Bits Bucket for March 12, 2013
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.
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
Boomerang buyers return to market after foreclosure
By Les Christie @CNNMoney March 11, 2013: 6:12 AM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
Borrowers who lost homes to foreclosure during the housing bust are starting to buy again.
Since the housing bubble burst, 4.8 million borrowers have lost their homes to foreclosure, and another 2.2 million gave them up in short sales, according to RealtyTrac. While many are still struggling to recover financially, a growing number are starting to bounce back — and they are looking for a new place to call home.
Susan Edwards and her husband, Dave, lost their Palmdale, Calif., home in 2010 after Susan’s severe arthritis made it impossible for her to work her medical device sales job.
The medical bills soon piled up and the couple could no longer afford their $2,300 monthly mortgage payment. In addition, their home’s value had plunged 40% below the $325,000 mortgage balance.
“We were living under such pressure,” she said. “We looked at the numbers and knew we had to default.”
After the foreclosure, Susan’s credit score had taken a 70-point hit; Dave’s score fell even further.
By paying all of the bills on time, they nursed their credit scores back to health. And in December, two years after they lost their old home, the couple was able to buy a new home with a loan backed by the Veteran’s Administration. VA-insured loans can be obtained just two years after a foreclosure, according to the Mike Frueh, director of the VA’s Loan Guaranty Program.
The new house is a lot like the Edwards’ old one, with one big improvement: The mortgage payment is $1,150 a month — roughly half the amount they used to pay.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/11/real_estate/foreclosure-homes/ - -
I can’t control my tears of joy for this happy couple.
VA is in the scam too, huh?
I’d be curious to see what these lending programs are.
“Student loans and mortgages backed by the Federal Housing Administration, among more than 100 other lending programs, contain potential losses that are much more costly than what current accounting suggests, according to the FER.”
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=3126
“Susan Edwards and her husband, Dave, lost their Palmdale, Calif., home in 2010 after Susan’s severe arthritis made it impossible for her to work her medical device sales job.”
Where is “down” from Palmdale, the Salton Sea?
“We looked at the numbers and knew we had to default.”
All of the commission junkies, hyena really, at the closing table “knew” they were dead the second their signatures were inked on the top sheet. Tough chit!
just remember…it was for the greater good.
“Susan Edwards and her husband, Dave, lost their Palmdale, Calif., home in 2010 after Susan’s severe arthritis made it impossible for her to work her medical device sales job.”
Did anyone see the photo of Susan Edwards? Now I am no doctor but I know a guy who had arthritis and when he lost 35lbs. he lost his arthritis too. Not to mention the fact that her husband Dave looks like he has spent more than a few years working on what looks to be the start of a really nice Gin Blossom.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gin%20blossoms - 18k -
Is Obesity Causing a Rise in Rheumatoid Arthritis Among Women?
By Alexandra SifferlinMay 10, 20120
Rheumatoid arthritis may soon be added to the growing list of health risks associated with obesity. According to a recent Mayo Clinic study, women with a history of obesity are at a higher risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis.
To study the association, the researchers analyzed medical records from 1980 to 2007 that were part of the Rochester Epidemiology Project. The team looked at data on 813 adults with rheumatoid arthritis and 813 disease-free adults, matched for age and gender, as the controls. About 30% of the participants were obese and 68% were women.
(MORE: Aching Back? Try Massage for Chronic Pain)
The researchers found that rheumatoid arthritis cases rose by 9.2 per 100,000 women from 1985 to 2007 and that obesity accounted for 52% of that increase. Women are more likely to get rheumatoid arthritis, which could explain why the association was more significant for them. In 2007, an estimated 1.5 million Americans had rheumatoid arthritis.
http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/10/is-obesity-causing-a-rise-in-rheumatoid-arthritis-among-women/ - 66k
I interviewed a guy for a story yesterday. He said that he kicked type 2 diabetes right outta his body by losing a lot of weight. It has never reappeared.
Although I treaded daily, my carb intake was very high, and my doc said I was a Diabetic and I had 30 pounds to lose. He held off on meds and gave me south beach diet guidelines to read, and gave me 90 days to get it done. Fast forward, I kicked my high blood sugar. That was 9 years ago. I might yo-yo 3 lbs, but now I get it. Of course, I didn’t fry my pancreas and got my blood sugar under control. Some folks rather take the meds and become a helpless “victim” of Type 2.
(I use to love white rice and pasta. Don’t touch the stuff now.)
Of course, I didn’t fry my pancreas and got my blood sugar under control.
Type II DM can take 10-20 years to fry the pancreas. You’re doing good so far.
This is about the ONLY reason I MIGHT support a “no-big-sugary-drinks” law. i.e. - it can be proven that government (taxpayers) are picking up the tab for people’s bad choices…
If the bad choice consequences are being picked up by Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, the U.S. Public Health Service, you bet your sweet bippy that We the Taxpayers are on the hook.
Of course, but this is why, while I’m for things like universal health care, I’d also want weights and measures in place as well. But until you have that you have to go the “free to make their own choices” route, IMO.
And yes, I’m not ashamed to say that my bippy is pretty sweet.
And yes, I’m not ashamed to say that my bippy is pretty sweet.
ttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064627/
And yes, I’m not ashamed to say that my bippy is pretty swee
If you are a young female, let us be the judge.
If you are a young female, let us be the judge.
*waves hand*
This is not the bippy you are looking for…
i used to have lower back problems…till i lost 20 lbs.
What is a “Gin Blossom”?
a crappy rock band.
Gin blossom definition
One of my uncles resembled that remark. He died of liver cancer. No surprise that his cancer took up residence in that organ.
Why buy a house today? Rent for half the monthly cost and buy later, after prices crater for 65% less.
The losses in suburban Maryland and in San Francisco will be incalculable.
Still waiting for rents in San Francisco to drop 65%.
Were you having a good week? Too bad. We’re here to shed some light on the housing situation in San Francisco. And it’s brutal. For us, anyway. You too, we can only assume. This map (via Zumper) shows the average rent in February 2013 for a 1BR in varying San Francisco neighborhoods.
Map: Average Rent For 1BR In San Francisco By Neighborhood
Why woud rents drop 65% when rental rates are half the cost of buying at these massively inflated asking prices of resale housing in the bay area?
What are your losses so far?
“The losses in suburban Maryland and in San Francisco will be incalculable”
Can’t do math eh ? Not surprised.
Incalculable. The losses associated with paying grossly inflated amounts for what is always a depreciating asset is stunning.
“too-small-to-save”
Has a nice ring to it! I wonder if the Sherman Antitrust Act could be brought to bear in the transition away from “too-big-to-fail”?
OPINION
March 10, 2013, 6:17 p.m. ET
Fisher and Rosenblum: How to Shrink the ‘Too-Big-to-Fail’ Banks
Dodd-Frank isn’t working. Time for a better, simpler approach to reducing risk. Call it ‘too small to save.’
By RICHARD W. FISHER AND HARVEY ROSENBLUM
A dozen megabanks today control almost 70% of the assets in the U.S. banking industry. The concentration of assets has been in progress for years, but it intensified during the 2008–09 financial crisis, when several failing giants were absorbed by larger, presumably healthier ones. The result is a lopsided financial system.
Meanwhile, the mere 0.2% of banks deemed “too big to fail” are treated differently from the other 99.8%, and differently from other businesses. Implicit government policy has made these institutions exempt from the normal processes of bankruptcy and creative destruction. Without fear of failure, these banks and their counterparties can take excessive risks.
It also emboldens a sense of immunity from the law. As Attorney General Eric Holder admitted to the Senate on March 6, when banks are considered too big to fail it is “difficult to prosecute them . . . if we do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy.”
…
The return of marketplace discipline and effective due diligence of banking behemoths is long overdue. We offer a modest proposal to level the playing field:
First, we would roll back the federal safety net—deposit insurance and the Federal Reserve’s discount window—to apply only to traditional commercial banks, and not to the nonbank affiliates of bank holding companies or the parent companies themselves, where the safety net was never intended to be.
Second, customers, creditors and counterparties of all nonbank affiliates and the parent holding companies would sign a simple, legally binding, unambiguous disclosure acknowledging and accepting that there is no government guarantee—ever—backstopping their investment. A similar disclaimer would apply to bank deposits outside the FDIC insurance limit and other unsecured debts.
Third, we recommend that the largest financial holding companies be restructured so that every one of their corporate entities is subject to a speedy bankruptcy process, and in the case of banking entities themselves, that they be of a size that is “too small to save.” Addressing institutional size is vital to maintaining a credible threat of failure, thereby providing a convincing case that policy has truly changed. This step gets both bank incentives and structure right, neither of which is accomplished by Dodd–Frank.
The downsized, formerly too-big-to-fail banks would be just like the other 99.8%, failing with finality when necessary—closed on a Friday and reopened on Monday under new ownership and management in the customary process managed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
The aim of our three-step proposal is simple: All banks would be subject to the same regulatory oversight—and most important, they would all be subject to the market discipline exercised by owners and creditors.
Had this plan been in place a decade ago, it would have altered the insidious behaviors that contributed to the crisis, avoiding the bailouts and their aftermath, the cost of which our nation’s citizens will bear for years to come. The Government Accountability Office and others estimate the cost of the financial crisis, measured in lost output and jobs, to be between $10 trillion and $20 trillion, roughly one year of U.S. output down the drain.
Most of all, adoption of our proposal would have avoided a crisis that undermined Americans’ belief in the fairness and justice of the economic system. The United States was founded on the principle of economic freedom, underpinned by secure property rights and by a strong aversion to special favors and subsidies to the few. Those fundamental virtues were undermined by the recent financial crisis and government’s response to it.
Rescuing too-big-to-fail banks from their bad investment decisions imposed an enormous economic burden on the American people. It also perpetuated a sense that powerful banking mandarins operate above the law and prosper at the expense of the thrifty and hardworking citizenry.
Congress should rewrite Dodd-Frank so that it actually ends the problem of banks that are too big to fail. Our proposal won’t lead to bigger government. It will lead to smaller banks governed by the market discipline of creditors who are at real risk of losses, and by laws that apply equally to all.
Mr. Fisher is president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, where Mr. Rosenblum is executive vice president and director of research.
Congress should rewrite
There you go, again…..
Congress DID rewrite Dodd-Frank, from stronger to weaker, just to get it through the bought off Senate. Even then, the watered-down version passed cloture ONLY because Senator Voinovich, old-school R from Ohio, was retiring and didn’t want to end his career with yet another game of lock-step filibuster.
Fisher needs to address his letter of complaint to certain members of the Senate. I’m sure that Senator Elizabeth Warren would be delighted to hand deliver such a letter.
How Wall Street Killed Financial Reform
Matt Taibbi
May 10, 2012
This was supposed to be the big one. At 2,300 pages, the new law ostensibly rewrote the rules for Wall Street. It was going to put an end to predatory lending in the mortgage markets, crack down on hidden fees and penalties in credit contracts, and create a powerful new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to safeguard ordinary consumers. Big banks would be banned from gambling with taxpayer money, and a new set of rules would limit speculators from making the kind of crazy-ass bets that cause wild spikes in the price of food and energy. There would be no more AIGs, and the world would never again face a financial apocalypse when a bank like Lehman Brothers went bankrupt.
Two years later, Dodd-Frank is groaning on its deathbed. The giant reform bill turned out to be like the fish reeled in by Hemingway’s Old Man – no sooner caught than set upon by sharks that strip it to nothing long before it ever reaches the shore.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-wall-street-killed-financial-reform-20120510
Dodd Frank codified TBTF, and created TSTS (too small to succeed). Dodd Frank is a disaster that has more unintended consequences than intended results.
I always suspected that Dodd Frank’s massive size and complexity bred lots of loopholes. I suspect Wall Street reform was aborted before pen was put to paper.
“We offer a modest proposal to level the playing field…”
Could this work to prevent Megabanksters from being a burden on the American people and to make them beneficial to the public?
A Modest Proposal
For Preventing the Children of Poor People in Ireland, from Being a Burden on Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Publick
By Jonathan Swift
…
I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy Child well Nursed is at a year Old, a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome Food, whether Stewed, Roasted, Baked, or Boyled, and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a Fricasie, or Ragoust.
…
the profits on flipping phoeinix real estate will be uncalcuable.
And here i thought the word would be flipping McCalcuable.
uncalcuable
Your losses will be ungoogleable.
There you go. I invented a word today.
Also I helped a old lady cross the street during lunch.
My day is done….I feel good…..
There you go. I invented a word today.
Nope. The word has been around a long time.
Guy next door to us in Bend put up his house yesterday; sign went up last night; I’ve seen 5 showings today. He bought in 2009, for 130k; selling today for 159k. I bought in 2009 for 117k; sold for 125k (Not in as big a town, Bend is moving quicker than Prineville)
Whose losses were more incalculable?
Poor drama queen.
Even all the anti-trust laws during the DOJ vs. NAR lawsuit haven’t done much good. Online broker firms are still out of the loop.
We sold through an online back then and saved $28K on the listing agent side. We were boycotted by the big franchises and sold through a small time broker. The REIC doesn’t like any leashes, even the DOJ ones. To this day, not much has changed. I am licensed in Ca.
“The Coming Housing Collapse: The Fed, Instead Of Lehman, Owns The Mortgage Market”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2013/03/05/peter-schiff-and-the-coming-housing-collapse-the-fed-instead-of-lehman-owns-the-mortgage-market/
There are many reasons NOT to buy a house right now.
1) Prices are massively inflated
2) Rental rates are half the cost of buying at current inflated prices
3) The cost of new housing is a fraction of resale housing in $/square foot.
4) $/square foot prices are falling
…. and most importantly… You’re going to lose alot of money if you buy a house now. ALOT of money.
“The Coming Housing Collapse: The Fed, Instead Of Lehman, Owns The Mortgage Market”
Well d’oh! Will Congress change the Fed’s charter to legitimize their move to take control of the housing market?
originator to fannie/freddie fannie/freddie to FED and boom you have more money to buy loans.
“The cost of new housing is a fraction of resale housing in $/square foot.”
Demand for such new housing is at a multi generational low.
Any fool can see where this is headed.
“2) Rental rates are half the cost of buying at current inflated prices”
Baloney as usual. I can rent my condo out at twice what the mortgage costs.
When did you buy it? Did you refinance it from 9% down to 3.5%?
I’m all for bringing in real math into PW’s fake math discussions, but you do realize that your statement doesn’t contradict his unless you bought at or very close to what it would sell for today, don’t you? If you bought in 1997, it is irrelevant.
Fake math? You can do math as easily as anyone here yet you seem reticent about it.
Why is that?
Unless you believe that all rent-to-own investors are completely irrational, they are able to buy at prices that allow them positive leverage (ie. they can charge rent that pays all expenses, the mortgage, and gives them a return on their equity that is greater than the cost of the debt).
For those who disbelieve, there will soon be some more public filings to review from those who are intending to take these new massive landlords public.
But that would take people checking conspiracy theories (about fraud, etc.) at the door, and believing that such math CAN be true.
Positive leverage! What the heck is that? I think you’ve made something up.
Maybe you mean positive cash flow. Maybe you mean lease to own.
Positive leverage–a common phrase.
If you buy a real estate asset at a 7% yield, and can borrow money at 5%, you have positive leverage. The higher the loan-to-cost, the higher the yield you achieve on your equity investment.
Example, if you buy a $100 asset at a 7% yield, you have operating income at $7 per year. If you leverage 50% of the purchase at a cost of 5%, interest only (let’s keep things simple now), your cost to service the debt is $2.50 per year.
So, the return on your $50 of equity is $4.50 ($7 minus $2.50), or 9%. If you borrow more, the 9% increases. If you borrow less, the 9% decreases, but NEVER below 7%. The magic of positive leverage.
If you borrow at 7%, for a 7% cap investment, no matter how much you borrow, you will always get a 7% return on equity…no positive leverage, no negative leverage.
