patrick.net

DennisN,

I'll have to read that. Polling (like stock picking) is often said to be "more an art than a science" but Dick takes a lot of the mystery out of it for us non-politicos.

The reason I found the Tamarack story interesting was that there are several companies touting fairly substantial spin-offs and you find yourself wondering just who it is that will be able to finance them to get the deal done? Speaking of which MSFT is said to have an announcement (?) in about 2 hours. What... could it be?

Eliza Says:
February 20th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
"The car analogy does not work for me, quite, because sales tax and initial registration of a car would be more analogous to a transfer tax on a house. Transfer taxes and sales taxes are one-time events and do not concern me. "

Yes, but the registration is an ongoing thing based on the original purchase price of the car and adjusted each year. I'm just gauging the principle of the thing on a different example.

"if I work for the same company for years, shouldn’t I be taxed only on the amount I made the first year I worked, plus, say, 2% a year?"

Forget the tax rate, you're on to one of my problems with these entrenched boomers in these corporations who produce less, require more, and somehow have made themselves a protected class. They basically are doing a prop 13 but on the salary side.

"Rant: This is the 7th straight year my community has seen major cuts in funding for public schools."

This is where we disagree. For some reason schools keep needing more and more money, and they keep cutting and adding new bonds etc. Yes maybe 2% is low but owners are not paying less, they are paying more and more in real money each year. The fact that schools are still suffering even during the boom when revenues should have been gowing through the roof (lots of houses were sold, and even resold causing 2 to 10 fold increases in assessments) is proof positive that it is not an income problem, they simply won't spend the money properly. Using your own stat 7th straight year, that is basically describing the bubble period. Were they not cutting before the bubble when assessed values were much lower?

DennisN,

If you're near a TV tune in to CNBC, I guess they're ready to reveal Steffi and Andre's involvement in Tamarack shortly.

I’m not suggesting shorting gold, I’m just saying it may become profitable in not too long. And I think gold will exhibit much less “stickyness on the way down” than real estate has been showing.

"Not too long" can mean 1 month or 15 years.

The rise of gold has been relatively mild.

Rhodium was trading below $450/oz in 2003. It now costs over $8000/oz. Yes. More than 17 times.

BTW, Randy H is the resident expert on housing price stickiness.

RE: schools

School voucher is the answer. I have yet to see a rational argument against it.

I would also like to see more tax incentives for home schooling.

Jeff Bezos just unloaded 1.8M+ shares at $70+.

Time to buy puts on AMZN.

Who is Jeff Bezos?

Founder of AMZN.

@Peter P,

The COMEX/NYMEX does not like competition-

Why doesn’t GLD have options???

The COMEX/NYMEX does not like competition

Gold is also traded on CBOT anyway.

Anyone has experience with YG/ZG on CBOT? I heard it has good activities at night.

Peter P Says:

> RE: schools School voucher is the answer.
> I have yet to see a rational argument against it.

Liberals in general hate vouchers because it will allow poor people to take their kids out of public schools where they learn important things like “white men are evil” “SUVs kill polar bears” “government programs are the way to succeed”.

Liberals in the teachers union really hate vouchers since private schools don’t pay as much and actually expect you to teach vs. sitting at your desk e-mailing friends while the kids watch DVDs of current movies.

Free Market is the only feasible solution to education.

Liberals in the teachers union really hate vouchers since private schools don’t pay as much and actually expect you to teach vs. sitting at your desk e-mailing friends while the kids watch DVDs of current movies.

I was about to express offense at this (I was a public school teacher back in the '90s), but then I realized: a) I was never unionized, and b) it accurately describes some (though certainly not all) tenured teachers I knew.

I am not aware that private school teachers aren't paid as much.

I know in other parts of the world, the private school teachers are paid a LOT. For example, for the private schools in Hong Kong, a teacher with 10+ years experience was paid on average US$75K+ a year, and I am talking about the early 80s. My aunt-in-law was a private school teacher, and when she retired in the mid-90s, her gross salary was already close to US$120K (plus housing allowance). She also enjoys generous pension after retirement which was almost half of what she made right before retirement.

Most liberals are genuinely kind-hearted people who want to help.

Most teachers genuinely want the best for the kids.

However, mixing liberalism and human nature gives interesting chemistry.

Just out of curiosity, how much do these teachers at Harker make?

What about the real elite boarding school teachers at Philips Academy?

I believe that public school teachers only make about $50-80K in the Bay Area, which is really not a lot given that such positions require certain certification/training beyond undergrad education. It is hard for me to imagine that you can recruit any quality teachers at Harker at a salary below that.

Moreover, home-schooling should be encouraged.

I believe that public school teachers only make about $50-80K in the Bay Area, which is really not a lot given that such positions require certain certification/training beyond undergrad education.

In a relatively free job market, why would they choose this profession?

The problem with vouchers is that it will amplify the difference between good and bad schools. Good schools will take the vouchers, add tuition on top and start an arms race the like of which you have never seen before.

The lesser schools will decline even further. The less savvy parents will not know what to demand from their schools in return for their vouchers.

The net result will be an even further decline in uniformity, and a near total loss of opportunity for the pupils in the poorer areas.

