forgot password / register

reset password

register

patrick.net

 
#housing #investing #politics #random more»
778,295 comments by 11,468 users, 9 online now: APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE, BayAreaObserver, Ceffer, Goran_K, lostand confused, mell, NuttBoxer, Patrick, sanatorium
new post

mell's comments

« First    « Previous     Comments 6113 - 6152 of 6,152     Last »

mell   ignore (1)   2012 May 9, 2:54am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

While rents certainly have gone up and competition has become more fierce due to people not/delaying buying and renting instead, this depends on the neighborhood. You can get a 2/3 bedroom easily around 2500 for example in the sunset. Fancy neighborhoods see those rent increases now but they will not last very long before people who actually can afford these prices have dried up.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 May 9, 5:17pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

BayArea says

Ok, it's official.

I have not gotten an offer accepted in all of 2012.

Between taking the time to research properties, going to see them, writing offers, and chasing the listing agent only to find out that my $20K above asking price offers are getting laughed at, it's getting quite discouraging.

5 months of trying is not a lot (and never has been) if you want the right house for the right price - start complaining again after having tried for 2 years ;) Our culture in general has moved to expectations of instant gratification and that play into the hands of the sellers/realtors ..

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jun 28, 4:12pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

HEY YOU says

I'm not a Racist or Bigot. I don't like anybody. ROFL

Agree - this is a stupid thread. To say it with the late Pete Steele:

Right wing commies
Leftist Nazis
Point their fingers
Rumors linger
[...]
"The left they say I'm a facist
The right calling me communist
Hate hate hate hatred for all - one and all
No matter what you believe
Don't believe in you - and that's true
;)

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 8, 12:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

It is really irrelevant what prices are doing, what is relevant that any increase in house prices, even a stall for that matter, cannot be supported by the average income as wage increases are mostly not happening and if they are they are so abysmal that after inflation most of them are still looking at a real income decline. So in the long run prices will crater (or the currency will be worthless), math just is (and can hardly be argued with) and on a long enough time-line you cannot spend more than you take in.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 10, 7:45am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Funny how this always boils down to predicting where house prices go. The job market in tech definitely has heated up again due to smart investor money parked on the sidelines during the crash and fueled by relentless artificially low interest rates, but mostly for senior positions and the interview process is much longer and harder than during the dot-com bubble. In fact a lot of companies have positions open for 6-12 months, churning though potential candidates and claiming the cannot find any rockstars. If you talk to a few recruiters you will find out that it is very hard to place engineers for them, so they stepped up their game and mass-email anybody who could be a potential match. House prices may show some swings in the future, but even if they go up temporarily, it will not be sustainable as real wages continue to stall or decline. $120K per year just pays the bills for a 3 person family (1 child), usually you need double income. As soon as the new venture capital dries up and backers remove their support for flailing companies you will see layoffs again. And if the main breadwinner loses their job, they will lose their house unless they have lots of savings/investments. Taking again that $120K per annum salary, any property buy above $500K is financial stupidity IMO and everything over 400K is risky - if you rent, try to stay around $2500 (excl. utilities) or below. What you say?

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 15, 3:58am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

This is for the SF bay area: There is some significant demand for the lower end rental market as people cannot afford to buy or decide not to do so and because the Fed has made it very easy for the high end renters to jack up the rents and wait for someone rich (and careless) enough to pay that much by keeping the interest rates super depressed. If you can roll over your debt almost indefinitely for less interest than inflation, you somewhat have the luxury to charge whatever you want. This has nothing to do with a recovery, as soon as interest rates will recover to normal - and eventually they will - these distortions will correct. Meanwhile funding for companies that haven't been profitable for a while is drying up rapidly again, look for layoffs and a generally weak job market. There will be no end to the housing inventory glut and a steady supply of foreclosures. Also the recent municipal bankruptcies seem to indicate more downturn than recovery and more will follow. You don't have to kill yourself, just be careful with regarding "housing" as an investment - I cannot see any reason for prices to go up.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 16, 12:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

The low interest rates do not benefit everyone equally. If you already have a lot of money and collateral you can borrow more, most ordinary people at this point do not qualify for big loans to buy a house and you don't get loans to pay your rent - except for using your credit card at horrible rates maybe ;) I agree on an increased demand for rent, but it comes solely from the combo of people not being able to afford to buy a house and (usually wealthy) landlords and corporations not needing full tenancy due to the depressed interest rates. Sure you could try and take advantage of this if you have enough income/collateral and buy a house to rent out, but IMO it is a huge risk as the people who are now paying those jacked up rents are living paycheck to paycheck right now.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 18, 2:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Depends on the neighborhood - the sharp rise in wealthy neigborhoods with little vacancy must have distorted those figures. You can still get a decent 2/3 bedroom (even a free standing house) in the sunset for rent for 2500 or below. For the same space you easily pay over a grand more in pacific heights.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 23, 2:35pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

