[livinincali]

[quote=AN]desmond, I agree. timing is everything. It’s different if you buy it last year vs if you buy it this year. This is also a small fraction of my total portfolio. You have to do your own research. There’s no safe bet in the market.

flu, I didn’t buy AGNC solely for its dividend. I was looking to invest in REIT and AGNC looks the best to me at the time with the combination of appreciation and dividend. Because they’re a REIT, they have to return 9x% back as dividend. So, I’m expecting RE to recover, so AGNC seems like a good idea. But like I said, it’s still a small portion of my total portfolio.[/quote]

AGNC is a high leverage play. If they are right about their investments it should have a decent return, if they’re wrong it’s a zero. It’s at least a 10 to 1 leverage play. They have 51 billion in liabilities, 54 billion in assets and 2 billion in cash. If the value of their assets drops by 10% they are bankrupt.

They also don’t have a long term history of big dividends either. Cash flow in 2009 was 118 million, 2010 was 288 million and 2011 was 770 million. So just 3 years ago the dividend was 1/7th of today’s and their return of investment is around 1%. 770 million cash flow on assets of 54 billion.

[livinincali]

[quote=UCGal]
Folks – this is math. You can’t fix the budget with just cuts. You can’t fix the budget with just taxes. The sequestration (fiscal cliff) combines both. I say lets go over that cliff… Yes, I personally will pay more taxes and yes, I personally will see services I enjoy cut. But it’s not nearly as dire as kicking the can forever.[/quote]

The real cliff is when the financial markets cut you off from deficit spending. In that scenario you don’t get to work you’re way there through gradual reductions. You get cut off all at once. That’s what’s happening in Greece. They can revolt all they want about the 50% cuts they are seeing to their retirement income but there isn’t a source of money that allows that fact to be false.

[livinincali]

[quote=spdrun]
You shop on Black Friday? I generally take care of business before BF, or first week of Dec. That is if I don’t buy online.
[/quote]

Costco is great to shop on Black Friday. Hardly anybody is there as most of them are at the mall.

I never really got the appeal of black friday. It’s usually specially made low quality junk electronics at a cost price point. Of course it’s been proven to be effective for the average masses. Some people like that kind of excitement, I prefer football and beer on Thanksgiving for excitement

[livinincali]

[quote=no_such_reality]
That’s assuming the top end moves proportionately. The problem is $8/hr is really externalizing the real costs of the products that are provided with $8/hr labor.

It’s exactly the same problem with legal labor and 99 cents/lb grapes.

The grapes aren’t really 99 cents, and the illegal labor isn’t really $5/hour.

The grapes are 99 cents plus $20,000 periodic and random ER bills and $14 Billion in school bonds.

And the labor is $5/hr plus the same $20,000 periodic ER bill and $14 billion in school bonds.[/quote]

In the US that is indeed true. We’ve decided to subsidize a standard of living or a level of consumption. Many countries don’t do this and yet they still don’t have a labor shortage and here in the US we exploit that fact.

The fundamental goal of rising minimum wage or increasing the middle class really boil down to consuming more goods and services. The way to allow for people to consume more goods and services is to increase the supply of goods and services. So how exactly does rising minimum wage increase the total goods and services produced by American’s?

In almost every scenario you can imagine, initially some businesses will be economically nonviable when minimum wage is increased and will go out of business. Therefore the total goods and services decreases. If the total goods and service decreases then as a whole people have to consume less so what have you done in increasing minimum wage is give those at the bottom a slight increase but those directly above them a slight decrease. The guy that used to make $15/hour hanging drywall will get less steak and the guy that worked at McDonald’s will get more. The market will increase the price of steak until it finds that balance.

We need to stop focusing so heavily on the demand side of the equation because we get the increase in demand but we’re weak on the supply side. We either don’t increase the supply and prices rise to meet the higher demand or the supply comes from some other country which doesn’t generate a job here.

Think about the health care law. We know it’s going to increase demand for health care because more people will be covered but what are we doing about the supply side. Are we building more hospitals, training more doctors, developing cheaper drugs? We’re not and likely won’t be.

[livinincali]

[quote=CA renter]Just for fun…this chart shows top marginal tax rates vs GDP. It’s clear that GDP grew quite nicely when top tax rates were at 70-90%. Can one of the anti-taxers please present data, any data at all, that shows how lower taxes lead to a stronger economy and better society? If you look at our own history, you’ll see that the periods with the lowest top tax rates caused/coincided with the greatest concentrations of wealth/income, and led to devastating depressions and economic shocks.
[/quote]

I think the constant threat of tax increases is actually more damaging than the actual tax increase. Certainty of the tax code is probably more important than the actual code. Of course I honestly don’t think taxes are remotely close to the most important thing in driving the economy forward. The problem is we’ve been increasing debt faster than GDP for decades and the bill is coming due. You can’t spend more than you make forever and we’re getting close to the limit. When that point hits the economy will shrink to a sustainable level and be free to grow again. Preventing that from happening means we going to sit in this quagmire of slow choppy growth for as far as the eye can see.

Tax policy, QE, fiscal stimulus and everything that gets tried to fix the economy will be relatively ineffective and will not produce a positive return on investment. Eventually the market will decide and the powers that be will be powerless to stop it. Is giving government hand outs and government employees more money actually going to increase the total goods and services produced here in America? That’s the only question that really matters and one that demand side economists ignore in our global economy.

[livinincali]

[quote=ucodegen][quote=The-Shoveler]More lower wage Jobs is not the answer,
And we need to kick minimum wage to 15 an hour IMO.

