is because earnings are down because the economy is weaker than last year which was weaker than the year before. We are on the wrong track.

So you think fundamentals suddenly now matter? Color me skeptical.

Option 2 requires that buying is equal or less than the cost of rent, which in our case was/is the case.

Now it wasn’t. And you know it deep down.

If rents collapse in San Francisco, then you will be right.

But I’ve been here since 1989 and the one bedroom in The Mission I rented back then for $450 a month probably goes for almost $2,000 a month now.

I am willing to take the chance that I’ll never see those kinds of rents again in this city. I am also willing to take the chance that I won’t die in the next earthquake, either.

But the $2700 a month rent we were paying (with the help of a roommate, and we were tired of having roommates at our age) is indeed more than we are paying now for P+I ($1600.) Property taxes will be offset but not til tax returns in 2014.

Dude, we got 90K interest free down payment assistance from the city. Bought a friggin’ house in San Francisco for 35K cash. Big Whatever to you

Risk: pay rent while waiting for the next leg down and if the next leg down does not adequately materialize (in your time frame) then you will be a retired perma-renter with fixed income and rising rents

Keep in mind my rent is $250/mo in a desirable area, in case that affects your calculation. If I were to rent what I’d actually like to buy, that would be more like $1500-2000. So I’ll be conservative and say that I’m $1000 ahead each month. Lets say in 100 months I’ve got 100k in the bank…am I better off or worse off than the person who bought 100 months sooner? I bet that can reduce the amount of time I need to finance by much more than 100 months if I put it into a house.

“Bought a friggin’ house”

No. You borrowed a massively inflated sum for a rapidly depreciating asset far far from your previous location.

Nice try though.

s/most/host

Oh, they are brilliant!

When do you think we will be able to do that thing? I love that girl.

I love Mitt. Mitt is mint!

When do you think we will be able to do that thing? I love that girl.

“Do you ever get deja…deja…deja…deja…deja vu?”

I’ll admit I didn’t get that one the first few times I saw it.

I also admit I have an iPad. And I’ve been burned several times (restaurant reservations, etc) by not being able to view Flash sites. I’m all for HTML5, but that discussion’s been going on for how long? Why would you not allow users to have full access to the internet in the meantime? Refurbed 32GB Xoom is on the way.

I need more cowbell.