patrick.net

I would buy gold to preserve my capital if I were rich. The government borrows and spends $140 billion more each month than it takes in with taxes. The dollar has fallen, and debt has been increasing. I don't know how high gold and silver will go, but I can't see why they would collapse until the government stops being so irresponsible. Historically the US went off the gold standard so it could spend money it didn't have.

fyi: on channel 7 today they mentioned that the boomer generation is starting to downsize to a more affordable lifestyle since many saved too little for retirement.

my advice bud, don't end up like that.... don't spend all your money on a housing structure you may end up regretting knowing that you wasted 30 years of your life paying for and not living a life being free.

Poll reveals baby boomers' retirement fears
Many baby boomers in poll see financially shaky retirements, and many expect to keep working

Despite the worries and dearth of savings cited by many, only about a third of boomers say it's likely that they'll have to make do with a more modest lifestyle once they retire. Only about 1 in 4 expect to struggle just to pay their expenses.

ChrisLA says

fyi: on channel 7 today they mentioned that the boomer generation is starting to downsize to a more affordable lifestyle since many saved too little for retirement.

Wont be sticking around CA, migrating out of the state. This is what i have been seeing over the past 10 years. Many sold at peak and will living off the gains and still working in FL, SouthWest or NorthWest. Gains go far in cheaper areas.

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

Most of the boomer assholes will just have to blow their brains out once they are sued by the hospital for medical expenses that they’ll have to pay for cash when medicare is eliminated by President Pawlenty and all health insurers drop everyone over the age of 34.
Ha!
Hahahahahahahahaha!
Hahahahahahahahahaahahahaha!
Fox News can have it as a feature at the end of every broadcast.
And today another sorry fuck has come up against his own sorry indolence and hatred of prosperity and failure to acquire the dynastic wealth required to buy a hospital. After this commercial message. . .

Zing!

thunderlips11 says

f the government hadn’t stepped in to save the banks from their own bad decisions by dumping cash by the trillions on them, a huge number of banks, including big players like Bank of America, Citigroup, etc. would not exist today, and their shareholders wiped out.

That would have been capitalism. Smaller, more risk-adverse banks would rise to take their place, the ones that had handled the bubble by lending conservatively.

The government let bankruptcy happen to most of the homebuyers, however.

So two supposedly equal participants in a transaction got very different treatment.

I never liked how they did the bail outs. That wasn't right. Although I still do not see why people who over-borrowed need the same treatment. Wouldn't that be essentially making the same mistake twice?

What kind of wine was that with the dinner? :)

Would you like fries with that order?

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

3 Truck stop budget fellator

Sigh... I BELIEVE it is spelled fellatiator and NOT fellator. I have not checked the OED on this though.

And why the fuck can't I vote eighteen thumbs up on this post???

ChrisLA says

fyi: on channel 7 today they mentioned that the boomer generation is starting to downsize to a more affordable lifestyle since many saved too little for retirement.
my advice bud, don’t end up like that…. don’t spend all your money on a housing structure you may end up regretting knowing that you wasted 30 years of your life paying for and not living a life being free.

you know there are certainly worse fates in life than having a house. it really isn't the end of the world.

MarkInSF says

kc6zlv says

The problem I have with it is that it has the potential to allow people to pay very little in taxes based on their income. Someone in another town where land is cheap could open a business making 50 million a year in revenue and pay the same taxes as someone making $30,000 a year with a home where the value of land is high.

You’re going to have a tough time attracting talented workers to your $50M/yr company in the Boondocks. If you succeed and the company is successful, the wages, and hence rental value of the land is going to go up.
And what is somebody making $30K doing living where the land value is high? If they did, they would be living in an apartment building, where the the tax is very low per person since you’ve got so many people on a small plot of land.

There are quite a few people who will move just about anywhere for jobs. Look at the places WalMart has located some of their distribution centers.

There are more people earning $30K in expensive areas than you think. They may have inherited property or money and bought property. They may have purchased the property well before the prices went up.

Here’s a description of the court case that led to property taxes being taken away from the areas they are collected:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serrano_v._Priest

On the one hand, I can see that people are much more amenable to paying property taxes when it goes directly to their local schools (and therefore supports local property values). But on the other hand, it seems unfair that kids in poor areas should get crappy schools. Bad way to start out life.

It’s kind of like taxpayers said “well, if we have to share with poor districts, then we’re not paying property taxes.” So California schools went from near the best to near the worst, tied with Mississippi. Except in rich neighborhoods where fundraising drives raise money that stays in the local school district. Since it’s basically private funding of public schools, the state can’t touch that.

Documentary about it: http://www.aypf.orgbriefs/2004/fb010804.htm

All property taxes in California stay within the county they are collected in. As far as I know it has always been that way.

