Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant[quote=joec]
What I find amazing is how all these dentists and eye guys are still in business. People getting laid off certainly aren’t renewing themselves and seeing how much they make for a teeth cleaning, it sorta sucks.[/quote]I’m gonna take a little different position on this. Dentists and optometrists aren’t operating under the same business model. Both are highly trained. But dentists make tons of money even when you don’t need special services, just once or twice a year cleanings.
Optometrists don’t have that cash flow. Many don’t get paid much for exams. They don’t have medicare or medicaid paying anything signfiicant. The only place they make any money is optical dispensing. I’m not suggesting anyone should pay more than they need to, but they are entitled to make a living.
Participant[quote=patb]
perhaps but you seem to be discounting the click fraud scandal.if it’s real, FB revenue number collapses, given they spend 75% of their revenue, they will have to either slash salary or spending. I don’t see them buying ads, so it’s got to be internl spending.[/quote]
Yeah, if that expands, they have some trouble. But their net tangible value is almost $15 billion, with more than $10 billion of that cash and eqivilents. They have the capacity to start over, and rebuild revenue, even if it takes a couple years to get back to where they are now, without slashing anything
Participant[quote=patb]funny it went from IPO to shreholder lawsuit in 48 hours, now, it could go from IPO to delisted before the restricted shares start to trade.[/quote]
Facebook isn’t going to get delisted. It’s current quarter earnings notwithstanding, it is still making money. It has value. The problem is not primarily an internal problem, it’s an external problem. It has real value. But it’s over-valued. Somewhere along the line they are likely to figure out how to monetize what they have, and they may even become worth their IPO price. But until then, they’re a fabulously well capitalized (possibly the best ever) company.
Participant[quote=DataAgent]”There is no drain in the laundry room”
Really? How does it work now?[/quote]
I’m sure what she means is there’s no drain in the floor. There is a drain for the machine.
July 31, 2012 at 9:13 PM in reply to: Future housing purchase – trading up when rates are higher? #749328Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]Well besides the location -location – location rule.
Back in the days when there was inflation and a house was a good investment
1950’s – 2005. there was always the buy as much house as you can possible afford rule, being that it would put you in a better position 10 or so years later due to inflation etc…[/quote]
It really didn’t always work out that way. Believe it or not, the bubble that burst a few years ago was not the first one. There were two other significant bubbles that collapsed in the last 40 years.
Participant[quote=spdrun]I’m not convinced that price dictates what’s *inside* the walls of a new house, unless it’s custom built. Builders are in it for the profit, and after the warranty and statute of limitations on suits expire, as long as it’s to code, it’s Not Their Problem.[/quote]
No, it doesn’t. Because inside the walls, they’re pretty much all the same. What makes a house feel like higher quality is the finishes. The cabinetry, applicances, flooring, doors and windows, etc. These finishes can add $100K or more to the cost of a house. (The kitchen appliances alone in my townhouse cost the builder $10-$15K more than if they had gone cheap. And that’s one of the reasons I bought THIS house, instead of teh cheap one down the street.)
All buildiers are in it for the money. If builders can go cheap and sell the houses they build, they will. If the market requires they spend more in order to sell the houses, they’ll do that too. Most of them know what they’re doing, and build the right houses for the right markets.
Participant[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=spdrun]Construction quality also has to do with execution, not just initial design, you know. That’s where all of the mass-produced-box builders fall down. If code only requires a 4″ slab, then the problem is with the code![/quote]
Poorly “executed” answer.
CE[/quote]
With the exception of the last sentence, it is a pretty accurate claim. Most, but far from all construction problems are execution rather than faulty design. Builders contract with subs who agree to build to spec, and then cut corners, sometimes occasionally, sometimes consistently. And sometimes, they just do it wrong. Every builder has these same problems.
But I’m not sure this discussion is really about design or workmanship. Generally, the more expensive a house is (as compared with the local market), the higher the quality of the products used to build the house. Builders can use inexpensive products and assemblies and not end up with defects. But cheap finishes make for cheap feeling houses, irrespective of the quality of the installation work.
