patrick.net

Michelle Cardinal, 37, formerly a customer service specialist for Searchme, also has landed a new job after being cut in October. “I’ve been laid off twice in 2008,” said Cardinal, who lost one job in February at Flickr, the photo-sharing subsidiary of Yahoo.com, then landed the position at Searchme in April.

The October layoff came during the week when Cardinal and her husband were about to close on a house in San Francisco. They managed to back away from the deal, and within a few weeks, a former co-worker had put her name through to Redroom.com, a San Francisco startup developing an online community for authors, agents and the literati.

“I was ridiculously lucky,” said Cardinal, who also had gotten some leads from Santiago before landing at Redroom after only a few weeks of joblessness. Her take on the startup lifestyle after more than a decade of job-hopping: “With the potential for great rewards come great risks.”

Deflation:
"Complexity for minimum component costs has increased at a rate of roughly a factor of two per year",
-Electronics, 38 (8), 1965.

Another way to increase complexity per minimum component cost by a factor of two per year is to cut the labor cost.

Think about it. Moore's Law.

Tesla. Bad name. Call it Edison and perhaps it might have a chance. LOL.

I still don't understand why anyone would pay $100K for that.

For that price, you can get a 750i.

I wouldn’t worry about those fortress people. For the most part they’re rich Asians, lotsa money from Asia they can patriate here to cover their standards of living.

MIRAGE is a myth.

Asia will be in free-fall any time now. I am sorry, but we all have to pay the piper, Asians or not.

SP Says:
# Different Sean Says:
I understand SF Bay Area prices are down 45% this year????

Only the median. Last year, the low end was stalled and mostly middle and high end properties moved, so the median in Nov 2007 was artificially high. This year seems to be the reverse - foreclosure sales are fattening up the low end (at lower distress pricing) while the high end is stalled because there are not enough buyers to make transactions happen at the ridiculous asking prices. As a result, recorded sales in Nov 2008 are mostly low-end - which when compared with the Nov 2007 median seems like a huge drop.

I think the YOY comparisons will flatten out from this extreme in a few months - giving realtwhores and that joker at Dataqueef a chance to claim that the market is bottoming out…

It's very similar here re the convenient representation of medians when the market is stalling and sales volumes are down. REIC reporting tactics seem uncannily similar.

Except for this bit:
Also, In the areas where most of us would actually _want_ to buy, wishing prices are down only about 15%. The ‘fortress’ has cracked, most people I meet are silently worried, and the fools who chanted ‘it won’t happen in crappertino’ have mostly shut the fuck up - but panic is yet to take hold.
I'm still waiting for 40% declines in real value going forward -- Steve Keen as mentioned above predicted this figure over a few years, and even sold his central city apartment in order to walk the talk, claiming he'll pick something up again after the crash...

justme Says:
December 28th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Health care is going to be a big topic in 2009.

On that note, does anyone here have some health care BLOGS to recommend? The ideal would be to find a blog that was the “Patrick.Net of Health Care”.

Not offhand, but a sizeable proportion of the OECD has some kind of 'single payer' medical system, aka socia1ised medicine, aka universal healthcare, so there are plenty of models to choose from. People in those countries receive benefits as a social guarantee though so they don't need to blog about it. The challenge to Obama is to come up with a solution that works that isn't going to be kyboshed by HMOs, insurers, big pharma, Republican and Democrat Congressmen receiving kickbacks, etc, due to too much change and taking away all the fat that's fed them for so long. The Australian PBS system delivers pharmaceuticals even cheaper than Canada, and has been a formidable and longstanding foe of big pharma. Ubiquitous 'bulk-billing' medical practices see all patients for free. Private health insurance is still far from a necessity, it made more sense to go public in an emergency, but the system was being whittled away by the last govt...

The availability, stability and value of traditional defined benefit pensions are diminished. Americans are experiencing dramatic losses in 401(k) and I.R.A. retirement savings accounts. Home equity is shrinking. Employers have been bailing out of retiree health plans. Unemployment is increasing and now, faced with mounting pressures, some employers are reducing contributions to 401(k) plans.

