- This topic has 110 replies, 18 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 4 months ago by
chrisp.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 22, 2009 at 2:14 PM #435968July 22, 2009 at 3:31 PM #435227
CardiffBaseball
Participant[quote=creechrr]
Another company looking to leave Southern California. There seems to be a trend here.May I ask, what industry is your company in?
Florida isn’t bad. It’s just a flatter, wetter California. Pretty good cultural diversity (assuming you’re not against that).[/quote]
My company was already mentioned by techyworker on the layoff thread, so you don’t have to add to the grand total… Sorry can’t add much more.
I have no problem with a little diversity, though I tend to not want to live in the the urban hipster type places (at least until I get my kids through school).
July 22, 2009 at 3:31 PM #435433Participant[quote=creechrr]
Another company looking to leave Southern California. There seems to be a trend here.May I ask, what industry is your company in?
Florida isn’t bad. It’s just a flatter, wetter California. Pretty good cultural diversity (assuming you’re not against that).[/quote]
My company was already mentioned by techyworker on the layoff thread, so you don’t have to add to the grand total… Sorry can’t add much more.
I have no problem with a little diversity, though I tend to not want to live in the the urban hipster type places (at least until I get my kids through school).
July 22, 2009 at 3:31 PM #435751Participant[quote=creechrr]
Another company looking to leave Southern California. There seems to be a trend here.May I ask, what industry is your company in?
Florida isn’t bad. It’s just a flatter, wetter California. Pretty good cultural diversity (assuming you’re not against that).[/quote]
My company was already mentioned by techyworker on the layoff thread, so you don’t have to add to the grand total… Sorry can’t add much more.
I have no problem with a little diversity, though I tend to not want to live in the the urban hipster type places (at least until I get my kids through school).
July 22, 2009 at 3:31 PM #435824Participant[quote=creechrr]
Another company looking to leave Southern California. There seems to be a trend here.May I ask, what industry is your company in?
Florida isn’t bad. It’s just a flatter, wetter California. Pretty good cultural diversity (assuming you’re not against that).[/quote]
My company was already mentioned by techyworker on the layoff thread, so you don’t have to add to the grand total… Sorry can’t add much more.
I have no problem with a little diversity, though I tend to not want to live in the the urban hipster type places (at least until I get my kids through school).
July 22, 2009 at 3:31 PM #435993Participant[quote=creechrr]
Another company looking to leave Southern California. There seems to be a trend here.May I ask, what industry is your company in?
Florida isn’t bad. It’s just a flatter, wetter California. Pretty good cultural diversity (assuming you’re not against that).[/quote]
My company was already mentioned by techyworker on the layoff thread, so you don’t have to add to the grand total… Sorry can’t add much more.
I have no problem with a little diversity, though I tend to not want to live in the the urban hipster type places (at least until I get my kids through school).
July 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM #435232smshorttimer
ParticipantWell this is just one story about cultural diversity from one person, but I have a family member — lifelong San Diegan — who moved to around Orlando and he experienced culture shock, particularly the number of times he’s heard the N-word uttered there.
July 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM #435438ParticipantWell this is just one story about cultural diversity from one person, but I have a family member — lifelong San Diegan — who moved to around Orlando and he experienced culture shock, particularly the number of times he’s heard the N-word uttered there.
July 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM #435756ParticipantWell this is just one story about cultural diversity from one person, but I have a family member — lifelong San Diegan — who moved to around Orlando and he experienced culture shock, particularly the number of times he’s heard the N-word uttered there.
July 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM #435829ParticipantWell this is just one story about cultural diversity from one person, but I have a family member — lifelong San Diegan — who moved to around Orlando and he experienced culture shock, particularly the number of times he’s heard the N-word uttered there.
July 22, 2009 at 4:04 PM #435998ParticipantWell this is just one story about cultural diversity from one person, but I have a family member — lifelong San Diegan — who moved to around Orlando and he experienced culture shock, particularly the number of times he’s heard the N-word uttered there.
July 22, 2009 at 4:14 PM #435242sdduuuude
ParticipantJust thinking out loud here.
Seems to me that they would eventually have to end such a program, and when they end the program, housing prices would just revert back to where they were.
