Bits Bucket for June 29, 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
I’ve had my Phoenix house on the market for 2 weeks now at 305k. Had a few lookers but no offers. Where is this buying frenzy that I’ve been hearing so much about in the media?
Afraid to leave the air conditioning?
The buying frenzy is for places that cash flow rental wise or are significantly underpriced and carry some upside for a possible quick flip. Guess what, most of those were bought in the past two years and are gone, gone, gone. It is all rear view mirror stats being used to claim you can sell your house now at the higher median price, when in reality, at those prices there aren’t the buyers.
Also who’d want to buy an old house when there are builders going crazy in Phx building new ones also. What kind of discount off of what a new house are you offering?
The problem is;
No properties cash-flow at current massively inflated asking prices.
Certainly far far fewer than when looking at what they would have cost a year or two ago.
I think inventory for sale popped up significantly in the last few weeks. These are people reading all the spin Stealtor media stories and thinking they can cash in. They buyers aren’t there. There are many houses just sitting or with price reductions, BUT not reductions down to prices where there are buyers.
AND WHO IS GOING TO BUY ALL THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION BEING PUT UP. WHOLE NEW PLANNED COMMUNITIES BEGINNING IN SE PHX. EVERYONE WANTS TO POINT TO THAT AS A SIGN HOUSING HAS RECOVERED, CAUSE THE BUILDERS MUST KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING RIGHT?
hey tom
price cut to $275k when the temps are over 115 degrees and it will sell quickly
Traditionally, 2 weeks is not a long time when it comes to selling a house. If you want a quick sale, it has to be priced right. It is not, plain and simple. Anything which is priced to sell finds a buyer immediately.
I think people have become conditioned to think, “a bunch of people came to my open house. They must really want this place.” The reality is, the place is fresh meat on the market so you naturally get more lookers.
My first open house was mostly neighbors wondering what I did to the place. (Large, old beat up house that everyone in the hood knew about, that I rehabbed back to what it once was…)
sleepless
Oh yeah, when we did our FSBO Open House every Gladys Kravitz came by to check out our home. We’re a shoe free home, so it limited the lookie-loos who felt insulted.
We sold paying the buyer’s side only. We listed with an online MLS service.
A Realtor Open House is their “field office” to fish for clients. It’s even said in real estate class.
I like open houses because they sometimes have free hot dogs or cupcakes.
Yep, that too. I don’t think they had anything at mine. Do you want the house or don’t you?
You had better try regularly testing the market with lower listing prices, as you run the risk of chasing the market down if mortgage rates keep rising as fast as they have recently risen.
If you take on mortgage debt at current massively inflated housing prices, you’ll enslave yourself for the rest of your life.
“Debt is bondage.”~ Suze Orman, May 11, 2013
Don’t Be A Debt Donkey®
suze orman has bankrupted a many.
You bankrupted yourself.
spending all this equity is tough. when is your BK final? Are you building more shanties at 50 bucks a foot today?
’spending all this equity is tough’
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=30k%20millionaire
Bankrupted.
shanty boy tell us the details of your BK? How many subs did you not pay so you can build at 50?
… and underwater.
dump your shoddy shanties @ 50 while you can.
…. and sinking.
“Why buy a house at these massively inflated asking prices? Buy later after prices crater for 65% less.
If you need to comment that $300k is much higher than the long term price trend you have the opportunity for a much bigger soap box by writing a letter to “O” magazine and getting it published.
When your only means of earning money is pimping inflated housing prices, you need to learn a new skill.
Facebook Realtor® has a BA in economics from CU Boulder, his only “skill” is polishing turds and selling them to hapless fools.
“polishing turds”
Forget the polishing, stick ‘em in cans and call ‘em art.
Do you really think $630/mo for a 3 BR apartment is grossly inflated? My new renters don’t think so.
Get a skill and a life.
Get a skill and a life.
Totally unfair; landlords provide a valuable service (shelter) to people who otherwise would not have it.
I am grateful to my landlord for renting me my current residence.
“I am grateful to my landlord for renting me my current residence.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ0up_MjsLk
(Eddie Murphy, “Kill my landlord”)
“purchase the least amount of home that meets your needs”
“bear in mind, too, that bidding wars have returned… if your budget is $300,000… you should be shopping for homes listed at $270,000″
- Suze Orman , O magazine July 2013 p 43
And how’s that working out considering $300k is 225% higher than long term affordability trend?
Let me help you out with that question………
Answer: Not so well Mr. Housing Analyst. Housing demand is at 17 year lows because prices are grossly inflated.
Didn’t come out in the right sequence:
If you need to comment that $300k is 225% higher than long term affordability trend you have the opportunity for a much bigger soap box by writing a letter to “O” magazine and getting it published.
You could write to Suze directly but a published letter would reach a wider audience.
Nothing “comes out in sequence” from liars like you.
“Private island off Homosassa for sale; bids start at $90,000″
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/realestate/private-island-off-homosassa-could-be-yours-for-90000/2129071
I put in my bid.
That place looks pretty cool. I wonder what’s wrong with it. I guess you need a boat to get there, but that could come in handy when the zombies hit.
Robert Shiller says up for maybe another year and then…..good time to flip houses
http://www.financialsense.com/video
HA
Maybe azdude might be a buy and hold. Like us, he bought for the long run. Some of us actually made a well rounded decision.
