[dumbrenter]

Yes, I did end up living in Carmel Valley & still renting as my name indicates. North of 56.

[dumbrenter]

For you item #2, I was asked about $2500 for a 3-bedroom in that same apartment community 3 years ago. Thought it was too expensive and declined.
If I remember correctly, these were prices assuming a 1 year lease.

[dumbrenter]

I am still a dumbrenter at this time, but did you happen to read that there are statutory limits on how much of property taxes could go for debt servicing? and these smart homeowners get to vote too!! they would rather PUSD default than pony up more monies in taxes. So either way, its a good deal for all except the lenders unless they find another sucker to buy a derivative off it.
But 20 years from now we will have smart educated spawn of dumbrenter (assuming I move there) who benefited from the high quality education that PUSD provided with the borrowed money.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=dumbrenter]Harvey,
Those who can’t do math will eventually have to go to work for those who can.
This is a very good deal that PUSD has gotten into. Hooray to all new home buyers in 4S & other PUSD neighborhoods.
Lets see, PUSD gets money now and promise to pay 20 years from now and even that is at a slightly higher interest rate. What is not to like in this plan?
Of course, I would not be a lender for such a risky idea, but kudos to PUSD for finding suckers to give them money.
Now, if only I could get a similar deal myself!

It is sad to see Voice of San Diego joining in this manufactured outrage though.[/quote]

All I can say is, if you live within the PUSD, I hope you’re still a dumbrenter, dumbrenter. If you’re a homeowner/taxdebtor there, I hope you’re planning on getting out while you still can . . .[/quote]

[dumbrenter]

Harvey,
Those who can’t do math will eventually have to go to work for those who can.
This is a very good deal that PUSD has gotten into. Hooray to all new home buyers in 4S & other PUSD neighborhoods.
Lets see, PUSD gets money now and promise to pay 20 years from now and even that is at a slightly higher interest rate. What is not to like in this plan?
Of course, I would not be a lender for such a risky idea, but kudos to PUSD for finding suckers to give them money.
Now, if only I could get a similar deal myself!

It is sad to see Voice of San Diego joining in this manufactured outrage though.

[dumbrenter]

who do you think is going to win the gold in curling?

[dumbrenter]

[quote=briansd1] Romney could have said: “I ran a complex multi-billion dollar business; I had deals to complete, accounts to close, money to transfer, all in amounts that you people cannot begin to understand. Do you realize that I sacrificed and gave up making even greater wealth to become the leader of you people? So stop pestering me with the little details.”
[/quote]

If Romney does say that, he’ll get my vote for sure.

[dumbrenter]

Davelj, you pointed a good example where a ‘cartel’ can tweak the outcomes in their favor. Does your example hold in cases where over 50% of a public company is held by a few individuals?
Also you got me interested about avoiding public companies….where else does an investor go if equity & bond markets are to be avoided?

[quote=davelj] I’m a big fan of markets – I used to be a small-l libertarian and I still have a great fondness for markets. But they don’t work ALL the time and it goes beyond just the textbook cases of market failure (e.g., pollution).

One big market failure is executive compensation at public companies. Public companies are fantastic vehicles for looting. Ownership tends to be fragmented and most large institutional shareholders place greater value on the information that management provides them than they do on proper governance. And the trading is such that there are very few “owners” and lots of “renters,” which is perfect for management. Consequently, it’s very unusual – although not unheard of – for investors to stage a coup (there almost has to be gross negligence involved). The boards are typically hand-picked by management and championed to the nominating committee. And of course the board fees are so lucrative relative to the time commitment that most decisions, including compensation, are rubber stamped. It’s really a complete joke. Once in a blue moon someone like Icahn will come along and shake things up but that’s the dramatic exception to the rule. So, I’d say executive compensation within public companies is a pretty big market failure as a result of internal control fraud. The shepherds (mutual funds, hedge funds, etc.) render the ultimate owners (the investors in those funds) impotent… and management runs roughshod over the lot of them. Which is why, in my view, public companies are to be generally avoided if at all possible.

So while I certainly prefer situations in which a pure market determines value… there are a lot of situations in which folks manage to do their damndest to make certain that doesn’t happen. Executive compensation is a good example, which fits in with the theme of this thread.[/quote]

[dumbrenter]

[quote=CA renter][quote=dumbrenter]when 90% of the population thinks nothing of exchanging their hard earned paycheck for a gadget of questionable value AND with the knowledge that they are paying for a 40+% profit margin, is it any wonder that the top 1% will soon have most of the wealth?[/quote]

Exactly. Not only the customers, but the employees who barely make enough to get by so that upper-level management and shareholders can get a bigger cut of the value the *workers* create. Those who make the most are the ones who control who the winners are — the ones who control where capital flows. “Hard work” has very little to do with it.

