patrick.net

Wow, even staynumz is here. . . How are things in your neck of the woods? It's nice to see you posting, I look forward to your commentary.

Hey Patrick, This is your Dutch Uncle. I'm curious why I was deleted? Please cite my "impoliteness". Your favorite Poster writes you a dramatic "Dear John" letter stating he's not going to hang out in this forum anymore, because his feelings are hurt, and you start deleting people trying to win him back? I think you may be a little too impressed by your own importance and forum. Please don't mistake my spirited debate for impoliteness. D

I basically did a search for the words "asshole", "libtard", "Mexifornia" and then poked through the results to see who was actually speaking seriously and with good will, and who was simply spouting hate or insulting the other commenters. Just a judgement call. Maybe I was wrong on your case.

Maybe I was wrong on your case.

No big deal. I still enjoy the Housing Crash portion of this forum ; )

Owning a house is no longer the American dream. It's just gonna run you in debt. The key is to have cash & investments. With money, you can rent anywhere and landlord will complete for your money.

I kinda stopped posting in this forum because to be honest, the housing market discussions are really all the same and can be summed up in a FAQ (actually that's a great idea; let's make a Patrick.net FAQ!) Q: Should I buy now or wait? A: Wait until median house prices in your arae are no more than 3x median family income in your area. Q: But I really, really want to buy now, can't I go ahead? A: No, you should really, really wait... Hehe! Not that I don't enjoy this conversation, but after a while it gets kinda old and then of course the political bs gets really old fast. I love having political discussions, but when people start the conversation with Obama=Hitler (sorry for the Godwin) it's pretty much guaranteed you're not getting through to them on any type of intellectual level. Lately I've been hanging around more in the Old Forums, which surprisingly enough, are spam free now. I really enjoy our discussions about economics, the stock market, and gold more than I do the housing discussions. Of course housing really is the core of our consumer economy so it's all related. Thanks for running the forums and trying to clean them up Patrick! It's appreciated. Maybe I'll come back and post a little more often here now.

lyoungblood says

Lately I’ve been hanging around more in the Old Forums, which surprisingly enough, are spam free now.

The old forum is spam-free because I blocked all new registrations there. This forum is spam-free because I can control it better. But it still lacks something in usability. Please write me with suggestions: p@patrick.net

patrick what do you think of posting the 'users (to be) deleted' in one thread.

It's pretty rare to delete any user. I think there have been only six so far, and no one could say they were polite. Well, maybe I made one mistake in there. Staynumz, that was actually relatively polite. I myself really don't like Obama's cooperation with the banks and posted a link about it today. I'm also annoyed he doesn't seem to be getting us out of Iraq at all. Every other country does health care much better than we do. Half the cost, universal coverage, and longer life expectancy. How do they do it? The French smoke and drink like crazy, so you can't say it's just our lifestyle. Anyway, if someone tries to tax me more for drinking moderately (and living longer because of it!) that would put me over the edge. I've got some hard cider bubbling in the back room right now. Really.

I too have noticed that most other forums are now serving as outlets for "conservatives" who have decided to blame all of the countries ills on Obama, liberals and foreigners. I don't know if they are being paid and organized to do this, or if there is just such hate there that we are doomed to a new generation of brown shirts, and I don't care. It's noise, pure and simple. Thanks for filtering them out and improving the noise to signal ratio.

Dear Ian: Lazy, stupid Americans who don't vote and who would rather watch "American Idol" are to blame for the country's problems. The noise is just scapegoat-ism and the entertainment morality so prevalent today. We are devoid of communication. I have noticed this in social interactions. Most commoners (idiots) in this "consumer" culture glaze over when I try to engage in cultured, literate conversations about real issues, meaningful books, poetry, etc., unless of course, I can recite chapter and verse about television, which I cannot because I don't have one. So, you get noise. What else can you expect from a culture of illiterates and a media that is part of the entertainment game?

The French smoke and drink like crazy, so you can’t say it’s just our lifestyle.

They also die at the rate of over 10,000 in a heat wave. Perhaps the French are a bit lacking on elderly health care.

Every other country does health care much better than we do. Half the cost, universal coverage, and longer life expectancy.

