[DWCAP]

Here is the real red flag for me, even more so than the ‘need imporovement’ credit (685) or the low down:
You dont live here yet, and own a house somewhere else?

This should have been disclosed in the OP, because it is a huge fact to me. San Diego is a VERY diverse city, and I would advise ANYONE moving here for the first time to rent. I dont care if you are Bill Freakin Gates, RENT YOUR FIRST HOUSE. You will not know where you want to be, and what kind of lifestyle you want/can afford until you are here. The housing, the noise, the weather, the people, the social scene, the activites, they are all so different.

Find what you want, then optimize it to what you can afford, and live the happy median. SD housing prices are stagnant or falling currently, interest rates are low, and going down. Rents are not skyrocketing. There is no possible reason you NEED to buy a house, in a city you dont currently live in, in the next 6-12 months. (unless someone else is paying the tab for you, which again is a fact needed in the OP)

[DWCAP]

Here is the real red flag for me, even more so than the ‘need imporovement’ credit (685) or the low down:
You dont live here yet, and own a house somewhere else?

This should have been disclosed in the OP, because it is a huge fact to me. San Diego is a VERY diverse city, and I would advise ANYONE moving here for the first time to rent. I dont care if you are Bill Freakin Gates, RENT YOUR FIRST HOUSE. You will not know where you want to be, and what kind of lifestyle you want/can afford until you are here. The housing, the noise, the weather, the people, the social scene, the activites, they are all so different.

Find what you want, then optimize it to what you can afford, and live the happy median. SD housing prices are stagnant or falling currently, interest rates are low, and going down. Rents are not skyrocketing. There is no possible reason you NEED to buy a house, in a city you dont currently live in, in the next 6-12 months. (unless someone else is paying the tab for you, which again is a fact needed in the OP)

[DWCAP]

[quote=permabear]

But maybe we should just run out and buy new BMW’s instead.[/quote]

This is exactly what they (FED and fed’s) want. The whole point of all of this is to make cash so painful to hold, that you spend it. That spending will increase sales, increasing jobs, increasing incomes yada yada yada. I know it was just a flippent remark, but it really is true.

Better yet, what they really recomend, is that you buy your BMW’s on credit and minimal downs, and take a vacation, and upgrade your house and have a ‘lets splurge’ Christmas. Your savings will go alot farther, stimulate alot more, with the power of leverage. Plus this way it wont hurt too much cause credit is cheap.

Your flippent, off the cuff remark IS our current national financial plan.

(well, coupled with the fact that it makes our current sXit of of debt easier to carry, so we dont try to do something stupid like pay it off or default out of it.)

[DWCAP]

[quote=permabear]

But maybe we should just run out and buy new BMW’s instead.[/quote]

This is exactly what they (FED and fed’s) want. The whole point of all of this is to make cash so painful to hold, that you spend it. That spending will increase sales, increasing jobs, increasing incomes yada yada yada. I know it was just a flippent remark, but it really is true.

Better yet, what they really recomend, is that you buy your BMW’s on credit and minimal downs, and take a vacation, and upgrade your house and have a ‘lets splurge’ Christmas. Your savings will go alot farther, stimulate alot more, with the power of leverage. Plus this way it wont hurt too much cause credit is cheap.

Your flippent, off the cuff remark IS our current national financial plan.

(well, coupled with the fact that it makes our current sXit of of debt easier to carry, so we dont try to do something stupid like pay it off or default out of it.)

[DWCAP]

[quote=permabear]

But maybe we should just run out and buy new BMW’s instead.[/quote]

This is exactly what they (FED and fed’s) want. The whole point of all of this is to make cash so painful to hold, that you spend it. That spending will increase sales, increasing jobs, increasing incomes yada yada yada. I know it was just a flippent remark, but it really is true.

Better yet, what they really recomend, is that you buy your BMW’s on credit and minimal downs, and take a vacation, and upgrade your house and have a ‘lets splurge’ Christmas. Your savings will go alot farther, stimulate alot more, with the power of leverage. Plus this way it wont hurt too much cause credit is cheap.

Your flippent, off the cuff remark IS our current national financial plan.

(well, coupled with the fact that it makes our current sXit of of debt easier to carry, so we dont try to do something stupid like pay it off or default out of it.)

