[SK in CV]

[quote=davelj]The sad part is that the Medicare and SS issues can be solved quite easily (well, in practice – not politically): raise the age at which folks start receiving benefits from 65 to 70. Voila! Problem solved. Literally, more than 40% of the projected liability would disappear. And the remaining liability can be funded under the status quo. But that AARP… they’re indefatigable.

Also, having folks actually work an extra five years would be good for the country’s overall productivity.[/quote]

Easy for you to say. Me too, pretty much. But for construction workers? Or other manufacturing jobs that require physical rather than purely mental work, not so much. For many, working to age 70 is just not a feasible option.

Additionally, life expenctancy for workers in many occupations, as well as lower income and minority populations barely exceeds 70. (As an example, life expectancy for African American men is 70.2 years as compared with more than 76 for all population groups.)

And normal retirement age is already over 65. I think for me (born in 1955) its something like 66 years 8 months. Early retirement benefits are still available at a lower rate at 62.

[SK in CV]

[quote=davelj]The sad part is that the Medicare and SS issues can be solved quite easily (well, in practice – not politically): raise the age at which folks start receiving benefits from 65 to 70. Voila! Problem solved. Literally, more than 40% of the projected liability would disappear. And the remaining liability can be funded under the status quo. But that AARP… they’re indefatigable.

Also, having folks actually work an extra five years would be good for the country’s overall productivity.[/quote]

Easy for you to say. Me too, pretty much. But for construction workers? Or other manufacturing jobs that require physical rather than purely mental work, not so much. For many, working to age 70 is just not a feasible option.

Additionally, life expenctancy for workers in many occupations, as well as lower income and minority populations barely exceeds 70. (As an example, life expectancy for African American men is 70.2 years as compared with more than 76 for all population groups.)

And normal retirement age is already over 65. I think for me (born in 1955) its something like 66 years 8 months. Early retirement benefits are still available at a lower rate at 62.

[SK in CV]

[quote=davelj]The sad part is that the Medicare and SS issues can be solved quite easily (well, in practice – not politically): raise the age at which folks start receiving benefits from 65 to 70. Voila! Problem solved. Literally, more than 40% of the projected liability would disappear. And the remaining liability can be funded under the status quo. But that AARP… they’re indefatigable.

Also, having folks actually work an extra five years would be good for the country’s overall productivity.[/quote]

Easy for you to say. Me too, pretty much. But for construction workers? Or other manufacturing jobs that require physical rather than purely mental work, not so much. For many, working to age 70 is just not a feasible option.

Additionally, life expenctancy for workers in many occupations, as well as lower income and minority populations barely exceeds 70. (As an example, life expectancy for African American men is 70.2 years as compared with more than 76 for all population groups.)

And normal retirement age is already over 65. I think for me (born in 1955) its something like 66 years 8 months. Early retirement benefits are still available at a lower rate at 62.

[SK in CV]

[quote=davelj]The sad part is that the Medicare and SS issues can be solved quite easily (well, in practice – not politically): raise the age at which folks start receiving benefits from 65 to 70. Voila! Problem solved. Literally, more than 40% of the projected liability would disappear. And the remaining liability can be funded under the status quo. But that AARP… they’re indefatigable.

Also, having folks actually work an extra five years would be good for the country’s overall productivity.[/quote]

Easy for you to say. Me too, pretty much. But for construction workers? Or other manufacturing jobs that require physical rather than purely mental work, not so much. For many, working to age 70 is just not a feasible option.

Additionally, life expenctancy for workers in many occupations, as well as lower income and minority populations barely exceeds 70. (As an example, life expectancy for African American men is 70.2 years as compared with more than 76 for all population groups.)

And normal retirement age is already over 65. I think for me (born in 1955) its something like 66 years 8 months. Early retirement benefits are still available at a lower rate at 62.

[SK in CV]

[quote=teatsonabull]Hey, Government….how’s that swine flu scare working out for ya? What have there been, like 8 deaths? 😉

Your buddies in Big Pharma sure did sell a lot of vaccine, though, huh? ;-)[/quote]

A few more than 8. According to the CDC, more than 11,000 have died in the US, with as many as 55 million contracting the virus.

Talk with virtually any hospital medical director around the county and they will confirm, the middle of November of ’09 was nervous time. At that time, most every tested flu symptom admission was H1N1, and otherwise healthy people were hitting ICU’s. Practically unheard of for our more common seasonal flus. And a good 3 months earlier than common seasonal flus. This was not your ordinary virus.

Then it went away. Just like researchers don’t fully understand why flus are seasonal, they don’t know why this one hit earlier than most, nor do they know if it will resurface in the spring as it did last year. Or next fall.

The preparation was appropriate, including the fastest development to market vaccine ever. Maybe even perfect. Even though for too many the vaccine arrived late.