Here’s the trick though, the more leverage you take on, the more risk you have in the case of declining rents (decreasing income), or rising yields (decreasing capital value)…so, as capital markets get frothy…as apartments are now, people use positive leverage as a way to financially engineer high equity returns.
In today’s market, the magic (and risk) of positive leverage can be best shown through investments in apartments…people will buy at a 5% yield (historically very low), and leverage at 4% (also historically very low). If they can, they’ll borrow up to 75% (or more) of the purchase price…positive leverage will get the equity a current cash-on-cash return of 8%…a good return on its face, but very risky. If income falls by a small amount, your 8% coupon could disappear…likewise, if cap rates rise only 1% (still below long-term averages), the capital value of the asset would fall by 20%, wiping out 80% of your equity. You better hope you can continue to raise rents.
But hey, the 8% feels good…while you get it.
“Positive leverage–a common phrase…”
LOL, I can do math. It’s junkie speak. May the road rise to meet you. Except you are riding the Mother of all roller coasters. Double down. Baby needs new shoes!
It’s very common vernacular in commercial real estate investment world. You didn’t seem to know that based on what you thought I may have meant (positive cash flow? lease to own?)–forgive me for trying to explain.
Positive leverage–a common phrase.
aka “Net Present Value” in the finance world.
How is Quantitative Easing working out across the pond?
European shares, sterling slip on UK output weakness
By Marc Jones
LONDON | Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:37am EDT
(Reuters) - Sterling slipped to a 2-1/2 year low and European shares dipped on Tuesday after data underscoring Britain’s economic weakness bolstered expectations of another jolt of central bank stimulus.
British manufacturing output fell in January at the fastest pace since June, official data showed, reinforcing fears that Europe’s second-biggest economy made a poor start to the year.
The pound has been one of the worst performing major currencies in 2013, having fallen 8.5 percent against the dollar and 7.6 percent against the euro.
It fell to $1.4832, its lowest since late June 2010, shortly after the data, as expectations firmed that the Bank of England would try to kickstart the economy with fresh stimulus in the coming weeks or months.
Analysts say it is likely to come via 25 billion pounds worth of bond purchases a month, which increases the amount of sterling in the system, effectively lowering its value.
“There are concerns on just about every front for the UK,” said Neil Mellor at Bank of New York Mellon.
“Political concerns, whether there will be another downgrade, the budget and whether or not we will see more monetary stimulus. Everywhere you look there is a negative.”
…
Savers are stiffed and forced to buy FB to get some yield? Gasoline and food prices continue to rise.
Kate’s baby is the only thing that really matters.
Harry is partying like a rock star on daddies cash.
As long as they have Kate’s baby to capture their attention, the Brits will be just fine.
That and footy.
daddies cash?
how about the british subjects’ cash.
It’s working so well that a trial balloon on negative interest rates was floated.
I was having a discussion last night about interest rates. I argued that inflation will kick in soon and rates will go up causing another downturn in the housing market. Most at the table had purchased homes in the last 5-10 years and used denial as a defense but one person, who I consider intelligent, said that we may not see mortgage rates over 5% for the next ten years in this deflationary environment. I hadn’t thought of this possibility. Any thoughts on when rates will hit 5% or even 8%? Full disclosure, it was a poker table with booze abounding.
It really doesn’t matter what interest rates do. They may accelerate the correction but the correction can only be delayed. It cannot be avoided indefinitely.
We already had a correction, you’re living in the past while the rest of us make money.
‘while the rest of us make money’
You said this:
‘I can rent my condo out at twice what the mortgage costs.’
A condo isn’t even real estate. What you owe money on is a box of air, surrounded by other boxes of air, also “owned” by your partners. And they are your partners until the day you no longer “own” that condo, like it or not. Doesn’t sound so great to me.
I could buy a car on credit, and rent it out on craigslist for the day or week and probably show a cash flow. Does that make it a good idea?
‘We already had a correction’
Yes, and the government tells us the economic recovery started in 2009. Funny that I work every day with construction people of all trades, and they are all hurting. Hmmm. Something doesn’t add up.
Yes, and the government tells us the economic recovery started in 2009. Funny that I work every day with construction people of all trades, and they are all hurting. Hmmm. Something doesn’t add up.
You’ve got that right! And, guess what, some of those construction people measure it twice, cut it once, and are real craftsmen. They’re taking it in the shorts just like the shysters.
Movie: “The Box”
Martin Teague: Sir? If you don’t mind my asking… why a box?
Arlington Steward: Your home is a box. Your car is a box on wheels. You drive to work in it. You drive home in it. You sit in your home, staring into a box. It erodes your soul, while the box that is your body inevitably withers… then dies. Whereupon it is placed in the ultimate box, to slowly decompose.
Martin Teague: It’s quite depressing, if you think of it that way.
Arlington Steward: Don’t think of it that way… think of it as a temporary state of being.
Paying retail prices for depreciating assets is no more “making money” than is bidding a job at a loss to “keep your guys busy”.
Oh… And “correction”? Housing continues to correct…… downwards. Prices are falling.
If you buy a house today, you’re buying at the top of the market. Proceed at your sole risk.
People are now paying $320,000 for houses I picked up for $260,000 in 2009 & 2010. The properties have been cash flowing about 5% on my equity investment. If the current residents ever move, the cash flow will double to 10% (I don’t raise rent on existing residents).
In the meantime, I have paid off 3% of the loan balance and been able to take some nice phantom losses against my ordinary income.
Housing Analyst, please choose another name. You do not seem to be able to analyze housing very well. Cash flow, tax benefits, appreciating prices….what’s not to like?
Don’t get stuck in 2007. It will not serve you well.
Houses don’t “appreciate” my friend. They depreciate.
And worse yet for you, cap rates are near zero to negative any price level over the last 12 years.
You only think you are making money on your skybox. It owns you. What you will not be sharing with readers is the hours spent weeping in private as you have no way out from under that anchor. “Condo”. LMFAO.
“…we may not see mortgage rates over 5% for the next ten years in this deflationary environment.”
When was the last time U.S. mortgage rates were as low as they have recently been?
And how long after that did it take for them to get back up above 5%?
Hint: I think the history of interest rates support your “one person’s” suggestion…
Hmmm…It appears rates were low from the early 1930 to the late 1950s.
I was thinking about the early 1960s as the most recent similar period in the history of U.S. interest rates. Of course, by 1980, the lid was blown off and inflation threatened to collapse the dollar. Paul Volcker was called in to lean against the hurricane in 1979. But somewhere along the way between 1960 and 1980, the 5% rate threshold was crossed.
Actually, this graph suggests that perhaps the lid was lifted off the mortgage rate pressure cooker around 1966. If I recall correctly those long-term U.S. stock market movement graphs in Robert Shiller’s Irrational Exuberance, then this coincided with the onset of a 16 year bear market in stocks which ended with price-earnings ratios around 7.0 in 1982. But my memory is hazy on the exact numbers, and whoever last borrowed my copy of Irrational Exuberance has yet to return it…
Inflation happened in the 60’s because the middle class was taking a bigger piece of the pie and women were working more. Now we have massive unemployment/underemployment we have globalization and automation taking over. We have a population that has very little savings to tap and who is still massively in debt. We are no where near inflation yet.
“We are no where near inflation yet.
This is a joke, right?
measton tell that to the ice cream makers $6.99 for breyers and its still only 48 ounces…some stores are running 2 for 1 specials the last few weeks….guess ice cream sales are now a luxury.
“We are no where near inflation yet.”
My weekly gasoline purchase costs suggest otherwise.
“This is a joke, right?”
“My weekly gasoline purchase costs suggest otherwise.”
So why haven’t interest rates done whatever the opposite of cratering is?
None of this is traditional “inflation” folks, or even deflation. Get your head out of your econ textbook and look at which industries are raising prices: NEEDS industries: food, gas, health insurance, college, housing, rent, used cars. Plain and simple, this is retail companies raising prices to what the market will bear.
There aren’t more dollars to chase fewer goods. More like, a higher percentage of a steady (or decreasing) number of dollars go toward necessities instead of goodies. This has beeing going on ever since companies have figured out that people have no choice but to pay, and hey, you can jack up the price when people have no choice but to pay. It’s simply a multi-faceted, subtle, and long-term analogue of price-gouging ice during a power outage. Prices for needs will simply raid pockets of savings like retirement, back-to-school clothes, Mother’s day lunch, the Sbux fund, the third income in a dwelling. And why not? What’s to stop companies from doing this? We already know the general opinion of “government intervention.” In fact, they love government intervention if it involves cheese. If you can get those bleeding heart Dems to subsidize some of those price increases for food or housing (think of the children), so much the better.
And you guys think that housing is going to revert to “historical mean” of 2.5x income? Why should it? What’s to stop sellers from raising prices to price J6P out of the market entirely? Why shouldn’t ALL the houses be sold only the rich people or rich hedgies to rent out at ice-gouge prices? What’s to stop them? Damn that FHA for giving J6P a chance!
Why shouldn’t ALL the houses be sold only the rich people or rich hedgies to rent out at ice-gouge prices? What’s to stop them?
I have wondered this myself. A nation of renters would please the PTB, no?
The FHA represents the Government Intervention Paradox: Whatever item the government subsidizes for the poor in the interest of making it more affordable, has the net result of making it more expensive.
Housing, education and medical care are classic examples.
“None of this is traditional “inflation” folks, or even deflation. Get your head out of your econ textbook and look at which industries are raising prices: NEEDS industries: food, gas, health insurance, college, housing, rent, used cars. Plain and simple, this is retail companies raising prices to what the market will bear. ”
My God you can’t be that deluded.
as long as the FEd has trillions of us treasuries and MBS on the balance sheet rates will stay low.
And how long after that did it take for them to get back up above 5%?
How long have interest rates been near zero in Japan? 20 years?
I would agree. We may climb back to a percent or two in next five years. 5% is decades out.
IOW, the economy will be a crapper for decades.
the economy will be a crapper for decades
The “recovery” will be papered over with fake stats but the reality for working Americans will be an endless, stagflationary depression.
You don’t recover from the largest credit expansion in history overnight.
Exactly! The tail end of this episode will outlive many of us posters.
Apparently the denial will as well.
The tail end of this episode will outlive many of us posters.
After waiting this thing out for almost a decade, it is this sentiment exactly that fueled my decision to buy.
For some, being a life-long renter is just fine. It just did not suit my family’s lifestyle any longer and I didn’t want to wait another 10 years to create my urban farm, just as I am ready to retire.
Our next dog will most likely be a Mastiff.
The logic there is elusive homowner. Your dream is to retire to urban SF and grow veggies in window boxes? How many truckloads of veggies or years of retirement would what you overpaid for a house provide?
Your dream is to retire to urban SF and grow veggies in window boxes?
Nah, my dream is to stay put, having been here for 24 years and built a life here in a place I love living.
Also, to have cats and dogs and chickens (already do) and we are working on raising bees. Backyard vegetable gardening is not worth the effort, to me, especially when the farmer’s market is a few blocks away.
My kids are super excited about the treehouse we are designing for the backyard.
Our particular lifestyle (kids, animals, gardening) is not suitable for everyone.
But our dog boarding business is bringing in more cash than dog training ever did. Since we bought the house we have fostered and re-homed 7 dogs. That makes me happy.
Maybe there’s a landlord out there who would allow that kind of home business in their rental, but I haven’t met one yet.
sfhomowner
We hit a decade on “pause” ourselves and wanted roots again. We are so happy to have a home again. Long term, it was a better decision to buy this place than continue renting (w/ storage). sfhomowner, I’m with you. Life doesn’t have a reset button.
^^^^^^^
LMAO
California must be really unfriendly to pet owners. I’ve never rented a place where dogs were not allowed. I raised a large litter of Shepard pups in one place. I have owned in neighborhoods where running a kennel business wasn’t allowed by the zoning.
Funny Inch, but I was just thinking that late in life, there is no reset button for a lifetime’s savings thrown out (or in) the window. May you never run out of cash and have the neighbors refer to you as the deadbeat, or anything similar.
There isn’t anything wrong with owning a house. If one can do this comfortably without debt, great. The point here is that we have had the most massive housing mania in history! Houses are way overpriced, by an large, tremendously so. To excuse being part of the mania because you got to save a dog (or seven) or save $100 on a storage bin for your surplus crap is….manic.
The point here is that we have had the most massive housing mania in history! Houses are way overpriced, by an large, tremendously so. To excuse being part of the mania because you got to save a dog (or seven) or save $100 on a storage bin for your surplus crap is….manic.
Didn’t you just buy a house?
alpha
Not surplus cr*p. Our Vette (drove it on weekends), piano, and furnishings needed roots. Wish it was only $100 a month. Bottom line, we’re happy, debt free, still have some dough, and now have a life of joy. All we need is a dog pal, and life will be grand. Adopting from the pound.
There are different “flavors” for each of us. Our solution works for us.
Note the italics, inch.
AlpoSlop is like a robot. Anyone rightfully pointing out that it’s a tragic error buying a house, he accuses them of just buying a house.
juss sayin’.
AlpoSlop is like a robot. Anyone rightfully pointing out that it’s a tragic error buying a house, he accuses them of just buying a house.
Found your new house yet?
We know.
See?
Poor AlpoSlop.
“you just buy a house….”
So what, for a pittance, not for half a mil and not with borrowed money. For sure not with the stated expectation that it would profit me in any way $$ wise. I’m not pimping houses as sound investments for the debt hampster crowd, because we are still in a housing mania.
You know why I bought the property and just like to turn things inside out.
i suspect you have a mortgage. Hopefully you are enjoying historic low rates of interest.
Will be? Where have you been for the last 30 years?
IMHO if the interest rates start to rise it will quickly be game over because servicing the national debt will become too hard. Therefore I think the Fed will keep them from rising as long as possible. I don’t understand how well they can play the game of low rates…is it “forever”?
“I don’t understand how well they can play the game of low rates…is it “forever”?”
They can play the game forever as long as they are willing to accept increased inflation. Given that all their actions to date have been primarily designed to directly stimulate said inflation, I think it’s a fair guess that unless inflation numbers can’t be covered up and get really high, they can, in fact, continue this indefinitely. Real inflation during the boom had to be close to 10-15% in high cost areas, and yet, the game continued then. Unless we get to a situation where it’s “high teens” (and reported at 6-7%), I doubt we’ll see any change in the status quo.
Inflation is the only way to fix a debt crisis like this. The Fed knows that. But there’s no way to say that without sparking a panic, so they continue to play their games (all call them “Fed meetings”).
WTF are you talking about? Do you know what inflation is?
“WTF are you talking about? Do you know what inflation is?”
I’m pretty sure I’ve got a good handle on it, would you like to expand your comment, or just chuck non-sense into the conversation without any explanation?
Then demonstrate the “inflation” you speak of.
” Real inflation during the boom had to be close to 10-15% in high cost areas, and yet, the game continued then.”
In my area, from 2002-2006 (roughly) prices more than doubled for the median home. Gas prices went through the roof. Food prices rose. The Fed called inflation at around 5% when the price of housing was rising 40% YOY in Palm Beach.
Let me ask you, with the exception of housing after 2006, what else do you see going down dramatically in price? Yes, housing is a big one, and needs to be factored in. However, everything else I seem to buy has seen significant cost increases over the last 6-7 years.
It’s time you go back to the drawing board and learn what inflation is.
Yes, housing is a big one, and needs to be factored in.
Fed thinking: “when you buy a house now you save $10K…that more than accounts for the extra costs in food and gas. Don’t sweat it!”
The real issue with the US compared to the bottom of the production chain is that for us food is a small portion of our overall budget. For the bottom it’s the major portion.
noun
1. Economics . a persistent, substantial rise in the general level of prices related to an increase in the volume of money and resulting in the loss of value of currency ( opposed to deflation ).
2. the act of inflating.
3. the state of being inflated.
Where exactly does Overtaxed go wrong?
Friend…. inflation is the result of escalating wages.
“Friend…. inflation is the result of escalating wages.”
Yet most people haven’t had real raises in the last 20 years.
rising wages = inflation FAIL.