Guess which choice the REIC (especially agents) are salivating over? That should tell you right there which choice is the right one.

The problem with vouchers is that it will amplify the difference between good and bad schools. Good schools will take the vouchers, add tuition on top and start an arms race the like of which you have never seen before.

What's the problem with differences?

The net result will be an even further decline in uniformity, and a near total loss of opportunity for the pupils in the poorer areas.

If uniformity is a virtue, God would have cloned us like Imperial Stormtroopers.

Why do you want uniformity? People are not born to be in equal in IQ, aptitude and creativity. We strive for a society of equal access to basic rights, not equal performance. We are not even born with equal opportunities, my kids will never get the same exposure and doors open to them as Bill Gates' kids, and that is fine with me.

In some areas, I have more rights than the emperor of Japan, who is prohibited by law from consuming Fugu. :)

Guess which choice the REIC (especially agents) are salivating over? That should tell you right there which choice is the right one.

Of course the REIC does NOT want vouchers, which empowers residents to send their kids anywhere they want.

Good schools will take the vouchers, add tuition on top and start an arms race the like of which you have never seen before.

Excellent! Free Market solution!

It is hard for me to imagine that you can recruit any quality teachers at Harker at a salary below that.

OO,

My wife was an Elementary School teacher. People who go into that field know they will be low paid, money is not the draw. You may have noticed that teacher shortages are not in the districts with the lowest, pay but where the students are more unruly. I never heard a teacher tell me they quit because of the pay. They lose heart after dealing with an entity that allows a student to be flunked only once, allows no way to effectively deal with disruptive students (one of the drivers at the cab company is a burley black man who quit teaching middle school to drive cabs because he was tired of facing down tough acting students), and parents concerned more with students "rights" over student learning. Add to that having coworkers who were hired more for affirmative action than for ability or work ethic.

I accompanied my wife to the housing projects several times for Parent-Teacher meetings. The third grade kids were able to be good students, but the parent (single term intended) usually stunk on ice and was the biggest detriment to the kids education.

Hopefully, the Supreme Court will get more conservative over time.

We need serious changes in the education system.

Headset,

thanks for the explanation. But low pay is definitely deterring more good people from entering this profession. In your wife's case, at least she has a spouse, you, who is probably making market salary. If she married another teacher, or remained single, her life would be very harsh given the cost of living in the BA. I think I have read some disheartening story about a teacher who had to get by at a homeless shelter.

I think such a compensation system is sickening. I am more than happy to pay for the best talents, and what investment is more important than our offspring? Teachers have kids too. Even if they are not materialistic at all, they still need to worry about putting food on the table for their family.

I am all for paying competent teachers the best salary we can afford. Admins are the people that we absolutely don't need at all. Parents who care about the education of their kids should be allowed to pay higher tuition to make teachers happy.

I am not a believer of public education.

We need serious changes in the education system.

I am not a believer of public education.

Me neither. But that should be obvious by now.

For too many parents, school is just a place to dump unwanted responsibilities. Such parents have no business having children.

Why did only one line of a post print? Oh well, here goes again

We need serious changes in the education system.

Even the "bad" schools with a high percentage of underachievers have some students who get scholarships or other academic achievement. A "bad" school is really just one where the the majority of students do not take advantage of what is offered.

You will never design a system that will give a good education to an unmotivated student with apathetic parent(s).

You will never design a system that will give a good education to an unmotivated student with apathetic parent(s).

But we can design a system that will ignore such influences.

But we can design a system that will ignore such influences.

How? Take kids away from bum parents and sent to boarding school?

How? Take kids away from bum parents and sent to boarding school?

We can send them to special schools that are more appropriate for their aptitudes. This way, they will be unable to adversely affect other students.

Good point.

Newport News has an "Achievable Dream Academy" that takes high risk kids. Seems to work, disipline and respect is enforce by Army NCOs who volunteer their time.

Newport News has an “Achievable Dream Academy” that takes high risk kids.

Yeah, we all want them to achieve the American Dream and buy a house with the latest financial innovations. It is that important. :)

Peter P Says:
February 21st, 2008 at 5:36 pm
-Good schools will take the vouchers, add tuition on top and start an arms race the like of which you have never seen before.- Justme

Excellent! Free Market solution! - Peter

This is the typical exchange on this particular topic. It's a funny issue because both sides agree on the outcome but for some reason the side claiming to want to improve public schools doesn't like the idea of allowing bad schools to fail. The argument goes something like, vouchers will mean everyone will flee from public schools and private businesses will make a lot of money. Then I get into the prop 13 argument with people saying public schools are underfunded. With no disrespect to anyone I have to ask, because it really begs the question, if schools are so underfunded why is it that these businesses will make a ton of profits with less public money and at the same time be so offensive as to draw away all the students with superior customer service?

justme Says:
February 21st, 2008 at 5:21 pm
"The lesser schools will decline even further. The less savvy parents will not know what to demand from their schools in return for their vouchers."

Oh no you di'ant. Are these the same parents who hate having their kids stuck in public schools with no other choices? You really believe that a parent concerned about their child's education to the point that they would yank them out of the public school, and actually shop for the best school, wouldn't have an expectation for a result?