Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
EconProf
ParticipantThe requirements are really stringent. Has to conform to landscape guidelines, be environmentally friendly, etc. Go to http://www.santaluzliving.com, or call Sonya Pluta at 858 759-3178.
ParticipantThe requirements are really stringent. Has to conform to landscape guidelines, be environmentally friendly, etc. Go to http://www.santaluzliving.com, or call Sonya Pluta at 858 759-3178.
ParticipantThe requirements are really stringent. Has to conform to landscape guidelines, be environmentally friendly, etc. Go to http://www.santaluzliving.com, or call Sonya Pluta at 858 759-3178.
ParticipantGood points Allan, and I’d add another: short-termism. We all want current benefits from government, whether lower taxes or government spending, and we ignor to long-term costs.
Our pension tsunami is the result of politicians promising mind-numbing increases that would all take effect years later. The savvy unions that extracted these committments knew they just hugely raised the lifetime income of their members. The complacent public and asleep media let it happen, and are now waking up to the cost that now must be paid.
The same can be said about social security, the recent “bailouts”, and impossible math of Obamacare.ParticipantGood points Allan, and I’d add another: short-termism. We all want current benefits from government, whether lower taxes or government spending, and we ignor to long-term costs.
Our pension tsunami is the result of politicians promising mind-numbing increases that would all take effect years later. The savvy unions that extracted these committments knew they just hugely raised the lifetime income of their members. The complacent public and asleep media let it happen, and are now waking up to the cost that now must be paid.
The same can be said about social security, the recent “bailouts”, and impossible math of Obamacare.ParticipantGood points Allan, and I’d add another: short-termism. We all want current benefits from government, whether lower taxes or government spending, and we ignor to long-term costs.
Our pension tsunami is the result of politicians promising mind-numbing increases that would all take effect years later. The savvy unions that extracted these committments knew they just hugely raised the lifetime income of their members. The complacent public and asleep media let it happen, and are now waking up to the cost that now must be paid.
The same can be said about social security, the recent “bailouts”, and impossible math of Obamacare.ParticipantGood points Allan, and I’d add another: short-termism. We all want current benefits from government, whether lower taxes or government spending, and we ignor to long-term costs.
Our pension tsunami is the result of politicians promising mind-numbing increases that would all take effect years later. The savvy unions that extracted these committments knew they just hugely raised the lifetime income of their members. The complacent public and asleep media let it happen, and are now waking up to the cost that now must be paid.
The same can be said about social security, the recent “bailouts”, and impossible math of Obamacare.ParticipantGood points Allan, and I’d add another: short-termism. We all want current benefits from government, whether lower taxes or government spending, and we ignor to long-term costs.
Our pension tsunami is the result of politicians promising mind-numbing increases that would all take effect years later. The savvy unions that extracted these committments knew they just hugely raised the lifetime income of their members. The complacent public and asleep media let it happen, and are now waking up to the cost that now must be paid.
The same can be said about social security, the recent “bailouts”, and impossible math of Obamacare.ParticipantAs zk’s link showed, CA prisoners cost the state $51,000 per year. I’ve read that Texas spends $25,000 per year, Montana $15,000. Perhaps we could outsource more prisoners to these states (we already do that a little), and benefit both CA taxpayers and let these more efficient states run a little profit.
ParticipantAs zk’s link showed, CA prisoners cost the state $51,000 per year. I’ve read that Texas spends $25,000 per year, Montana $15,000. Perhaps we could outsource more prisoners to these states (we already do that a little), and benefit both CA taxpayers and let these more efficient states run a little profit.
ParticipantAs zk’s link showed, CA prisoners cost the state $51,000 per year. I’ve read that Texas spends $25,000 per year, Montana $15,000. Perhaps we could outsource more prisoners to these states (we already do that a little), and benefit both CA taxpayers and let these more efficient states run a little profit.
ParticipantAs zk’s link showed, CA prisoners cost the state $51,000 per year. I’ve read that Texas spends $25,000 per year, Montana $15,000. Perhaps we could outsource more prisoners to these states (we already do that a little), and benefit both CA taxpayers and let these more efficient states run a little profit.
ParticipantAs zk’s link showed, CA prisoners cost the state $51,000 per year. I’ve read that Texas spends $25,000 per year, Montana $15,000. Perhaps we could outsource more prisoners to these states (we already do that a little), and benefit both CA taxpayers and let these more efficient states run a little profit.
ParticipantA few years ago when I bought investment properties I took out 15-year loans in order to retire the debt faster, and to get about a 1/2% break in the interest rate. Of course cash flow suffers on these investments since so much of the monthly payments goes to principle.
Now, however, banks rake me over the coals when I try to get a loan, because “You don’t have enough cash flow”. My great balance sheet doesn’t matter to them, or my better interest rate on existing loans. (Nor, BTW, does proof of living below one’s income). They just want wage slaves, or last year’s favorable Form 1040, or commissioned salesmen coming off of a good year. Very frustrating. -
AuthorPosts