[DWCAP]

[quote=permabear]

But maybe we should just run out and buy new BMW’s instead.[/quote]

This is exactly what they (FED and fed’s) want. The whole point of all of this is to make cash so painful to hold, that you spend it. That spending will increase sales, increasing jobs, increasing incomes yada yada yada. I know it was just a flippent remark, but it really is true.

Better yet, what they really recomend, is that you buy your BMW’s on credit and minimal downs, and take a vacation, and upgrade your house and have a ‘lets splurge’ Christmas. Your savings will go alot farther, stimulate alot more, with the power of leverage. Plus this way it wont hurt too much cause credit is cheap.

Your flippent, off the cuff remark IS our current national financial plan.

(well, coupled with the fact that it makes our current sXit of of debt easier to carry, so we dont try to do something stupid like pay it off or default out of it.)

[DWCAP]

[quote=permabear]

But maybe we should just run out and buy new BMW’s instead.[/quote]

This is exactly what they (FED and fed’s) want. The whole point of all of this is to make cash so painful to hold, that you spend it. That spending will increase sales, increasing jobs, increasing incomes yada yada yada. I know it was just a flippent remark, but it really is true.

Better yet, what they really recomend, is that you buy your BMW’s on credit and minimal downs, and take a vacation, and upgrade your house and have a ‘lets splurge’ Christmas. Your savings will go alot farther, stimulate alot more, with the power of leverage. Plus this way it wont hurt too much cause credit is cheap.

Your flippent, off the cuff remark IS our current national financial plan.

(well, coupled with the fact that it makes our current sXit of of debt easier to carry, so we dont try to do something stupid like pay it off or default out of it.)

[DWCAP]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Guys:

You are missing the points on prop.s

Most prop.s are trying to accomplish things and fighting battles that should be fought in the legislature. That is why we elect these people. If they are not doing those job, the right course of action is to pressure them to accomplish it and change them if needed.

To put some law on the ballot and have people who have less than 10 minutes to decide on issues is the worst way we can run this state. This leads to misleading prop.s, special interests pushing their agendas and 30-second soundbites on TV. This is lawmaking at its worst.

Prop.s should only serve as a check on legislature. Passing one should be a rarity.

Public, please leave legislating to the legislature!!! Your job is to shape the legislature, not to replace them!!![/quote]

Excellent post. Most excellent. I just wish more people felt this way.

[DWCAP]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Guys:

You are missing the points on prop.s

Most prop.s are trying to accomplish things and fighting battles that should be fought in the legislature. That is why we elect these people. If they are not doing those job, the right course of action is to pressure them to accomplish it and change them if needed.

To put some law on the ballot and have people who have less than 10 minutes to decide on issues is the worst way we can run this state. This leads to misleading prop.s, special interests pushing their agendas and 30-second soundbites on TV. This is lawmaking at its worst.

Prop.s should only serve as a check on legislature. Passing one should be a rarity.

Public, please leave legislating to the legislature!!! Your job is to shape the legislature, not to replace them!!![/quote]

Excellent post. Most excellent. I just wish more people felt this way.

[DWCAP]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Guys:

You are missing the points on prop.s

Most prop.s are trying to accomplish things and fighting battles that should be fought in the legislature. That is why we elect these people. If they are not doing those job, the right course of action is to pressure them to accomplish it and change them if needed.

To put some law on the ballot and have people who have less than 10 minutes to decide on issues is the worst way we can run this state. This leads to misleading prop.s, special interests pushing their agendas and 30-second soundbites on TV. This is lawmaking at its worst.

Prop.s should only serve as a check on legislature. Passing one should be a rarity.

Public, please leave legislating to the legislature!!! Your job is to shape the legislature, not to replace them!!![/quote]

Excellent post. Most excellent. I just wish more people felt this way.

[DWCAP]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Guys:

You are missing the points on prop.s

Most prop.s are trying to accomplish things and fighting battles that should be fought in the legislature. That is why we elect these people. If they are not doing those job, the right course of action is to pressure them to accomplish it and change them if needed.

To put some law on the ballot and have people who have less than 10 minutes to decide on issues is the worst way we can run this state. This leads to misleading prop.s, special interests pushing their agendas and 30-second soundbites on TV. This is lawmaking at its worst.

Prop.s should only serve as a check on legislature. Passing one should be a rarity.

Public, please leave legislating to the legislature!!! Your job is to shape the legislature, not to replace them!!![/quote]

Excellent post. Most excellent. I just wish more people felt this way.

