Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
UCGal
ParticipantAsking prices are different than selling prices. I could market my house for $2 Million. I couldn’t SELL my house for that, though.
UCGal
ParticipantAsking prices are different than selling prices. I could market my house for $2 Million. I couldn’t SELL my house for that, though.
UCGal
ParticipantIn defense of women…. I’ve seen couples where the man was the one who was obsessed with size and status and the woman was the one arguing moderation.
I had a coworker who went completely out of control when his wife suggested moving to a better school district. She was happy with a small home – he figured if they were going to take on more debt they “deserved” the big house… put in a custom pool… all with an interest only loan and only 1 income. He was pretty up front that he was the one that cared about the size, the expensive upgrades and she was nervous about it.
And plenty of women look at these huge houses with dismay because they know it’s a lot more to clean.
UCGal
ParticipantIn defense of women…. I’ve seen couples where the man was the one who was obsessed with size and status and the woman was the one arguing moderation.
I had a coworker who went completely out of control when his wife suggested moving to a better school district. She was happy with a small home – he figured if they were going to take on more debt they “deserved” the big house… put in a custom pool… all with an interest only loan and only 1 income. He was pretty up front that he was the one that cared about the size, the expensive upgrades and she was nervous about it.
And plenty of women look at these huge houses with dismay because they know it’s a lot more to clean.
UCGal
ParticipantIn defense of women…. I’ve seen couples where the man was the one who was obsessed with size and status and the woman was the one arguing moderation.
I had a coworker who went completely out of control when his wife suggested moving to a better school district. She was happy with a small home – he figured if they were going to take on more debt they “deserved” the big house… put in a custom pool… all with an interest only loan and only 1 income. He was pretty up front that he was the one that cared about the size, the expensive upgrades and she was nervous about it.
And plenty of women look at these huge houses with dismay because they know it’s a lot more to clean.
UCGal
ParticipantIn defense of women…. I’ve seen couples where the man was the one who was obsessed with size and status and the woman was the one arguing moderation.
I had a coworker who went completely out of control when his wife suggested moving to a better school district. She was happy with a small home – he figured if they were going to take on more debt they “deserved” the big house… put in a custom pool… all with an interest only loan and only 1 income. He was pretty up front that he was the one that cared about the size, the expensive upgrades and she was nervous about it.
And plenty of women look at these huge houses with dismay because they know it’s a lot more to clean.
UCGal
ParticipantIn defense of women…. I’ve seen couples where the man was the one who was obsessed with size and status and the woman was the one arguing moderation.
I had a coworker who went completely out of control when his wife suggested moving to a better school district. She was happy with a small home – he figured if they were going to take on more debt they “deserved” the big house… put in a custom pool… all with an interest only loan and only 1 income. He was pretty up front that he was the one that cared about the size, the expensive upgrades and she was nervous about it.
And plenty of women look at these huge houses with dismay because they know it’s a lot more to clean.
UCGal
ParticipantI think this is potentially bad news for both parties… Under the system, prior to this ruling, candidates were beholden to the party bosses in order to get funds for their house or senate campaigns. Now they can blow off the DNC or GOP and align with corporations… They’ll serve the needs of the corporations and not the parties.
I think this is bad for small business – they can’t play at the level of the big boys and will probably see legislation coming out that favors the big corporations at their expense.
It’s ironic that corporations already had the right to make and pay for the airing of commercials, independent of a candidates campaign… This is how PACs do it. And corporations and individuals have been able to do this as well… This supreme court case was based on a 90 minute film: “Hillary: The Movie”. If the makers had PAID to air it, it would have been legal. But they tried to air it as entertainment and charge for it. If they’d aired it as an infomercial it would have been perfectly legal.
UCGal
ParticipantI think this is potentially bad news for both parties… Under the system, prior to this ruling, candidates were beholden to the party bosses in order to get funds for their house or senate campaigns. Now they can blow off the DNC or GOP and align with corporations… They’ll serve the needs of the corporations and not the parties.
I think this is bad for small business – they can’t play at the level of the big boys and will probably see legislation coming out that favors the big corporations at their expense.
It’s ironic that corporations already had the right to make and pay for the airing of commercials, independent of a candidates campaign… This is how PACs do it. And corporations and individuals have been able to do this as well… This supreme court case was based on a 90 minute film: “Hillary: The Movie”. If the makers had PAID to air it, it would have been legal. But they tried to air it as entertainment and charge for it. If they’d aired it as an infomercial it would have been perfectly legal.
UCGal
ParticipantI think this is potentially bad news for both parties… Under the system, prior to this ruling, candidates were beholden to the party bosses in order to get funds for their house or senate campaigns. Now they can blow off the DNC or GOP and align with corporations… They’ll serve the needs of the corporations and not the parties.
I think this is bad for small business – they can’t play at the level of the big boys and will probably see legislation coming out that favors the big corporations at their expense.
It’s ironic that corporations already had the right to make and pay for the airing of commercials, independent of a candidates campaign… This is how PACs do it. And corporations and individuals have been able to do this as well… This supreme court case was based on a 90 minute film: “Hillary: The Movie”. If the makers had PAID to air it, it would have been legal. But they tried to air it as entertainment and charge for it. If they’d aired it as an infomercial it would have been perfectly legal.
UCGal
ParticipantI think this is potentially bad news for both parties… Under the system, prior to this ruling, candidates were beholden to the party bosses in order to get funds for their house or senate campaigns. Now they can blow off the DNC or GOP and align with corporations… They’ll serve the needs of the corporations and not the parties.
I think this is bad for small business – they can’t play at the level of the big boys and will probably see legislation coming out that favors the big corporations at their expense.
It’s ironic that corporations already had the right to make and pay for the airing of commercials, independent of a candidates campaign… This is how PACs do it. And corporations and individuals have been able to do this as well… This supreme court case was based on a 90 minute film: “Hillary: The Movie”. If the makers had PAID to air it, it would have been legal. But they tried to air it as entertainment and charge for it. If they’d aired it as an infomercial it would have been perfectly legal.
UCGal
ParticipantI think this is potentially bad news for both parties… Under the system, prior to this ruling, candidates were beholden to the party bosses in order to get funds for their house or senate campaigns. Now they can blow off the DNC or GOP and align with corporations… They’ll serve the needs of the corporations and not the parties.
I think this is bad for small business – they can’t play at the level of the big boys and will probably see legislation coming out that favors the big corporations at their expense.
It’s ironic that corporations already had the right to make and pay for the airing of commercials, independent of a candidates campaign… This is how PACs do it. And corporations and individuals have been able to do this as well… This supreme court case was based on a 90 minute film: “Hillary: The Movie”. If the makers had PAID to air it, it would have been legal. But they tried to air it as entertainment and charge for it. If they’d aired it as an infomercial it would have been perfectly legal.
UCGal
ParticipantI’ve been looking seriously at rental properties… So far nothing has cashflowed. Looked at a duplex today that I calculated would work at about $100k less than asking… Found out there was a cash offer at $50k less than asking and a full list offer (typical financing).
I don’t see appreciation in rents or in the rental units… so if it doesn’t cashflow, it’s not worth it.
At least with CD’s it’s not losing money.
UCGal
ParticipantI’ve been looking seriously at rental properties… So far nothing has cashflowed. Looked at a duplex today that I calculated would work at about $100k less than asking… Found out there was a cash offer at $50k less than asking and a full list offer (typical financing).
I don’t see appreciation in rents or in the rental units… so if it doesn’t cashflow, it’s not worth it.
At least with CD’s it’s not losing money.
-
AuthorPosts
