- On 24 May 2013
in
What kind of Asian are you?,
bmwman91 said:
As someone who has spent a fair amount of time working in the San Francisco Bay Area, this is funny as all Hell. I think most of the Bay Area Asians would agree.
Haha! Yeah, the typical SFBA "pasty programmer with an Asian fetish."
- On 24 May 2013
in
What kind of Asian are you?,
bmwman91 said:
make it secret? because too many tree huggers out there!
I don't get it. Do they hide the menu because it has illegal stuff like shark fins and tiger penis on it and they are afraid that westerners will report them for, you know, breaking the law in a western nation? Or is it just because they figure that white people won't eat the stuff and they don't want it to go to waste? Based on your reference to tree huggers, I assume it is #1.
And it sounds like you don't know many white people lol.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
But I still don't see a reconciliation of much of this information, even with what you said housing prices should be lower along with food costs.
Globalization is also a factor now, much more than was then. Much of the rest of the world has pretty nasty income to living expense ratios, and America is sliding in that direction. We were much more of an isolationist nation prior to WWII. Just like how baseball is a different game now, America is a different nation now.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
I thought the prices back then were hard to explain away by inflation. Most of them were lower inflation adjusted.
Income is not but when you look at what you can buy today with those adjusted dollars you apparently are not better off?
I just wanted to see what yous would say. Iwog is conspicuously absent.
Got it.
"yous" ... are you from upstate NY?
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
The average American’s annual income in 1933 was $1,550.00. Today, that would be the equivalent of $25,218.00. According to the last Bureau of Labor Statistics report for 2009(4), the average American’s annual income was $28,592.00 (mid range between highest and lowest by State for 1 person). This may seem like we’re ahead of the game compared to the Great Depression. However, when you consider that the lowest bracket of income tax was levied at 4% in 1933 compared to 15% in 2010, you can see that we are almost on par. But you also must consider the plethora of other taxes and deductions that have since been siphoned out of the average American’s paycheck. Contemporary sales taxes and compulsory enrollments like mandatory insurance (both auto and health) must also be added into the equation to get a better gauge as to where we are now compared to days gone by.(5)
Next question. Are you arguing that people were better off back then?
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
Ok then what about these numbers?
Cost of a new house 1933: $5,750.00 (equivalent to $93,565.72 in 2010)
Cost to rent a house in 1933: $18.00 per month (equivalent to $292.00 in 2010)
Brand New Plymouth in 1933: $445.00 (equivalent to $7241.17 in 2010)
Gallon of gas in 1933: 10 Cents (equivalent to $1.62 in 2010)
Loaf of Bread in 1933: 7 Cents (equivalent of $1.13 in 2010)
1 Lb. Of Hamburger Meat in 1933: 11 Cents (equivalent to $1.79 in 2010)
Can of Campbell’s Vegetable Soup in 1933: 10 Cents (equivalent to $1.62 in 2010)
Dozen Eggs in 1933: 5 Cents (equivalent to 81 Cents today)
What were median wages back then?
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
I had numerous family members who went through the depression of the 30's. There is absolutely no comparison between then and now. Back then for example there were hardly any safegaurds in place. If your bank went under then you instantly lost all your money. If you were out of work you instantly had no income as there was no such thing as unemployment insurance.
I'll just put it this way: To this day those in my family who are still alive from that generation still keep their fridges and freezers absolutely stuffed full of food as well as all of the pantries and basements too. Things were so bad back then that even food was in some cases a scarcity.
The recession of the 2000's was and is nothing in comparison.
Yup. By today's standards my grandparents looked like "hoarders", but they lived through the great depression and had their reasons. One thing that I noticed about them was that they rarely, if ever, complained about any sort of inconvenience in life, whereas people today go nuts if they can't find 3G data coverage while waiting in line for a whopping 5 minutes at Starbucks.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
I am not going to try to make an argument that housing is not expensive, because it is. However, it is not "out of reach of anyone that works for a living" as some people say. It is going that way, and will do so for a good few years probably, and then something will break again. However, I realized that sitting on the sidelines forever isn't the only solution. There is more to it than just finances, and I have a lot of things that I want to do with my time and space that are either difficult or impossible in an apartment. I'd rent a house if it cost less than owning one, but that is not the case around here unfortunately.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
Your example is but one data point. You should also clarify your example to show its validity:
Are you and your wife similarly educated to your parents?
