Bits Bucket for December 2, 2012
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here. And check out Chomp, Chomp, Chomp by a regular poster!
The Housing Bubble
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
About Me
Name:Ben Jones
Location:Northern Arizona, United States
To donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: thehousingbubble@gmail.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Links
-
April 2024 M T W T F S S « Sep 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
Social Security disability applications backlogged
Ryan Randazzo, The Arizona Republic
As the nation ages and effects of the recession linger, millions are applying for disability benefits, and Social Security can’t work through the claims fast enough.
(Photo: Michael Schennum, The Arizona Republic)
Story Highlights
Applicants say the process is complex and overburdened
Social Security Administration is working to streamline the process
Revenue shortfall means program could be insolvent by 2016
2:22AM EST December 2. 2012 - PHOENIX — Adria Howard doesn’t understand why her application for Social Security disability payments was denied without explanation.
The mother of two from Tolleson, Ariz., had worked until recently, when she was diagnosed with breast cancer that had spread to her back, and the pain made her job impossible. Now, she is preparing an appeal, and statistics show it could take nearly a year to get a hearing with an administrative-law judge. Meanwhile, her bills stack up.
“With chemo and everything, at this point, I cannot work,” she said.
Sarah Burkhart of Chandler, who suffers from a neurological disorder, waited 2 and one-half years for approval of her disability benefits. She had to move back in with her parents during the long process.
The Social Security disability program, which is funded by workers’ payroll deductions, is intended to help people who get sick or injured and no longer can work.
As the nation ages and effects of the recession linger, millions are applying for disability benefits, and Social Security can’t work through the claims fast enough.
Pressure is building on the system because aging Baby Boomers, many still in the workforce, are more prone to injury as they get older. The recession also caused many who were hanging on to jobs despite chronic medical issues to apply for benefits when they lost those jobs.
…
lots of people are trying to get a free check.
You guys don’t understand the “system”. I told a friend of mine years ago that the BEST retirement plan is SS Disability. You get LARGER payouts than if you wait till retirement, and you get it NOW, at whatever age you may be.
I looked at my SS retirement statement years ago, and if I worked an additional 15 years, my payout was less than if I became disabled “TODAY”.
It’s a great big scam that MILLIONS have been able to get ahold of.
I often refute all the BS put out by other posters here, such as the POOR want good-paying jobs.
BS. Everyone wants something for nothing.
That is the GOAL of retirement: To get paid while basking in the sun on a beach in Yucatan.
IF you can retire at 17 with 3 kids in a government house, with government food, free medical care, a government paid phone and “cash benefits”, why would you ever get a “job”?
When a dysfunctional person lacking any economic power gains access to any of these programs they become instant consumers, and corporate American welcomes them with an invitation to start shopping. The only way to win is to buy corporate stock, or figure out how to pay the least into taxes.
A co-workers wife gets SS disability I don’t think there is anything wrong with her. fibermyalgia is the diagnosis. My co-worker agress says she was just depressed.
after he met her and married her she got better since he now pays all the bills. I guess she spends her SS on whatever she wants ? age ~40 years old
“A co-workers wife gets SS disability I don’t think there is anything wrong with her. fibermyalgia is the diagnosis. My co-worker agress says she was just depressed.”
At home she is Master and Commander whereas in the office she must follow the rules, and she likely has to compete for pecking order with the younger “flat-tummy” women. It’s even worse if she’s dumpy, unpleasant or lacking a college degree.
Your hypothetical 17 year old with 3 kids who has never worked would not be eligible for SS disability on her own earnings, but could possibly qualify on a parent’s earnings.
http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dqualify10.htm#age22
Disability is also subject to periodic review.
http://www.ssa.gov/dibplan/dwork1.htm
Oh, and I forgot, disability isn’t about “physical disability”. I includes mental disability, which has a whole list of psycological problems, like i just can’t handle the stress of work, and best of all,
Alcoholism and Drug addiction are “disabilities.
So, if you spent the best part of your ‘earning years’ getting high on Crack, now you can retire, because you are an “addict”, and need to be supported by the greater society.
You just need a good lawyer who has the right payoff to the bureaucrat making the determinations. Then you can retire early.
‘… like i just can’t handle the stress of work, and best of all,
Alcoholism and Drug addiction are “disabilities.”‘
My job stresses me out plenty, and I have a number of colleagues who clearly feel driven to drink by their work.
So are you saying that if I drink enough to get fired, then claim disability, I can get early SS retirement at a higher rate than if I wait until age 67, or whatever later age the fiscal cliff negotiators decide we should finally become eligible for full retirement benefits?
Well, it isn’t that simple. The government has made up rules that if you go out and become a drunk, the COMPANY must first “accomodate” your disability and their insurance company will have to pay for your “rehab” treatments.
So, yes, coming in drunk and failing to perform your job will get you a free rehab period. The company first has to attempt to “accomodate” your disability. Then, when you can’t be rehabbed, you can file for PERMANENT disability, because you are mentally ill.
The Americans with Disabilities Act is another Government boondoggle.
More money goes out for mental stress than physical disabilities.
Can you get disability for being just a straight-up dumbass? I think you can.
With due respect for everyone’s umbrage, the folks on SS disability are for the most part people you don’t want anywhere near your workplace.
Here in CA they receive the princely sum of between $423-835/MONTH to stay hidden from the general public — which most are quite happy to do. They differ from public service employees who receive union-backed disability payments — which for fire personnel can approach the mid-six (tax free) figures.
“With due respect for everyone’s umbrage, the folks on SS disability are for the most part people you don’t want anywhere near your workplace.”
Good point Hansen; no truer words ever spoken.
Reminds me of Nam; nobody ever wanted the new guy.
Diogenes (Tampa, Fl)
You just need a good lawyer who has the right payoff to the bureaucrat making the determinations. Then you can retire early.
————————
Actually, its not even that complicated. The lawyers will find you and even if you don’t want to do it, they will talk you into it because they can explain the mechanics.
Once again, its the lawyers who drive this because its a fool proof way for them to get paid; specifically, they know what LANGUAGE to use to get your disability approved. Which doctor to go to…
In addition, they know what judges to get in front of if there is a problem.
The reason I know about this is because a lawyer explained it to me; once I stopped mouthing off about lazy black people long enough to hear what he had to say.
Theres a quote out there that goes something like this:
“all good ideas start as a “cause”, turn into a “movement”, and finally end up a “racket”
“The lawyers will find yu even if you don’t want to do it, they will talk you into it because they can explain the mechanics.”
And because talk is so cheap the return to them for explaining the mechanics to you is enormous.
When you sign falsified papers you take on the risks of fraud and the payoff for doing this is some sort of reward and part of this reward is passed on to the lawyers.
You take the risks, the lawyers get a chunk of the reward.
Plenty of customers push these too, especially if they know someone else who has gotten SSD. Getting disability is the holy grail for a lot of people, and what’s really cool is that the clock starts running as soon as you apply, so when it finally comes through you usually get a 13k lump sum.
You can also work on the side and it’s totally legit.
What I saw typically were applicants whose job skills and experience were minimal, and just couldn’t get a foothold in the world of work.
But the one above with breast cancer shouldn’t have been turned down if she’s terminal and her working days are over. But the first app is nearly always rejected. People shouldn’t even bother with a lawyer that first time around. Things don’t start to happen until the appeal.
“When you sign falsified papers you take on the risks of fraud and the payoff for doing this is some sort of reward and part of this reward is passed on to the lawyers.”
what are you trying to say Combo?
Spit it out…
Nobody said anything about false statements or lies; its navigating the bureaucracy and paper work that makes a person say “Im not interested…I don’t wanna do it…”
In addition the person also says: “I don’t wanna do it cause I ain’t got no money”
See, the lawyer already knows his fee will come out of the first several disability checks, which will be sent straight to his office since the client has no fixed address or bank account…”
Once the lawyer shows you what to do, then the person will do it.
Truth be told, I have no idea what qualifies as a disability.
You or I may have one and not even know it?
Matter of fact, one could argue that “quotas”, “minority set asides, and affirmative action prove being a black person is a disability?
These type programs come dangerously close to saying as much.
But the key is, white people are careful to avoid claiming these programs are a compensatory response to RACISM.
They never admit that.
They have some slick language that avoids racism and makes a bunch of other things “the reason” for the compensatory nature of these programs.
In other words, they saying black people need some special help, because they got a special problem. We ain’t really sayin exactly what it is, but its real, and we gonna prove it by giving them some help we don’t give other people.
BTW Combo, are you an attorney?
Someone correct me if I am wrong but I believe there is no tax on a SS disability payment…
And the Government Bubble continues to expand.
When will it pop?
2016?
2019?
2020?
Tens of millions -perhaps hundreds of millions - are in for one helluva shock.
Government cannot, and will not, be able to take care of you.
Tech Bubble. Check.
Housing/Credit Bubble. Check.
Government Bubble yet to come.
It is here it is the government bond market which has funded the deficits.
Doesn’t even matter, Dan. We’ve arrived.
When the Government Bubble finally pops, the waters might become quite dangerous. Much more so than anything that has happened since 1945.