If you already own a lot of properties and have good cash flow and you can just sell a couple if you get into a crunch, then you might be able to close some deals, either all-cash or at least with a decent down payment. The problem is that it is still a shitty time to buy for first timers who cannot afford to miss a mortgage payment or depreciation, because their wages do not support the debt burden and if they lose their job they will lose their house. At some point the couple percent will be shuffling the properties around themselves but will face dwindling rental income as the eroding middle-class becomes too poor to pay the demanded rental prices. Doesn't mean that there isn't a steal here and there if you have the cash, but compared to wages home prices are still overpriced.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 27, 2:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Thanks for posting this. Although there is more to the story (where he apparently "left" the legal system and didn't show up in court for his bailed bond) that made this arrest possible it shows how so not free citizens have become. GMO labeling is suppressed while raw milk advocates and companies find it increasingly diffcult to operate in compliance. People have to import fresh colostrum from overseas because the last supplier in CA has at least temporarily folded due to sanctions imposed by the food administration after a case of e coli - for which the products in question tested negative, but nonetheless - in like seven years that "could have been linked" to the consumption of their raw products. Literally sickening and showing that dems and reps are one and the same, the people need a true grassroots libertarian change to become free again.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 28, 8:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

The Original Bankster says

wthrfrk80 says

The Original Bankster says

Liberalism is simply the tool of what is left of imperialism. It's the 'babylon system' we've been warned about.

What?

That's a little extreme don't you think?

no.

California has SLAVERY, WIDESPREAD DRUG USE, SEXUAL DEBAUCHERY, BROKEN FAMILY, POLITICAL CORRUPTION, IRREPARABLY DAMAGED FINANCES... sounds a hell of a lot like every failed empire in history.

but Californians insist their system is better because they allow gay marriage and they're sad when something bad happens to an Arab.

The San Francisco Treat

WTF has sexual debauchery to do with this? You mean people are actually open about their sexuality instead of taking a hike in the Appalachian mountains? Social liberalism is not the issue, in fact it is an asset, it's crony capitalism and financial liberalism (or better laissez-faire) that is wreaking havoc.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 28, 12:05pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

It's not "stupid" for a bank to loan out to people they know cannot pay back, it is criminal/fraudulent, but definitely not stupid. Most of the money they lend out is backed by nothing and most of the the involved parties get instant kickbacks. Then when they foreclose they get the home for free as they have not had the money on the books to begin with. Also if the bank ever folds - which is unlikely as they keep getting bailed out with taxpayer money - most have made enough money, far more in those "golden" years than they would have if they had to pay themselves "regular" salaries on a lifelong basis.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 28, 11:15pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

robertoaribas says

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

Because they create money out of thin air through fractional reserve banking.

whenever anyone says clearly demonstrating so little knowledge about finance or economics, it is best to just nod and smile. SImply put, they don't have either the education to bother talking to them... mell says

It's not "stupid" for a bank to loan out to people they know cannot pay back, it is criminal/fraudulent, but definitely not stupid. Most of the money they lend out is backed by nothing and most of the the involved parties get instant kickbacks.

ok, we have a society of the economically illiterate! have fun!

