April 17, 2014

Bits Bucket for April 17, 2014

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




RSS feed

83 Comments »

Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 05:19:14

I loathe the MSM.

Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-04-17 05:34:15

I feel personally beholden. If not for the MSM, how would we know when the next dot com crash had started?

Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-04-17 05:37:53

April 16, 2014, 3:01 p.m. EDT
Is this March 2000?
By John Nyaradi

Is the recent tech selloff a precursor to another March 2000?

The recent bloodbath for technology stocks has rekindled some traumatic flashbacks for those who lost large amounts of money during the bursting of the dot-com bubble in March 2000.

The era was marked by unbridled enthusiasm for Internet companies, which became “dot-com” stocks before many of those companies had earned a single penny. Investing was completely based on speculation, rather than fundamentals, such as price/earnings ratios, etc. During the dot-com era, some people found themselves investing in ideas, rather than functioning businesses.

Although the dot-com bubble deflated over a longer period, running from 1999 through 2001, most people identify March 2000, as the defining moment for the end of that reckless period.

 
Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 05:44:41

Oh, is another dot.bomb underway?

 
 
Comment by goon squad
2014-04-17 05:44:04

the new york times, washington post, abc, nbc, cbs, cnn, npr exist to give you the correct attitude about whatever the designated victim class of the day is, and if you are white, to give you sufficient liberal guilt and self-hatred.

fox news, wall street journal editorial page, talk radio, drudge report exist to stoke the impotent anger of a dying demographic who think they can ‘restore our future’ or ‘take america back.’

all of which is just a sideshow to distract the sheeple from the 0.1%ers continued looting of the country, the statists’ bipartisan destruction of civil liberties, and an increasingly hard to ignore feeling that this country is on the wrong track, but that this time is different, that there is no going back to the way things used to be, that the future will only be worse.

welcome to the recoveryless recovery.

Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 06:00:18

I must say, that’s a rather good summary.

Comment by rms
2014-04-17 06:06:04

I must say, that’s a rather good summary.

+1 Indeed. In fact I just saved it with a citation.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 06:34:12

Ditto

 
 
 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-04-17 06:09:34

Don’t forget about global warming = the root of all problems in modern society.

 
Comment by Oddfellow
2014-04-17 07:31:50

¨ a sideshow to distract the sheeple from the 0.1%ers continued looting of the country ¨

Like by posting articles about black-on-white crime all the time? That’s a great way to keep the sheeple separated and mistrustful of one another. It’s been working for over two centuries now.

 
Comment by oxide
2014-04-17 08:37:28

You forgot PBS. Several people on the Great Orange Liberal Site (you know the one) believe that those oligarchs who run the country have started to subvert the PBS NewsHour, probably by using their high-dollar donor clout. I thought I detected a change too, but it’s very subtle. It has to be subtle. PBS viewers are not easily fooled.

 
Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 09:02:15

but that this time is different, that there is no going back to the way things used to be, that the future will only be worse.

Hasn’t this been the case for the past 30-40 years? Jobless recovery after jobless recovery? Offshoring has been ongoing for decades. The only difference now is that things are getting worse faster than before.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 09:08:56

And the end result is collapsing demand.

Got cannibalized economy?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by goon squad
2014-04-17 09:18:57

i’m not old enough to speak about 40 years ago. my adult working life has been framed by dot com bubble, dot com collapse, 9/11, iraq war, housing bubble, housing bubble collapse, bush/obama stagflationary depression, and now the recoveryless recovery.

‘things are getting worse faster than before’

i wonder how many people in usa agree with this, even if they’d never admit it out loud.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by MightyMike
2014-04-17 10:38:12

I think that recoveries starting getting slower starting with the 1990-91 recession. Quite vigourous growth is generally needed to bring back all of the jobs lost. That did happen during the recovery after the 1980-82 recession, in part because Mr. Volcker reduced interest rates significantly after raising them a lot.

What has been going on for about 40 years is the whole lucky ducky phenomenon. Even during periods over those 40 years when a lot of jobs have been created, far too many of them have had low pay and/or no benefits.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 13:19:35

I still remember the discussion of the “McJobs” replacing real jobs as far back as the mid 1980’s.

 
Comment by MightyMike
2014-04-17 13:22:33

Exactly - that’s not a jobless recovery. It’s a goodjobless recovery.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Mr. Banker
2014-04-17 06:10:10

“I loath the MSM.”