Are you and your wife in similar professions as your parents?
Are you and your wife of a similar age as your parents when they purchased their house?
Do you and your wife have a comparable level of job security as your parents?
Is the house you are buying a true comp to theirs? Not just similar in size, location, and the other usual criteria but also as it was . If you bought the same house with an additional 32 years of wear and tear you need to factor in the expense of upgrades to bring the two in line.
How about the down payment and interest rates? Did you take out the same type of loan as your parents?
Can you anticipate similar appreciation and the possibility of refinancing at a lower rate as your parents did?
Yes, technical undergrad degrees (my mom got a BA but ended up in tech as a photomask digitizer)
Yes, all in tech
Yes, my wife and I are 1 year older than my parents were
Sure, that's more of an "ask me in 10 years' question though. My dad has been convinced that he'll be laid off "next year" for the last 30 years and it never happened.
Yes, my dad has commented that this house is in fact in BETTER shape than the one they bought in 1981. It is bigger than theirs originally was by 250SF (they added a 2nd story in the 1990's) and better built based on our look at the foundation supports and such. The quality of the location is about equal.
My parents took out a 10 year ARM at 15% with 10% down. My wife and I have a 30 year fixed at 3.625% with 23% down. My wife's and my DTI ratio is lower now than theirs was then.
Appreciation? I don't know or care because my only interest is in living in the house for a LONG time. As far as retirement is concerned, I am not even factoring the house in except as a fixed cost. I plan to fund retirement from real investments like stocks and (maybe) rental properties. It is retarded to use your primary residence as an "investment" unless you live somewhere expensive and plan to retire in Utah, which I currently don't. My parents said that if you told them in 1981 that their $105k house would now be worth $900k and that college grads would be pulling $100k in high tech, they would call the cops because you must be high on some wild shit. Refinancing at a lower rate? I have a better rate now than they ever did, or will because their house is paid off.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Great Depression vs. Current Depression -,
bmwman91 said:
I'm just curious, but what is the main point that is being argued in here? Is it that inflation has blown up the cost of living and ruined everyone?
I disagree, if that is the case. A lot of people argue that housing, in particular, has blown away anyone's hope of affording it in just the last 30 years. My parents bought a house in 1981, and from talking to them, the house that my wife and I just purchased cost 7.4x as much as theirs. My wife's and my combined income is 7.2x what theirs was at the time. Mortgage interest rates today are 24% what they were then (3.625% now versus 15% then). As far as I am concerned, the "housing has blown-away what any normal person can afford" argument holds no weight. People are cash-strapped, DEFINITELY, but as far as I can tell that is largely a byproduct of over-consumption of credit.
- On 22 May 2013
in
Peninsula Experts Get in Here Please,
bmwman91 said:
Honestly, just rent as close to work as possible. Highway 101 is a steaming pile of shit, morning or afternoon, either direction. While some parts of the peninsula have some appeal to me, the commute alone ruled out the possibility of settling there.
If you are into the outdoors, there is a LOT to do up on Skyline Blvd / Hwy 35. It is reasonably easy to get up there if you live down in the valley. In the summer, I regularly drive up there to do trail runs, climb and hike after work. Kayaking on the bay is also an option, although you do need some experience to handle the wind and chop in the afternoon. You also need to be careful of shoulder-deep mud muck along the shore. Outrigger paddling is a GREAT sport, the people are wonderful, and there are a few teams along the peninsula that you could check out.
Demographics...the peninsula is largely Asian and white. It is becoming increasingly Asian at a pretty quick rate. There are a LOT of foreign nationals buying RE along it, and either being absentee owners or sending their kids here for education. The white folks...plenty of nice people, and if you don't mind people that just look for "D" on election ballots and drive Priuses you'll be fine. The Hispanic population is mostly in East Palo Alto, and black people don't seem to have any real presence there.
