Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
drboom
Participant[quote=IT.MOM]I don’t want to sound like I am advertising for the agent.
But there is no GFE fee or any other ancillary fees.
Sounds too good to be true. I really don’t know how did she ( the agent) do it.Before refinance my rate is 5.0%[/quote]
Our fellow piggs will correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there’s a problem with posting information like this–quite the contrary!
Seriously, if I could refi down to the rate you got and break even in less than a year I’d jump on it.
ParticipantPretty good for a jumbo.
I looked into refinancing my year-old 30 year/5.125% fixed loan a few weeks ago. The payback was in the 3.5 year range when all of the GFE items were taken into account, so I gave it a miss–we’re conserving ready cash given the employment environment.
Do you mind telling us who the lender was and what the approximate total was for ancillary fees? I might jump on it if the payback is short enough.
ParticipantPretty good for a jumbo.
I looked into refinancing my year-old 30 year/5.125% fixed loan a few weeks ago. The payback was in the 3.5 year range when all of the GFE items were taken into account, so I gave it a miss–we’re conserving ready cash given the employment environment.
Do you mind telling us who the lender was and what the approximate total was for ancillary fees? I might jump on it if the payback is short enough.
ParticipantPretty good for a jumbo.
I looked into refinancing my year-old 30 year/5.125% fixed loan a few weeks ago. The payback was in the 3.5 year range when all of the GFE items were taken into account, so I gave it a miss–we’re conserving ready cash given the employment environment.
Do you mind telling us who the lender was and what the approximate total was for ancillary fees? I might jump on it if the payback is short enough.
ParticipantPretty good for a jumbo.
I looked into refinancing my year-old 30 year/5.125% fixed loan a few weeks ago. The payback was in the 3.5 year range when all of the GFE items were taken into account, so I gave it a miss–we’re conserving ready cash given the employment environment.
Do you mind telling us who the lender was and what the approximate total was for ancillary fees? I might jump on it if the payback is short enough.
ParticipantPretty good for a jumbo.
I looked into refinancing my year-old 30 year/5.125% fixed loan a few weeks ago. The payback was in the 3.5 year range when all of the GFE items were taken into account, so I gave it a miss–we’re conserving ready cash given the employment environment.
Do you mind telling us who the lender was and what the approximate total was for ancillary fees? I might jump on it if the payback is short enough.
Participant[quote=jeeman]The only reason we had a surplus in 1998-2000 was because of massive capital gains tax revenues from the stock market bubble. When this went away, the deficits returned. Bush cut tax *rates*, but if you look at tax *revenue* charts, the revenues climbed after the rate cuts.[/quote]
This is a widely-held belief (that a surplus existed), but it’s not true.
A change in accounting lumped Social Security contributions into the government’s “income” category. It was a dishonest change and was done for obvious political reasons. There was in fact a substantial (though laughably low by 2010 standards) deficit throughout that period.
Participant[quote=jeeman]The only reason we had a surplus in 1998-2000 was because of massive capital gains tax revenues from the stock market bubble. When this went away, the deficits returned. Bush cut tax *rates*, but if you look at tax *revenue* charts, the revenues climbed after the rate cuts.[/quote]
This is a widely-held belief (that a surplus existed), but it’s not true.
A change in accounting lumped Social Security contributions into the government’s “income” category. It was a dishonest change and was done for obvious political reasons. There was in fact a substantial (though laughably low by 2010 standards) deficit throughout that period.
Participant[quote=jeeman]The only reason we had a surplus in 1998-2000 was because of massive capital gains tax revenues from the stock market bubble. When this went away, the deficits returned. Bush cut tax *rates*, but if you look at tax *revenue* charts, the revenues climbed after the rate cuts.[/quote]
This is a widely-held belief (that a surplus existed), but it’s not true.
A change in accounting lumped Social Security contributions into the government’s “income” category. It was a dishonest change and was done for obvious political reasons. There was in fact a substantial (though laughably low by 2010 standards) deficit throughout that period.
Participant[quote=jeeman]The only reason we had a surplus in 1998-2000 was because of massive capital gains tax revenues from the stock market bubble. When this went away, the deficits returned. Bush cut tax *rates*, but if you look at tax *revenue* charts, the revenues climbed after the rate cuts.[/quote]
This is a widely-held belief (that a surplus existed), but it’s not true.
A change in accounting lumped Social Security contributions into the government’s “income” category. It was a dishonest change and was done for obvious political reasons. There was in fact a substantial (though laughably low by 2010 standards) deficit throughout that period.