This unfortunate state of affairs serves to remind the nation of the importance of the core mission of Social Security — to provide widespread and basic protection against loss of income due to death, disability or retirement.

Although this comes as a surprise to some, Social Security is fundamentally sound, backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. Projected financing problems, though real, are relatively modest, manageable and many years in the future.

For those of us fortunate enough to have retirement savings, we can only wish that the value of the other assets in our portfolios are as well positioned to withstand the current economic uncertainty.

DS,

Fair enough, and I am familiar with all the single-payer models etc.

However, I still feel like there is a lack of understanding (on my part and in general) on how the current system REALLY works, in terms of how the different Actors in the system behave and WHY.

E.g., what are the main incentives and motivating factors, how do they affect patient care, what are the economics of care delivery (and non-delivery), etc etc etc.

It is kinda' like this:

We all thought we knew on a basic level how the mortgage business works, but then it turned out upon closer scrutiny (as delivered by CR and Tanta et al) to be much more complex and multi-faceted that the average person had ever imagined.

My postulate is that the health-care business is much the same way. And I would like to understand it.

I would google 'us health care system inefficient' for starters.

While you can go into all the ins and outs and why and wherefores of how the US healthcare insurance model is structured, at the end of the day it is just that: an insurance system, attempting to deny claims and in many cases denying claims in the interests of profiting shareholders. It doesn't particularly intrigue me to try to decipher how any particular insurance business operates, to be honest.

The difference when you switch to a so-called 'single payer' model is suddenly that you don't spend all day trying to think of ways of knocking back claims, you suddenly become *twice* as efficient as you get on with the core business of delivering healthcare, and payments are streamlined and it simply becomes a case of administration. In the case of a GP consult, they type in a couple of entries on a standard form, the patient signs it, and the govt reimburses the doctor. Very simple. Then it is simply up to the tiers of govt to determine how to py for and run the hospitals, e.g. Federal sales tax here gets returned to the states, the states run the hospitals and pay everyone. Nothing to it.

Scrap social security and use the money for universal health care. How about that?

you don’t spend all day trying to think of ways of knocking back claims, you suddenly become *twice* as efficient as you get on with the core business of delivering healthcare

We still need a mechanism to knock back unnecessary medical procedures.

I really won't say the people in fortress are mostly rich Asians, I have met plenty of not-so-rich-oh-so-in-debt Asians, particularly in Palo Alto, because it is such a mecca for Asians with its reputation spreading far and near in India, China, Singapore, Hong Kong etc., some Asians see it their lifetime goal to own a piece of Palo Alto. What if you cannot really afford it? Borrow it. Living in Palo Alto being a "neighbor" to Steve Jobs is a huge bragging right.

South Palo Alto is full of people like that. I know of a guy who took on $1.2M loan to get into an Eichler home. If you are rich, you won't take on any mortgage loan beyond $1M because beyond that magic number you lose mortgage interest tax deduction. People who borrowed $1.2M really need that amount of money. Think about how fragile that family's financial situation is? What if 2 incomes become 1 income, even briefly?

On top of this, Asia is deeply affected by our recession, when American consumers poop out, who is going to buy their exports? I really won't count on fortresses being immune, although I think the key determinant for fortress to crack a big way is the job market, which is quite ok for these worker bees.

When Google starts to lay off 10% of its full-time workforce, fortress will easily lose 30% of its value.

If we scrap social security, that will take care of the Medicare problem in about 2-3 years.

Nothing against Facebook, but where does the dough come from? In a more polite term, what is their biz model and how do they expect to be cash flow positive just based on operations?

Any companies that are not cash flow positive will be wiped out in a year, because no VC (VC cannot close fund raising rounds) will have enough resources to pour money into a black hole. I personally think LinkedIn will do much better, because now that job market has gotten tough, I see TONS, TONS of activities from acquaintances on LinkedIN, and they are definitely willing to pay for service if that is how they can access their job leads from friends and ex-colleagues. LinkedIn has reached the critical mass for pricing power.