Correct.
“Friend…. inflation is the result of escalating wages.”
So the dictionary definition of inflation is wrong?
Rising wages are a symptom of inflation, though they don’t need to be (especially if real wages are falling dramatically, and workers aren’t already at subsistance wages, ie wages that only cover a single person’s food and shelter for the day). Inflation is a decline in the value of the unit of money (ie the divisor). If wages or other items decline just as quickly in value nominal wages wouldn’t need to change even under high inflation.
Disagree.
Inflation of the money supply can be infinite yet no impact on prices. It’s not until is goes into circulation does it cause inflation. How does it get into circulation?
Wages.
You have lost your mind.
Refute it.
They can play the game forever as long as they are willing to accept increased inflation.
I think we’re exporting our inflation to the bottom of the production chain (which is causing unrest where food costs are a major part of a family’s budget) and it will take a long time for it to back its way up to the US. The powers that be probably consider the unrest a good thing, too, since it keeps peoples’ eyes off the ball and makes our currency more “valuable”.
Here we have more and more people on food stamps and we’ve got reality TV so it’s not as big a deal. Panem et circenses.
“The powers that be probably consider the unrest a good thing,…”
I think not, as otherwise why bother with food stamps and reality TV at all?
“The powers that be probably consider the unrest a good thing,…”
I think not, as otherwise why bother with food stamps and reality TV at all?
废话. Not unrest here. Unrest at the bottom of the production chain; keeps ‘em hungry for our dollar.
“Unrest at the bottom of the production chain; keeps ‘em hungry for our dollar.”
If you mean unrest in other countries, that seems better than unrest at home…
“They can play the game forever as long as they are willing to accept increased inflation.”
There is another way, which is to periodically engineer renewed deflationary pressures. Stock market crashes serve this purpose well (recent example: October 2008-March 2009).
Why do the Marketwatch peops keep talking about a pullback when Mr Market seems determined to go up to the stratosphere? Got disconnect?
I’d be curious whether the Citigroup guy is putting more plunge protection pedal to the metal than TTT did. Is there any publicly available source of information on Treasury Department stimulus measures?
March 12, 2013, 8:55 a.m. EDT
Stock futures off as confidence battles exuberance
Stories You Might Like
4.6 magnitude earthquake hits So. California: USGS
By Kate Gibson and William L. Watts, MarketWatch
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — U.S. stock futures drifted slightly lower Tuesday as Wall Street’s record run left investors to debate whether the market is in the midst of a durable rally or has slipped into an irrationally exuberant buying frenzy that would lead to an imminent pullback.
…
I wonder how many net etrade accounts have been opened in the past 4 years?
Is the Plunge Protection Team slipping? It looks like Mr Market is doing his best to sell off against the rah-rah effort to push the S&P500 past its all-time high…
Again inflation to fix a debt crises only works of people have excess savings, can increase their income, or can borrow money. Food and fuel inflation will just decrease consumption of manufactured goods and services leading to more unemployment. Until they figure a way to get money into the hands of the middle class we will not have long term massive inflation. We could have a jolt upward followed by a massive fall however.
The so called inflation would be lending, credit expansion. You can’t borrow your way out of a debt crisis.
Went to my favorite outdoor, heated, saline (not chlorine) treated pool yesterday for lap swim. They are raising their prices $3.00 per visit. Wow. That’s steep.
Maybe they are having trouble rolling over their loans!
I heard an ex-Fed economist last week say that the Fed really wants 4-6% inflation for a while…but they’ll never say so publicly.
Anyway you look at it, there’s no happy ending. I can see a happy ending only and only if we default, but that would mean we gonna have to take a big hit to the currency and also the to credit rating.
How about selective defaults? Break some promises but not all promises. Change the rules for Social Security, for example.
Also break some promises through outright default and reduce the burden of others over time through controlled inflation to gradually erode the real value of long-term debt obligations, as debt is repaid in nominal dollars.
“Change the rules for Social Security, for example.”
Is changing the rules tantamount to breaking a promise? For instance, one of the promises is to provide old age insurance. If the definition of old age gradually changes to reflect longer productive lives and increasing life expectancy, wouldn’t a later social security retirement age still be in line with the promise of providing old age insurance?
there are to options here. Default or debt monetization. I think the later will occur. It is very easy to create money with the click of a mouse. More people will be on govt assistance they cant afford to make a living.
I’m going to assume you posted this as bait.
Default or debt monetization ??
And we are experiencing the later right now….It works as long as we are the “go to” safe haven for principal preservation…Whats the saying; We are the cleanest shirt in the dirty laundry….
If the definition of old age gradually changes to reflect longer productive lives and increasing life expectancy, wouldn’t a later social security retirement age still be in line with the promise of providing old age insurance?
And since the wealthy outlive the not-so-wealthy and the poor, then SS should kick in at different ages for different socio-economic groups?
It does seem rather absurd to demand someone continue working as a roofer or coal miner in their late 60s, but not so ridiculous for a doctor or lawyer to have to work longer, since their jobs are conducive to it, and their life expectancies are longer than a miner or roofer.
Blue collar/lucky ducky retirement age: 65.
White collar retirement age: 70?
Working as a doctor after 50 or 60 isn’t as easy as you think. The amount of continuing education and mental stamina needed to do this is significant. It also depends on the type of physician, to be sure. For primary care, I can buy it.
Working as a doctor after 50 or 60 isn’t as easy as you think
I bet it’s easier than being a coal miner.
Maybe the older doctors could teach, since we clearly need more physicians.
“And since the wealthy outlive the not-so-wealthy and the poor, then SS should kick in at different ages for different socio-economic groups?’
Why would you want to penalize the people who manage their lives well enough to have wealth and longevity when they reach age 65? I’d think you would want to create positive incentives for a prosperous old age, but I guess it is different in libtard land.
I’m on board with CIBT. Yeah, great idea, let’s penalize people for being educated and resourceful. Let’s disregard the fact that, if we were a real capitalist society, wages and benefits would reflect health risks and job difficulty. Instead, let’s encumber SS/MC with some top-down, centrally-managed regulations whereby we decide when people should retired based on some criteria we make up in our head. Awesome!
I really love how people call me a communist but then we have people here on the board suggesting that we should make major decisions about when we will pay SS/MC based on a job title. Something that would literally (no joke) be done in a communist country with a centrally planned economy.
Rather than us trying to remove regulations and Fed intervention that *really cause* the problems afflicting the lower end of our work force, let’s create new regulations to counteract (in a ham-handed way) the bad effects of our other bad policies.
**SMH**
Do we need to incentivize making a lot of money at a white collar job? Will people who could be doctors or lawyers instead choose to become roofers and miners because they can get Social Security 5 years earlier? Even though they will live on average 5 years less?
I was just toying with your idea about changing the retirement age to reflect today’s longer life expectancies, and taking into account that these longer life expectancies aren’t equally shared across the socio-economic strata.
wages and benefits would reflect health risks and job difficulty.
Has that ever been the case in world history?
I’m just not on board with special privileges offered to chosen classes of people who the Democrats define as deserving, responsible, underserved, whatever, conferring extra bennies on a discriminatory basis.
I thought discrimination was outlawed with the 1960s Civil Rights Act. Apparently that is not the case, as Democrats come up with one program after another for which I fail to qualify because I am too white, male, not old enough, not poor enough, etc. I have always been against discrimination, and hence am philosophically opposed to what the Democratic Party stands for.
How about selective defaults? Break some promises but not all promises. Change the rules for Social Security, for example.
Heaven forbid we stick it to the banksters.
special privileges offered to chosen classes of people who the Democrats define as deserving
Like ramps for handicapped people?
Heaven forbid we stick it to the banksters.
Austerity for joe6pack, inviolability of contracts for the 1%.
Austerity for joe6pack, inviolability of contracts for the 1%.
What the 1% always forget is that it’s crap like that the enables the despots in history. I’m sure the Czar had no clue that oppressing the Russian people would come back to bite him and his family in the butt.
Yeah, great idea, let’s penalize people for being educated and resourceful.”
Sorry. but all I’ve ever seen are people who are lucky enough to not have not had unforeseen problems that most people have to deal with or an insider information that most people don’t have.
Educated? Resourceful?
Hubris.
I’m sure the Czar had no clue that oppressing the Russian people would come back to bite him and his family in the butt.
Until the day that they were ordered into the basement of the Ipatiev House.
When you’re in the 0.01% it’s probably human nature to assume that if there’s going to be a despot it’ll be you or someone you control.
Was there a tipping point where Hitler went from “under control” to “out of control” from the perspective of TPTB?
When he burned downed the Reichstag.
Was there a tipping point where Hitler went from “under control” to “out of control” from the perspective of TPTB?
Operation Barbarossa wasn’t one of his best moves. Not by a longshot
Also, after the Afrika Korps got whupped by the Allies, Erwin Rommel tried to get a meeting with Der Fuhrer. Rommel wanted to tell Hitler that the war was lost, and that it would be best to negotiate a truce.
Correct me if I’m wrong on this point, but Hitler’s aides wouldn’t let him meet with Der Fuhrer.
Rommel wasn’t too happy about being blown off. To the point where he was one of the key men behind the 1944 assassination plot. Y’know, the one with the briefcase under the table with the bomb in it. Bomb went off, but it was too far away from Hitler.
Rommel paid for his role in that plot. He was forced to commit suicide on October 14, 1944.
“Like ramps for handicapped people?”
Try handicapped privileges based on race, gender or ethnicity for people who are not handicapped.
The czar didn’t have mass media, electronic surveillance, drones, automatic weapons, etc. A very small # of well armed soldiers could keep the masses at bay for a long time. Just ask Sadam. Without the US he would still be in control of that country despite the fact that his sect is a minority and he was a brutal dictator.
Agree, MV. Interest rates dictate more than mortgage rates. Gov debt and stock market margins depend heavily on leverage too.
I believe that interest and mortgage rates will stay relatively low until 1) other countries catch up with the US in terms of environmental and/or labor laws thus bringing jobs back to the US; 2) Gov spending is curbed through universal Medicare and/or means testing of SS; 3) The current Welch-Fiorina-Gekko generation of corporate greedheads passes on and the emphasis shifts back to goods and services for profit instead of rate-based money manipulation.
I’ve had a suspicion that this is why FHA is taking a risk and going full-bore on convincing regular people to buy a house at 3.5% interest and 3.5% down, even if prices are still high. Somebody high up in gov is betting on inflation happening. At some point, interest rates and wages will rise, and those who locked in a stable PITI will have more discretionary income to spend and keep the economy going.
1) other countries catch up with the US in terms of environmental and/or labor laws thus bringing jobs back to the US;
Not going to do much to spur inflation if China stops buying all those commodities.
2) Gov spending is curbed through universal Medicare and/or means testing of SS;
Cutting government spending certainly isn’t going to spur inflation.
3) The current Welch-Fiorina-Gekko generation of corporate greedheads passes on and the emphasis shifts back to goods and services for profit instead of rate-based money manipulation.
Greed is going to disappear? Unlikely. More likely consolidation of corporate power and wealth will lead to consolidation of political power and further destruction of the middle class. Not inflationary. Thus interest rates are unlikely to climb
and those who locked in a stable PITI will have more discretionary income to spend ??
As I have suggested before, IMO there is going to be significant cause & effect from the interest rate policy for SFR’s in the future…
Given a choice, I just don’t think people will give up their 30 year 3% loan…And, that kind of low fixed rate financing is in place and continuing throughout the country through refinancing and purchases…Even with a potential job move for more money, It will need to be balanced with the possible impact & cost of borrowing mortgage money @ 5% + vs. the 3% that you already have….
In job rich urban area’s that have little available developable land, we may see constant low inventory of SFR’s…Higher interest rates clearly will tend to suppress prices but that could be countered by persistent low inventory …The new housing will be high density developed on major corridor’s with mass transit close by…
Excellent point re: people with 3-4% mortgage rates much less likely to “trade up” housing in the future.
The “price appreciation” of the 90s and 00s was greatly helped by people leaving “starter homes” with 7% interest rates to move into “McMansions” with a lower mortgage rate (sometimes variable, sometimes interest only!). The mortgage rates (and related shenanigans) obscurred the real costs of taking on the larger house. It also disincentivized people from staying in their house and paying off their mortgage.
Somehow it became normal for people with school aged kids to move from a 1500-2000 sq ft house into a house of 2x the size. Then, the kids go off to college and the parents are left in a McMansion by themselves. It’s a very questionable move, a very inefficient use of resources, but people did it without questioning. “The house will pay for the kid’s college” (HELOC) or “the house will fund your retirement” (when you sell and downsize).
Nothing to see here, just some sheep getting sheared. LULZ.
I plan to pay off my house as soon as the MID does nothing for me (depends on what the std deduction is, but probably will be around ‘16 or ‘17). I think once my wife sees what it’s like to have no housing payment, she won’t want to do some stupid “trade up” thing. It’s a mindset I’m trying to impress upon her.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
LOLZ
Couple with gross annual income pushing 300k and loaded parent$ buys 150k house.
Losses: staggering.
Hey RAL, get back to dealing with trailer trash Harley buyers and try not to think too much, k?
Relax my harpsichordist. It wasn’t directed at you. Perhaps it should’ve been with your nonstop posting of mindless blather.
Hey RAL, I admit it, my housing expenses will be STAGGERING.
You’re certainly locked in but not in the way your wild assumptions have you thinking.
“Full disclosure, it was a poker table with booze abounding.”
Is that a metaphor for the Fed’s interest rate policy?
I wish I was that clever!
It appears you were.
America’s stockmarket
Better than the alternatives
The Dow reaches a record high
Mar 9th 2013 |From the print edition
ONE more milestone has been passed on the road to recovery. On March 5th the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 14,253.77, a new high, finally surpassing the level reached in October 2007, just as the subprime-mortgage crisis really took hold. (The S&P 500, a more broadly based and better constructed index, stayed just shy of its record high.)
Wall Street is not alone. Stockmarkets in the developed world have been in fairly buoyant mood since the start of the year with the MSCI World Index rising by 5% in the first two months of 2013, and the Japanese market gaining 13.5%. Emerging markets, in contrast, have been flat.
It is tempting to attribute the strength of the Dow to optimism about the American economy. Tempting, but wrong. Studies have shown almost no correlation between GDP growth and equity returns. Indeed, the Shanghai stockmarket trades at less than half its 2007 peak, even though the Chinese economy has performed much more strongly than that of America since then. As the chart shows, this rally in the Dow has been accompanied by the weakest GDP growth of all the bull markets since the second world war.
The main factors behind the current surge seem to be twofold. The first is a degree of confidence that some “tail risks” have been avoided, at least for now. The euro zone has not broken up and politicians in Washington, DC have not brought the entire economy to a halt over tax-and-spending policies. Hurdles remain (such as raising the debt ceiling) but investors assume a deal will be done.
The second factor is that equities look better than the alternatives. Cash yields are puny and central banks have made it clear that interest rates will not rise for a while. Ten-year government bonds in much of the rich world yield 2% or less. Although there is no sign of the much-heralded “great rotation” out of bonds and into equities (see Buttonwood), there are signs that investors are putting cash in both asset classes following a long period in which equity funds suffered withdrawals.
Some think the bull market is bound to continue as long as the central banks of America, Britain and Japan keep buying assets. “There are three guys with cheque books which matter in the world, and they will all have hand cramps in the coming quarters and years as they furiously accumulate trillions in securities,” was the verdict of David Zervos, a strategist at Jefferies, an investment bank. “The only safe asset, as these fiat cash and reserve liabilities explode higher, is the one that has at least a chance of generating positive real returns—equity capital.”
Can cheap money prop up share prices in the long run?
…
I generally disagree with “investors are dumb” arguments for why the markets are doing whatever they are doing. A more plausible argument would be, “investors know the markets are acting crazy thanks to Quantitative Easy and are doing their best to profit from the craziness”…
March 11, 2013, 1:50 p.m. EDT
Global growth is burning out and fading away
Commentary: Economic gains are limited, but investors don’t know it yet
By Satyajit Das
SYDNEY (MarketWatch) — Driven by massive monetary stimulus from the world’s central banks, the performance of global financial markets, especially stocks, have decoupled from the reality of a moribund world economy.
