patrick.net

Dan8267 says

The American Pledge of Allegiance, like all pledges of allegiance to anything, are inherently wrong. Allegiance should be constantly earned, not given for the simple matter of being born into a tribe. The very concept of a pledge of allegiance is repugnant to any free thinking person. Ironically, the American Pledge of Allegiance is entirely Unamerican in every principle it demands others to pledge. What a disgusting work. I've always hated it.

AND YOU CALL YOUR SELF A CONSTITUTIONALIST ... OH THATS RICH !

Sounds like your against the US Constitution and therefore would not uphold our laws.
Your at odds with the founders of the this country..
NO..... ITS YOU WHO IS UNAMERICAN...

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

The oath of office of the President of the United States is an oath or affirmation required by the United States Constitution before the President begins the execution of the office.

The wording is specified in Article Two, Section One, Clause Eight:

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

leo707 says

For a little perspective...

Compare this to the Wehrmacht Oath of Loyalty in 1934 Germany:

"I swear by God this sacred oath that to the Leader of the German empire and people, Adolf Hitler, supreme commander of the armed forces, I shall render unconditional obedience and that as a brave soldier I shall at all times be prepared to give my life for this oath."

your not being truthful here...

Although the popular view is that Hitler drafted the oath himself and imposed it on the military, in truth it oath was the initiative of Defence Minister General Werner von Blomberg and General Walther von Reichenau, the chief of the Ministerial Office.

Indeed, Hitler was surprised by the oath.[1] Before Hitler took office, the military swore the Reichswehreid to the German constitution and president. The intention of Blomberg and Reichenau in having the military swear an oath to Hitler was to create a personal special bond between him and the military, which was intended to tie Hitler more tightly towards the military and away from the NSDAP. Years later, Blomberg admitted that he did not think through the full implications of the oath at the time.

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

When George Washington and all other presidents were taking the OATH of office,
were they also doing a Sieg Heil ? you so called Progressive Liberals are really screwed up ...

thomaswong.1986 says

your not being truthful here...

Why hello again here Thomas. Say, when you are done telling everyone all about hitler & such, you might want to circle back around to the "republican party in 10 years" thread since the ball is in your court. As a refresher:

1. You said SF suffered economic declines from 1960 til 2000, while SJ experienced economic gains during the same (1960-2000) timeperiod.

2. Your chart shows that from 1975-2000 home prices in both SF and SJ moved in lockstep. If home price is tied to economic performance, how is this possible? How can this be?

It was refreshing to see you initially respond to me in an honest and direct answer. However, as (i believe) you realized how at the end of the day you are going to have to back off of item 1 or 2 above, you went to your usual well of responding with tangential non-issue after tangential non-issue.

Thusfar, I have put each and every tangential non-issue into the asked and answered column and will continue to do so if necessary. That said, can you now address the central issue here? Feel free to respond to me here or in the original thread -- but in either event, good luck!

CDon says

1. You said SF suffered economic declines from 1960 til 2000, while SJ experienced economic gains during the same (1960-2000) timeperiod.

2. Your chart shows that from 1975-2000 home prices in both SF and SJ moved in lockstep. If home price is tied to economic performance, how is this possible? How can this be?

very simple SC/SJ didnt have a bubble mentality from 1960 to mid 90s.... you know of any bubbles in stock wages or home prices ?

Your stuck in this notion if someone made an extra 5-10% it went to housing when it actually went to savings..

its no surprise SF economy was declining since the 50s..and that continued into the early 90s.
normal jobs kept the prices flat adjusted for inflation. a home was just another home in SF and it wasnt anything glamorous !

thomaswong.1986 says

very simple we didnt have a bubble mentality from 1960 to mid 90s.... you
know of any bubbles in stock wages or home prices ?

I am willing to concede that too - put that too into the "asked & answered" pile, but again, sadly I think you are deliberately trying to skirt the issue here. In case that's not really whats going on -- in case you truly do not understand, lets try this a little bit differently below is part 1 of 3 yes or no questions.

