Good Romney LA Times article today

[Anonymous]

Corporate profit margins? Do you mean Government Motors? Chrysler?

No true capitalist really wants the gov to bail out corporations that can’t manage their affairs.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Brutus]Corporate profit margins? Do you mean Government Motors? Chrysler?

No true capitalist really wants the gov to bail out corporations that can’t manage their affairs.[/quote]

You mean like when the government bailed out Bain Capital?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/08/29/feds-bailed-out-bain-co.html

just askin.

[Coronita]

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=flu][quote=no_such_reality]~US autoworker rant …[/quote]PM’ed you… In short, STFU… :)[/quote]

Thank you for beating me to the punch, flu 🙂
[/quote]

I think you misrepresented my intentions here.

I’m not agreeing with anyone here, and not definitely not disagreeing with nsr…..

Some of us are just tired of worthless, endless bickering on the most inane non-RE, non-financial, non-investment (or for that matter, anything off-topic, yet perhaps insightful thing)…that don’t contribute to anyone’s bottom line or helpful advice or “gee, I learned something new today”…

We’re just reminding each other to hold the original purpose of this blog and to immediately disengage from such abyssal/useless ratholes, and a gentle reminder to said folks that there’s probably better use of one’s time than to participate is such things…

(I know, I know, NSR…..STFU… I’m doing so myself..)

Have fun, I’ve got better things to do.

[Coronita]

In a celebrity 2-2 football tournament….Who do you think can handle the ball better? Romney/Ryan or Obama/Biden.

I’d say Obama being a younger dude probably can handle a ball better than Romney…But then again Ryan seems pretty energetic and Biden seems like an old fart…Maybe the better matchup is ryan v. obama and romney v. biden.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=flu] . . . Some of us are just tired of worthless, endless bickering on the most inane non-RE, non-financial, non-investment (or for that matter, anything off-topic, yet perhaps insightful thing)…that don’t contribute to anyone’s bottom line or helpful advice or “gee, I learned something new today”…[/quote]

Maybe a new thread should be started on the viability of rental SFRs in Detroit … as investments … for those who are becoming disenchanted with the stock market.

Being the foremost LEDLITA on this subject (who has never been anywhere NEAR MI), I’m not the one who should start it, ESP when we have *resident expert(s)* on board here ;=)

I mean, how much net rent annually does one need to pay off a $40-$45K mortgage and still end up with a little “profit” and a “slush fund” … even AFTER a property mgmt fee is taken into account? Or how about purchasing one for all cash and spending $5-$8K for repairs/replacements to put it into rental service?

They can’t be THAT badly built, given the ages of most of the neighborhoods and the fact that they are built to live in in sub-zero degree weather for several months per year, right?

The $64M question is “Are there enough prospective tenants there who have the income to rent and want to rent?” And, if so, “WHERE in the Detroit area would they prefer to rent, what is the average length of tenancy and how much does it cost to buy a good house there?”

And maybe the Piggs need to watch a good u-tube video on “pipe-wrapping.” Then they could “learn something” and perhaps get some good investment ideas for their stagnant portfolios :=]

Since you’re constantly on the lookout for “opportunities,” what’s wrong with this, flu? Do you know of anyplace with cheaper houses (that aren’t mobile homes)?

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]
Some of us are just tired of worthless, endless bickering on the most inane non-RE, non-financial, non-investment (or for that matter, anything off-topic, yet perhaps insightful thing)…that don’t contribute to anyone’s bottom line or helpful advice [/quote]

That’s kinda ironic coming from someone who wrote tons of childish, nah nah nah nah, posts.

You know, the kind of low-intelligence arguments that cutting spending is stimulative and creates jobs. Stupid arguments about confiscation and theft.

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=flu]
Some of us are just tired of worthless, endless bickering on the most inane non-RE, non-financial, non-investment (or for that matter, anything off-topic, yet perhaps insightful thing)…that don’t contribute to anyone’s bottom line or helpful advice [/quote]

That’s kinda ironic coming from someone who wrote tons of childish, nah nah nah nah, posts.

You know, the kind of low-intelligence arguments that cutting spending is stimulative and creates jobs. Stupid arguments about confiscation and theft.[/quote]

+1

Someone who not only joined in those threads, but started many of them. One whose very own username is “fat lazy union.” Kinda ironic, no?

Thank you, Brian.