Look, I'm not trying to predict house prices (though I have a general direction), also I am generally happy for people who enjoy their home or can make decent rental income from their houses and the work they out in - IF I didn't have to substitute so many of the mortgages and zombie banks out there with my taxes time and time again. Debt should be treated equal without favoritism and rigged low interest rates at the expense of the saver. I trade stocks (besides having a full time job) - no bank crap though and not on margin - and maybe I am part of the system because of this, but at least I take full responsibility and all the risks for my investments. Also to simply deny that banks have not been using mark to market (thus inflating their value), hiding non-performing mortgages from their balance sheet, rigging interest rates (liebor), knowingly selling junk MBS for AAA and not practicing "one dollar spent/lent backed by one dollar of capital/collateral)" makes me wonder where you have been the last 5 years.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 29, 11:58am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Was pre-approved in 2003 and considered buying a place with a friend of mine. We were new to the game (both from overseas) and had an offer in after the realtor suggested that we had to at least offer 30K over asking in order "to be taken seriously" and "not to offend the seller". Overnight I reflected upon this bullshit and we pulled our offer first thing in the morning. I have met one decent realtor (nice "substitute agent" from denmark who actually advised us to continuously underbid by at least 10% if we are not in immediate need to move and own) out of maybe 50 total, have not looked back since and enjoy renting with the family.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 2:32am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Krugman is a stupid populistic douche who gets money for nothing. Anybody who advocates for more deficit spending is debasing the $ even more and defrauding the country. There are no simple solutions at this point and austerity is inevitable. If you think you can just go ahead and pillage the rich, be my guest - not sympathizing with them. However you will find out that you will fall short significantly (they already spent a lot, luxury lifestyle ain't cheap, and a lot is in offshore tax shelters) even then and general austerity and much smaller government is needed. You cannot spend more than you have, math just IS and cannot be argued with. Let's start with collecting Krugman's salary.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 2:34am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Let's start prosecuting the fraud, reinstate the rule of law and put people who are currently above the law to jail, claw-back what you can get and then make needed cuts.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 8:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Also while probably everyone agrees on the need to drastically reduce the military budget by ending useless wars, thinking that the continued spending spree by Dems will save the middle class is stupid - cuts are needed and yes, there will be stagnation, maybe even depression for a while, but in the end prosperity will set in faster as the bad debt is gradually cleared and deflation is correcting the prices. If you spend and inflate the rich will have it easy as they have most of their fortunes in assets that will inflate with them while the middle class is mainly depending on day job salaries as their main source of income, and we all know that those already haven't been able to follow the recent inflation. A loose spending policy under the false premise to help the middle class will make things far worse than spending cuts where prices will deflate back to fair value - money always finds a way to trickle up but it never comes back.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 8:53am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Who cares - it's a one party system. Mitt Obama or Barack Romney - your pick ;)

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 2:04pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Problem is there is no police/politicians that aren't pwned - hence no handcuffs, no accountability whatsoever.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 2:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

There is nothing hard about economics - everybody who fails science grade math (such as electrical engineering or physics etc.) can fallback to becoming an "economist", which is just above realtor ;) A grandmother who saves more than she spends knows more about economics than twits like Krugman and his ilk - problem is only she is getting fucked over by team bernanke/geithner// who are really run by team banksta, fucked so hard that her 0.1 % savings turn negative after adjusting for cheap money inflation. So she has to worship the Keynesian monkeys and riverboat all in with her savings, maybe in Vegas, perhaps in the stock market, or buy "prime" real estate in hope she hits the jackpot. But thanks for the laugh about the "Macroeconomic commentary of a Nobel Laureate".

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 2:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

&feature=player_embedded

all you need to know about [current] economics.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 30, 3:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

I had a guy back up into my car out of the blue while traffic had come to a stillstand a decade ago. I didn't have collision and though he was clearly at fault and had admitted it even on paper, his insurance (AAA) convinced him to change his story and secretly colluded with my insurance at that time (Allstate). When they told me I had to go after him myself I said fine just give me the recorded documents with our statements and I will bring this home quickly in small claims court. Allstate told me they cannot give me any documents (no reason given) and consider all paperwork their personal files and I'd have to sue them to get access to my own investigation reports. After I told them consider yourself sued the super-super-supervisor finally faxed me one paper with the other guys initial statement and claim evaluation and it took me 5 minutes in court to win this - although AAA had provided a lawyer for the other guy at the court. Fucking unbelievable, all I asked for was the amount of $1,500 to cover the repairs. I got rid of Allstate and things have been ok with Mercury since. Oh, and ditched AAA roadside assistance for BetterWorldClub which is cheaper and insures bikes as well. Crooks everywhere!

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 31, 6:17am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

david1 says

First, I don't idolize Krugman. He's just right.

And second, Milt Friedman was NOT an Austrian supply-side witch doctor. He was a monetarist.

If you want a Nobel Laureate example who authored your supply-side, anti-central planning voodoo look at Hayek.

The easiest way to distigiush between them is Monetarists believe that centrally controlling the money supply positively contributes to overall economic well being, where Austrians believe centrally planned increases in money supply are the only known causes of nightmares in children. Or something like that.

New Keynesians (like Krugman) are very similar to monetarists. Keynesians cite lack of demand for economic malaise, monetarists cite lack of money. New Keynesians have trouble explaning rapidly changing prices, monetarists struggle with liquidity traps.

Austrians can't verify anything empirically, so they struggle with reality.

