March 8, 2013

Bits Bucket for March 8, 2013

Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.




RSS feed

230 Comments »

Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 05:48:29

New York Was No. 1 in Per Pupil Spending Last Year

Wednesday, May 25, 2011 - 01:55 PM
By Beth Fertig

New York City spent $19,000 per student, above the statewide average, because of a change in state aid brought about by a lawsuit. But education spending also included federal stimulus aid that year, which is now winding down, and school spending rose nationally that year. New York state has since cut school aid by $1.5 billion for the next fiscal year.

States with the lowest spending per pupil in 2009 were Utah ($6,356), Idaho ($7,092) and Arizona ($7,813), according to the U.S. Census Bureau. If the District of Columbia was a state it would have come in No. 2 for highest spending at $16,408 per pupil.

http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/wnyc-news-blog/2011/may/25/ny-state-spent-most-student-2009/ - 36k
———————————————————————————-
Officials: 80 Percent Of Recent NYC High School Graduates Cannot Read

March 7, 2013 10:55 PM

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — It’s an education bombshell.

Nearly 80 percent of New York City high school graduates need to relearn basic skills before they can enter the City University’s community college system.

The number of kids behind the 8-ball is the highest in years, CBS 2′s Marcia Kramer reported Thursday.

When they graduated from city high schools, students in a special remedial program at the Borough of Manhattan Community College couldn’t make the grade.

They had to re-learn basic skills — reading, writing and math — first before they could begin college courses.

They are part of a disturbing statistic.

Officials told CBS 2′s Kramer that nearly 80 percent of those who graduate from city high schools arrived at City University’s community college system without having mastered the skills to do college-level work.

In sheer numbers it means that nearly 11,000 kids who got diplomas from city high schools needed remedial courses to re-learn the basics.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/officials-80-percent-of-recent-nyc-high-school-graduates-cannot-read/ - -

Comment by polly
2013-03-08 06:21:55

The headline is terribly misleading. It sounds like it is 80% of all the city’s high school graduates. If you read it carefully, it is only the ones who are going into the CUNY cummunity college system and they need help to be able to do college level work (not just basic reading).

So the kids who are ready to go to college are not showing up at the CUNY community college system (which I believe is completely open enrollment - no application process of any kind) but are actually going to college - either a 4 year CUNY school or some other school. How did that happen?

Comment by Northeastener
2013-03-08 11:39:07

The headline is terribly misleading.

Not really. The relevant questions to ask are what percentage of NYC High School graduates go on to college? What percentage of NYC High School graduates that go on to college go through the CUNY system?

Once those questions are answered, you’ll realize that the majority of graduates of the NYC school system are ill-prepared for college or the real world.

It isn’t about the money spent either, as the article shows… it’s about the power of the Teacher’s Union, the Federal and State governments pushing poor curriculum, the abject failure of “No Child Left Behind” and education driven by standardized test scores, and lastly, a lack of involvement from parents in regards to their child’s education.

Comment by polly
2013-03-08 12:53:28

So , the story is about 11,000 students who needed a remedial course before starting college classes at the community college. It is clear from the story that this is 80% of the people who are starting at the community college and graduated from NYC schools at some time in the past (could be anything from months to decades before). In 2011, over 52,000 kids graduated from NYC high schools in 4 years (the total number of kids graduating would be even higher).

The headline says: Officials: 80 Percent Of Recent NYC High School Graduates Cannot Read

And you can’t even admit that this is a misleading headline? You really are a low information voter, aren’t you?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Northeastener
2013-03-08 13:26:46

And you can’t even admit that this is a misleading headline? You really are a low information voter, aren’t you?

Given the questions I stated that headline would lead me to ask and the answers to those questions, I’d say no. But don’t let that stop you…

Here’s another article about city graduation rates from 2012 (for 2011). Think there is any relation to the “gains in graduation rate” from my article and the “lack of preparedness for college” in the article above?

 
Comment by polly
2013-03-08 14:57:25

In case it hasn’t occured to you, kids who don’t graduate aren’t part of the group of kids who do graduate.

My original comment was about a misleading headline. You seem to have decided that I am making a blanket statement of the education level of students who have ever attended any NYC public school whether they graduated or not.

I take it back. You may or may not be a low information voter. You just have terribly poor reading comprehension.

 
 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 13:31:06

It isn’t about the money spent either, as the article shows… it’s about the power of the Teacher’s Union, the Federal and State governments pushing poor curriculum, the abject failure of “No Child Left Behind” and education driven by standardized test scores, and lastly, a lack of involvement from parents in regards to their child’s education.

No, it’s about poverty and income level. This has been documented time and time again.

Find me a low-performing school that is predominantly middle class or upper middle class.

OR, explain how the teacher’s union or the poor curriculum account for this situation:

Friend of mine was a 6th grade math teacher at an inner city low-performing public school. Worked there for 10 years. Mostly kids living in families at or below the poverty level. Majority of her students test “below basic” or “far below basic”.

Two years ago she transfers to a high performing public school (same school district - SFUSD) on the other side of town. Same teacher, same curriculum, same subject, same grade, same school district, same union. Different school with a different demographic.

Lo and behold, when the test scores come out, all of her students score “proficient” or above.

Merit pay for her? Give her a bonus because now she is such a better teacher based on her student’s performance?

Again: Find me a low-performing school that is predominantly middle class or upper middle class.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by polly
2013-03-08 15:03:26

When my brother was doing his Phd, he did some data collection for a professor’s research project. Second graders in a very, very poor district. A large number of the kids didn’t even really understand that letters make sounds and that sounds are put together to make words. He could barely imagine how it was possible for that many 7 years olds to not ever really understand what reading was. Eventually concluded that the whole neighborhood might have been contaminated with lead paint.

Exactly how is a teacher supposed to fix that?

 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 15:11:50

Eventually concluded that the whole neighborhood might have been contaminated with lead paint.

Exactly how is a teacher supposed to fix that?

It’s the union’s fault

 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 15:16:00

low-performing school that is predominantly middle class or upper middle class.
——–

This would be pretty difficult to find.

Baltimore City’s teacher performance review system doesn’t count test scores for much. There are a slew of factors, but the numbers just inform the principal’s impressions and they look at how the same students performed in previous years, etc.

Teacher performance reviews factor into pay. Teachers earn units for the level of evaluation received. If you get the highest rating (there are a limited # at each school) you will get a pay bump every year, similar to the bump people used to get just for having another year of tenure. If you get the lowest rating more than a few times, you won’t be around long enough to worry about pay raises.

My wife is in her 4th year teaching this year, she started at 48600 in fall 09, right now she is at approx 62 or 63000 (I forget the exact number).

To get beyond 85000 on the pay scale there start to be other requirements. But once you’re finished 5 years you can start trying to meet those requirements. So there is a good chance in the next couple of years she’ll make that jump.

The top of the scale if you don’t become an administrator is in the 105000 ballpark. There are a limited number of spots per school, so that will be a tougher nut to crack.

 
 
 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 06:39:27

That’s Racist®

 
Comment by 2banana
2013-03-08 06:53:44

And remember - 3/4 of this school budget goes towards salaries, benefits and pensions.

Public unions - gotta luv them.

They do it for the children…

Comment by Montana
2013-03-08 06:59:27

combat pay

Comment by rms
2013-03-08 07:46:33

“combat pay”

+1 And no federal income tax either.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by alpha-sloth
2013-03-08 13:33:14

And no federal income tax either.

How so?

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 15:52:58

Only while you’re deployed in a combat zone. At least that’s the way it worked during Desert Storm.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Montana
2013-03-08 07:01:22

gee and for years NYC schools have been advertising nationally for bright idealistic people to teach there.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 08:05:57

“Idiocracy” was a documentary.

