patrick.net

DinOR - thanks, for enlightenment - I figured these guys are all selling this stuff and chopping it up and selling it again and that somehow it gets in with what I would think were safe investments - but I guess we'll still be hit as I'm sure the funds own insurance company stock too. I only have bonds, because it is recommended - but I'm not sure that they are worth having - maybe in the long long run I will be glad, but right now I'm not sure they are worth having with a retirement 30 odd years away.

I can't actually envision not being hit by this train wreck - if insurance companies get hit - then they will just up everyone's premiums on everything to pay for their risky gambling in other areas. If they are publicly traded then you can bet mutual funds are into them as "safe" stocks. If pension funds (especially state) get hit, then they will have to get the money from somewhere to support the pensions - increase taxes to bail everyone out?

DinOR :

The sense of vindication is, well……. intoxicating! (Hick’) :)

Oh yes. I am generally long on stocks - Never shorted a stock, but did buy puts on occasions when I thought the market is overbought in the short term.

But in this case, seeing one billion of market cap evaporating in mere 2 days is more vindictive than seeing Colts finally win it. One BILLION US$ in such a short time. OUCH OUCH OUCH.

Claire,

Actually StuckinBA has a good point. PIMCO has more than "one" fund. But like every firm they have their "flagship fund" and for PIMCO that would be the "Total Return Fund". It's first in their product placement and what their wholesalers "lead" with to secure 401K business so I apologize for the assumption.

(I swear these guys have the fund fact sheet "stapled to their forehead" when they walk into your office!) Meaning if you distract them in the slightest you've thrown them totally off balance.

StuckinBA - yes I like Vanguard too - why can't 401k's offer Vanguard - let me guess they don't give any kickbacks to the 401k "managers".

Claire,

Here is a link to an old (1925) article introduction that has people questioning why the US government didn't retain more land initially and let it as leaseholds in order to keep speculation/land values lower.

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=1548-9000(192507)1%3A3%3C322%3ATPLSIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5

We really don't see too many leaseholds here. In upstate NY they had vacation cottages on Iroquois land, and when I was about 18 the 99 year leases expired and the Iroquoi told the people to take their cottages and go. Of course some people sued, but they didn't have a legal leg to stand on and they had to leave.

DinOR - Hope you don't mind.....but,

this is what I hate about our "Plan" - all the names of the funds are "slightly" changed so you do not actually know what you have and no way of tracking prices - the PIMCO one is PIMCO Total Return Admin - I'm guessing it is the one you refer to. Also offered are Maxim Bond Index, Maxim Loomis Sayles Bond Portfolio, Maxim US Government Securities Fund, and Lord-Abbett Bond-Debenture A - and then they charge fund operating expenses on top - but you never see a $ figure.

SF Woman,

I believe that some builders in Inland CA are trying to sell leaseholds, it's possible they are trying them elsewhere.

Claire,

I happen to have a lot of respect for Lord Abbett and Loomis Sayles. At least when you call them (in Jersey City, NJ) they're right on top of it. Great service, decent returns.

NIA

I think there is a lot more rental stock in the core Bay Area now than 2000, precisely because many companies saw the rental frenzy and started building like crazy. So rents will not go up as much.

One of the rental complexes I lived in 2000 got converted into a condo complex. It's not clear to me that rental properties have grown in number. :(

Claire,

I can't see why anyone would want to buy a leasehold house in the US, unless they wanted a specific site on BLM land or something. It's not like it's London, where freeholds aren't common.

I guess it's cheaper, and people figure they'll be dead before the lease is up, so they don't care.

I guess trailer parks are mostly leaseholds. I have read about $2 million trailers in Malibu, I am going to suppose that's all land value.

Commercial leases can be quite long term and can be quite valuable (or detrimental) to a company's bottom line. Often times, long term RE leases will be the most valuable thing in a business bankruptcy.

SFWoman,

I know, I know, but that would be one way to revive the market for the REIC, right? I would not buy a leashold myself, but I'm sure if they put the right spin on it, they could sell anything, they certainly managed to sell all those toxic loans didn't they?