Clearly, what is missing today are regulations that keep a check on government behavior. And punish those in government that are guilty of misdeeds. (There are plenty of regulations upon the people; we don’t need any more). That we have a Cabinet filled with ex Goldman Sachs people tells me all I need to know.
Folks in Washington and New York have no interest in ceding
power or authority to the hands of individuals. Look where the money is geographically, and look what they’re doing.
Nothing is being solved.
It’s lawyers doing their thing.
Extend, extend, extend and rake in the dough. Billable hours can be maximized as client misery index is increased.
Interestingly, some of today’s lawyers are still dumb enough to brag about the money they make as thieves in the temple. Good crooks don’t brag about what they have just stolen. Apparently, pedigree doesn’t always offset stupidity.
I digress. Sort of, anyway.
In any event, what one is left with is the notion that many in DC really do detest the notion of “the individual”.
40 years from now, the next generation of hell raisers could be very anti-government and very pro-individual freedom.
My prediction is that they’ll make Boomers and the hippies of the 1960s look like absolute pikers.
I won’t hold my breath. Rebels that are not self-aware and articulate are easily co-opted by radicals with an agenda.
Im sure someone will raise a fuhrer.
That train is never late.
Adria Howard doesn’t understand why her application for Social Security disability payments was denied without explanation.
So are they handing them out like candy, or not?
Clearly this woman is not some lazy layabout. S\he has cancer and cannot work. She doesn’t sound like the “free sh!t army” to me.
Maybe she can’t perform her current work. But can she find other work? Also the problem is the government run “insurance” Not enough premiums to cover payouts. Wait until you see how Obamacare works.
A women with cancer. Good luck getting hired anywhere, especially anywhere that has group health insurance.
You guys need to get out more. The defacto national hiring policy now is to try to find the 32 year old guy, with 15 years of experience, has been trained to match your exact requirements, lives with 10 immediate relatives, and can survive on $10/hour. No one else need apply.
If they can’t find someone that meets that criteria, well, they just go without. And bitch about “lousy employees” and “unable to hire qualified individuals”. They don’t want to train anyone; they don’t want to hire anyone who poses the smallest risk of having expensive medical conditions.
Companies are turning into the equivalent of 10 year old brats. They want everyone to kiss their asses, and throw tantrums when they don’t get their way. They want people to work for $10/hour, and become happy little untermensch.
Get a grip. There is a reason they have to pay people to do work. Given a choice, people don’t want their lives to revolve around your crappy little job. The work to get money to do the things they would rather do
If ever there was a job that people should do for free, it’s “porn star”. But even they get paid. Mainly because you wouldn’t want to watch porn made by people willing to do it for nothing.
Mainly because you wouldn’t want to watch porn made by people willing to do it for nothing.
Which is fundamentally the same reason I’m opposed to nudist beaches.
BRAIN BLEACH!! NOW!!
Thank you X-GSfixr , this is the biggets problem coming generations are facing, technology is going to work for those who owns the means of production and services and they are not going to need that many employees, only less educated immigrants who will take care on maintenance of their lifestyle needs. The rest will apply for disability insurance… and live for around $800…of course if GOP will agree, otherwise they might refer Pacific or Atlantic oceans as a solution…
An old neighbor of mine used to care for his son’s friend from time to time because the mom was a meth head. She was on Social Security Disability due to her “mental” problem. She collected that check, was selling meth, and dealing in stolen property. I saw her one time and she was scary. All scrawny with hardly any teeth and looked like a cadaver. Why are there no drug tests? They do a piss-poor job of determining who should get it, and who should not.
Sheesh, almost all apps are rejected the first time, especially if the applicant filed it himself. Even legal services here used to tell people to just get the first one it asap so they could help with the appeal.
Still, someone with end stage cancer should get on ssd without having to appeal, but it probably came down to the quality of the evidence submitted.
Still, it ought to be reassuring to the taxpayers that the process is so tough. Damned if it is, damned if it ain’t.
I love how everybody knows somebody, who knows a cousin whose cheating on SSDI. Narc em out, if they are cheats.
But when you talk to people who have actually applied, like unemployment benefits, getting them is hard, and they don’t pay out that well.
Exactly.
Narc them out and stop with the second hand anecdotes, because I know far too many people who deserved disability and it was DAMNED hard to get.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: quit believing the wingnut propaganda that ANY type of welfare is easy to get, because it isn’t.
“…aging Baby Boomers, many still in the workforce, are more prone to injury as they get older.”
It’s both injury AND illness.
Politics: Congress
‘Fiscal cliff’ negotiations may change cherished mortage deduction
December 1, 2012 | 8:00 pm
The mortgage interest deduction that has been embraced by generations of American homeowners may be significantly changed in negotiations to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff, but the multibillion-dollar question is, will the deduction be slashed or capped in a way that reaches deep into pockets of the middle class?
While Congress last week remained gridlocked over how to produce an alternative solution to a cascade of massive tax hikes and federal spending cuts that are set to take place in January, both sides agreed that some kind of tax increase must be part of the solution, and both parties agree that $4 trillion in deficit reduction is needed in the next decade.
For many Republicans, eliminating or capping deductions, including home mortgage interest, is gaining popularity as a way to raise revenue, particularly if it is crafted to hit mostly higher income earners.
“I don’t know what the number would be,” said Rep. Steven LaTourette, R-Ohio, when asked how low the cap on the mortgage interest deduction might be set. “But I’ll tell you, the purpose of the home interest mortgage deduction is to give Americans the dream of homeownership. The guy that has the $5 million house, he’s probably living the dream and doesn’t need the mortgage interest deduction.”
…
“I don’t know what the number would be, MFer, whooooop” said Rep. Steven LaTourette, R-Ohio
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Boehner: ‘There’s a real danger of going off the fiscal cliff’
November 29, 2012 | 11:56 am |
Modified: November 29, 2012 at 12:10 pm
According to House Speaker John Boehner, everything is not rosy in Washington in spite of reports that Democrats and Republicans are working to close a deal.
Boehner signaled that the White House was not serious about making spending cuts or compromising with Republicans adding that he and Majority Leader Eric Cantor had a “frank and direct” meeting with Treasury Secretary Geithner.
“There’s a real danger of going off the fiscal cliff,” Boehner warned in a press conference this morning. “The White House has got to get serious.”
…
Boehner is acting in public like he’s all about coming to a solution, but in private he leads the party of “no.” Boehner wants to go off the fiscal cliff.
Both parties won’t cut the major portions of the so-called federal budget to a noticeable degree. This, after borrowing 40% of each dollar spent. So both parties are putting us over the cliff. Actually we already jumped off and are playing games about how delightful or worrying is the great wind passing us.
I’m in a bad mood and my bones ache.
Can I collect a disability check?
Politics
Barone: American men find careers in collecting disability
December 1, 2012 | 8:00 pm
Americans are very generous to people with disabilities. Since passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act in 1990, millions of public and private dollars have been spent on curb cuts, bus lifts and special elevators.
The idea has been to enable people with disabilities to live and work with the same ease as others as they make their way forward in life. I feel sure the large majority of Americans are pleased that we are doing this.
But there is another federal program for people with disabilities that has had an unhappier effect. This is the Disability Insurance program, which is part of Social Security.
The idea is to provide income for those whose health makes them unable to work. For many years, it was a small and inexpensive program that few people or politicians paid much attention to.
In his recent book “A Nation of Takers: America’s Entitlement Epidemic,” my American Enterprise Institute colleague Nicholas Eberstadt has shown how DI has grown in recent years.
In 1960, some 455,000 workers were receiving disability payments. In 2011, the number was 8,600,000. In 1960, the percentage of the economically active 18-to-64-year-old population receiving disability benefits was 0.65 percent. In 2010, it was 5.6 percent.
Some four decades ago, when I was a law clerk to a federal judge, I had occasion to read briefs in cases appealing denial of disability benefits. The Social Security Administration then seemed pretty strict in denying benefits in dubious cases. The courts were not much more openhanded.
Things have changed. Americans have grown healthier and significantly lower numbers die before 65 than was the case a half-century ago. Nevertheless, the disability rolls have ballooned.
One reason is that the government seems to have gotten more openhanded with those claiming vague ailments. Eberstadt points out that in 1960, only one-fifth of disability benefits went to those with “mood disorders” and “musculoskeletal” problems. In 2011, nearly half of those on disability voiced such complaints.
“It is exceptionally difficult–for all practical purposes, impossible,” writes Eberstadt, “for a medical professional to disprove a patient’s claim that he or she is suffering from sad feelings or back pain.”
In other words, many people are gaming or defrauding the system. This includes not only disability recipients but health care professionals, lawyers and others who run ads promising to get you disability benefits.
…
Would some of these mood disorder sufferers be the same ones our government used to fund institutionalization for? But then Regan reversed all that and put many out on the streets?
We hate when they snap and take out 20 people are so but otherwise refuse to acknowledge they’re there among us.
Sorry, Snow girl removing people from mental health hospitals was not done by Reagan, it was and still is a liberal policy. In many ways the movie one flew over the cuckoo nest pushed the policy. Every time we have a shooting in this country it would be much better if we revisited the policy instead of having a debate on gun control.
