The Housing Bubble

Housing is a money pit.
Renting is also a money pit,
especially since you never own a paid in full place to live.

Bill stated he will buy when he retires. He has plans to exit renterhood. I’m not fond of lies through omission of facts. He acknowledged the money pit part, and he still wants a home.

“Just for the record; there is no shortage of housing. Not in California, not in Tokyo, not anywhere. And there will come a day (again) when the media will tell us, ‘there’s a glut of houses for sale in….’, and regale us with sob stories, ‘I was doing great until the economy went south and my income went away and I can’t get rid of this damned house!’”

~Ben Jones, August 8, 2013

This false notion…. this lie….. that there is a shortage of housing in the US is laughable considering there are tens of millions of excess empty houses out there. A sea of them. And it’s growing. Day by day.

I am wavering. Have two storage units I rent. One with family mementos. I have the taste for simple things. My rule of thumb is not to buy a house more than one sixth of my net worth. I can afford most houses in Phoenix.

But the older I get the more likely I will tell myself, how many years will I really enjoy a house? And it is a huge gamble because I am more interested in interacting with friendly neighbors. These days they are very rare. I would only want to live where the neighbors are all college educated white collar types, working or retired. It is easy to find a house to live in. It is extremely difficult to find a home. Better to lease a couple years at a time to find the right neighborhood than to find you moved next door to a frat house.

I do plan to rent four months of the year in a place like Flagstaff, the central Sierra Nevada, or central coast of Cali while Phoenix is in the hot season.

When I was driving a few days ago, I listened to the radio show Money Pit. It was kinda funny that they call the show that, when it’s people calling in one after another with expensive problems. They often reference the show This Old House. That name is funny too, if you think about it. I wondered why they don’t join forces with a show called, This Old Money Pit.

This Old Money Pit

Old houses are indeed money pits, especially if you aren’t handy or skilled in trades like carpentry, plumbing, etc.

Ask me how I know…

Old or new…. they bleed you dry. Now stack it with taxes and a massively inflated price and you have a lifetime of irrecoverable losses.

I am not handy in DIY. That includes auto repair. I prefer spending time on fitness. While home moaners putter around Home Depot on weekends I will be mountain biking some great single tracks in the desert (in the cool season).

Renting is easy street while I open up the statement on my municipal bond and see my month income higher than the previous month!

What does it matter? Especially with a cash-heavy renter like you.

Got a leak? Call the landlord.

Pool water too cold? Call the landlord.

AC not cool enough? Call the landlord.

All at a fraction of the price of owning.

I miss my old life of freedom when I rented and envy those still enjoying it. I really miss the 5% I was getting on my savings account.

‘When I was driving a few days ago, I listened to the radio show Money Pit.’

If you really want some yuk yuks, listen to the ‘Real Estate Today’ radio show hosted by Gil Gross. It can make you think why the heck aren’t you buying a house. The TLDR cliffnotes of the show is you should buy a house or else you are a loser. At least ‘The Money Pit’ is more endearing as it like the Click and Clack type of DIY infomercial radio show.

I think it would be a hoot if buying a house becomes like the esteemed college degree senior citizens acquire after years in the work force. They wanted the accomplishment of having a degree even if it is way past the average age of obtaining one. Imagine houses the same way. At age 70 you finally buy a house with intentions of leaving it to heirs. Maybe the latter years you can die in peace knowing and finding out what it is like really to say you own a house. In my case, I think that is probably what will happen. As I read this blog, and the non-minor influence of some opinions here, I realize that the government is still not conscripting houses yet….but health insurance…oh yeah they are cramming us with that. Not to be a downer, but houses can be seized along with bank accounts if the gov deems it so.

Bill I hope you have renters/ contents insurance on those items.

Also did you take pictures of the items….

We scanned most of our family photos a few years ago, and all our important documents when one long weekend we had 4 computers at my parents house we brought our scanners and made it a family outing. we all have the finished dvd.

————-

I am wavering. Have two storage units I rent. One with family mementos. I have the taste for simple things

“The Money Pit” (1986): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091541/

“These days they are very rare. I would only want to live where the neighbors are all college educated white collar types, working or retired.”

Sounds like the ‘hood where we rent!

“Housing is a money pit.”

You better believe it. Especially considering current resale housing prices are 3x higher than construction costs(lot, materials, labor, profit).

Renting is half the cost of buying so you know what to do. Buy later for 70% less.

