patrick.net

Tenouncetrout says

Surely you've been paying attention to TALF, TARP, QE1, QE2, not even to mention the Bank Bail Out 1 and 2 the devaluation of the dollar as the open window overnight rate has set parked at less than .50% since 08.

So which of those things were specifically done by Obama? How about none. I hate to burst your bubble, but Bush signed TARP. Maybe you should read that newspaper from August '08.

Maybe I should just stick to the Housing Forum. The Misc forum seems to have too many talking points and not much substance...

Honestly, the politicians have milked the "small business" BS lines for way too many years. People are far too gullible and buy into this crap, just like they buy into the "estate tax hurts small farms" nonsense. It's good marketing, but not based in reality.

This isn't about Obama OK! Fuck OBAMA!
But he's the President NOW, and these same policies are still being forged every day. They talk a lot but in the end, the rich gets GOBS and GOBS of Government money. Obama's like Lesko for the Rich guys.

Will the Tall Black man up front, please sit his ass down, so people can see what is going on behind him?

ch_tah says

Using your strategy, have any of your friends purchased?

Waiting out is the best strategy.

OK would you feel better if I called him Mr. President?

Tenouncetrout says

OK would you feel better if I called him Mr. President?

But you said it wasn't about Obama, didn't you? Is your memory slipping again. I know it's evening time at ToT's house so I guess we can overlook it.

just_passing_through says

I'm not so sure the state is reporting concrete data... Governments are notorious for fudging numbers.

EDD which keeps track of businesses in the state. I'm sure FTB also helps out with the stats. Come on.

The point is that you're using random anecdotes that are based on perceptions, which is fine, but you also have to check it against the data. The right answer is to do both, not ignore one or the other, so your story about Bunghole Guy is not really helpful here. Your perception was that California has been losing businesses left and right, and it's not true, even in this deep recession. If your Texans on the plane feel the same way, don't you think their anecdotes are suspect too?

I'm not saying Texas' economy is weak. Far from -- but it has always had its ups and downs too. Houston, for example, has never recovered from its oil-induced bubble in the early 80s. Its housing prices were still nominally lower (i.e. without even including inflation) 15 years later, as I stated here recently.

As I said, it depends on the business. If I wanted to engage in manufacturing of something not too technical, I'd probably vote Texas. If I wanted to engage in tech, I'd probably choose California. Do taxes and cost of living matter? Yes. But so do the skills of the work force, financing, critical mass, etc. There's no one simple answer.

Could California have a less dysfunctional state government? Maybe if we removed term limits and Prop 13. But Texas has some massive budget deficits too.

corntrollio says

EDD which keeps track of businesses in the state. I'm sure FTB also helps out with the stats. Come on.

Okay, but still no information about what those businesses are. I suspect they are as accurate as possible but at the same time I'm suspicious.

corntrollio says

Could California have a less dysfunctional state government? Maybe if we removed term limits and Prop 13. But Texas has some massive budget deficits too.

Texas has a pretty dysfunctional state govt too. I just used that as an example. I know about the deficit they have, a friend of mine from Moscow likes to remind me about it. Same guy thinks added value taxes are a great idea. I think they are sneaky. Same guy thinks we should add a $5 per gallon tax on gasoline to get people out of SUVs. I think that would be disastrous but those are my own anecdotal opinions.

CA has lived on boom after boom. Do you think we can get by without another one? If not do you think there will be another one? If so what do you think the next one will be? It won't be biotech - that is leaving and what is left, for the most part is low wage slave labor. Life Tech (800lb gorilla) just announced they are moving to China. Their CEO said they want a "presence" there but layoff info leaks through the place like a sieve.

Torch, acid, or coup d'grace.

Ramble... Ramble... Ramble... And still no proof or facts Shrek. That's amazing. How do you remain so consistently inane?

simchaland says

Tenouncetrout says

OK would you feel better if I called him Mr. President?

But you said it wasn't about Obama, didn't you? Is your memory slipping again. I know it's evening time at ToT's house so I guess we can overlook it.

I'm a proud Gemorran

It is what it is, and if the President's name right now was Mud Budd. Then I be bitching about Budd. But right now Obama is Mud to me.