DinOR - thanks, maybe I will look at it all again closely, my problem is that they add on this extra component "Maxim" to some of the funds which in the small print are managed by sub-advisers and "they are not directly related to any mutual funds" and "their preformance may differ substantially" - that makes me more wary.

OT, but interesting:

Which Sci-fi/Fantasy character are you?

http://sqt-fantasy-sci-fi-girl.blogspot.com/2007/02/i-love-these-things-so-sue-me.html

Sorry - didn't mean to drag it all back to finance, but I am still trying to learn it all, most of all my other fund picks are doing really well. Not had the courage to actively trade though (plus I don't have a huge amount that I could invest and be happy about loosing anyway). I keep thinking the whole market (stock) will tank when the housing market gets real bad.

Peter P -

Samwise Gamgee apparently

Samwise Gamgee apparently

I got Harry Potter. Interesting...

When I moved to the bay area from the east coast in 2000, my wife's then company actually hired someone to help us find an apartment! And he drove us around to 15 or so apartment complexes and at the end of the day we could find none with a vacancy.

In fact, some landlords would chase us away even before we parked. Luckily we found something a couple of days later for the low price for just $1750 (2 BR 2 BA) in Santa Clara.

To go back to the original question, I think renters should be allowed to turn around and subrent their apartment. When everyone starts doing this for a higher cost, it would be touted as an investment opportunity and banks would start lending to people to do just that. Bad credit, no problem.

Soon, everyone will be renting $10,000 a month studios even though they cannot afford it because they can always rent it to someone else for more!

What would be cool is if all the renters got together and formed a renters strike. All the renters could then move out of the state for the rest of the year and come back in 08' to claim your pick of the distressed FB's properties. I think that would speed things up considerably!

@EBGuy,

Re the age restriction on gifts to children: That was written with old rules in mind. Investment income for children 13 and under has had to be taxed on parents' return for donkey's years. The age limit has now been changed to 18. Write your Congressdroid and thank them.

Sriram Gopalan Says:

> I think renters should be allowed to turn around
> and subrent their apartment.

Most apartment leases prohibit subleasing, but it is hard to stop it. Many renters in San Francisco make thousands every year renting out rent control apartments and Berkeley has even more “Tenant Landlords” making money by subleasing rooms or their entire apartments…

On another note entirely, my wife, sick and tired of cold and damp, decided we had to get away to sun and warm. I suggested getting in the car and driving south randomly until we encountered same but, instead, she has booked flights to Lost Wages.

I don't gamble - unless the odds are hugely in my favor, in which case it's not exactly gambling, eh? - and I'm not much into spectacle. All suggestions for worthwhile entertainment are welcomed.

I do figure I could have a lot of fun visiting desperate realtors or condo projects. I have cash. I could write pretty substantial offers without financing contingencies but only at lowball prices. What's a decent haircut? 40% off asking? 60% off asking?

In fact, some landlords would chase us away even before we parked. Luckily we found something a couple of days later for the low price for just $1750 (2 BR 2 BA) in Santa Clara.

Wow... I wasn't as lucky in the year 2000. I ended up paying $2000 with a 2 year contract for a 1.5/1.5. :(

"Which Sci-fi/Fantasy character are you?"

Yoda.
---
eburbed - I had a nice 2br in MV for $2000 back in 2000. I pay less than that now for an even nicer place in a better neighborhood.

Yesterday I said:
Don’t forget to do this with appreciated stock. Then the little ones can sell in 2008-10 and get the gains tax free. (see Anthony’s post above).
Then StuckInBA asked:
Interesting. What if they already own the stock ?

To follow on further to Punchbowls reply, if the childs unearned income is above $1700, the parents tax rates apply (this is, I believe, the "kiddie tax"). So you (well, your child) may be able to get away with selling the stock in small bits from 2008 to 2010 to keep the earned income (cap gains) under the limit. Not much help if the stock is greatly appreciated.
All this is giving me a headache. Anybody want to give a plug for the best state 529s....