 
 
Comment by AbsoluteBegiiner
2013-03-08 06:06:13

Help. Wall Street is occupying me.

Comment by Martin
2013-03-08 06:11:40

And Jobs report is a joke. Dow will go up more again. I wonder how much it goes up before Bernanke closes the tap.

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:45:54

January revised down from 157k to 119K.
Can anyone seriously trust this kind of massive revision month after month? Let’s find out how many were off the employment pool….

 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:47:11

And there it is. The civilian labor force dropped from 63.6% to 63.5%

Comment by Bluestar
2013-03-08 07:32:55

This could be the effect of more older people leaving the workforce with respect to fewer younger workers and fewer immigrants entering the job market. Just look at the demographics, participation rates are in a natural decline due to lower birth rates in advanced economies. If it wasn’t for the Latinos and Asians we would be in a real hurt. Why do you think the Treasury Dept. defined the full employment rate at 6.5%?? In the good old days it was less than 5%. The jobs report is encouraging. We should short bonds.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 08:27:15

Yet we hear that the percentage of older peeps in the workforce is increasing, and the percentage of youth in the workforce decreasing.

 
Comment by Bluestar
2013-03-08 09:01:33

Maybe that explains the high productivity numbers too. Older folks have a bigger skill set after 30 years in the workforce. It drops off after age 60 because our brains start to decline in performance.
“Alzheimer’s Patient Population Projected to Triple by 2050″
http://www.pharmacytimes.com/news/Alzheimers-Patient-Population-Projected-to-Triple-by-2050

“Alzheimer’s disease is the fastest-growing threat to Americans’ health”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/alzheimers-health-united-states-america-threat_n_2820887.html

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 09:16:02

At 60 ???? There is a divergence IMO at more like 80, where some are drooling and using a walker and some are sharp and active. Not much middle ground, just from my observations. Sure some in 60s are impaired, but hey I’ve known lots of stoners that were dolts in their 40s and younger.

 
 
 
 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:54:30

Sell some T-shirts…

Comment by ahansen
2013-03-09 00:17:08

When do we get to twelve greasy sandwiches?

 
 
 
Comment by Martin
2013-03-08 06:08:03

Dow keeps going up and up. Stock markets in all BRIC countries going up and up. Still major bubbles all across the world. Instead of that being fixed, we are another bubble in US both in RE and stocks. But who am I to say it. I’m a fool who cannot make money in any situation as I’m too confident in my reading of the bubble and scared to put in my hard earned money. Whereas, people in power and with more information play the game and make money in short term in both up and down cycles.

Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 06:19:03

I feel more at ease for a potential kicking myself in the butt for a coulda, woulda, shoulda now than in 2009 -ie- now is time to take profits IMHO. Money is nice to leverage via holding in equities which may beat inflation and paltry interest rates but I have a feeling there is gonna be a need to raise cash for many entities soon. Things can only go so long on credit. If I think I am missing out on a hothand market run and feel compelled to put everything in, I know I am probably cruising for an upset with a market sell-off. Just past experience talking.

Comment by Martin
2013-03-08 06:30:16

I’m myself waiting for Dow to drop 3-4K points before I put my 401K money back in the market. Otherwise it would stay in MM for a long time.

I never knew of manipulation of this order could happen and always believed in fairness.

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:41:32

I am in MM, too. It’s not risk free either.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 06:43:41

Today’s gonna be another scorcher based upon the futures.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:53:14

The employment news is bad for the stocks. Gono may actually have to start thinking about tightening if he believes these numbers last few months.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Montana
2013-03-08 07:03:02

same here, 70pc mmkt.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 07:13:58

If the FED has the ability to manipulate the markets so much why on earth did they let them crash in the first place?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 07:18:42

To show who’s the boss?

In Hindu and Greek mythologies, it’s quite common for a god to pull a stunt to teach a lesson.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 10:18:02

If the FED has the ability to manipulate the markets so much why on earth did they let them crash in the first place?

IIRC somebody posted something a while back that stated that the data showed someone big was selling in such a way as to drive the market down as hard as possible right up until we “saved” the banks. And then they stopped.

 
 
Comment by michael
2013-03-08 07:36:11

“I never knew of manipulation of this order could happen and always believed in fairness.”

i din’t so much believe in fairness…but i did believe in creative destruction…a tenet of capitalism that apparently no longer applies.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 13:49:07

“I never knew of manipulation of this order could happen and always believed in fairness.”

Oh it’s even worse than that.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by oxide
2013-03-08 09:06:05

I”m starting to think the same thing… move some gains from the equities to the guaranteed accounts. Of course, the guaranteeds are paying only 3%, but now it’s about return OF principle, not return ON principle…

Comment by Martin
2013-03-08 09:22:07

Which guaranteed accounts are paying 3%?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sleepless_near_seattle
2013-03-08 10:08:31

She forgot the decimal point. Supposed to be .3%.

 
Comment by oxide
2013-03-08 11:57:31

There are some retirement funds that, once you put money in, you can’t cash it all out at once, even after age 59.5. You can only withdraw it in installments over several years. How they do it is a mystery, but if they know that they will always have x amount of money in the pool (by limiting withdrawals), that’s how they can keep that guarantee.

 
Comment by talon
2013-03-08 13:13:46

“There are some retirement funds that, once you put money in, you can’t cash it all out at once, even after age 59.5.”

TIAA does that with their guaranteed annuity. Returns about 5%, but if you want to move your money you can only cash out 20% per year over five years.

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 13:56:11

TIAA does that with their guaranteed annuity. Returns about 5%, but if you want to move your money you can only cash out 20% per year over five years.

I’m in the process of moving my money out of TIAA-CREF and into another company. The total time involved in the move: Nine years.

The drag is due to the guaranteed annuity. Everything else got moved at once. And, I might add, Other Company’s customer service was a dream. TIAA-CREF’s was a nightmare. I can’t wait for all of my money to be outta there.

BTW, TIAA has been sued several times over what I’ve just described, but, so far, it has prevailed.

 
Comment by talon
2013-03-08 15:47:54

For some reason TIAA seems to think it’s still 1980. Until recently, their web site was all but useless for transactions that any brokerage or mutual fund house would let you do as a matter of course (e.g, you could do an ACH transfer in to a fund, but not out—for that you had to call them). I just left my TIAA money there, since 5% guaranteed isn’t a bad deal, but when I went to roll my CREF account into a brokerage IRA I was subjected to a barrage of pop ups and redirects urging me to reconsider, and was I sure I really wanted to do that, and investing can be tricky, and by the way we have these wonderful other products etc. etc. Thanks, but I’m not 12 years old and I know what I’m doing, so buzz off (unfortunately no check box for that sentiment on the site).

 
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-08 07:57:57

But those who have been steadily dollar cost averaging into index funds are not nervous. We bought more shares when NAVs were low and we are buying fewer shares as they are high. Stubborn to not recognize cyclic nature of markets although we are humble in admitting we cannot time them. Both features work well for our assets.

Comment by Combotechie
2013-03-08 08:05:17

“Stubborn to not recognize cyclic nature of markets although we are humble in admitting we cannot time them.”

Don’t time them, price them. Bargains are not a function of time, they are a function of price.

If the price is right then buy. If the price is not right then don’t buy.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 08:24:37

“steadily dollar cost averaging…”

A philosophy based on the assumption that even purchases made at market tops will be worth much, much more in the future. Permagrowth. Perma credit expansion. It’s all we’ve ever known.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-08 17:37:32

I point you to the Dow since 1926.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 10:01:20

Who is this “our”? I thought you were a diehard single person. Or are some of your investments tied up with an ex wife?

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 10:52:13

He is speaking for all the other dollar cost averagers.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 10:06:49

“I’m a fool who cannot make money in any situation as I’m too confident in my reading of the bubble and scared to put in my hard earned money.”