We LOVE our new home. The pool is starting to have an upside. It’s HOT in So Ca.
glad the new home is working out for year. Good to hear a positive story. Its hot all over in the west today. Good pool day for sure.
azdude
By far, this is the best choice we’ve made for a home, and we had a 4,000 sq ft McMansion with a view from 6 rooms upstairs. (reg sale a long time ago as the bubble went insane)
We paid $380ish cash for this one-story modest home w/ a cement pond. We are very, very happy.
At the peak, this home’s value exceeded $600K. We waited for the exhale to go back into the market.Renting was just a nightmare for us. Now we are in control of our lives.
HA
Go out and enjoy the day.
Donkey,
What did you pay for your dump?
pimp your shanties somewhere else please.
You got ripped off. How badly?
your shanties aren’t selling are they?
Don’t lie.
How badly?
HA, the answer you seek is right before your myopic little pig eyes (sorry for the insult to porcines) but you are too obsessed with repeating the same old schtick over and over and over to even notice.
HA
Any relations to the pit-bull breed?
I’m just saying.
He fathered them all.
Don’t run liar.
What did you pay for your death shack?
What did you pay for your death shack?
$35 per square foot.
That’s about right for a 20 year old depreciating houses. (all of them depreciate though)
So house prices decline when interest rates go up, right???
===========================================================
Mortgage rates spike in response to Fed statement; 30-year crosses 4 percent mark
By Amrita Jayakumar, Published: June 27 E-mail the writers
Mortgage rates rose at the highest rate in three decades this week as senior Federal Reserve officials attempted Thursday to calm investors’ nerves about when the central bank will begin to taper its bond-buying program this year.
Rates have been climbing steadily since May but leapt to 4.46 percent this week, up half a percentage point and crossing the 4 percent mark for the first time since March 2012, according to data released Thursday by Freddie Mac.
Why would housing prices stay at massively inflated levels when houses depreciate?
Because buying consumables is not a business decision.
wat
a well built house will outlive you. of course @ 50 bucks a foot they wont last long.
Houses ALWAYS depreciate
do your shanties at 50 include indoor plumbing?
Houses are a loss. ALWAYS.
HA
I’m not so sure. My family buys to own until death usually. This is our third home, and we’ve always made a sizable or least a decent profit. This home is paid for, partly from real estate proceeds, and partly being frugal. The remodel is paid for as well. Saving for the backyard remodel. We LOVE our modest home.
Not everything in life is about money anyway.
This is our third home, and we’ve always made a sizable or least a decent profit.
HA’s point is that the houses depreciate—e.g. if you did not invest continuously in maintenance, it would eventually be worth nothing. He is generally correct in that.
You are ignoring in your “decent profit” calculation that you benefited from the housing bubble in one instance (e.g. you were an unintentional speculator), combined with the fact that the “sizable profit” that most purchasers experience is largely an effect of the Fed devaluing the dollar faster than your house depreciated, increased by the fact that you did in fact maintain it.
My family buys to own until death usually. This is our third home
Wha……?
Houses are a loss. ALWAYS.
ALWAYS
We moved from a two-story PUD HOA 2,000 sq ft, and then into a PUD HOA 4,000sq ft. Both bought new and we made some dough. Then my “yenta” family said the next home should be the last one, you guys are past 50 now. Listened.
Donkey,
You didn’t “make” anything. You financed a boatload of inflated expenses.
Donkey,
Why are you so afraid to disclose the massively inflated price you paid for your death dump?
“So house prices decline when interest rates go up, right???”
Yup.
What buyers? Housing demand is at 1997 levels and falling.
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2013/03/20130328_house2.jpg
Housing demand is at 1997 levels and falling.
Housing demand _IS_ at 1997 levels, but it has been at 1997 levels for about two years now—and has not fallen further. I’m not suggesting that it won’t, merely that is has not.
I think you need to amend your cut/paste to:
“Housing demand is at 1997 levels.”
I think you need to amend your cut/paste to:
“Housing demand is at 1997 levels.”
Nope, it’s still inaccurate. His link is to mortgage applications, which of course is not synonymous with housing demand. But what do you expect from someone who also claims “depreciation” refers to valuation.
He’s far more deceptive than your average realtor.
LOLZ.
Of all people accusing someone else of deception.
Here’s a bulletin AlWog……. You don’t get any more synonymous than housing demand/mortgage apps but we don’t expect you to wrap your dishonest mind around that reality.
Palo Alto, CA Rental Rates Down 8% And Falling
http://picpaste.com/pics/23449738e89aa5bef2a290996ea459f1.1372099211.png
San Jose, CA Rents Fell 4.5%
http://picpaste.com/pics/75da8095d50e9868d5c7f8f3190dff54.1372099011.png
everyone and the brother is buying. how much does zillow pay you to post rubbish all day?
How can that be when housing demand is at 17 year lows and falling?
according to your boss at zillow?
How can that be when homeownership rates have fallen to 1996 levels… and falling.
I’m not sure what’s more pathetic….
The fact Housing Analyst thinks houses will depreciate 65% or the fact he thinks Zillow data is worth anything.
Discuss….
Slithers,
Show us your current construction project.
If I buy a pound of, say, flour I’ll get sixteen ounces fo the stuff, but if I buy a pound of gold I’ll only get twelve.
What’s up with that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_ounce
Don’t be silly, a pound is 14 troy oz plus a few odd dwt.