I love the MSM. The MSM creates discomfort and tension among the great multitudes of unwashed masses and at the same time offers up solutions to relieve these discomforts and tensions and - what a surprise? - these solutions just happen to involve the spending of money.

And since the unwashed masses do not have at hand the money needed to relieve these discomforts and these tensions they are thus driven to my bank and are driven to sign dotted lines that I provide to them and these dotted lines have the effect of temporarily alleviating their discomfort and tensions but since the MSM is forever creating discomfort and tensions there will forever be a line forming at my bank.

Bottom line: The MSM does its work and I end up with the rewards.

God’s plan and all that.

Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 06:11:32

Awww, STFU.

 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-04-17 06:15:14

“…these solutions just happen to involve the spending of money.”

They often further entail the creation of trillions of dollars from thin air which can be loaned to bankers such as yourself at near-zero interest rates so you can loan it out to customers at much higher rates and pocket the spread. This is the perfect recipe to save the system from systemically risky, too-big-to-fail Megabank apocalypses.

Comment by Mr. Banker
2014-04-17 06:23:51

“… so you can loan it out to customers at much higher rates and pocket the spread.”

You are absolutely correct. I might add that most of the money that my customers borrow at high interest rates goes to buying things that they really don’t need but only think they need because the MSM told them so.

And these people think they are smart because I tell them they are smart.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Mr. Banker
2014-04-17 06:34:43

Once upon a time the impulse buyer’s decision whether to buy or not buy was governed by two factors:

1. The strength of the impulse to buy, and

2. The amount of money he had in his wallet.

No matter what the strength of the impulse the sale would not happen because the money was just not there.

Enter the credit card. Now factor number 1 - the impulse to buy - can be satisfied because factor number 2 - the lack of money in his wallet - no longer becomes a factor.

Once again, people are smart. Once again, you can’t lose with the stuff I use.

 
Comment by oxide
2014-04-17 07:04:21

Mr. Banker, which is more profitable for you: the 1970’s when people paid cash for everything but you collected 13% on a mortgage, or now, when people pay 4% for a mortgage but you collect interest and fees for smaller purchases?

 
Comment by Oddfellow
2014-04-17 07:48:45

I would say that judging by their pocketbooks, the present has been much more profitable for the bankers than the 70’s.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 20:30:23

“I loathe the MSM.”

My “progressive” boss posted on FB that he distrusts 90% of what he sees on Internet. I guess as a corollary he trusts 90% of what he sees on MSNBC, CBS, CNN and ABC.

 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 05:20:12

We are at the peak of the rebubble.

Why buy a house at these massively inflated prices when you can buy later for 70% less?

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 06:38:14

Oh the fall is going to be so interesting here. What with the elections where Republicans might win the Senate and the echo bubble firmly in crash mode with prices going down the same way they went up in the 24 months prior.

If PHX falls 25 percent in a year the same way it went up, oof.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 06:55:49

“Oh the fall is going to be so interesting here.”

The fall will be spectacular.

Comment by rms
2014-04-17 17:21:08

“The fall will be spectacular.”

+1 Yeah, I’m afraid you’re right.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 20:32:05

I don’t vote. anymore. But I will eat popcorn. Hoping for change, whether done by the ballot box or by citizens marching to a bureaucrat thug lair with pitchforks (or AR-15s).

 
 
Comment by goon squad
2014-04-17 06:49:16

Just in case you feel like throwing up in your mouth, read this from city data in which a prospective buyer posts:

“I hope things aren’t this crazy forever. It would be nice to have more than a few days to decide on a house.”

And the realtor replies:

“All depends on the price range and the time it goes on the market. I was once quoted in the Realtor mag > “If you have to sleep on the house, you’ll never sleep in it.”

My best strategy (advice) is to 1. get pre-approval (get through underwriting) and 2. make your best offer after you see the house first thing in the morning.

you are welcome :)

http://www.city-data.com/forum/denver/1348006-positive-real-estate-news-26.html

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 07:45:32

Which statement is more accurate;

1) Realtors Are Liars

2) People Are Gullible

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2014-04-17 08:16:22

Fish where no one wants to go.

Hunt when others want to sit by the fire.

