You playing with fire when you give the flight attendants any trouble, if they think your going to be a trouble passenger, they will ban you from the airline, And chances are if one airline bans you, others will quickly follow suit. Then your stuck with taking the bus next time you have to travel. What ever you do, don't piss off or get into arguements with the flight staff. .
Also at the end of 20 years, the solar company takes the panels back, you may have the option to buy them.
So let's recap there.
1. You lease the panels for 20 years, at full cost of the panels and at inflated price.
2. The solar company gets all the state and federal tax incentives.
3. At the end of 20 years, you still don't own the panels, but you may purchase them, probably at an inflated price, because what they really want you to do is sign another 20 lease. We gonna keep there suckers hooked.
4. Selling you house in the future will be difficult at best, you'll probably have to cut the price of your house to sell.
5. From what I'm reading customer service is horrible, not to mention shoddy workman ship, the net is full of stories of systems systems incorrectly install, NOT generating electricity and still on the hook for the monthly lease payments,
Honestly I don't like there business model, I can't help to wonder if people will wise up and it will adversely affect there bottom line. Not to mention what happens if the rebate is allowed to expire. There basic business model is:
They lease the panels to you, you pay a monthly lease fee
They Over estimate the amount of power the panels will produce, so your electricity saving are not as rosy as they claim they are.
The cost of the panels are inflated, so your not getting a deal on the panels, your paying a premium for them.
They keep the 30% tax rebate
If you want to sell you house in the future, the new owners have to assume the lease on the lousy deal you brokered. I'm sure it's going to affect real estate values, after all if you have a choice between two houses, one with a lease panels to deal with and one without, which would you pick?
Overall it's a lousy deal for the homeowners, Now if you installed your own panels and you own them, it's a different story. You get the 30% tax rebate and the panels will add value to your house, not subtract. Not to mention if you take a loan out to pay for the panels, they will continue to produce electricity years after the loan is paid off. Solar Panels could last 50 years or more if not damaged.
I have a John Deere X300 riding mower, it was worth it weight in gold a few years ago when I had 6 big snow over a two winters. If your going to get a riding mower, do yourself a favor and get one that costs at least $3,000+, those low end mowers from Lowe's or Home Depot are junk.
This setup saved me in a pinch before I had a real plow, did my 150 Foot long driveway with it, I ended up getting a real plow for it a few snow storms later.
This story really means nothing. You could assume she's shop lifting because she's a down on her luck realtor, but the reality is some people just like to shoplift, some find it a thrill to get away with stealing, even if they can easily afford to buy the merchandise in question. Most of the time the people who shoplift and easily afford to purchase what they steal, but they get a high from shop lifting. And the odds are in there favor, the majority of shop lifters get away with it. Chances are this realtor has been shop lifting for years, but if you do something often enough, the law of averages will catch up to you.
This housing bubble has some fundamental differences than the last one. I don't know where all this money is coming from to buy these houses, but it's not from banks lending it to unqualified home buyers. So long as there are renters willing to rent the properties investors are buying, often at ever increasing rental rates, I guess the "end" or pop will be when rents are too high for renters to afford. Vacant properties equals loses to investors, which will force a end to rising prices. Not a collapse however, more of a market price stabilization. Once prices drop to a point investing makes economic sense again, investors will rush back into the market, which will prevent a housing market collapse like we had before.
I'm not sure how we got on the subject of cars from office space, but what the hey. $10,000 is a heck of a lot of gas. The average American drives 10,000 miles a year, at 35 mpg, that's 285 gallons of fuel a year. at $4 a gallon, that's around $1,100 a year. So your talking 9 years to pay for that premium in price of your natural gas car, and that's not even including the cost of Natural gas, at $2 a "gallon" of Natural gas, your car is going to have to last you 18 years, just to break even.
It's a nice dream cheaper fuel, but it doesn't add up in the end. Of course if gasoline prices spike to $10 a gallon in the future and Natural gas prices hold steady, it might make economic sense, but with all the new oil wells in the United States producing oil, I don't see prices spiking anytime in the next 5 years.
I highly doubt there are sufficient tenants to occupy such a building in Saudi Arabia, the building of skyscrapers in cities like New York was a necessity due to space limitations, not because they look pretty. In Dubai, office building’s occupancy rates are less than 50%. There’s no good economic reason to be building more buildings in Dubai, and I’m sure the same holds true in Saudi Arabia. New York in contrast, office space occupancy rates are at least 90%, and residential apartments are even higher, at 99%. Sure they can build it, but I believe it’s economically irresponsible to do so. Building an excess of office space isn’t going to solve Saudi Arabia’s future economic stability when there oil runs out.
She was ordered to pay $2.389 million in restitution, but those victims will never see that money. Hell it's not easy to earn 2.3 million when you have a successful business, and she going to with a conviction on her record, her business and credibility destroyed?
Snowden was a fool. In the end he will end up in a federal prison for the rest of his life. No country wants to accept him, he's a liability, not an asset. He has no state secrets to bargain with, he already gave them all away. He doesn't have any money either. if he was independently wealthy, I'm sure some Country would accept him, but without money, who is going want to support his lazy ass once he arrives? Another state welfare case?