The truth appears to lie somewhere in between –
The final report of the commission to President Carter contained the recommendations upon which the Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 was based. Despite the methodological flaws of the earlier report, the act was considered a landmark in mental health care policy. The key to the proposals included an increase in funding for Community Mental Health Centers and continued federal government support for such programs. But this ran counter to the financial goals of the Reagan administration, these were of c ourse to reduce federal spending, reduce social programs, and transfer responsibility of many if not most government functions to the individual states. So, the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan on August 13, 1981. In accordance with the New Federalism and the demands of capital, mental health policy was now in the hands of individual states.
http://www.sociology.org/content/vol003.004/thomas.html
The truth does usually occur between but not usually in the middle. The desire to remove people from mental health hospitals was and is a progressive policy. Did fiscal conservatives in the states fight the policy as hard due to it being short term cheaper, probably not. However, the policy was not initiated or promoted by Reagan.
The truth appears to lie somewhere in between –
In between what? The truth was exactly what Snowgirl said: Reagan rescinded the law and gave the crazies the boot.
Reagan voted against the bill to send them out and left it to the states. It was the worse president before Obama that supported moving them from the mental health hospitals
Which part of “So, the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan” is not truth?
You don’t get that the law was more of the same by the liberals to make it easier not harder for the mentally ill to stay out of the institutions, Reagan refused to make it mandatory on the states.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Revisionist History, Mental Health Patients and Ronald Reagan
With the recent Arizona shootings by a mentally deranged person, the revisionist history of Ronald Reagan and his so called “closing down the mental health system” during his reign as governor in California has popped up again. The real story is Reagan had not turned from the dark side when he was governor, and instituted the changes in the mental health system at the behest of progressive reformers of the time.
The blaming Ronald Reagan for destruction the mental heath system is typical progressive revisionists history. By the late 1960s, the idea that the mentally ill were not so different from the rest of us, or perhaps were even a little bit more sane, became trendy. Reformers dreamed of taking the mentally ill out of the large institutions and housing them in smaller, community-based residences where they could live more productive and fulfilling lives. Simultaneously, the ACLU was pushing a mental health patients right agenda that resulted in O’Connor v. Donaldson (see below) In 1967, Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS), which went into effect in 1969 and quickly became a national model. Among other things, it prohibited forced medication or extended hospital stays without a judicial hearing. The Governor signed a bill inspired by those who clamored for the “civil rights” of the mentally ill to be on the street and who claimed they’d be better off with community counseling.
So no, Reagan, didn’t close mental hospitals or put anyone on the street. Progressive views on mental health, a misguided ACLU, and politicians who “know better” did it. Then finally (the last year Reagan was governor), O’Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975), the Supreme Court found a constitutional right to liberty for mental health patients: “There is…no constitutional basis for confining such persons involuntarily if they are dangerous to no one.” With this constitutional recognition, the practice of mental health law became a process of limiting and defining the power of the state to detain and treat. The result was a codification of mental health rights that have done away with non-voluntary commitment except in extreme cases.
Posted by Brad G at 9:40 PM
Labels: California, Mental Health, Ronald Reagan
Cite: onespeedbikerpolitico.blogspot.com
the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan
Posted by Brad G at 9:40 PM
Labels: California, Mental Health, Ronald Reagan
Wow. A post on a web site with a mission statement that sounds like a 5th grader wrote it. A poorly educated 5th grader:
Why do you feed us this tripe, AQDan?
Like this better from PBS?:
Deinstitutionalization was based on the principle that severe mental illness should be treated in the least restrictive setting. As further defined by President Jimmy Carter’s Commission on Mental Health, this ideology rested on “the objective of maintaining the greatest degree of freedom, self-determination, autonomy, dignity, and integrity of body, mind, and spirit for the individual while he or she participates in treatment or receives services.”8 This is a laudable goal and for many, perhaps for the majority of those who are deinstitutionalized, it has been at least partially realized.
So eco Carter’s commission created the bill that Reagan vetoed and some how Reagan is responsible for Deinstitutionalization, I just don’t see how your brain works or maybe I identified the problem in my question.
BTW, beside always attacking the source do you have any evidence that the any of the factual allegations were not true?
Read your own PBS link. The left wanted the crazies out of the prisons and into more humane and specialized treatment- for which the federal gov would help provide funding. The repubs, under Reagan, released them from the the prisons, but didn’t fund any of the other treatment. A great money saver!
Snowgirl gets her “information” from media clips.
Yes, under Reagan the media went wild showing people on the streets, “feeling the pain” of the mentally ill and disadvantaged. They are still out there. In a country of over 300 million people you can find some “story” somewhere, where people are living on the street, having gun-fights, getting a bad medical treatment, and the media can put that on a screen and work you up into a frenzy about all the “injustice”.
Contrast that with today.
Nothing Obama does is ever wrong. Even when stories come out about really bad stuff, they are soon pushed aside as “old news”.
No more NIGHTLY “death watch” of soldiers dying in foreign lands.
It’s all good, now.
Kill your TV.
“Kill your TV.”
+ a bunch
“Kill your TV.”
Maybe shoot bullet holes it as Elvis used to do.
Dio I can remember in the Carter years when the “homeless” were called “street people,” romantic hippies who hitchhiked around the country seeking love and adventure, so they could write books like Blue Highways, and stuff.
Did you miss the “So, the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan” which is easily confirmed by, oh, the Congressional Record?
This is from another blog, I will post link below and it shows that Reagan was not the driving force behind it, even in California:
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Revisionist History, Mental Health Patients and Ronald Reagan
With the recent Arizona shootings by a mentally deranged person, the revisionist history of Ronald Reagan and his so called “closing down the mental health system” during his reign as governor in California has popped up again. The real story is Reagan had not turned from the dark side when he was governor, and instituted the changes in the mental health system at the behest of progressive reformers of the time.
The blaming Ronald Reagan for destruction the mental heath system is typical progressive revisionists history. By the late 1960s, the idea that the mentally ill were not so different from the rest of us, or perhaps were even a little bit more sane, became trendy. Reformers dreamed of taking the mentally ill out of the large institutions and housing them in smaller, community-based residences where they could live more productive and fulfilling lives. Simultaneously, the ACLU was pushing a mental health patients right agenda that resulted in O’Connor v. Donaldson (see below) In 1967, Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (LPS), which went into effect in 1969 and quickly became a national model. Among other things, it prohibited forced medication or extended hospital stays without a judicial hearing. The Governor signed a bill inspired by those who clamored for the “civil rights” of the mentally ill to be on the street and who claimed they’d be better off with community counseling.
So no, Reagan, didn’t close mental hospitals or put anyone on the street. Progressive views on mental health, a misguided ACLU, and politicians who “know better” did it. Then finally (the last year Reagan was governor), O’Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975), the Supreme Court found a constitutional right to liberty for mental health patients: “There is…no constitutional basis for confining such persons involuntarily if they are dangerous to no one.” With this constitutional recognition, the practice of mental health law became a process of limiting and defining the power of the state to detain and treat. The result was a codification of mental health rights that have done away with non-voluntary commitment except in extreme cases.
Yes Montana and when Clinton took over the homeless stories stopped even though the homeless were still out there.
The law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan is a matter of Congressional Record.
BTW, how’s your Nobel Prize nomination coming along?
onespeedbikerpolitico.blogspot.com
Is cite for Reagan history.
Wrong again, Dan.
Reagan systematically closed the CA State Mental Hospital system in in the 1970’s releasing tens of thousands of homeless crazies onto our city streets. Done in the name of “compassion” it was vociferously opposed by pretty much every police, fire, public health, and social service agency in the State.
I lived in Malibu at the time, and within months the place was flooded with the former residents of Camarillo now living in ravines on the beaches, behind the shopping center, in the city park, etc. It got so bad that a few years later Martin Sheen, then mayor, declared the town a “sanctuary city” — THAT went over well. (Not.) Eventually, they were “encouraged” to move south to Santa Monica, where city services were better able to corral them, feed them, and police them. I doubt anyone would argue that the quality of life was improved for any party involved.
But it “saved money”, right?
Sorry Hansen show me that it was not proposed by the “advocates” for the mentally ill who were liberal. Also, we were talking about the nation not just California.
Unlike the idiot we have in the Whitehouse now, Reagan would compromise with people.
You were just shown ADDD Dan.
“So, the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan…”
Ecofeco read the bill or at least understand what it was about.
BTW, what happen to Rio can’t post since I have been right on the direction Brazil is going? All the members of the left part of this blog were always so impressed by how Brazil was going and dismissive of my remarks but guess what I am right again. We won’t even talk about how I was right about the direction of Egypt. Just once I would like a A Hansen to be right about anything just to break the monopoly.
Monotony but monopoly works in this case.
“So, the law signed by President Carter was rescinded by Ronald Reagan…” is not some misinterpretation, ADDD dan.
It a matter of Congressional record.
Facts: you ignore them.
You would not know a fact if you tripped over it. Carter’s bill was to promote not reverse removing people from mental hospitals. He wanted them to just check in to local treatment centers to get their meds. The system we use now, so how the hel* is vetoing such a bill kicking people out of mental hospitals.