“State gas tax rises 3.5 cents, California highest in the nation”
Nobody likes high gas prices — or taxes — and Californians are about to get hit with both when a 3.5-cent increase in the state gasoline tax kicks in Monday.
That will give the Golden State the highest gas tax in the nation — nearly 72 cents a gallon.
The increase was approved by the five-member state Board of Equalization in February under a complicated “gas tax swap” that eliminated most sales taxes on fuel purchases in favor of a higher excise tax.
Sales tax revenues fund local government programs, while the state excise tax on gas funds highway and mass transit projects throughout the state.
“A tax increase without the usual 67 percent supermajority vote? The anti-tax crowd must be having kittens,” said motorist Diane Berger, of San Jose, who owns an electric Chevy Volt and says she seldom even looks at prices at the pump.
The Legislature gave the tax board the authority to raise the excise tax by a simple majority vote. If a tax had gone before voters as a special tax, it would have needed a two-thirds majority.
The average tax on a gallon of gas is 49 cents nationwide. New York has the second-highest with 68.9 cents, according to the American Petroleum Institute,
Board of Equalization member George Runner voted against the tax hike, saying taxpayers have a right to be angry.
“Most of the July 1 increase is based on uncertain projections of future gas prices,” he said in a news release. “I don’t think we should be in the business of raising taxes based on guesswork.”
Taxable sales of gas in California have fallen from 15.9 billion gallons in 2006 to 14.6 billion gallons last year, a result of the recession and vehicles that get better mileage. That translated to a $157 million shortfall in revenue last year.
And consumption of gas was down nearly 53 million gallons in the first two months of 2013, about a 2 percent decrease.
Gasoline tax increases are highly unpopular with voters. How will they respond?
“How drivers react to an increase in the excise tax largely will depend on what is happening to gasoline prices overall,” said John Goodwin of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “If crude oil prices are driving gas prices higher, then a 3.5-cents-a-gallon boost will compound the pain. If the excise tax increase kicks in at a time that crude prices are falling and pulling down pump prices with them, the tax hike could be invisible.”
California drivers are paying an average of $4.03 a gallon, up 23 cents from a year ago.
“The state budget deal of 2010 was essentially revenue neutral for taxpayers and of no added value to commuters,” said Carl Guardino, CEO of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and vice chair of the state Transportation Commission. “At some point soon, California needs to make a real investment in our transportation systems, ranging from local street and road repairs to serious expansions of roads and rail. Gridlock does not keep the Golden State moving.”
A person who drives 15,000 miles a year at 20 mpg would pay an extra $26.25 per year in gas taxes. A typical annual fuel bill runs about $479 in taxes, according to the board of equalization.
For Christina Wise, who commutes from Boulder Creek to Cupertino, an extra 3.5 cents a gallon adds up.
“Some of the alternate commute options, like taking a bus or train or bike to and from work, aren’t feasible for a working mom of two kids,” she said. “All it does is set us back further financially.”
“Taxable sales of gas in California have fallen from 15.9 billion gallons in 2006 to 14.6 billion gallons last year…
And the tax revenue suffers as a result, hence the tax raise.
What a surprise!
demand keeps falling but prices still go up. monopolies do wonders.
Debt donkeys are blind to what a credit bubble causes.
“I’ll never be your beast of burden” - The Rolling Stones.
The biggest monopoly of all is government.
How is it working out now that government controls nearly ALL of health care, housing and higher education?
Don’t you know nuthin’?
Monopolies are only evil if evil capitalists run them. When the govt runs monopolies, they totally rock.
It’s not really a “monopoly” as much as it is a “needs industry.”
Say Joe uses 100 gallons of gas a month, but he could get by on 50 gallons if he had to. Gas of price goes up. Joe cuts his usage. Repeat. Eventually, it’s conceivable that Joe pays twice as much per gallon, effectively paying the same amount of money for half the gas. Oil company makes the same profit; Joe suffers.
This is why the government is in the regulation business for vital needs like electricity.
This is why the government is in the regulation business for vital needs like electricity.
False. It’s not because it is a “vital need”—some things make sense as a regulated monopoly due to the infrastructure required.
How much sense would it make to have a dozen different companies all running completely separate systems of electrical wires all over town? How efficient would that arrangement be?
“Say Joe uses 100 gallons of gas a month, but he could get by on 50 gallons if he had to. Gas of price goes up. Joe cuts his usage. Repeat. Eventually, it’s conceivable that Joe pays twice as much per gallon, effectively paying the same amount of money for half the gas. Oil company makes the same profit; Joe suffers.”
Try that math again. If Joe uses 1/2 as much at twice the price, he is no worse off and the evil oil companies are no better off.
100 gallons at $4 = $400
50 gallons at $8 = $400
“How much sense would it make to have a dozen different companies all running completely separate systems of electrical wires all over town? How efficient would that arrangement be?”
Works just fine with multiple companies running cable lines all over town.
If Joe uses 1/2 as much at twice the price, he is no worse off
He does so by traveling less, walking more, riding the bus more, and buying a new more efficient car. All those are (arguably) “suffering”.
A smug jerk (most likely democrat) who thinks he will escape government taxation.
“A tax increase without the usual 67 percent supermajority vote? The anti-tax crowd must be having kittens,” said motorist Diane Berger, of San Jose, who owns an electric Chevy Volt and says she seldom even looks at prices at the pump.