Half the cost and universal coverage, yep. But you might want to check on that "life expectancy." The life expectancy figures you are getting may not be just for natural deaths, but may be skewed by including expected deaths from war, traffic deaths, accidents, natural disasters, and murders.

HeadSet says

The French smoke and drink like crazy, so you can’t say it’s just our lifestyle.

They also die at the rate of over 10,000 in a heat wave. Perhaps the French are a bit lacking on elderly health care.

Nice anecdote. Do you have any actual EVIDENCE that elder care is better in the US than in France, or even that heat waves kill more people in France than in the US on average? HeadSet says

Every other country does health care much better than we do. Half the cost, universal coverage, and longer life expectancy.

Half the cost and universal coverage, yep. But you might want to check on that “life expectancy.” The life expectancy figures you are getting may not be just for natural deaths, but may be skewed by including expected deaths from war, traffic deaths, accidents, natural disasters, and murders.

Well, here is the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy Of course there are different factors involved in life expectancy but surely health care is a HUGE one. Just look at the rankings! Every single country in Western Europe has a higher life expectancy than the US. Every single one! If you want to claim that our health care system is better than all of theirs but somehow other extraneous issues cause them to have longer lives you need to come up with something pretty convincing before I'll believe you, not maybe this, maybe that. If your just going to assume your right and assume that evidence to the contrary must somehow not be telling the whole story then you are just being an ideolog.

We have war zones all over this country caused by the Drug War & Welfare State - which both parties still support! Of course we have lower life expectancy with all these animals killing each other of drug money!

I think the premise of this site was 'hang on, don't buy, prices are ridiculous'. Now that it has proven true, there isn't much to discuss. People now are losing jobs, and have a bleak outlook for the near and longterm future. No reward for not getting caught up in the hype. I think more exciting topics might help (not to insult your site, you've done a fantastic job). I get caught up reading posts on abovetopsecret (not a plug, but I get fascinated with some of the topics there like 4 big name financiers suicides in 48 hours, potential crashes, etc). I also think a more {hmm} picturesque background would make people want to hang around... maybe a choice of music. I also moved to local news postings, to read their posts. Every article about foreclosures leads to a plethora of comments from 'stop building' to 'dumb for buying', etc. The democrat vs. republican comments really ire and irk me, but ... well there's another topic that could suit this site. I think this particular thread should boot some postings (Patrick included :) as "off topic" Just my 2 cents which I wish I could redeem in actual copper.

I also got annoyed when posters here used incomprehendable financial lingo. I think I may have annoyed people with drunken lingo, sorry 'bout that, but Thunderlips was just too funny...

bdrasin says

Well, here is the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

Interesting article. According to the UN chart, the life expectency difference between the longest lifespan European country (France) and the USA is 3 years. With England and Germany, the difference is a little over one year. In fact, the life expectancy of England and Germany is right there with the US Virgin Islands. Considering the minor differences shown, and the fact that the life expectancy includes estimated future deaths by drunk drivers, war, and murders (all which are higher in the USA), I would say the difference caused by medical care is insignificant. This does not mean I an against heath care reform, I just thing the "life expectancy" is a bogus argument.

Stress in the US is the killer. Worried about paying your bills... what a life. Other countries may have found a way around this, like... you don't have to worry about basic necessities. You exist, you need to make money to pay for it, or else no basic rights for you. If you or your family gets sick, and you can't pay the bill, nobody cares, just die already. I'm living in this environment, getting by for now. But I think given the current economic climate, there should be more discussion like "okay you don't need me to work right now, but let me relax."

bdrasin says

Nice anecdote. Do you have any actual EVIDENCE that elder care is better in the US than in France, or even that heat waves kill more people in France than in the US on average?

Are you serious? 10,000 deaths is an OUTRAGEOUS number of deaths. Too bad it was really more like 14,000. That particular French heat wave lasted about a month with about 7 days hitting 105 degrees F. We have had several USA heatwaves of longer duration and higher temperatures (and some shorter). The one that hit in 2006 lasted over a month, affected nearly the whole country, had temperatures up to 120 degrees F even in cold states like the Dakotas, yet killed less than 230 people. And we are talking about an area affected that is larger and more populated than France. And in both th USA and France, the overwhelmingly biggest number of deaths were elderly that did not get taken care of in time. Even Earthwatch, which has an ax to grind, only puts the total USA heat wave deaths at less than 3,000 during the period 1955 -2003.

