[SK in CV]

[quote=SD Realtor]
The fact that most of the employer offered insurance plans will suffer the same fate is not yet realized, but it will happen over the next 2 years.[/quote]

You’re probably right, but this has almost nothing to do with the new law. Over the 10 years before the law was passed, 15 million people lost employer sponsored coverage. There is nothing to indicate that trend will change. Employers have been dropping coverage, reducing the benefits of plans, and charging employees more for their coverage and coverage of dependents. What is different now, is that everyone who loses employer sponsored coverage will have more and better access to continued coverage.

[SK in CV]

[quote=flu][quote=spdrun]Taken in context of earnings, it’s terrible.[/quote]

Bubble stocks don’t trade on fundamentals you know… It trades on hype..

Just saying….[/quote]

I think you’re both wrong. The stock movement was consistent with what they reported, because they reported much more than just historical earnings. And it’s no longer a “hype” stock. They’re a real operating company with operating profits. FB is priced with potential growth figured in. It may never reach those targets, but the targets are not unreasonable. As opposed to TSLA, which is trading solely based on hope right now, not computed future earnings.

[SK in CV]

[quote=spdrun]

And again: If the Fed would have been smart a year or two ago, they’d have started buying infrastructure development bonds rather than gov’t bonds and MBS. Infrastructure improvements provide lasting value rather than blowing bubbles.[/quote]

That wouldn’t have changed the market much. Muni bonds are priced based on treasury yields.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]While SK is correct about the additional *tax assessment* not adding to your cost basis, the actual cost of the work completed should probably be applied to your cost basis (SK, please correct me if I’m wrong on this as this is your area of expertise). Of course, if they keep the $250K/$500K tax exclusion on occupied housing, it probably won’t make much of a difference…but with Janet Yellen at the helm of the Fed, who knows?[/quote]

Right, the costs do affect basis for income tax purposes. How the tax assessors form is filled out doesn’t.

[SK in CV]

[quote=The-Shoveler]
Yea I would have to agree with this part, without QCOM and all the tag along wireless industry in that area CV would not have been anything like it is today.

It would still be an expensive area IMO but just not a ridiculously expensive one. 3000+sqf homes on 4000sfq lots etc… going for 1M+ (without Ocean views) and Condos going for 600-800K (without ocean views).
I must admit that to me seems ridiculously expensive.[/quote]

I doubt that’s true. I lived there for almost 10 years. I met scores, maybe a couple hundred people. Never met anyone who worked at QCOM. I’m sure there are many. But not enough to have any significant effect on prices.

[SK in CV]

My first thought was that it was maybe a corporate dividend reinvestment plan, but I checked and AAPL doesn’t have one. So at least in the case of your Apple stock, it is USAA’s plan. (There are some corporate plans that allow you to reinvest directly, sometimes at a discount to closing price on the payment date.) Keep in mind, that dividend reinvestment is probably your choice, you don’t have to reinvest. Essentially, what you’re doing is buying fractional shares of stock, presumably without paying a commission. So you’ve paid $1.20 for 64 stock transactions. That’s pretty cheap.

[SK in CV]

How you fill out this form has absolutely nothing to do with your basis for income tax purposes.

[SK in CV]

[quote=spdrun]For one thing, they can’t foreclose when an application for a loan mod has been submitted, and they’re required to try to modify.

Betting that the borrowers can tie things up in the “loan mod” stage a long time, and with no threat of foreclosure to push them to cooperate with the bank, they can live basically for free while the mod is in process.

For another, the “single point of contact” rule may require structural changes in the lending departments of the big banks, and those take time.

This is unlike in NJ where it takes a while for foreclosure cases to make it to court, but once they do, if the judge sees a history of non-payment, he’ll allow the sheriff’s sale to go ahead. Attempted modification or not.[/quote]

Bunch of crap. They’re required to review a loan mod app. If the borrower doesn’t qualify, they can foreclose, same as they could before the law. They can’t foreclose while they’re negotiating a loan mod. They have to have their paperwork in order. A single point of contact makes sense, it saves money for the lender.

Lenders have abused borrowers for years without recourse, these tiny little hoops make sense for everyone. And if it ever actually delayed foreclosures, that should have no effect now that the law has been in effect for so long.

[SK in CV]

[quote=spdrun]And what makes you think that banks won’t start to foreclose? The best explanation I’ve heard is that “The Homeowners’ Bill of Rights Makes CA a judicial state in all but name.” [/quote]

Which clause in the legislation could reasonably cause any extended delay? Whiney ass lenders. That excuse makes no sense at all.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CDMA ENG]
You kidding right? See what happens the next time you disobey an officer.

Remember Rodney King?

How about failure to obey a lawful order? Creating a public nuisance… Trespassing.

There are propably a half dozen other laws they could have used to arrest students.

Remember it’s only the cop’s job to arrest you. It’s the judge’s job to figure out if the cop made a good application of the law he arrested you under. Either way you get locked the fuck up and your time and money is down the drain…

I am not defending the police… Believe me I got my own opinions on them but you have got to kidding me if you dont think the cops had the authority to do what they did despite what you think…

CE[/quote]

I’m actually not kidding. The most obvious would be the failure to obey a lawful order. Everything a LEO says is not a lawful order, despite the fact that many would like to have that authority. They make requests under their authority all the time. But there aren’t very many that qualify as lawful orders. In most states they’re specifically granted the authority to direct traffic. Or to conduct investigations. Or protect the peace. So violating orders given in the process of those duties would be a failure to obey a lawful order. Lawful orders are only those which laws grant the police specific authority. Absent that authority, there is no lawful order.

Hence, as far as I know, none of the students involved were ever pursued on charges of failure to comply.

[SK in CV]

[quote=spdrun]I’m assuming the same law that obligates anyone to follow cops’ orders, no matter how fucking arbitrary and bizarre.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure that in most circumstances, that law doesn’t exist.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CDMA ENG]That being said though the students did disobey orders and should have been spray though by an approved product…

Another two wrongs story…

CE[/quote]

Which law is it again that obligates a student to follow the orders of a law enforcement officer?

[SK in CV]

[quote=Dougie944]Let me be contrarian here. I’m just as appalled by the 30k that each of the protesters received. They completely blocked all paths the police officers could take to leave the area and were each individually warned, in advance, that they were going to be pepper sprayed if they did not allow them to pass. Then they got sprayed just as they were warned and still won $30k each.

You can’t impede the cop’s ability to leave an area. The alternative was to physically break the human chain they had created. That would have resulted in injuries.[/quote]

Not quite. They didn’t impeded any cop’s ability to leave the area. The videos pretty clearly show cops crossing over the line at will. In fact, the cop that sprayed the protesters easily walked over the line just seconds before he let loose with the spray. Including spraying some protesters that weren’t even on the concrete path.

[SK in CV]

[quote=Essbee]
Actually, it is both north AND south of Poway Rd. http://www.zipmap.net/California/San_Diego_County/Z_Sabre_Springs.htm

:)[/quote]

Well it looks like it is. It wasn’t when I moved away from that area 12 years ago.

[SK in CV]

It’s all treated the same way. Though your IRA may be in multiple accounts, you essentially have 1 IRA. If some of the contributions were non-deductible, some were deductible, and some were from a roll-over, it’s taxed as if you have 1 IRA. So it’s non-deductible contributions (less previous non-taxable recovery)/value of all IRA’s at the beginning of the year to determine taxable portion of all IRA distributions. You can’t pick and choose when you recover the basis tax-free.

So as a practical matter, you can’t recover all the basis until you take a final IRA distribution.

[Author]

Posts