Sabe

You only need to ask ONE question to get the correct answer.

Question: Is a Realtor involved in ANY of this?

Thats ALL you need to know! If Yes,,,,run for the hills.

If NO...do some more investigations. It sounds slimy and foul to me. Someone is doing someone...and if you don't enjoy it, don't bend over.

I do smell the stench all the way over here. Stinko P.U. ! Liar Liar pants on fire.....and YOU know they are up to some chicanery. Stay away and save your cash. You will need it as our Republic is destroyed by these scheming greedy liars.

investor90 says

Is a Realtor involved

Ahem, investor, it's Realtor®, okay?

@SF Ace

Thanks for the additional tips.

gbenson says

Region is Portland, OR. Is just my first exposure to anything like this (shady wise) and didn't want to sound too harsh on our rejection of the sellers 'counter' if the consensus is that I am just over-reacting.

Absolutely not. You're reaction is what law enforcement professionals call a, "hunch". And you are likely correct.

Now, the issues about the HOA should have you running for the hills. But that aside, I believe you are correct on most points except one. I don't think you "snooping" into the HOA is what caused them to induce and offer higher than yours, but I do think the $60k is intended to make you go away. I bet if you walk, and then look this place up in 6 months, you'll find it sold to that investor for cash for about $40k. It's a simple as:

Tell you the offer is now $60k
You walk
They, feigning "fairness", ask any and all comers: "Anyone else? 60? Anyone? Nope, ok, "sold!"
Then the investor "withdraws" the offer, feeling it's too high now
They counter to $40k
Owners do not list the property again, they give preferential consideration to the investors offer in a back-room type deal
Investor gets the property

They just want you to go away because you're messing up their efforts to corner the market in this complex, so they pretend someone went higher than you, you go "ok nevermind" and walk, and then they get back to selling it to whomever they wanted to own it in the first place. They can do this because whoever stands to pull the 6% commission from the sale is working with the investor, and might even be double-dipping on the commission by acting as the seller's agent too. That's the person who's claiming there is a higher offer. Investor says, "Get this asshole out of here, he's over-bidding me. I'll cut you $1,500 in extra "commission" once the sale closes in my name." And the realtor pulls the BS they are trying to pull on you.

The extra bit about the HOA would just firmly cement my decision to walk if I were you, but don't fool yourself into thinking that was the reason these tactics are being tried on you. This is very, VERY common in short sales, and probably won't be your last experience with the ol', "Oh yeah.....funny you mention it...we just received another offer.....would you like to bump your's up?"

I'd say either walk away and find something else or say the offer stands and if the other party backs out it still stands. They might be bluffing anyway.

I put an offer in on a home that had excessive mold. It was a newer home but mold issues. I had buyer representation and put an offer in of 250k. The listing agent was dragging her feet on delivering this offer. Well she got on the horn to try to drum up another buyer in the meantime. While my offer was on the table she put new wording on the listing in the MLS best and highest by a the end of the week. Meanwhile my offer still has not been delivered and it was the only offer. At the end of the week she says she has another offer from a contractor who is working with her = full commission for her. Anyway we lose the house to this contractor who had an offer of 211k. What??? My offer was 250k his 211k. We are told that it was an all cash offer and that is why he got it. Well he rehabs the home puts it back on the market for half a mil. I am a single mom trying to purchase a home for me and my children. Anyway he couldn't sell the home and I find out it's been repossessed (What??) Yes, it was financed through citizens bank. Is this legal??

corntrollio says

They just didn't think it was worth it based on the market.

Something I learned when searching for a home to buy...

If it is a good deal, it's not coming your way. There are plenty of other people they'd rather give the deal to than to someone they do not know.

wormwood says

Howabout some get together on this site and ban the methane coming out of Henny Penny back side, after all what comes out the other end of geese is what geese are known for. The woman clucks and argues in circles.

How mature.

rubyrae says

Is this legal??

No it is not illegal in the current system. No laws are violated. Home is sold to the buyer that gets the maximum commission to the RE guy. Seller gets less or more doesn't matter. Fraud like these are now rampant in the system but no laws are violated. Good luck in your pursuit.