Definitely NTA.
See below for more info on kiddie tax changes:
http://www.smallbusiness.adp.com/accountants/newsletter/af_sept06_2.asp

I would probably be Ford Perfect, with just a touch of Marvin.

Punchbowl, Zion and Grand Canyon are both within a few hours' driving of Los Vegas. If you don't mind the cold and enjoy communing with nature alone, that's certainly a possibility.

ubermonkey Says:

> FormerAptBroker, In a more charitable interpretation,
> gentrification also often implies ethnic/cultural changes
> in a neighborhood. When a group starts being pushed
> out by higher land values.

I often hear people say that we need to stop gentrification so long time residents of the area will not get “pushed out”. Homeowners in California can not get “pushed out” since property taxes have nothing to do with land values. In San Francisco and Oakland rent control prohibits landlords from “pushing out” long term renters and the value of the land has almost nothing to do with the rent the landlords can charge…

> often long-established social institutions (churches, nightclubs,
> service organizations, specialty stores, etc.) are driven out
> early and are replaced by ones that are unfamiliar or hostile
> to the existing group.

With rare exceptions participation in “Long Established Social Institutions” have been dropping since the turn of the century (the book Bowling Alone talks about this). With the exception of a few Asian families and maybe a black family or two the area I grew up in on the Peninsula has not changed much yet attendance at all churches is down and most “service organizations” have all but died (most Catholic parishes used to have chapters of the Ancient Order of Hibernians, Knights of Columbus, Catholic Daughters of America and Sisters of Mary Immaculate and now they struggle to just keep the lights on). Like the rest of the country chain stores are replacing the little local stores in record numbers…

I would probably be Ford Perfect, with just a touch of Marvin.

Did you take the test?

http://www.tk421.net/character/

Marcus Cole. I have no idea who he is. :-?

But then I was never a SciFi person. My introduction to it was Foundation Trilogy. Became a fan of Asimov. The original Trilogy is on my list of best books ever. But nothing else came even close. I wasn't impressed with 2001 Space Odyssey (book) and thought other books by ACC were just OK.

Liked Start Trek, but after TNG, everything else seemed so ordinary. I have given up on SciFi TV series completely.

I am a big Star Wars fan. But I thought Fifth Element was quite idiotic. I shocked my friends by saying it and they shocked me by getting shocked.

I simply dislike fantasies. Except LOTR - which I think is awesome.

So I am not that Marcus Cole - whoever that it is. I am "love one, nothing else" person.

I always loved SciFi.

I never liked Star Wars though, so you can hate me now.

Star Trek was my favorite, until I have found Serenity.

I do not like the idea of a hero (or a small group of heroes) saving the world (or the universe). It is just too ... you know.

For this reason, I did not fall in love with Star Wars and 24.

Punchbowl :

What’s a decent haircut? 40% off asking? 60% off asking?

Aren't you concerned that they might actually accept your offer ? ;-)

Well, it looks like I'm Data. :(

SIBA: Except LOTR - which I think is awesome.

Tried Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast trilogy?

Aren’t you concerned that they might actually accept your offer ?

Most certainly. But, at say 60% off and no leverage, how bad could it be?

If I buy two, will that screw up the comps for everybody? LMAO.

Peter P,

Hate is a very strong emotion. I reserve it only for terrorists and criminals of worst sort. (No I do not _hate_ REIC.)

And you like food, and you are not vegetarian ! So we have something in common.

On other things, I think it makes sense. I like 24. So there is a pattern here.

Tried Mervyn Peake’s Gormenghast trilogy?

Never heard of it. Will google it.

If I buy two, will that screw up the comps for everybody?

Try the anti-fraud technique. Buy it for cash and less it for less to your wife. Then she will turn around and sell it for even less back to you. All cash transactions. That will definitely stir the pot.

What is LOTR?

Hate is a very strong emotion.

Hate is not as strong as fear though. ;)