So, lets say today the market value of a home (without the tax break) is $200K. The gov gives a $15K tax break, meaning people would be willing to spend more than $200K on that house – because they aren’t really paying $200K. Lets say market forces bring about a situation where buyer and seller split the 15K so the house is purchased for $207,500. The buyer spends $192,500.
Lets say a few years pass, and the house value doesn’t change. Expected purchase price is still $207K.
Then, the govt nukes the $15K tax benefit. Without the tax benefit, the expected sales price of the house would go back to 200K. The net effect on housing prices is 0.
If the government reduces spending in other places to make up for the $15,000 loss in revenue, I’d be all for it as it would effectively be a tax reduction. I doubt that will happen.
Really, the govt is keeping gov. spending the same, borrowing the money they didn’t get from the buyers, and paying interest on it all for the purpose of keeping housing prices up for as long as the program is in place.
A truly unsustainable program.
July 22, 2009 at 4:14 PM #435448ParticipantJust thinking out loud here.
Seems to me that they would eventually have to end such a program, and when they end the program, housing prices would just revert back to where they were.
So, lets say today the market value of a home (without the tax break) is $200K. The gov gives a $15K tax break, meaning people would be willing to spend more than $200K on that house – because they aren’t really paying $200K. Lets say market forces bring about a situation where buyer and seller split the 15K so the house is purchased for $207,500. The buyer spends $192,500.
Lets say a few years pass, and the house value doesn’t change. Expected purchase price is still $207K.
Then, the govt nukes the $15K tax benefit. Without the tax benefit, the expected sales price of the house would go back to 200K. The net effect on housing prices is 0.
If the government reduces spending in other places to make up for the $15,000 loss in revenue, I’d be all for it as it would effectively be a tax reduction. I doubt that will happen.
Really, the govt is keeping gov. spending the same, borrowing the money they didn’t get from the buyers, and paying interest on it all for the purpose of keeping housing prices up for as long as the program is in place.
A truly unsustainable program.
July 22, 2009 at 4:14 PM #435766ParticipantJust thinking out loud here.
Seems to me that they would eventually have to end such a program, and when they end the program, housing prices would just revert back to where they were.
So, lets say today the market value of a home (without the tax break) is $200K. The gov gives a $15K tax break, meaning people would be willing to spend more than $200K on that house – because they aren’t really paying $200K. Lets say market forces bring about a situation where buyer and seller split the 15K so the house is purchased for $207,500. The buyer spends $192,500.
Lets say a few years pass, and the house value doesn’t change. Expected purchase price is still $207K.
Then, the govt nukes the $15K tax benefit. Without the tax benefit, the expected sales price of the house would go back to 200K. The net effect on housing prices is 0.
If the government reduces spending in other places to make up for the $15,000 loss in revenue, I’d be all for it as it would effectively be a tax reduction. I doubt that will happen.
Really, the govt is keeping gov. spending the same, borrowing the money they didn’t get from the buyers, and paying interest on it all for the purpose of keeping housing prices up for as long as the program is in place.
A truly unsustainable program.
July 22, 2009 at 4:14 PM #435839ParticipantJust thinking out loud here.
Seems to me that they would eventually have to end such a program, and when they end the program, housing prices would just revert back to where they were.
So, lets say today the market value of a home (without the tax break) is $200K. The gov gives a $15K tax break, meaning people would be willing to spend more than $200K on that house – because they aren’t really paying $200K. Lets say market forces bring about a situation where buyer and seller split the 15K so the house is purchased for $207,500. The buyer spends $192,500.
Lets say a few years pass, and the house value doesn’t change. Expected purchase price is still $207K.
Then, the govt nukes the $15K tax benefit. Without the tax benefit, the expected sales price of the house would go back to 200K. The net effect on housing prices is 0.
If the government reduces spending in other places to make up for the $15,000 loss in revenue, I’d be all for it as it would effectively be a tax reduction. I doubt that will happen.
Really, the govt is keeping gov. spending the same, borrowing the money they didn’t get from the buyers, and paying interest on it all for the purpose of keeping housing prices up for as long as the program is in place.
A truly unsustainable program.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