Participant[quote=jeeman]The only reason we had a surplus in 1998-2000 was because of massive capital gains tax revenues from the stock market bubble. When this went away, the deficits returned. Bush cut tax *rates*, but if you look at tax *revenue* charts, the revenues climbed after the rate cuts.[/quote]
This is a widely-held belief (that a surplus existed), but it’s not true.
A change in accounting lumped Social Security contributions into the government’s “income” category. It was a dishonest change and was done for obvious political reasons. There was in fact a substantial (though laughably low by 2010 standards) deficit throughout that period.
ParticipantRandom thoughts:
If you have the space, I’ve seen amorphous silicon panels (Kaneka) for less than $1/watt. They’re inefficient (6% or so), so you need a lot of room for a given amount of power. But they do better in cloudy weather than mono- or poly-crystalline cells.
A friend of mine put in a solar heater for his pool and loves it. It takes up a huge amount of space, but he has an otherwise unusable east-facing slope right next to his pool so it worked out great. He changed out the pump motor for something more efficient, and that helped keep the power consumption down.
The same friend put a 4kW system up a couple of years ago, and he had a long-running fight with the (well known) contractor over the actual vs. promised performance of the system. If you do one of these, make sure the contractor gets the engineering right and puts the design numbers in writing.
If you don’t use a lot of power, the payback for solar can be lengthy or non-existent. Don’t forget to factor in the time value of money when doing your calculations (unless you’re a serious gold bug who thinks the dollar will be worthless in a few years anyway).
Mandatory Time Of Use (TOU) metering could change solar economics, and it may be coming soon. My neighborhood is scheduled for smart meter rollout in December, but I haven’t heard anything about tariff revisions that mandate residential TOU. SDG&E has a voluntary SES TOU (“Net Electric Metering” in their jargon) program, but UCAN has serious questions about whether the program works for most people. I wouldn’t depend on it helping the consumer.
ParticipantRandom thoughts:
If you have the space, I’ve seen amorphous silicon panels (Kaneka) for less than $1/watt. They’re inefficient (6% or so), so you need a lot of room for a given amount of power. But they do better in cloudy weather than mono- or poly-crystalline cells.
A friend of mine put in a solar heater for his pool and loves it. It takes up a huge amount of space, but he has an otherwise unusable east-facing slope right next to his pool so it worked out great. He changed out the pump motor for something more efficient, and that helped keep the power consumption down.
The same friend put a 4kW system up a couple of years ago, and he had a long-running fight with the (well known) contractor over the actual vs. promised performance of the system. If you do one of these, make sure the contractor gets the engineering right and puts the design numbers in writing.
If you don’t use a lot of power, the payback for solar can be lengthy or non-existent. Don’t forget to factor in the time value of money when doing your calculations (unless you’re a serious gold bug who thinks the dollar will be worthless in a few years anyway).
Mandatory Time Of Use (TOU) metering could change solar economics, and it may be coming soon. My neighborhood is scheduled for smart meter rollout in December, but I haven’t heard anything about tariff revisions that mandate residential TOU. SDG&E has a voluntary SES TOU (“Net Electric Metering” in their jargon) program, but UCAN has serious questions about whether the program works for most people. I wouldn’t depend on it helping the consumer.
ParticipantRandom thoughts:
If you have the space, I’ve seen amorphous silicon panels (Kaneka) for less than $1/watt. They’re inefficient (6% or so), so you need a lot of room for a given amount of power. But they do better in cloudy weather than mono- or poly-crystalline cells.
A friend of mine put in a solar heater for his pool and loves it. It takes up a huge amount of space, but he has an otherwise unusable east-facing slope right next to his pool so it worked out great. He changed out the pump motor for something more efficient, and that helped keep the power consumption down.
The same friend put a 4kW system up a couple of years ago, and he had a long-running fight with the (well known) contractor over the actual vs. promised performance of the system. If you do one of these, make sure the contractor gets the engineering right and puts the design numbers in writing.
If you don’t use a lot of power, the payback for solar can be lengthy or non-existent. Don’t forget to factor in the time value of money when doing your calculations (unless you’re a serious gold bug who thinks the dollar will be worthless in a few years anyway).
Mandatory Time Of Use (TOU) metering could change solar economics, and it may be coming soon. My neighborhood is scheduled for smart meter rollout in December, but I haven’t heard anything about tariff revisions that mandate residential TOU. SDG&E has a voluntary SES TOU (“Net Electric Metering” in their jargon) program, but UCAN has serious questions about whether the program works for most people. I wouldn’t depend on it helping the consumer.
-
AuthorPosts