French eat lots of good food and have a hard time leaving the kitchen. Most of the French deaths were kitchen related.

JboBbo says

French eat lots of good food and have a hard time leaving the kitchen. Most of the French deaths were kitchen related.

I was in France for about 6 months in the 90s flying out of LeTube near Salon de Provence. Salon was a typical beautiful French country town with great food at restaurants, griils, and even street carts. But right in the middle of town, among the very French environment, was a popular McDonalds. Go figure.

"We have had several USA heatwaves of longer duration and higher temperatures (and some shorter). " This is hardly an accurate comparison. The upper midwest including the dakota's gets very high temps and humidity levels almost every summer. The area's of France affected by the heat wave (I have lived there) almost never get high temps or high humidity. Even if there is a hot day or two the nights are always cool. Having 2 weeks of very high nighttime temps was the biggest factor in the disaster. Only something like 2% of houses in France have air conditioning including the much hotter more humid south. Of course the fact that 90% of the people in Northern France spend August on holiday in the south leaving pretty much no one around to deal with it didn't help at all. I don't exactly see where a natural disaster is a referendum for elder care. I guest the Indonesians must have the worst elder care in the world after the tsunami killed 230,000 people.

HeadSet says

JboBbo says

French eat lots of good food and have a hard time leaving the kitchen. Most of the French deaths were kitchen related.

I was in France for about 6 months in the 90s flying out of LeTube near Salon de Provence. Salon was a typical beautiful French country town with great food at restaurants, griils, and even street carts. But right in the middle of town, among the very French environment, was a popular McDonalds. Go figure.

Last time I was in France several years ago I noted the French are getting much fatter than they were 20 years ago. McDonalds rules.

bob2356 says

I don’t exactly see where a natural disaster is a referendum for elder care. I guest the Indonesians must have the worst elder care in the world after the tsunami killed 230,000 people.

Calling it a "natural disaster" is disingenuous. A heat wave is not the same as an earthquake, tsunami, or meteor strike. Properly coordinated, one can go to businesses, government buildings, hospitals, etc to escape the heat. Emergency A/C, ice, swamp coolers, etc can be set up. No such defense against "natural disasters" like an unexpected and fast hitting tsunami. The comparison may be "hardly accurate," but we are talking about 14,000 deaths.

90% of the people in Northern France spend August on holiday in the south

Are you saying that northern France has only about 10% of its population in Aug?

I agree with the OP. Too much bashing here. RE has become secondary. It has become a political bashing site which is too bad. Until recently I looked forward to reading posts, but not any more.

I thought France had a lot going for it when that hot finance chick showed up right after the financial crisis started, but I haven't seen much since. Je ne sais que.

I think it's funny when people blame illegal immigrants, democrats, and republicans for "our" my problem(s). The fact of life is that WE-YOU-I are the ones responsible for this life we have. If you want to play the victim-blame game, go right ahead. And then, as DR. Phil would say, "How's that working out for you-lol. The sooner we take R E S P O N S I B I l I T Y, the sooner things will change. And yes, WE do create our own reality. From KLNR The Little Guy

I think we're responsible for our reaction to the garbage "fed" to us, maybe.

For what it's worth, I have been finding the blog portion of this site simply unmanageable for some time now. The ideas are fragmented, and there is much less in the way of evidence-based analysis. I miss the old blog!