[SK in CV]

[quote=teatsonabull]Hey, Government….how’s that swine flu scare working out for ya? What have there been, like 8 deaths? 😉

Your buddies in Big Pharma sure did sell a lot of vaccine, though, huh? ;-)[/quote]

A few more than 8. According to the CDC, more than 11,000 have died in the US, with as many as 55 million contracting the virus.

Talk with virtually any hospital medical director around the county and they will confirm, the middle of November of ’09 was nervous time. At that time, most every tested flu symptom admission was H1N1, and otherwise healthy people were hitting ICU’s. Practically unheard of for our more common seasonal flus. And a good 3 months earlier than common seasonal flus. This was not your ordinary virus.

Then it went away. Just like researchers don’t fully understand why flus are seasonal, they don’t know why this one hit earlier than most, nor do they know if it will resurface in the spring as it did last year. Or next fall.

The preparation was appropriate, including the fastest development to market vaccine ever. Maybe even perfect. Even though for too many the vaccine arrived late.

[SK in CV]

[quote=teatsonabull]Hey, Government….how’s that swine flu scare working out for ya? What have there been, like 8 deaths? 😉

Your buddies in Big Pharma sure did sell a lot of vaccine, though, huh? ;-)[/quote]

A few more than 8. According to the CDC, more than 11,000 have died in the US, with as many as 55 million contracting the virus.

Talk with virtually any hospital medical director around the county and they will confirm, the middle of November of ’09 was nervous time. At that time, most every tested flu symptom admission was H1N1, and otherwise healthy people were hitting ICU’s. Practically unheard of for our more common seasonal flus. And a good 3 months earlier than common seasonal flus. This was not your ordinary virus.

Then it went away. Just like researchers don’t fully understand why flus are seasonal, they don’t know why this one hit earlier than most, nor do they know if it will resurface in the spring as it did last year. Or next fall.

The preparation was appropriate, including the fastest development to market vaccine ever. Maybe even perfect. Even though for too many the vaccine arrived late.

[SK in CV]

[quote=teatsonabull]Hey, Government….how’s that swine flu scare working out for ya? What have there been, like 8 deaths? 😉

Your buddies in Big Pharma sure did sell a lot of vaccine, though, huh? ;-)[/quote]

A few more than 8. According to the CDC, more than 11,000 have died in the US, with as many as 55 million contracting the virus.

Talk with virtually any hospital medical director around the county and they will confirm, the middle of November of ’09 was nervous time. At that time, most every tested flu symptom admission was H1N1, and otherwise healthy people were hitting ICU’s. Practically unheard of for our more common seasonal flus. And a good 3 months earlier than common seasonal flus. This was not your ordinary virus.

Then it went away. Just like researchers don’t fully understand why flus are seasonal, they don’t know why this one hit earlier than most, nor do they know if it will resurface in the spring as it did last year. Or next fall.

The preparation was appropriate, including the fastest development to market vaccine ever. Maybe even perfect. Even though for too many the vaccine arrived late.

[SK in CV]

[quote=teatsonabull]Hey, Government….how’s that swine flu scare working out for ya? What have there been, like 8 deaths? 😉

Your buddies in Big Pharma sure did sell a lot of vaccine, though, huh? ;-)[/quote]

A few more than 8. According to the CDC, more than 11,000 have died in the US, with as many as 55 million contracting the virus.

Talk with virtually any hospital medical director around the county and they will confirm, the middle of November of ’09 was nervous time. At that time, most every tested flu symptom admission was H1N1, and otherwise healthy people were hitting ICU’s. Practically unheard of for our more common seasonal flus. And a good 3 months earlier than common seasonal flus. This was not your ordinary virus.

Then it went away. Just like researchers don’t fully understand why flus are seasonal, they don’t know why this one hit earlier than most, nor do they know if it will resurface in the spring as it did last year. Or next fall.

The preparation was appropriate, including the fastest development to market vaccine ever. Maybe even perfect. Even though for too many the vaccine arrived late.

[SK in CV]

[quote=clearfund]
Yes, from your IRA you can only borrow up to $10k ($20k if married) in for a downpayment on a home. If its an IRA you will be subject to taxes on the withdrawl, however, the IRS will waive the early-withdrawl penalty. $10k helps, but isn’t a miracle.

[/quote]

This isn’t exactly right. It is not a loan at all, it’s a penalty free withdrawal. A taxpayer in the 28% tax bracket will only net $7,200 (ignoring state taxes for the moment). A pretty costly way to acquire a home, and at least with our local prices, it doesn’t really help much with the acquisition. So you’re right on the last part. It isn’t a miracle. It’s likely to be somewhere between $7000 and $8500 that costs you $10,000. Loan shark kind of cost. Pretty high vig for your own money.

And there are other requirements. It has to be for the purchase of a first home.