New Tax Would Penalize Electric Cars for Not Using Gas
Here’s another entry for the no-good-deed-goes-unpunished file: Environmentally conscious drivers may soon get hit with a charge to make up for the gas that they’re not using.
Aiming to cut use of gasoline and dependence on foreign oil, the federal government gives you a $7,500 tax credit if you buy a new electric car. Various states add their own tax credits ranging up to $5,000. So far, so good. But now state and federal proposals would penalize electric cars for not paying gasoline tax, by imposing a tax on the miles they travel. And here’s a hackle-raising detail: to make it work, states would have to track your mileage with a mandatory GPS device on the car.
The cost of highway and other transportation expenses are (partially) offset by gasoline taxes — an 18.4 cents per gallon federal levy and widely varying rates at the state level. (Check the rate in your state). The federal tax, unchanged since 1993, already has fallen short of financing the federal highway trust fund, with $19. 5 billion transferred from general revenues this year. And revenues may continue to decline: Federal regulations require vehicles to average 35.5 mpg by 2016, which has already cut into gas tax revenue.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505145_162-40542612/new-tax-would-penalize-electric-cars-for-not-using-gas/
And here’s a hackle-raising detail: to make it work, states would have to track your mileage with a mandatory GPS device on the car.
Easier way: why not tax tires rather than gasoline?
“And here’s a hackle-raising detail: to make it work, states would have to track your mileage with a mandatory GPS device on the car.”
To a govt loving Democrat that’s a feature, not a bug.
states would have to track your mileage with a mandatory GPS device on the car.
Can’t they just check your mileage at your vehicle inspection? And/or when you sell your vehicle and have to state its mileage to transfer the title?
Hush. We’re having a hissyfit about big brother in democrat guise.
tootie:
The word “jerk” is a masculine noun.
Keystone Pipeline advocates take note:
Kern County, California ALONE is responsible for 10% of all the oil produced in the United States. Three of the largest five oil fields in the country are located in Kern County. Gasoline prices in Kern Country, California are $4.79/gal for regular octane, 22% higher than most non-oil-producing regions of California.
Higher taxes = More prosperity
Gasoline prices in Kern Country, California are $4.79/gal for regular octane, 22% higher than most non-oil-producing regions of California.
Is it actually refined there, or merely produced in the fields?
Gas might be a tad cheaper near the refineries, but there’s no reason for it to be cheaper near the oil-fields.
Of course, most of the difference in gas prices between states is due to state gas taxes…
Keystone will make has cheaper because the supply of refined gas will increase. It has nothing to do with where the refineries will be. Gasoline is fungible and geographically so as well. Gas from oil in Alaska refined in CA is no different than gas from oil in Texas refined in Louisiana. All that matter is there is more total oil and more total refined gas on a macro level, which is what Keystone does. This is week 1 of Econ 101 stuff.
The pipeline refines oil into gas?
“Kern County, California ALONE is responsible for 10% of all the oil produced in the United States”
What is the unemployment rate in Kern County, California?
December 20, 2012, 2:42 PM.
North Dakota Population Booms Amid Low Unemployment
By Ben Casselman
Unemployment in the U. S., at 7.7%, remains high. Unemployment in North Dakota, at 3.1%, is about as close to zero as a state ever gets. Perhaps it should come as no surprise that people are moving there in droves.
North Dakota’s population grew by 2.17% between July 2011 and July 2012, making it the fastest growing U. S. state, according to new Census Bureau data released today.
The rapid growth is a big turnaround for North Dakota, which was just the 37th-fastest growing state between 2000 and 2010. But by last year, its growth had picked up to make it the sixth fastest. This year, it wasn’t even close; no other state grew by even 2%.
It’s no mystery what changed. An oil boom in the Western part of the state has turned North Dakota into the nation’s second-largest producer of crude, after Texas, and led to a surge in demand for workers — not just for drillers, but also truck drivers, construction workers, burger-flippers and pretty much every other kind of job, skilled and unskilled.
As word of hiring frenzy spread, job seekers began heading to North Dakota in search of work. The state’s rate of natural population growth, change based on births and deaths alone, is right about the national average. But its rate of net migration is the nation’s highest by far at 16.8 new entrants per 1,000 residents. The vast majority of the new residents came from inside the U. S.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/12/20/north-dakota-population-booms-amid-low-unemployment/ - 84k -
Everyone always gets mad at me for driving a Prius, and then they also want to complain about gas. If you are driving some crazy Ford 750 or whatever, and you live like an hour away from work, then you can cry me a river.
“Housing’s ‘Shadow Inventory’ Still Haunts Banks”
http://news.yahoo.com/housings-shadow-inventory-still-haunts-banks-152949909.html
With 25 million excess, empty and defaulted houses on the horizon, the risk of losses buying a house at current grossly inflated asking prices of resale housing is massive.
BEWARE
For Sale signs are growing like weeds across the northeast and mid Atlantic. This is in addition to the sea of signs that were already there. Empty houses everywhere and no buyers in sight.
The most ominous sign?
Rental rates are falling.
Rental Rates in So Ca aren’t falling. Prices are insane. Location. Sunshine Tax.
In fact they’re falling in the priciest areas in CA.
Liar,
what did you pay for your death shack?
Not in east Ventura County.
HA - Are you a pit-bull?
What are you afraid of?
“What are you afraid of?”
Widths.
I am not scared of heights but I am scared of widths.
Wide places scare the sh#t out of me.