Most countries who are financially conservative outperform their Keynesian counterparts by multitudes. Germany has been generally fiscally conservative post-WW2 with low inflation and thus have been running the show in Europe. Estonia and Latvia went cold turkey and are now in great shape. India has been importing gold with their trade surplus and is looking good - sure, they still have slums and sharp contrasts of wealth, but they are improving consistently while the US and the European Keynesian worshippers are on the way to become slums. Japan, UK, the PIIGS and the US got badly damaged by Keynesian bullshit (used by greedy politicians and elites, so please stop talking about idiots like Krugman.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Jul 31, 8:18am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

david1 says

mell says

Most countries who are financially conservative outperform their Keynesian counterparts by multitudes. Germany has been generally fiscally conservative

Wha???? Germany has a social market economy. This is Keynesianism on steroids. They maintain employment despite capacity under-utilization!

For Christ's sake, the German government has collective bargaining rights with private employers! All workers are members of one central union!

Estonia and Latvia? Estonia has 11+% unemployment. Latvia has 15% unemployment. Yeah those are shining cities on a hill...

What does that have to do with Keynesian money policies? You can have aspects of a social market economy while still being fiscally conservative and balance your budget(s). Stop thinking in left-wing right-wing and libertarian vs liberal mindset, then you might actually see that monetary policy wise there is no difference between dems and reps. Also, if you keep citing high unemployment rates in the mentioned countries, they have been steadily improving (and cleared their bad debt), and if someone is counted as employed it actually means that they are above poverty level, unlike in the US where the numbers are fudged beyond sense (the real unemployment % as in the US is likely significantly higher than in Estonia or Latvia).

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 1, 9:03am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

Facebook is on its way to federal court in the ninth district for fraud and final delisting. This thing stinks to high heaven.

Sorry, that's your wishful thinking - while your accusations might have merit, the SEC/FBI is too busy watching porn. Nobody here goes to prison for financial crimes. Judges can and will be bought and paid for. Although delisting is a real possibility at least ;)

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 1, 9:30am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

I hope it gets and stays defeated - just because you can screw over the taxpayer /saver in "worse" ways doesn't make it any better. I think for those people "trapped" the best and right option is to default and squat until they get kicked out, then use the savings to rent. The government should not be in the business of defining what a "good loan" is worth subsidizing vs a "bad loan" not worth subsidizing. Interest rates need to sort themselves out and right now should be - without constant gov. intervention" close to or in the double digits.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 1, 10:47am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

Big difference:

Zuckfuck has lied and cheated everyone he's ever spoken to - including people who can afford lawyers working for most of a decade to make sure he ends up in a wedding dress in a supermax, bent over a lunch table while neonazi serial killers shred his asshole for him.

The twin fucktards should take a piece of their settlement and hire some lawyers to build some referrals to Justice and hold quarterly press conferences on Zuckfuck's crimes, until he's indicted and put away. Make it into a reality TV show.

Maybe so - he is also not a member of Wall Street. Let's see if we can get some fireworks.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 1, 1:17pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

freak80 says

Romney is a perfect example. He's "liberal" on social issues but "conservative" (i.e. neocon) on economic & military issues. Obama is another perfect example. He does the bidding of powerful special interests (like the homosexual pressure groups and Planned Parenthood) but won't go really go after the top 0.1%. Do we have anything like Glass-Stegall in place? No.

Well said. Gay marriage is a perfect example - one the one side we have religious zealots trying to seize the opportunity to bring back religion-based politics and on the other side you have a herd of Pavlov's dogs conditioned to bark "discrimination!" if somebody just expresses their personal views (clearly separated from their business), and "human rights issue!" when it is clearly not. If one really strongly feels about reducing favoritism they would stand for abolishing government backed marriage, incl. all the perks and duties, as well as removing the ban on poligamy and let marriage return to a purely religion-of-choice event/journey if desired and a fusion of families/civil union based on contracts agreed by the involved parties only which can easily be enforced by courts without the government's interpretation, so that the people who simply don't want to marry don't get left out.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 1, 2:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Marriage as defined by the government is an utterly artificial construct to incentivise procreating families. They didn't do the best job as they could have simply paid per child instead which would have been much fairer, but to think of it as a civil right is ludicrous. But if you want to make that point with the court on your side than you should go all the way and also legalize poligamy as a civil right as well as what is commonly understood as "incest", as people cannot be discriminated against their religious or whatever preference for multiple husbands/wifes, or for their preference for their brother or sister. Heck even a father would have the right to marry his daughter (if old enough and consentual) - which by the way has happened without both parties who had been separated knowing they were related. The only way to solve this in all fairness is for the government to get out of the marriage business.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 7:18am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Have been renting for 12 years in San Francisco now (first 4 years with roommates) and only had one rent increase of $42 in all those years. I stayed 2 years, 2 years, 5 years, 2 years, and currently 6 months. At my first place the rent dropped from 2001 to 2002 by $300 from $900 to $600. Only one of the places (for 2 years) had rent control, ironically that was also the only place which ever increased my rent.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 7:32am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Cause chicks dig money. Krugman would have no girlfriends if he were paid for actual work/goods delivered.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 7:55am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Delurking says