1. Going back to your precious FHFA housing chart, home prices in San Francisco and San Jose move pretty much in lockstep from 1975 to 2000. Basically, when one went up, so did the other -- and when one went down, so did the other. I think this is painfully obviously correct, but I have to ask do you agree with this? Yes or No?

CDon says

1. Going back to your precious FHFA housing chart, home prices in San Francisco and San Jose move pretty much in lockstep from 1975 to 2000. Basically, when one went up, so did the other -- and when one went down, so did the other. I think this is painfully obviously correct, but I have to ask do you agree with this? Yes or No?

they were all pretty much flat up to 1998..didnt matter if you were a Govt paid Civil engineer or a Tech HW/SW Engineer. Home prices were not that radically different across much of Bay Area.

Would it surprise you to see a home of equal size in SF or SJ at around 150K ?

thomaswong.1986 says

they were all pretty much flat up to 1998

OK, so I think we are on the same page here, you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both flat for the 1975-1998 period. Yes?

CDon says

OK, so I think we are on the same page here, you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both flat for the 1975-1998 period. Yes?

and how long have you been in SFBA ?

I am not in the SFBA.

Again, if this is really really important to the overall discussion or theme of what you are trying to convey to us, I promise I will come back to this once we finish with my items 1-3. But in the mean time lets consider this asked and answered and move on.

So again, I think we are on the same page here, but I want to be sure. When you say, "they were all pretty much flat up to 1998" you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both flat for the 1975-1998 period. Yes?

From what city/state are you from ?

Arlington, VA.

Is that enough? Are you now ready to answer the yes or no question (part 1 of 3)?

I wanna answer parts 5 & 6, but then again i've always been a day early and a dollar ahead....

CDon says

Arlington, VA.

Is that enough? Are you now ready to answer the yes or no question (part 1 of 3)?

CDon says

Arlington, VA.

Is that enough? Are you now ready to answer the yes or no question (part 1 of 3)?

the answer for SFBA is the same as the answer for your region...mid Atlantic.

what can you tell us about your region..... same old song and dance..

http://web.archive.org/web/20110722134334/http://www.housingbubblebust.com/OFHEO/Major/MidAtlantic.html

thomaswong.1986 says

CDon says

Arlington, VA.

Is that enough? Are you now ready to answer the yes or no question (part 1 of 3)?

the answer for SFBA is the same as the answer for your region...mid Atlantic.

what can you tell us about your region..... same old song and dance..

http://web.archive.org/web/20110722134334/http://www.housingbubblebust.com/OFHEO/Major/MidAtlantic.html

Actually, no. Not in the slightest. See, I would never, never, NEVER suggest that any one of those areas was going through 50 years of economic decline, while one or all of the others were enjoying economic prosperity. Not with the way all those trendlines were moving in lockstep (basically all flat up til 1998). Granted, you could say some are underperforming or overperforming relative to the others, but they are all experiencing some modicum of economic prosperity. But again, we are getting waaaaay ahead of ourselves.

So again, just for absolute clarity, when you say, "they were all pretty much flat up to 1998" you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both flat for the 1975-1998 period. Yes?

CDon says

So again, just for absolute clarity, when you say, "they were all pretty much flat up to 1998" you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both flat for the 1975-1998 period. Yes?

take a look at the numbers... what do you think ? browse through the bottom of the chart and see the indexed numbers since 1975...

http://web.archive.org/web/20110722135954/http://www.housingbubblebust.com/OFHEO/Major/NorCal.html

CDon says

Actually, no. Not in the slightest. See, I would never, never, NEVER suggest that any one of those areas was going through 50 years of economic decline, while one or all of the others were enjoying economic prosperity. Not with the way all those trendlines were moving in lockstep (basically all flat up til 1998). Granted, you could say some are underperforming or overperforming relative to the others, but they are all experiencing some modicum of economic prosperity. But again, we are getting waaaaay ahead of ourselves.

over 50 years... of course many large cities saw a decline and continued seeing declines as many fled the cities for suburbia. no surprise to anyone.. has SF-Oakland done as well
as Santa Clara - SJ where money flowed for new construction and jobs..

drive down parts of SF and Oakland during the 80s-90s.. pretty dismal... not much in demand.

and yet in all of this.. prices were not out of sync...

we simple did not have this irrational mentality regarding Real Estate..

did people think and expect prices to appreciation double digit in decades past pre 1998.. certainly NOT.