Financiers assume that the strong rise in equity markets anticipates a strong economic recovery. However, there are fundamental reasons why the world may be entering a period of low- or no growth. If that is the case, then the current optimism of financial markets may prove premature.
In historical terms, economic growth is a relatively recent phenomenon. In a deliberately provocative 2012 National Bureau of Economic Research paper entitled “Is U.S. Economic Growth Over? Faltering Innovation Confronts The Six Headwinds,” economist Robert Gordon found that prior to 1750 there was little or no economic growth (as measured by increases in gross domestic product per capita).
It took approximately five centuries (from 1300 to 1800) for the standard of living to double in terms of income per capita. Between 1800 and 1900, it doubled again. The 20th Century saw rapid improvements in living standards, which increased by between five or six times. Living standards doubled between 1929 and 1957 (28 years) and again between 1957 and 1988 (31 years).
Other measures show similar trends. Between 1500 and 1820, economic production increased by less than 2% per century. Between 1820 and 1900, economic production roughly doubled. Between 1901 and 2000, economic production increased by a factor of around four times.
Gordon controversially questions whether economic growth is a continuous process that can persist forever. He argues that both growth and improvements in living standards will slow significantly. For pure shock value, he speculates that future yearly growth rates may be 0.2%, far below even the modest 1.8% annualized growth between 1987 and 2007. Read: Moment of truth for Mario Draghi.
…
Doesn’t sound inflationary to me?
Per yesterday’s discussion of garden sheds, I priced a couple:
Home Depot 12′x16′ fancy-ish is about $2900 ($15/sq ft).
Lancaster Barns cutie patootie really fancy dancy 12′x14′ with a porch and bells and whistles: $5500 ($32/sq ft), but the sq ft cost drops to ~ $25/sq ft at larger sizes. Their site has a good online quote calculator:
http://www.lancasterbarns.com/acatalog/Harvest_Victorian_Shed.html
So I guess it would be possible to outfit a shed into a tiny house… it’s probably been done thousands of times. But on a sq ft basis, a trailer is cheaper.
BTW Blue Skye, the price range for houses in my neck of the woods is around $190/ sq ft, but more than half of that is tied up in the land and location. In, say, Frederick ( outer burb ~1 hr commute to Beltway), used McMansions can be as low as $90:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/414-Mohican-Dr-Frederick-MD-21701/67483443_zpid/
Way too far of a commute for DC or anything inside the beltway, really (Bethesda, Silver Spring, the Pentagon, Arlington, Alexandria). It would be murderous to make that trip at anything approaching a normal commuting hour. Maybe could commute to Rockville/Germantown type places.
Also, way too much carpeting and cheap tile for a house of that size and at that price.
Love the klassy touches as well (Romanesque columns, faux stone in the super-high ceiling living room, etc)
Ultimately, the funniest thing about that house is that it’s 4,500 sq ft but I doubt it will be inhabited by any more than 3-4 people. Quite possibly just a dual income couple.
So I guess it would be possible to outfit a shed into a tiny house… it’s probably been done thousands of times.
It sure looks like they mean to with the shed that has a covered front porch and window boxes. Of course, even at $35 dollars a square foot, you’re getting a shed with no plumbing, electric, walling, or insulation, and unfinished flooring. And no foundation. And it wouldn’t be to code in almost all areas.
I had a property once with one of these fancy sheds out back. The previous owner had used it as an art studio. It was a lot nicer than some of the fishing cabins I’ve rented.
There are still places where “code” doesn’t matter. There are thousands of what we call “campsites” around here outside of town. You don’t need utilities really if you are an acomplished camper. You don’t think about “code” if you pitch a tent or sleep in your vehicle at your “campsite”. Just don’t expect to get mail delivered.
the price range for houses in my neck of the woods is around $190/ sq ft, but more than half of that is tied up in the land and location.
I’d love to see how you balance a check book.
The losses in suburban Maryland will be incalculable.
This should help
http://ssl-product-images.www8-hp.com/digmedialib/prodimg/lowres/c02156364.png
Howmuch for a used Airstream per sq. ft.?
Howmuch for a used Airstream per sq. ft.?
Depends on whether or not it will ever stop being towed.
The popping law school bubble:
“The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts 75,000 new legal jobs will be created this decade while the nation’s law schools are producing 40,000 graduates a year … Law school graduates left with an average of $100,433 in debt, according to a 2012 survey from U.S. News & World Report.”
So that leaves 325,000 new law school grads without legal jobs owing over $32 billion in student loans they can repay working at Starbucks
Loosers.
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-12/northwestern-law-cuts-size-of-class-as-graduates-can-t-land-jobs.html
75,000 new legal jobs will be created this decade while the nation’s law schools are producing 40,000 graduates a year
Wow. I would like to see the stats on MBA jobs.
MBA jobs
Many MBA grads will be loosers but not as big of loosers as the law grad Lucky Ducks. Consider some of the following circumstances:
Many MBA students work full-time during the day and go to night and weekend classes.
Some get tuition assistance/reimbursement from their employers. How many law students get this?
Lower tuition and shorter program than law school, so less debt.
The law school grads’ losses will be incalculable.
Many MBA students work full-time during the day and go to night and weekend classes.
Part time MBA has no practical value in the MBA job market.
Full time MBAs for students directly out of undergrad university are what is worthless.
Part Time and Executive MBAs have value.
Most of the real value in an MBA is the pipeline to a job thta is noticeably better than what the person could’ve gotten before the MBA. This is really only reliably achieved at a dozen or so schools. And those schools might have some certificate or executive MBA junk (Wharton and Harvard do, I’m assuming others as well) but the top recruiters that come to campus only want to meet with the FT students.
You can probably find a list somewhere of what schools places like Blackstone, Bridgewater, Goldman, etc recruit at on-campus. I guarantee you the list is very selective. Same thing for the top tech companies (note: not necessarily big tech companies, but the selective ones that have the brightest prospects). Google doesn’t recruit for executive positions from the part time MBA pool at Michigan State and BlackRock isn’t going to be recruting vice presidents from UMass-Lowell’s MBA program.
It’s the same with LS, by the way. Most of the people who get into LS could already get a pretty good job if they network, get some experience, etc. So to make LS worth it, you have to play your cards right and make it onto the radar of the very top employers. This is very doable from an NYU or Berkeley but extremely difficult to do from a Wayne State or University of New Hampshire. Basically, most people who are admitted to law school could’ve done just fine without the degree and the degree is superfluous unless they really go to a top school or finish in the top 5% of their class.
Do you ever stop to think that maybe some people beyond the top 2% want to improve their career prospects?
Jeezus christ your crap gets old. “No one should have any education unless it gets them into rich people land” is your basic spiel.
Who the f* cares where Google recruits. Samsung, Exxon, Verizon, ATT, Microsoft, JP Morgan, and other giant corporations pay for their employees to get MBAs. I’m sure they are not doing it for their health or for charity.
My last company paid for me to get an MBA. But they didn’t pay me any additional salary after I got it.
some people beyond the top 2%
joe smith does not associate with such common rabble.
My last company paid for me to get an MBA. But they didn’t pay me any additional salary after I got it.
That’s what I was talking about. I saw bunch of my co-workers toiling for an part time MBA because it was free. Some were from top universities I might add. Sadly, 80 to 90% of the time, neither it helped them procure an “MBA job”, neither it got them a promotion or a salary increase.
I know it very well because I thought about doing it. I opted for a FT MBA program. I was accepted to a top 10 program, but I decided not to attend MBA all together the last moment.
That’s what I was talking about. I saw bunch of my co-workers toiling for an part time MBA because it was free. Some were from top universities I might add. Sadly, 80 to 90% of the time, neither it helped them procure an “MBA job”, neither it got them a promotion or a salary increase.
Here’s what turned me off to the MBA: I was working for an academic journal at the University of Pittsburgh. Part of the job involved annotating books used in MBA programs.
Gawd, I was bored.
I figured if annotating the books was a snoozer, using them for semester-long classes would be even worse. So, no MBA for Slim.
some people beyond the top 2%
joe smith does not associate with such common rabble.
———
Is this a joke? My wife is a teacher, my friends have all sorts of random jobs, my brothers served in the military.
People are missing my point (or I’m stating it badly - entirely possible): Education has high costs, especially when you include opportunity costs. And, not surprisingly, graduate degree recipients tend to be a very self-selecting bunch where they would do just fine *without* the graduate degree.
If an employer fully pays for an MBA, well, you might as well get it. However, one reason they’re doing that is the caveat that you (usually) owe them a certain amount of time after obtaining the MBA, your performance must remain high, etc.
The *marginal* value of most degrees is very limited. We have a massive inefficiency in this country of people paying incredible amounts of money and giving up years of their life because the Educational Industrial Complex tells them “it’s a great investment”.
I’d love to know what the ROI is on a part time MBA from an average state university. After investing the money (part of it might be paid for, sure) and time and giving up alternatives like networking or moving for a better job, I really wonder if a part time MBA makes sense for most people. I’m guessing no. And my basis for guessing no is, let’s say someone makes 75k before the MBA. When they get the MBA will they be at 90 or 100k the next year? Sorry but it seems unlikely. There is a plentiful supply of MBAs, it’s actually pretty similar to the lawyer situation.
The *marginal* value of most degrees is very limited. We have a massive inefficiency in this country of people paying incredible amounts of money and giving up years of their life because the Educational Industrial Complex tells them “it’s a great investment”.
Which is precisely what my family did. They paid the big bucks, I was the dutiful student with the good grades, and here I am. Making a living with the commercial art training I got in high school, which was combined with the computer and OJT I had as an adult.
75,000 new jobs and 40,000 new grads? Sounds like a labor shortage to me. Did you mean to say that there are 400,000 new grads?
40,000 new grads a year and 75,000 new jobs over the next decade.
“The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts 75,000 new legal jobs will be created this decade while the nation’s law schools are producing 40,000 graduates a year …
I love how reporters screw up their numbers as if they are trying to confuse matters more than necessary.
How about this:
“The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts 75,000 new legal jobs will be created this decade while the nation’s law schools are expected to graduate 400,000 in the same time frame.”
The good schools will still be placing their grads, even if what they have to do to achieve it is cut down on class size/boost their selectivity. I forget who NU’s dean is, but he is well known for being pro-student (even started a 2-yr JD option where students basically go year round for 2 years and thus save a year of opportunity cost).
Most law schools are nowhere near a job market where there are even law firms big enough to have positions that need filling. But law schools are a revenue source (many classes are large lectures, say 75 students at $3k for the course = $225k for one course). So every state university wants a large-ish law school and even minor state universities want in on the action.
Outside of NY, SF, DC, Chicago, and a few other places, many of these people will have a hard time ever getting their career on track.
The other thing is that a lot of these people will end up working in government or in businesses where they don’t need the law degree but where it is reasonably related. One obvious example is public policy or lobbying, but this comes into play in insurance and finance as well because of compliance jobs. Still, a terrible waste of opportunity costs. In some cases, the law degree will provide a leg up (e.g. federal jobs), but in many it will barely factor into an analysis. Wasteful. Employers don’t have to do much training because they can be super picky and require a lot of education but yet still not pay that well. Lucky ducky future indeed.
employers don’t have to do much training because they can be super picky and require a lot of education but yet still not pay that well.
Sounds like the entire jobs economy, not just the legal profession/law school axis.
Is that 75000 figure totally new jobs, or does it include positions opened up by attrition?
Joe, how gray is your profession?
We are pretty gray because about half the lawyers here are partners. This is unusual, though.
There are plenty of young grads out there, the profession isn’t that gray, IMO. The real story is that many people figure out before graduation or shortly thereafter that they would be better off taking a non-law-practicing job. It’s a bit of a scandal, because law schools report these people as “employed” but they do not include a breakdown for what % are employed as bar-admitted lawyers who actually practice. If they reported that number, people within the Education Industrial Complex would flip out.
To Place Graduates, Law Schools Are Opening Firms
“I realized that was what we needed,” Mr. Sylvester recalled. “A teaching hospital for law school graduates.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/08/education/law-schools-look-to-medical-education-model.html?ref=education&_r=1&
Another basic math fail.
Population of unemployed lawyers today = (whatever it was last year) + (new grads) - (new jobs) - (old retirees/downsized/quit law/imprisoned)
So of the 5 obvious variables, they’ve reported only 2. That’s great reporting. Real insightful.
I have anecdotal evidence the situation is very grim. None the less, theoretically, given the reported data, if 47501 old lawyers retire / die / go to prison per year, they should be all good with 40000 grads plus roughly 75K/10 new jobs. On the other hand if only 47499 retire, then someone gets screwed. Ha Ha white collar guys, you laughed and said “retrain” when all the blue collar guys got fired, now its your turn …
Technology is definitely limiting how many lawyers are needed for routine transactions and functions. Right now most of the hit has been taken at the lower levels of the profession. In the future, it could include the people who do transactional or regulatory work. It’s a matter of timing and degree, the only sure thing is change over time.
How will we ever survive without a surplus of incompetent lawyers?!
Petty crime and ambulance chasing from the few clever enough to run their own business will come cheap.
Gay divorces? That will keep them busy.
Don’t forget the gay weddings….straight people are just shackin up not much $$$ there
Just saw this great news this morning on the way to work:
http://picpaste.com/e356793437455db0e0cb74022856a343.jpg
They print paper copies of the Washington Times? I thought it only existed as an online source for Drudge Report links.
Yes indeed. That picture is from a corner right near the shooting spree you posted about the other day.
The NRA is holding a protest at the site of that shooting later today. I guess their theory is that if one of two of the 11 people who were shot had been in possession of a weapon at the time of the shooting, they would’ve been able to return fire and there would’ve been less injuries? The whole “a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun” thing. The problem is, it was 2:15 am and the club had just let out, everyone was probably extremely drunk.
If your prediction sux, at least man up and acknowledge it. Equivocation and backpedaling is for loosers.
David Weidner’s Writing on the Wall Archives
March 12, 2013, 6:00 a.m. EDT
Dow 36,000? Try 6,300
Commentary: James Glassman reminds us of his biggest blunder
By David Weidner, MarketWatch
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — You have to hand it to the editors over at Bloomberg. They’re leading the discussion.They’ve got people talking.
Unfortunately, for them, no one is saying anything nice.
Instead, the chatter is mostly mockery. James K. Glassman, via a guest column on Bloomberg.com, is back with his prediction that the Dow Jones Industrial Average will hit 36,000. It’s a prediction he made in a 1999 book co-written by Kevin A. Hassett when the Dow was close to 10,000. You know, a few years before it went to 7,700 and a few years after that to 6,600. See Glassman’s ‘How to get to 36,000’ on Bloomberg.
Glassman became a cautionary tale of the market forecasting business. His book wasn’t entirely a prediction. It was more about how far stock values could go, along with the economy, if we created the right conditions.
The problem for Glassman is no one remembers the argument, just the reckless prediction.
“Kevin’s idea for the title of the book, which was ‘A Treatise on the Declining Risk Premium,‘ wouldn’t have sold as many books, but it wouldn’t have gotten us into so much trouble,” Glassman said.
…
if stocks go up 10% / annum and inflation is at 10% / annum do you win?
“if stocks go up 10% / annum and inflation is at 10% / annum do you win?”
This is the traditional argument against a capital gains tax, especially a long term one.
If I buy chunk “X” and it does nothing but keep up with inflation, whats the moral argument for the govt claiming a larger and larger fraction of chunk “X” over time based on cap gains increasing? Its an interesting form of confiscation.
so you think inflation should be taken off your gain before you pay a tax? Sounds fair to me.
I think inflation should be deductible, and then they should be taxed the same as income.
Hard to judge when the Ministry of Truth is the one publishing the inflation numbers. Inflation itself is a tax.
