[paulflorez]

[quote=Coronita]See if I was black, I probably would have been hired according to what Eric said.[/quote]

Black engineers continue to have an abysmally low rate of representation in engineering. Sounds like Eric was feeding you bullshit. Eric would not have hired you if you were Black. Eric wanted to hire another Eric. That’s still how the industry is. People hire people who are like them and avoid hiring people who are different. Not only does it hurt under-represented minorities, but it also hurts the ability of businesses to innovate. Echo chambers are not the optimal places for innovation.

[paulflorez]

[quote=LiarInHI]He’s spot on. This recession came out of left field and ironically due to a virus from Brian’s beloved China. Until then things were humming along and few if any financial experts were calling for one this year.[/quote]

He’s not spot on anymore and now he’s disappeared from the thread the same exact way he’s accusing FlyerInHI of disappearing when there is good news.

[paulflorez]

[quote=flu][quote=FlyerInHi]Unlike you flu, i don’t post market updates as an argument for or against anything.
I discuss the broad trends that affect the economy.

When I created the thread the intention was to discuss the conditions that would less you a recession 2 years later.

I’m just calling you on your game. Market updates, anyone?

As far as Trump, you are the one making the connections to Trump.[/quote]

Bullshit you don’t. You posted updates anytime there was any news that fit your narrative even if it had nothing to do with your original narrative. The only reason why you haven’t posted any updates until now was there literally was NOTHING supporting your narrative, and you went into hiding because you were looking like an idiot because until a completely unrelated Coronavirus came into existence, you were itching for any excuse to post about Trump tanking the economy. So for pretty much most of last Q4 and beginning of January you disappeared and went into hiding. Because the trump destroying the economy thesis literally blew up in your face. And as I predicted, you came right back the moment anything would fit your narrative even if the narrative has changed. lol . And I guarantee the moment the markets no long fit your narrative again, you’ll go right back into hiding as you always do. That was that one thing you did that was comical, because you started talking about the economy and stock market despite knowing very well you have no game in equity markets….. like you do all the time with many things. But please do keep up the narrative… Because like I said, things tend to go the opposite of what you predict. lol[/quote]

OMG, grow up! Own that you obnoxiously mocked a 2020 recession instead of blaming everyone else. Either that or spare us the time wasted having to scroll past your comments by deleting your Piggington forum account.

[paulflorez]

[quote=flu][quote=paulflorez]Did a non-serious post making fun of an old thread really need a new thread? Just post it in the old one.[/quote]

yes. because 90% of the threads are now non serious since the lunatics took over. So two extra superfluous threads are not going to hurt.

Sure beats China is awesome thread, Trump thread, GOP thread, who will run in 2020 thread, impeachment thread, PE Ratio thread. I think there are a few real estate related thread left.[/quote]

The China thread linked an interesting YouTube video about AI, international politics and China’s real estate data. The impeachment thread was started by scaredyclassic, hardly a “lunatic”. Most of the threads I find here to be informative. The parody threads you are creating are just garbage taking up space.

Also, your original reply to me of just “Yes.” was better, because at least then you were subtly acknowledging it was just trollish behavior. Editing your comment to try to add some kind of sensible justification was a waste of time. Even if you think the other discussions should be censored because they add no value, don’t make the problem worse by contributing your own worthless posts.

[paulflorez]

Did a non-serious post making fun of an old thread really need a new thread? Just post it in the old one.

[paulflorez]

I would think that California taking redistricting out of the hands of legislators and into the redistricting commission helped reduced the political influence in the redistricting process itself. In 2012, many incumbents who relied on gerrymandering lost their elections after the new commission drawn districts were used. All states taking redistricting out of the hands of legislators would be a good start.

The new jungle primary system also, I assume, helps. In districts that lean heavily towards one party, a challenger from that same party could represent more moderate views to draw support from voters of the other minority parties, making voting not a complete waste of time for those voters.

As for publicly funded elections, I don’t see how you can avoid having tons of private dollars flooding elections without the courts finding it a first amendment violation (since corporations now have many of the same rights that people do). Since it can’t be beat, why not encourage it? Tax any and all spending that explicitly mentions an election, candidate, proposition, etc, to provide a fund which is then divided equally amongst all candidates. The more political spending there is in favor of one candidate/issue, the more political spending there will be given to the opposite side. Neither side has limits on how much they can spend.

[paulflorez]

I think we are already compromising in ways that both protect religious freedom and persecuted groups and that there is room for continued compromise in the future.