I’m not worried about storage units. The mementos are not worth anything more than sentimental value in the one unit. In the other, the place is run by kindly grannies and granpas and all camera’d and inside. You have to sign in at the desk or they will come after you. All the doors look the same.

Reminds me of the old game show by Soupby Sales “Let’s make a Deal!” What’s behind door number 2?

The spender of last resort.

And when you tax or borrow you crowd out the private sector. If printing money or huge government spending could create prosperity, Zimbabwe would be the richest country on earth.

“And when you tax or borrow you crowd out the private sector.”

Do government contractors dwell in the private or government sector on your planet?

Since I live on Earth, you must live on another planet but I suspected that already. Government contractors and professors are in the government sector. Their positions add to the GDP but the funding of their positions takes money from the private sector and depresses GDP. Just like building the King’s palaces provided work but made society as a whole poorer. The Founding Fathers understood this fact well, we forget it at our peril.

And when you tax or borrow you crowd out the private sector.

After it protects the private sector.

The Founding Fathers understood that a federal government was needed for a strong country.

Touched a nerve, eh?

P.S. You forgot to include Islam, Santanism, Taoism, Nihilism and Anarchism on your list of evil belief systems which are equivalent to Progressivism.

P.S. You forgot to include Islam, Santanism, Taoism, Nihilism and Anarchism on your list of evil belief systems which are equivalent to Progressivism.

Other than Islam, none of the religious or philosophical belief systems you mention are an organized threat to America. As far as Islam goes, we have waged a new crusade against it for years… it’s called the “War on Terror”. It will continue as long as NeoCons and the MIC hold power in our government.

We do have a Marxist president, however. He and his party are the greatest threat to Liberty and the American way of life since the Communist USSR tried to place ballistic missiles in Cuba.

Are you truly naive enough to believe the Marxist threat to the US ended with the dissolution of the USSR in the 90’s? Do you not see the threat in our midst? The takeover of Europe by socialists? The infiltration of academia by Marxist sympathizers?

Mediocrity has become the norm pushed by our children’s educators. Dependence upon the state has lost all stigma. Adversity is now to be avoided. Look at the common core educational standards and cohort testing. It is all there, all you need is to open your eyes and see.

“We do have a Marxist president, however.”

He is so Marxist, we ended up with Obamacare instead of single payer or a National Health Service.

Communism, Marxism, Socialism, Progressive, Democrat… what do all these words share in common?

Bringing out the obvious ignorance from those who don’t know the difference of the labels.

We do have a Marxist president, however. He and his party are the greatest threat to Liberty and the American way of life since the Communist USSR tried to place ballistic missiles in Cuba.

You should be a comic in Vegas.

Progressive in tax language isn’t related to progressive meaning “a new word for liberal.”

It has a very specific, technical, mathmatical meaning. It means that people who earn more, pay a larger share of their income.

From each according to one’s abilities. To each according to one’s needs… right, Comrade?

They mean exactly the same thing. Please don’t try to hide Marxist ideology behind “mathmatical meaning”. The term “Progressive” doesn’t exist in the lexicon of mathematics…

May have missed a closing tag.

The term “Progressive” doesn’t exist in the lexicon of mathematics…

Would you feel better about it if we called it the “monotonically-increasing tax rates”?

Would you feel better about it if we called it the “monotonically-increasing tax rates”?

It’s a simple upward sloping line… call it “positively-gradient tax rates”.

As I have said before, words have meaning… why have Marxists relabeled themselves “Progressives”? Why is the term “Progressive” infiltrating our lexicon in subversive ways?

Maybe it’s not strictly mathematical. However, it is a dry, non-ideological term for a structure of tax rates.

Of course, liberal types are prone to make the same mistake. I once read one somewhere referring to a flat tax as being a regressive tax.

Exactly Mike.

I suppose people trying to refer to the flat tax as regressive are doing one of two things. They are either identifying it as less progressive than the current system, which is correct. That would be using regressive to refer to the direction of the change in the rate structure, rather than the proposed rate structure itself. It is very imprecise, and if that is what people mean, they should say so.

Or they might be referring to the financial damage to a family in different situations. If you assume that 23% is the rate you would need on a flat tax, then you can see that the impact of that rate on a family of 4 making $17,000 a year (I know people in this situation) is a heck of a lot more damaging than the impact it would have on a family of 4 making $170,000 a year. The $3910 would devastate the first family. The $39,100 would do nothing of the kind to the second. This is just too fuzzy to be useful in a serious conversation.