“I’m in a bad mood and my bones ache.”
Recall that bumper sticker, “Support mental health or I’ll kill you.”
So damn true it ain’t even funny.
Yes, and you forget the other side of the government pool of parasites: “disabled veterans”.
While there are a lot of truly “disabled” veterans, who have my deepest sympathy for their injuries, I see LOTS of Harley riders with DV tags, that are Perfectly able bodies and partying hardy.
They are obvious frauds, but, just like the hero worship instilled for firefighters and policemen, I don’t think anyone dare call them out on their fraud.
But I see LOTS and lots of biker and sport -loving “disabled veterans”.
I am going to an afternoon outing where biker types often show up today. I expect to see a few DV tags on the Full Dress Harleys.
Firefighters are among the biggest overpaid/idolized frauds out there.
Cops not so much. They actually get shot at those they are trying to contain.
Your typical house fire is without malice. It doesn’t intend to kill the fireman.
fires are much more toxic these days because of the plastics and synthetics….
Which is why they wear structural turnouts and SCBA to building fires. Here’s a link to standard fire-fighting gear:
http://www.sccfd.org/clothing_turnouts.html
You’ve NEVER been near a real fire, have you McBeth?
Your statement alone shows you are a VERY dangerous person in the negligent kind of way.
I notice lots of anti-government types are full of bullshit about the nature of government duty.
“But I see LOTS and lots of biker and sport -loving “disabled veterans”.”
TBIs are not visible to the naked eye. Like early Alzheimers, they seem capable, but you never know who is going to wake up in the morning. And their ability to focus in tasks can be intermittent.
In other words, many people are gaming or defrauding the system. This includes not only disability recipients but health care professionals, lawyers and others who run ads promising to get you disability benefits.”
it’s unemployment insurance that doesn’t run out
It will continue to grow. When inflation really kicks up it won’t buy much because the government won’t index real inflation correctly like business will have to. so we can look forward to sad stories about disabled folks eating dogfood
“…my American Enterprise Institute colleague”
From Wikipedia:
The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is an American conservative think tank founded in 1943.
Some AEI scholars are considered to be some of the leading architects of the second Bush administration’s public policy.[3] More than twenty AEI scholars and fellows served either in a Bush administration policy post or on one of the government’s many panels and commissions.
Thank god you found a scientificly neutral source.
Are you sure you couldn’t find something more right wing?
The Morning Dust
……..you goddamn lying realtors.
Magic Dust?
Cheech and Chong - Santa and the Magic Dust - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bf9lUdRWFA - 132k -
Bannana
You might enjoy 2:30 - 2:40
Magic Dust 4:05 - 4:45
Realtors Snort Angel Dust
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2012-12-01 19:05:35
Exactly:
“I will defend to death your right to say you how much you hate Obama and why as often as you feel the urge…
on some other blog!”
So I am guessing you are in favor of segregation.
I was just talking about defending rights to free speech, not enforcing apartheid of anti-Obama bloggers and others.
Posted: 4:35 p.m. Friday, Nov. 30, 2012
Fewer homes underwater, but many still just treading water
By Kimberly Miller
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
comment(4)
Posted by Dive4Blood at 7:03 a.m. Dec. 1, 2012
I live in 33415 and most of the area is populated with A) poorly educated folks who paid WAYYYY more than they could afford during the boom and B) folks who took cash out and put it into boats, cars, vacations, etc and refused to pay it back.
The zip code is turning into a rental region as investors snap up homes and condos selling at 20% of peak prices.
Posted by SteveinWPB at 8:38 a.m. Dec. 1, 2012
I think the real problem is that the banks have been allowed to artificially set the price of houses by manipulating the inventory of housing on the market. Housing is just too expensive. Everyone has to work 50 percent of their time just to make enough money to pay their rent or mortgage.
Posted by doubledoobie at 8:55 a.m. Dec. 1, 2012
“About 41% of mortgage holders in South Florida owe more on loan than home is worth”
I ask you, this is good news???
Posted by taxpayer1 at 10:05 a.m. Dec. 1, 2012
Realtors contributed largely to the housing bust since they are the ones that “suggest” the price at which a house will sell/will be bought. At this very moment the market in S Florida is heading quickly towards another period of inflated home prices, again created by realtors. Asking prices are now well beyond the income of the average person. Mortgage payments are too high, and the problem is exacerbated by onerous RE taxes and exaggerated insurance costs. The RE market can not be healthy under these conditions.
I guess prices are back to peak in some s ca markets. game on, people have short memories.
If I recall my early 20th century history correctly, there was one last stock market orgy after the initial dip, just before the Depression set in for real. That’s how I see this phenomenon.
The real housing bust has been a can kicked down the road.
Yes, game on! Buy now or be priced out forever!
I think it just has not dipped enough. I was looking at realtor.com. In Memphis there are 70 houses listed for over a million dollars. In Nashville there are a similar number. I am not picking on Tenn. I friend was thinking of moving to Memphis and yesterday the NYT has an article on a house in Nashville for sale for $20M and used in a TV series. I posted a few weeks ago the same situation in Raleigh, NC. Lots of room for prices to fall. I think it will be another 5 - 10 years. As different as 2012 looks from 2006, 2018 will make 2012 look 2006. Second tier cities are somewhat under the radar of some people who live in NY, DC or San Fran or LA. The second tier cities have good jobs and such… But I can’t believe enough to support prices as noted. Dallas for example has 400 houses list for $1M or more.
Housing = Government
Government = Housing.
Of course the real housing bust has been kicked down the road!
The very last thing government wants is to learn that it is the emperor with no clothes.
Talk about having a coronary…wow.
While in the not so desirable markets, say anywhere in the Inland Empire, prices aren’t recovering.
“Inland Empire”
Lol, what a ridiculous name for an area. Kind of like the bogus Newspeak names they give slum areas to make people feel better or something.
Liberty City! (Miami)
It sounds better than “hot, dusty and smoggy place, far from the coast”
True, but it’s nothing more than turd polishing. However, turd polishing seems to be the national pastime, from Wall Street and Washington, to Main Street.
Pravda got nothing on the US MSM.
“Devil’s Dust Bowl” has a catchy sound.
How does “LA Air Pollution Catchment Basin” grab you?
“How does ‘LA Air Pollution Catchment Basin’ grab you?”
I like it.
True, but it’s nothing more than turd polishing.
Trust me, everyone in SoCal already knows that.
According to wikipedia:
“The term “Inland Empire” is documented to have been used by the Riverside Enterprise newspaper (now The Press-Enterprise) as early as April 1914.”
Back then Riverside was considered to be a separate place. Heck, when I was a kid, it was still considered the sticks, separate from metro LA. Of course back then the Irvine Ranch Company, really was a ranch.
Pravda got nothing on the US MSM.
FWIW, the term “Inland Empire” has been in use for 100 years,.
I guess prices are back to peak in some s ca markets ??
In some area’s of silicon valley its full blown frenzy… You’ve got to be here and see it to be able to comprehend it…
True, but it’s nothing more than turd polishing ??
Hmmm…Well, it does smell sum but thats due to a few dairy’s and cattle ranches…Most of it is Ag. and some of the most fertile soil in the world…
“Inland Empire” Lol, what a ridiculous name for an area ??
Well, first, California is so big and its geography so diverse that we do describe it in many different ways…The Redwoods in the north-west…The Sierras in the east…Big Sur coast….Beaches of Orange county…The Mojave….And yes, the inland empire…Its HUGE….Maybe 70 miles wide and 500 miles long of some of the best Ag. land in the world…
“Liberty City! (Miami)”
Sauna with a high crime drainage ditch
While in the not so desirable markets, say anywhere in the Inland Empire, prices aren’t recovering ??
The inland market has been “crushed”…25-cents on the dollar off the peak in many, many markets….
It had to be the epicenter of the bubble, along with Vegas. The place is an armpit. It’s only redeeming feature is that the beach and Disneyland are close enough to be day trips.
“… people have short memories.”
And long ones. People have been contitioned to believe that, over a very long time, real estate is the best investment one can make because over the long run “real estate always goes up”.
These memories were imprinted during decades of economic expansion; This expansion has disappeared but the memories remain.
IMO these memories are a form of capital that can be cashed out or otherwise exploited by those who make good livings by cashing out and exploiting capital.
People have been contitioned to believe that, over a very long time, real estate is the best investment one can make because over the long run “real estate always goes up
And it’s supposed to be unaffordable.
“And it’s supposed to be unaffordable.”
This view is reinforced by the long memory that “real estate always goes up”.
What is unaffordable today will be even more unaffordable tomorrow if the economy continuously expands, not so if it contracts.
Don’t know what stuff sells for nowadays, but list prices in San Diego appear to be about what they were back in 2005-2006, i.e. peak bubble pricing…
Well….. the best cure for inflated prices, is higher prices.
But the reality is prices in the bay area are falling MoM and QoQ.
Don’t know about here but the housing bubble in Brazil is not going to last much longer with these numbers, it is a bit*h to be China’s bit*ch:
Brazil’s economy slowed unexpectedly in the third quarter, new data suggests.