Comment by Jingle Male
2014-04-17 14:56:20

In 2008 & 9, my purchase offers would not even get a response for 3 or 4 months. I had to call the banks and remind them my offer was still valid and I could close escrow anytime. Two of the houses took 6 months to get under contract.

No one was fishing in the real estate pond in those days.

The last house I sold went under contract on day 7 in 2013.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 17:00:58

“No one was fishing in the real estate pond in those days.”

Except for dumb money.

 
Comment by Jingle Male
2014-04-17 21:11:30

HA, Ha, ha, that shows your ignorance.

Bought in 2010 for $296,000
Sold in 2013 for $420,000

That is smart money. $100,000 of smart money. Plus $10,000 in cash flow and $15,000 in paid loan principal.

I am happy. So Happy, HAppy, HA, Ha, ha, ha, ha…..

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-18 11:22:53

Meaningless given your zero credibility here.

Have you ever substantiated your wild claims?

 
 
 
Comment by Guillotine Renovator
2014-04-17 12:16:12

“If you have to sleep on the house, you’ll never sleep in it.”

That is the classic sales pitch designed to create a sense of urgency. “You better hurry up and buy, or you’re going to miss out.” This is best met with “I don’t have to buy, so what’s the hurry? I never rush into any purchase.”

 
 
 
Comment by Blackhawk
2014-04-17 05:26:46

Bonanza on the Eagle Ford Shale. A new energy revolution is unfolding in South Texas - Wash Times

Truck drivers: All over the interior United States, trucking companies are begging for drivers. The reason? They’ve all gone to Texas. There are $5,000-signup-bonus billboards along the Texas interstates and haulers have “now hiring” posted permanently. The drivers in the Eagle Ford haul sand, gravel, water, pipe and anything else needed at the drilling site. Often they work in family groups, and they do quite well.

Drillers: A tough, sometimes dirty job, mostly performed by young men who can handle physical labor, but they get well paid for it — up to $1,600 a week.

Women on the job site: A woman driving a one-ton Ford hauling a trailer passed by coming out of the oil fields in Karnes City, Texas. Women are on the site, usually driving trucks, but where women really shine is in team coordination. Typically, the owner of a drill site will have less than a half-dozen or so people on-site, but there may be up to 30 contractors and subcontractor.

Etv. Etc. Many job openings in many areas of expertise. Plus TX doesn’t have an income tax.

Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 08:40:09

Life in the oil patch: repeated boom/bust cycles. Moral of the story: save all your money and don’t buy any local real estate. When the next bust hits you climb into your paid for vehicle and move on to greener pastures.

 
Comment by Guillotine Renovator
2014-04-17 09:00:30

When this recent oil boom goes bust, and it will, it is going to make the old Texas oil bust look like a warm-up act.

Comment by Blackhawk
2014-04-17 09:45:47

I could live in an RV no problem. The nanny state makes it too easy to sit on your butt, watch TV and live off your neighbors who are paying all the taxes.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-04-17 11:39:37

Yeaup…. It’s going to be a money losing painful event for many.

 
 
 
Comment by goon squad
2014-04-17 05:32:45

wall street journal - coalition of the disappointed

‘you can tell it’s an election year because so many noncrises are suddenly urgent priorities. real median household income is still lower than it was in 2007, the smallest share of americans is working since 1978, and the russians are marching west, but democrats are training fire on race, gender and the grievances of identity politics.

obama democrats are now what they call the ‘coalition of the ascendent,’ made up of minorities, young people, single women and affluent, college-educated cultural liberals. the problem is that this year they may be a coalition of the disappointed, so democrats are trying to scare them to the polls with pseudo-controversies.

mr. holder should recall the treatment of his predecessor alberto gonzales before implying that his critics are racist, but then he sees jim crow everywhere. in his speech before al sharpton’s national action network, he said the right to vote faces, ‘unprecedented, unwarranted, ugly and divisive adversity.’

yet every democrat seems to have received the white supremacist conspiracy memo. last week nancy pelosi said at a news conference that ‘i think race has something to do with the fact that they are not bringing up an immigration bill.’

the color-by-numbers strategy may prove a tougher sell for young adults, who are among the biggest losers of the obama era. the millennials are the first generation since world war ii to be poorer and more jobless than their parents at the same stage of life, according to the pew research center.

america’s largest problems don’t have an ethnicity or gender, and most of them could be ameliorated with faster economic growth that would benefit everyone. sadly, the liberal strategy of cultivating resentment will only get worse as the year drags on.’