By the way, I used 23% because I have heard it thown around, but I don’t think it is a real number. I’ve never heard a real flat tax proposed by anyone in a position to draft a law or get one passed. They ALL include a huge standard deduction which really makes it a graduated tax with two marginal rates 0% and x%.

you can see that the impact of that rate on a family of 4 making $17,000 a year (I know people in this situation) is a heck of a lot more damaging than the impact it would have on a family of 4 making $170,000 a year. The $3910 would devastate the first family. The $39,100 would do nothing of the kind to the second.

LOLZ. Another Marxist showing her colors… Yes, a 23% Federal tax on $170,000 isn’t felt at all… unless you need to buy food for that family of 4, pay for schools for 2 children, pay for after-school activities, pay for housing in a good neighborhood, pay for transportation, save for retirement, take the occasional vacation, etc. Notice I’m not even touching the state and local taxes.

Then there is a good chance that family earning $170,000 has 2 wage earners in the work force compared to 1 minimum wage earner in the family of $17,000. So while one family has one member sitting at home letting the state pay for Section 8 housing and SNAP benefits and welfare because they are “below the poverty line” while they pay less in taxes as a percentage of income, the other family sacrifices to provide a better life and is penalized by the “progressive” taxes.

As I said, “progressive” = “Marxist”. From each according to one’s abilities, to each according to one’s needs. Those who view adversity as a challenge to learn, grow and overcome obstacles need not apply.

However, it is a dry, non-ideological term for a structure of tax rates.

No, it is very ideological… in fact, it is Marxist pure and simple. The fact that you recognize that after it has been shown clearly proves your ideology and agenda here.

Yes, Northeasterner, absolutely. Having to pay for housing, food and perhaps some childcare plus other necessities out of $130K a year is exactly the same as having to pay for housing, food, and other necessities with $13,000 a year and some minimal housing subsidies (if you can actually get them, which lots of people who qualify can’t) and some food stamps.

You really don’t see the difference at all, do you?

And society (thats you and me) PAY when people live in poverty. Have you never had to avoid walking in an area because it is dangerous? The kids raised in those impoverished families will be the adults who make the world what it is when my young relatives are adults and when I am old. I’d prefer not to punish myself by making sure their lives are as miserable as possible. It must be a sad thing to live in a brain like yours. I pity you.

“As I have said before, words have meaning… why have Marxists relabeled themselves “Progressives”?”

Some time in the late ’80s/early ’90s, the term “liberal” became a nasty one. It came to imply more than just economic positions. Think “Massachusetts liberal”. Weak on defense, anti death penalty, etc. So they sensibly adopted the term “progressive”.

And society (thats you and me) PAY when people live in poverty.

Did Communism alleviate human suffering? Poverty? Do you know anyone who actually lived in Communist Soviet Union? Do they miss it? Here’s a hint: Everyone was impoverished. Everyone suffered… except the Politburo and those favored by the Communist leadership.

It must be very sad living in your mind, thinking all this time that life was fair and everyone less fortunate was entitled to the life of those more fortunate. It must be very sad going through life thinking adversity was something to be avoided and dependency something to be embraced.

How far America has fallen…

I never saw a wild thing
sorry for itself.
A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.

so very well said, Northeastener.

My wife and I went to bed at about 4:30am, both working until then. That’s pretty uncommon for me…much more common for my wife.

She is becoming a Republican after growing up in a VERY blue house.

The main reason is that the constant implications from the left, and justification for higher taxation on her higher income, is that she “didn’t build that”. That somehow she didn’t earn the money she makes.

Let’s say that my wife and I are both very grateful for the position that we are in, and expect to pay more in taxes than most (which we do).

That said, it makes our blood boil when people put so much credit the government and society, and much less on in individual’s efforts and achievement within that society.

Let’s take a simple problem, and two solutions:

Problem: Social Security will be underfunded by the time I hit retirement (if not sooner):

Solution #1: Tax the high income earners more now, and leave the system in place as-is with respect to benefit payouts.

Solution #2: Means test the payouts, so that the wealthiest get less in retirement.

Both get to the same place…the wealthy take the brunt of the program change.

I favor solution #2. Why? Because earning higher income in one year (and thus being subject to higher taxes in that year) does NOT mean that you are necessarily going to be wealthy in retirement. Those folks should get to keep their money to make up for what may be lean years between that good income year and retirement. The best indication of whether you need assistance in your older age is…what you have when you are older.