[SK in CV]

[quote=clearfund]
Yes, from your IRA you can only borrow up to $10k ($20k if married) in for a downpayment on a home. If its an IRA you will be subject to taxes on the withdrawl, however, the IRS will waive the early-withdrawl penalty. $10k helps, but isn’t a miracle.

[/quote]

This isn’t exactly right. It is not a loan at all, it’s a penalty free withdrawal. A taxpayer in the 28% tax bracket will only net $7,200 (ignoring state taxes for the moment). A pretty costly way to acquire a home, and at least with our local prices, it doesn’t really help much with the acquisition. So you’re right on the last part. It isn’t a miracle. It’s likely to be somewhere between $7000 and $8500 that costs you $10,000. Loan shark kind of cost. Pretty high vig for your own money.

And there are other requirements. It has to be for the purchase of a first home.

[SK in CV]

[quote=clearfund]
Yes, from your IRA you can only borrow up to $10k ($20k if married) in for a downpayment on a home. If its an IRA you will be subject to taxes on the withdrawl, however, the IRS will waive the early-withdrawl penalty. $10k helps, but isn’t a miracle.

[/quote]

This isn’t exactly right. It is not a loan at all, it’s a penalty free withdrawal. A taxpayer in the 28% tax bracket will only net $7,200 (ignoring state taxes for the moment). A pretty costly way to acquire a home, and at least with our local prices, it doesn’t really help much with the acquisition. So you’re right on the last part. It isn’t a miracle. It’s likely to be somewhere between $7000 and $8500 that costs you $10,000. Loan shark kind of cost. Pretty high vig for your own money.

And there are other requirements. It has to be for the purchase of a first home.

[SK in CV]

[quote=clearfund]
Yes, from your IRA you can only borrow up to $10k ($20k if married) in for a downpayment on a home. If its an IRA you will be subject to taxes on the withdrawl, however, the IRS will waive the early-withdrawl penalty. $10k helps, but isn’t a miracle.

[/quote]

This isn’t exactly right. It is not a loan at all, it’s a penalty free withdrawal. A taxpayer in the 28% tax bracket will only net $7,200 (ignoring state taxes for the moment). A pretty costly way to acquire a home, and at least with our local prices, it doesn’t really help much with the acquisition. So you’re right on the last part. It isn’t a miracle. It’s likely to be somewhere between $7000 and $8500 that costs you $10,000. Loan shark kind of cost. Pretty high vig for your own money.

And there are other requirements. It has to be for the purchase of a first home.

[SK in CV]

[quote=clearfund]
Yes, from your IRA you can only borrow up to $10k ($20k if married) in for a downpayment on a home. If its an IRA you will be subject to taxes on the withdrawl, however, the IRS will waive the early-withdrawl penalty. $10k helps, but isn’t a miracle.

[/quote]

This isn’t exactly right. It is not a loan at all, it’s a penalty free withdrawal. A taxpayer in the 28% tax bracket will only net $7,200 (ignoring state taxes for the moment). A pretty costly way to acquire a home, and at least with our local prices, it doesn’t really help much with the acquisition. So you’re right on the last part. It isn’t a miracle. It’s likely to be somewhere between $7000 and $8500 that costs you $10,000. Loan shark kind of cost. Pretty high vig for your own money.

And there are other requirements. It has to be for the purchase of a first home.

[SK in CV]

A few comments about Del Cerro.

Like Kobio, i grew up there. During the 60’s and early 70’s. My mother lived there till she died a few years ago.

The homes you linked to are in a nice part of the neighborhood but kind of a hassle to get to compared to some of the rest of del cerro. Going over the hill takes forever and if you do it daily, your tires will never last more than 20,000 miles. And going the other way via Navajo takes a bit longer. It’s a slightly newer part than the more southern part of madra by Norman Lane and below (which has some very nice homes, btw)

Kobio makes a good point about living on the hill. there are a few flat streets up at the top, but most of it just isn’t near as kid friendly.

The homes at the east end of Del Cerro blvd, where it starts to turn north towards Elaine are 20 to 25 years newer, my recollection is that they were built mostly in the late 70’s as opposed to most of the stuff east of college which was built in the late 50’s/early 60’s. You’ll find more high ceilings in the new part, almost none in the older part, except for a few on the hill. (Back then, the hill was Del Cerro Highlands. Not sure if that name is still used.)

My sister still lives there near the elementary school, and it seems that the neighborhood feel has remained there a bit more than up on the hill. But the homes are a bit smaller, and dated, almost all ranch. The number of 2 story homes on the west side of college is nil.

And yes, there is a difference between del cerro and princess del cerro. Nobody that lived there when i did considered them the same neighborhood. For that matter, even the homes you linked to were considered San Carlos. Anything on the down hill side towards the high school was. No one would get away with calling those homes part of the highlands. Whether that neighborhood snobiness remains, i have no idea.

[Author]

Posts