I don't feel sorry for him, it's no great revelation to me that the NSA records Americans conversations without there knowledge. The NSA doesn't care whose cheating on who or what pretty crimes they committed, they are interested in terrorists and other threats to our country. When NSA recordings of American conversations without court orders are used to court as evidence for petty crimes people committed, THEN I would get very concerned.
Huh? The poor are stealing from the middle class. Me and my wife have the child of an unemployed prostitute drug addict. We are the foster parents for the child and would like to adopt her. The deadbeat mother got a free apartment from the state, free drug treatment program and free medical care, and she still doesn't work! At least nothing reportable/taxable. And your telling me THEY are being ripped off? Give me a break.
I know someone that was unemployed for two years. He couldn't afford medical insurance and was told that if your an illegal immigrate, you can get medicare, But if your a American citizen, tough luck. This country is doomed to collapse under the weight of it's social programs to the undeserving.
Mortgage owners: You pay for 30 years, pay taxes, HOA, fix everything, and after all that you own an old box. Better make sure your job is stable.
The difference here is that old box can be worth quite a bit of money. Some of those old boxes in Redwood City, CA are worth over 600k for a 3 bedroom, 1 bathroom, 1,000 sq ft house. When you rent you end up with NOTHING after 30 years. Rents are $2,500 in Redwood a month, but property taxes are under $800 a year for property owners. It true owner get shafted compared to renters the first years of ownership, but in the end it's the owners that are Far better off.
Looks like there money to be made here. Just open a bank and charge a higher interest rate for loans to questionable industries (porn, legalized pot, strip clubs, gun shops, drug dealers, distributors of low yield nuclear weapons, etc). If there's money to be made someone will fill the gap. Hell I would if I had the resources to do so.
Bank of America foreclosed on the house after the bank lost a $27,777.85 cashier’s check Thomas had sent in an effort to save the home.
I can't help to wonder if there isn't a certain amount of fraud here to. Let's say your a realtor investor looking for places to buy, if you get yourself a friend in management that works in a bank could give you a heads up what owners are behind on there payments, well before it listed on a pre-foreclosure website. You take a good look at the properties and decide what are the most desirable to make you the most profit. Now you tell your friend do everything in there power to help the owner get foreclosed on. "lose" paperwork, lose "payments", refuse to help the owner work out a deal with the bank, etc. After the bank foreclosures, you buy the property at a steep discount, re-sell it for top dollar, give your friend a taste and it's on to the next score.
"He took out a $411,200 loan in 2009 to buy his San Ramon house. He was making regular monthly payments of $1,796.40 a month. But in January 2012, Thomas realized the payment on his fixed-rate mortgage had jumped to $3,197.70. The bank gave him no explanation."
Actually I don't understand how the court could have allowed the foreclosure to proceed. You can't change one side of a contract and claim database errors, screw the 27k missing check, any contract law lawyer should be able to make a case to sue Bank of America for loses and damages.
"... he agreed to sign over $353 a month of his $1,033 monthly disability pension for five years in exchange for $10,000 in cash up front. Those terms, including fees and finance charges, work out to an effective annual interest rate of more than 36 percent. After Mr. Govan belatedly did the math, he was shocked."
Same Shit, Different day. Don't people have the forethought to do the math BEFORE they sign? I really can't feel sorry for someone too stupid to protect themselves.
Total expenses ............................................ 4,049
Net loss......................................................... (443)
Subtracting the three BS fees, you still are running a loss, just not as big loss.
Depreciation and amortization.................2,003
Advisory management fee - affiliates .....2,159
General and administrative....................... 881
Actually looking at the number, Property operating and maintenance seems really high as well. I wager that a lot of these expenses are one time costs when setting up the fund, next year costs should go way down and they should be able to turn a profit.
Frankly the offerings of LED lights have been somewhat pathetic so far. The brightest LED lights are 1780 Lumens (a measure of brightness), CFL's on the other hand go as high as 11,000 Lumens. I have a couple of lights in my garage that are 8,500 Lumens, really brighten up my workshop, they are equivalent to 500w incandescent bulbs. (but only use 100 watts) LED's might have a place in replacing common 60 watt bulbs, but they are not a serious choice if you really want some bight lighting.
I'll repeat what I said in the other thread. Do not underestimate the extreme power of the billions on Wall Street applied to SFR rental properties.
The new REITs and ETFs will use scale to be more efficient and earn more money than traditional small landlords. Substantial tax benefits will also be passed to investors and because they are dealing in cash, the new class of Wall Street landlord will not have any interest cost.
This isn't an after-bubble. This IS the main bubble with the 2006 peak being a foreshock. I believe my bubble model will apply here and we'll see a peak in about 4-5 years.
The problem with Wall Street is they can't get enough of a good thing. The original idea of combining mortgages into lots to spread the risk and selling them off to investors really wasn't a bad one. It was when wall street continued to demand more of these investment funds, that someone was more than happy to package up crappy mortgages sell them to hungry investors. I see the same thing happening here. Investors will hear about the good returns this type of real estate investment fund yields, they will demand more funds created, to meet demand someone will just throw them together, AAA rated, poorly planned and investors will happily buy the funds, only later realizing they were sold crap that will lose them money.
Later rating companies will make excuses that did not have enough experience rating this new type of investment, that why everything was AAA++ rated.