Re: post #88, I say yes. In 1975 both SF & SJ index values were in the 40s and the differential between the two was approx. 4%

In 1998 both were in the high 200s and the differential between the two was about 6%. Granted they flip flopped (SF higher in 75, SJ higher in 98, but that's a pretty tight relationship between the two considering we are talking about a 23 year period here.

And in any event, looking at their values as shown on your chart. I think its fair to say they are both "pretty much flat". But honestly, this isn't about me. It is not my contention that SJ went through a 50 year period of economic prosperity while SF simultaneously went through a 50 year period of economic decline. But again, we are way ahead of ourselves here.

So now, again, one more time Thomas, just for absolute clarity, when YOU said "they are pretty much flat up to 1998" you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both pretty much flat for the 1975-1998 period. YES OR NO?

Anyway its now midnight out here on the east coast so off to bed for me. And as you can see I have been more than accommodating answering question after question from you in an honest and straightforward manner. So it is now your turn. Are you ready?

If so I expect to turn on my computer tomorrow AM, log into Patnet, and see an entry from you that says either

YES

or

NO

And once done, congratulations! You will then be 1/3 of the way through all the while displaying some (TBD) level of intellectual honesty and cognitive capacity to answer a question in a straightforward manner. So until the AM Thomas, good luck!!!

CDon says

If so I expect to turn on my computer tomorrow AM, log into Patnet, and see an entry from you that says either

YES

or

NO

And once done, congratulations! You will then be 1/3 of the way through all the while displaying some (TBD) level of intellectual honesty and cognitive capacity to answer a question in a straightforward manner. So until the AM Thomas, good luck!!!

You will need less patience waiting for the sun to go supernova than waiting for thomas wrong to give a yes or no answer.

CDon says

So now, again, one more time Thomas, just for absolute clarity, when YOU said "they are pretty much flat up to 1998" you are saying in sum, yes, home prices in SF and SJ were both pretty much flat for the 1975-1998 period. YES OR NO?

I do so much detest lawyers and govt bureaucrats..

you have your data.. and you came to the same conclusion.

You dont need my answer on that... you already figured it out.

its all about the irrational thinking...

http://www.youtube.com/embed/d__GPqOVNbE

bob2356 says

You will need less patience waiting for the sun to go supernova than waiting for thomas wrong to give a yes or no answer

it doesnt take much to see many on PNET are just locked into the RE bubble mentality...

and of course many others who are are in the RE industry...

perhaps "Y2K Bug" wasnt about some computer program spitting out gibberish..

it may well have been about the insanity of public greed which led to financial bubbles.

CDon says

2. Your chart shows that from 1975-2000 home prices in both SF and SJ moved in lockstep. If home price is tied to economic performance, how is this possible? How can this be?

you mean incomes to prices.. affordability index.. go look one up for that period...

thomaswong.1986 says

bob2356 says

You will need less patience waiting for the sun to go supernova than waiting for thomas wrong to give a yes or no answer

it doesnt take much to see many on PNET are just locked into the RE bubble mentality...

and of course many others who are are in the RE industry...

perhaps "Y2K Bug" wasnt about some computer program spitting out gibberish..

it may well have been about the insanity of public greed which led to financial bubbles.

Do we take that as a yes or a no? I do have to say I admire someone who can take gibberish to an art form.

bob2356 says

Do we take that as a yes or a no? I do have to say I admire someone who can take gibberish to an art form.