You underestimate the will and ability of central bankers to inflate asset prices, while saying all along with a straight face that there are no bubbles. It’s hard to win in this one-sided poker game unless you are on the receiving list for ZIRP loans by the megabillions.

 
 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 06:11:10

Here’s a good one: CHINA: Cheap Housing Is Not Available.

Comment by Martin
2013-03-08 06:26:57

I think it is the Wall street banks driving up bubbles all around the world and coming up with reports of more growth and no bubble in many economies whereas even a normal sane person can see it is a bubble. Like in CHina, Aussie, NZ, HK,SIngapore, Canada, India and many more. Some analyst will say come from JP Morgan or GS and say a positive words and the bubble keeps going. These banks are in bed with the local central banks to keep interest rates low and keep printing more and more money in accordance with G-20. What a manipulation.

But how long can it go? Forever or just 3-4 years? It is all a new world to me. Some folks are getting it too easy and others are struggling very hard.

 
 
Comment by Bub Diddley
2013-03-08 06:35:09

Haven’t visited for a while, jus’ checkin’ in.

So, housing is still overpriced, right?

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 06:40:36

Buy a house today and your losses will be incalculable.

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:42:45

instantly underwater

Best handle I have seen in a while.

Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 06:48:21

Kinda makes a house seem like a new car just driven off the lot.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:56:29

Actually it is. You have to account for the 6% realtor fees.

 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 06:57:10

Kinda makes a house seem like a new car just driven off the lot.…….. and over a cliff.

 
Comment by Combotechie
2013-03-08 07:01:35

Except people don’t abandon new cars as soon as they are driven off the lot.

People don’t expect their cars to appreciate in value but their expectations for housing is that they ALWAYS appreciate in value. And if they don’t? Well, then they just walk away.

Love the NAR, love Zillow. Both are reversing FB expectations. Both are acting in concert to entice FBs to stay and pay instead of walking away.

 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 07:05:33

‘Except people don’t abandon new cars as soon as they are driven off the lot.’

So, houses are somewhere in there between cars and puppies?

 
Comment by Combotechie
2013-03-08 07:12:35

Zillow says my house went up $6,674 over the past 30 days. That’s at a rate of about $80 thou a year.

I find this quite amusing, but that’s because I am not underwater. If I were underwater if would most likely find this more hopeful than amusing, hopeful enough to keep on making the payments instead of walking away.

 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 07:15:16

Zillow says my house went up $6,674 over the past 30 days

Thought you were a renter?

 
Comment by Combotechie
2013-03-08 07:21:27

No, the only rent I am involved with is the imputed kind.

 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 07:25:05

“So, houses are somewhere in there between cars and puppies?”

This is what happens when the Housing Religion takes effect. Both depreciate.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 07:38:57

“So, houses are somewhere in there between cars and puppies?”

No. An elephant is nothing like a puppy, even if they are both white.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 10:09:28

“Kinda makes a house seem like a new car just driven off the lot.”

They are not equivalent. For an apt comparison, your losses from buying a house in our area would throw away an amount of money you could otherwise have used to purchase a new car.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 10:11:24

Not just making this up; supposing you paid 6% in commissions, and ignoring how far underwater you are initially due to paying an inflated sticker price, you would be out 6% * $500,000 = $30,000 the day you closed. And I keep reading about how people don’t have enough money to afford a new car…

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 10:20:42

Except people don’t abandon new cars as soon as they are driven off the lot.

Well…there was this time that Mitsubishi did some kind of nothing down and no payments for the first year or some deal like that. An “unexpectedly” high number of those were repoed after the first year.

 
Comment by polly
2013-03-08 15:06:18

Darn that accrual accounting.

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 22:26:51

“And if they don’t? Well, then they just walk away.”

And this is why it is imperative for the Fed to make real estate start always go up again. When real estate doesn’t always go up, banks lose money.

 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-09 14:30:56

Instant slum will move into the same neighborhood. Which is why not making any commitment to any physical location is a must in these times of “fair housing act.”

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 06:56:03

Hey Bub, the NAR says that we’re in a rebound and there is a shortage of houses for sale!

Still, new construction is at a 60+ year low. Go figure.

Maybe peeps are waiting for TEOTWAWKI that the Pres told us would happen if we sequestered a portion of his budget increases. No one would want to be stuck holding cash when that music stops.

Comment by alpha-sloth
2013-03-08 14:49:37

new construction is at a 60+ year low

Link?

 
 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 09:01:43

Yo, Bub! Long time, no post!

Welcome back to our ongoing nightmare/party/whatever you want to call it.

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 10:01:49

Renting = party
Loanownership = nightmare

Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 10:23:09

Renting = party
Loanownership = nightmare

And you are a renter, right?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 10:51:09

renting=Half the cost of buying at current inflated asking prices

You=Debt Junkie

 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 12:37:06

The losses in San Francisco will be incalculable.

 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 12:38:21

And you are a renter, right?

Answer the question, please.

 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 12:49:16

What are your losses so far?

 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 13:34:52

Dude, you are SO tiresome.

Are you single-handedly trying to drive people away from HBB?

Because your tedious and empty posts are boring, characterless, colorless, dull, flat, ho hum, humdrum, insipid, interminable, irksome, lifeless, monotonous, mundane, platitudinous, plebeian, prosaic, repetitious, routine, spiritless, stale, threadbare, tiresome, tiring, trite, unexciting, uninteresting, unvaried, vapid, wearisome, and well-worn.

At least put a little effort into it and use on online thesaurus.

 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 13:54:47

What are your losses so far?

Answer the question.

 
 
 
 
Comment by ahansen
2013-03-09 00:23:59

Yo, Bub!

 
 
Comment by 2banana
2013-03-08 06:51:30

Senate Vote of the Confirmation John Owen Brennan to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency:

Democrats:
YEA: 50 (to include one I who caucuses with the D)
NAY: 2

Republicans:
YEA: 13
NAY: 31

And remember - I read the memo. When democrats are in power - both parties are just as bad, there is no difference between the parties, it really doesn’t matter who is in charge so we may as well keep who we have.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=1&vote=00032

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 06:59:39

I am surprised that many voted against the drone master. Looks like those who were dined by the prez voted for him. Time for R party to kick war mongers like McCain and Graham.

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 07:05:45

Both D Nay’s were Vermont senators.

Elizabeth Warren shows what she truly is.

 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 07:10:56

The Democrat losses in 2014 will be incalculable.

Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 07:23:04

I doubt. Akin and Murdoch will be there again in some form.

Comment by oxide
2013-03-08 12:09:57

The trend is that 2014 is going to be a weak year for democrats in the Senate, based simply on the number of retiring Senators and demographic shifts in red and blue states. For example… if a blue-dog Dem in a red state retires, he is likely to be replaced by a solid R candidate.

By the way, I wonder what Obama said to those folks at swanky dinner to get them to vote for Brennen? Hopefully it wasn’t something like “If you get me my drone man and I’ll get you your Age 67 Medicare.” :shock:

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 06:51:46

Bloomberg lists the “best” big cities for renters (correction: every big city is best for renters, because renting is always better, and homeownership is always a loss). Unfortunately presented in slideshow format, as if they are trying to be MarketWatch.

1. New York
2. Seattle
3. Boston
4. San Francisco (tie)
4. Washington DC (tie)
5. Portland

http://www.bloomberg.com/money-gallery/2013-03-06/the-best-big-cities-for-renters.html

Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 08:11:10

That is a list of the HIGHEST rents in the nations.

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 08:29:29

Renting is always better. Always.

Comment by alpha-sloth
2013-03-08 14:57:18

Always.

What about that million dollars Taylor Swift made owning a beach house for a year?