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 06:45:19

Republicans are crony crooks, and Democrats don’t even have a plan. I should legally change my name to “None of the Above” and run for office.

Comment by Northeastener
2014-04-17 09:09:07

I should legally change my name to “None of the Above” and run for office.

LOL. That’s a winning strategy right there.

Comment by dustartist
2014-04-17 10:40:38

Nobody for President. Because Nobody cares about YOU!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Oddfellow
2014-04-17 08:45:00

¨ the liberal strategy of cultivating resentment will only get worse as the year drags on.¨

Change that to ¨the two party strategy¨ and weĺl get a better idea of the problem.

 
Comment by MightyMike
2014-04-17 11:11:13

‘i think race has something to do with the fact that they are not bringing up an immigration bill.’

This doesn’t sound so unreasonable. Look at the words that she used - “I think”, not “I know” and “something to do”, not “the reason”.

Also, consider Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and the whole wacky right wing media. For some reason it’s not enough merely to attack Obama. They need to have a whole cast of villains to talk about. Those villans include the MSM, liberal Hollywood elites, liberals at good colleges, etc. Not every member of Obama’s cabinet is part of that cast of villains. It’s not outrageous to suggest that Holder’s skin color may have made him eligible for membership.

 
 
Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 06:12:42

The lesson? Never volunteer any info to the gov at any level.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/colo-eminent-domain-case-settled-with-115000-sale/

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 06:49:04

Sounds like they had a cruddy lawyer, but that lawyer got paid nonetheless. Also sounds like there is a little more to the story.

 
Comment by Blackhawk
2014-04-17 07:19:10

They’re out of control. They don’t have to pay their own lawyers any more so why not take the little people’s land. They don’t even have a reason to do this. It’s a shame.

Comment by Northeastener
2014-04-17 09:23:51

My great-grandfather had land taken from him by eminent domain back in the late 50’s. The city (with help from the state) decided to build housing projects on land he owned… what was populated primarily with fruit trees and grape vines. I’m quite sure he didn’t receive “market value”, and certainly lost on any of the future appreciation of the land. Today, his estate would be worth millions had the government not taken his property.

It doesn’t matter if it’s socialism or fascism, it’s tyranny all the same. I for one will be donating financially to help those brave men who have gone to the aid of the Bundy family in Nevada. A crew of retired veterans from NH is there now providing security to the family and property.

Comment by Guillotine Renovator
2014-04-17 12:18:52

You’re comparing eminent domain to illegally grazing cattle on BLM land? Wow, you’re really mixed up.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 08:42:43

The lesson? Never volunteer any info to the gov at any level.

Meanwhile tens of millions post private and intimate details about themselves on fakebook.

Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 08:45:18

I have tried looking up old friends from Mexico on Fakebook. Almost none of them have an account. It was explained to me the middle to upper class Mexicans avoid Fakebook like the plague, because they prefer to remain as anonymous as possible in a society where being abducted for ransom is a very real threat.

 
 
 
Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 06:27:39

Following up on the comments of Ben and others regarding incompatibility of immigration and the welfare state, here’s a post from a thread on welfare and food stamps in the City Data forum:

“I’ll be brief. We spent several years on welfare, when we immigrated to the USA.
We are very grateful to American people that paid our bills and provided for us through those years.
We, also, went to schools and graduated, with solid degrees and jobs.
We are off any state support since 1998.
We make very decent salaries and pay decent taxes. We helped our kids and they paid most of it anyway, to get through schools and get their decent education and decent jobs.

I’d say, point to my post is - it depends. It can be a great trampoline to start you into a better future, better for all, or it can suck you in and turn you into lazy, entitled mush. YOUR CHOICE.”

This is what makes me sick to my stomach. WTF? What is wrong with this picture? Person comes to the US and gets “provided for” by the “American people” and they’re “very grateful”. No one asked the “American people” if they wanted to provide for these a-holes. This person thinks they’re a real success. LOL! This is why we have a problem. The new “American Dream”, come to the US, get on the dole.

