patrick.net

2 vanities, you mean the facet and surrounding areas? In the US, 2 sinks are pretty standard for new residential bathrooms, I've even seen it in 2nd bathrooms in newer townhouses.

I am, however, all for food handouts when an acute crisis is brought about by unforeseen events which are difficult to plan for–eg the recent tsunami in Asia. If conditions in a country are unsuitable for farming or other productive activities, then sending food is a waste. Better to let nature takes its course. The people will eventually solve the problem themselves or emigrate to a place where they can find a way to feed their families.

I agree. Natural disasters/Acts of God are one thing, but "disasters" resulting from colossal levels of human stupidity, aggression or government corruption & incompetence are quite another (Zimbabwe, Sudan, Myanmar, Chad, etc.). I see no reason to send my money overseas for it to be intercepted by and primarily benefit thugs like Robert Mugabe.

This is a house in my neighborhood - 965 HENDERSON AVE, 94086.

94086? I thought that is on the "wrong" side of Sunnyvale (school district). :)

BTW, that is also where I live now.

I smell short sales in the VERY, VERY near future…..YAY!

Perhaps you will buy it back for 600K at a future foreclosure auction. :)

Everything is scarce.

i don't think it is. you seem to be able to eat to the point of obesity and stay warm OK. man is able to easily accumulate a huge surplus these days, due to the benefits of industrialisation.

Otherwise, I wouldn’t have to work to feed, house and clothe myself. I could just swing by my favorite restaurant and order a complete meal–free! I could fill my closet with clothes–free! My landlord wouldn’t charge me rent! Where do I sign up for this world of abundance??

it's a struggle, isn't it? i dunno. just become bill gates and leverage other people's money... he hasn't had to work for a long time...

As for “luxuries” I suppose you mean things like cars, telephones, computers, plane trips, etc… These items may not be strictly necessary, from a survival standpoint. But they are kind of nice to have.

kind of nice to have. but you refute yourself then... hoist by your own petard...

scarcity is an illusion. it's not the right word to use at all, it's a classical economist's trick. you don't have unlimited access to unlimited things, but i think it's time to wake up and realise you have more than you need, and you are picking discretionary luxury items...

note the exclusive singular noun used in whenisitgonnaend’s post. Had to laugh.

It is about per person average. :)

Gates should get the spoils of the gamble he took. Had Gates failed then millions in taxes would have never been paid.

if gates had failed, then millions of others would've filled the void with other products, probably cheaper ones, as per open source... and they would've paid tax also...

i think he primarily gambled $50K of his parents' money buying DOS from someone else to onsell to IBM... we gamble more just in purchasing housing every day...

The man who invented DOS

"It's 1980, and the leviathan IBM calls on a rambunctious company near Seattle that IBM hopes can fill the software hole in its embryonic PC project. The young Microsoft can do it, but to close the deal, it needs a crucial element in the package: an operating system for a 16-bit machine. And it needs it fast. Microsoft acquires the rights to QDOS, 86-DOS officially, and licenses a version to their secret client, IBM.

Seattle Computer needed an operating system to sell with the new 8086 machines. Gary Kildall's Digital Research had provided the standard operating system, called CP/M, for earlier chip generations, but was overdue with software for the new processor. Paterson, tired of waiting, went to work to build his own.

"To get to that first version took about two man-months," Paterson recalls. "I worked on it about half the time over a four-month period," although by the time the original MS DOS 1.0 shipped with IBM a year later, he calculates his time investment "was more like six man-months."

Neither Paterson nor Seattle Computer knew who Microsoft's customer was until he was hired here in 1981. "IBM," he remembers thinking. "That's weird. Big computer company. Hope they do well." He reflects about this briefly. "I have no great ability to figure out where the future is going," he says.

Eventually Microsoft invested a total of $75,000 for 86-DOS. Both Microsoft and Paterson have fended off legal and professional challenges involving DOS -- Microsoft settled a contract dispute brought by Seattle Computer for $1 million in 1986. And Paterson has taken pains over the years to detail the originality of the 86-DOS program, despite a surface resemblance to CP/M."

Randy H,

I understand that there may not be an actual exchange of goods in the futures market, but the spot price of something physical and tangible is set in the futures market such as oil, pork, gold, frozen concentrated orange juice, and concrete. What I don't get are futures on such things as fed funds rate and housing. These vehicles represent perhaps intangible commodities, and as such, appear to me to be simply a vehicle to place a wagers on. Same concept as gambling. Do you see what I'm getting at. I may not be articulating my issue with housing futures as well as I should. What I need is a book called, Futures Market For Dummies.