[DWCAP]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]Guys:

You are missing the points on prop.s

Most prop.s are trying to accomplish things and fighting battles that should be fought in the legislature. That is why we elect these people. If they are not doing those job, the right course of action is to pressure them to accomplish it and change them if needed.

To put some law on the ballot and have people who have less than 10 minutes to decide on issues is the worst way we can run this state. This leads to misleading prop.s, special interests pushing their agendas and 30-second soundbites on TV. This is lawmaking at its worst.

Prop.s should only serve as a check on legislature. Passing one should be a rarity.

Public, please leave legislating to the legislature!!! Your job is to shape the legislature, not to replace them!!![/quote]

Excellent post. Most excellent. I just wish more people felt this way.

[DWCAP]

[quote=briansd1]At least I provided facts that conservatism and evangelical religiosity are joined at the hip.[/quote]

Sigh, no you didnt. You disproved your own stance.

1) The issues you seem to hinge your argument on, are from a quote from the poll director, “a self identified progressive.”
[quote]”The way the data looks, if this is a marriage of convenience, it’s one that would be against the law. The relatives are too close,” said Jones, a self-described progressive[/quote]

Lets poll the *Republican* (edit, democratic) party, and see how they feel about MoveOn.org . And lets put a Republican incharge of it. See what they find and how they spin it.

2) Half of evengelical people are NOT identified with the Tea Party. Your own quote calls the groups contradictory. Half of evengelicals are not supporters of the tea party, and half are. The Tea Party also pulls half its members from non-evangelicals.
Your gonna have to explain to me how that is joined at the hip when 1 out of 2 of both groups dont self identify with each other.

3) your own article talks about the fact these people are united in their opposition to the, currently controlling left wing of the Democratic party, not some kind of unifing ideology. IF and when they are replaced, this group will likley turn on itself. This is what they are united in, oppisition to a liberal government.

And “the road to hell is paved in good intentions” is a quote that needs to be given to every public servant on day 1.

[DWCAP]

[quote=briansd1]At least I provided facts that conservatism and evangelical religiosity are joined at the hip.[/quote]

Sigh, no you didnt. You disproved your own stance.

1) The issues you seem to hinge your argument on, are from a quote from the poll director, “a self identified progressive.”
[quote]”The way the data looks, if this is a marriage of convenience, it’s one that would be against the law. The relatives are too close,” said Jones, a self-described progressive[/quote]

Lets poll the *Republican* (edit, democratic) party, and see how they feel about MoveOn.org . And lets put a Republican incharge of it. See what they find and how they spin it.

2) Half of evengelical people are NOT identified with the Tea Party. Your own quote calls the groups contradictory. Half of evengelicals are not supporters of the tea party, and half are. The Tea Party also pulls half its members from non-evangelicals.
Your gonna have to explain to me how that is joined at the hip when 1 out of 2 of both groups dont self identify with each other.

3) your own article talks about the fact these people are united in their opposition to the, currently controlling left wing of the Democratic party, not some kind of unifing ideology. IF and when they are replaced, this group will likley turn on itself. This is what they are united in, oppisition to a liberal government.

And “the road to hell is paved in good intentions” is a quote that needs to be given to every public servant on day 1.

[DWCAP]

[quote=briansd1]At least I provided facts that conservatism and evangelical religiosity are joined at the hip.[/quote]

Sigh, no you didnt. You disproved your own stance.

1) The issues you seem to hinge your argument on, are from a quote from the poll director, “a self identified progressive.”
[quote]”The way the data looks, if this is a marriage of convenience, it’s one that would be against the law. The relatives are too close,” said Jones, a self-described progressive[/quote]

Lets poll the *Republican* (edit, democratic) party, and see how they feel about MoveOn.org . And lets put a Republican incharge of it. See what they find and how they spin it.

2) Half of evengelical people are NOT identified with the Tea Party. Your own quote calls the groups contradictory. Half of evengelicals are not supporters of the tea party, and half are. The Tea Party also pulls half its members from non-evangelicals.
Your gonna have to explain to me how that is joined at the hip when 1 out of 2 of both groups dont self identify with each other.

3) your own article talks about the fact these people are united in their opposition to the, currently controlling left wing of the Democratic party, not some kind of unifing ideology. IF and when they are replaced, this group will likley turn on itself. This is what they are united in, oppisition to a liberal government.

And “the road to hell is paved in good intentions” is a quote that needs to be given to every public servant on day 1.

[Author]

Posts