California's problems with education have a lot more to do with other factors than funding. Throwing money at education isn't going to solve the problem with culture-demographics. Many school districts are wrestling with ESL issues. There is also an attitude that sitting down in a classroom and learning is "acting white." There are many other issues. The amazing thing about it is there are Asian kids going to some of these schools who seem to do just fine. This should really be a big fat clue that it isn't all about money.

The Donald's campaign slogan should be,
"It's time to flush"

2 is good. rest are too softie.

toothfairy says

ChrisLA says

fyi: on channel 7 today they mentioned that the boomer generation is starting to downsize to a more affordable lifestyle since many saved too little for retirement.

my advice bud, don’t end up like that…. don’t spend all your money on a housing structure you may end up regretting knowing that you wasted 30 years of your life paying for and not living a life being free.

you know there are certainly worse fates in life than having a house. it really isn’t the end of the world.

Getting trapped in a forest fire is worse, but that's an act of nature that sometimes can't be avoided. Fiscal irresponsibility however is a human invention and can easily be avoided with prudence. Whats your point exactly?

The "Birther" movement is spreading. I heard a rumor that even Clarence has joined their ranks.

ChrisLA, if you are worried about being trapped than you should never buy a house, never get married, never have kids, never buy a car and definitely don't even have a 9-5 job because that is the ultimate trap.

I am totally in favor of the Teahadists and Birthers purging any moderate photogenic elements of my former party.

Go!

SubOink says

ChrisLA, if you are worried about being trapped than you should never buy a house, never get married, never have kids, never buy a car and definitely don’t even have a 9-5 job because that is the ultimate trap.

Please don't pull out Taputu like naive arguments that world is either black or white. I'm simply advising against 30 year mortgages which trap individual taking away their life and soul. Relying once career and life on coincidence of local area. It's a wasted life, a socialist corporation wet dream, where a worker bee cannot relocate to a better opportunity.

ChrisLA says

SubOink says

ChrisLA, if you are worried about being trapped than you should never buy a house, never get married, never have kids, never buy a car and definitely don’t even have a 9-5 job because that is the ultimate trap.

Please don’t pull out Taputu like naive arguments that world is either black or white. I’m simply advising against 30 year mortgages which trap individual taking away their life and soul. Relying once career and life on coincidence of local area. It’s a wasted life, a socialist corporation wet dream, where a worker bee cannot relocate to a better opportunity.

Great...another Klarek or Joshuatrio where a 30 year mortgage is a life sentence. Do the concepts of selling, shortselling or foreclosing completely escape you guys? Obviously, the latter 2 aren't optimal, but there are risks involved with everything. You realize there is a risk in waiting to buy until you have enough cash to purchase a house, right? It may be a very small risk, but there is a chance the government/fed will succeed in creating high inflation in housing. And if rents rise like many articles are predicting now, you're going to be stuck paying more for your bricks and sticks.

I still think with this economy prices will not go up...if they start to, they will fall back down again eventually.

I live in Vegas, prices went WAY down...and who thought they would? CA state is doing too bad to raise prices.

You forgot prostitute.

ChrisLA says

Whats your point exactly?

i dont see the 30 year mortgage as an evil life sentence that should be avoided. Actually it locks in hour housing expense for 30 years. Once you have income coming in to cover that payment you're pretty much set.

ch_tah says

Great…another Klarek or Joshuatrio where a 30 year mortgage is a life sentence.

Some of us are just allergic to debt. Not our fault you drank the kool-aid.

toothfairy says

i dont see the 30 year mortgage as an evil life sentence that should be avoided. Actually it locks in hour housing expense for 30 years. Once you have income coming in to cover that payment you’re pretty much set.

If what you are saying is true, than why did so many people just end up losing their houses when they didn't want to walk away?

Did their 30 year plan somehow not account for raising interest rates, the fact that they may be unemployed for a really long time, the fact that they may not afford healthcare one day, or economy around them would collapse turning their McMansion into a deserted ghost town with high property taxes and maintenance costs.

Do you personally know where you will be in 15 years? Do you know you will not get very very ill, or fall on difficult times? Most people foreclosed in this country (at least before the crisis) due to medical bills. Do you know if your city turn into a ghost town like in "Roger & Me" when GM closes it's factory (just an example)?

30 year loan for most people is a life sentence which takes on more risk than one should take on reasonably. For others it simply raises a cost of housing because many choose to stretch liability over 30 years raising costs. And all it does is make lots of money for Bankers and Realtors. Someone got to pay for all those extravagant bonuses they give out in the lending industry after all.

joshuatrio says

ch_tah says

Great…another Klarek or Joshuatrio where a 30 year mortgage is a life sentence.

Some of us are just allergic to debt. Not our fault you drank the kool-aid.

If you want to live a debt free life, that's perfectly fine. But as we discussed before, a 30 year mortgage is not indentured servitude or a life sentence. Rather, it can be a very helpful tool.

Another reason Prop 13 was popular was because it made property taxes predictable. No surprises.