Latin America’s biggest country clocked just 0.6% growth in the three months to September versus the previous quarter, half the rate expected by analysts.
Businesses cut their investment by a further 2%, while consumer spending growth was a sluggish 0.9%.
The weak private-sector spending counteracted a big round of stimulus spending unleashed by the government, including tax cuts for businesses.
“It was horrible,” said Jankiel Santos, chief economist at BES Investimento in Sao Paulo. “The government is certainly going to be worried about this. The expectation is that they are going to come out with more stimulus measures.”
In September, the government cut its growth forecast for the year to 2% - a figure that was still seen as too optimistic by markets even before the latest data release.
Growth for 2012 now looks set to be closer to 1%, compared with 2.7% last year and 7.5% in 2010.
President Dilma Rousseff launched the first in a series of measures aimed at injecting up to $50bn (£32bn) into the economy over the next five years, and increasing the private sector’s role in the economy.
The plan included privatising about 14,000km of railways and roads, followed by selling ports and lowering energy costs.
Expensive energy, poor infrastructure and increasing labour costs - known as “Custo Brasil” or the “Brazil Cost” - have weighed on growth, analysts say.
Despite the move, the latest data suggests that Brazilian companies remain unconfident about business prospects.
P.S. that is a BBC link.
Expensive energy? Not possible, Rio told us that they have the best energy policy. Of course, he thinks Obama is a great president and Reagan a poor president.
BTW, some good news on the China and Mexico front. In 2000, the average manufacturing wage in China was about 30 cents an hour while the wage in Mexico was 1.50 an hour. Now, it is about 1.50 or 1.60 in China and around 2.16 in Mexico. U.S. companies are moving manufacturing jobs to Mexico, unemployment is half of what it is in the U.S. Thus, the slow economy in the U.S. combined with the better economy in Mexico is reducing illegal immigration and in fact is encouraging self-deportations. Bad for countries supplying China but good for us. These figures are my recollections of numbers that appeared in the Economist a few weeks ago.
The average wage in Mexico is $2.16 and the average wage in the U.S. is - what?
Whatever it is it’s nowhere close to $2.16. It’s lucky for us that Mexico is a country located far, far away from the U.S.
Minimum wage in Mexico is about 44 US cents an hour.
$2/hr is what many college grads make.
Take it up with the Economist magazine their numbers.
The Economist is full of beans. I have relatives with engineering degrees who don’t even make $800 USD a month.
The official minimum wage is currently 60 pesos a day. Depending on the exchange rate that’s as low as 44 cents an hour (I’ve seen the rate fluctuate between 14 and 16 pesos to a USD)
To get $2 an hour in Mexico you have to be semi-skilled: an electrician, plumber, auto mechanic, etc.
This is from the Dallas news and it uses even higher numbers:
Published: 15 September 2012 02:35 PM
MEXICO CITY — Not long ago, Mexican factories couldn’t compete with the “China price,” the ridiculously low cost of production in the Asian nation.
But sometime this year, with rock-bottom wages soaring in China, the average cost of factory labor in the two nations will be roughly the same. This is a boon to Mexico, and its industrial parks are swelling.
The trend has caught the attention of chief executives such as Rob Moser, the president of Casabella Holdings, who recently started adding up the pros and cons of where to make the housewares that his New York firm designs and sells.
China was cheap — really cheap — when he first started buying there in 2003. But labor costs have climbed at a double-digit pace, and there were other factors that made China less convenient.
“You’ve got to get a visa to China, and that takes time. It’s a 16-hour flight, hours to the factory. It’s days at the very least to tackle some of these issues,” he said, referring to production problems that invariably arise.
“You literally can be in a facility in Mexico the same day and be fixing things. That is a huge benefit,” Moser said.
So, like a number of U.S. and Canadian businesses, large and small, Casabella decided to bring some of its business back to North America this year, specifically to Mexico, the United States’ third-largest trade partner after China and Canada.
Mexico’s charms look more attractive than ever to global supply-chain managers. Eclipsed in the past decade by the white-hot industrial juggernaut in China and marred by an image of rampant criminality, Mexico is again seducing global business, drawing billions of dollars in investment.
The Boston Consulting Group, a major business strategy consultancy, says average factory wages in China this year have hit about $4.50 an hour — including benefits and other costs — and are likely to climb to $6 an hour by 2015. Mexico’s National Statistics Institute says average manufacturing wages stood at $3.50 an hour in June, the most recent month tallied, but that figure doesn’t include benefits.
“The plan included privatising about 14,000km of railways and roads, followed by selling ports……..”
Why does that have a Goldman Sacks type stench to it?
“including benefits and other costs…”
…is always a propaganda ploy used inflate wages reporting. “Benefits and other costs” do not, DO NOT!, pay the rent and put food on the table.
Mexico’s National Statistics Institute says average manufacturing wages stood at $3.50 an hour in June, the most recent month tallied, but that figure doesn’t include benefits.
According to this Mexican news article, Mexican autoworkers are paid 300 pesos a day, which is 21 USD for an 8 hour shift. which is $2.68 per hour. Like US autoworkers, Mexican autoworkers are among the best paid factory workers in Mexico,
http://www.zocalo.com.mx/seccion/articulo/sureste-de-coahuila-tercer-lugar-en-sueldos
A better measure are workers who labor in maquiladora factories. They are paid an average of $105 pesos per day, which is just under a dollar per hour.
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2012/09/24/politica/006n1pol
Not here yet my house sold at 600K in spring 2006 now similair homes listing for 450K long way to go still
93021
Now that the Fiscal Cliff is hitting high gear, we should all take a moment to look to our right and our left (not the political ones). What else is happening that isn’t getting as much air time?
http://www.whoswholegal.com/news/features/article/29378/the-2012-world-conference-internationaltelecommunications-brewing-storm-potential-un-regulation-internet
Aside from providing top politicians with a justification for household wealth confiscation and redistribution schemes, what purpose would a Fiscal Cliff deal serve?
What is the advantage to society of taking away the incentive for families to save, invest, and leave money for their heirs? Why force the kids to sell off parts of the family farm, just to keep the tax man away?
How is it consistent to undermine market forces by propping up the value of homes, in order to make Ownership Society members “wealthier,” but then to confiscate large pieces of the family farm if an Ownership Society member dies?
I’m missing the logic of this topsy-turvy wealth redistribution scheme.
Analysis: Democrats’ discord undercuts Obama estate tax push
November 30, 2012|Kim Dixon | Reuters
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Divisions among Democrats are undermining President Barack Obama’s push to raise the U.S. estate tax on inherited wealth, just weeks before the arrival of the “fiscal cliff” could drive the present estate tax rate even higher than Obama proposes.
Action on the estate tax could be postponed. But in his successful re-election campaign, Obama called for wealthy Americans to pay more in taxes - and it is overwhelmingly the wealthy who pay the estate tax.
The outcome may hinge on whether Obama insists on his estate tax proposal - or something close to it - as forcefully as he has insisted on raising individual income tax rates for high income-earners, or whether he lets the issue be put off.
If a single facet of the complicated partisan stand-off over taxing the wealthy best captures Capitol Hill’s fiscal gridlock, it may be the estate tax - a long-standing and volatile issue - that may finally be coming to a head.
“If you look at where the public is on tax issues compared to the last time this was debated - it is night and day,” said Frank Clemente, campaign manager for left-leaning Americans for Tax Fairness. “They are deep into this tax fairness position.”
…
Guess you’re asking a rhetoric / sarcastic question? It makes sense because it provides a living for the politicians and bureaucrats and lobbyists. You would not want they to have earn a an honest living instead sponging off others?
For anyone who may have an interest;
http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe5613777d670c7d7d14&ls=fe1b1d777d6c017e741275&m=fefc1172766306&l=fed1157376640678&s=fe35157277640d7d711074&jb=ffcf14&t=
No dollar shall be allowed to escape.
And no Banksta left behind!
Sorry, I should have mentioned that the above link is about the possibility of modifying California’s Prop.#13…
You just nailed it, Cantankerous. What purpose beyond what you stated would you expect it to serve?
BTW, it’s just another symptom of the expanding Government Bubble.
There’ll be a lot more of this until suddenly, there isn’t.
The “isn’t” will come when the Government Bubble pops. POP!
When that happens, we’ll really be getting our hands dirty. Until then, we’re paying increasing fees for a sideshow we are being forced to subsidize at gunpoint.
I thought there was some kind of concern out there about the U.S. spending itself into bankruptcy. So I am a bit mystified by all these politicians working so fast and furiously to negotiate the proper arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic.
Our military, currently serving as the petro-dollar enforcement team, is making the infamous statement “deficits don’t matter” our current reality.
Such views now have been rendered worthless. So have views that entitlements are too large.
I don’t understand why people don’t understand this.
We’re beyond the point of “cut that program - but don’t cut mine” discussion. It’s too late for that.
Same with this 1%er crap. We could confiscate ALL of 1%er wealth and not make a dent in our debt.
Let me put it another way:
Government rapidly is killing the taxpayer’s ability to pay.