You do win. The alternatives are spend (100% loss) or hold in cash (10% loss per year).
Sure, holding your investment doesn’t sound like much of a win, but compared to the alternatives, it’s not as bad. Also inflation is not broadcast equally across all assets. Even if food increases by 10% per year, everything can’t, or it would only happen for a few years before it consumed everyone’s entire paychecks.
And there is no moral argument for capital gains taxes, but just the question as to whether inflation should be calculated into some asset classes but not others. Right now it is adjusted for houses but not stocks. Capital gains gets preferred rates. I think that’s a good enough deal, though I completely understand the argument that all asset classes should be taxed equally.
If cap gains start getting adjusted by inflation, then why not regular income taxes too? You go down a weird hole.
Its an interesting form of confiscation.
Government currency manipulation and debt monetization is a far more interesting form of confiscation.
Also remember that taxes on capital gains don’t take into account inflation. To mom & pop, that will matter. To some huge hedge fund, probably not so much.
Hope and Change in Hopeychangeyville USA:
“For the second time in history, federal regulators have accused an American state of securities fraud, finding that Illinois misled investors about the condition of its public pension system from 2005 to 2009.”
Forward
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/business/sec-accuses-illinois-of-securities-fraud.xml
Public unions bankrupting and corrupting everything they touch.
Don’t try this in the private sector - you will go to jail for a long time.
In the public sector?
Public unions are the LARGEST campaign/political contributors in America history. They support democrats 99-1.
They will not be touched.
They support democrats 99-1 ??
Yeah right….99 out of 100 of prison guards, police & firefighters are democrats right ?? What they are is hypocrites….They vote locally for democrats that give them those cushy jobs & pensions and then call themselves tea-partiers on the state & national level…Like I said; Hypocrites….
“Public unions are the LARGEST campaign/political contributors in America history.”
No, they aren’t, you liar.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/contriball.php
Why do you bother engaging him? He repeats the same canards, over and over, even after they have been disproven countless times. You know he won’t ever admit he was wrong, even if Jesus himself descended from the sky and told him he’s wrong.
Because he perpetuates lies that if not refuted, will become memes.
Remember, if you repeat a lie often enough, people WILL believe it. This is pyscho warfare propaganda 101.
Nice try obama kool-aid drinker.
Notice I did say OF ALL TIME.
Unions (public and private) are 13/20 top ALL TIME POLITICAL Donor. They give massively ONLY to one party.
In fact, you have to go to top political donor #19 to get to the first SLIGHTLY leaning republican political donor.
I can see why you want to keep those facts hidden. Especially for closed union shops where employees are forced to join a union as a condition of employment and are forced to pay union dues without their consent.
But please - keep crying about the corruption of the political process by all those fat cat republicans while ignoring the massive corruption of the obama administration and public unions.
Top All-Time Donors, 1989-2012
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
You post a chart that proves you are a liar?
Seriously, seek help.
Never mind that total business donations are much greater than total union donations.
Never mind that unions have collapsed over the last decade. Thus your using stats back to 1989 to make a point.
Never mind that more and more sectors of the economy are controlled by a handfull of corporate elite that get their way at the federal level.
Nope the problem is unions??
Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%
“those lucky enough to be in the stock market have reaped the bulk of the wealth gains. These have gone overwhelmingly to the wealthy … corporate stock constitutes just 3.1 percent of the net wealth of the middle class (defined as the middle three wealth quintiles) excluding pension accounts, with two-thirds of their wealth in home equity.
But for the ultrawealthy (defined as the top 1 percent), home equity accounts for only 9.4 percent of their wealth, with stocks accounting for 25.4 percent. The not-quite-rich (defined as the next 19 percent of households below the top 1 percent) are also heavily invested in stocks, which constitute 14.9 percent of their wealth, with 30.1 percent in home equity.”
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/wealth-spending-and-the-economy/
Get to work, Mr Chairman.
Can’t believe the D party is for such a wealth inequality.
…because they aren’t.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/09/28/usa-democrats-offshore-idUSN2821013620100928
Nice deflection.
Swimming De Nile again?
Caeful, you might catch something nasty.
ecofeco…Republicans are against protectionism (and for free trade).
Changing the law as the Democrats want is a form of protectionism.
Depressingly, the gross value of household real estate is up only about $1.4 trillion over the last year despite a 7.3 percent increase in home prices, according to the widely followed Case-Shiller Index. The nation will need to do that well annually for another three years before beleaguered homeowners are back to where they were in 2006 in terms of housing wealth.
—————–
I almost vommited when I read that paragraph.
It’s important to realize that the people who run this country don’t actually want a wealthy middle/upper middle class. They want a middle/upper middle class that *feels* wealthy. So they will spend spend spend. And go into debt based on a perception that “it’s worth it” and “the future is bright”.
The USA capitalist system is one giant prison in which only people like Bill in Los Angeles are truly free.
Wait until the government goes after his index funds and PM holdings.
I’ve brought this up to him before & never gotten a good answer. I think Bill is old enough he will get away with it.
Still interesting to see if he’s considered it, given his “thugernment” tirades.
Bill likes to talk tough, but he’ll be among the first to flee should his predictions come true.
Got a Glock 17, Colt 1911 and soon as I get my CCW I have my sights set on this:
http://www.maricopatactical.com/colt-6920-m4-carbine/
Got 9mm ammo, .45 ammo and will have to buy .223 ammo.
Great. Then you should consider moving to your promised land, North Korea. You’ll love it there.
They love to sell that Snake oil.
those
luckystupid or in possession of enough insider information to be comfortable picking up nickels in front of steamrollers enough to be in the stock market have reaped the bulk of the wealth gains.tresho wrote in the China vs Mexico debate “If petro gets over $200 a barrel, what will happen to transportation costs?”
Mexico wins twice over because they have a rapidly declining petroleum industry (they’ve pumped almost all of it out, basically) but the pumps are still squirting “some” out, and they’re closer aka less total energy to transport. In the very long run there’s no reason other than existing property tax law (which can be changed…) that they couldn’t be almost oil-free and use electrified trains for 99% of goods export to the US. We’ll go back to the days of sailing ships before we have electrified ocean crossing container ships with 5000 mile extension cords. Or nuke powered commercial ships. Maybe a really long railroad suspension bridge from CA to China? Or more likely from alaska to siberia?
Overtaxed wrote “That’s simply not true. My company has open hiring of CCIE and VCP certified individuals” and “However, there are only “thousands” of the people we’re looking to hire”.
Oh, there’s more like 10K or so CCIEs worldwide, although most of them are (were?) in the USA. I was a CCNA and CCNP about a decade ago before I went into software dev and although the written CCIE is simple (if you’ve already done the CCNP routing test, anyway) the practical test is/was nearly impossible. Hey google what is 10e3/400e6*100 ? Oh, so ultra-elite level tech certification is currently realistic for 0.0025% of the population? Awesome. Hmm the other 99.9975% can …? Hey google, who said “let them eat cake” and how did that turn out? For the sake of humor we’ll assume its possible to scale up the talent pool by 100x without crashing technical standards. The only effect of scaling up the talent pool by a factor of 100x would be cratering wages in the router community after which a mere 99.75% of the population would be sharpening the guillotines. A factor of 100x is ridiculous for just CCIE, but it is “reasonable” for ALL tech. All server certs, all firewall certs, all radiologists, blah blah. Tech is no magic bullet against the seemingly inevitable “let them eat cake” future.
One big problem I’ve personally run into is the tech equivalent of the “Coffee Barista with masters in english lit”. So I’ve been to interviews asking for CCIE but they lower themselves to a mere former experienced CCNP like myself and it turns out they are offering an entry level, CCNA level job, at McDonalds wages. Why ask for a CCIE to do a CCNA job? Unemployment, because we can, etc. Seriously, not making this up, I went to a multinational financial services co in the early 00s where this played out and they offered $12/hr for call center shift work to tell people to power cycle their routers… I had a real CCNP-level job paying a bit less than three times that, why did they make me waste a vacation day to even come in to the interview and then lay it on thick that they were doing me a favor and permitting me to interview despite not having the mandatory CCIE? In other words, if you wave a wand and create 100K more CCIEs you’re not going to create 100K more CCIE level job responsibilities and payrates, you’re just going to get a lot of CCNPs and CCNAs fired/downsized, and frustrate the heck out of the new CCIEs by giving PHD’s the equivalent of ditch digger jobs.
Spending money on education when the job market is already flooded with overqualified applicants is just wasting money and time. We already have too many CCIEs for too few CCIE level jobs, training more isn’t going to help that ratio. If you’re not getting an absolute flood of applications you’ve got a salary problem or a very severe reputation problem. Or more likely you’ve got a CCNA / CCNP level job, but demanding only seriously overqualified individuals can fill it, and frankly asking 3rd level support / engineer types to downgrade back to front line call center shift work is simply not going to work.
“Oh, there’s more like 10K or so CCIEs worldwide, although most of them are (were?) in the USA.”
Not all of the CCIE’s have VMware experience, although, of the 2, that’s far easier to pick up than deep Cisco routing.
” We already have too many CCIEs for too few CCIE level jobs, training more isn’t going to help that ratio. If you’re not getting an absolute flood of applications you’ve got a salary problem or a very severe reputation problem. ”
The starting salary for the positions we have advertised are around 100K, up to about 125K for people with significant consulting experience. I don’t want to share the company, but, we don’t have a reputation problem. They are one of the biggest MSP’s in the world.
And, no, we’re not getting a “flood” of applications. Except for one, everyone we’re hired is already employed making similar $$ somewhere else. We have to recruit the best candidates away from our competitors.
The basic qualifications for most of our positions are CCIE, VCP, industry storage certification from one of the big players (EMC, NTAP) bachelor’s degree (preferably in computer science or MIS) or equiv (15 years) experience, 3-5 years consulting experience (we’ve waived this before), willing to travel 75-100 days/yr (overnight travel). Work from home is typical.
If you can tick most/all of those boxes, can speak in front of groups and present to high level executives (IE, English as a first language as well as a presentable appearance), and aren’t making 100K/yr, perhaps Ben can help us get in touch. Doesn’t matter where you live, but has to be reasonably close to an airport.
15 years experience to make 100k is pretty shitty. Especially with that laundry list of certifications you want.
I’m not shocked you don’t get a lot of applications and have a bit of a problem finding people. A person bright enough to earn all those certifications could make about the same money as a teacher with 10-15 yrs experience. And they’d still have the summers off.
as a teacher with 10-15 yrs experience.
Wha…….?
I thought the teachers were only making 30K a year and spend most of their earnings buying school supplies.
My sis in North Carolina makes about 48K as a bilingual teacher with 15 years experience.
15 years’ experience with a BA, a teaching credential, and a Masters Degree gets you 70K a year in SF.
Median income here = 73K.
That NC salary is pitifully low, I hope it’s in a low COL area?
And SF, I am shocked.
I still think even just 75k to teach is still a better deal than this cr*p that Overtaxed is peddling. You don’t need a dozen certifications and round-the-clock availability, plus you get summers off. I laugh at the notion of signing your life away by racking up experience and certifications to drone for someone who would cut you loose the minute they find someone else a few bucks cheaper.
Interesting that no one here even mentions whether they are doing meaningful work that they love.
I guess if money is the singular point of working, then it makes sense to try and get the job that pays the most. And for most of the world, the point of work is to make money to survive.
But if you are able to find work that fulfills you AND pays the bills, more power to you.
When all is said and done and I’m on my deathbed, I don’t think I am going to look back and regret that I didn’t make more money.
Living in a place you love, doing work you love, and being surrounded by family and friends is what matters.
Well that’s the other thing I’ve mentioned before, she helps society infinitely more than I do. And she loves her job, goes above and beyond what’s “required” (although that factors in because Baltimore City is like DC where pay is linked to performance ratings).
I think it goes without saying that teaching science/social studies to 3rd graders is cooler than the vast majority of jobs out there.
Being respected by your supervisors and colleagues + well compensated is a nice bonus, though.
That NC salary is pitifully low, I hope it’s in a low COL area?
It’s in the Winston-Salem metro area. SIL is also a teacher in the Raleigh metro area. About 4-5 years experience, makes about 35K.
Starting pay in our school district is about 30K and maxes out around 65K.
15 years experience to make 100k is pretty shitty. Especially with that laundry list of certifications you want.
That and the H1-B invasion and offshoring is why smart American kids are avoiding the profession.
Oh, and I’ll bet that as a “CISCO certified network engineer” that you are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Sheesh, even doctors get down time.
“Oh, and I’ll bet that as a “CISCO certified network engineer” that you are on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”
Of course. As am I and my boss as well. There’s no downtime when you’re looking for these big salary positions; that just comes with the territory.
It’s also why, when I do go on vacation, I look at a cell phone coverage map and always go somewhere that’s totally out of range for any carrier. My boss goes to Nepal.
My boss goes to Nepal.
I saw few cybecafes equipped with skype. Must be for the tech support tourists….
Of course. As am I and my boss as well. There’s no downtime when you’re looking for these big salary positions; that just comes with the territory.
“Big salary”? 100K?
Like I said earlier, not even doctors are on call 24/7.
I’m on call 24/7 365. Working holidays is SOP for people in the corporate jet business. The only way I can “guarantee” that I can have a day off (even on weekends and holidays) is to take vacation time. And you will still get called.
(My personal favorite was a guy I knew who got an AOG call on the bosses air yacht during his daughter’s wedding. Even though he had put in for vacation 3 months before)
12-15 hour days aren’t uncommon either. The FAA doesn’t think mechanics need “hours on duty” restrictions, like pilot’s have.
And I don’t make anything close to $100K.
I used to like my job, but as many others have seen, the general level of crap stacked on the typical J6P/schlub in tech-land has increased exponentially, while the pay/bennies are going the other direction. Even in jobs where there are supposedly “shortages of qualified individuals”.
“Overtaxed” isn’t looking for Tech people……he’s looking for “Bullshit artists” with a tech background.
You boosters of “the market is always right” worldview need to get out and see what’s really happening. Around here, a person’s “success” has more to do with winning the parent lottery and a roulette wheel, than it does “intelligence, skill and talent”.
the general level of crap stacked on the typical J6P/schlub
I decided to retire prematurely when the level of crap stacked on me as a professional exceeded what I was willing to tolerate.
I once asked a state highway patrolman on his last work day before retirement, what he would miss about this job. He said, “All the lies. Some days, I thought, if I heard one more lie I would take out my pistol and start shooting.”
Different people’s tolerances vary.
LOL, I’m not sure what you want me to say. First I’m called a liar for saying we have open hiring for people with the right skills. I lay out those skills in detail, and then the “job is s**tty”.
Also, you’re looking at the long path to this kind of job. Come out of college, get some certifications and experience, and you could have this job before you’re 30 years old. That’s a pretty good track for the vast majority of the country.
He’s just saying that if you’re that smart that you can do much, much better in other professions.
The world outside of the rarified air of the Ivies and other top 20 schools is of little concern to Mister Fancypants, BA Princeton, JD Virginia.
“He’s just saying that if you’re that smart that you can do much, much better in other professions.”
And you can do much, much worse (IE, the teacher who spends the entire salary buying crayons). I love my field, which is why I decided to pursue this as a focus moving forward.
However, what you’re saying is true; which is exactly the reason we have so much trouble finding people. We’re not looking for “genius”, we’re looking for “very good”. Wall St gets all the geniuses who want to make a lot of money.
All that said, the myth that “there’s no jobs in IT” or “they pay like cr*p” is, in fact, a myth. If you have the skills, you’re going to get a job quickly and make 100K+ without much trouble at all.
JD Virginia??
LOLZ
You don’t get it overtaxed. If you can do worse, why would you. If you can do better, why wouldn’t you? Raise your salary offer by 50% - 100%. You will have no shortage of applicants. That was your complaint. You don’t need a CCIE to make 100k. You can get that with a BS in software after 5 years. So why would you put all that effort in to get the CCIE if you are just going to make the same amount anyway. It’s almost like you have a reason to NOT understand why you are having challenges hiring for this position. e.g. maybe you are a part owner and every dollar out of their pocket is a dollar in yours?
