[ucodegen]

[quote UCGal]
They bought in Nov 1991 for $169k.

Somewhere along they way they pulled out an additional $390k (on top of their original loan.)

Amount owed: $582,589.15
Back to the bank today when no one would pay $350k at the steps.
[/quote]
Here is the kicker. Because the Home Equity Loan is generally considered for home improvement, the proceeds of the loan is not taxable as income. (390K virtually tax free)

The interest on the loans was tax deductible.

The loss of the property due to foreclosure has the potential to be deducted against future income – possibly at the value that the house was appraised at when they took out the Home Equity Loan.

The only counterbalance would have been the banks 1099 for loan loss forgiveness.. but that has been waived away for a while.
swwwweeeeettttt (CS) <-- no way related..

[ucodegen]

[quote UCGal]
They bought in Nov 1991 for $169k.

Somewhere along they way they pulled out an additional $390k (on top of their original loan.)

Amount owed: $582,589.15
Back to the bank today when no one would pay $350k at the steps.
[/quote]
Here is the kicker. Because the Home Equity Loan is generally considered for home improvement, the proceeds of the loan is not taxable as income. (390K virtually tax free)

The interest on the loans was tax deductible.

The loss of the property due to foreclosure has the potential to be deducted against future income – possibly at the value that the house was appraised at when they took out the Home Equity Loan.

The only counterbalance would have been the banks 1099 for loan loss forgiveness.. but that has been waived away for a while.
swwwweeeeettttt (CS) <-- no way related..

[ucodegen]

[quote UCGal]
They bought in Nov 1991 for $169k.

Somewhere along they way they pulled out an additional $390k (on top of their original loan.)

Amount owed: $582,589.15
Back to the bank today when no one would pay $350k at the steps.
[/quote]
Here is the kicker. Because the Home Equity Loan is generally considered for home improvement, the proceeds of the loan is not taxable as income. (390K virtually tax free)

The interest on the loans was tax deductible.

The loss of the property due to foreclosure has the potential to be deducted against future income – possibly at the value that the house was appraised at when they took out the Home Equity Loan.

The only counterbalance would have been the banks 1099 for loan loss forgiveness.. but that has been waived away for a while.
swwwweeeeettttt (CS) <-- no way related..

[ucodegen]

..hickup..

[ucodegen]

..hickup..

[ucodegen]

..hickup..

[ucodegen]

..hickup..

[ucodegen]

..hickup..

[ucodegen]

@Robert Buchanan
The piggington site is definitely the wrong place to troll for a whining victim of the mortgage mess, who happens to be divorced but having to live with the ex-spouse. It almost sounds like you have already came up with your conclusions and now want to justify them with an interview. I would suggest tossing the entire interview as it is presently structured – etc, because you are now ‘busted’, caught fishing for a person in a specific situation to try to sell a position.

If you want to know something about piggington board/blog, try reading the recommended reading – noted on the home page – link shown here: http://piggington.com/bubbleprimer
Start at the bottom and work up. You’ll notice that the board was noting/discussing problems as early as 2005 (and actually a bit earlier)… this is way before any ‘official’ recognition of the problem by the fed and the main stream media.

If you think it was only Rich Toscano posting this type of commentary, try:
http://piggington.com/financial_book_review_the_creature_from_jekyll_island_a_second_l
from 2006

And another from 2006..
http://piggington.com/latest_offer_from_centex_homes_5k_home_only_304_per_month

[ucodegen]

@Robert Buchanan
The piggington site is definitely the wrong place to troll for a whining victim of the mortgage mess, who happens to be divorced but having to live with the ex-spouse. It almost sounds like you have already came up with your conclusions and now want to justify them with an interview. I would suggest tossing the entire interview as it is presently structured – etc, because you are now ‘busted’, caught fishing for a person in a specific situation to try to sell a position.

If you want to know something about piggington board/blog, try reading the recommended reading – noted on the home page – link shown here: http://piggington.com/bubbleprimer
Start at the bottom and work up. You’ll notice that the board was noting/discussing problems as early as 2005 (and actually a bit earlier)… this is way before any ‘official’ recognition of the problem by the fed and the main stream media.

If you think it was only Rich Toscano posting this type of commentary, try:
http://piggington.com/financial_book_review_the_creature_from_jekyll_island_a_second_l
from 2006

And another from 2006..
http://piggington.com/latest_offer_from_centex_homes_5k_home_only_304_per_month

[ucodegen]

@Robert Buchanan
The piggington site is definitely the wrong place to troll for a whining victim of the mortgage mess, who happens to be divorced but having to live with the ex-spouse. It almost sounds like you have already came up with your conclusions and now want to justify them with an interview. I would suggest tossing the entire interview as it is presently structured – etc, because you are now ‘busted’, caught fishing for a person in a specific situation to try to sell a position.

