Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
temeculaguy
ParticipantTo envy the salary of a state employee is missing the point and the facts. Here is the budget.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf
If you close every court, every prison and get rid of every state employee and their pension, you won’t balance the budget.
70% of the budget goes to three things, k-12 education, higher education and health and human services (ie. welfare, medical for the poor).
At some point you need to to realize that prisons, cops, fireman, judges and everything else that pisses you off isn’t where the real money goes, it goes to poor people, sorry.
If you really want to solve the budget problem, put birth control chemicals in the water supply and only give the anti-dote to people who can prove they have health insurance and a certain income. Require parents of students in both k-12 (40% of the state budget) and higher education pay the full expense of their offspring’s education, no sliding scales, no freebies, pay to play, if you can’t afford them don’t have them. You may not agree but the poorer someone is, the more kids they have, and many get free money, more than the employees of the state when totaled up.
Take every pension away, fire them all and you still wont solve the problem. Socially it hurts to admit it, spiritually it hurts as well, but at some point you have to admit that you need to come up with a different system. A system that does not spend ten times the total lifetime taxes collected on a person’s education or health care. We are fooling oursleves to say that we are better. We give out too much free money, we refuse to let poor people die even if it costs us more in a week than we will collect from them in a lifetime.
I hate being the downer, but the OP mentioned “non salary cuts” because the state salaries is but a fraction of the expenditures, the state employee is anectdotal, it makes you feel good to attack it, but that is not where the fundamental problem lies.
And no I don’t have the answer, it hurts my heart as much as anyone to tell poor people that they can’t have that lifesaving medicine or surgery or that poor people can’t have a bunch of kids and send them all to college for free, feed them for free or that economic refugees can’t come here and fulfill a dream like my ancestors did, but you need to realize that the real money is going there, thank god I don’t have make these decisions now that there isn’t enough money to go around.
ParticipantTo envy the salary of a state employee is missing the point and the facts. Here is the budget.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf
If you close every court, every prison and get rid of every state employee and their pension, you won’t balance the budget.
70% of the budget goes to three things, k-12 education, higher education and health and human services (ie. welfare, medical for the poor).
At some point you need to to realize that prisons, cops, fireman, judges and everything else that pisses you off isn’t where the real money goes, it goes to poor people, sorry.
If you really want to solve the budget problem, put birth control chemicals in the water supply and only give the anti-dote to people who can prove they have health insurance and a certain income. Require parents of students in both k-12 (40% of the state budget) and higher education pay the full expense of their offspring’s education, no sliding scales, no freebies, pay to play, if you can’t afford them don’t have them. You may not agree but the poorer someone is, the more kids they have, and many get free money, more than the employees of the state when totaled up.
Take every pension away, fire them all and you still wont solve the problem. Socially it hurts to admit it, spiritually it hurts as well, but at some point you have to admit that you need to come up with a different system. A system that does not spend ten times the total lifetime taxes collected on a person’s education or health care. We are fooling oursleves to say that we are better. We give out too much free money, we refuse to let poor people die even if it costs us more in a week than we will collect from them in a lifetime.
I hate being the downer, but the OP mentioned “non salary cuts” because the state salaries is but a fraction of the expenditures, the state employee is anectdotal, it makes you feel good to attack it, but that is not where the fundamental problem lies.
And no I don’t have the answer, it hurts my heart as much as anyone to tell poor people that they can’t have that lifesaving medicine or surgery or that poor people can’t have a bunch of kids and send them all to college for free, feed them for free or that economic refugees can’t come here and fulfill a dream like my ancestors did, but you need to realize that the real money is going there, thank god I don’t have make these decisions now that there isn’t enough money to go around.
ParticipantTo envy the salary of a state employee is missing the point and the facts. Here is the budget.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf
If you close every court, every prison and get rid of every state employee and their pension, you won’t balance the budget.
70% of the budget goes to three things, k-12 education, higher education and health and human services (ie. welfare, medical for the poor).