This is funny. Anyway, nowhere but up, you actually made an extremely poor investment decision with your assets in 2006 by not selling them at that price. As 17 of the 18 houses you own are rentals, I am sure that you are familiar with price to rent. I am also sure at that time that those houses were seliing for probably 20 times the yearly rent, which means you were returning 5% on your assets before paying insurance, taxes, and maintenance. So you were getting, my guess is, about 2% ROA on an asset with, as it has turned out, a fair amount of risk. The YTM on the 20 year t-bond fluctated between 4.75% and 5.5% in 2006, of which you wouldn't even have been paying CA state income taxes. (at least 9.3% for you) Lets say you depreciate the properties, so you effective tax rate is only 5%. So you were getting about 95% of 2% (1.9%) ROA on your assets in a risky proposition in which you had some amount of work, where you could have gotten 2.5 to 3 times that return on a completely risk free investment. And that is assuming 100% occupancy at the time. If any of your propoerties sits for even one month, your pretax ROA falls about .5%. Good job. Go ahead and gloat all you want. Even now, with home prices down 25% in your area, you should still sell your rental assets. If houses were selling for 20 times the yearly rent then, and they are down 25%, then now they are selling for 15 times the yearly rent. That is a ROA of 6.667% before taxes, maintenance, and insurance. Again lets say those three are 3%, bringing your pretax ROA to 3.667%. You get 95% of that because CA takes a chunk after depreciation, and your ROA is 3.48%. The YTM on the 30 year t-bond is today 4.19%. You are losing .7% for doing all of your landlording work even if you have 100% occupancy all the time. It's a good thing you inherited all those assets because you didn't inherit much else.

ann says

For what it’s worth, I have been finding the blog portion of this site simply unmanageable for some time now. The ideas are fragmented, and there is much less in the way of evidence-based analysis. I miss the old blog!

I agree. The old forum was much more informative and "to the point".

SG, >>Wait, it’s polite for him to say to me: “Are you married and do you have kids? I’m just curious if the passion you have politically has an effect of dampening your relationships or maybe you only show this side of you on this (and possibly other) forums?” I think this was very condescending of cashmonger. Being condescending IS impolite, and even less palatable if the motivation for being condescending is that you have run out of valid arguments.

I don't think a license is necessary to give shots, but deciding which shots to be given and what dosage does (after all, many diabetics inject themselves without issue, but they don't decide that they need to be injected in the first place). The botox thing doesn't bother me so much. If people are dumb enough to inject a deadly poison into their faces then they deserve to suffer ill effects.

Kevin says

I don’t think a license is necessary to give shots, but deciding which shots to be given and what dosage does (after all, many diabetics inject themselves without issue, but they don’t decide that they need to be injected in the first place). The botox thing doesn’t bother me so much. If people are dumb enough to inject a deadly poison into their faces then they deserve to suffer ill effects.

Sure, diabetics give shots. But they're injecting themselves with stuff prescribed by physicians. Drug addicts inject themselves, as do the women on that HCG diet (people inject themselves with fertility drugs and eat 500 calories a day). But if I go to get a shot, I would prefer that it be by someone who has a clue as to how deep to inject, what they're injecting & what to do if there's a problem. Not to mention universal precautions - do they understand them? Botox can be used for medical purposes - I would want a physician or trained personnel such as a nurse administering the shots. And passing along information - I would want someone who understands the issues. Do you want an untrained person passing your symptoms along to the doctor? I know that I don't, and when I need to speak with my doc I fax a note to him/her. Also, there are no requirements as to background checks, so the person injecting you could be a drug addict who's jonesing and can't focus.

Oh, I agree with you in general, but I still think that anyone dumb enough to inject poison into their face deserves to suffer the consequences, particularly if they're trying to do it on the cheap.

brutal, but true david1 says

This is funny. Anyway, nowhere but up, you actually made an extremely poor investment decision with your assets in 2006 by not selling them at that price. As 17 of the 18 houses you own are rentals, I am sure that you are familiar with price to rent. I am also sure at that time that those houses were seliing for probably 20 times the yearly rent, which means you were returning 5% on your assets before paying insurance, taxes, and maintenance. So you were getting, my guess is, about 2% ROA on an asset with, as it has turned out, a fair amount of risk. The YTM on the 20 year t-bond fluctated between 4.75% and 5.5% in 2006, of which you wouldn’t even have been paying CA state income taxes. (at least 9.3% for you) Lets say you depreciate the properties, so you effective tax rate is only 5%. So you were getting about 95% of 2% (1.9%) ROA on your assets in a risky proposition in which you had some amount of work, where you could have gotten 2.5 to 3 times that return on a completely risk free investment. And that is assuming 100% occupancy at the time. If any of your propoerties sits for even one month, your pretax ROA falls about .5%. Good job. Go ahead and gloat all you want. Even now, with home prices down 25% in your area, you should still sell your rental assets. If houses were selling for 20 times the yearly rent then, and they are down 25%, then now they are selling for 15 times the yearly rent. That is a ROA of 6.667% before taxes, maintenance, and insurance. Again lets say those three are 3%, bringing your pretax ROA to 3.667%. You get 95% of that because CA takes a chunk after depreciation, and your ROA is 3.48%. The YTM on the 30 year t-bond is today 4.19%. You are losing .7% for doing all of your landlording work even if you have 100% occupancy all the time. It’s a good thing you inherited all those assets because you didn’t inherit much else.