I don't follow the logic of the price being acceptable to your friends and then only "several months later" it is clearly too "high." So if the bank had accepted their initial offer, would they be whining about how they overpaid or would they be content that they got it for what they wanted.

Using your strategy, have any of your friends purchased? Or is this a technique that guarantees they may never buy since they always want something just out of their reach?

The logic is that the market is descending. So the property value (what you think the property is worth) in Sept would be much lower in Dec or March. A considerable amount of time has passed and the market and value of the home has gone down so you would have to adjust the price offered accordingly.

OOOOH well Hells Bells, a WSJ article declaring the TARP money was paid back, I asked for Raw Data NOT Fairy Tales and Bubba Meisas.

Tell me are you self lubricated or does the Liberal media use KY jelly on your mind?

By the way, despite what many Americans think, the Vietnamese people aren't diehard communists at heart. I have been there. The Vietnamese were tired of foreign powers in their country (China -at times in the past centuries), France and finally the US).

Some people will remain ignorant of scientific process, willfully or otherwise. More than just deny they may in fact fight tooth and nail against findings that don't fit their world view.

Without support at the policy level individuals can do little to affect any outcomes from climate change. Sure we can reduce our own carbon footprint, but that does not matter unless everyone is doing it.

Do you see any significant changes coming at the policy level? I don't, and with climate change there is about a 30 year lag between action and consequences. Policy changes don't tend to happen until the consequences are right in our faces. Humans just are not built to think that long in the future. By the time any real policy changes have been made it is going to be waaaayyyyy too late to avoid any disaster scenarios you see coming as a result of climate change.

Of course anti-climate change people tell you to do nothing, and climate change advocates tell you to affect policy change, and reduce your own carbon output. No one is advising on what the average person should do to prepare themselves and family for the, what I see as, inevitable results of climate change.

Whether you see the results as severe or relatively minor, hell even if you think climate change is not man made, there is bound to be some resource restriction, and migration. Most will not do anything about it until they have to.

The more people that are unprepared, the better off those that are prepared will be.

So, wormwood, et al. please as you were. Climate change is a hoax. You need not even concern yourselves with responding to a thread like this.

rubyrae says

The logic is that the market is descending. So the property value (what you think the property is worth) in Sept would be much lower in Dec or March. A considerable amount of time has passed and the market and value of the home has gone down so you would have to adjust the price offered accordingly.

I guess this goes back to what others have said in the past (one of the few times I agree with Klarek). You should be doing thorough analysis and make offers based on that full analysis not some small amount of data. If your offer was good "several months" ago based on your thorough historical analysis, realistically it should still be a good offer. Otherwise, why the hell were you making that offer in a descending market? You knew the market was descending; you thought the number was good then, you should account for potential declines.

Maybe if you take the example to the extreme and change "several months" to almost a year and put the time frame when our country may have on the brink of financial collapse (2008-2009), then there could have been a big enough decline where market values actually dropped significantly and the offer is now too high. But in today's market, in the better parts of the BA, this is BS for you to wait, then the bank agrees to your price and then you go lower. Follow this plan and you'll likely never buy, even though just 3 months ago, you would have been perfectly happy buying that house for that price. Whatever happened to the view that buying a house is a multi-year commitment? Now you guys are looking at it in terms of months.

Bachmann/Palin 2012: Go With The Mayans

shrekgrinch says

What do you mean 'no proof'? There's more than enough evidence around that proves that you rabid Bush-haters blame him for everything including the kitchen sink...especially if you think it will deflect from Obambi's fuck-ups.

Then it should be no problem for you to provide some, right?

I mean, it's everywhere...

Tenouncetrout says

The Taxis here spend about 1200 USD, to convert their '92 Nissan hoopties to Natural Gas. Yup just old USA discarded junk they are taking out the icky parts and putting in the LP gas parts. The taxi driver says he drives all day long on 20 soles. or $6.00 that's about 300 miles of driving. Yep no Eggmobiles no Liberals bitching about foreign Oil they do it, because it makes economic sense and the conversion industry is mom and pops industry, not Big Brother's Company Store Incorporated.

Umm... you can do or get (mom and pop if you wish) natural gas conversions in the US. There are even filling stations around that will fill you up with natural gas.