Sean,

You and I have different starting points. I really believe towering individuals make history. History may turn out completely different if different people were driving it. In other words, history does not drive individuals. Let me guess. You like Hegel. (I don't know his stuff, but have read summaries of his thoughts. All second-hand, of course.)

For example, the Norman conquest of England might not have succeeded had the defending king (forgot his name, some nordic guy) rested a little before attacking William. The whole English history would have been re-written.

Had the Typhoon been delayed, the Mongolians might have conquered Japan. Well, 20th century would have been re-written.

The problem with housing futures is that there will be NO physical settlements. All settlements are cash only. The paper trades will be divorced from its underlying physical reality. Anything can happen.

Even though in the commodity futures market most settlements are cash only, physical settlement remains a possibility and a threat. That's why the silver nuts constantly talk about the COMEX default.

Of course, the exchange has ways around the default problem. It did it once in the silver crunch in 1980, by raising the margins for the LONGS.

The whole market is very crooked. Last night, I watched an hour-long expose of how naked shorts were permitted by SEC and how they ruined many companies. I do not want to share it, because I want to use the knowledge to my benefit. The more people who are ignorant, the better I can exploit the situation. Remember, I need to make 10 bil to support starving phycisists and mathematicians.

Sean,

Had you met Bill Gates, you might have had different opinions. What the media (books included) portrays (about anyone) is always incomplete.

I just saw on a message board: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-07-12-lebanon-israel_x.htm.

Escalation in the middle east. Gold is going back up.

BTW, a while ago, I did say Bernanke would bust Gold and Au did slid $200.

But His Honorable Bernanke cannot control geopolitical events. So Au is going back up. My estimate is $680-$720 the minimum.

Oil might break $80 this time. If it does, I will SHORT oil.

DS said:
scarcity is an illusion. it’s not the right word to use at all, it’s a classical economist’s trick. you don’t have unlimited access to unlimited things, but i think it’s time to wake up and realise you have more than you need, and you are picking discretionary luxury items…

You agree with me that you do not have unlimited access to unlimited things. In fact, you don't have unlimited access to virtually anything. I call that scarcity. You can use another word, if you like. But then we are just arguing about semantics.

Call it what you will, the fact remains that everyone can not have everything they want. Human wants are virtually insatiable. With the exception of a few Buddhist monks and hippies (who live peaceful, contented lives), and billionaires (who can't think of anything they can't have), almost everyone on the planet would like to have more of something that they don't have. Even most monks, hippies and billionaires probably aspire for something--enlightenment, a more peaceful, harmonious world, a good life for their kids, prestige, better health, etc...

You seem to imply that we should not want "luxuries." But why not? What's wrong with a little "luxury" (especially when you define luxury so broadly--ie anything but food, shelter or food-- that your concept of "luxury" includes things like central heating, indoor plumbing, electricity, phones, cars, etc....)

But wants are what keep us going and aspiration is what makes the world a better and better place over time. I agree that acquisitiveness and consumer materialism can be taken to unseemly extremes. But I would rather live in a society full of people aspiring for a better life than in a society of people who are content to stagnate.

I actually like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. I think they are honorable men, as opposed to most congressmen who are dishonorable. That being said, I think it would be wise of them to spend some of their money on infomercials; educating the public about toxic mortgages and letting people know that it would be a good idea to save some cash money for a rainy day. You never know when or where the next Katrina will strike, or when the big one will hit California.

You may have to fend for yourselves for 6 months or a year without a paycheck. And, don't depend on FEMA to cover your ass. Can you imagine someone like them urging Americans to save money, as opposed to spending more than we make, like we do now. I know I'm dreaming, but what if someone used their wealth and influence in public service announcements and commercials to promote good public economic sense. Using just some of their money in this way would be for the greater good of society. I can think of a lot more better ways of helping society than spending it all on vaccines and computers. If the did things like this with their money, I could care less about the government getting one red cent of their money in taxes.

You guys (Glen and DS) missed one crucial point. Karl Marx made the same mistake. It's not about attaining to some level of material comfort or survival. It's about being ahead of the next guy. Humans, especially males, have an innate desire to get ahead of others, to be number one. In the chimp kingdom, the top chimp gets to mate. We are no different. Therefore, there will ALWAYS be fights for dominant positions.

Mike, billg and Buffet will never do that. They are business people. They are not over the top like that Soros guy.

GC's Rule Number One: You never, ever go against the status quo unless you want to lead a rebellion.

GC's Rule Number Two: You can never win by dissuading the public away from their bad habits; they will hate you. It's better to preserve yourself so that you can do good to others in your remaining years.