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 06:54:27

Does that story you quoted even make any sense? I think it is someone just putting out a lie. Going to school and graduating and getting a solid degree and job? Off state support since 1998, but then talking about how their kids also went through school and got a decent education and job? I don’t think the timing adds up.

Comment by jose canusi
2014-04-17 07:08:02

Doesn’t sound like a lie to me. They could have and probably did immigrate with children. Doesn’t say when they immigrated, but prior to 1998 anyway, which shows this has been going on for a long time. They’re endorsing welfare as a springboard (or as they call it, a trampoline). They’re trying to say they made the right use of it. I personally would rather see American citizens make the right use of it, not immigrants. And I think immigration law (mostly ignored) says immigrants may not become a “charge” on the citizens of the US.

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-04-17 18:12:06

I still think it sounds pretend, like someone was trying to act like what they think happens, not something that actually did happen.
Off state support for 16 yrs. So they got good jobs in 1998 but kids are already educated with good jobs?

But I agree, I would at least like to see it used for a springboard, not a black hole like now sucking multi generations in forever.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 07:16:50

The real test of the motivations behind granting amnesty is this: Does the government want open borders and no passports so that anyone can come in and stay as long as they want to? No. The government wants open borders only for low wage laborers. The next question is “why?” And we know the answer.

Permanent Democrat Majority.

Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 09:11:06

So why hasn’t the GOP done something to stop this? Or are they too blinded by their greed for cheap labor?

 
Comment by MightyMike
2014-04-17 11:30:41

Reagan signed the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty law in 1986 because he wanted a permnanent Democratic whatchamacallit.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986
Colloquial acronym(s) IRCA
Nickname(s) Simpson–Mazzoli Act
Enacted by the 99th United States Congress
Citations
Public Law Pub.L. 99–603
Stat. 100 Stat. 3445
Legislative history
Introduced in the Senate as S. 1200 by Alan K. Simpson on May 23, 1985
Committee consideration by: Senate Judiciary, Senate Budget
Passed the Senate on September 19, 1985 (69–30)
Passed the House on October 9, 1986 (voice vote after incorporating H.R. 3810, passed 230–166)
Reported by the joint conference committee on October 14, 1986; agreed to by the House on October 15, 1986 (238–173) and by the Senate on October 17, 1986 (63–24)
Signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986

v· · t· · e ·

The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), Pub.L. 99–603, 100 Stat. 3445, enacted November 6, 1986, also Simpson-Mazzoli Act, is an Act of Congress which reformed United States immigration law. The act[1]

• required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status;

• made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants;

• legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants, and;

• legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language.

About three million illegal immigrants were granted legal status through this act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

 
 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 06:48:55

Revisiting the potential of a “one time” confiscation of 10% of your electronic (or retirement) assets, as done in Cyprus and other countries:

America’s experience is to treat us as frogs in a pot and keep turning the temperature up slowly.

They can only get away with the “one time” confiscation once. And even so, they will add more people to the tea party opposition, the militia groups, libertarians, non-compliers, and so on. The thugs would not be able to get away with it again. And when they change the rules in other areas and bring heavy guns to traditionally unarmed government agencies and give them more rule-making powers, there will be tens of thousands of people with locked and loaded guns at the doorsteps of the armed thugs when they do another “Bundy Ranch” episode - but that is after the asset confiscation.

Americans are angrier than ever at how big government has become.

At the same time, the government is trying to inflate the stock market. Most people in congress own stocks. Many bureaucraps own stocks. Maybe a lot of those thugs of BLM behind rifles own stocks. The U.S. government does not want to kill the stock market. Foreign investors do not want the U.S. government to kill the stock market.

I’m leading up to this: The stock market is a good long term place for your investing. Far better than any other asset class. But you need to diversify for insurance against the government confiscating a percentage of your 401k and IRAs.

I think it is preposterous to think 100% of our 401ks and IRAs will be confiscated. That would be akin to turning the kettle to boil. Lots of angry frogs with AR-15 hopping out. And of course it would cause a big market crash. And that would cause precious metals prices and anything else movable and hidable to go up remarkably in price.

The probability of confiscation of your electronic assets is very high. I would say 90%. The probability the confiscation percentage is above 10% is low. I would say 10% of all your assets should be in physical precious metals for that reason alone.

Comment by goon squad
2014-04-17 07:02:50

Is it “go time” yet?