So to get a land value tax, we would need to make increases very predictable.

What about Jizz Mopper at the local nudie booth?

ch_tah says

If you want to live a debt free life, that’s perfectly fine. But as we discussed before, a 30 year mortgage is not indentured servitude or a life sentence. Rather, it can be a very helpful tool.

Whatever makes you feel better.

ch_tah says

Great…another Klarek or Joshuatrio where a 30 year mortgage is a life sentence. Do the concepts of selling, shortselling or foreclosing completely escape you guys? Obviously, the latter 2 aren’t optimal, but there are risks involved with everything. You realize there is a risk in waiting to buy until you have enough cash to purchase a house, right? It may be a very small risk, but there is a chance the government/fed will succeed in creating high inflation in housing. And if rents rise like many articles are predicting now, you’re going to be stuck paying more for your bricks and sticks.

Anybody who views home ownership as a gambling operation does not understand home ownership. It was bad during the housing bubble. Today it is inexcusable.

ch_tah says

If you want to live a debt free life, that’s perfectly fine. But as we discussed before, a 30 year mortgage is not indentured servitude or a life sentence. Rather, it can be a very helpful tool.

I have a 30 year since, since 1992. We are not in pre-bubble years when such mortgages made sense, and the economy was doing better. Many are still in denial over the mess that has been caused.

But others are correct, it made no sense to take on an inflated home prices and and equally inflated home loans, which many did during the bubble and could never pay off thus going into foreclosure.

I like many other tax payers WE ALL now on the hook to pay these loans on behalf of people who should have never idioticaly purchased a home using 30yr fixed, ARM, or any other mortgage. WE the taxpayer are now "indentured servitude" for their mistakes.

It is bad for everyone concerned. Like it or not, renter or long term homeonwer you will be the one to pay these loans off.

APOCALYPSEFUCK says

If you can’t pay cash for a house, you are begging to be fucked by banks, brokers, all the grim, psychopathic engrossers that flock to real estate to exploit people who need to live indoors.
Otherwise, get a tent and tell the engrossers to fuck themselves and die.

I'll take the tent option to get ready for the cannibal anarchy that is going to follow. :)

joshuatrio says

ch_tah says

If you want to live a debt free life, that’s perfectly fine. But as we discussed before, a 30 year mortgage is not indentured servitude or a life sentence. Rather, it can be a very helpful tool.

Whatever makes you feel better.

So if you could buy a house and have a 30 yr. mortgage with a lower monthly payment than what you would pay to rent the same house, you wouldn't do it?

tatupu70 says

So if you could buy a house and have a 30 yr. mortgage with a lower monthly payment than what you would pay to rent the same house, you wouldn’t do it?

In the BA, it only made sense between early to mid 90s. For many other parts of the nation after 2001, it didnt make any sense. Prices and their mortgages were all a bubble which were going to bite you back and hurt you financially.

thomas.wong1986 says

tatupu70 says

So if you could buy a house and have a 30 yr. mortgage with a lower monthly payment than what you would pay to rent the same house, you wouldn’t do it?

In the BA, it only made sense between early to mid 90s. For many other parts of the nation after 2001, it didnt make any sense. Prices and their mortgages were all a bubble which were going to bite you back and hurt you financially.

So you are changing the conversation from: all 30 year mortgages are bad to 30 year mortgages on "overpriced" houses are bad. Aren't any purchases of an overpriced house bad? Paying cash for a $1M house that eventually is worth $500k is bad too, no? Therefore, if you remove the overpriced part of the equation, it seems like you agree that 30 year mortgages are fine (which is obviously why you used one in the 90's).

tatupu70 says

So if you could buy a house and have a 30 yr. mortgage with a lower monthly payment than what you would pay to rent the same house, you wouldn’t do it?

Not a chance. 30 years is to long. Hell, I'm still in my twenties : - )

Because I've rented for 3 years, I've been able to relocate twice, and more than double my annual income. Moving from the east coast, to the mid west, and again out to the west coast. Opportunities that would have never materialized had I'd been strapped to a house payment.

thomas.wong1986 says

In the BA, it only made sense between early to mid 90s. For many other parts of the nation after 2001, it didnt make any sense. Prices and their mortgages were all a bubble which were going to bite you back and hurt you financially.

Sure--they were during the bubble years. Many places are back down to reasonable levels now.

joshuatrio says

Because I’ve rented for 3 years, I’ve been able to relocate twice, and more than double my annual income. Moving from the east coast, to the mid west, and again out to the west coast. Opportunities that would have never materialized had I’d been strapped to a house payment.

That's fair enough. Renting does offer more flexibility--although you may owe 2 mos. break lease fee. I know everyone thought I was crazy last time I mentioned it, but every time I've moved cross-country there has always been a relocation package. I've done the same-moved from east coast to midwest to CA. as an owner each time. Being an owner didn't stop me...