When government maims the taxpayer enough, the Government Bubble will POP!
We’re going to have at least two generations (born from roughly 1955 to 1980 - maybe even 1985 now) that in 10 years will discover the effects of being effectively maimed.
And they won’t have much for the government to take.
What happens then? Invade Mexico? Unlikely.
POP! goes the government.
Same with this 1%er crap. We could confiscate ALL of 1%er wealth and not make a dent in our debt.
Really? Let’s see…
Let’s calculate!…37.1% of 54.2 $trillion with a T…is…well it’s more than $18 trillion, which pays off the debt easily.
Hey! Thanks for the suggestion! We could confiscate all of the 1%ers wealth and pay off the debt. We’ll have to keep that in mind.
Oh, and thanks for the disinformation!
‘We could confiscate all of the 1%ers wealth and pay off the debt.’
Why don’t you try it? Come on Robin Hood, walk down the street and start taking. Where’s your guts? Show us your metal. Or are you going to vote to have this done? Oh yeah, most of the people you vote for are 1%ers. Hypocrite.
Hypocrite.
How am I a hypocrite? Because I prefer the truth to disinformation and straw men?
And so it goes among those who make their money off an ideology rather than through productive means.
That so few in Washington are net producers of wealth means that in practicality, there are frightfully few chairs on the Titanic.
Watch them become increasingly frenetic as the Government Bubble morphs into a full-fledged mania.
Just like the Titanic, that ship is going down.
Geithner: No deal without higher tax rates on rich
The Oval
David Jackson
9:38AM EST December 2. 2012 - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner echoed President Obama on Sunday, saying there won’t be a fiscal cliff deal with Republicans without higher taxes on the wealthy.
“There’s not going to be an agreement without rates going up,” Geithner said on CNN’s State of the Union, one of a series of talk show appearances he made on Sunday.
Geithner noted that Obama is offering the debt reduction deal he campaigned on, including an elimination of the George W. Bush tax cuts for Americans who make more than $250,000 a year.
Republicans say they will agree to more government revenues through elimination of tax loopholes, but not through an increase in tax rates they say will slow the economy.
Both parties face the prospect next year of the so-called “fiscal cliff,” a series of tax hikes and budget cuts that affect all Americans in the absence of a debt reduction agreement.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, told Fox News Sunday that “the White House has spent three weeks (since the election) doing basically nothing,” and that its pending offer emphasizes tax hikes while lacking specifics about spending cuts.
Obama and his team “won the election,” Boehner said, but “they must have forgotten that Republicans continue to hold a majority in the House.”
Mortgage deduction defended by Realtors
By CHRIS CASHMAN - ccashman@shawmedia.com
Created: Sunday, December 2, 2012 5:30 a.m. CST
McHENRY - Local Realtors are lobbying against any changes in the mortgage interest deduction.
Fiscal cliff negotiations reportedly have included discussions to eliminate or reduce the deduction, which has been a perk for homeowners for nearly 100 years.
Many homeowners of all income levels deduct their mortgage interest when itemizing their deductions. The deduction has helped bolster the income of millions of families – and the broader housing market.
“We’re opposed to any change to the mortgage interest deduction,” said Jim Haisler, chief executive officer of Heartland Realtor Organization.
…
See my posts in yesterday’s bits bucket showing how a million dollar mortgage gains you lots more interest deduction than, say, a 100K dollar mortgage would.
We need to start calling the mortgage interest deduction by its proper name: WELFARE FOR THE WEALTHY.
The problem here is that RE’s have sold it to the general public who truly believe that it benefits them and from the ones that I’ve talked to that is the only reason that they quote as why that bought vs. rented. RE’s will be quaking should it be eliminated and prices should fall, but you can’t fix American Stupid.
“… but you can’t fix American stupid.”
American stupid = profit centers for some
I am going to see Ron White, he is coming to the Albuquerque area in January. He owns the you can’t fix stupid line.
Wiki-up Ron White and you will discover that he has been married three times.
Lol. You can’t fix stupid.
“Wiki-up Ron White and you will discover that he has been married three times.”
A man whose wife never aged?
It’s welfare when those collecting benefits don’t pay in. If someone makes $1M and pays ~$300K in federal taxes reducing them by $30K because of MID is hardly welfare. But bleeding heart tax and spend liberals have difficulty distinguishing between those who pay taxes and get benefits and those who pay no taxes and get benefits. The same liberals moan and groan about “the rich” getting tax cuts. You got to pay taxes in the first place to get tax cuts.
P.S. Not defending the MID scrap it along with the social engineering / distorting tax code. One flat rate across the board for everyone - 10%. No credits, no deductions. Everyone can file a one page return.
The 1%ers would love that.
What government functions would you get rid of to pay for that? It is going to have to be quite a lot. As in almost everything. You might be able to do it by cancelling social security immediately and eliminating the entire military.
And you wouldn’t come close to getting everyone onto a one page return with that. Small businesses that pay with schedule C and cascade that onto their 1040s would still have to calculate their business profits which is quite complicated. And unless that 10% applies to the selling price of capital assets, you still have to figure out capital gains to get the number to which the 10% applies.
And what are you going to do about the people who are now in a position to actually go hungry or become homeless now that they are paying $1500 a year in taxes instead of getting the earned income tax credit?
Government Bubble in action, everywhere it seems….
Taxpayers increasingly lack the ability to pay…and, alas, fewer and fewer deck chairs remain on the D.C. Titanic.
Lurking in the waters below are the same sharks that ate the low-grade scraps previously tossed overboard by those aboard the D.C. Titanic.
With every toss of the low-grade food scraps, more hungry sharks appear, lurking.
With every bailout, the D.C. Titanic slips deeper into the water.
As the well-heeled shipgoers continue their quest of one-upmanship, bribes and payoffs, the D.C. Titanic takes on ever more water…
Unless you are saying NOBODY (not the mythical 47%) else pays taxes, it’s got nothing to do will “librul” ideology.
…to do with…
The Realtwhores™ and their MSM minions are serving up a great abundance of scare stories to frighten the sheeple about the effects of eliminating the MID.
But as I have already stated many times, there are ways it could be phased out to mitigate the dire consequences the fear mongers predict.
And besides, as my bits bucket examples showed yesterday, the greatest impact of eliminating the MID would fall on those with million dollar mortgages — i.e. people who are likely rich enough to buy homes with cash, and whose purchase decisions are least likely to be driven by a paltry tax deduction on mortgage interest. By contrast, middle class families whose deductions including the MID don’t clear the standard deduction threshold would feel no impact whatever.
So I’m wondering how the study which FunYun cited came up with a 15 percent price decline estimate, given the limited effect of eliminating the MID?
“We’re opposed to any change to the mortgage interest deduction,” said Jim Haisler, chief executive officer of Heartland Realtor Organization.
And I and others are opposed to the perpetual and persistent lies you and your organization, National Association of Realtors, repeat without consequence.
National Assocation of Realtors. The most corrupt, fraudulent, dishonest organization in human history.
The history of our nation is one of perpetual RE corruption.
“The history of our nation is one of perpetual RE corruption.”
Exactly.
The cost of raising a child in 1995 averaged $145,000. Today it costs $227,000.
The price of tuition at Yale was $1,950 in 1967. Today it is $38,300.
A movie ticket cost 50 cents in 1962. Today it costs as much as $13.
A child’s ticket to Disneyland cost 35 cents in 1956. Today it costs $80.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-cheaper-everything-used-to-be-2012-4?op=1 - 153k - Cached
Average Cost Of New Home Homes
1930 $3,845.00 , 1940 $3,920.00, 1950 $8,450.00 , 1960 $12,700.00 ,
1970 $23,450.00 , 1980 $68,700.00 , 1990 $123,000.00 , 2008 $238,880 ,
Average Wages
1930 $1,970.00 , 1940 $1,725.00, 1950 $3,210.00 , 1960 $5,315.00 ,
1970 $9,400.00 , 1980 $19,500.00 , 1990 $28,960.00 , 2008 $40,523 ,
Average Cost of New Car Cars
1930 $600.00 , 1940 $850.00, 1950 $1,510.00 , 1960 $2,600.00 ,
1970 $3,450.00 , 1980 $7,200.00 , 1990 $16,950.00 , 2008 $27,958 ,
Apr 13, 2012 … It’s not just the used car market that’s hopping right now — new cars are selling for the record average price of $30,748. That’s 6.9% higher than …
Average Cost Gallon Of gas
1930 10 cents , 1940 11 cents , 1950 18 cents , 1960 25 cents ,
1970 36 cents , 1980 $1.19 , 1990 $1.34 , 2009 $2.051 ,
Gas prices are slowly coming down. The weekly average price of a gallon of regular gas is $3.80, down 2 cents compared to a week ago, … Oct 1, 2012 5: 54pm …
Average Cost Loaf of Bread Food
1930 9 cents , 1940 10 cents , 1950 12 cents , 1960 22 cents ,
1970 25 cents , 1980 50 cents , 1990 70 cents , 2008 $2.79 ,
Average Cost 1lb Hamburger Meat
1930 12 cents , 1940 20 cents , 1950 30 cents , 1960 45 cents ,
1970 70 cents , 1980 99 cents , 1990 89 cents , 2009 $3.99 ,
Some of the above can be explained due to the inflation over 70 years , but there are also many other reasons why some prices increased dramatically ( Housing Bubbles. Middle East Wars, Weather problems causing food price inflation, Population explosion, ) it also can work the other way due to improvements in technology offering much cheaper goods for example TV’s, Calculators, Computers ETC.