Wide places scare the sh#t out of me.
agoraphobia
“agoraphobia”?
There is such a thing? I heard a comedian say…
“I am not scared of heights but I am scared of widths.”
It’s a fear of wide open spaces.
Rentals are going up where I live and have been for the last year.
And where would that be?
Thin markets are the friends of those who handle OPM. That’s because one gets to easily control the price.
If the OPM handler takes a large position in, say, bunch of houses in a neighborhood then he can easily jump up the prices of all the houses he already owns by jumping up the prices of any new additions he chooses to make. Jump up the prices of the newly acquired houses and the prices of the already acquired houses go up as well.
After he does this he can produce an nifty chart showing steadily rising prices (hence steadily rising values) and can thus attract a fresh batch of OPM.
He extracts his hefty fees, the owners of the OPM get to enjoy the ride.
The really nifty thing about all this is the OPM handler doesn’t have to do much advertising, rising prices do most of the advertising for him.
People see a trend and then they jump on it. By jumping on it they add fuel to the trend. Adding fues to the trend strengthens the trend and a strengthening trend attracts more OPM.
More OPM means more fees to the handler of the OPM, it also means the handler has more money at hand to buy more houses, and since he is a major buyer he can insure that the prices of the houses will be forever rising.
Well, almost forever rising.
What a handler of OPM is really selling is a rising line on a chart.
And because he is doing the buying at the prices he gets to set by offering to buy well over the asking price he gets to make sure this line on the chart is forever rising.
This is really neat if one bothers to stop and think about it a bit. It’s especially neat in that it is not his own money that he is using to do all this buying.
And what is really especially neat is there are very few people who will take a position against this idea in that it seems to be in the national interest - almost patriotic - that real estate prices always go up.
Ponzi schemes all end the same way.
True dat. But before they end the guys running the schemes get to extract some hefty fees - which is what it is all about.
Luckily there is a deterrent to these schemes which is …
(hold that thought for a bit, I’ll get back to you)
Luckily there is a deterrent to these schemes which is …
Sanity? Market forces? Regulation? Laws? The Federal Penitentiary?
In defense of this scheme (choke) I have to say that it is not a Ponzi. For one thing a Ponzi is illegal, these schemes are not.
These things are legit in the sense that one puts his money into a pool and the manager of the pool buys products with the pool’s money, in this case houses, and the value of the pool increases as the price of the bought products increase.
The problem is, in this case, the manager of the pool (if he does it correctly) is the one who determines the value of the products that goes into the pool and thus is the one who determines the value of the pool.
He sets the price and the price sets the value. And setting the price higher and higher sets the value higher and higher and this ever-rising value is what sucks in new money.
Which, as with a Ponzi, will work until it doesn’t.
Which, as with a Ponzi, will work until it doesn’t.
Yep—works great until he stops buying houses in that area. At that point, the manager of the pool no longer has a influence on future pricing.
It is an interesting twist, though. People have attempted to corner markets in the past, which is essentially what this scam consists of doing. However, the local nature of housing allows for cornering a very small market fairly easily, causing localized pricing dislocation. Interesting.
Time should eventually cure the resulting mal-investment…
Yeah, as long as he never tries to sell anything.
“Considering current asking prices of resale housing are 40% higher than new construction, why buy a used house? Rent for half the monthly cost of buying.”
Cover Story: Bert and Ernie Celebrate Gay Marriage : The New Yorker
Well, at least it should be a relatively simple process for either Bert or Ernie to become a T instead of a G. Would that make one of them an L or a B? Wait, one of them couldn’t be an L unless they both became a T. Hold on, now I’m confused. Can a T be an L or a G or does simply becoming T automatically make you a B? Or is it all OK as long as you’re not an H? Are there rules for this? Does anybody know?
Cover Story: Bert and Ernie’s “Moment of Joy”
Posted by Francoise Mouly and Mina Kaneko
June 28, 2013
“It’s amazing to witness how attitudes on gay rights have evolved in my lifetime,” said Jack Hunter, the artist behind next week’s cover, “Moment of Joy.” Hunter, who originally submitted his image, unsolicited, to a Tumblr, continued, “This is great for our kids, a moment we can all celebrate.”
See more of our coverage of the Supreme Court and same-sex marriage.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2013/06/new-yorker-cover-bert-ernie-gay-marriage.html - -
A great moment for our kids?
The DOMA Law was passed overwhelmingly by republicans and democrats in the house and senate and signed by a democrat president.
The California initiative that was passed directly by “the people” in direct democracy and was supported by over 70% of black voters.
Both laws were “overturned” by 5 unelected judges forcing their will over the will of the people.
I have said it before. Democrats/liberals/progressive never understand that the tactics and schemes they use on others to get to their political “ends” will one day be used against them.
Yeah, FINALLY the Supreme Court came out in support of marriage! Imagine that….
Marriage or Garriage?
passed directly by “the people” in direct democracy
Good thing we’re not a “direct democracy”.
Gee - I have to agree with the banana on this one. The whole purpose of having referenda in a state constitution is to allow the people to allow to implement their will directly, without it being thwarted by the legislature. It was outrageous that the California AG or whoever to decide not to defend the law in federal courts. In the future referenda in CA will have to include language compelling the state government to defend the proposed law in any state where it may be challenged.