What do I need Facebook for? None of my friends or colleagues are on Facebook for constant maintenance, the active users of Facebook are either in college or graduated without a job (trend of 2009). Very soon, because of the education loan crisis and credit crunch, many small private colleges will be closing down, and students cannot get loans for their college education. The Facebook target customers are so dead.

If we scrap social security, that will take care of the Medicare problem in about 2-3 years.

Very well. Soon, we will realize that retirement is unnatural and extending welfare to retirees is against Nature. We will learn this lesson hard.

RE: Facebook

I have small-business-owner friends who love Facebook. It is a good social-networking tool.

Medicare and SS are the biggest Ponzi schemes in the world. Worse still, this is the ONLY country in the world where ONLY the elderly get such lavish treatment on the dime of everyone else.

Because of Medicare and SS, lots of Americans falsely believe that their retirement are taken care of and squander to no ends while they are young, and rely completely on the rest of us to fund their retirement and lengthen their life span. Well, there won't be enough of "us" around to support these people because of a simple fact - population structure.

Self-funded retirement is admirable, and that should be the goal of everyone. I am ok with providing elderly with food so that they don't starve to death, but it is disgusting that we are giving an 85-year old cancer treatment

but it is disgusting that we are giving an 85-year old cancer treatment on taxpayers' money, while many younger people are without medical insurance or on insufficient medical insurance coverage.

I agree!!!

It is an upside-down ponzi scheme. Life past 70 is a luxury and medical care for elderly should not be free. In fact, we should slap a luxury tax on them.

Self-funded retirement is admirable, and that should be the goal of everyone.

Again, I agree.

I am ok with providing elderly with food so that they don’t starve to death, but it is disgusting that we are giving an 85-year old cancer treatment

We should feed the children before we feed the elderly.

I propose tying voting power to your marginal tax rate. If your tax bracket is 30%, you should have twice as much vote as someone who pays 15%.

People who do not pay income tax should NOT be allowed to vote.

Good heavens

Peter P Says:
Scrap social security and use the money for universal health care. How about that?

ah, in Oz and the UK they somehow manage to have unemployment benefits that never terminate, and aged pensions, and baby bonuses, and low cost university education, and free universal health care, all off a tax base similar to the US. And right now have $40bn in the bank on a tax basis of 10 million taxpayers. Must be magic.

Peter P Says:

We still need a mechanism to knock back unnecessary medical procedures.

That happens somewhat due to waiting lists and restrictions on funding for elective surgery, etc.

Is there no end to the insults? The general consensus at Merrill Lynch this past week is that most received bonuses comparable to last year. That's our f-ing tax dollars rewarding people for a performance that they should all be fired for!!!

This shit has gotta stop.

Peter P,

Perhaps tie voting to land owners like the old days! Maybe that could help move some inventory.

Paul

How about if we vote in the same manner that stockholders vote - by number of shares. Only we base it on income tax payment. So your votes are weighted by your latest or recent income tax payments. Those who pay no tax get no vote, and those who pay the bulk of the tax bill get the bulk of the say.

Peter P says: "Very well. Soon, we will realize that retirement is unnatural and extending welfare to retirees is against Nature. We will learn this lesson hard."

The really hard lesson will be when you reach old and feable age and cannot support yourself, and get no retirement under your proposed system.

Essentially you advocate starving the old out - even though they have previously been productive citizens. Such a harsh society would, no doubt, kill all non-productive adult citizens. No welfare needed - just kill the leaches to save money. Certainly the never productive are less deserving than the previously productive!

At the other end of the spectrum is the environment we have actually been migrating toward, where we subsidize uselessness by taxing the productive people and giving it to people who produce nothing (except more welfare recipients). This reminds me of the Americans with No Abilities Act, a law intended to protect the millions of Americans who lack any real skills or ambition:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28982

enjoy.