I have lived in Mountain View for the last 5 years and it has been nice. However, I would NOT want to commute to Foster City every day from here, or Palo Alto. If I was renting and single, I would move to Foster City and leave when I took another job elsewhere. There really is not much to "do" along the peninsula other than hike, eat out and drive to SF if partying is your thing. If you were a software developer then I'd say that there are things to get involved in.
- On 21 May 2013
in
Fiserv - Moody's Case-Shiller Forecast - SFBA,
bmwman91 said:
the bust portion of the cycle starting around 2016.
That's an interesting stance. What will be the causes of this potential bust?
I don't want to put words into their mouths any more than I have, so I'll give my take on it. Basically, it looks like all of the various measures taken to bolster housing prices are working, and will continue to do so. Eventually, many owners will have enough positive equity that they will want to sell, and inventories will rise at this higher price point. Even with rates as low as they are now, there just are not all that many people that are qualified to mortgage a house at that price, given RESPONSIBLE lending standards (20% DP, 46% DTI or less). At that point, I see 2 possibilities:
1) House prices stagnate and drop. While it is plausible that owners will just de-list and send us back to nonexistent inventories, I think that there is a mass psychology factor there and lots of on-the-fence sellers will panic because the strong seller's market that started last year will suddenly look like a buyer's market, and they will want to cash out "while they still can."
2) Lending standards loosen up again and that propels the bubble to new levels. ARMs blow up in people's faces and we get another delightful melt-down.
I would bank more on option 1 than option 2 though. Maybe I put too much faith into Wall Street, but I don't see them repeating last decade's mistakes again so soon.
- On 21 May 2013
in
Fiserv - Moody's Case-Shiller Forecast - SFBA,
bmwman91 said:
You really can't follow things that well huh? Supply was at 9yrs in Cali at the time. Are you debating that? And we are all still very screwed. Except Concord and Phoenix people I guess, cause everything is so hunky dory according to the real estate bulls. Hope the Fed stays your friend long enough for you to lock in some of them magnificent gains you crow about non-stop.
Well, as long as the Fed holds on until mid 2015, I think that his plans will probably come to fruition. At least from what I recall reading here, iwog and SFace seem to be making moves based on the Fed pulling back around then, and the bust portion of the cycle starting around 2016.
- On 21 May 2013
in
Fiserv - Moody's Case-Shiller Forecast - SFBA,
bmwman91 said:
I told you in Feb 2012 that "you" were in the fact the demand and not know it or believe it. lol
Having the benefit of knowing how people think and react, the next wave of buyer will be exacly the same ones that lost their home in 08-11 and drive the market for another 3 years.
The fiserv chart has been amazingly accurate.
Yup. Once I started taking a serious look at buying, I realized that a decade of driving old cars and renting cheap apartments got my wife and I a lot more buying power than we had initially thought. I am just glad that I decided to accept yours, iwog's and E-man's posted facts about reality and make a move now, because I don't even want to think about having to compete with the last melt-down's repeat participants. Hindsight is 20/20 for sure, and I should have acted 12-18 months ago, but I'll chock up my recent "overpaying" to inexperience, and it won't really be an issue in a year anyway. Call it newbie's ignorance or whatever...the bear arguments have a lot more emotional appeal, but it is crystal clear that reality does it's own thing and people never learn.
Maybe I will even be able to make some money in the next cycle if I pay enough attention and keep emotion out of things.
- On 21 May 2013
in
Diamond Foods,
bmwman91 said:
Aaaaah Diamond. That was my first "real" engineering job where I worked as a mechanical engineering intern in the spring/summer of 2005. Back then it was just Diamond Nuts and the newly launched Emerald Nuts product line. My claim to fame there was designing the roasting line for the candied walnuts for McDonalds' new (at the time) Fruit and Walnut Salad. Food manufacturing was very interesting, not something that I wanted to do forever, but it was interesting to see how stuff goes before it hits grocery store shelves.