And in the inflationary environment of 1970-2012, buying has generally made sense 10 years after the purchase, as rents have risen:

Do not have debt. Debt is a millstone. Everyone says that inflation "makes debt easier." No, it doesn't for you. It does for the lender, but not for you. The reason is that your cost of living will rise faster than your wages and income will, and that will make paying the debt harder, not easier. Don't fall for that line of crap, it is a lie and you will lose. Under no circumstances should you borrow against any existing asset you hold; if you wish to use one or more assets as part of your capital base (see below) liquidate it right up front.

Taken from: http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=209605

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 9:14am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

I agree it depends on your personal situation, AKA if you can handle the debt with stable income etc. All cash and no debt is always best and the least risk. But I disagree with those statistics (never trust one that you haven't made up yourself), what about all the people that falter under the debt, not just because they were not prudent, but also because of unforeseen events (it's part of being prudent to plan for those but you cannot control everything), I doubt that these statistics take those poor souls into account. That being said, I am not saying that owning homes or making a business out of it cannot be profitable - it's just very risky - unless you know you can count on a bailout.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 9:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Delurking says

mell says

but to think of it as a civil right is ludicrous.

I have a hard time folding my brain to where you get the basis for thinking the ability for two people to form a legally-binding partnership for life is not a fundamental right.

Marriage is not about popping out babies. It's about equal partnerships between adults. THAT'S why it's a social good.

You already have that right by drafting and signing simple contracts between each other. Everybody has that right. What happened is that government intervention has given some people additional rights and duties mostly hidden out of plain sight, embedded in a bunch of legislature that nobody will ever read. It also gave itself and greedy lawyers a good grip on your life. This is what you are calling a civil right?

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 10:13am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Call it Crazy says

Philistine says

We have paid $2000/mo since 2008. Never had an increase.

That can't be true... Iwog said rents are rising, he knows the whole market because he is a landlord you know....

Same here - usually no increases in years.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 2, 10:21am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

It's like Stalin opened a poultry fast food chain in here..

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 4, 11:36am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Cloud says

The next liberal trump card for raw power in the future, after that is making it perfectly legal for a man to pee in a public bathroom with your 11 year old daughter is .... lower the age of consent.

The line "The Man Boy Love Association" have been standing in is getting shorter and they are licking their chops.

The perversion of society is simply a raw power grab by depraved under achievers: Liberals.

If the man needs to pee and just does that, so what? These issues - and ironically a lot of the perverted crimes they are trying to prevent - seem to be prevalent in the US only. I guess I must be a criminal at times, when I need to piss or crap, I use whatever bathroom is available (starting with the men's room first of course). Sorry, I really don't care who else is in the bathroom ;)

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 5, 3:06am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Temporary bubbles or bounces need to be distinguished from any real recovery. It is also well known that bubbles can last quite longer than you'd expect. But without a grip on the massive debt floating around, starting from the federal deficit to state and municipalities deficits, no real recovery can take place. Doesn't matter whether it continues in inflation or deflation, or most likely stagflation, but while I am willing to believe personal success stories (which can happen) I must say that anybody arguing for a grand recover in spite of the cold hard debt facts is at least mildly delusional.

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 6, 9:42am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Nobody has been able to explain how we are going to curb the runaway deficit, it looks like we have passed the inflection point long ago where the amount by which the GDP must grow just to stop the deficit from growing and pay interest only is still achievable. I mean I don't care for politics here, tax 90% or cut spending 50%, whatever you choose it will hurt (for the better) ;)

mell   ignore (1)   2012 Aug 6, 12:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

robertoaribas says

apocolypsefuck is still winning in my book, but duckhead is in a strong second position for the main reasons to read this site!

It's the best screen name by far and that alone qualifies to be on every possible blog. When I am zoning off in the morning before work watching my stocks go up for no reason I get that blank stare and in those minutes I try to figure out what this screen name could possibly mean and how Shostakovich is connected to the apocalypse. This goes even deeper than picking the daily winner of computer generated spam email subjects and beats any politician's, banker's, lawyer's, real estate agent's or Keynesian economist's dribble of the day. Dow to 50K, long printing presses and mortgages!

users   about   suggestions   source code   contact  
topics   best comments   comment jail   old posts by year  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home