That’s gotta be better than renting, no?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 15:13:39

That’s gotta be better than renting, no?
Only for Taylor Swift, and she doesn’t hang out in these parts. Your mileage will vary.

 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2013-03-08 15:21:21

Only for Taylor Swift, and she doesn’t hang out in these parts

Oh doesn’t she?

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by CRATER!!!!
2013-03-08 06:54:11

KEYYYYYYRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASH!!!!!

That’s the the sound of housing prices smashing through the floor in your neighborhood.

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 06:57:25

The losses in suburban Maryland and in San Francisco will be incalculable.

Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 07:17:33

instantly underwater

So instead of a…..

improvised explosive device (IED)

It would be a…..

(IUD)

instantly underwater deed

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 07:41:40

Contraceptives are not effective if you do the deed.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 07:01:13

Dude, that’s weak. That’s just a sinkhole swallowing a Bush.

 
 
Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 06:56:55

Last night I was looking for a song that these lyrics would fit in “You’re a liar. You’re making sh*t up again. Why is that?” couldn`t find one. But I did find this, don`t think I have headr it since about 1970.

Dead skunk in the middle of the road (lyrics) - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaN7xuAIjXI - 200k -

Comment by aNYCdj
2013-03-08 08:38:03

His son is a big gay guy….

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufus_Wainwright

Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 09:05:27

He sure is. But I think the father was a better musician.

OTOH, Al Jarreau. The guy is gay as all get-out and one heckuva singer.

 
Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 09:14:28

“His son is a big gay guy….”

Like I said last week after posting the article on the NFL teams asking a college kid who would be in this years draft if he liked girls……

If you can find me a 300 lb. lesbian who can stop the run and push the pocket, I want her on my team.

 
 
 
Comment by Lip
Comment by instantly underwater
 
Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 07:27:00

:)

 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 07:16:12

How the 0.1% (and the 0.01%) live in Singapore:

“What I see here is what I imagined must have happened in the U.S. in the 1880’s, in the Gilded Age, when it first took over England in terms of wealth,” he says. “It is truly shocking how much wealth there is — and how willing people are to spend it.”

http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/a/SB10001424127887324662404578334330162556670?mg=reno64-wsj

Comment by 2banana
2013-03-08 07:31:00

I would imagine most Americans would like to return to many of the policies of the 1880s:

1. Gold standard
2. Small and limited government
3. Factories opening all over the place
4. The 0.01% making their money PRODUCING things
5. No income tax
6. No wars without end
7. No drone strikes on kids
8. Any who wanted a job could find a job
9. Vast spaces of open land. Cheap land. Cheap housing.
10. Balanced budgets
etc.

Comment by Bluestar
2013-03-08 07:54:25

No electricity and a life expectancy of 45. You want to live like that you can always move to north Alaska. It’s the #1 place people go to ‘disappear’.

 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 07:59:31

Because the 1880’s were such a great time to be a Woman or a Negro.

Comment by Michael Viking
2013-03-08 08:08:43

Notice he said return to many of the policies of the 1880s:, not all policies. He then listed some of the policies. You forgot to mention all the medicine and disease problems we would have by going back to some of those policies.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 08:16:48

“a great time to be a Woman or a Negro…”

Or Irish

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 08:19:09

11. No speed limits

Comment by snowgirl
2013-03-08 12:16:06

no highway

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by alpha-sloth
2013-03-08 15:09:09

3. Factories opening all over the place

6. No wars without end
7. No drone strikes on kids

Kids working 72 hour weeks in those factories. Kids dying on the front lines of the Civil War. The majority of the population disenfranchised. Crony capitalism blowing endless bubbles and busts during the Long Depression.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-09 17:21:20

Did the factory owners force the kids to work there? Provide a URL for evidence.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by michael
2013-03-08 07:47:27

thos job creators really know how to party.

 
 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 07:17:31

“Future Leg down in the Great Housing Crisis”

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/housing/2013/03/aging-baby-boomers-and-next-housing-crisis/4863/

Demographers often describe the baby boom generation as if it were an indigestible mammal – maybe a pig, or a rabbit, or a really big rat – slowly moving through the python that is America’s population. As this generation has aged, the baby boom bulge has remade society in its image…In the 20 years between 1990 and 2010, these consumers were at their peak family size and peak income. And suddenly, there was massive demand in America from the same kinds of people for the same kinds of housing: big, large-lot single-family homes (often in suburbia). In those two decades, calculates researcher Arthur C. Nelson, 77 percent of demand for new housing construction in America was driven by this trend.

Looked at another way, he adds, in all that time “there was virtually no demand for starter homes.”

In the coming years, baby boomers will be moving on (inching further through the python, if you will). “They will want to sell their homes, and they’re hoping there are people behind them to buy their homes,” says Nelson, director of the Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah. He expects that in growing metros like Atlanta and Dallas, those buyers will be waiting. But elsewhere, in shrinking and stagnant cities across the country, the story will be quite different. Nelson calls what’s coming the “great senior sell-off.”
Demographics will further complicate this picture. We’re moving toward a future in America when minorities will become the majority. But given entrenched educational achievement gaps, particularly for the fast-growing Hispanic population, Nelson fears that the U.S. is not doing a good job educating the “new majority” to make the kinds of incomes that will be required to buy the homes we’ve already built.

As the Hispanic population expands, and more baby boomers retire, the gap between the two groups in the housing market – expressed in unsellable houses – will only widen.

I got lost at this point of shilling for ever greater public outlays on education, as if outsourcing of jobs & other issues regularly raised on the HBB don’t exist, or don’t count.

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 07:50:10

The products of low-investment parenting will soon be the majority in USA. An incalculable amount of money can be thrown down the sinkhole of public education, but it will do nothing to offset the growing minority population’s culture of low-investment parenting.

But it’s Racist® to talk about any of this.

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 08:08:14

One word: CRATER

 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 08:38:30

Idiocracy is the future. Even whites will continue to get dumber and dumber, even as we decline as a % of the population. More white kids will be raised in fundamentalist or reactionary households and more will be raised by WTs.

On the flip side, it is going to get significantly easier, from 2030 onward, for kids to get into Ivies and similar schools. The alums don’t have many kids (less than 2 per couple) and parents with grad degrees will similarly be reproducing below the replacement rate (women with grad degrees avg 1.3 children now).

Our only hope is that American-born asians will have big families, but I doubt this will happen. America was a nice experiment while it lasted, in 50 years it will be ruled by mouth-breathing trash, even moreso than now. That’s right around my life expectancy so I’m not going to stay up late at night worrying about it too much. It does make me thing twice about having a child in a couple of years, though.

Comment by aNYCdj
2013-03-08 08:43:39

Joe:

Why is everyone so scared of a War on Ebonics? This level of functional Illiteracy should be an embarrassment to the teacher unions, and politicians.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 08:45:45

You rockin’ the house on your harpsichord this weekend?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 08:56:54

The fastest growing demographic is USA is from Mexico and Central America. It’s racist to state that their parenting is more about quantity than quality but it’s true. The future prospects for the next few generations of their descendants will be much, much different than that of the Irish, Italians, Eastern European Jews that came to USA 100+ years ago.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 10:28:16

The fastest growing demographic is USA is from Mexico and Central America.

In California there are more Asians immigrating than Mexicans and Central Americans.

Asian Immigration To California Has Surpassed Latin-American Immigration

 
 
Comment by oxide
2013-03-08 09:16:58

So only whites and Asians are capable of having high IQ’s?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 09:45:40

No, but they (most of them anyway) have more of a culture of learning.

 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 09:55:18

@oxide - I’m assuming parental investment plays a huge role, equal to or above genetics. The white population is going to get even dumber than it is now as well, given the segments of the population that have the higher fertility numbers. It’s not really about race, per se, but about patterns between parental education, fertility patterns, and school performance.