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/pricebasket.html - 26k
There ya go: Major asset and consumption good price inflation taking place right under our very noses…
I am really close to the Average Wages starting in 1980 through now and the rest of these numbers just aren`t working out to well for me. Because my wages pretty much doubled and everything else went up pretty much x 4.
It has nothing to do with the creation of the Fed in 1913, people that make claims like that wear tinfoil hats.
would it have anything to do with the money supply?
“would it have anything to do with the money supply?”
Oh those wascally wabbits!
“It has nothing to do with the creation of the Fed in 1913, people that make claims like that wear tinfoil hats.”
Please expand on this dan, but wait a minute while I grab some Reynold’s Wrap first.
The price of raw materials in general more than doubled from 2004 to 2008, and are back in the 2008 range after the dip in the 2009 “financial crisis”. Lumber, metals, food, energy, all track. I don’t think this can be explained by shortages, population, weather or the rise of China. I think it might be explained by the rise of speculative banking, which in this country I have heard is as least the same magnitude as our GDP ( I suspect that is a gross understatement). This is the “financial industry” that we had to bail out, and continue to do so with nearly free money for the bankers to hoard our necessities.
Painful as it will be to those employed at the wheel, I don’t think we can have a sustainable economic system until this model crashes. In past times of real shortage, speculation in necessities has been considered a crime against humanity.
For some reason that last scene from Thelma and Louise keeps coming to mind.
Thelma & Louise:Ending Scene - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z88U915uq8 - 210k -
I never did get this scene. Thelma and Louise win by driving their car off a cliff?
If they were to truly win they would fix it so the other guys were the ones that went off the cliff.
Just like Obama will win by driving off the cliff. Reagan in 1984 had more than 7% growth almost as much as Obama in four years. He knew how to strike deals with Tip O’Neal and thus give business confidence and reduce their uncertainty, which lead to more hiring. What Obama gains in revenue from the tax increases he will lose due to slower growth by not knowing how to strike a deal.
” I think it might be explained by the rise of speculative banking, which in this country I have heard is as least the same magnitude as our GDP ( I suspect that is a gross understatement). This is the “financial industry” that we had to bail out, and continue to do so with nearly free money for the bankers to hoard our necessities.”
It was shown her many times how banks were HEAVILY speculating in raw material and stockpiling, thereby distorting the true market demand.
Like I said, “free market” means free to eff you up the butt without consequence and due to “gaming”, there will NEVER be any such thing as a “free market”.
Airfare is cheaper too. I have been flying from the east coast to California for the past 20 - 25 years a few times a year. The price has remained constant about $300 - $400 round trip.
A child’s ticket to Disneyland cost 35 cents in 1956. Today it costs $80.
While Disney ticket prices have far outpaced inflation, that comparison is apples and oranges. Back in 1956 the admission price did not include access to rides. Remember the old ticket books? With the A, B, C, D and the infamous “E Tickets”?
Middle East Wars
+1 This observation is frequently omitted by the press.
Look at all that doubling and re-doubling of tax revenue!
With all those increases, government should be swimming in money. Yet, it isn’t. Fancy that.
Wars and rewarding Wall St failure ain’t cheap.
Bookmark this!!!!!!
http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html
It must be good to be a section 8 LL.
Cities Where People Can’t Afford Their Rent
Posted: March 21, 2012 at 6:41 am
10. Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, Md.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.11/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,506 (11th highest)
> Average renter wage: $15.85/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $28.96/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 73/wk.
9. Pike County, Pa.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.17/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,011 (74th highest)
> Average renter wage: $6.28/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $19.44/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 124/wk.
8. New Haven-Meriden, Conn.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.26/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,352 (21st highest)
> Average renter wage: $12.74/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $26.00/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 82/wk.
Also Read: The Six States Where Taxes Are Soaring
7. San Benito County, Calif.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.48/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,204 (34th highest)
> Average renter wage: $9.68/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $23.15/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 96/wk.
6. Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, N.H.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.67/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,369 (20th highest)
> Average renter wage: $12.66/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $26.33/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 83/wk.
5. Orange County, Calif.
> Rent affordability gap: $13.73/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,652 (fifth highest)
> Average renter wage: $18.04/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $31.77/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 70/wk.
4. Monmouth-Ocean, N.J.
> Rent affordability gap: $16.10/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,417 (17th highest)
> Average renter wage: $11.15/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $27.25/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 98/wk.
3. Santa Cruz-Watsonville, Calif.
> Rent affordability gap: $16.62/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,504 (13th highest)
> Average renter wage: $12.31/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $28.92/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 94/wk.
2. Nassau-Suffolk, N.Y.
> Rent affordability gap: $18.94/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,682 (fourth highest)
> Average renter wage: $13.41/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $32.35/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 96/wk.
1. Honolulu, Hawaii
> Rent affordability gap: $19.96/hr.
> Fair market rent: $1,767 (third highest)
> Average renter wage: $14.02/hr.
> Wage needed for 2BR apartment: $33.98/hr.
> Hrs. needed to rent 2BR apartment: 97/wk.
http://247wallst.com/2012/03/21/cities-where-people-cant-afford-their-rent/ - 120k -
This chart shows that rents can go up even where wages are not, thus the gap. Those that think that rising rents are impossible in a stagnant wage environment should take note.
“Those who think that rising rents are impossible in a stagnant wage environment should take note.”
Double up on the occupancy and - presto - the unaffordable magically becomes the affordable.
A wee bit uncomfortable maybe, but hey.
DON’T BELIEVE LYING REALTOR™ SCARE TACTICS — ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE ANNOUNCED WITH CAPITAL LETTERS!!!!
KENNETH HARNEY NATION’S HOUSING
CUTBACKS IN REAL ESTATE WRITE-OFFS COULD RESULT IN HOME DEVALUATIONS
By U-T San Diego
12:01 a.m., Dec. 2, 2012
Updated 7:25 p.m. , Nov. 30, 2012
A study indicates that proposed tax reforms would have dramatic effects on housing prices. K.C. Alfred • U-T
What would happen to home values if popular real estate deductions for mortgage interest and local property taxes were cut significantly? It’s an issue you’re likely to hear more about as Congress and the Obama administration wade deeper into “fiscal cliff” and comprehensive tax reform negotiations heading into 2013.
Some of the forecasts are scary: Any significant reductions in these long-established tax benefits would inevitably trigger declines in home values. Under some circumstances, they could be well into the double digits — 15 percent, according to Lawrence Yun, chief economist of the National Association of Realtors. “That’s how much we can expect values to fall as buyers discount the value of the deduction in their purchase offers,” Yun says.
Other projections are more nuanced: Yes, cutting back on real estate write-offs could make homes less attractive financially, but other potential features of a final tax compromise could counteract the loss of deductions, softening the net impact on values. Plus no one on Capitol Hill is talking at the moment about eliminating the mortgage interest or property tax write-offs, just capping them in some way for higher-income individuals.
…
Is there any other way out of this housing bubble hell besides ‘home devaluations’??
How about ‘affordability improvements’?
The real estate tax burden on my paid-off house has increased 400% since 1980. Wouldn’t mind a bit of ‘home devaluation’ from the local tax assessor.
they’ll just up the mill rate to offset the decrease in assessed value. the government will get their pound of flesh one way or another…
they’ll just up the mill rate to offset the decrease in assessed value
Got TABOR?
“It’s a mad house! A mad house!” -Taylor
The -fixr is doing some soul searching lately, trying to come to grips with my place in the world…..after a few recent incidents.
First…….I wanted to go see a Springsteen concert a couple of weeks ago. Since for various reasons, the number of unmarried women over 30 I know can be counted on the fingers of one foot (meaning zero), I asked my 22 year old if she would go. I didn’t want to go by myself, as I don’t want to have the LOSER sign on my forehead.
Her answer “Why don’t you go and sit in the “Looser” section, meet some other loosers, and maybe you can make some new looser friends……”
I love my daughter. She’s really good at sugarcoating bad news.
Educational moment #2……..My brother (who is gay) came to visit with his significant other. Anyhoo, my brother had left the room for a minute, and the S/O and I were flipping channels on the TV. I turned on one of the movie channels, and there was an old Elizabeth Taylor movie. At this point I mentioned that I just didn’t “get” the whole fascination/adoration thing with Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe.
The S/O said at this point “OMG, you need to turn your “Gay Man” card in right now………”
Now, as far as I can tell, I’m not gay (not that I have a problem with someone else being gay). But I wondered if somehow, someway that I’m not aware of, I gave off that vibe. So, valuing the opinions of respected friends and co-workers, I decided to ask some of the guys at the hangar/work.