Democrats favor solution #1. Why? More tax is better? Bigger government is better? Reducing entitlement payouts is bad, no matter the reason?

Both solutions put the burden of the solution on those who can pay the most.

Solution #2 is a practical solution to the problem.
Solution #1 solves the problem, but as far as I can tell is rooted in a “bigger government is better government” ideology.

No, it is very ideological… in fact, it is Marxist pure and simple. The fact that you recognize that after it has been shown clearly proves your ideology and agenda here.

Nothing has been shown clearly. Wouldn’t a Marxist want everyone to have the same level of income? Progressive taxation doesn’t accomplish that.

why have Marxists relabeled themselves “Progressives”?”

Who are the people that formerly called themselves Marxists and now call themselves Progressives?

Do you know anyone who actually lived in Communist Soviet Union? Do they miss it?

I know a woman from Hungary who think that it was better in the days of communism. It’s a little hard to believe, but I have zero personal knowledge of the country. On the other hand, they had something called Goulash Communism, which was different from the Soviet variety.

I have never believed that life was fair. That life isn’t fair was my mother’s favorite saying.

But there is a huge difference between everyone getting the same thing, and making sure that people don’t starve and kids have enough safety that they can make use of their education and that people aren’t so impoverished that they make the places where I live uninhabitable. A difference as wide as the Pacific. You wouldn’t like to live in a world with no social safety net and no government. If the gangs don’t get you, the cholera will.

We have widely accepted dictionaries and encyclopedias which are the arbiters of the meanings of words and phrases:

1) http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/progressive?q=progressive

2) http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/478399/progressive-tax

Poetic license is counter-productive in factual discussions.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.” — Humpty Dumpty, “Through The Looking Glass” by Lewis Carroll.

I’m making up a new word now - HumptyDumptyism. There was huge increase in HumptyDumptyism during the summer of 2008 which hasn’t abated yet.

You wouldn’t like to live in a world with no social safety net and no government. If the gangs don’t get you, the cholera will.

Hyperbole much? Yes, not having progressive taxes will increase the spread of cholera. Here’s a lesson for you: waste disposal, sewage and water treatment are generally paid for with local real estate tax dollars, not Federal, “progressive” tax dollars.

Not having a “social safety net” will mean armed gangs will roam city streets killing innocents. Oh, wait a second. In every major metro in the country, armed gangs already do roam the streets killing at random. And that’s with the safety nets. My lord, how much worse could it be… I mean Chicago has more fatalities in a year than our combat forces in Afghanistan.

Here’s another quote for you:
I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.
On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor -
Benjamin Franklin

Who are the people that formerly called themselves Marxists and now call themselves Progressives?

How about Van Jones and Valerie Jarret… names ring a bell? They should to a Democrat, err I mean Marxist hack.

“A small bird will drop frozen dead from a bough
without ever having felt sorry for itself.”

How do you know? How do you know what a bird feels? Did you ever ask a bird if it feels sorry for itself?

Does a small bird have the intellectual capacity to feel sorry for itself? Does it have the capacity to run what if scenarios? If not, then it is no accomplishment that it does not feel sorry for itself. It is simply an indication of its limitations. Have you studied the small species of birds enough to even make a guess as to what it is feeling?

If you want to ascribe nobility to not feeling sorry for oneself, then you need an example of an entity that has been proven to be capable of doing so and chooses not to.

Feeling sorry for oneself may be an essential trait of an entity that is capable of making changes necessary to improve its existence.

Yeah, that is pretty lame. If a person was freezing to death and had some sad, negative thoughts during the last hour of his life, would that be a reason that we should have less respect for him?

From each according to one’s abilities. To each according to one’s needs… right, Comrade?

You sound like a clown.

How far America has fallen… to the TP ignorance and hate for their own country.

And those with good credit get better rates than those with bad credit.

The Home Mortgage Interest Deduction: Who Benefits?
By Jackie Stein
Author: NPP Intern on July 8, 2013 in Taxes & Revenue
Dreaming house ?
Photo by Nguyen Dai

When Chris and his wife decided to buy a house, the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction (HMID) allowed them to buy their dream home. “It was a deciding factor in how much we thought we could afford to borrow,” he said. Chris’ story is the story of many Americans who dream about and finally become owners of their own homes. And for a long time, the HMID has been considered key to encouraging home ownership among those who might not otherwise buy.