Mathguy,
I know why we’re having hiring challenges; there aren’t enough people with the certifications we need and the people that have them are already gainfully employed (perhaps at a higher salary) elsewhere.
Read back to my original comment. My original point was that there are certainly jobs out there for people with the right skills. The problem is that there are far too people with the skills or the aptitude to get those skills. Or, maybe put another way, the people with the aptitude aren’t choosing the field that we’re hiring in. If it wasn’t so rare, we wouldn’t have to pay so much.
Yes, if we raised our salary by 100% we certainly could attract talent from other employers. However, it would stand to reason, they’d then need to do the same thing to continue to attract that level of talent. The problem is; there aren’t enough people with the required skills.
Part owner.. LOL, not hardly.. If only! I work for a Fortune 50. And we are a great “resume” job, even if you want to go elsewhere. I understand exactly why we can’t get enough people in the position, my argument isn’t that our pay is “great” it’s that, with the right skills, a 100K job isn’t hard to find in IT.
If you need the position, then why not just up the pay until you get someone.. Isn’t that the “demand driven market” ? Why is this a problem? It’s like saying you want a new Ferrari, but only have 100k. Ok we all want a new Ferrari for 100k. We live in reality though and understand that Ferraris cost more because they are much more specialized and less available… why is this hard to understand? You can go get an Audi (CCNP) for 100k if you want, but just wishing you would get a Ferrari (CCIE) for 100k doesn’t make a lot of sense…
Teacher than spends her entire salary on crayons… ummm, what?
If you teach in any decent area, you can top out at the same salary you’re pitching *plus* get summers off *plus* avoid round-the-clock availability *plus have time to enjoy your life.
I’ve said it before, but I think teaching is pretty cool and that my wife has a great life. She’s in year 4, makes 62 or 63k (somewhere between those two), great benefits, loves her job, and works a matter of blocks from our house. Yes, she will only top out at 80something, but remember, that is for approx 9 months a year.
There are slaves at all salary levels, IMO the job Overtaxed is pitching is for coolies/slaves/modern sharecroppers, not for anyone who wants to be compensated well and have a good work/life balance too.
“I understand exactly why we can’t get enough people in the position, my argument isn’t that our pay is “great” it’s that, with the right skills, a 100K job isn’t hard to find in IT.”
————-
So at least you’re now admitting that what you want is 100k coolies. Why didn’t you come out and say this at the top of this thread?
JD Virginia??
LOLZ
———–
Yes it came down to UVa or Liberty U, definitely a laugher. Not like UVa is everyone’s top 10 and top 5 lists or anything.
“So at least you’re now admitting that what you want is 100k coolies”
What are you talking about? If you’re using that term in the pejorative sense; first off, what’s the matter with you? And second, since when does “Asian slave labor” mean a 100K+ job?
Man, you need to get a grip. Would it be better if my company had jobs that were suitable for morons with no education, no drive what-so-ever, and a guaranteed 40 hour work week that paid 100K? Is that really the new American model?
I would have gone with Liberty U myself. A stint at Heritage after Liberty might have opened up few doors with .001% neocons.
I never mentioned UVa here explicitly. Goon figured it out because I referenced how much I hate spread-out suburban type living in the context of living in Charlottesville for a few yrs.
@Overtaxed - I’m not referring to coolies in the historical context, I’m putting a modern spin on it. There isn’t anything wrong with having coolies, as long as you realize you’re lowballing your labor.
Man, you need to get a grip. Would it be better if my company had jobs that were suitable for morons with no education, no drive what-so-ever, and a guaranteed 40 hour work week that paid 100K? Is that really the new American model?
———
By the way this was a strawperson post, because no one says the job has to be 40 hrs or require no drive. You went to this extreme because you know the job you’re offering is on the far opposite extreme. Well over 40 hrs, lots of travel (1/3+), lots of certifications, need to be available all the time, etc.
I’m suggesting there are much better “midway” options that are better than having a ton asked of you for fairly paltry comp.
“fairly paltry comp”
100K is chump change now? You do know that puts you higher than all 9 out of 10 people, right? And 100K is certainly not the ceiling, we hired our last guy in the low 130s (CCIE, VCP, NACDA, 15 years experience, no degree). 100K is about the min for these positions, with enough experience, you can push to close to 200K, most are making in the 130s after a few years. Also, there are bonuses and good benefits on top of the salary. It’s a pretty good job from the pay perspective, but, not good enough to get people beating down our door, that’s for sure.
Biggest problem we have; most of the people we get in can’t speak well. Clients paying big bucks to a company simply won’t put up with a consultant of any type who’s not articulate and well spoken. The next biggest problem is typically inability to travel (young kids at home/single parent, etc). I don’t know where all you guys work, but, I’d love to find this “100K tech job” where I could put in my 40-50 hours a week, not travel much, and call it a day. In my experience, they are very hard to find. Yes, I could probably move to Mountain View and get a job in that area making 150-200 on a desk somewhere; but, I doubt that would be 50 hours (try 70+) and, I’d be in an area where 150K is more like making 75K in my current area (FL). So, I travel; I travel a lot, and make a salary that’s much higher than most others in the area I live, giving me a nice lifestyle and disposable income.
It’s all choices and sacrifice. Yes, I could make more if I was willing to go 100% travel (IBM, for example, pays people with similar skills 200K+) but I’m not willing to do that. And, I could make less and travel a lot less/none if I took a desk job in a mid size company in my immediate area. My job, and most of the openings we have, are kind of in the middle. I get to work from home when I’m not traveling (a huge bennie, IMHO, not only for quality of life, but also because of all the money I save commuting, when I drive anywhere for work, it’s billable to the company. And I drive FAR less than most people do commuting to work.
You guys crack me up with the “unreasonable requirements” and “your pay sucks” comments. All I hear on this blog (and many others) is how there’s no work for anyone out there. Well, here’s work, and there are probably plenty of other jobs just like it out there in other industries that go unfilled because, when people think “work” they think 40 hours and done; home at 5:30, leave for the office at 7:30.
Sorry, but for many of those who are trying to climb into the upper income brackets (so we can pay an absurd amount of tax), that’s simply not the reality. The world has changed, adapt or be left behind.
Now, back to my regularly scheduled programming (answering the e-mails that are now streaming in from our sales teams in the Pacific)..
Ok we all want a new Ferrari for 100k.
Leave me out of this. I wouldn’t pay more than $25 for a new Ferrari, and it better have a full tank of super premium.
And, no, we’re not getting a “flood” of applications.
Then I suppose that you just need to pay more.
Or does that only apply to executive pay?
Overtaxed is only interested in finding 100k coolies. Trust.
Uhm, I’ve worked in IT for a long time and 50K jobs are hard to come by, but only if you don’t have a long list of certs.
With certs, you don’t really need reasoning, logic or people skills. Of course, you also don’t really know how to fix the problems.
Yes, I’m saying that a lot cert folks are dumber than doorknobs whose a only real skill is an edict memory and a very narrow skill set.
“CCIE, VCP, industry storage certification from one of the big players (EMC, NTAP) bachelor’s degree (preferably in computer science or MIS) or equiv (15 years) experience, 3-5 years consulting experience (we’ve waived this before), willing to travel 75-100 days/yr (overnight travel). Work from home is typical.”
Good lord man, all those together? Are you serious? I thought you meant just CCIE or just VCP or . What kind of job could possibly involve all that at once? I mean I’m in the business, and for a long time (decades), so I know what it means. I’m amazed you’re getting any applicants at all.
I’m guessing you’re hiring router software developers to design and test software defined routers that exist as VMware images, like here’s a VMware image of a BGP route mirror or a VMware image of a insta-deployable BGP looking glass? The problem is people have been doing that for free with linux and Zebra/Quagga/etc for like a decade, so be prepared for some pushback. Its like trying to sell a webserver when everyone knows Apache is the best and it also happens to be free…
So CCIE is basically CCNP with R+D level of troubleshooting skill, like look at protocol analyzer and decode why this OSPF area is flapping. I did stuff like that but never passed the CCIE just the lower level stuff like CCNP. Its the kind of thing you need on the job to work in R+D at Cisco or maybe a competitor. If all you need is a designer/command like jockey you just get a cheaper CCNP or if all you need is remote hands who can follow directions you get a CCNA. Its like PHD level or at least masters degree level.
VCP doesn’t technically exist there’s a lot of vmware related certs like VCP5-CE or something for vmware 5, cloud edition or whatever and about a dozen other “VCP” family certs. Its pretty detailed stuff, beyond “put the disk in to install and click a lot of times”. Some high level troubleshooting and design work. Again not a console jockey cert more of a boss of a console jockey or maybe an R+D research scientist position. Sure a guy with that cert could stuck a DVD in a drive and install and click enter a hundred times but talk about being horribly overqualified to do it… Like hiring a neurosurgeon to put a bandaid on my finger. There’s a bunch of different certs but this is at least bachelors degree level of effort required.
The NAS guys are again separate division number three. Much like very few cardiologists get certified as neurosurgeons and plastic surgeons, this is starting to get ridiculous. Sure why not wish for agile certification and a MCSE too, I mean why not? What I mean is a jack of all trades at a small shop might be stuck doing all three, but by the time you multihome BGP route internet AND have a big ole nas for storage AND have a blade farm for a private cloud aka vsphere you don’t have one guy doing it all, you have one guy as a mid level manager with three direct report supervisors who have a team (or at least one guy) who does nothing but baby sit the NAS or a guy who does nothing but router work all day or nothing but vsphere/cloud admin work all day. I’m in the biz and I’m at a loss as to how you’d get the OTJ experience in three separate pigeonholes. Once you’re pigeonholed into “router guy” like happened to me, how in the world do you become a world class guy in other fields?
The smartest senior consultant I ever met worked as a consultant instead of getting a real job because he didn’t have the BS degree to get past HR. So you’re really limiting your field. Its more common than you’d think… As a crude first approximation, employees only have degrees and consultants have certs and experience, mostly.
15 years experience means he’s probably been downsized and given employment trends etc permanently removed from the tech pool. Once you’re out awhile no one will hire you because you’re not up to date anymore. Also you’re getting close to ageism limit where nobody gets hired in tech past age 30/40/whatever. So I cry kinda bogus here. You’re going to get applicants who are right at the border of assuming they’ll never work in tech again because they’re too old/expensive. Please no anecdotes about “I know one guy with gray hair…” because for that “one guy” there’s like 25 young kids right outta college, mostly recently hired to replace the “too expensive” older downsized guys.
Willing to travel a third of the time and being 15 years minimum out of college, lets be honest, that means you’re looking for single/gay/non-family man. An there ’s nothing wrong with that. Bill in LA self identifies as single non-family dude on a daily basis. Of course you’ve just limited your hiring pool by a factor of about 50, maybe 100. Needless to say there’s no way in hell I’d apply even if I somehow met all the other reqs, I’ve got a house and wife and kids. I’d only apply if I were totally desperate, like I need to work there just to pay the bills till I can get a real job. So you’re looking for top of the line world class techs who are lifetime singles and hopelessly desperate… I’d drug test them if I were you, there’s gotta be a toxic backstory or he’s literally one in a billion. How does an absolutely top of the technological elite in routers stay at that peak of the router field when he spends 1/2 of time in airports or away from home and then 2/3 of his time on the job doing NAS and vmware and his competition spends all their time at home doin “router” stuff all the time? So you’re looking for a terminal position, a guy who is/was elite, doesn’t care if he never gets another job in the field again, because he doesn’t have a family he doesn’t have to worry about poverty, because he’ll have no time to keep up with current developments?
Are you familiar with the “Drake Equation” where you estimate how many alien civilizations can come visit? You’d assume there’s trillions of stars, but after repeated cuts over and over at the one-in-a-million rate or one-in-a-thousand rate and you end up with the Earth is probably alone. Or whatever. Frankly I’m amazed you’ve found anyone with all those requirements. And let me guess, given those ridiculous skill sets required, it turns out he’s just an overblown sales engineer that any HS grad with a nice smile could do just as well?
The analogies in other fields would be ridiculous. The ex-GSFixr would LOL. I wanna A+P mfgr certified jet mechanic with a PHD in aerospace, PHD in biochem, and a PHD in french literature, who also was an air force major general and he needs to be a canonized by the catholic church saint and a nuclear plant certified TIG welder with an ATP pilot flying license and a current class 1 flight medical cert, and he’s gotta be single no kids no house. Yeah, sure, no problem, got a million of these guys resumes right here… I mean I’m not kidding that in the industry this dude is asking for something very much like an original NASA “right stuff” astronaut for a pitiful $100K/yr. Anyone like that, or with the ability to be like that, is already making five times that or owns his own engineering company or whatever. Good luck man, you’ll need it.
My guess was that he has some ownership stake and by reducing what they pay the breadwinner, they get more dough in their own pocket.
Wow.. First off, great comment Vince.
Yes, they are hard to find. And no, we don’t always get it all in the same person. We have 3 people on staff who are VCP+CCIE+storage (generally NTAP). We have others who are single line certified (Cisco CCNP+ and a BS are about the only one’s we’ll consider). Those with all the certs are generally better paid. We will pay for additional certs (as well as re-certing as necessary). Oh, and yes, I know VMW recently changed the name of all the certs, I refuse to learn the new credentialing.
The thing that usually kills it for us is the travel. It’s hard to get someone to travel that much. We make a lot of offers before we find someone because, as you point out, you’re going to be on the road a lot and away from your family a whole lot of the time. Everyone who works with me, though, does have a family and a life.
I think your “1 in a billion” might be a bit optimistic.
There are a lot of people out there cross certified. And we’re willing to work with people who have the right base skills (although, if you don’t have a CCNP, you’re probably not going to get an interview for this position).
This isn’t so much a “terminal” position as a transition. The role for these people is to work with customers to implement solutions. So, you’re tech skills are going to get rusty, but you need to have the credentials to be credible. It’s a real nightmare for me when I have to re-cert (which I just did at VMware PEX this year, ugh) because I don’t work with the technology much anymore. The transition in this role is from “gear head” to “guy in a suit in front of a whiteboard”. That’s why we so highly value good communication skills. But you need the strong technical background to be good at the job and provide a level of credibility when you speak with the customers and implement their solutions.
I don’t work in software, more “cloud” (IaaS) where we do custom design and architecture for individual customers.
“Willing to travel a third of the time and being 15 years minimum out of college, lets be honest, that means you’re looking for single/gay/non-family man. ”
You’d be surprised how common this is in the higher paying IT (and probably all) jobs. 1/3rd of the time isn’t even that high; I once interviewed at IBM and they wanted 80%! And IBM wanted a MS degree. Most of our staff is 35-55, most have families. They make sacrifices, as do I, to be at the high end of the income scale.
We do hire people without degrees, just require more experience to jump the HR hurdle. Frankly, I’ve never seen anyone with the right credentials for this position who’s worked in the field for less than 10 years or so.
Finally, 100K isn’t the limit. We have a few guys who’ve come into the company at 130+. It’s where we’d like to find people, but, for the right fit, we do go higher to lure them away from their current employer. Problem is, any of these guys could, tomorrow, get a job with NTAP/CSCO/VMW and probably make more. They’ll have to travel more though, which is typically what keeps them with us.
They make sacrifices, as do I, to be at the high end of the income scale.
————-
You might be at the high end of the income scale (probably the highest of anyone on HBB anyway) but these 100k coolies/sharecroppers you are trying to recruit are mostly sacrificing, not really getting paid well. They’re traveling a ton and have to be available “around the clock”, right? I completely understand why people aren’t lining up for this and “it’s hard to find people”.
“You might be at the high end of the income scale (probably the highest of anyone on HBB anyway)”
Not a chance. I’m paid well, but I’m not making anything like “bankster money”.
