Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
no_such_reality
ParticipantWednesday June 6
LA Unified Employee seeks more in Cortines Settlement
“Attorneys for Scot Graham, who accused former Supt. Ramon Cortines of sexual harassment, say the district’s handling of the settlement invaded his privacy.”
“The school system announced May 23 that the school board had approved paying $200,000 and providing lifetime benefits to Graham, a senior manager for 12 years in the facilities division who earned about $150,000 a year”
June 5, 2012 at 4:55 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745075ParticipantThe system is broken. Settling for a realistic solution in the broken system is the first step to the wasteland. It is acceptance of the status quo.
Settling for a realistic solution on immigration is a continuation of the completely ineffectice and inept status quo.
Settling for a realistic pension solution is the status quo.
Settling for a realistic budget solution is the status quo.
What is the status quo? Crying about the draconian cuts when in reality the total proposed budget is larger than last year and a mere $4 billion out of $145 Billion smaller than the largest budget ever back in 2006.
How’d we get here? Dumb stuff like the cigarette tax where the money is marked.
June 5, 2012 at 1:39 PM in reply to: How are people dumber than us going to make out with their 401(k)s? #745067ParticipantRetiring early is an art form. The prinipal driver of which is figuring out how little you actually need to live the life you want.
The big unknown for most isn’t how much money, it’s how much with health coverage be.
ParticipantCost us $900 to put four new tires on the Mazda. It has to do with popular tire sizes now being 17 inches.
Sadly, the tires were about $500. It was all the other mandatory stuff: state disposal fee, mounting, blah blah.
June 5, 2012 at 9:05 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745053ParticipantNot in retirement.
and definitive not when you look at nearly half having only 20 years or less of service.
June 5, 2012 at 7:22 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745050Participant[quote=CA renter]
What percentage of CalPERS beneficiaries have 30+ years of service and make $100K+/year? Percentages matter, and you (and others) are trying to skew numbers in order to make things look far worse than they are. Once again, the ***vast majority*** of CalPERS retirees do not earn anywhere near $100K/year, and that is a fact.[/quote]There is no skewing, read CalPERs financial report.
It is 10% of the current retiring group. It is the largest increasing group they have.And that includes the large group of people retiring with less than 20 years of service.
June 4, 2012 at 8:57 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745039Participant[quote=CA renter]
No matter how you slice it, the ***vast majority*** of CalPERS retirees are not earning anywhere near $100K…not even close. For those who are, they have been making concessions and are paying more toward their pensions.[/quote]It’s 41% of retirees with 30 or more years of service in the last year.
Or about 10% of current year retiree if you count all the people retiring with less 5 years, less than 10 years, etc.
But it’s okay,that $66K and $50K group accounts for 2/3rds of CalPers costs but represent 1/3 of the people.
ParticipantYes, the sweet spot is 1%
What 1% you might ask, 1% as monthly rent. i.e. Your target is to get to 1% of the homes purchase price as monthly rent. Until then you will lose money.
As for losing money, well, you don’t really want to lose money. You want a paper loss but real money income. In other words, you want depreciation to push you to zero or near zero. If your real tangible expenses put you negative, you don’t even have a tax advantage unless you’re a real estate professional.
If you can keep the actual rent, including vacancies & losses covering expenses: mortgage interest (not principal), insurance, maintenance, taxes, advertising, legal, etc. Then you’re getting the home for your time.
If not, it’s ironically one of things of value in the rich dad series: how many of those deals can you do where you’re lossing money?
June 4, 2012 at 6:08 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744967ParticipantWe’re not talking averages. We’re talking the group that is rapidly growing with much larger pensions. AS highlighted in the prior link.
That’s the nice thing about statistics, it’s how you slice them.
The chart on page 47 should show you how CalPers can trot out a nice low number.
http://www.lhc.ca.gov/studies/204/Report204.pdf
(printed page 31, pdf page 47)
If you had 30 years or more of service, the average retirement was $66,000.
About half are retiring withless than 20 years of service.
June 3, 2012 at 3:29 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744888Participant[quote=SK in CV]Why on earth would you not consider net present value. Is $50K 30 years from now the same as $50K today?[/quote]
Yes, when you have a cola index. 🙂
It’s worth less if it isn’t, hence, NPV.
Luckily we have the gub’ment workers and their union to protect us ig’nant masses from ourselves.
ParticipantAs a minor note, the only fraud and issue with this case is the straw buyers to take control.
What they did once they had control, IMHO,is standard operating procedure for most HOA boards and property management firms engaged to support HOAs.
June 2, 2012 at 9:59 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744837Participant[quote=CA renter]
AN,In all of your examples, you’re ignoring dividends and fixed income returns on bonds that were purchased before ZIRP. If you bought a 10-year Note in 2000, you would have earned ~6.5%. Someone who was retiring in 2000 should have had a healthy bond portfolio with a fairly large mix of long-term and short-term Treasuries in addition to municipal bonds and some GSEs, etc. If they were overweight bonds in 2000 — which they should have been if they were retiring — they should easily have earned 5-7% over the past 12 years.
http://www.multpl.com/interest-rate/table%5B/quote%5D
In hindsight treasuries where a good deal from 1995-2000. The 30 year was 6-8%. Today, not so much, 2.5%. Inflation will be harsh at the end of the 30 year term. And comparitively, the Dow is up somewhere between 10% and 250% depending on when in 1990-2000 you would have bought.
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor]Thank you for this.
As someone who has versions of this conversation regularly while working on short sales, this was pretty funny.
I peed a little.[/quote]They actually answer the phone now?
ParticipantYou hit the Trifecta!
-
AuthorPosts