The HMID is one of the largest tax breaks in the tax code; the White House estimates that it will cost the federal government $101 billion this year. For comparison, all federal spending on education programs this year will total around $70 billion.

As Congress begins to consider tax reform, they are re-evaluating the effectiveness of the HMID in promoting homeownership. One problem raised by analysts is that the main beneficiaries of the HMID are upper-middle-income households (making $75,000-$500,000 a year). They get 77 percent of the tax savings, but are already the most likely group to buy a home without a tax break. Consequently, according to the Tax Policy Center, the HMID mainly provides an incentive “for those who would own a home without a subsidy to purchase larger or more expensive homes.”
…

The loudest voices in an effort to keep the MID on life support are LIEberals. (Not likely it will help but they pander anyways)

“The loudest voices in an effort to keep the MID on life support are LIEberals.”

It holds in general.

Jeebus. I just realized our country is almost exactly like a dysfunctional family heading for divorce. One side says “lets spend all the money on guns and a new hummer” while the other one says “ya but the kids need new shoes and schooling!” To which the former counters with “let them go get a job and pull themselves up by their bootstraps.”

Meanwhile the credit card debt keeps piling up…..

I just realized our country is almost exactly like a dysfunctional family heading for divorce

And the “liberals” are going to win it. Why? We’re smarter, have the best lawyers and have god on our side.

‘the “liberals” are going to win it’

One minute you are a libertarian. Next you are a “centrist.” I think mainly you are an artist. A bullshit artist. I’m done with you.

RioTard lied again.

RioTard is a liar.

For those that refinanced at very low rates, wouldn’t this accomplish the same thing? I am all for abolishing the MID and with the low mortgage rates, wouldn’t now be the perfect time?

That works for me, but since so many people use computer programs and commecial preparers to do their taxes, they don’t know that they derive no benefit from the MID. Hard to convince people to hate something that they think is valuable to them (even if it isn’t). And the credit would be very valuable to the middle quintile, because they would get to use the credit and still take their standard deduction.

There is what should be and what is politically feasible. Small changes are always more politically feasible than large ones.

The tax brackets should at most be indexed based on inflation since 1913.

Essentially, the average American should pay no more than 1% of his income in taxes. The average 1% should pay no more than 2% of his income in taxes. Same for capital gains and dividends.

my equity has provided a lavish lifestyle, thank you ben bernake. All that money printing and buying of bonds has helped a lot of people.

“Equity” is a fallacy. It doesn’t exist.

Chew your way to freedom.

Chew your way to freedom.

My mortgage is due tomorrow. Oh wait. Sorry. I don’t have one.

And to think you could have got out before paying the bank all that money.

Stupid.

azdude02
Smart leverage has made my family members rich. Unfortunately, these asset bubbles have distorted the real estate game. My family owns lots of commercial properties (pre-bubble transactions).

I wish I would have started buying in the 80’s like them. One is a Billionaire, CEO of his successful firm.

That generation rode the leverage up.

Many future generations of Americans will ride the leverage (or paying it back) down.

Correction: The same generation of Americans will ride the leverage (or paying it back) down.

Deflation will shred these leveraged fortunes. Almost everyone stays in a Ponzi until it is over.

Deflation will shred these leveraged fortunes.

After most of us are dead I think.

Dying soon are you?

You don’t think RioTard.

Granite counters

I have them in 4 bathrooms and 1.5 kitchens. Cheaper than formica in Brazil.

They are fine for me.

Cheaper than formica in Brazil.

I never understood why it should be expensive in the first place; granite is one of the most abundant substances on the planet!

She’s paying more than rent.

Keep up Riotard.

Maybe we both need to read more carefully

That’s what your lawyer said?

Ask. We comply.

ahhhh…. cute donkeys.

From what I understand, there are many charming villages in Nova Scotia where houses are pretty cheap. Many of the people in these villages formerly worked in the fishery industry, which has declined due to overfishing. So I guess that they’re somewhat abandoned fishing villages.

The swamp witch took him. Dang swamp witch.

They are in Cali.

That means they better have 5 times more than that $1.8 mil in the form of municipal bonds, Roths, offshore businesses, precious metals, and stocks.

Meanwhile, Mr Kill List is plumbing new lows in approval ratings. This ACA thing may clean democrats out of DC for a couple decades. Who knows what’s going to come out of all this.