At some point you need to to realize that prisons, cops, fireman, judges and everything else that pisses you off isn’t where the real money goes, it goes to poor people, sorry.
If you really want to solve the budget problem, put birth control chemicals in the water supply and only give the anti-dote to people who can prove they have health insurance and a certain income. Require parents of students in both k-12 (40% of the state budget) and higher education pay the full expense of their offspring’s education, no sliding scales, no freebies, pay to play, if you can’t afford them don’t have them. You may not agree but the poorer someone is, the more kids they have, and many get free money, more than the employees of the state when totaled up.
Take every pension away, fire them all and you still wont solve the problem. Socially it hurts to admit it, spiritually it hurts as well, but at some point you have to admit that you need to come up with a different system. A system that does not spend ten times the total lifetime taxes collected on a person’s education or health care. We are fooling oursleves to say that we are better. We give out too much free money, we refuse to let poor people die even if it costs us more in a week than we will collect from them in a lifetime.
I hate being the downer, but the OP mentioned “non salary cuts” because the state salaries is but a fraction of the expenditures, the state employee is anectdotal, it makes you feel good to attack it, but that is not where the fundamental problem lies.
And no I don’t have the answer, it hurts my heart as much as anyone to tell poor people that they can’t have that lifesaving medicine or surgery or that poor people can’t have a bunch of kids and send them all to college for free, feed them for free or that economic refugees can’t come here and fulfill a dream like my ancestors did, but you need to realize that the real money is going there, thank god I don’t have make these decisions now that there isn’t enough money to go around.
ParticipantFormer, that was EPIC, if the bottom of the market, the top of the market, the middle, the recession and the depression look like that, sign me up! Not sure I can handle a double, I probably wouldn’t survive a weekend, but I’ll give the old college try.
ParticipantFormer, that was EPIC, if the bottom of the market, the top of the market, the middle, the recession and the depression look like that, sign me up! Not sure I can handle a double, I probably wouldn’t survive a weekend, but I’ll give the old college try.
ParticipantFormer, that was EPIC, if the bottom of the market, the top of the market, the middle, the recession and the depression look like that, sign me up! Not sure I can handle a double, I probably wouldn’t survive a weekend, but I’ll give the old college try.
ParticipantFormer, that was EPIC, if the bottom of the market, the top of the market, the middle, the recession and the depression look like that, sign me up! Not sure I can handle a double, I probably wouldn’t survive a weekend, but I’ll give the old college try.
ParticipantFormer, that was EPIC, if the bottom of the market, the top of the market, the middle, the recession and the depression look like that, sign me up! Not sure I can handle a double, I probably wouldn’t survive a weekend, but I’ll give the old college try.
ParticipantThere are a few schools of thought on this, the optimum is to buy for a lower price while rates spike up, then get lucky to catch the rates on the decline while you are in escrow just before you lock or refi down the road. Most people buy on payment, especially in the middle of the market. If rates go lower, they bid higher, if rates go higher, they pay less, either way they shop for a 2k mortgage as opposed to certain price or rate. Low rates tend to flood the market with buyers but they end up paying more in price, wiping out any payment benefit.
Cash buyers or those with big downs should shop when rates are high.
In your situation, I don’t know if rates should be the fundamental that you base your “yes/no” vote on, rates are a factor but not a fundamental. Not knowing your market, figure out what it’s 2003 price was (or a similar property) and it’s 2001 price and try to get closer to the 2001, combine that with the rate and more of it is in your favor than against.
I think you’ll find the opinion on the boards is that the million+ coastal market, still has some to give and hasn;t reverted to it’s pre bubble pricing, but I’m guessing since I haven’t looked at your market.
ParticipantThere are a few schools of thought on this, the optimum is to buy for a lower price while rates spike up, then get lucky to catch the rates on the decline while you are in escrow just before you lock or refi down the road. Most people buy on payment, especially in the middle of the market. If rates go lower, they bid higher, if rates go higher, they pay less, either way they shop for a 2k mortgage as opposed to certain price or rate. Low rates tend to flood the market with buyers but they end up paying more in price, wiping out any payment benefit.