( I know I am alone in that one)[/quote]Unintended consequences: Businesses go under, or lay off. Upward pressure on all wages.. and costs.[/quote]

That’s the problem right. $15/hr sounds like a good plan until you realize that all the costs in the system will go up. What you could buy with $8/hr is the same amount of stuff you can buy with $15/hr once the system adjusts to it. It’s the amount of stuff your productivity buys in the system that’s important. People working a low skill service job where anybody can do it have a ton of competition and therefore will be compensated at a survival level no matter what the units of currency are.

It’s really the same argument is every should have a good pension (i.e. $40K/year). Sounds good again but resources are limited and the retirement class has to compete with all the other people in the retirement class for the left over goods and services produced by the productive segment of the population. If I’m in the productive class I’m going to provide for myself, my kids, my own parents, before I have anything available for a stranger not working.

[livinincali]

[quote=Zeitgeist][quote=flu][quote=Oni Koroshi]Aside from the small sales tax increase, this won’t affect the income for most of us yet public education will benefit greatly which does affect all of us.[/quote]

It won’t do shit for public education.

Bookmark this thread and let’s compare notes in 2 years to see if your local public school are any better off 2 years from now…

Local schools know this…And that’s probably why there’s a bunch of local bond initiatives to fund schools locally.[/quote]

Exactly right. The public schools will still under perform and the teachers will blame the parents for lack of involvement. Nothing changes. I remember when the lottery passed. People thought it would help the schools. Think again.[/quote]

More money for schools is always built on some sort of silly premise that we’ll be able to attract the best and the brightest to become teachers. Of course look at what the schools do as soon as they get that money. They don’t go out and hire more teachers or attract new young teachers with higher starting salaries, they always give the teachers and administrators, we already have, big raises.

[livinincali]

[quote=flu][quote=livinincali][quote=flu]
I hope I’m right and we see the stock market tanks all the way until the end of the year… I hope we have falling rates, and I hope that this down market wipes out the investment spirit during the first quarter of 2013, so that we can get some decent inventory locally again for the first quarter in 2013……..[/quote]

I’d probably wait until one of these Single Family investment hedge funds blows up 3-5 years down the road. That will be an interesting forced liquidation. Thousands of rental properties to be liquidated, although I don’t think we’ll see much in San Diego though. It will probably be Las Vegas or Phoenix where the implosion happens.[/quote]

I’m more interested in seeing how the state taxes hike across the board is gonna put less money into average j6p pocket…making them perpetual renters…

After all, those incremental 1% or 2% tax for the top income earners isn’t probably gonna make nearly as bad a dent as the sales tax is gonna be for average j6p

but hey, it’s what the people wanted… so cool….

Then again with a super demo government, we could see more moratorium after moratorium…So who knows…..

Only in Kalifornia in Amerika…[/quote]

I honestly wouldn’t be surprised by anything CA does. If those evil investors start jacking up rents on poor Californians we’re sure to see rent control. That should be good for housing values and the mom and pop real estate investor.

[livinincali]

[quote=flu]
Yup, but wait. Some people think we should repeal that now…Well at least for investment property (obviously from people who don’t own investment property)…[/quote]

Of course. It’s always ok tax and spend somebody else’s money. The problem with going down that path is eventually we come up with some tax and spend where “you” are the somebody else’s money.

[livinincali]

[quote=Rhett][quote=SD Realtor]Um none of this because Romney lost. All this because of what the system has become. The article may have been written in support of Romney however most of the Piggs responses have nothing to do with who is president.[/quote]

I was only addressing the timing of this being posted, not what was said or any of the responses.[/quote]

The original blog entry was posted on Nov 5th. It’s not like this was sitting in the OPs queue just waiting for the right moment to put it on piggington. You can certainly question the timing of the original blog poster, but why does it even matter.

The total debt, the endless deficit spending, and the inability to meet the entitlement promises of the future are an issue that will debated from now until the inevitable reform or crash. The due date is starting to be visible.

[livinincali]

[quote=flu]
I hope I’m right and we see the stock market tanks all the way until the end of the year… I hope we have falling rates, and I hope that this down market wipes out the investment spirit during the first quarter of 2013, so that we can get some decent inventory locally again for the first quarter in 2013……..[/quote]

I’d probably wait until one of these Single Family investment hedge funds blows up 3-5 years down the road. That will be an interesting forced liquidation. Thousands of rental properties to be liquidated, although I don’t think we’ll see much in San Diego though. It will probably be Las Vegas or Phoenix where the implosion happens.

[livinincali]

[quote=flu]
Actually, I’m more curious… How the hell did Filner pull ahead of DeMaio!!!!![/quote]

Because the unions came out in force to vote Y on 30 and no on 32.

[livinincali]

[quote=spdrun]My stocks are actually fairly steady today. Love renewables!!!

This being said, I’m hoping for a 10-20% correction. Should be a nice opportunity to make moneh![/quote]

Forget renewables you should be in guns. Look at SWHC or RGR today.

[livinincali]

[quote=flu]make that -239 and falling…[/quote]

Yeah it’s shaping up to be a trend day down. Maybe we get a small bounce later on but I figure we close near the lows today, whatever that might be.

[livinincali]

[quote=ctr70]
There is no way paying a little extra sales tax is equivalent to paying 10.3% state income tax on say $350k AGI! For someone who makes $350k a year that is $35k+ out the door to the mental midgets in Sacramento that you wouldn’t have to pay in WA State! I’m a frugal guy and I don’t buy a lot of shit so sales tax wouldn’t affect me much. I would save huge by moving my business to WA State.[/quote]

If you’re really smart you move your business to Vancouver, WA and drive across the bridge to Portland when you need to buy a lot of stuff subject to sales tax.

[Author]

Posts