Dems really, REALLY like this sentiment.

it’s the truth, not a sentiment. yes, the dems do love this truth, but probably not as much as i hate it..

And we see very quickly how the MSM will grab onto a sound byte from a decade ago to discredit a Republican politician in an election.

Where is the MSM outrage over the intentionally misleading claims about Obamacare during a Presidential election, and now the backpedaling from those comments (claiming that he didn’t say them).

I guess it depends on what the definition of “is” is…

http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/05/obama-denies-you-can-keep-it-videotaped-promises/

The R party is toast.

they abandoned their principles long ago. they became liberals. there’s barely a whisker of difference between them and democrats now.

It’s because neither parts really represents conservatives or liberals…they represent corporations. So why do conservatives and liberals keep voting for them? As far as I can tell it’s because they have been successfully manipulated into thinking at least they can keep the other side out of power. They both win that way…neither side is in power.

Who knows what’s going to come out of all this.

america is going to be punished, severely.

It’s because neither parts really represents conservatives or liberals

i’d say that liberals are well represented.

they represent corporations.

see ‘capture theory’..

i’d say that liberals are well represented.

Only if you believe the corporatists who want you to spend all your energy fighting the “liberal” boogeyman and for liberals to spend all their energy fighting you.

Sure, call me Liberace.

But facts are facts and NYC is far safer than LA, San Fran, Chicago (LOL Chicago), Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Boston, Miami, DC, or any other major city you can muster. On a per capita basis, NYC is safe as it gets unless you’re living in a legit ghetto.

But facts are facts and NYC is far safer than…

Indeed, it’s amazing how much security can be had by ignoring constitutionally-protected liberty.

A quote comes to mind:
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” - Ben Franklin

Close but no cigar.

Obama will be on the outside looking in by the time this is in place.

Republicans are just laying the groundwork for the massive screw job they are going to inflict on Joe 6 Pack in 2016.

People were saying the same thing about Clinton.

‘Purge surge’: Obama fires another commander

Naval commanding officer alarmed by ‘relentless’ attack on Armed Forces

Published: 19 hours ago

F. Michael Maloof

“The truly sad story is that many of the brightest graduates of the three major service academies witnessing what the social experiment on diversity … is doing to the U.S. military, are leaving the service after five years,” he said. “We are being left with an officer corps that can be made to be more compliant, that is, exactly what Obama needs to effect his long range goals for the U.S. military.”

The future of the military is becoming more and more of concern, added Boykin, since colonels who would become generals are also being relieved of duty if they show that they’re not going to support Obama’s agenda, which critics have described as socialist.

“I talk to a lot of folks who don’t support where Obama is taking the military, but in the military they can’t say anything,” Boykin said.

As a consequence, he said, the lower grades have decided to leave, having been given the signal that there is no future in the military for them.

Referring to recent reports that Obama has purged some 197 officers in the past five years, Boykin said the reports suggest these officers were suspected of disloyalty or disagreed with the Obama administration on policy or force-structure issues. As Boykin pointed out, a number of them have been relieved of duty for no given reason.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/11/purge-surge-obama-fires-another-commander/ -

What’s the problem?

We are giving everybody an equal opportunity to get whacked.

All of this Obamaphobia is the perfect cover for the TeaPartier/Corporate NeavoNazis to distract the public from their plans to turn the country into Nigeria-West, circa 2016-2020.

‘All of this Obamaphobia’

I for one had great hopes that this president would turn around the Bush doctrine. He said all the right things, held out an olive branch, then resumed pretty much the same militaristic policies. Now with the NSA stuff, jailing whistle-blowers, attacking press freedoms and the drones, I think we see what he really is. This ACA thing was the last straw for me. It isn’t constitutional, and I don’t care what a bunch of old people in black robes say.

What I want in DC is opposition. It used to be that the democrats would protect me from the republicans and vice versa. You had someone representing labor and capital. Someone retraining spending, someone looking out for opposing interests. And the system is supposed to work with checks and balances to produce something that benefits the people.

I think most are missing what’s happening here. One of the 2 parties in our 2 party system is trying to find a reason for being. I’m encourage to see some libertarians emerging, and neo-cons leaving. Hopefully we can get back to a balance that works.

‘All of this Obamaphobia’

Fast and Furious, Benghazi, NSA, IRS, If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like you healthcare plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.

Obamaphobia? Is that what you call it? Well if that’s what you call it, you’re right, there is a lot of it.

At least he bombs with love.

And he’s good at it!