I got paid a whopping $12 per hour (plus overtime) and managed to completely support myself financially in wonderful Stockton, CA. Still had a little money left over for beer each month too lol.
- On 20 May 2013
in
Best real estate within drive from bay area?,
bmwman91 said:
Merced, CA. It is close to Yosemite and has great access to the Sierra. There is a good sized airport there, and if you are into aviation there is Castle Air Museum nearby.
- On 19 May 2013
in
Ground report from Cupertino,
bmwman91 said:
Yellow Alert: More and more houses showing up in Sunnyvale, and now in Mountain View. Three just put up for sale signs on my street this week.
Spring market, or are owners looking for the exits?
I have noticed an uptick in listings in MV too. My agent says that inventories are also increasing, although they are still only about 25% of the historic norm. I think that it is a combo of the spring/summer selling season bounce and prices rising enough from a year ago that some people want to capture gains. Most of what I am seeing listed are condos and townhouses, so maybe those people want to try to move-up into SFH's or something.
- On 19 May 2013
in
Is real estate bubble 2 showing some strain?,
bmwman91 said:
It has nothing to do with FHA. Those type of buyers will never even get a chance to bid on a house in this market. Unless it's grossly overpriced, and then the loan won't go thru because the house will never appraise. Unless you are a cash buyer or have a f-ton of money to put down you won't be buying in LA soon.
Houses under $600k are getting 20-30 offers right now. I put an offer on a house two weeks ago, $20k over list. The house went to a cash offer no inspection or contingencies, 40k over list.God help ANYONE looking in the sub-$600k market in coastal CA. Around here, everything in that range seems to go all-cash to investors. The $600k-$700k range is still rough as hell because it is expensive enough that investors aren't snatching those up quite as readily, but that's the range that most of the reasonably qualified buyers seem to be corralled in and duking it out with one another.
Every agent that I have talked to has said that a) FHA loans might as well be written on toilet paper, and b) they refuse to even work with FHA buyers. I'd say that FHA buyers have established a price floor at $729k (or whatever the FHA limit is in a given locality), but honestly FHA buyers are not even a factor right now with inventories being non-existent.
Based on my recent experience in buying a house, a would-be buyer needs to be ready and able to offer up to $50k over what they think a house can appraise for and pull ALL contingencies. This applies to "normal" neighborhoods, not nutty places like Cupertino and Palo Alto where you need $1M in cash or more. I am by no means advocating this wild behavior, but it is what it is for the time being and I generally agree with iwog that this price run-up will have momentum for a while (hell, it could still build more momentum if inventories don't increase). It is just simple supply and demand. If inventories went up 5x overnight prices probably would crash, but I can't see any reason for inventories to do that. I don't like it because a lot of my friends seem to be screwed, and I wonder what my younger sister will be able to do (she is 3 years younger though, so maybe by the time she is looking the next correction will hit). As for me, I don't give a shit what the house is worth ever again because the payments are manageable even on one income (if it comes to that) and I plan to be there for a hell of a long time. I suspect that a LOT of owners have re-fi'ed to under 4% and are thinking, "why would I want to sell and move-up when my payment just got chopped by 30%+, prices are rising and there's nothing for me to buy anyway?" That's a nasty feedback loop there!
- On 18 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
Took care of appliance shopping today. We went to Sears and got a fridge (top freezer), washer (high efficiency, which gets us a $125 rebate from Santa Clara) and dryer with the steam option which will save me some hassles with wrinkled shirts before work. All Kenmore brand, no extended warranties or anything. They are doing a 15% off of everything sale if you buy 2 or more major appliances, so that saved us a few hundred dollars. While it isn't exactly the most economical choice, this stuff should last us a very long time, and I can fix things if they do break.
Just for kicks we dropped by University Electric and looked at some high end stuff. $10k Sub Zero fridges...no thanks. Unless they can guarantee that food will taste better in one, it isn't my cup of tea.
- On 15 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
Yes, different strokes for different folks. I also don't build speakers that are more expensive than cars.