 
Comment by aNYCdj
2013-03-08 10:30:32

And of not having kids they cant pay for…..how many deadbeat Asian fathers do you hear about? or having 11 kids by 10 women…

No, but they (most of them anyway) have more of a culture of learning.

 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 10:34:06

White people are indeed threatened by the success of Asian immigrants:

Asians: Too Smart for Their Own Good?

AT the end of this month, high school seniors will submit their college applications and begin waiting to hear where they will spend the next four years of their lives. More than they might realize, the outcome will depend on race. If you are Asian, your chances of getting into the most selective colleges and universities will almost certainly be lower than if you are white.

Asian-Americans constitute 5.6 percent of the nation’s population but 12 to 18 percent of the student body at Ivy League schools. But if judged on their merits — grades, test scores, academic honors and extracurricular activities — Asian-Americans are underrepresented at these schools. Consider that Asians make up anywhere from 40 to 70 percent of the student population at top public high schools like Stuyvesant and Bronx Science in New York City, Lowell in San Francisco and Thomas Jefferson in Alexandria, Va., where admissions are largely based on exams and grades.

In a 2009 study of more than 9,000 students who applied to selective universities, the sociologists Thomas J. Espenshade and Alexandria Walton Radford found that white students were three times more likely to be admitted than Asians with the same academic record.

Sound familiar? In the 1920s, as high-achieving Jews began to compete with WASP prep schoolers, Ivy League schools started asking about family background and sought vague qualities like “character,” “vigor,” “manliness” and “leadership” to cap Jewish enrollment. These unofficial Jewish quotas weren’t lifted until the early 1960s, as the sociologist Jerome Karabel found in his 2005 history of admissions practices at Harvard, Yale and Princeton.

In the 1920s, people asked: will Harvard still be Harvard with so many Jews? Today we ask: will Harvard still be Harvard with so many Asians? Yale’s student population is 58 percent white and 18 percent Asian. Would it be such a calamity if those numbers were reversed?

For middle-class and affluent whites, overachieving Asian-Americans pose thorny questions about privilege and power, merit and opportunity. Some white parents have reportedly shied away from selective public schools that have become “too Asian,” fearing that their children will be outmatched. Many whites who can afford it flock to private schools that promote “progressive” educational philosophies, don’t “teach to the test” and offer programs in art and music (but not “Asian instruments,” like piano and violin). At some of these top-tier private schools, too, Asian kids find it hard to get in.

At highly selective colleges, the quotas are implicit, but very real. So are the psychological consequences. At Northwestern, Asian-American students tell me that they feel ashamed of their identity — that they feel viewed as a faceless bunch of geeks and virtuosos. When they succeed, their peers chalk it up to “being Asian.” They are too smart and hard-working for their own good.

Since the 1965 overhaul of immigration law, the United States has lured millions of highly educated, ambitious immigrants from places like Taiwan, South Korea and India. We welcomed these immigrants precisely because they outperformed and overachieved. Yet now we are stigmatizing their children for inheriting their parents’ work ethic and faith in a good education. How self-defeating.

 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:01:37

Read Amy Chua’s book about her life as a Tiger Mom. She wasn’t very nice to her daughters, but they seem to have turned out okay. The younger girl wasn’t too into the mandatory music lessons, but she became a killer tennis player.

 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 12:04:11

The cultural relativist diversitards can’t stop spinning the “our differences only make us stronger” lie. What joe smith posted is correct. The Duggar family is the demographic future for white USA. And while Asian immigration may now exceed that from Latin America in land of fruits and nuts California, it does not for USA as a whole.

Reality is Racist®, some cultures value education and learning, some do not.

 
Comment by cactus
2013-03-08 13:26:56

My Junior High school son gave me the scoop on race just last night.

it’s funny. Blacks are considered being able to do anything better than anyone else except school work.

Asians and Indians don’t hang around non-honor students ie Mexicans and Blacks.

White is bad he is taught but he was not specific on how he was taught that ? I was quite curious about this but he’s in Junior high so getting rational answers is dicey.
he calls himself Mexican he is half Mexican so OK whatever.

I asked how many Mexicans were in his honors math class ? Answer none besides himself.

The Public School thought programming does not seem to be working out so well does it ?

And why are the kids who get free school lunches so over weight?

 
Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 14:15:42

White is bad he is taught but he was not specific on how he was taught that ? I was quite curious about this but he’s in Junior high so getting rational answers is dicey.
He is like a fish, and you are like someone asking a fish about the water he has been swimming in for his entire lifetime. Don’t expect a useful answer. He will likely come to an understanding of how he was ‘taught’ that, but probably not for a few more decades. I am impressed that he is at least aware of what he has been taught so far, and he seems to getting a glimmer that his lesson is unreal and not all that useful for his future life. Talk to him about the things you once thought were gospel truth but have learned, in later life, were utter nonsense.

 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2013-03-08 20:14:04

‘My Junior High school son gave me the scoop on race just last night. ‘

Sounds like SouthPark meets Napoleon Dynamite. I was lol at what you wrote.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 10:14:51

“great senior sell-off.”

We’ve been over that here hundreds of times by now. Glad to see MSM writers are catching on…

Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 13:53:17

Glad to see MSM writers are catching on…
I post stuff like that to document the ever-so-gradual change in conventional wisdom. When enough wisdom has percolated from places like the HBB through the MSM & into the electorate’s thick skulls, we just may pull out of the crisis we’re in.

 
 
 
Comment by chilidoggg
2013-03-08 07:31:57

From yesterday’s bits bucket:

Comment by joe smith
2013-03-07 07:27:16

The avg American has only like 75k in his/her 401k.

No. The average 401(k) balance is $75k.

Those two statements are not the same.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_162-57569677/401-k-accounts-hit-record-high-is-yours-enough/

“(MoneyWatch) According to Fidelity Investments, the average 401(k) balance among 12 million participants in plans they manage was $77,300 at the end of 2012.”

12 million participants is not the American labor force.

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 07:48:56

Many of the workers in our shop do not have a 401K. They do not participate despite a $ match by the employer.

Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 08:42:23

WHat’s the vesting period?

How much is the match?

A lot of places require 2 years for vesting. If it’s not a dream job, it might not make sense to contribute because if a good job comes along you lose the match if you take the job. Meanwhile your money is locked up in a stupid system with red tape and penalties for taking the money out.

A lot of places only match up to 1-2% of salary. Not that worth getting worked up over.

There’s no reason that people need to have some special account marked as “retirement savings”. Smart people will save on their own volition. It shouldn’t take government encouragement or nanny-ing.

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 09:19:05

3% and 1 year. Job retention in the shop is probably 10+ years on average. If you make it to 1 year, probably going to stay forever.

The match is worth the red tape, and if you leave you still get your own contribution back.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 09:58:01

In this case, everyone should contribute the 3%.

There are a lot of bad plans these days, with a 1% match after 2 years or other such nonsense.

I’d still say it’s madness to contribute 10% of your income, for example, if the employer is only matching 3%. It takes research and discipline, but there are much better rewards out there. Sadly, for the average complacent American, a 401k is “forced savings” because most of them would not save the money if they were not goaded into it.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 10:55:16

Joe, a mortgage is as close to forced savings as most Americans get.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 17:51:27

“It takes research and discipline, but there are much better rewards out there.”

The average “complacent” American is overwhelmed with the requirements of daily modern life where they have to be their own expert at everything because you can’t trust anyone these days and there are no longer any real penalties or compensation for those who commit fraud against them.

I have to watch my bank everyday. That’s just for starters.

 
 
Comment by cactus
2013-03-08 12:58:44

after the last recession the match went away at many companies like RFMD

I have no idea if it came back

No match on 401K were I work. We get RSU and stock options. maybe 5K to 20K per year taxed as income. As soon as you vest Etrade sells some to pay taxes what you do with the rest is up to you.