‘As first reported in a book review by the Washington Post’s Peter Hamby, Obama told aides in connection with the CIA’s drone program that he is “really good at killing people.”

http://news.yahoo.com/new-book–obama-told-aides-that-drones-make-him–really-good-at-killing-people–144734667.html

“really good at killing people.”

“Civilian casualties are estimated at 416 to 948, with 168 to 200 of those being children”

Children too.

I have learned that supporting Bush and the Republicans was just as bad but jeez.

According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the CIA has conducted 378 strikes in the program’s 10-year history. Of those, 326 are classified as “Obama strikes.” The total number of people killed by drones is estimated at 2,528 to 3,648. Civilian casualties are estimated at 416 to 948, with 168 to 200 of those being children. As many as another 1,545 are estimated to have been injured in those strikes.

“We conduct those strikes because they are necessary to mitigate ongoing actual threats — to stop plots, prevent future attacks and, again, save American lives,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said in February. “These strikes are legal, they are ethical, and they are wise.”

As I have suggested before, watch Dirty Wars on netflix and learn of the operations of a unit called JSOC. It’s worse than the drones.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-rise-of-jsoc-in-dirty-wars-2013-4

Maybe we’d have get to make stuff again.

I do not care what they say but I do take notice of what they are actually doing. They continue to buy more and more gold. They also seem to want to shift from holding fiat U.S. currency to anything tangible even NYC real estate. I guess even a 50% haircut is better than holding currency which is fit only for toilet paper.

But who is getting that gold? The government, or individual Chinese.

Gold is a good plan, when there is no “social safety net” and few options for safe investments, especially portable ones.

We’re in a race to see whose Ponzi collapses first.

Actually both the government and the individual Chinese are buying gold. The Chinese invented paper currency and they know what always happens when a currency does not have the backing of money, like gold.

They stopped materially adding to their dollar hoard many years ago. Buying real estate in the US with the dollars makes perfect sense if you are about to knock the dollar off its pedestal. You will have a hard asset without undermining the dollar.
I do not know why many countries would not agree as long as the currency is backed by gold. It would be lot safer than counting on a fiat currency in a country that cannot get its house in order and shows no sign of addressing the future entitlement Ponzi schemes. Becoming the world’s superpower for the cost of less than one trillion dollars does not seem like an excessive amount. It is easier and cheaper than spending as much as we spend on defense to achieve military parity.

How would it would work? Would the Chinese purchase a trillion dollars worth of gold, store it in vaults and then issue a new currency “backed” by that gold? Would that really make them a superpower?

It doesn’t sound plausible.

They become a superpower by default due to our decline. Without the status of having the reserve currency, we cannot afford our military or our social programs. We collapse and they become the most powerful force in the world. It is far cheaper way to become a superpower than what the USSR tried matching our spending on defense.

Whenever I’m searching around for bubble reports, I come across articles on China setting up trade deals all over the world. What is it they say, ‘that used to be us.’

By that reasoning, they’ll become the dominant superpower sooner or later. Knocking the US dollar would just hasten the process. I don’t see why they would want to hurry things along.

“Knocking the US dollar would just hasten the process. I don’t see why they would want to hurry things along”

You do not see why they would not like to become a superpower sooner? You do not see why they might not want to chance the remote possibility that we get political leadership that would pass something like Bowles/Simpson that would prevent the bankruptcy and fall of the US? You don’t see why they may be at a stage where they no longer want the US to be competing with them for natural resources? I do not understand what you do not see.

Oh, so that’s what you’re getting at. There are still a large number of obstacles to accomplishing such a thing. China would have to get cooperation from many countries to make the switch work. The most prosperous countries have accomodated themselves to a world dominated by America. Many of them hold large amounts of dollar-denominated assets. A gradual decline in the value of the dollar is one thing. A sudden end to its reserve status would be probably be more disruptive and panic-inducing than the financial crisis of five years ago.

Transport outfits are converting from oil to natgas eh?

Gawd you just talk and talk and talk no matter what…

I was mainly referring to the long hauls, as the stations are inadequate. The I-80 drive, a major one, is not doable. Yet. I
agree that the economics are there, yet no one has forked over the large cash to complete the infrastructure to make it happen.

The short-haul areas are a no brainer, any fleet w/big odometer readings is foolish not to switch over.

Yeah, the long hauls will take time, but hopefully successes for local delivery fleets will show that the math works and encourage folks to make the investments for longer hauls.