So, I've been dating this guy who can't stand the "trout lips" look so popular in Hollywood. He also loathes the skinny body/huge breast look because it's so artificial. I guess I'm asking you to weigh in on this one. I think that some of them look beautiful if not overdone, but like nice china they're pretty but useless. I have a problem putting something artificial in my body just to make me look better to others. And, of course there are the freaks that overdo: Check out www.awfulplasticsurgery.com; a few extreme cases to search would be Amanda Lepore, Jocelyn Wildenstein (aka the Cat Woman), and Priscilla Presley (too many injections, they solidified in her cheeks and can't be removed). But Paris Hilton is another example of plastic surgery gone wild, she was a mousy-looking, normal person who transformed herself. She had brown hair and a normal body & face pre-surgery. And she obviously has a stylist who tells her how to stand and from which angle to be photgraphed: http://parisfacial.ytmnd.com/ What do you think of the hollywood ideal?

Health Care Reform Is More Corporate Welfare By Ron Paul Published 09/19/09 Last Wednesday the nation was riveted to the President's speech on healthcare reform before Congress. While the President's concern for the uninsured is no doubt sincere, his plan amounts to a magnanimous gift to the health insurance industry, despite any implications to the contrary. For decades the insurance industry has been lobbying for mandated coverage for everyone. Imagine if the cell phone industry or the cable TV industry received such a gift from government? If government were to fine individuals simply for not buying a corporation's product, it would be an incredible and completely unfair boon to that industry, at the expense of freedom and the free market. Yet this is what the current healthcare reform plans intend to do for the very powerful health insurance industry. The stipulation that pre-existing conditions would have to be covered seems a small price to pay for increasing their client pool to 100% of the American people. A big red flag, however, is that they would also have immunity from lawsuits, should they fail to actually cover what they are supposedly required to cover, so these requirements on them are probably meaningless. Mandates on all citizens to be customers of theirs, however, are enforceable with fines and taxes. Insurance providers seem to have successfully equated health insurance with health care but this is a relatively new concept. There were doctors and medicine long before there was health insurance. Health insurance is not a bad thing, but it is not the only conceivable way to get health care. Instead, we seem to still rely on the creativity and competence of politicians to solve problems, which always somehow seem to be tied in with which lobby is the strongest in Washington. It is sad to think of the many creative, free market solutions that government prohibits with all its interference. What if instead of joining a health insurance plan, you could buy a membership directly from a hospital or doctor? What if a doctor wanted to have a cash-only practice, or make house calls, or determine his or her own patient load, or otherwise practice medicine outside the constraints of the current bureaucratic system? Alternative healthcare delivery models will be at an even stronger competitive disadvantage if families are forced to buy into the insurance model. And yet, the reforms are sold to us as increasing competition. What if just once Washington got out of the way and allowed the ingenuity of the American people to come up with a whole spectrum of alternatives to our broken system? Then the free market, not lobbyists and politicians, would decide which models work and which did not. Unfortunately, the most broken aspect of our system is that Washington sees the need to act on every problem in society, rather than staying out of the way, or getting out of the way. The only tools the government has are force and favors. These are tools that many unscrupulous and lazy corporations would like to wield to their own advantage, rather than simply providing a better product that people will willingly buy. It seems the health insurance industry will get more of those advantages very soon. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Ron Paul tells it like it is. I tried to post this as a new thread but for some reason it doesn't show up? Maybe it didn't meet with the censorship committee approval. Anyway I thought everyone should have a chance to read it before they force us all to drink the KOOLADE. The original link is: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=218

Funny, the left feels the same way!

BobK says

From what I’ve seen, the left has taken over the forum. I’m afraid that one day it will dominate to the point where dissent is punished.

I've been a naughty, naughty girl and need to be punished...