If you want to know something about piggington board/blog, try reading the recommended reading – noted on the home page – link shown here: http://piggington.com/bubbleprimer
Start at the bottom and work up. You’ll notice that the board was noting/discussing problems as early as 2005 (and actually a bit earlier)… this is way before any ‘official’ recognition of the problem by the fed and the main stream media.

If you think it was only Rich Toscano posting this type of commentary, try:
http://piggington.com/financial_book_review_the_creature_from_jekyll_island_a_second_l
from 2006

And another from 2006..
http://piggington.com/latest_offer_from_centex_homes_5k_home_only_304_per_month

[ucodegen]

@Robert Buchanan
The piggington site is definitely the wrong place to troll for a whining victim of the mortgage mess, who happens to be divorced but having to live with the ex-spouse. It almost sounds like you have already came up with your conclusions and now want to justify them with an interview. I would suggest tossing the entire interview as it is presently structured – etc, because you are now ‘busted’, caught fishing for a person in a specific situation to try to sell a position.

If you want to know something about piggington board/blog, try reading the recommended reading – noted on the home page – link shown here: http://piggington.com/bubbleprimer
Start at the bottom and work up. You’ll notice that the board was noting/discussing problems as early as 2005 (and actually a bit earlier)… this is way before any ‘official’ recognition of the problem by the fed and the main stream media.

If you think it was only Rich Toscano posting this type of commentary, try:
http://piggington.com/financial_book_review_the_creature_from_jekyll_island_a_second_l
from 2006

And another from 2006..
http://piggington.com/latest_offer_from_centex_homes_5k_home_only_304_per_month

[ucodegen]

@Robert Buchanan
The piggington site is definitely the wrong place to troll for a whining victim of the mortgage mess, who happens to be divorced but having to live with the ex-spouse. It almost sounds like you have already came up with your conclusions and now want to justify them with an interview. I would suggest tossing the entire interview as it is presently structured – etc, because you are now ‘busted’, caught fishing for a person in a specific situation to try to sell a position.

If you want to know something about piggington board/blog, try reading the recommended reading – noted on the home page – link shown here: http://piggington.com/bubbleprimer
Start at the bottom and work up. You’ll notice that the board was noting/discussing problems as early as 2005 (and actually a bit earlier)… this is way before any ‘official’ recognition of the problem by the fed and the main stream media.

If you think it was only Rich Toscano posting this type of commentary, try:
http://piggington.com/financial_book_review_the_creature_from_jekyll_island_a_second_l
from 2006

And another from 2006..
http://piggington.com/latest_offer_from_centex_homes_5k_home_only_304_per_month

[ucodegen]

Three comments on the LED traffic lights.
1) They use a small fraction of the energy that the normal ones do. Portland OR. replaced theirs, payback on cost was under 3 years. There are some energy ‘rebates’ tied to replacing the incandescent traffic lights with LED – don’t know the specifics on it. The reduction in energy costs ends up being a ‘recurring savings’ with a payout of about 33% on cost after the 3 year period due to energy savings alone.
http://www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=111737
2) The LED lights last a lot longer than the incandescent (claimed 3x as long – they must be stressing the LEDs, because it should be longer. I hope they are using a heat sink in the mounting for the LEDs). This cuts the yearly maintenance cost in a third.
3) Not all LED traffic light lamps are made in the US.

Eyeballing the costs. 4 way intersection, 2 assemblies per direction – 3 lamps each : 24 bulb assemblies – approx $100/per lamp = $2,400 in material. The $5000/per may be high, but it is near the ballpark. It could be the ‘fat lazy union-workers’ ;-P who pad up the bill with slow bulb changes – though I see that labor costs are taken out of the $5000/intersection.

[ucodegen]

Three comments on the LED traffic lights.
1) They use a small fraction of the energy that the normal ones do. Portland OR. replaced theirs, payback on cost was under 3 years. There are some energy ‘rebates’ tied to replacing the incandescent traffic lights with LED – don’t know the specifics on it. The reduction in energy costs ends up being a ‘recurring savings’ with a payout of about 33% on cost after the 3 year period due to energy savings alone.
http://www.portlandonline.com/shared/cfm/image.cfm?id=111737
2) The LED lights last a lot longer than the incandescent (claimed 3x as long – they must be stressing the LEDs, because it should be longer. I hope they are using a heat sink in the mounting for the LEDs). This cuts the yearly maintenance cost in a third.
3) Not all LED traffic light lamps are made in the US.

Eyeballing the costs. 4 way intersection, 2 assemblies per direction – 3 lamps each : 24 bulb assemblies – approx $100/per lamp = $2,400 in material. The $5000/per may be high, but it is near the ballpark. It could be the ‘fat lazy union-workers’ ;-P who pad up the bill with slow bulb changes – though I see that labor costs are taken out of the $5000/intersection.

[Author]

Posts