 
Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 09:28:12

All they have to do to confiscate a portion of your savings is to keep creating more money. It’s invisible. It doesn’t show up on your monthly bank statement. It does show up at the grocery store checkout and at the gas pump, but we’ve been conditioned to accept that as inevitable.

It would be dumb for them to try an overt grab. Why would they? The current system works just fine.

Comment by polly
2014-04-17 12:12:29

In addition, there is no difference between your IRA account, 401k account and any other bank or brokerage account that is located in the US. Actually, the 401k is a little different because technically it is owned by the company, not you. But that is it.

When I brought my friends to an IRS service center to start filing the three years of tax returns they had not filed, they also had an appointment to discuss an identity theft issue he had had a few years earlier. The woman pulled up his SS number and told him that as far as she was concerned, he owned $1000 in a bank account because it was under his number. If they had owed any taxes (they didn’t), the IRS would have gone after that bank account even though, before that day, he had never heard of it.

Comment by Blue Skye
2014-04-17 17:58:03

I believe that one key difference is that the retirement accounts can be shielded from judgment.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 19:04:54

“In addition, there is no difference between your IRA account, 401k account and any other bank or brokerage account that is located in the US.”

Exactly. Because 401ks and IRAs have 1099-Rs - they send to the IRS. Brokerages/Mutual fund familes send in 1099-Bs and 1099-DIV, and banks send in 1099-INTs. Not to forget TreasuryDirect.gov of course - it issues 1099-INTs.

All these have the electronic account info that the IRS is all aware of.

In addition your Turbo Tax helps keep track of your IRA basis (Roth or/and other forms).

The IRS might not know the complete balance in your brokerage / mutual fund accounts but they know your gains and income.

They probably have a good idea of your total current balance in your retirement accounts.

Of course when you file your state taxes, they get a copy of your federal return so the state can obtain all this information if they want.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2014-04-17 10:38:16

Apparently you think the probability of deflation is about zero.

Buckle up!

 
 
Comment by seenitall
2014-04-17 06:53:00

Saw this. Is it getting worse:
Underwater homes rise

Numbers in Connecticut get worse in first quarter of year

REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN

The number of mortgaged homes in Connecticut “seri­ously underwater” has gone up recently, according to a new report.

During first quarter of 2014, 93,519 homes out of 436,367 mortgaged resi­dences were “seriously un­derwater,” meaning the homeowners owed at least 25 percent more than the prop­erty’s estimated market val­ue, according to a report by Irvine, Calif.-based housing data provider RealtyTrac.

Comment by rms
2014-04-17 17:30:16

“Numbers in Connecticut get worse in first quarter of year”

A number of articles referenced here have pointed-out Connecticut’s high property taxes. No retiring there on Social Security checks. Fugg’n unreal, IMHO.

 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
Comment by In Colorado
2014-04-17 08:47:54

I wonder if the dealership was a money laundering front.

 
 
Comment by Muggy
2014-04-17 14:54:19

I am destined to become a hermit. I’d like to live in a van down by the river (with no neighbors).

That is all.

Comment by phony scandals
2014-04-17 16:15:14

If the Van is Rockin’ Don’t Come a Knockin’ - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nC0-ug86YMc - 143k -

 
Comment by rms
2014-04-17 17:36:23

“I am destined to become a hermit.”

After the kids are finished with college?

Comment by Muggy
2014-04-17 19:14:13

No guarantees…

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2014-04-17 18:00:03

You visit me over the 4th of July and you’ll be one step closer to living on a boat on the river.

Comment by Muggy
2014-04-17 19:15:43

I’m looking forward to it –

 
 
 
Comment by phony scandals
2014-04-17 15:47:05

Harry Reid Calls Cliven Bundy Supporters “Domestic Terrorists”

“I repeat: what happened there was domestic terrorism”

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
April 17, 2014

Senator Harry Reid has escalated the war of words over the Cliven Bundy dispute, sensationally labeling the Nevada cattle rancher’s supporters “domestic terrorists” during an event in Las Vegas today.

During a ‘Hashtags & Headlines’ event at the Paris Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Reid referred to Bundy supporters as “Nothing more than domestic terrorists,” adding, “I repeat: what happened there was domestic terrorism.”