I liked this, many many thanks Zephyr :-)

Congress Passes Americans With No Abilities Act
June 24, 1998 | Issue 33•24

Related Articles
Lewinsky Subpoenaed To Re-Blow Clinton On Senate Floor

WASHINGTON, DC—On Tuesday, Congress approved the Americans With No Abilities Act, sweeping new legislation that provides benefits and protection for more than 135 million talentless Americans.

The act, signed into law by President Clinton shortly after its passage, is being hailed as a major victory for the millions upon millions of U.S. citizens who lack any real skills or uses.

Zephyr, we may have the worst of both worlds. :)

The unproductive will still be rewarded and we will still get nothing when we retire.

How about if we vote in the same manner that stockholders vote - by number of shares.

Already proposed! :)

http://patrick.net/wp/?p=336#comment-140700

Already proposed!?? Great! Sorry I missed that. So, lets vote on it. But, do we count he votes based on the new or old system?

"...we may have the worst of both worlds. The unproductive will still be rewarded and we will still get nothing when we retire."

Perhaps the reason we will have nothing when we retire is because the unproductive are rewarded.

Addition by subtraction. Subtracting a liability is as good as adding an asset. Doing both is a homerun.

So, stop subsidizing the never productive, and put them to work.

Perhaps the reason we will have nothing when we retire is because the unproductive are rewarded.

I have to agree. :(

If convicted felons are not allowed to vote, why should career welfare receipients be allowed to? Many felons have at least been productive before! I am all for a social safety net but people should not be allowed to rely on welfare indefinitely.

Case Shiller is out.

SFO (Bay Area) is now at 139.44.
Down 4.18% MoM
Down 30.98% YoY
Down 36.15% fro Peak in May 2006

Using 2% MoM declines we reach equilibrium now in April/May of 2009 - but that is relativeto retracing the bubble using an anual BA historic appreciation of 4.25%.
At this point I feel normal appreciation is off the table. Inflation is now negative and recession with job-loss and jumbo mortgage unaffordability will drive the market below the pre-bubble historic norms. I feel we can easily see Nominal 2000 pricing by early 2010. In theory, the market will simply stall there for a while but this is heavily dependant on how the economy is managed.
With the rate debt is being added to the US, there is a chance of whipsaw inflaton that the Fed would need to drive rates through the roof to correct. That will have the effect f really depressing housing.
So, I see early 2010 as a time to get a low rate, fairly low cost house. Then some time starting near mid 2011 housing will start another downward correction due to rising mortgage rates. Those with cash in 2012 will not care about the high rates and can get homes cheaper than 2010.
Of course there is a TON of economic intervention coming between now nd then. . .

Citi/Chase just informed me that they are closing one of my unused-for-24-months credit card accounts.

Talk about closing the barn doors after the cows are gone. Or closing the wrong barn door in this case.

Talk about closing the barn doors after the cows are gone. Or closing the wrong barn door in this case.

Actually, that might be a cost cutting measure. After all, why should Citi pay the cost of keeping revolving credit lines open for people too smart to use them?

Speaking of housing, did anyone notice that the tax code for 2008 allows one to deduct house property tax, even when one does not itemize? That is a boon for people with paid-for or nearly paid-for houses. Paid-for homes obviously generate no interest deduction, which makes the owners unlikely to have enough other deductions to make itemizing worthwhile. But now the "true" homeowners can take the standard deduction as well as deducting property tax. Is the tax code now encouraging housing thrift? Is someone going to catch hell from the bank lobby for letting this item slip in? I like it!

HeadSet,

Actually, that might be a cost cutting measure. After all, why should Citi pay the cost of keeping revolving credit lines open for people too smart to use them?

I think they will spend more money on postage and paper for trying to get me to sign up again than they do keeping a few bytes of account in their computer.

But seriously, the bank is probably grouping me in with the crowd that is (or they think is) just about ready to max out all their old cards as a last gasp before going bankrupt.

HeadSet,

One can elect not to itemize, except that particular ONE item. Very strange.

A shrivel of integrity left for what's remaining in the system?

http://news.ino.com/headlines/?newsid=68956898476790

Well, Saturn just turned retrograde.