Most Engineer’s put in the max ~22K. Most high level managers don’t even bother they get >500K in stock grants and option’s all public record. This is per year.

I did much better buying pre IPO options in 2006 for par so no AMT. Company went public around 2010 so when I sold long term capital gains.

But it was risky the company could have gone to zero it was way before it made a profit.
I bought them because I quit and moved to Phoenix. I had 60 days then they went back to the company.

Working for public companies is crap compared to start ups as far as potential stock option gains go. All the sciopaths move into managment when it’s public it’s a whole different thing.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Neuromance
2013-03-08 09:54:21

One has to make enough to meet his or her living expenses and immediately-available savings goals before being able to put away money that he won’t use until retirement.

Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 09:59:50

I get what you’re saying, but saving is always a choice, just like paying down debt. There are always other temptations. Even if the savings you start out with are paltry, it’s a mindset that must be sharpened.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-08 08:00:59

In all the engineering environments I worked coast to coast, most engineers invest in 401ks.

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 08:06:46

Maybe for the first few years. After 5, many become owners or get huge bonuses that dwarf their annual salary.

Comment by cactus
2013-03-08 12:48:02

Maybe for the first few years. After 5, many become owners or get huge bonuses that dwarf their annual salary.”

Engineering ? No way

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 15:17:52

Yes way.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 16:12:21

Dwarf? The biggest bonuses I’ve seen so far in software engineering (not management) are 40% of annual salary.

 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 21:43:54

“software” engineering…. ehh…. Not really engineering but that’s not the point. Once you become an owner in a civy firm, the salary becomes so small relative to 401k, profit sharing, bonus and dividend, it’s almost meaningless.

 
 
 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 08:43:45

They’re sheep unless they’re getting a good match. The match is a good ROI, so long as you actually get it. The fees, red tape, penalties, and tracking of one’s money really mute the so-called benefits of using a 401k in many situations.

Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 09:29:02

would you trust your retirement to wall street?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 09:48:09

The short answer is no, the real money on Wall Street is a) made prior to IPO b) in products the average person can’t buy c) not in public companies d) when it is in a public company, it’s a deal you can’t get unless you’re a big player and, finally, e) made in transactions costs and fees paid to lawyers and bankers for structuring deals which rarely benefit J6P shareholders. There are better ways to roll than trusting Wall Street with your retirement.

If you’re getting a match of 3 or 5% of salary and it’s a reasonable vesting period, then it could be worth it but only for the match (IMO).

 
Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 10:50:02

your retirement can vanish overnight if there is a crash.

I invest in myself.

 
 
 
 
Comment by rms
2013-03-08 08:06:34

“12 million participants is not the American labor force.”

+1 And the lösers are busy fine-tuning their disability limp/twitch.

Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 08:22:45

If home and stock prices are going up so much do people need a job?

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 08:25:54

To earn cash to pay someone to backfill the moon crater.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 08:48:41

That makes my point even more.

If they average ACCOUNT is 75k, that is woefully inadequate and downright pitiful. What the heck can you do with 75k over the course of even a 10 year retirement?

The context of me saying this was, the LAST place I’d want to have, say, a million bucks is in a 401k or IRA. Having a well-funded retirement account is an invitation to be means-tested out of a chunk of SS or MC benefits. Of course, these might be really paltry benefits anyway in 40 years when I am eligible.

No thanks, I don’t feel like giving the gov’t a good reason to take from me and give to an older generation that basically screwed the country up.

In addition, 401ks and IRAs are a joke compared to the real vehicles that people in-the-know use to avoid taxes. They’re for pikers. If you’re 50+, sure maybe the gov’t won’t means test or touch your retirement account. But it would be foolish for a young person to invest in these vehicles. People who know how to save and play the game would see there are superior methods.

Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 09:05:40

Also, the contribution limits on 401ks and IRAs are too low. Unless you start setting aside 10k+ age age 25 and the market provides a 5% avg annual return, I don’t think the system makes any sense. Most people in their 20s don’t have a steady enough job or a job that pays enough. Many have school loans. Then you have people later in life who are laid off in their 50s - all it takes is a few years to get off-course. And in the meantime, if you want to tap the money to start a business, pay off your house, etc. there are penalties *plus* you get to pay the taxes.

401k’s and IRA’s were just a way for the puppet masters to obscure how screwed the masses are. “Hey, you can use these personal accounts, they’re much better than pension plans. And since they’re self funded, they’re a great supplement to SS/MC.” All the meanwhile, they can fail to plan for SS/MC cuts (that will likely happen, esp for younger people) and get rid of pensions and let companies void their pension obligations. But hey, the rank-and-file loser J6P’s of the world have “their own 401k’s”, so all they need to do is be responsible. Duh!

Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:02:53

401k’s and IRA’s were just a way for the puppet masters to obscure how screwed the masses are. “Hey, you can use these personal accounts, they’re much better than pension plans. And since they’re self funded, they’re a great supplement to SS/MC.”

Bingo. That’s exactly what the game plan was. And is.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CA renter
2013-03-10 05:27:13

Exactly.

 
 
Comment by HBB_Rocks
2013-03-08 11:09:29

If they average ACCOUNT is 75k, that is woefully inadequate and downright pitiful. What the heck can you do with 75k over the course of even a 10 year retirement?

======
A worker can have more than one 401k account, because they don’t travel with you from job to job. If you want to consolidate them, you have a 410k IRA Rollover, and the average on that is something like $125k. But there is no general reason to do so, so it’s not all that common.

The statistic you keep quoting is based on accounts as far as I can tell, not consolidated by person. Also, 401ks haven’t been around all that long, so the EBRI doesn’t even seem to keep stats on them.

Also for all this garbage about means testing taking away SS, the average person gets $1200 a month in Social Security and the median retired person who has a pension gets less than $20k a year from it. A $20k a year pension is the equivelent of about $350k saved.

http://www.ebri.org/pdf/notespdf/EBRI_Notes_05-May10.IAs.pdf

For a really fun comparison and to stir up 2Bananna’s blood, check the average pension for a public vs private worker: more or less 2X.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 11:34:48

A worker can have more than one 401k account, because they don’t travel with you from job to job.

I hadn’t thought about that. Most of my accounts are now with Fidelity as various different past companies have slowly been assimilated, but while I think of my 401(k) as a total amount, it actually is in multiple smaller accounts technically.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2013-03-09 02:19:02

@Carl,

Is there a reason you don’t roll them into one IRA (where you have lots of control on investments)? I have no 401k (and never have), my wife has been with two companies with two 401ks, and IRAs (Roth and traditional).

Through conversion and consolidation, we now have 2 Roth IRAs and 1 401k (also Roth). Three accounts now total, which originally was 6.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-09 19:08:24

Is there a reason you don’t roll them into one IRA (where you have lots of control on investments)?

I checked into self-directed at one time and that option had been shut off in the account I was looking at at the time. I haven’t done what you are describing because I don’t understand the full ramifications enough to trust doing it. For example the gotchas with Roths…don’t fully understand that either.

 
 
 
Comment by Carl Morris
2013-03-08 10:58:42

If they average ACCOUNT is 75k, that is woefully inadequate and downright pitiful. What the heck can you do with 75k over the course of even a 10 year retirement?

Well…you make a valid point but keep in mind that the average worker is still mid career and figuring on another 20 years of contributions and compounding.

Personally, for all the downsides of a 401(k) I’m still glad to have something that follows me from job to job rather than making me do most of my career at one company to get a pension. The army taught me that.

 
Comment by mathguy
2013-03-08 12:28:53

What are these “Real vehicles” of which you speak?

 
Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 14:16:16

A recession every 6 years,serial layoffs, no raises and double digit inflation makes it IMPOSSIBLE for J6P to save any real money for retirement.