However, if we’re talking generally about the issue of governments ignoring the will of the people, that generally happens to the benefit of Republicans, or more specifically, in cavorted of large corporations and wealthy individuals. Due to the need of candidates to raise large sums of money, there are many Congressional elections in which both candidates are to throw right of the voters.
The whole purpose of having referenda in a state constitution is to allow the people to allow to implement their will directly,
What if their will is unconstitutional?
+1.
What if 51% of a county voted to that the National Guard could quarter in private residences? What if 66% of a town voted to make Islam the state religion? What if 99% of a state voted to make slavery legal again?
According to banana, those would all be just fine and dandy as long as it was the “will of the people.”
That said, I really don’t know how to answer the argument that a state didn’t defend a state-passed law. You would think there would be some provision to provide representation by outside means.
Yes, we’re all familiar with the idea of the constitution’s limits on what the majority can do. It’s good that such limits exist. But there are so many examples of the Congress and state legislatures ignoring the will of the people that the referendum option that exists in some States looks like a wonderful option. The issue was put to the people. Millions of California voters showed up to the polls and expressed their wishes. The will of the majority became law. Thus the millions were able to circumvent a few hundred legislators and one governor, who, for whatever reason, have an opinion that differs from the population that they’re supposed to represent.
Now when it comes to this issue, it’s well known that public opinion has been changing pretty rapidly. The organizations in cavorted of same-sex marriage could have put another referendum on the ballot next year and convinced the millions of voters to overturn Proposition 8. If they would have done they probably would have prevailed. Instead they decided that it would be easier to convince a small number of judges on the other side of the country.
Ironically, the “will of the people” in California WAS thwarted by one wealthy family from Ohio abetted by the Mormon Church of Utah, and a very misleading but extremely well-managed off-year political campaign.
SOCUS did not rule on the constitutionality of discriminating against one class of people; it ruled on whether the plaintiff in the case had standing to bring the issue to higher court.
That is alot of kielbasa!
——————————-
High Cost of VIP Travel: Biden’s $665,545 Hotel Bill in Moscow, Obama’s $450,000 Warsaw Tab
weeklystandard.com | 6/29/13 | JERYL BIER
The Washington Times reports that the cost of Obama’s Africa trip, estimated as high as $100 million, is overshadowing President Obama’s agenda. If past VIP trips are any indication, lodging and local transportation would represent only a fraction of the $100 million, yet those costs would likely still dwarf those of the average citizen traveling abroad. In late March, Vice President Joe Biden’s $321,000 limo bill and $585,000 Paris hotel bill for his trip to Europe earlier this year were revealed.
While the amounts spent were deemed fairly ordinary by government insiders, the fact that the closely-held information was found on a publicly available government website had some speculating that perhaps the postings had been inadvertent. Wolf Blitzer, who spent seven years reporting from the White House, even called it “an extremely rare glimpse.” However, further investigation has revealed that the information is not as rare as previously supposed.
“The Washington Times reports that the cost of Obama’s Africa trip, estimated as high as $100 million, is overshadowing President Obama’s agenda.”
It could have been worse if the Sportsman in chief had not canceled the safari that was to include a military sniper team.
White House cancels Obama’s African safari after plans are revealed to include a military SNIPER team ‘to take out lions and cheetahs if they threaten first couple’
By David Martosko In Washington
PUBLISHED: 14:58 EST, 13 June 2013
President and Mrs. Obama are planning a trip to sub-Saharan Africa later in the month, but the White House has scotched a plan to include a Tanzanian safari on the agenda after a reporter revealed that a team of snipers with high-powered military assault rifles would accompany him in the wild.
The Washington Post reported Thursday afternoon that the itinerary’s dangers ‘would have required the president’s special counterassault team to carry sniper rifles with high-caliber rounds that could neutralize cheetahs, lions or other animals if they became a threat.’
The newspaper based its report on a confidential planning document leaked from someone in the administration.
‘But the White House canceled the safari Wednesday,’ the report continued, ‘after inquiries from The Post about the trip’s purpose and expense, according to a person familiar with the decision.’
Sit still, Simba: Sniper rifles were planned accessories for Obama’s visit to Africa, but to protect him from wild animals, not crazed jihadis
Obama and Vice President Biden offered solemn promises for more gun control following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings in December, vowing to ban so-called ‘assault rifles’ - even though the Newtown shooter left his AR-15 rifle in the trunk of his car
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2341276/White-House-cancels-Obamas-African-safari-plans-revealed-include-SWAT-team-SNIPERS-high-powered-rifles.html -
Yeah, he should have loaded the family onto a bus and set off into the veldt with a picnic basket and a slingshot, like regular heads-of-state do….
Click the link and scroll to the bottom. He didn’t have to take Michelle and the kids, they already went on safari in 2011. I don’t know if they had a military sniper team or not.
Call of the wild: Michelle Obama and family members in their safari vehicle at Madikwe Game Reserve in South Africa in June 2011
Love it. That would have been environmentally friendly.
Rare video of actual Obama safari protection.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKlkD-D20OI - 202k -
Comment by Professor Bear
2013-06-28 12:55:22
Gold is a great investment over the long run, with “long run” defined to mean a century or so.
Only if you bought it at the right price. I’m guessing that some of those who bought at $1900 will not be happy for quite some time…
“I’m guessing that some of those who bought at $1900 will not be happy for quite some time…”
Maybe there will be a GARP program for them.