Haha well, it doesn't say much for the car lol. I have my demands from inanimate objects. The objects that I make those demands of are sort of unusual though, and the demands themselves are maybe a bit odd. Call it the curse of working in a field where you have to know how everything is made in intricate detail. When you see how things are made and where they come from, suddenly every single object in any retail store looks like the same gray crap with different tin foil decorations on top to hide the guts (this is most applicable to electronics and furniture). That's why, when it comes to things that I a) care about and b) know that I can't do better than a mass production line, I build it myself so that I KNOW that it was built with proper anal-retentive attention to detail and construction. It might not be the best, but at least I know that it can last long enough for my grandchildren to throw away when they inherit it lol. A fridge or stove...yeah, I am not going to be able to build a good one from scratch so I accept that I have to buy one. One that keeps my food from spoiling and doesn't give me trouble is worth $1000 or more to me since the cost is negligible over a decade. I am finding that fridges in the $500 range are either too small or seem to have a reputation for breaking, so my dreams of being the ultimate cheap ass might need adjusting.
- On 15 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
I hate the idea of living life demanding so little. (which is essentially inheriting other peoples garbage) Good luck thinking a vintage appliance are better than the new ones, lol. Good value yes, but not my idea of how to rationalize things.
I am not saying you need viking or subzero, but come on a $500 fridge? Yep a $3500 hood and a 500 refrigerator makes sense. It's like buying a BMW to just use the radio.
Different strokes for different folks. In the end it is the same thing as buying a used car. If you can answer "yes" the question, "does it do the job it was designed for" then chances are that you are getting all that you can really demand from it, whatever it is. I get the idea of feeling better about buying something really expensive because you can tell yourself that it is better, and I have done that myself (still do sometimes, with my heinously expensive custom car engine being a prime example...probably could have done it myself for half the cost), but eventually you have to draw a line somewhere...unless you are a millionaire in which case burning cash isn't a big deal. Some people really like to demand a high standard from material things, and some people really don't care. Anyway, as far as used things go, as long as they are clean, don't smell like anything that they shouldn't and are made from quality materials I don't see an issue. Personally, I like old stuff that was made with the intent of it lasting forever, versus new stuff which is generally made to be disposable. The disposability itself doesn't irk me all that much, but rather the fact that it reflects on how shallow America is. People seem to demand more from inanimate objects than they do from their relationships, themselves and their free time despite the latter three things more or less being the definition of "living."
You can still get really nice, well made stuff that may last a lifetime. It is super costly, but might work out to cost the same as a bunch of cheaper disposable stuff if you are OK with having it for a long long time. Nothing wrong with that.
Chances are that this could easily turn into a big philosophical debate lol. Too late, actually. This thread has been everywhere else, so why not?
- On 15 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
Interesting. Could one conceivably just disconnect the defroster and do it manually when needed?
- On 15 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
Most fridges have the same damned reciprocating compressors as they've had for eons. If you were to cut open most any fridge today you'd probably find about the same too: a big sheetmetal box either filled with expanded foam or sheets of Styrofoam. There's not really much to them. Often times what people are paying for is the nice stainless sheets on the front and maybe a few nice looking PCB-mounted pushbuttons. So yeah- go with the cheapest damned thing you can find. I know on Craigslist you can get a used one for next to nothing.
Well put. Yup, no point in dropping $$$ on one. We are capping our fridge budget at $500. My aversion to used ones is that the compressors are all sort of crap, and if the thing is only going to live 5 years I am not sure that I want to buy a 4.5 year old one. How hard are replacement parts to get, and how fast would the cost of parts exceed the cost of a fridge?
- On 15 May 2013
in
bmwman91's Buying Adventure Log,
bmwman91 said:
My advice on appliances, furniture, and whatnot is to buy used and cheap. IMHO, most appliances today are effectively crap with different brand badges stuck on. I actually went with the vintage appliance route and these are built like tanks. Plus I didn't pay more than $100 for each which included a stove, fridge, freezer, range hood, and so on. Furniture is the same. Most made in the last 20+ years is made out of crap as well. Particle board with some sort of veneer. All of my furniture is from the 20's-50's. All solid wood. None of the pieces more than $50.