Reid was referring to the stand off on Saturday in Bunkerville where Bundy supporters, some of whom were armed, forced Bureau of Land Management agents to back down and release around 380 head of cattle belonging to Bundy that had been seized over the course of the previous week.

Reid claimed that Bundy viewed the United States as a “foreign government,” while accusing his supporters of goading violence.

“There were hundreds, hundreds of people from around the country that came there,” Reid said. “They had sniper rifles in the freeway. They had weapons, automatic weapons. They had children lined up. They wanted to make sure they got hurt first … What if others tried the same thing?”

Despite Reid’s characterization of Bundy supporters as “domestic terrorists,” the only violence metered out during the dispute was when BLM agents tasered and assaulted Bundy supporters during an incident on April 9.

No matter where you stand on the Bundy issue, Reid’s characterization of American protesters as “domestic terrorists” is chilling and a massive backlash is almost certain to follow.

It also fits the narrative that the federal government has been pushing for years through literature such as the MIAC report, which framed Ron Paul supporters, libertarians, people who display bumper stickers, people who own gold, or even people who fly a U.S. flag, as potential terrorists. In 2012, a Homeland Security study was leaked which characterized Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority,” and “reverent of individual liberty” as “extreme right-wing” terrorists.

Reid attracted controversy earlier this week when he promised that the BLM’s fight with Bundy was “not over”. The Nevada Senator was hit with accusations of cronyism after his former staffer Neil Kornze was confirmed as the new BLM director earlier this month.

Reid is obviously angry after his complicity in the siege against the Bundy family was exposed and became a viral story. Although many news outlets claimed this issue was “debunked,” Reid’s involvement in a solar farm just 35 miles from Bundy’s ranch is documented. Archived files which were deleted from the BLM’s own website confirm that confiscating Bundy’s cattle was necessary in order to clear the way for lucrative solar deals with transnational corporations.

Meanwhile, the BLM has admitted slaughtering two prize bulls belonging to Cliven Bundy during their round up of his cattle. The BLM claims the bulls “posed a safety hazard” but refused to elaborate. Bundy supporters have pointed to photographs which appear to show one of the bulls having suffered a gunshot wound.

 
Comment by phony scandals
2014-04-17 16:32:48

Federal Judge: BLM Engaged In A Criminal Conspiracy Against Ranchers

Court opinion exposes BLM’s true intent against Cliven Bundy

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
April 17, 2014

For over 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management engaged in a “literal, intentional conspiracy” against Nevada ranchers to force them out of business, according to a federal judge whose court opinion exposes the BLM’s true intent against rancher Cliven Bundy.

BLM agents who impounded Cliven Bundy’s cattle.
In his opinion of United States v. Estate of Hage, U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Jones reveals that after late Nevada rancher E. Wayne Hage indicated on his 1993 grazing permit renewal that by signing the permit, he was not surrendering his family’s long-standing water and forage rights on the land, the BLM not only rejected the permit but also conspired for decades to both deny his family’s property rights and to destroy their cattle business.

“Based upon E. Wayne Hage’s declaration that he refused to waive his rights — a declaration that did not purport to change the substance of the grazing permit renewal for which he was applying, and which had no plausible legal effect other than to superfluously assert non-waiver of rights — the Government denied him a renewal grazing permit based upon its frankly nonsensical position that such an assertion of rights meant that the application had not been properly completed,” Judge Jones wrote. “After the BLM denied his renewal grazing permit for this reason by letter, the Hages indicated that they would take the issue to court, and they sued the Government in the CFC [Court of Federal Claims.]”

And at that point, Jones explained, the BLM refused to consider any further applications from Hage.

“The entire chain of events is the result of the Government’s arbitrary denial of E. Wayne Hage’s renewal permit for 1993–2003, and the effects of this due process violation are continuing,” he stated.

Judge Jones continued:

In 2007, unsatisfied with the outcome thus far in the CFC, the Government brought the present civil trespass action against Hage and the Estate. The Government did not bring criminal misdemeanor trespass claims, perhaps because it believed it could not satisfy the burden of proof in a criminal trespass action, as a previous criminal action against E. Wayne Hage had been reversed by the Court of Appeals. During the course of the present trial, the Government has: (1)invited others, including Mr. Gary Snow, to apply for grazing permits on allotments where the Hages previously had permits, indicating that Mr. Snow could use water sources on such land in which Hage had water rights, or at least knowing that he would use such sources; (2) applied with the Nevada State Engineer for its own stock watering rights in waters on the land despite that fact that the Government owns no cattle nearby and has never intended to obtain any, but rather for the purpose of obtaining rights for third parties other than Hage in order to interfere with Hage’s rights; and (3) issued trespass notices and demands for payment against persons who had cattle pastured with Hage, despite having been notified by these persons and Hage himself that Hage was responsible for these cattle and even issuing such demands for payment to witnesses soon after they testified in this case.