Gold Affordable Refinance Program (GARP)
If you’re upside down on your gold purchase and have been unable to get traditional refinancing because the value of your gold has declined, you may be eligible to refinance through the Gold Affordable Refinance Program (GARP). GARP refinance loans require a loan application and underwriting process, and refinance fees will apply.
you may be eligible to refinance through the Gold Affordable Refinance Program (GARP).
LOL… Nice one, jeff…
+1
I currently am renting a townhouse. The owner is looking to sell the place. (he lives in another state) Question: What obligations do I have in making the place look sellable? Am I obligated to get a professional cleaner to come in? Do I pull out the power washer (that I don’t have) and do two hours of power washing? It’s kind of hard to make the place look not lived in when you have three small children! Thoughts? Thanks in advance!
What does your lease say?
“What obligations do I have in making the place look sellable?”
My first DBLL short sold the house I was renting from him while he lived out of state. We kept the lawn cut and the place clean like we always did, but I did not preasure clean or do anything out of the ordinary for the Realtor to show the house. I also set hours of the day and days of the week for them to show the house and required notice for when they were coming. One Realtor showed up on a Sunday (a no show day) sneaking around the back showing a couple the house and I walked out and chewed his @ss while I was escorting him to his car. I called the listing Realtor and told him if that happened again there would be no more showings and no more rent payments until I was gone.
I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice but it has been my experience that they will accept reasonable rules from the renter to keep the rent checks coming until the place is sold.
Your only obligation is to accommodate showings with at least 24 hours notice. You don’t have to accept the exact time that the landlord trows out, you don’t have to leave the house for the showing, and you don’t have to clean.
Do you want to continue living there? Your answer should determine your course of (in)action.
My buddy upped my salary by another $5,000 to $130,000. I just found that out a minute ago in e-mail I just opened - he must have sent it yesterday.
So $3,000 hiring bonus
3 weeks paid vacation, all health insurance and dental paid for (about $5,000 annual benefit). 50 cents per every dollar up to 4% of salary for 401k matching, but my 401k does not kick in until six months later.Pool of sick days. profit sharing and bonuses. I figure adding things up, the bennies without the profit sharing and bonus are a minimum of $10,000.
On the conservative side my total compensation without profit sharing and bonuses is $140,000 compared to what I left, $164,000 no bennies and what I would be doing otherwise as a con-w2 at his company, $150,000 with per diem (that is equal to $175,000 due to the first year tax break).
I’m dropping much of my municipal bond new money investing to free up more cash available.
Temp hiring - may be a trend with obamcare but the sequestration deal in defense spending is making it more likely I will have two or three gigs a year with maybe 3 months of downtime because of the fickleness of spending programs.
I’m signing the offer.
feds drool, contractors rule.
This company with which I am leaning on joining does government contracting from time to time. Right now it’s strictly commercial.
If I get the travel bug again, it will be only out west between Arizona and the w.c. But part of the perks of staying in one place for years is to join masters swimming again. I have to wait n see whether I want to commute or break my lease and get an apartment rental in Irvine.
Go for it Bill,
Remember the dream car and the dream lady. A regular schedule and some longevity in the job has its merits. Enjoy the new gig.
Dude, how come these things never happen to me?
If you take a chance you will give yourself a chance.
Ask yourself how many chances have you taken lately?
I’ve had many “Charlie Brown” years for more than half my career. Started winning in 1998.
We have been living here for 3 years and this is the 3rd place we have rented since we moved here 8 years ago. I would prefer not to move from the townhouse but the guy is selling it and of course wants too much money for it. He wants to get his money back….of course he does……he paid ~$225k for it. It is listed on zillow for ~$194k. A similar townhouse sold for $200k on March 1st of this year. Long and short of it is i could buy it for cash but i am not paying $225k for it. I really don’t want to own anything but I am getting sick of moving….4 places in 8 years after renting for 12 years in two different places up North.
Of course he is looking to sell to an out of country “investor” so if he lucks out and is able to do it, we might be able to continue renting it so it is probably in our best interest that he sells it sooner than later so we know if we have to look for a new place to live. (lease is up in April of 2014)
2banana- Lease does not talk to it at all other than in the right of access section where they can show premises at any time blah blah blah
other than in the right of access section where they can show premises at any time
Sounds like they’ve got you, then.
Can you fart in the house while it’s being shown?
Bobby you lease goes with the sale of the house….if either the new or old landlord wants to break it they would have to pay you to move…a lease works both ways.
Yea…..that was the first thing I made sure of. Have until April to find another place…..4th move in 8 years……thank you Fed…..thank you government…..keep the bubble inflated as long as you can.
Au contraire. Earlier today we enjoyed a delicious lunch in the B Terminal food court at the Houston Airport. I paid for it with a credit card, backed up by the electronic equivalent of paper money, and the price was fairly reasonable as well.
And we didn’t need to go to the trouble of converting devalued gold into dollars before buying our food, either…
Is posting articles which factually state that gold just had the worst quarter on record considered “taking pot shots”?
No. I enjoy seeing all the negative articles on gold, particularly Gartman and whatsisname Roubino. I see all sorts of articles and commentaries on Kitko mostly saying gold will drop further.
Anytime now, Time and Newsweek will announce the death of precious metals.
Capitulation.
I have lots of cash and the alternative currencies gold and silver. These are very good times to build up the stack with higher amounts than several months ago.
How many underwater gold bugs are planning to hold on to their collapsed investments forever?