No gibberish.. No one in my area will benefit from higher home prices but only the vested interest... Realtors.. as if they ever gave a rats ass about anyone else... y

perhaps you and CDon need to look over this as well..you should ask why
Carl used the term "alarm" and "plague" to describe high home prices..

http://www.sfgate.com/business/ontherecord/article/ON-THE-RECORD-CARL-GUARDINO-2574540.php#ixzz1v6EFUJaI

Q: So are those really challenges?

A: Unequivocally, yes. Not only to the CEOs in the boardroom, but to any family you talk to in their living room. What we hear time after time from CEOs as well as frontline employees is how incredibly difficult it is to come here and stay here. That truly does have an impact on a company's bottom line when the cost differential is so much higher here than it is in other regions around the state, nation and globe, or the ability to recruit top talent is also impacted.

You mentioned housing. It probably is the top concern we hear about in Silicon Valley from both CEOs and employees in terms of local issues. Does that have an impact? Let me put a finer point on it.

Hewlett-Packard and Dell are the top two computer-makers in the world. Corporate headquarters for HP are located in Palo Alto and Dell is in Round Rock, Texas. Obviously, they both have people and facilities around the globe.

In those two communities where their corporate headquarters are and where a lot of research and development takes place, the median resale price for a home in Palo Alto is about $1.6 million. In Round Rock, Texas, it's about $180,000, except the home and property are bigger.

We hear from HP all the time that a huge deterrent to the ability to recruit and retain people anywhere near Silicon Valley is the housing issue. We don't hear that from Dell, which is also a member company, about their operations in Round Rock. It does continue to plague us and we will continue to sound the alarm.

thomaswong.1986 says

perhaps you and CDon need to look over this as well

Thanks, but no thanks. I have slightly less interest in bay area and/or CA real estate than in the epidemiology of toe nail fungus.

thomaswong.1986 says

you have your data.. and you came to the same conclusion.

You dont need my answer on that...

But I do. You see Thomas, in a lot of ways the data is secondary. In a lot of ways this is a simply proxy on your capacity for intellectual honesty. In this particular case, there appears (to many of us) to be a potential flaw in your logic - so in an effort to flesh that out, we ask you questions.

Thusfar, you seem either unwilling to address it, or (perhaps) unable to understand it. Thusfar, you flit between periods of calm rational discussion (now), and anger induced flailing (earlier) -- but at no point have you ever come close to answering the most simple questions asked of you.

So in this test for your capacity for intellectual honesty, you are failing -- and badly I might add. The reason why I have been so patient with you was because I figured you would either (a) eventually answer the question, in which case we get a bit closer to resolving some facts about the performance of housing prices in the bay area or (b) do exactly what you are doing, thereby further exposing you as someone unworthy of engaging in the hopes of having a real and honest discussion about anything.

Anyway, ball is back in your court Thomas. Part 1 of 3 is out there. If you want to address it by answering either YES or NO we can proceed to part 2. If you don't, we can continue to dance around it, as we have for the past two days, that's fine with me too.

CDon says

But I don't really understand the reason behind employing an argument style that looks to any third party who reads it as gibberish. Why would you take a position that makes you look so, for lack of a better term, dumb?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

freak80 says

CDon says

But I don't really understand the reason behind employing an argument style that looks to any third party who reads it as gibberish. Why would you take a position that makes you look so, for lack of a better term, dumb?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_effect

LOL. Someone else sent me the exact same link today!

thomaswong.1986 says

in the end .. all they say is... Hey Look at Me .. its About Me..

You know, there may be a modicum of truth to that. But what I find more interesting here is your response. It was direct - it was to the point. Why cant you always be like that?

Tell you what, we are pissing on a lot of threads here (you are currently back on the "republicans in 10 years" thread) so im gonna let you go here in the hopes you answer what I ask you on that other one.

Either way, I think I have proven my point here about who you are and what you are all about. Of course, that being said, if you want to actually try and build back some semblance of an honest responsible individual, go back and answer the simplest of "yes" or "no" question I asked you above.

The REAL Pledge of Allegiance should end like this:

One Nation, Under the Dollar, with Liberty and Justice for Those Who Can Afford to Buy it.