You are correct, it is a great way to make older cars "clean". People often forget that recycling should be the last option in the "Reduce -> Reuse -> Recycle" conservation steps.

It's because most people are horribly lazy. As in too lazy to make themselves even a sandwich these days.

As to why they eat McDonalds crap, probably because it's convenient and cheap, and they have no taste buds.

In so far as your memories as a kid, yes McDonalds was better then. Their buns were made of real bread instead of leftover sawdust, etc. They have cheaped the quality of pretty much all of the ingredients used over the years.

state says

TOT why do you think I am a democrat or like obama or want people to drive "eggmobiles" whatever the fuck that means

Because you do not prescribe to a teabagging, ultra-right world view.

Anyone who does not whole heatedly buy into, and vigorously promote, the FOX "news" propaganda is by definition an insane lunatic liberal.

state says

zzyzzx says

It's because most people are horribly lazy.

I'm not sure I buy this argument. is it really easier to go out to the car, drive to a mcdonalds, wait in line, get your food, drive home than to slap 4 ingredients together on some bread?

If you are at home, and it's just you, of course it's easier at home. Now if you you have a bunch of annoying kids to feed, or are already in your car doing other errands, that's a different story.

zzyzzx says

state says

zzyzzx says

It's because most people are horribly lazy.

I'm not sure I buy this argument. is it really easier to go out to the car, drive to a mcdonalds, wait in line, get your food, drive home than to slap 4 ingredients together on some bread?

If you are at home, and it's just you, of course it's easier at home. Now if you you have a bunch of annoying kids to feed, or are already in your car doing other errands, that's a different story.

Yes, have you ever tried to cook, even just for 5 minutes, with screaming kids?

I think that it is laziness, and the health education in our county is pitiful. People have grown accustomed to the taste, and do not realize the crap they are putting in their (and their children) bodies.

That said advertising has a much greater influence on people than they think.

state says

"eggmobiles" whatever the fuck that means

Tenoz likes cars that are big and blocky, and resists the physics of aerodynamic efficiency in cars as liberal propaganda:
http://patrick.net/?p=795306

I think that if he were forced to drive an aerodynamic vehicle he would be the guy with a plywood cutout strapped to the front bumper catching as much air as possible. Just to stick it to the "liberals".

xxxxx says

First Golden Rule of invesitng in RE is never ever buy a Condo or Townhouse. The HOA will kill you and you compete against apts. Buy a house, that is where the demand is now.

Could you elaborate? I would think that buying a house to rent out would be more risky.

1. It's a far larger investment.
2. Carrying costs would be greater.
3. You have to maintain both the interior and exterior. With a condo, you only have to maintain the interior.
4. In many places, like pretty much all of south Florida, you still have to deal with an HOA and sometimes they restrict your right to rent out. One house I rented had an HOA rule that an owner can only rent out for two years.

Of course, apartment HOAs can also restrict rental periods and can require HOA approval of tennants.

Still, I'd think that buying and renting a house would carry larger risks than a condo. The main concern I'd have over investing in condos are all the condo vultures that you are competing with. I suspect they have far more time and expertise to determine what condos are prices under market and which ones are over market.

state says

The screaming kids argument is a little better, but i dunno, there weren't any kids at the mcd's i went to

They are all either at home impatiently waiting for a home cooked meal, or in the drive through watching a DVD.

state says

I think part of it is you get addicted to fatty/sugary foods.

Yep, totally.

state says

My office always gets pizza at the same place and I had always liked it before. I'm guessing I had come down off my fat/sugar addiction and fatty stuff no longer tasted good.

You also got used to eating fresh unprocessed food. Dominoes (not saying that is where you ate at, but it is the "low bar") is a far cry from some pizza places where you can get fresh ingredients that don't rely too much on grease and sugar.

leoj707 says

Yes, have you ever tried to cook, even just for 5 minutes, with screaming kids?

Of course not! I know better than to have kids or let one in my house!

shrekgrinch says

But don't worry! The Denial Express always has train waiting for you at the station:
Top Obama adviser says unemployment won't be key in 2012
By Ian Swanson - 07/07/11 08:25 PM ET
President Obama’s senior political adviser David Plouffe said Wednesday that people won’t vote in 2012 based on the unemployment rate.