My point isn’t (and has never been) that “we have great jobs that are fun, easy, pay great and have no qualifications”. My point is, there are jobs out there for people willing to make sacrifices (be it, travel, education, etc).
Since when did we all expect a job that puts you in the top 10% (or higher) of US family income (by yourself) to be a 9-5, easy, and not have a ton of qualifications? Maybe I’m too young to remember those days, but, for years, everyone I work with has been killing themselves for their jobs, it’s just expected (or I thought it was) at this level.
I completely understand why people aren’t lining up for this and “it’s hard to find people”.
I sure wouldn’t. There are other jobs, even tech jobs, where you don’t have to travel constantly and aren’t on call 24/7 and make 100K.
@overtaxed - I meant that you’re the highest paid on HBB. And I still really wouldn’t want to trade, as I imagine the lifestyle would be dangerous to my health/relationship/sanity.
More and more IT jobs are requiring jack of all trades with pay for entry level.
Overtaxed, vinceinwaukesha pretty much nailed it in his post above.
You want to grow your staff at that level, bump your comp. I’m in software development, not networking/storage/VM solutions, but wouldn’t touch that job or one like it for less than $175k total comp… not worth the hassle of travel, never mind the laundry list of certs/experience.
For the record, I’ve been in the biz for 15 years, don’t have a masters or a single cert and make more than what you’re offering… and I don’t have to travel and I’m only on call once every few months. While I know the more advanced Cisco certs are a PITA, the vast majority of cert holders I’ve done technical interviews with were woefully unprepared for real world problem solving in software development. Experience is the single best teacher… everything else is just covering up for a lack of it.
NorthE,
Do you work for yourself or a company? Consulting or direct development?
Just curious, it’s always insightful to see some of the other areas of IT and where people come in versus what they are doing.
BTW, in all those numbers above, I was talking salary, not total comp. We have annual bonuses, great 401K plan, and good health (free for single) that pushes total comp quite a bit higher, especially if you max your 401K. A guy with a 100K salary has a total comp around 140K or so, assume they take the health plan, we hit our numbers and they max the 401K.
I currently work directly for a tech company doing platform development full time. I’m also a co-founder of a startup on the side. We’re trying to get past the incubation stage and receive VC funding to grow the sales, marketing and tech development beyond myself and the other two founders.
When I say total comp, I only mean salary and bonus. Benefits are a given to be competitive. I know the recent trend is to count everything, as even my company has started doing it to try and slow down employee turnover.
Sad that this is the trend. All the tech-heavy crunchers with MS or higher that have no kids are raking in the dough, spending it on escorts in Canada or Nevada, driving cars like this:
http://www.astonmartin.com/cars/vanquish
But then we lack the joy of seeing ourselves in young eyes.
To do that would mean a Toyota Sienna lifestyle.
There’s a tradeoff in everything man.
“Sad that this is the trend. All the tech-heavy crunchers with MS or higher that have no kids are raking in the dough, spending it on escorts in Canada or Nevada, driving cars like this”
On this point, I totally agree with you. If you watch Mad Men, I look on that lifestyle with envy. Yes, I get to go a lot of interesting places, and, yes, I have some nice cars in the driveway. But no children, I could never live this lifestyle with children. And a lot of other sacrifices. I only see my wife on the weekends for long periods of time when I’m traveling a lot. I work crazy hours (finally the folks from Asia have left me be!). And, yes, this is “standard” for the industry, I couldn’t change jobs to another position with similar pay and expect any different.
I’m not complaining, I chose this for myself, and, generally, I’m happy with my choices. But I can see it in other employees faces, they gave up something they really wanted (a home life, children, etc) in pursuit of this career, and, frankly, it wasn’t what they wanted. People burn out a lot in this line of work too; it’s not terribly mentally challenging (except for the certs, those can be quite difficult), but, it’s terribly political and, on a day to day basis, just exhausting to try to fight all the internal battles and external fires that pop up. Thing is, we’re all so overstretched that none of us do the work well anymore, we all just do it as quickly as humanly possible to try to get to the next thing that’s piled up. Partially this is because we can find people, partially because we’re often just overloaded and unable to bring in temp help. And then there’s the paperwork BS, the hours of expense reporting on a Saturday… Blah, blah, poor me.
Again, I’m happy with the choice, but, from the time I was a child, I knew I wanted the expensive car and big house. Children were never in my plan. For others, the choice is far more difficult.
And, at this level, it’s particularly difficult. If you get to the 400K or so range you can “outsource” your children (nannies, au pair, etc) and, some of my bosses have done exactly that. They travel all the time and see their kids on the weekend. But, in the “gap”, it’s harder. If I ever have children, it will be very late; most of my friends have 5-10 year olds now, I don’t even have plans for any in the next 5 years.
And, as bad as this sounds.. I’m not going to work like this and live the “Toyota Sienna” lifestyle (which is what I’d have to do with children). We’ve only got one round on this earth, and if I’m going to spend it slaving away, I’m going to make sure that I get some pleasure out of it. So, escorts in NV, not really my thing.. But, Aston Martin.. Sign me up!
Consider yourself signed!
Yes the saying “the grass is greener on the other side” applies to both cases.
The moral to the story is you take the lemon and make lemonade. In classics, Voltaire’s “Candide” story’s saying was “cultivate your own garden.”
Great parents with great kids are wealthy in one sense. Single people who live the life of luxury are wealthy in another sense. You got the ball, might as well run for the touchdown. It’s sad though that some busy bodys from one side of the fence hate the guy with the perceived greener grass on the other side of the fence.
“Tech is no magic bullet against the seemingly inevitable “let them eat cake” future.”
Assuming that the majority of the population can actually do tech work. There are a whole lot of people who want to work in tech because of the money, but have no aptitude for it and no love for the systems that they are working on. Even if they get the certifications, they’ll burn out because the field demands too much retraining.
Could the pool be expanded? Sure, especially if Wall St would stop sucking up all the top talent from the field. However, there’s so much expansion needed, I’m not sure we’re going to “top this out” anytime soon. There are lots of people who have the mental skills necessary to do this kind of work; problem is, the vast majority of those people are already employed in good jobs (typically in another profession that they like more than IT work). So, yes, while we could swamp any one profession if we took all the top talent, the problem in, across the professions that require high level cognitive ability, there simply isn’t enough of it to go around. Except for lawyers, sounds like that profession is pretty much overstocked.
But look at the usual suspects; medical (biology, chemistry, etc), engineering (CE, ME, EE, etc), information systems (MIS).. All of these fields has, in many areas, pretty much “open” hiring. If you have the credentials, you’ll get a job doing something in the field. And if you stay with it, you’ll probably be making big (relative to the median, not compared to the Wall St warriors) bucks in 5-10 years.
“But look at the usual suspects; … information systems (MIS).. All of these fields has, in many areas, pretty much “open” hiring. If you have the credentials, you’ll get a job doing something in the field.”
Overtaxed that is totally bogus. I have to call you out on that. You’re listing the fields that politicians pick on, not because there’s an actual shortage, there’s plenty of un- and under-employed people in those fields, but because the management/politicians are tired of paying “white collar” wages to people they feel only deserve “blue collar” or “field hand” wage, if that.
It is so not like that, not at all. Please no anecdotes about one time during the dotcom boom in one city at one company one year.
Especially something like bio. Yes the market is booming for BS in bio grads, they make great $25K/yr foresters and DNR agents and um… yeah. You’re almost better off with English Lit or womens studies than a bio degree.
but because the management/politicians are tired of paying “white collar” wages to people they feel only deserve “blue collar” or “field hand” wage, if that.
I once heard of techies referred to as the “new blue collar job”. Of course it’s a “blue collar” job that requires:
A technical college degree
An above average IQ
That you constantly retrain yourself, on your time and dime.
Oh, and you don’t get paid for any overtime.
I’ve heard Opel refer to pilots as “overpaid bus drivers.”
Idiocracy was a documentary.
“People”
Damn crappy spell checker.
“…but because the management/politicians are tired of paying “white collar” wages to people they feel only deserve “blue collar” or “field hand” wage, if that.”
Exactly, this.
Your arguement is sound except for the fact that there will be fewer consumers and the economy will tank.
Not for the 1% it won’t.
But the cities will burn long before then.
Mexico wins twice over because they have a rapidly declining petroleum industry (they’ve pumped almost all of it out, basically)
It’s the low hanging fruit that’s running out. And PEMEX doesn’t have the expertise to extract what’s left and they won’t allow foreign firms to do it.
“And PEMEX doesn’t have the expertise to extract what’s left and they won’t allow foreign firms to do it.”
Sell it now for $100/barrel or later for $300/barrel. As long as they’ve got the safety valve to the north to send all their workers to great paying housing bubble jobs in el norte they’re all good with pumping it later rather than sooner… whoops…
Anyway the point is they’re way better off than China when oil prices rise. Everyone’s screwed, yes, but they’re better off, relatively.
PEMEX can hire the expertise if/when they need it. After all, expertise can come from all over the world.
After all, petroleum engineering is petroleum engineering. Same body of knowledge whether you’re in Caracas or Baghdad. Or, for that matter, Dallas or Mexico City.
My understanding of the situation is that those with the “know how” aren’t “for hire”. They will drill in the tricky places (usually in the gulf of Mexico) for a “cut” (a really big one). Problem is that the Mexican constitution forbids that as oil is national patrimony.
There have been rumblings to amend the Mexican constitution (it’s much easier to amend than ours) but there is a great deal of political resistance to reopen Mexican oils fields to “foreigners”.
That engineering expertise is American. Period.
Take my word for this. (or don’t)
That engineering expertise is American. Period.
Take my word for this. (or don’t)
Agreed. And it works all over the world.
Found this on the internet, Google for the rest of the details:
If methane extraction from clathrates scales up and makes economic sense, it would change the world economy.
They should be better off. They can build most of the low wage sweat shops along the US border and transportation costs approach zero.
Hope and change
Forward.
Leadership.
The 47% free sh*t army has spoken.
————–
Debt Soared $5.5 Trillion Since Last Senate Budget
Investor’s Business Daily | 03/11/2013 | John Merline
If you want a sense of just how massive the nation’s debt problem is, consider this: The U.S. added $226 billion in new debt in just the 35 days since President Obama missed the legal deadline to submit his budget.
That’s more than the government will spend this year on education, homeland security, law enforcement, housing aid, energy and the environment, combined.
Senate Democrats, meanwhile, haven’t produced an annual budget — also required by law — since 2009. Over that time, the nation’s debt has climbed $5.5 trillion, according to the Treasury Department.
get on food stanps while you can!!!
I still enjoy the hypocrisy:
You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.
“Paul”? I don’t get it…Ron Paul? I’m flattered. Rand Paul? I’m honored…
Paul O’Neil
Paul… ly Shore.
he got learned…he got learned real good.
More Hope and Change in Democrat utopia Detroit:
“The financial crisis that has made Detroit one of the largest cities ever to face mandatory state oversight was decades in the making, a trail of missteps, of trimming too little, too late, of hoping that deep-rooted structural problems would turn out to be cyclical downturns that might melt away as the economy picked up.”
Forward
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/us/for-detroit-a-financial-crisis-was-long-coming.xml
racketeering, extortion, bribery and mail fraud, among other things…..
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/03/11/174008847/former-detroit-mayor-kilpatrick-convicted-on-corruption-charges
Should have sent that clown to jail a long time ago.
But the people chose him to lead them.
Looks more like he bought his election.
Boulder Daily Camera publishes Los Angeles Times piece pimping the FEAR:
There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.
They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.”
Only Obama can save us.
Only Bloomberg can save us.
Only Feinstein can save us.
Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.
http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_22766671/home-grown-extremists
movement has been growing at a blistering pace, especially following the election of President Obama in 2008 ??
Because he is a democrat ?? Or because he is a demo-Black ??
it’s because he’s half white.
“They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.”
“movement has been growing at a blistering pace, especially following the election of President Obama in 2008 ??”
I think it has been growing since 2009 when they came out and said this. “also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks.”
By Eli Lake and Audrey Hudson
The Washington Times
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Napolitano stands by controversial report
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she was briefed before the release of a controversial intelligence assessment and that she stands by the report, which lists returning veterans among terrorist risks to the U.S.
“Rightwing extremism,” the report said in a footnote on Page 2, goes beyond religious and racial hate groups and extends to “those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely.”
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks.
The assessment is not the first Homeland Security product to examine threats based on political extremism. In January, the department sent law enforcement officials an assessment of cyberterrorism threats from such left-leaning sources as environmental, animal rights and anarchist groups.
Mike German, policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union and a former FBI agent, said his organization was concerned about law enforcement agencies’ focus on radicalization, regardless of the specific ideology.
“Certainly, the right-wing report is focused far too much on rhetoric and things people say and things people think rather than on criminal activity and the people involved in criminal activity,” he said. “There is plenty of crime out there for federal, state and local law enforcement to worry about. They don’t need to invent threats that they have no factual basis for supporting.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/?page=all - 96k -
“…..calls of angry men…..”
Yeah, there is a lot of “talk”.
It all brings to mind someone said about “alligator mouths and hummingbird azzes”.
The only balls any of these guys have are those chrome “truck nutz”
I was recently involved in an event that garnered death threats for the organizers. They got to the point where the organizers had to get police protection for the actual event.
And, wouldn’t you know it, no one came to disrupt the event. And I do mean no one.
I talked to one of the cops about this, and he said that it’s very easy to make threats on Facebook. But carrying them out? Naaaah.
Yeah, there is a lot of “talk”.
And if the SHTF these guys will be hightailing it out of the country, shoving women and children out of their way as they escape to Canada or Mexico.
Or overestimate the viability of the “one man/family as an island” survival plan.
They won’t be able to stay in that bunker forever. Especially if they have kids. And all they have to do is screw up once……..
“They won’t be able to stay in that bunker forever.”
You guys are right, they eventually got Anne Frank too didn’t they. Looks like this propoganda push has been succesful. I am sure you will all be cheering when the SS or I mean DHS starts kicking the doors in. Maybe they will get all of us, the Wing Nuts, the Tea baggers, the Ditto heads etc.
Where was it in the history books that I saw a Political party vilify a group of people for years so when they were taken away evidently the population thought it was a good thing.
If anyone is believing propaganda, it’s the gun-nut crowd.
Take my word for it. Nobody is coming to kick down your door, looking for guns. Especially someone wearing a UN uniform.
Want to put that concealed carry permit to good use? Start volunteer, unpaid walking patrols in high-crime areas at 0200. In fact, make that a requirement for the permit.
Suburban commandos who have a concealed carry permit in their low crime, all Caucasian, all of the time, one-murder-in-10 years suburbs, just make me wanna laugh.
A World War 2 study by the US Army found that only about 10% of the riflemen would actually aim and pull the trigger on a human target. I don’t expect that US American civilians will do any better. Which means that when the SHTF, 90% of the concealed carry guns will soon be be possessed by the 10% actually willing to pull triggers.
Where was it in the history books that I saw a Political party vilify a group of people for years so when they were taken away evidently the population thought it was a good thing.
Right wing white guys are the new Jews? You guys are really having trouble adapting to your new minority status, aren’t you?
Were you decrying the persecution when the report on left-wing extremist groups came out in January?
So you are saying the people who have been shooting at the “No More Hesitation” targets will do better than 10%.
DHS Contractor Apologizes For Selling Shooting Targets of Children …
http://www.infowars.com/dhs-contractor-apologizes-for-selling-shooting-targets-of-children/ -
Take my word for it. Nobody is coming to kick down your door, looking for guns. Especially someone wearing a UN uniform.
You’re right. They’re not wearing UN uniforms, they’re wearing State LEO uniforms and US military camo patterns…
California Seizes Guns as Owners Lose Right to Keep Arms
And for the record, those confiscations are happening without a warrant…
A World War 2 study by the US Army found that only about 10% of the riflemen would actually aim and pull the trigger on a human target.
That was before video games. I suspect the percentages have changed for people unwilling to pull the trigger. The ones who freeze up due to fear but would otherwise respond “normally” is probably constant.