Cash buyers or those with big downs should shop when rates are high.
In your situation, I don’t know if rates should be the fundamental that you base your “yes/no” vote on, rates are a factor but not a fundamental. Not knowing your market, figure out what it’s 2003 price was (or a similar property) and it’s 2001 price and try to get closer to the 2001, combine that with the rate and more of it is in your favor than against.
I think you’ll find the opinion on the boards is that the million+ coastal market, still has some to give and hasn;t reverted to it’s pre bubble pricing, but I’m guessing since I haven’t looked at your market.
ParticipantThere are a few schools of thought on this, the optimum is to buy for a lower price while rates spike up, then get lucky to catch the rates on the decline while you are in escrow just before you lock or refi down the road. Most people buy on payment, especially in the middle of the market. If rates go lower, they bid higher, if rates go higher, they pay less, either way they shop for a 2k mortgage as opposed to certain price or rate. Low rates tend to flood the market with buyers but they end up paying more in price, wiping out any payment benefit.
Cash buyers or those with big downs should shop when rates are high.
In your situation, I don’t know if rates should be the fundamental that you base your “yes/no” vote on, rates are a factor but not a fundamental. Not knowing your market, figure out what it’s 2003 price was (or a similar property) and it’s 2001 price and try to get closer to the 2001, combine that with the rate and more of it is in your favor than against.
I think you’ll find the opinion on the boards is that the million+ coastal market, still has some to give and hasn;t reverted to it’s pre bubble pricing, but I’m guessing since I haven’t looked at your market.
ParticipantThere are a few schools of thought on this, the optimum is to buy for a lower price while rates spike up, then get lucky to catch the rates on the decline while you are in escrow just before you lock or refi down the road. Most people buy on payment, especially in the middle of the market. If rates go lower, they bid higher, if rates go higher, they pay less, either way they shop for a 2k mortgage as opposed to certain price or rate. Low rates tend to flood the market with buyers but they end up paying more in price, wiping out any payment benefit.
Cash buyers or those with big downs should shop when rates are high.
In your situation, I don’t know if rates should be the fundamental that you base your “yes/no” vote on, rates are a factor but not a fundamental. Not knowing your market, figure out what it’s 2003 price was (or a similar property) and it’s 2001 price and try to get closer to the 2001, combine that with the rate and more of it is in your favor than against.
I think you’ll find the opinion on the boards is that the million+ coastal market, still has some to give and hasn;t reverted to it’s pre bubble pricing, but I’m guessing since I haven’t looked at your market.
ParticipantThere are a few schools of thought on this, the optimum is to buy for a lower price while rates spike up, then get lucky to catch the rates on the decline while you are in escrow just before you lock or refi down the road. Most people buy on payment, especially in the middle of the market. If rates go lower, they bid higher, if rates go higher, they pay less, either way they shop for a 2k mortgage as opposed to certain price or rate. Low rates tend to flood the market with buyers but they end up paying more in price, wiping out any payment benefit.
Cash buyers or those with big downs should shop when rates are high.
In your situation, I don’t know if rates should be the fundamental that you base your “yes/no” vote on, rates are a factor but not a fundamental. Not knowing your market, figure out what it’s 2003 price was (or a similar property) and it’s 2001 price and try to get closer to the 2001, combine that with the rate and more of it is in your favor than against.
I think you’ll find the opinion on the boards is that the million+ coastal market, still has some to give and hasn;t reverted to it’s pre bubble pricing, but I’m guessing since I haven’t looked at your market.
Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan]
I have a simple theory. Homes are much more affordable than they have been in a long time.
[/quote]Life is not complex. We are complex. Life is simple, and the simple thing is the right thing.
– Oscar WildeSometimes it’s hard to take a step back and see the obvious, I like your theory, it takes me 700 words to say the same thing, even then it is convoluted, brevity is not my strong suit.
SD, I thought you’d like the laker’s analogy, it was intended that way.
-
AuthorPosts