I saw that and was thinking what a moron Obama and his advisors must be. Either that or delusional. In either event I end up with a mental image of Obama in the Furherbunker

leoj707 says

Umm... you can do or get (mom and pop if you wish) natural gas conversions in the US. There are even filling stations around that will fill you up with natural gas.

I'm in Florida not in California. The only cars in Florida with Gas powered cars are large corporations with fleets. They have their own filling station location that is just for their companies cars.
I'm quite sure that if I rolled up on Peoples Gas and asked them to fill me with BBQ juice, they'd conch me on the head and call it a day.

i refuse to believe there are people who are so busy they do not have time to buy some turkey, cheese, lettuce, tomato and bread and make some sandwiches. or buy some frozen chicken breast and throw it on a foreman grill, which takes about 5 minutes.

A bit off topic, but worth addressing...

Although I usually avoid fast foods, the few times I eat them are during lunch, not dinner. I suspect this is true for most people. And since most of us have day jobs, a Foreman grill isn't an option.

I like to get fruit during lunch at a local supermarket, but fruit is a hit-and-miss. They either have 5,000 ripe bananas or 0. Never anything in between. Strawberries aren't an option since you have to clean them.

So, I suspect that people eat at fast-food restaurants during lunch simply because they are strapped for time. I'm not sure that eating a cold-cut sandwich for lunch every day is much better.

As for taste, although you might find the fast food disgusting tasting, most people don't. Fast food is bad precisely because most people find it tastes good. Fast food exploits the evolutionary food preferences of humans. Our stone-age ancestors survived because they valued sweet and fatty foods. Sweet fruits are ripe and have more vitamins, and fatty foods are high in calories, which were hard to get back in the stone age. The fast food industry is highly competitive and any restaurant that didn't invest in finding out exactly what foods their customers like, wouldn't stay in business.

Tenouncetrout says

Greetings from Pachacama.

Thanks for the info there, 10 oz.

Troy says

Actually, I don\'t think I do. The war was arguably a mistake -- or at least mistakes were made -- but it was never unwinnable. Westmoreland just fought it wrong.

If you believe that then you do need to read more. You sound just like the clueless warmongers of the time. If we just sent in more men, bombed more, sent more money, etc., etc. we would have won. Read some of the North Vietnam viewpoint sometime. Most people in the North truly believed they were fighting a war of liberation. They were committed to the cause. In the south the only people who believed in the war were the corrupt leaders trying to hold onto power and wealth. The rest of the south was divided between people believed in communism and people who didn't care one way or another. The war was unwinnable in any kind of practical terms short of the US committing to total war and overrunning the north.

Troy says

We\'d won the war against the VC by 1972,

We won the war against the VC in 1968. The tet offensive destroyed the VC. The NV leaders cynically sacrificed the VC at tet to make political gains in US public opinion. They of course hoped to win with tet but would settle for a major embaressment of the US. After that the war was between us army and nv army.

Troy says

The military geography of Vietnam made it very difficult to secure the Saigon regime\'s control over the hinterlands,

The fact that the army of sv was corrupt, incompetent, and frequently refused to fight made it impossible to control most of the country.

Troy says

The territory PAVN controlled wasn\'t significant in population terms, but it was strategically useful in that they had \"inside lines\" of communication and the freedom to concentrate their forces anywhere they desired

After 13 years of US forces at war that situation didn't change one bit. At what point would that be winnable? The only way to win would have been to commit 30+ US divisions, stop all shipping into Cambodia (nv was NOT supplying the 20+ divisions they had in Cambodia from the Ho Chi Min trail, our Cambodian "allies" were looking the other way while cargo ships delivered hundreds of tons of supplies), stop all shipping into haiphong, attack the nv forces in Cambodia, attack the nv forces in laos, and launch a full scale invasion of north vietnam. Since the American people had been told (lied to) for years we were just assisting SV with VC guerrilla forces as opposed to what we were actually doing, fighting a full scale war with against another countries standing army, this would have been a pretty hard course of action to sell.