But J6P keeps voting for the very people who keep screwing him.

You can’t fix that kind of stupid.

 
 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
Comment by instantly underwater
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 09:26:41

Narcissism doesn’t die, it gets embalmed.

Comment by Bluestar
2013-03-08 10:10:10

Chavez was right about one thing though, Bush was evil. Worst president since Reagan.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:03:53

Agreed. And I’m not exactly in the Hugo Chavez fan club.

 
Comment by Northeastener
2013-03-08 11:57:35

Chavez was right about one thing though, Bush was evil. Worst president since Reagan.

And some people here wonder why I throw around the term “Communist” so much. Nothing Chavez did was worthwhile. He was evil. His ideology was evil. He was anti-capitalist. He was a Communist. Please take your head out of the liberal socialist left’s ass…

And no, Joe “I’m a freaking Communist” Kennedy and his “Oil for poor people paid for by Citgo and that Communist Chavez” was not worthwhile… it was leftist propaganda.

 
Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 12:26:04

I wouldn’t say any President is “evil”, why not just say he was responding to incentives and serving a master other than the average American.

To be honest, the thing that annoyed me most about W was that he believed in black/white, right/wrong, evil/good ways of thinking. The real world has many gray areas and nuances that must be examined. If we’d done this, we would’ve been fighting a very limited and well-defined battle with AQ or else not fighting anyone at all for the past 12 years. It would’ve been a glorious time by comparison to what we’ve been doing.

 
Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 14:18:12

Chavez did more for the average person than the capitalist aristocrats EVER did.

Period.

 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 14:34:36

Chavez did more for the average person

I am sure you know the difference between buying votes and helping the needy….

 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-03-08 10:17:19

mummified…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Pimp Watch
 
 
Comment by ten crispy donuts
2013-03-08 10:57:43

As long as Mrs. Chavez, brother Chavez or a kid Chavez don’t think they are entitled for political offices, I would say it’s worth it.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 09:13:13

Buy a house today and your losses will be incalculable.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/08/us-housing-is-the-recovery-real/

 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 10:39:07

About time judges get serious about dangerous bike riders:

That guy made his bed when he immediately went online after the accident with his bravado and testosterone about the accident (before he knew that the person he hit had died).

The hills here are no joke on a bicycle, and it’s pretty easy to hit 35 mph, even in the city.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:07:01

I can remember an attempt to pedal up a hill in the Presidio. I was biking around the country, it was 1981, and I quickly learned how hard the bicycling is in San Francisco.

My attempt was unsuccessful.

 
 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:05:39

I’m as much of a hater of the gonzo bicyclists as the next person. After all, I have two elderly parents who could easily be in Sutchi Hui’s place.

So, two-wheeler dealers, control your speed out there, mmm-kay?

Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:24:44

From Tucson, there’s the other side of the coin:

Driver accused of hitting pro cyclists defends himself in online forum

In the online comments after this story, we gave the driver a verbal beat-down. And, yes, I participated. Oh, did I ever.

Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 12:41:55

I’ve seen a lot of cyclists with GoPro cameras mounted on their helmets, and have heard of more than one instance of drivers acting aggressively toward bicyclists and the entire thing was recorded, including the license plate.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 13:09:15

One of my neighbors rides with a GoPro. I’m thinking of doing the same thing. I’d like to record a few things as I ride.

 
Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 14:17:15

I’d like to record a few things as I ride.
Playback’s a bitch, or so I’ve heard.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by instantly underwater
 
Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 10:52:05

is aapl a value stock now since it has dropped 40%?

wasnt cramer pimping aapl before it crashed?

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 10:58:08

yes he was.

And today he pimped housing for the entire morning.

Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 11:15:39

who pays this guy?

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 11:31:06

Pays him to do what?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 13:13:38

pimp everything.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2013-03-08 22:16:29

As soon as he pimps my company’s stock, I am selling it all.

 
 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 11:22:07

Here’s a little data point for y’all: Among other things, I write copy for websites. Which means that I get more than a few inquiries from the SEO (search engine optimization) companies.

Now, truth be told, I did have a site that was ranked #1 in Google for several years, and that wasn’t just my doing. (I had a great SEO guy who was also a dear friend. Alas, he died in 2006.)

So, let’s just say that I know enough about SEO to be dangerous.

Earlier this week, I got an inquiry from a company wanting to know about my level of expertise in:

- Real Estate
- Automotive
- Chiropractic Care
- Laser Hair Removal, skin care, tattoo removal, etc
- Custom Window Treatments

What do all of these industries have in common? Well, they’re highly competitive. Meaning that it’s difficult to get your website to rank well in the search engines.

They also have way too many people in them for the amount of business that’s out there. That’s especially true in real estate. You’ve probably heard that expression, if you don’t have any friends in real estate, you don’t have any friends.

However, they could be indicative of a growing economy. After all, window treatments weren’t exactly in demand back in 2008 or 2009. Likewise, autos. Sales haven’t exactly been booming for a while.

Since I like to be honest about what I can and cannot do, I told this particular company that the above industries are not within my area of expertise. Instead, I concentrate on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and green (meaning environmentally-oriented) businesses. The STEM sector appears to be picking up, and green, well, let’s just say that it’s red-hot these days.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2013-03-08 11:54:11

“If you bought a house 1998-current, you’re going to lose alot of money. ALOT of money.

Comment by joe smith
2013-03-08 12:22:01

Corrolary:Buyinga house is always a loss, always.

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 13:10:57

Good point my harpsichordist. However, the losses associated with buying from 1998-current are far greater than any other time in history.

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2013-03-08 12:31:15

And guess where the majority of NEW jobs come from? Hint: It is not from big businesses…

————————–

Big Business Supports Minimum Wage Hikes - Lobbying intended to hurt mom-and-pop competitors
Michigan Capitol Confidential | 3/7/2013 | Jarrett Skorup

A new poll shows that a majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage. Doing so would almost surely help large businesses at the expense of smaller mom-and-pop stores and lower-skilled workers.

A few years ago, the conservative chief executive at Wal-Mart went public advocating for an increase in the minimum wage. A short time later, the “maverick” left-wing Costco CEO Jim Sinegal followed suit. Was it out of the goodness of their hearts? Maybe, but the more likely reason is that this would help their bottom-line.

While small businesses tend to be only marginally profitable and would have to spend a greater proportion of time and money dealing with this increase, larger corporations face no such predicament. Wal-Mart and Costco already pay significantly higher hourly wages than the current federal minimum — an average wage of $10-$13 an hour at Wal-Mart and $17 an hour at Costco as of a few years ago.

But minimum wage workers generally work for smaller, locally owned operations. These jobs tend to be temporary and help get low-skilled and first-time workers into the workforce. Many readers have undoubtedly started out with a similar experience. So while a higher mandated minimum would barely touch larger corporations, it would certainly hurt their small business competition.

Big business loves big government. In 2009, Philip Morris teamed up with the Obama administration and supported a bill that would allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco in a way that hurts its competition. A few years ago, Coca-Cola announced a “world-wide commitment” to support putting energy information on all products — significantly hurting smaller bottlers while barely denting the huge conglomerate’s bottom line.

Nike and Apple advocate for a “carbon tax,” which would hammer their competitors while leaving the majority of their out-of-country operations unscathed. And H&R Block and Turbo Tax continue to lobby the Internal Revenue Service to crush smaller operations so they, in their own words, “won’t be competing against people who aren’t regulated and don’t have the same standards as we do.”

A small percentage of Americans actually make the legally allowed minimum, typically 2 percent to 5 percent of hourly workers, compared to nearly 15 percent in the late 1970s and early 1980s. These workers tend to be young, low-skilled and just starting out in the workforce. But as they gain skills and experience, workers move up and their compensation increases.