Keep in mind you can always buy nicer stuff later. You now have the leisure of time. No sense in blowing a ton of cash right away when you're buying a house.
Good advice. We know that we are going the used route with our furniture. Luckily, I have built some of my own solid wood furniture and I can identify the particle board garbage that you mention. We are still looking around craigslist for considerable less expensive stuff than what her coworker is selling. At least that stuff is well made with "real" materials, although it is still a little pricey to me.
I'm with you on the inexpensive fridge thing. From what I can tell, they all have the same lousy guts and the cosmetics are all that really differs.
- On 15 May 2013
in
U.S. car use falls as younger generation shifts gears,
bmwman91 said:
Wow, no internet forum is immune to raging fixie debates, it seems!
I can appreciate the mechanical simplicity of a fixie, and the "fun" aspect of the challenge of being a proficient rider of one. At the same time, as someone that rides a road bike as his PRIMARY mode of transit 250+ days per year, I think that they are a lousy mode of transportation compared to a bike with multiple gears and proper brakes. Having no brakes makes them a particularly giant hazard on roads that you share with cars. Yes yes you can lock the rear wheel on a moment's notice, but your rear brake is vastly less useful than your front brake under 90% of road conditions. I literally do not use my rear brake at all except when it is raining and I am crossing a few known-slippery wooden bridges where I have had my front wheel lock and slide. You get the maximum stopping power on a bike when you are cranked 100% on the front brake and the rear wheel is just starting to lift off of the ground, and I can attest to that from some of my own panic stop-experiences. Honestly, a brake-less bike (fixie or otherwise) has no place on a road with cars. Bike paths and parks, sure no problem.
--------------------
As for the original post, I am glad to see this trend. I agree that adulthood in America is about getting OUT of your parents' house and being self sufficient, but anyone claiming that you need a car to be a "real" adult is a moron. I have found having a car to be indispensable, and it is 100% the reason why I went into engineering and why I have continued to study and learn technical subjects outside of my field. However, most people, many engineers included, don't give a fuck about their car beyond its ability to go from A to B so I don't think that cars are a necessity to keep people interested in STEM or anything. Honestly, biking beats the hell out of driving. Commuting made me hate people, all people, because it puts all of people's worst traits right up in your face: selfishness, lack of forethought, ignorance, lack of motor control, inattentiveness and just plain irrational behavior. Commuting generally made me a cranky person when I got home from work most days. Biking and running to and from work does not have that effect on me, and that is why I do it, not because it is "green" or saves me money (those are pluses, but I wouldn't do it for those alone).
I look at how so many people in my parents' generation have generally let their physical fitness and health completely deteriorate in the name of daily convenience and I want nothing to do with that. Maybe they are convinced that some diet or magic pill will make them healthy, but in the end the only real truth is "no pain no gain." Health is an investment and there is no substitute for hours of exercise each week, period. Sure, riding to work is vastly less convenient than driving, but giving up mental and physical well being in the name of a mere convenience is a really poor long term decision in my opinion (sadly it seems like the definition of "America" these days). And of course, if one lives too far to bike directly to work, there is always public transit which usually involves at least a good walk.
Anyway, this is coming from a kid born in 1984 which makes me an "old fart" of the Millennial generation. I don't know a whole lot of people that share my views enough to actually get on their bike and go to work, but most people my age agree that biking to work is "better" than driving. I am not up on some high horse where I'll berate someone for driving because it is bad for the earth or costly or anything because I'd drive too if those were the only drawbacks. It's the toll that commuting takes on your mind and body that gets me. Getting to a very high level of physical fitness really messes with your perception of things I guess, and I know that most people think that I am genuinely nuts / weird for being excited about moving further from work so that I can bike 7 miles each way. Different strokes for different folks I guess, but it terrifies me to think that I'd ever be in a condition where I couldn't run, let alone bike, 7+ miles without thinking twice about it. If you're in that condition then you know what I am talking about. It is probably the same kind of thing that happens to rich people as they make even more money; they worry even more about losing their money.