By filing for a public water reserve, the Government in this case sought specifically to transfer to others water rights belonging to the Hages. The Government also explicitly solicited and granted temporary grazing rights to parties who had no preferences under the TGA [Taylor Grazing Act of 1934], such as Mr. Snow, in areas where the Hages had preferences under the TGA.

It is necessary to note that under the TGA, according to Red Canyon Sheep Co. v. Ickes (1938), a rancher whose cattle had previously grazed in the area based upon adjacent land, water rights on the land, etc., has a right to a grazing permit over others who apply for a permit to graze the area without having previously grazed there.

So in this instance, Hage would have priority over Snow for a grazing permit, but the BLM willfully ignored this court ruling.

And after the agency filed for a public water reserve, according to Judge Jones, the BLM “sent trespass notices to people who leased or sold cattle to the Hages, notwithstanding the Hages’ admitted and known control over that cattle, in order to pressure other parties not to do business with the Hages, and even to discourage or punish testimony in the present case.”

“For this reason, the Court has held certain government officials in contempt and referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” he wrote. “In summary, government officials, and perhaps also Mr. Snow, entered into a literal, intentional conspiracy to deprive the Hages not only of their permits but also of their vested water rights.”

“This behavior shocks the conscience of the Court and provides a sufficient basis for a finding of irreparable harm to support the injunction described at the end of this Order.”

So in other words, the BLM willfully attempted to destroy the Hage family’s livelihood because Hage dared to assert his existing rights to the land which his family has held since the late 19th century.

And unfortunately the BLM is attempting to do the exact same thing to Cliven Bundy.

“Has Attorney General Eric Holder prosecuted any federal officials for criminal activity and violation of the Hage family’s constitutionally protected rights? No,” William F. Jasper, senior editor of The New American, wrote on the subject. “Has Sen. Harry Reid denounced this lawlessness and criminal activity by government officials and call upon President Obama and Attorney General Holder to protect the citizens of his state from the depredations of federal officials under their command? No.”

“With attitudes such as those expressed above by Sen. Harry Reid, it is almost a certainty that the recently defused Bundy Ranch standoff will be replayed again — and in the not-too-distant future. And the outcome could be much less amicable for all concerned.”

This article was posted: Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 2:26 pm

 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-04-17 20:43:54

I was thinking this morning about how to maximize freedom.

For a person in their 20s to 40s I recommend contract consulting. Tax benefits are huge. I recommend never getting married. Marriage is bondage to the state. I recommend not owning a house. If you are a contract consultant your primary residence should be very low monthly payments - you should rent a room from someone and keep your stuff there. Maybe visit every once in awhile. That’s your base address. If you have a 401k only contribute up to where you get full matching percentage contributions from your job shop. My job shop did a 2% match. For remaining change, invest in stock index funds - and they are not tax deferred. Stay in them for the long term. Once you have a certain amount, you can maybe get into a tax managed broad index fund that has low taxes until you realize the long term gains. Then the long term gain tax is lower than your ordinary rate.

By renting you keep mobile and you have a lot of money rolling in from your consulting career. You build up wealth fast. I know a guy who was a multi millionaire by his mid 40s - a consultant for most of his career - since his 20s. He became a father in his mid 40s for the first time. Smart guy. Deferred the settling down until after he made the fortune.

Living cheap, being mobile (keeping short leases, preferably month-to-month, regarding yourself as a nomad, staying debt free, not voting, not marrying, and building up tangible assets (you can store gold in certain places besides a safe deposit box even if you do not own real estate), well that’s the quick route to wealth and it is freedom.

It amazes me how enslaved my colleagues voluntarily like to be. They get marrie (strike one), they make babies (strike 2) and they buy houses in Orange County (You’re OUT of Freedom!).

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

Trackback responses to this post