GC's Rule Number Three: The society is never logical. Therefore, what seems to be the logical way is always abandonded by the society. Machiavelli once said [in Prince] that the world consists nothing but the vulgar. You cannot persuade nor enlighten the vulgar.

That is why I do not like giving to the poor.

You should read Alexis de Tocqueville's "Ancient Regime and the Revolution." The horror of the French Revotion -- by the way, few textbooks mentioned the real horrors of the Revolution -- occured after France obtained half a century of good growth, prosperity and rise of living standards for all. When the aristocrats started to care about their people, they found themselves at the guillotine.

That being said, I think it would be wise of them to spend some of their money on infomercials; educating the public about toxic mortgages and letting people know that it would be a good idea to save some cash money for a rainy day. You never know when or where the next Katrina will strike, or when the big one will hit California.

There is plenty of good, free (or cheap) prudent investment advice available to those who want it. You can read the shareholder letters of Warren Buffett and Marty Whitman, go to pennypincher websites, read prudentbear.com or even listen to Suze Orman (she tends to be pretty conservative, although I think she did buy into the HB a bit--haven't seen her show for a while). There is an entire industry (insurance) devoted to trying to get people to plan for disasters. Nobody wants to hear that they should spend less, pay down debt and save for a rainy day. They just want to learn how they can be as rich as Gates or Buffett overnight--without exerting any effort. That is why Robert Kiyosaki, David Bach, Jim Cramer, Robert Allen, etc. are so successful.

I actually like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet.

I do not know why many people do not like Bill. :(

In the chimp kingdom, the top chimp gets to mate. We are no different. Therefore, there will ALWAYS be fights for dominant positions.

Unless we all meditate and rise to the next level. ;)

Yes, I agree that human society is mostly about ranking. This is why I think our society is a zero-sum game.

They are not over the top like that Soros guy.

I also admire Soros for his success in speculation. But he is really over the top. What is he thinking?

GC, have you been going into my dreams and stealing my thoughts. :)

OMG, we should have sushi someday.

Peter,

Sounds good. When I visit BA, I'll let you know.

In the end, vast numbers of people will get what they deserve, being that we reap what we sow. I am a firm believer in, what comes around goes around. My thought process is on a much higher plain of conscientiousness than that of the animal kingdom. When I contemplate that which separates humans from animals, I see that we are made in the image and likeness of God. In the beginning there was the Father and the Word, as it says in the Bible. I correspond these two entities to the subconsciousness and the consciousness of man. We are godlike beings, which is why we should be better.

Mike,

I have some thoughts similar to yours. But they are not cast in religious light.

We (men) all have the same yearning: To be Number One and procreate. But only a few can ascend, due to differences in natural abilities and circumstances. However, we are all human beings as far as our natural inclination is concerned. That's why US opted for equity, not equality.

In some sense, had humans stuck to the animalistic philosophy -- that brute might makes right -- we would never have evolved.

It is precisely because we allow for other forms of dominance and superiority, i.e., intelligence, creativity, etc., that humans are able to conquer the earth, despite the fact that we are physically weaker than many predators.

An author pointed out that the human society has a built-in neotenic tendency and that our adults are really the child-like version of the great chimp and that that is the reason we are more curious and creative than the chimps.

But wants are what keep us going and aspiration is what makes the world a better and better place over time. I agree that acquisitiveness and consumer materialism can be taken to unseemly extremes. But I would rather live in a society full of people aspiring for a better life than in a society of people who are content to stagnate.

there's a whole other universe of thought on this out there, that you label you as absolutely blinkered, not aware of sustainability issues, as being mankind's own worst enemy. your definition of a 'better' life isn't necessarily everyone's. show me a large society of people content to 'stagnate' - that's a stupid straw man argument. however, my initial point is that homo sapiens sapiens lived in a similar mode for something of the order of 200,000 years without progressing significantly technologically at all, and it certainly didn't kill spell the end of the species... there are so many qualifications to what you say it just becomes meaningless -- when your PNAC neocon politicians use pretexts to claw more resources for one country, is that indicating a sustainable use of resources? is that progress? is that making the world a better place? is that a moral way for everyone to strive to do better? if you have to start stealing resources internationally to make ends meet, that suggests to me that the resource is starting to run out...

sometimes you just have to learn to want less, and realise that you actually have enough. needs and wants are quite different things.

I was in the same room as Bill Gates once. He and Ballmer and some small intense woman came in behind me into the lobby at Wired, where I worked. I was buying a meal card from the receptionist. The small intense woman tried to cut in front of me, proclaiming in a very self-important manner "We are from *Microsoft*!"