Comment by instantly underwater
2013-03-08 12:35:25

The losses created by Obama and the Democrats will be incalculable.

Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 14:10:06

indubitably

 
 
 
Comment by cactus
2013-03-08 12:36:13

In Las Vegas, where Pardee Homes is building 150 percent more homes this year than they did last year, finding workers is increasingly difficult.

“We lost quite a bit of labor to the oil fields and to places like Wyoming and North Dakota, where you would not expect it to go,” noted Klif Andrews, Pardee’s Las Vegas president.

Andrews said he is paying workers five to ten percent more now, and that has pushed his home prices higher. “We’ve raised median home prices up over 15 percent, so we’ve been able to stay a little bit ahead of it, but cost increases, it’s not just labor, it’s also materials,” he added.

Nationwide, the median price for newly built homes rose 2 percent in January and new home prices now far exceed the median price for existing homes.

Comment by ecofeco
2013-03-08 14:07:34

5 to 10%!

Be still my beating heart! :roll:

 
 
Comment by snowgirl
2013-03-08 12:56:13

Oh, this little tidbit from the local paper caught my attention. Makes one feel all warm and fuzzy going into the weekend.

Remington Arms awarded $80 million federal contract for sniper rifles

Washington — The Department of Defense has awarded the Remington Arms factory in Ilion a contract worth $80 million to produce more than 5,000 sniper rifles for the U.S. military, Rep. Richard Hanna said today.

The rifles will be manufactured over the course of 10 years at the Remington plant in Herkimer County, said Hanna, R-Barneveld.

The federal contract award comes on the same day of reports that Remington plans to spend $20 million upgrading the plant, which employs about 1,200 people.

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/03/remington_arms_awarded_80_mill.html#incart_more_business

Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 14:03:33

“Sniping” is an activity open to most of the population willing to invest in a bit of basic equipment and a lot of practice. Think of Chris Dorner without the craziness, but with patience & a willingness to get no closer than a half a mile. There is a monument on the grounds of the Michigan state capitol building that illustrates my point.

Comment by tresho
2013-03-08 14:20:27

Photo of the monument is posted here.
“Sharpshooter” is the Civil War term for sniper. A little known fact is the statue’s point of aim - the capitol building’s front door.

 
 
 
Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 14:06:35

CNBC Maria Bartiromo smirked and started laughing when interviewing some liar who said “housing inventories are low”.

Comment by Arizona Slim
2013-03-08 14:16:33

She’s been bicycling with me. We’ve been riding around Tucson looking at the shadow inventory. Not to mention all those SFRs and apartment complexes looking for tenants.

Comment by Pimp Watch
2013-03-08 14:33:00

I’m enjoying the same ride across 4 states in the northeast.

 
 
 
Comment by sfhomowner
2013-03-08 14:28:22

Does Crime Drop When Immigrants Move In?

As lawmakers in Washington continue to negotiate over immigration policies, they’ll have to grapple with a fundamental disagreement about the link between immigrants and crime.

Elected officials from Pennsylvania to Arizona have argued that undocumented immigrants contribute to higher crime rates, but some social scientists tell a different story. They argue that first-generation immigrants actually make their communities safer — and they point to some of the nation’s biggest cities as proof.

“When a lot of immigrants come to communities, crime tends to drop,” says Philip Kasinitz, who teaches sociology at the City University of New York Graduate Center. “And, of course, it’s quite the opposite of what many people think.”

And it’s not just happening in New York City. Across the country, cities with high rates of immigration, like Los Angeles, Houston and San Diego, also have much lower crime rates than they did 20 years ago.

Some social scientists say that’s not a coincidence. Robert Sampson of Harvard University argues that first-generation immigrants make their communities safer by working hard and raising families.

“You don’t migrate to the United States from countries around the world on a whim. It takes planning,” Sampson says. “And for the most part, it is driven by economic motivations. People want a better life. They’re seeking to get ahead. And those are the very factors that tend to be associated with lower crime.”

Sampson says this seems to be true whether or not the immigrants have entered the country legally. But some say there is a difference when it comes to crime.

“There’s no evidence that immigrants — or even illegal immigrants — are necessarily any more or less likely to be committing crimes than the population at large, says Jessica Vaughan, the center’s director of policy studies. “It’s just that they tend to be associated with certain types of crimes — drug trafficking, for example.”

There is evidence that immigrants are overrepresented in local prison systems in Arizona and elsewhere. But overall, violent crime is actually lower than you would expect along the U.S. border with Mexico, says Ramiro Martinez, who teaches criminology at Northeastern University.

“In Texas, homicides are actually a little bit lower in border counties than they are in the rest of the state,” Martinez says. “Not only in Texas, but also in New Mexico and Arizona, in California — more immigrants means less crime.”

That finding may run counter to the public perception that immigrants contribute to higher crime rates. But if lawmakers in Washington look to the research of Martinez and others, they’ll find a growing body of evidence to the contrary.

 
Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 15:14:26

MACHINE GUN FOR ME BUT NOT FOR THEE? Anti-Gun Lobbyist Caught-On-Tape Moment An Embarrassment To Himself, Bloomberg

Published on March 8, 2013
by ColoradoPeakPolitics

A picture is worth a thousand words, and this picture doesn’t say a lot about the integrity of Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s top anti-gun lobbyist.

Gun control for thee, but “assault weapons” for me?

Michael Bloomberg’s lobbyist Adam Eichberg may hate watermelons, but he seems to love hypocrisy.

The Washington Free Beacon tells the story. Read it.

One of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s top gun-control lobbyists in Colorado appears to enjoy firing the very guns he is working to restrict.

Denver-based Headwaters Strategies lobbyist Adam Eichberg participated at a “watermelon shoot” in September 2012 at the farm of Colorado state Sen. Greg Brophy (R.) where he fired a semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine.

A picture obtained by the Washington Free Beacon shows Eichberg smiling broadly as he shoulders a DPMS .308 rifle with a 20-round magazine.

Then wonder… is this just a game for Mr. Eichberg? After the Drudge Report picked up on this story yesterday, it isn’t just Capitol insiders asking themselves that question. A few million of our closest friends have seen the distasteful hypocrisy of the anti-gun movement — guns are fun and safe, but only insiders and political big shots get to use them.

http://coloradopeakpolitics.com/2013/03/08/ar-for-me-but-not-for-thee-anti-gun-lobbyist-caught-on-tape-moment-an-embarrassment-to-himself-bloomberg/ -

 
Comment by hazard
2013-03-08 15:35:28

LMAO

Michael Bloomberg nanny state: has the mayor gone too … - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drhhxSUk99w - 216k - Cached - Similar pages
1 day ago …

 
Comment by ecofeco
 
Comment by ecofeco
Comment by CA renter
2013-03-10 05:40:08

Wow. Good stuff, eco!

 
 
Comment by anngogh
2013-03-08 17:48:49

So I saw a nice place in Vista, Ca

http://instatour.propertypanorama.com/instaview/snd/130011687

Hello Ann,
Cris West here, I work with Nils at Keller Williams. I look forward to meeting soon and assisting you with your home search along with Nils;)
I know you are in the process of getting Loan Approval which is of course is Step 1. Just wanted to let you know that the listing agent remarks say that the home will be available for showing this weekend, Sat 9-5 and Sun 9-5. They are accepting offers ONLY until Monday 3-11. (Yes, this market is hot!)
I will be available this weekend so if you want to view, give me a call and I would be happy to set it up! My direct cell is 760.419.3003.
Hope you have a great weekend Ann!
Cris

I don’t want to get pre approved, i just want to see the house.
oh well.

Comment by azdude
2013-03-08 19:08:31

sounds slimy to me.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-03-08 21:51:44

“(Yes, this market is hot!)”

No good can come from doing business with a liar.

 
 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post