This is one of the main reasons that wealth is driven up in the absence of an intervening force (like govt); that, and the fact that it’s much easier to make $1MM/year when you already have $100MM vs. having to work for that $1MM…and don’t even get me started on the fact that these incomes are taxed at different rates.[/quote]

You misunderstood me. My point was that nobody is forcing the 90% to go out and buy an Ipad or I-whatever. These people have a choice not to buy those gadgets, not to participate in the markets Or at least get Apple to drop that insanely high profit margin for an appliance. Instead, these 90% dumb people choose the temporary gratification of getting this overpriced gadget and then complain in leisure about the 1% they just bought it from.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=CA renter] Developing something new and actually creating something is very different from “investing.” Very different.

I have no problem with those who **create.** My complaint is with those who simply buy up existing assets, hoarding the very things that are necessary for survival (food, housing, etc.) in order to force others who NEED those things to pay them higher prices or rent.

By all means, people should go out there and create, innovate, and improve upon things. That’s valuable to society, no doubt. But “investors” who don’t create, don’t expand productive capacity, etc.? That’s zero-sum, and requires other to suffer in order for the “winners” to gain.[/quote]

Those people who create need people with capital to help them with bills or else the creator’s family would desert them. Or there would be nothing to create in the first place.
It is those investors who take that ‘risk’; betting on the chances that the creators become successful. They expect a reward proportionate to that ‘risk’.
While it is debatable on the risk-reward equation, to say that these ‘investors’ do not create value is very immature especially with so many examples that you could just see even without taking your eyes off your computer screen.

You seem to forget that for every successful investor, there are a hundred others who lost their shirts taking those risks (incl. yours truly). Those had to go back to their day jobs or something to provide for themselves. Typically these are not the ones who complain; they know they took the risk and lost out when the outcome did not pan out as expected. It is those who have never taken the risk that seem to complain the most about ‘investors’. And those who seem to complain the most seem to come from ‘public sector’ background.

[dumbrenter]

when 90% of the population thinks nothing of exchanging their hard earned paycheck for a gadget of questionable value AND with the knowledge that they are paying for a 40+% profit margin, is it any wonder that the top 1% will soon have most of the wealth?

[dumbrenter]

Interesting thread; to see waves of dogma about taxes & government and personal innuendo keep crashing against the rock of scholarship interwoven with a poignant personal tale that brought tears to my eyes.

Every man who has gotten to a point of something better from subsistence life knows deep down how close it was and how bad things would have turned out for reasons beyond his control (i.e. luck of whatever). We cannot find a better example than what happened to flu’s story.

[dumbrenter]

sdrealtor, I hope you are right but the data says otherwise. You have been given numbers to show the influence of DoD related jobs in San Diego. Same with state/county/city jobs.
And other industries, tourists don’t just pick up in correlation to the decline in defense jobs. For all you know, they could even be positively correlated.

We are close to 20 years after 1993; A whole new generation has replaced those who suffered those times, which means assuming they are not any more stupider or smarter, the chances of them repeating the same mistakes are very high.

[dumbrenter]

[quote=deadzone]Well that’s what happens when there is an unusually low supply and interest rates are at all time lows. But, don’t get too excited, let’s see how long this lasts. Bigger picture, how will the SD housing market weather the looming defense cuts? It could get ugly, a la early 90s. Anyone who thinks San Diego is not reliant on DoD spending is fooling themselves.[/quote]

One look at the to 10 employers in San Diego county makes that very clear. With the exception of Sharp and the big-Q (which by the way don’t even make it to top 5), everybody else is either DoD, or state/county/city or university. I was surprised to find San Diego Unified in the top 5 employers.

This city sucks on government tits more than any, except DC of course.

Wonder what happens if/when these government jobs go away.

[dumbrenter]

Wow, nice summary.
I have been in category 2 for quite a while now. Maybe I’ll let the rest of the herd move on before jumping in.
I’m not a “dumb”renter for nothing.

[dumbrenter]

OP got the terminology mixed up.

Tiger parents do not blabber on about the achievements, they simply demand excellence from their kids.
If OP’s parents only had done that, we would not have had such a confusing post!!

I do not like parents who keep talking about their kids achievements either, but I see nothing wrong with demanding excellence of kids in whatever they do.
May be we all will be in a better society when more parents start doing that.
There are some real problems everyday on the other end of the spectrum i.e. parents who simply are not interested in their kid’s education & activities.

[Author]

Posts