I turned and looked at the three of them and shrugged and went back to buying my meal card. I remember thinking "Wow, that guy kind of looks like Bill Gates. Even funnier, he is wearing a Microsoft shirt!" Microsoft was having a convention at the time at the Moscone center just a block away, but I didn't know it at the time. Right after I got my meal card and started heading to the cafeteria, Andrew Anker, the President of Wired Digital went running by me. I was wondering what the heck he was doing, so I turned around and saw him run up to Bill and shake his hand. Then I realized that the person I had been eyeing in line really was Bill Gates.

At that moment I thought about running up and spitting in his face, but I didn't. I kind of regret that I did not, actually.

None of us in the Internet world had much use for Microsoft and I still don't today. I think Bill Gates set back modern computing by at least ten years by foisting a buggy, poorly designed and inherently insecure product on the public and killing all the decent competitors with unsavory and illegal buisiness practices. If I could point to one person who has caused more total economic hardship to humanity in the last 30 years, I think it would have to be him. The potential of computers is so great and he has set us back so far.

You know all the spam you get in your inbox? You know all the crashing, slow, pop-up and virus infested computers that cause people untold grief and lost productivity? You know all the computer crime facilitated by the army of hacked zombie boxes? You have Bill to thank for all of them. We knew how to build secure computing systems back in the 90s, Bill was just in too much of a rush to crush the competition to do things right.

At least he is trying to do something good with his wealth now. I actually don't dislike the guy anymore, I think he is a decent human being who is doing the best he can.

But I still think he set back the human species quite a bit with his crappy O/S.

New thread: Police: Realtor® Murders Possibly Related

GC,

Geesh, I didn't think I'd agree with you much on human nature, but I think you hit the spot on the human desire to be one up their neighbors. I guess it's how we manifest our desire to do better. We can't really think objectively about how well we're doing, so we gauge it by checking out our neighbors.

One of the problems with our runaway consumerist society is that lots of well paid ad-men are trying to convince us that luxuries and useless trinkets are the norm and that we should have them. And boy is it convenient that the house ATM is open and we're getting so many credit card offers!

Jimbo,

Windows is buggy, but I think MAC would be nearly as buggy if it was more prevalent. The solution is to built a more robust infrastructure and make spamming cost inefficient. Maybe start charging a small fee (1 or 2 cents per piece) for unasked for email.

Jimbo,

I also don't use MSFT stuff much anymore, except my operating system (too lazy to install and learn Linux, bimonthly proclaimations to self notwithstanding). I do word processing on Open Office and most of my internet sites are either openware, labor of love, or google.

Still, I don't know if MSFT set back computing 10 years. (In fact, I had always posited the opposite, MSFT's stranglehold on OS and wordprocessing just lead creative people to focus on the internet, where hegemony was less likely and the cost of development was lower.) When did you think the lag time came?

BTW, I have no problem with Soros. He always viewed making money as a way to fund his writings. I also have no problem with where he's spending money. Peter P, what's your beef with him?

Also, whatever the good and evil perpetrated by tech companies pales compared to the damage by McD, Coke, and Pepsi. Their high fat, high sugar, hormone filled gunk is creating fat kids who'll have lifetime health problems. Or oil/mining companies...

BTW, I have no problem with Soros. He always viewed making money as a way to fund his writings. I also have no problem with where he’s spending money. Peter P, what’s your beef with him?

I admire him as a intellect, philosopher, and philanthropist. His books gave me a better understanding on bubbles.

However, I think philanthropy does not have to be mixed with partisan politics.

At that moment I thought about running up and spitting in his face, but I didn’t. I kind of regret that I did not, actually.

Huh? He has been by idol since grade school. I always think he should perhaps run for the presidency.

Peter P,

I guess our politics just differ a bit. A lot of rich men are partisan zealots on the Republican side, and they're often hypocrites to boot. Soros's political ideology seems coherent and consist for me. I think the Republicans have painted him into a more polarizing figure than he actually is.

Now, she hates me.

I have friends with multiple houses in CA and AZ. Now imagine.

Peter
Did you suggest to your friends that perhaps it is not the best time to buy?
Did they buy recently?

They have made money in RE before. Why would they listen to a JBR like myself? I did tried.

Did they buy recently?

Yes, some are recent but some are not.

But, because I wasn’t excited for her…just cautious…Blahhhhh!
I just can’t fake it!

I have learned to keep it real fake. :)

Here’s the worst part.
She USED to be a realtor….so of course she knows everything…..
She said her loan broker said it was a great deal…

My friend does BOTH real estates AND loans. :)

Just don’t want to see bad things happen to good people.

They will survive. Waking up from a dream is no big deal.