These 4 Miners Can Still Thrive With Gold At $1,200
By Sean Williams
June 29, 2013
It has been a miserable year for gold bulls and the gold miners themselves, with the yellow metal suffering its worst decline in a decade. Since the year began, gold prices have dropped close to 28% and are now off 36% since hitting a high of $1,888 an ounce in August 2011.
The impetus for the recent drop in the price of gold is the imminent paring back of the Federal Reserve’s monetary easing policy known as QE3. This policy allowed the Fed to purchase $85 billion each month in a combination of long-term Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities, and it also gave gold optimists comfort that their money-printing hedge would maintain its value or even head higher. With QE3 set to end sooner rather than later, and margin requirements on owning gold spiking because of volatility, bulls haven’t been able to head to the exits fast enough.
In spite of these concerns, I still feel very confident about the future of gold prices. Previously, I listed five reasons I thought gold was a screaming buy, and I still consider each and every one of these reasons valid today. I also have absolutely no intention of selling any of my commodity-based holdings in my personal portfolio.
While gold at $1,200 an ounce will certainly make it difficult for some gold miners to operate profitably — such as in Africa, where labor costs and political unrest made it challenging even when gold was north of $1,700 an ounce — four miners stand out as being ahead of their peers in their ability to survive and even thrive in this depressed gold environment.
…
Underwater? All five of them who bought all their gold on the day it touched $1900!
Houston!? In July!? Have you gone mad!?
Anybody remember this?
“Hey, what’s the matter man?
We’re gonna come around at twelve
With some Puerto Rican girls that’s just dyin’ to meet you”
“We’re gonna bring a case of wine
Hey, let’s go mess and fool around
You know, like we UUUUSED to”
Ah aaaahhhh aahhh ahh aaaah, ah aaaahhhh aahhh ahh
Ah ah AH ah
Sometimes I wanna say,
Sometimes I wanna say…
I was off! I heard “Sometimes I wanna say…Sometimes I wanna say”
but it’s
Sometimes I want to say to myself
Sometimes I say
Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh
The Stones could make even disco sound cool.
Looks like National Security Agency leaks by former contractor Edward Snowden has damaged U.S. foreign policy and weakened President Obama. Because if Susan Rice says it’s false, then it must be true.
Rice: NSA leaks didn’t weaken Obama
By Meghashyam Mali - 06/29/13 08:05 AM ET
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice rejected suggestions that National Security Agency leaks by former contractor Edward Snowden had damaged U.S. foreign policy or weakened President Obama.
“I think that’s bunk,” said Rice, who will assume her new post as Obama’s national security adviser next week, in an interview with the Associated Press published Saturday.
“I think the United States of America is and will remain the most influential, powerful and important country in the world, the largest economy, and the largest military, [with] a network of alliances, values that are universally respected,” said Rice.
Snowden earlier this month revealed classified information detailing the NSA’s secret surveillance of internet and phone data. The disclosures included information about PRISM, a program which tracked internet data of foreign users, sparking international criticism.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/308577-rice-snowden-leaks-didnt-weaken-obama -
Originally published June 29, 2013 at 12:00 AM
Page modified June 29, 2013 at 8:26 AM
Bonds a big loser in 1st half of 2013
After years of steady returns, many bond mutual funds have suffered losses this year.
By Stan Choe
The Associated Press
Brace yourself. If you have money in a bond mutual fund, you’re likely to feel some pain when you open your midyear account statement.
After years of steady returns, many bond mutual funds have suffered losses this year. Some of the sharpest drops are in funds that buy Treasury bonds, and it could be a rude awakening for investors lulled into thinking Treasurys were among the safest investments.
A look at how other mutual-fund categories performed during the first half of 2013 shows other clear losers, as well as winners. Midyear is often a time when investors check on their portfolios, but it’s important to only make adjustments that are in line with your investment goals.
“While performance can give you a guide as to how a fund or ETF has done, it’s not gospel,” says Todd Rosenbluth, director of ETF and mutual-fund research at S&P Capital IQ. “You should not chase performance. You should use it as one of the tools to help you sort through the investment universe.”
Among the biggest losers of the first half of 2013: mutual funds that own long-term government bonds, like 30-year Treasurys. They lost an average of 10 percent through Wednesday, according to Morningstar. That follows returns for the category of 3.9 percent in 2012, 32.9 percent in 2011 and 11.7 percent in 2010.
Demand for bonds has declined because of concerns that the Federal Reserve may ease up on its bond-buying economic- stimulus program. Chairman Ben Bernanke said that the central bank may slow its purchases later this year and halt them altogether by mid-2014.
The drop in demand has forced prices down for bonds. The price decline has been more than enough to wipe out the regular interest payments that bonds make. When a bond’s price falls, its yield rises, and a 30-year Treasury bond yielded 3.57 percent on Wednesday. That’s up from a low of 2.83 percent on May 1.
“You don’t need a big move in bonds to eliminate a whole year’s worth of income,” says Mark Spellman, manager for the Value Line Income and Growth fund, which has a four-star rating from Morningstar.
Long-term bond funds are hurt even more by interest-rate increases than short- or intermediate-term bond funds. That’s because 30-year bonds are locked into the lower rates for longer periods, making them less attractive. Intermediate-term government bond mutual funds have lost 3.1 percent so far this year, and short-term government bond funds have lost 1.1 percent, fractions of the losses for long-term government bond funds.
…