Toll doesn’t tend to build those houses. Hovnanian does in so cal. But generalizations can be dangerous. It can change from development to development.
(And in some situations, a 4″ slab is perfectly acceptable. And one 4″ slab is not exactly the same as every other 4″ slab, concrete mix and assembly varies. Some conditions call for a thicker slab, irrespective of code.)
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
SK: Yup, agree on solvency versus IOUs being two separate issues. My point on the IOUs was simply that the government has been dipping into the SS trust fund for years and not “repaying” the money (quotes used to denote that the amounts represent an “intracompany payable” in accounting parlance.)[/quote]
Last time. The government has had no choice but to “dip into” the SS Trust Fund. The only legal investment the trust fund can make is in special issue US debt. Even if there was no other federal debt, the fund would still have to buy those bonds, the treasury would still have to sell them (essentially borrowing the funds). The debts have never been repaid before last year because the current year collections have always exceeded current year benefits. As a practical matter they couldn’t be repaid.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
SK: Well, my post was simply pointing out the fact that the SS trust fund was essentially stuffed with IOUs and headed for insolvency.We’re basically hosed. As I pointed out in a previous post, this is a Balance Sheet recession and the debt overhang will have to be dealt with before any serious positive motion begins.
This is why all the various central banks moves have been smacked in the face with the Law of Diminishing Returns and repeated Keynesian “pump-priming” has proved ineffectual at best (we’ve “spent” trillions and barely moved the needle.) Our politicians not only lack the will, they lack the right answers, too.[/quote]
Couple things.
I just think the IOU issue is not material to the discussion of solvency. The solvency issue is fixable relatively easily. Whether there is the political will to do so, remains to be seen.
If you’re talking about stimulus being the pump priming…i’m reasonably sure that the fiscal stimulus didn’t meet what Keynes would have suggested. I’m going back pretty far, but i’m pretty sure that expansion of money supply isn’t a primary stimulus in keynesian economics, and suggests that it will be mostly ineffective during depression and deep recession. If I remember correctly, then it certainly hasn’t been proved wrong.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Shoveler: What SS money? Dude, politicians have been treating this like a massive cookie jar and replacing actual money with IOUs for years.
[/quote]
Irrespective of the fact that it’s the only allowed investment, what’s the better alternative to US debt in the SS trust fund? Stock market would be better? Gold? Cash?
Participant[quote=desmond]What is NBC doing with the time difference? Are they showing events live or is it going to be delayed?[/quote]
Some of both. TV schedule can be found at:
http://www.nbcolympics.com/tv-listings/index.html?v=grid&d=2012-7-27
Easiest way to find particular stuff is to click on the TV Schedule by Sport tab. Some of it’s live, some is delayed.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=SK in CV][quote=Aecetia]So Brian, what do you propose to do with the “privileged class”? What is the solution to the retirees already getting the pensions?[/quote]
As a practical matter, I’m pretty sure nothing can be done, unless those already getting the pensions are doing so as a result of illegal acts. That is, unless the retirement systems go bankrupt, in which case all pension beneficiaries would probably be treated similarly.[/quote]
Pretty much what SK said.
The contracts are very hard to undo. Bankruptcy in some municipalities will show the potential course of action for other municipalities.[/quote]
I’m not sure that municipality bankrutpcies will have any effect on current retirees, with regards to pensions. (health care benefits are a different story.) I think it’s possible that liabilities related to already retired employee pensions may shift from the individual employers (municipalities, school districts, etc.) to the plan trustees (STRS, CalPers). Interesting question though. I responded originally as if I was pretty sure. I still think I’m right, but far from positive.
ParticipantNice work bg.
Participant[quote=Aecetia]So Brian, what do you propose to do with the “privileged class”? What is the solution to the retirees already getting the pensions?[/quote]
As a practical matter, I’m pretty sure nothing can be done, unless those already getting the pensions are doing so as a result of illegal acts. That is, unless the retirement systems go bankrupt, in which case all pension beneficiaries would probably be treated similarly.
-
AuthorPosts