Personally, I think the definition of a religious organization is too loosely defined. I would categorize an organization as religious in nature if they
A) Hired only people of the same faith
B) Provided services to only people of the same faith (excluding services that are free)
C) Performed functions that were inline with well defined religious beliefs.

That being said, I can accept compromise. I can accept the more loose definition of any non-profit that is privately funded and follows a set of religious principles be eligible for exemption as a religious organization. I can also accept the compromise that tax-exemption be interpreted not as a form of public funding.

I draw the line at exemptions allowed for for-profit companies and non-profits operating with public funds. The harm done to the groups which are targeted for discrimination greatly outweighs the meager additional protections for-profit and publicly funded non-profits gain.

[paulflorez]

As a married, gay man, if I decide I want to see what is on the gay agenda, I typically peek at raunchy conservative sites like free republic, since they seem to obsessively have all the deets on all the destruction I’m suppose to have wrought that day.

I wonder what people like paramount would do with married gay teachers. I remember seeing spouses visit their teacher husband/wife (opposite-sex couple) before as a child, including sharing a kiss during a hello or a goodbye. I don’t think I ever heard outrage about that.

Then there are the plethora of childrens books that highlight opposite-sex couples and their families: The Berenstain Bears, The Ugly Duckling, Hop on Pop, etc. Do these books expose children to “sex” somehow, or is it only books about families headed by same-sex couples that expose children to “sex”?

I agree with most everyone else here that a book that simply talks about a same-sex couple adopting a child together is not sexual. There’s little difference between such a book and books that highlight multi-racial families. I’m also tired of the knee-jerk censorship of educational materials that simply include families headed by same-sex couples. Gay parents have kids in the education system too.

[paulflorez]

Filner should resign. Even if he didn’t do any of the things people accused him of doing, he didn’t handle his response well. When you stand up to established power brokers in the city, you’re going to make enemies and they will do things to hurt you or simply give you enough rope to hurt yourself. Once he admitted acting inappropriately, he lost my support.

Had I known Filner had such horrible boundaries, I still would not have voted for DeMaio, I would have simply written in Fletcher, whom I voted for in the primary. I was extremely disappointed when DeMaio used Fletcher’s pro-LGBT voting record to make the case as to why the SD GOP should not back Fletcher. DeMaio lost any chance at my support when he sold his soul to Charles LiMandri by agreeing to shut up on social issues. That screams of politically corrupt behavior and selling out your constituents. DeMaio could have taken a completely different, groundbreaking approach and won the GOP nomination by focusing on his fiscal victories while making the case for LGBT equality as a conservative issue. Instead he sold out many of his constituents because he desperately wanted the SD Republican nomination.

[paulflorez]

Yes, let’s cut the police budget so that you can go faster than the posted speed limit without getting a ticket.

[paulflorez]

I shopped in that area back when I was looking for a house. Ultimately, I bought in the Castle neighborhood, just a walk across the pedestrian bridge of Park De La Cruz, because the prices there were even more affordable, but of course the neighborhood is nice. Park De La Cruz and the Cherokee Point neighborhood are where I walk my dog, so the contrast between Castle and Cherokee Point is obvious to me.

In Cherokee, the majority of the people keep up the front of their houses and yards. Lawns are mowed, houses are well painted and maintained and fences are mended. I notice this because in Castle very few houses have well kept yards and houses. This is probably because you have more homeowners and fewer landlords in Cherokee. Todd Gloria used to live in that neighborhood before it got redistricted out of District 3. The owner of Marie’s Cafe in North Park also lives in that neighborhood.

Of course, Wightman St. is more disheveled because it’s zoned higher, as is anything north of University (Teralta), but for the most part houses south of Wightman are just as nice as houses in North Park in the university/805/thorn/north park way quadrant. Definitely better than houses north of University in North Park because there are not as many gigantic apartment buildings.

If you are set on getting a starter home instead of a condo, Cherokee Point is a good choice. Be prepared to have heavy competition though because it is a small neighborhood with lower prices. Back in 2009 it was almost impossible to beat the multitude of all-cash offers that were coming in for that neighborhood, I imagine it’s only worse now.

Also, FYI, that YMCA will be relocating to El Cajon Blvd (where Pearson Ford used to be) within the next couple of years. Todd Gloria said they already have several potential tenants lined up, but I’m not sure what they’ll be.