[Arraya]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcGyLIp9iHg

[ocrenter]

[quote=flu][quote=bearishgurl][quote=flu][quote=no_such_reality]~US autoworker rant …[/quote]PM’ed you… In short, STFU… :)[/quote]

Thank you for beating me to the punch, flu 🙂
[/quote]

I think you misrepresented my intentions here.

I’m not agreeing with anyone here, and not definitely not disagreeing with nsr…..

Some of us are just tired of worthless, endless bickering on the most inane non-RE, non-financial, non-investment (or for that matter, anything off-topic, yet perhaps insightful thing)…that don’t contribute to anyone’s bottom line or helpful advice or “gee, I learned something new today”…

We’re just reminding each other to hold the original purpose of this blog and to immediately disengage from such abyssal/useless ratholes, and a gentle reminder to said folks that there’s probably better use of one’s time than to participate is such things…

(I know, I know, NSR…..STFU… I’m doing so myself..)

Have fun, I’ve got better things to do.[/quote]

FLU, problem is how many times can we say, “it is a great time to buy a primary or rental because prices are amazing and the interest rate crazy low, too bad you can’t find any inventory.”

[CA renter]

[quote=briansd1][quote=CA renter] The people who were behind the decimation of private sector unions are the very same folks who are leading the attacks against the public sector unions, and they are NOT “taxpayer advocates.” They are anti-labor capitalists, and Mitt Romney (some of us would argue Obama, as well) is going to help them accelerate the widening of the wealth/income gap, and weaken the voice of labor.[/quote]

CA renter, you should be blaming Reagan Democrats. Many of them were union members who voted for Reagan. I think the voters have has much responsibility as the leaders.

So considering how you feel, who are you going to vote for? Obama or Romney?

I just heard of an acquaintance who has been umemployed and living off of savings. He does not have health insurance but has cancer. He owns a house and has assets so he doesn’t qualify for any assistance. I heard that he’s looking to get treatment in Mexico or something… He’s a vociferous Republican. He made his bed, so he can lie in it now.[/quote]

Brian, I’ll be voting for Obama because we have no other choice. I would much prefer to have someone like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders in the White House, but in practice, they will probably have more power and influence in the Senate.

And yes, we know far, far too many of “that type” of Republican that you mentioned here. It’s insane, but there is no denying they exist — and in surprisingly large numbers. Very average workers who live paycheck to paycheck and retirees living on SS voting for Republicans…there’s some crazy stuff going on out there for sure.

[scaredyclassic]

I’m an agnostic as to the free market but a fervent believer in the flea market.

[ctr70]

[quote=SD Realtor]I thought that the following quote in the LA Times was one of the most responsible statements regarding housing that we have ever seen:

*****************************
….That man was typified by Romney’s response little more than a year ago when he was asked by the Las Vegas Review-Journal about another housing issue: What he would do about the foreclosure crisis that was costing thousands of Nevadans their homes?

“Let it run its course and hit the bottom,” Romney said. “Allow investors to buy homes, put renters in them, fix the homes up, and let it turn around and come back up.”
******************************[/quote]
I would vote for Romney just for this quote alone! That is exactly what should have happened. We should have just let the foreclosures run their course (like we have the past 100+ years) instead of all this absolute whacked out Gov intervention BS that happened instead (loan mod’s, people squatting in their houses for 3 years, the whole non-issue Robosigning sh*t). This quote by Romney shows some business intelligence and business mindset vs. the loony tunes that happened instead.

[Veritas]

More news:

Romney doubles charitable giving-

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/sep/21/romney-doubles-obamas-charitable-giving/

[pencilneck]

I was just reading that. The conclusion is potentially misleading as Romney has up to five years to take the tax deduction for his charitable contribution.

He admits to over paying on his taxes to hit the target he said he’d hit. Since he can deduct the contributions in following years, I think it is some potentially pretty sneaky accounting.

article clip:

“Mr. Malt said the Romneys would have had an even lower tax burden if they’d claimed the full deduction for all of their charitable giving in 2011, but said they “limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the governor’s statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13 percent in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.”

When charitable contributions and federal and state taxes are combined, it amounted to 38.5 percent of the Romneys’ income, the trustee said.”

[Veritas]

Yes, I agree with you pencilneck it is really sneaky accounting of Romney. How dare he be so generous, especially when it makes Obama look cheap. What a jerk. “That’s nearly twice the rate of President Obama, who according to his tax returns from 2000 through 2011 donated just less than 7 percent of his adjusted gross income to charities.”

[Author]

Posts