“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration,” said the report, which also listed gun owners and veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as potential risks.”
If Napolitano really wanted to make the “Homeland” safer, she would be doing something about these everyday events.
Baby dies after being shot 5 times; dad part of Chicago gang
4:24p.m. EDT March 12, 2013
CHICAGO (AP) — Authorities said Tuesday that an attack in which a 6-month-old girl was fatally shot and her father was wounded was apparently gang-related, and that they are searching for the gunman and the driver of the getaway van.
Jonylah Watkins was shot five times during the Monday afternoon attack in the South Side neighborhood of Woodlawn. She died Tuesday morning at Comer Children’s Hospital, police said.
Her father, Jonathan Watkins, was in serious but stable condition, recovering at Northwestern Memorial Hospital from wounds to his side, buttocks and face, which was only grazed, police said.
Witnesses said the attacker approached Jonathan Watkins around 1 p.m. while he was standing beside his minivan and changing his daughter’s diaper. She was on the front seat. Her family said Jonylah was shot in the thigh, shoulder, lung, liver and bowels.
Jonathan Watkins belongs to a gang and has a long criminal history, and Monday’s attack appears to have been gang-related, McCarthy said at a Tuesday news conference. He said police weren’t sure yet whether Watkins will decide to cooperate in the investigation.
“No child, certainly not an infant, should be a victim of gang violence,” McCarthy said.
Authorities found surveillance video of the blue van in which they believe the attacker fled. They believe a driver waited in the van during the shooting.
McCarthy said police flooded the neighborhood Monday night to prevent a retaliatory attack over the infant girl’s shooting.
“He was obviously targeted,” McCarthy said of Jonathan Watkins. Police were trying to determine whether a reported Facebook post threatening Watkins actually exists, McCarthy said.
It wasn’t the family’s first brush with Chicago’s gun violence. The girl’s mother, Judy Watkins, was shot in the knee while she was pregnant with Jonylah, according to the woman’s mother, Mary Young.
“There’s too much shooting over there,” Young told reporters Monday. Speaking of her granddaughter, she added, “She’s nothing but 6 months old. How could anybody — what kind of heart?”
Chicago has seen a rise in gun violence — much of it gang-related — and registered at least 500 homicides last year for the first time since 2008. In 2011, there were 435 homicides.
McCarthy had told reporters Monday that homicides were down 26 percent this year, compared with the same period a year earlier. On Tuesday, he said: “It’s hard to see the progress.”
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/12/chicago-baby-shooting/1982235/ - -
Northeastener
See what you think. BS or not?
http://www.westernjournalism.com/us-camp….
18-28 March: Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty
All Member States of the United Nations gathered in New York on 2-27 July 2012 for an historical initiative in the area of conventional arms: to negotiate an Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The Treaty would establish high common standards for international trade in conventional arms. The Conference could not reach agreement on a treaty text. The General Assembly of the United Nations has decided to convene a Final Conference on the ATT, in March 2013, to conclude the work begun in July 2012.
More information: http://www.un.org/disarmament/ATT/
18-28 March: Final United Nations Conference on - Welcome to …
http://csonet.org/?page=view&nr=159&type=13&menu=14 - 9k
The 1% want a disarmed population. They (Bloomberg, Feinstein) all have armed bodyguards of course.
One rule for me, another for thee.
It fits the facts as we currently know them… military hardware like MRAP’s going to LEO, massive buildup of munitions for DHS while actual warfighters have to scrounge, and new civilian gun restrictions.
Remember, the Patriot Act was sitting waiting for the right event for years before it was dusted off. Why not a plan to deal with insurection in the homeland? That’s what Pentagon planners are paid to do and it’s happened here before, so there is historical precedent.
People like Gordon Kahl have been around forever, nothing really new in the discussion.
If you want to read about SHTF, follow current events in Syria, that’s what SHTF looks like.
In fiction, James Kunstler’s play “Big Slide” is an American version of SHTF.
It’s good to know that the only reason you own your 30-06 is for the nostalga of a simpler time, when men fought a virtuous fight against evil. I mean, when DHS comes to take your rifle away, you won’t put up a fight. You’ll gladly hand it over to avoid anything so messy as bloodshed for the constitutional right to defend you and yours from tyranny…
Easiest way to stop people from consuming $h*tloads of HFCS-laden beverages?
Stop subsidizing big ag/corn.
I’m sure Bloomberg knows this but I’ve never heard him bring up the idea (not saying he hasn’t said it, just I haven’t heard it).
I’m sure Bloomberg knows this but I’ve never heard him bring up the idea (not saying he hasn’t said it, just I haven’t heard it).
And kill any chance he might have had for a national office?
Bloomberg also supports WallStreet, supported bailout and supports what Gono is doing right now…..
In another word, Bloomberg is not a friend of middle class and upper middle class americans.
Bloomberg IS Wall St.
Hello?!
“They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.”
And often end up dead, accomplishing nothing but harm.
Darwin Award winners, one and all.
We are not that far from calling anyone who voices an opinion of dissent “dangerous”, “intractable”, “extremist”, “zealot”. That helps to justify the use of force to quiet dissent.
Quite a leap there.
I’m only referring to the ones who lose control, of which there have been plenty lately.
And BTW, I’ve been on the wrong of political dissent, blackballing and retaliation, thank you very much.
One wonders if more are losing control of self or more are losing compromise. External pressure to submit may be in play.
Oops, my Glock is illegal now.
Molon Labe
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22765004/colorado-gun-bill-senate-vote-limit-ammunition-magazines
Your brothers behind enemy lines in the liberal haven of New England support you. Visit us at northeastshooters.com. The sheep have no idea how many sheepdogs are ready to defend their constitutional rights against those who embrace tyranny.
Molon Labe
“The bill passed on a 18-17 vote, with Democratic Sens. Cheri Jahn of Wheat Ridge and Lois Tochtrop of Thornton voting against it.”
I am sure with permission to take cover from DC after they knew they had the votes.
‘Krugman’s Four Dangerous Fiscal Fables - Yahoo! Finance’
By Laurence Kotlikoff
“There are four dangerous fiscal fables afloat. The first is that taxes can be cut to raise revenues and lower the deficit. The second is that spending can be raised to raise revenues and lower the deficit. The third is that the deficit can be financed by printing money with no real consequences. And the fourth, and most dangerous, is that the deficit’s accumulated value — the official debt — is a meaningful measure of our country’s or any country’s true indebtedness.
Paul Krugman, who has been pleading for more deficit spending on a continuous basis in his New York Times column, is hawking all four fables. Pity our children if our policymakers continue to take his views seriously.”
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/krugman-four-dangerous-fiscal-fables-174155103.html
From the article credit: Laurence Kotlikoff is an economist at Boston University and President of Economic Security Planning, Inc. whose company markets Maximize My Social Security and ESPlanner (Economic Security Planner).
I’m still lobbying for “Uncle Sam’s Garage Sale” to reduce the deficit.
Sounds like good areas of expertise from which to base talking about Social Security and pension obligations. It’s always good to have the financial disclosures to see what these guys motivations are. My first gut feeling is if this guy is pushing SS maximization for people he sure doesn’t want the funds to be overobligated and not able to pay, especially due to borrowing from the general fund (or rather the general fund borrowing from SS and not able to pay it back).
“Limited number of qualified people…….”
Let’s say you put out an ad for $12/hour ditch diggers in Death Valley, and one of the requirements was “applicants must run a 4.2 in the 40….”
As has been repeatedly seen, you can have an IQ of 80, be a borderline psycopath, and still get a $300K/year (part-time) job in the NFL if you can run the 40 in 4.2.
So where is the problem? The job prerequisites, or the lazy/worthless job applicant?
GS, these are just excuses for H-1B’s the same as eliminating import taxes as free trade were just excuses to offshore expensive US blue collar labor while still selling goods domestically.
The rookie minimum for the upcoming NFL season is $405,000.
Anyone who runs a 4.2 and gets drafted is going to make a bunch more than that, unless their psychopathy includes literally killing people.
The average 1st round pick gets something like 20MM in guaranteed money. For 2nd rounders it drops off but is still about 4 or 5 MM.
Guaranteed money in the NFL is far from guaranteed, as one would normally describe it. I’d be surprised if most players earned more than 60% or so of their guaranteed money.
So, your saying that anyone who can run a 4.2 might not want to waste their “intelligence/talent/skill/training” on a $12/hour job in Death Valley?
And this is why the US of A is so screwed up. The current “market” supposedly decided that robber banksters and various reality show skanks (whose only skillset seems to be the willingness to do “home porn”) are worth millions………
While “the market” decides that other jobs shouldn’t pay enough to enable someone to rub two nickels together. Then “the market” wants to bitch about not being able to find “qualified” people”, and lobbies the government for H-1Bs and government-paid “training programs” to fill the perceived “shortage”.
The “market” is a whiny, spoiled, 15 year old, bitchy teenager, especially when chickens start coming home to roost.
The “market” decided that tech people are naval lint, unless they can turn into BS-artists/part-time liars-hedgers and become salesman.
(If I seem bitter about sales people, it’s because in my experience, their success had more to do with the ability to tell customers bald-faced lies than with any other skills they may have possessed.)
Now, we have a nationwide shortages of “qualified people” in critical tech jobs? After 30 years of tech people getting cram downs, pay cuts/benefit cuts, pension-plan looting via “leveraged buyout” and generally throwing the workforce under the bus, causing people to move on to greener pastures?
The aviation business is a microcosm of the whole economy. The industry says there are “shortages” of trained personnel. Free market dogma would suggest that pay scales would rise, until supply met demand. But that isn’t how it works.
What they are really saying is “shortages of trained people who will work for peanuts”. So they lobby for H-1Bs…..but, too bad, so sad, there is a worldwide shortage of trained/qualified people.
So, they lobby the FAA to let untrained people do the work, under the banner of “excessive regulation”. And/or lobby the government to provide trained people, by government paid training, tax breaks to employers for training, etc.
Then they whine about “unemployment benefits/paying people to do nothing” because a guy who gets laid off with no unemployment is more desperate than one who has six months to a year to be picky.
The only thing that makes sense is that the PTB have designed business plans to keep costs low by screwing employees out of money, and reward the management for doing so.
The incentives are lined up in a manner where it is more profitable to pay five people $12/hour to screw up the job four times, than it is to pay a skilled person $60/hour to fix it right the first time.
Now, we are getting to the logical conclusion to that policy. The good $60/hour guys are mostly out of business, so now the $12/hour guys have jacked their rates to $45.
We have government of the highest bidder, by the highest bidder, for the highest bidder to thank for all this:
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=c
I nearly died when i saw that last category. Lawyers and lobbyists have their own lobbyists! To the tune of 400 million since ‘98.
Sad for America.
Things just keep looking worse for Walmart.
March 12, 2013, 1:59 p.m. EDT
H&R Block snafu delays 600,000 refunds
Tax preparer neglected to fill out mandatory field, IRS says
By Jonnelle Marte
The nation’s biggest tax preparer bungled more than 600,000 returns, delaying refunds by as much as six weeks, the IRS tells MarketWatch.
Though people turn to preparers for expertise in making sense of the confusing forms, sometimes even the professionals can’t get it right. H&R Block improperly filed Form 8863, used to claim educational credits, leaving a mandatory field blank. The snafu is impacting about 10% of the 6.6 million tax returns containing Form 8863, IRS spokeswoman Michelle Eldridge says. Those taxpayers may have to wait six more weeks before they receive their refunds, she says, adding that the IRS is hoping to reduce that wait time.
H&R Block confirms there is an issue with tax returns filed before Feb. 22 because the IRS changed the way it processes some of the yes or no questions on the form. While in previous years, leaving a field blank to indicate “No” on certain questions was acceptable, the IRS is now requiring preparers to enter an “N.” As a result, H&R Block says, it is working with the IRS to clear these errors, but the company would not give details on how it is correcting returns or exactly how long taxpayers will have to wait for their refunds. The IRS says it is able to keep processing these returns now that it is aware of the system-wide error, but that affected taxpayers will still face delays because of extra steps needed to correct the issue.
…
Where’s the Walmart connection?
A variation of the “Wal-Mart is busiest on SNAP card deposit day” Theory.
Delayed tax return. Delayed trip to Wal-Mart to spend the tax refund.
A lot of people will spend their tax refunds at WallyWorld.
And, as has been reported here recently, the temporary Social Security tax cut’s phase-out has hit Wally pretty hard. So, this will be another hit.
Thx for correctly reading my mind.
No problemo! And thanks for your diligence in keeping us abreast of media coverage on various issues.
http://bostonherald.com/business/business_markets/2013/03/feds_bust_up_100m_nc_crop_insurance_fraud_ring_0
Damn unions and welfare cheats driving Escalades with free Obama phones!
Oh wait…
Sounds like a good opportunity ahead for those with dollar savings to diversify them.
When push meets shove, would a strengthening dollar tend to correlate positively or negatively with U.S. stock market moves?
Financial Times
March 12, 2013 12:50 pm
Stars align for big dollar bull run
By Michael Mackenzie in New York
The stars are aligning for a major bull run in the dollar. As America emerges from the Great Recession in better shape than the rest of the developed world, the US currency is on a roll.
A wave of upbeat economic figures, the latest being Friday’s robust February jobs data, have pushed the 10-year benchmark Treasury yield back above 2 per cent and left the S&P 500 stock market index sitting just 1 per cent below a record high. And that is good news for the dollar.
On a trade-weighted basis, the world’s foremost reserve currency has marched 4.5 per cent higher over the past five weeks – gaining with relatively risky assets such as equities as US recovery prospects have brightened – while the euro, sterling and yen have all retreated.
“It’s becoming increasingly clear that the US is crawling out of the mud faster than other developed economies,” says Nicholas Pifer, portfolio manager at Columbia Management.
This relative US outperformance is restoring the role of interest rates to foreign exchange markets. Put simply, the rise in the dollar is attracting more foreign investors wanting to own US assets that generate additional currency gain.
Even as the Federal Reserve has been buying heavily US Treasury bonds under its quantitative easing programme – which in theory would send bond prices higher and yields lower – yields have been rising against those of other debt such as German Bunds and Japanese government bonds, boosting the dollar.
“The best explanation for this latest leg up in the dollar is growth differentials mediated by interest rate differentials,” says Marc Chandler, global head of currency strategy at Brown Brothers Harriman.
Alan Ruskin, global head of currency strategy at Deutsche Bank, says: “We are getting back to a traditional cycle where the US is at the forefront of a recovery.”
…
returns on AAPL will be unfathomable in 2103.
Read this debunking and get ready to get your government tracking chip.
snopes.com: Obamacare Requires Microchip Implantation?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/microchip.asp - - Cached - Similar pages
Feb 7, 2013 … ‘Obamacare’ health care legislation requires that everyone be … Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1,001-1,008: …
Incalculable!!!
Rolling Stones - Paint It Black - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQgT1vt2Wu0 - 211k -
Songwriters: Jagger, Mick; Richards, Keith; hazard
My loans delinquent but the Bank wont take it back
No payments in five years they must be smokin crack
I see the girls walk by dressed in their summer clothes
They must be payin rent and man that really blows
I`ve got nice neighbors here but they’re all payin’ back
Sometimes they`re pissy cause my house looks like a shack
I see people turn their heads and quickly look away
They call me Deadbeat it just happens every day
I look inside myself and see my heart is black
My loans delinquent but the Bank wont take it back
Maybe then I’ll fade away and not have to face the facts
It’s not easy facin’ up to this late payment stack
No more will my green sea go turn a deeper blue
I started refing back in 2002
If I look hard enough into the settin’ sun
My love will laugh with me before foreclosure comes
My loans delinquent but the Bank wont take it back
No payments in five years they must be smokin crack
I see the girls walk by dressed in their summer clothes
They must be payin rent and man that really blows
I wanna see your face, painted black
Black as night, black as coal
I wanna see the sun blotted out from the sky
I wanna see those payments, payments, payments, pay em back
Yeah!