[paulflorez]

He has also called for an amendment to the NJ Constitution making marriage between same-sex couples illegal and opposes marriage equality in general. He has also said he will never evolve on this issue, even if it becomes politically unpopular; and his position will become *very* unpopular.

[paulflorez]

There should be less restrictive HELOCs which base the high price off of average appreciation over several decades (more conservative estimate) but let you spend it on whatever you want and then HELOCs which take whatever the appraiser says but requires oversight so that you invest in something that will actually improve your financial situation (home improvement, pay off higher interest student loan debt, etc).

Or more generally, something that keeps people from at least directly using equity to buy junk that only depreciates in value.

It’s obvious that the consequences of unbridled freedom of credit for the individual cannot be limited to the individual. When the economy tanks, it affects even those who do not abuse credit and make smart financial decisions. Reasonable limitations should be put in place and more oversight is definitely needed. While I’m somewhat happy my home value is going up, I’m actually more worried about another bubble developing in this more-demand-than-inventory environment. I’d rather have slower growth of my home value and economic stability over the long term.

I’m tired of this attitude that short term gains are worth destroying long term viability. It destroys households, businesses and seriously threatens our economy.

[paulflorez]

[quote=bearishgurl]How do you know it “sold” for $250K a week later?[/quote]

It’s been a while, but I believe I went to the county records office to lookup the sale information. Either that or I did google-fu to find out who bought it and who was selling it and who was the new listing agent. I am sure the listing agent was the same person who sold it both times though. On Zillow it shows it sold for $245k and the last sale was $320k and both were in the same month, and I remember seeing one listing go away and a new one pop up. In fact, our realtor told us it was back on the market for $300+ and asked if we wanted to make an offer, but that was just the last straw for us as for buying a house.

[quote=bearishgurl]If it DID recently sell, was the listing agent, his broker or a “straw buyer” on behalf of either one the “buyer?”[/quote]

I’m not sure I understand. The listing agent was the same agent when it sold for $245k as a short sale and then sold again for $300k+ as a traditional sale. The name of the buyer in the first sale was the same name as the person who owned/sold it in the second sale.

[quote=bearishgurl]Did the listing agent or his broker have a financial interest in the property when it was bought in 10/09 for $320K (within the period of time of the local market “trough”).[/quote]

I have no idea. From what I recall he was listed only as the listing agent. He was not listed as an owner of the property in any way in the first or second sale, as far as I can remember.

[quote=bearishgurl]Did you ever ask why it was listed at $250K when it was bought only three years prior during a period of low MIR’s and low prices? If so, what story did the LA give you?[/quote]

Basically, the story was the bank had already approved the short-sale at that price and if we bid on this house we would get it. Not only did my agent tell me that the listing agent told him this, but the listing agent also told me this directly when I was finally able to get him to call me. We actually wanted to bid a higher price to have a better chance of getting it, but our agent said he didn’t want us to pay more than we had to and that we risk the bank doing something different with the short sale if it gets a higher price than what its already approved.

[quote=bearishgurl]paulflorez, could YOUR agent actually have bought the property (under a spouse or relative’s name?) or gotten a straw buyer on his behalf before the short lender to purchase the property for $250K cash in order to effectively eliminate the higher debt on it. Could it be that he had his “bid” considered in lieu of yours in exchange for a another listing to the SS LA upon closing?[/quote]

This is as much as possibility as the listing agent working with someone else to get the house via short sale at a very low price and then at the higher price. Either way, the listing agent gets commission twice on the same house in one month. Additional kickbacks may have been involved, who knows. What bothers me the most is that the listing agent encouraged us to bid $245k and, even more upsetting, our agent discouraged us from being more competitive in our bidding. I don’t know if it would have made any difference though, if the intent was that they get it at the lower price and they are in control of who it is sold to, they would have found a way to disqualify our bid.

[paulflorez]

That’s exactly what happened here:
http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/3627-36th-St-San-Diego-CA-92104/16960138_zpid/

Selling agent took offers, but told us to bid $250,000 specifically and that the bank was guaranteed to take it. After offer is accepted, zero contact. I eventually was able to contact him by leaving a message saying that I was interested in a property that he listed (he knew my agent but not me) and then telling him the property I was interested in I had already bid on and he wasn’t returning my agents calls. He was reassuring again.

A week or so later, he emails telling us we didn’t get the offer. House sold for $250,000, shows up a week later as a listing again for $320,000 with the same selling agent.

So much for a “free market”.

[Author]

Posts