Yes, they said, we think you are gay. Real gay. A giant flamer, in fact. You’re welcome.
I’ve formerly ascribed my borderline depression to, three bootstrapping episodes since 2004 aside, I find myself unable to tred water (much less get ahead) in this crappy environment we call an economy, and the fact that it appears that none of the banksters who created this mess will ever go to jail. Now I am left wondering if my real issue is that my straight guy persona was always doomed to failure, and if I should be redirecting my life accordingly.
Signed,
Coin Tosser/Chick’s best friend……
You need to spend a month or two running around with me. Literally.
We’d fight a lot, but you’d benefit from (1) discovering that what I believe really doesn’t matter to you, and, (2) it’s okay that it doesn’t.
Life’s too short to comtemplate what others think of you.
I go to places by myself all the time. Restaurants, movies, trips, museums, baseball games, whatever. If I want to go and no one else does or can, I go anyway. My interest in the subject at hand readily trumps any pinhead’s thoughts about what a “loser” I might be.
To them, I’m a “loser”. To me, I am on a grand adventure. (What’s neat about going solo is that you can make snap decisions about what to do next without having to consider someone else).
Interestingly, I’ve had several people compliment me over the years - “How do you get the nerve to go by yourself? I could never do that.”
It helps that I am not at all shy in striking up conversations with people I’ve never met. Weird looks sometimes come from that. Othertimes, I meet great people and have wonderful conversations.
I enjoy the great conversations much more than I worry about the weird looks.
+1, MB
The main benefit of going solo is the option to hang out with anyone interesting you might happen to meet. Also, it’s FAR easier to get one really great seat than two together at the last minute.
“It helps that I am not at all shy in striking up conversations with people I’ve never met.”
I was explaining the importance of this skill just last night to my 18-year-old daughter, who is struggling with loneliness in her first year of college away from home. I did not possess this skill when I was 18, but I do now.
As I told my daughter, the ability to offer a warm smile and strike up a conversation with someone you don’t know can immediately turn a sense of isolation in a crowd of strangers into feelings of belonging and fellowship. Not only that, but if you approach the situation right, you enrich the life of your new companion at the other end of the conversation.
Dang, that’s harsh. I don’t know what I’d do in your situation, but I know that would make me contemplate major changes.
LOL fixer. Sounds like your self esteem meter is running on empty.
None of us, no one fits any stereotype perfectly. None of us is really a success unless there are lots of lies woven in.
Seek adventures that do not require the approval of others. Don’t be anyone’s bitch, you’ve been through too much to need approval.
“None of us is really a success unless there are lots of lies woven in.”
Wow. Get some new friends even it means being alone for a few years.
That’s what I had to when I was younger and was damn well worth it.
And start working on snappy, harsh comebacks. Many people are thoughtless boneheads and stupid as well, who have no self control and much be b-slapped at times because they are not shy about sharing how stupid they are and forcing YOU to accept their stupidity.
You know what fixer, fck them crackas!
er, ah, wait a minute… strike that.
Listen man, you are a dude; you don’t need no woman to qualify you because men are better than women.
Let me repeat that for the hard of hearing: MEN ARE BETTER THAN WOMEN.
Why?
Because men must qualify to be men in a way that women NEVER hafta qualify to be women.
This is why you cannot use a womans validation of you as a measurement of ANYTHING!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_dFPC5FKuE
In what ways might those be, Spook? Seriously curious here. How are traits like character, courage, compassion, spirit in any way to sole province of men?
They are the province of men because women don’t need them.
You ever heard the term “man up?”
character, courage, compassion, spirit… are internally generated because not only are men held to account, they KNOW they are going to be held to account.
Think about it?
Throughout history, for men, losing the battle meant being slaughtered.
For women it meant, get ready to have a new husband.
Womens hypergamous instinct (which serves her well from an evolutionary perspective) means its up to men to rationalize being Gandhi instead of Hitler, because women really don’t care; they just want the most powerful man they can get.
This is why we are better than you.
What a magnificent piece of trolling.
“…hypergamous…”
+1 Okay, I had to look that one up.
Is Larry Summers posting here now?
Why Men are better than Women at Math (Situations Matter)
by Jeremy McCarthy on October 4, 2011 in Book Reviews, Questions of Science
Men are better than women at math and science. This is a comment likely to rile the feathers of some of my more feminist readers, and yet I could easily support such a statement with evidence showing that men get higher SAT scores in math than women or how science and technology careers are predominantly male disciplines. In spite of this evidence, I wouldn’t be the first to get into trouble over comments like this. Larry Summers, once president of Harvard University, lost his job after giving a speech on this subject to the National Bureau of Economic Research in 2005.
But he didn’t lose his job for pointing out this disparity. In fact, the whole point of the conference was to explore the reasons behind the gender gap in science, engineering and mathematics. What got Summers into trouble was saying that inborn differences in aptitude probably played a greater role than societal expectations. He felt that men were inherently better and not just situationally better–an idea which did not sit well with the female faculty at Harvard who believed their president felt justified in giving preference to male faculty for tenured positions and other opportunities for advancement.
…
P.S. My subjective personal anecdotal comment on Summers’ observation follows:
I have four reasonably bright kids, three sons and a daughter. Of the four, my daughter has the greatest natural gift for mathematics. It comes so easily to her that she cannot fathom why it seems hard to others.
Yet she is not pursuing mathematics or science in college, beyond basic requirements.
The reason? SHE DOESN’T ENJOY IT.
And there lies the gender gap in my brood with respect to math and science achievement.
Agreed. A tautological masterpiece.
Women don’t want to win.
They want a winner.
“Women don’t want to win.
They want a winner.”
This gender-biased comment does not describe my wife, who is a winner in her own right.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AloNERbBXcc
(Explicit)
What I’m sayin’ X-Gs, is that you should start snorting heroin.
BTW, my neighb did the annual on the ship that just went down in the bay. You guys definitely work in an interesting industry.
I learned a lot about blades today.
fixr,
First of all Springsteen sucks imo. Seriously overrated I feel. But that means nothing.
Get comfortable in your own skin, flaws and all. Know thyself. Be honest with yourself. Have the ability to laugh at yourself (and others too). Once you’re reasonably happy in your “wrapper” you’ll realize that what other people think just doesn’t really matter much.
The S/O said at this point “OMG, you need to turn your “Gay Man” card in right now………”
I don’t know what that means as a matter of fact half of the stuff on this board I don’t know what it means
Yes, they said, we think you are gay. Real gay. A giant flamer, in fact. You’re welcome”
mechanics what do you expect ? They just f*ing with you
The risk you face is letting feedback between your current situation in life and your self-assessment drag you down. Like Mr MacBeth, I make a point of enjoying life’s experiences just the same whether I am by myself or with friends or loved ones.
We can all tell by your posts that you are an interesting guy, with plenty to offer and share with others. Just believe in yourself and keep trying. If you are unhappy with your current range of experiences, try visualizing how you would rather have your life play out. Once you get the visuals going, start brainstorming how you can transform your current realm of experience into one that would give you fulfillment. Next, start trying out the ideas that come to you during your thinking time.
Practice the above strategy over the course of 2013, and I predict by this time next year, your life will be far richer and fulfilling than it seems at the moment.
You are who you think you are, fixer. Ask yourself why you care about the assessments of shallow, hurtful people who don’t really know you?
Here’s a hug, sweetie.
mwah
RE: Polly’s below post. The 10% for a flat tax was an example. It might have to be 15% or 20% initially. But the idea is to be fair everyone on pays the same rate. And the administration and enforcement cost is greatly reduced. There is plenty of waste and fraud in the government. It’s not a matter of eliminating programs just not overpaying for them, if they are truly necessary. Consider this from today’s San Fran. Chron. The government greatly distorting the rental market in San Francisco. IF it is a function of government to house the poor rather than charity - very debatable - why house in people in one of the most expensive cities in the country? Lot’s of the people paying the taxes for this “entitlement” can’t afford to live in San Fran and commute. Of course the authority’s head makes north of $200K plus benefits. Another example is the earlier post today about the surge in Social Security disability claims. 8 million people collecting!!!! Lots of targets for cutting there. Whenever the topic cuts come up the same refrain - orphans and widows and gramps will be in the street, sky falling, etc…
“…The San Francisco Housing Authority operates 6,476 units of low-income housing at 45 public housing projects around the city. It also runs the Section 8 voucher program, which currently gives 9,577 vouchers to low-income people to subsidize their rents in private apartments.
The agency is funded by the federal government,…”
Comment by polly
2012-12-02 11:04:41
What government functions would you get rid of to pay for that? It is going to have to be quite a lot. As in almost everything. You might be able to do it by cancelling social security immediately and eliminating the entire military.
And you wouldn’t come close to getting everyone onto a one page return with that. Small businesses that pay with schedule C and cascade that onto their 1040s would still have to calculate their business profits which is quite complicated. And unless that 10% applies to the selling price of capital assets, you still have to figure out capital gains to get the number to which the 10% applies.
And what are you going to do about the people who are now in a position to actually go hungry or become homeless now that they are paying $1500 a year in taxes instead of getting the earned income tax credit?