[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CDMA ENG][quote=livinincali]

Thanks for bringing up France it’s a great example of how minimum wage doesn’t necessarily help employment prospects. For example minimum wage in France is 1430 euros per month ($1959 in US dollar terms). France also has a work week of 35 hours per week so if you assume 4 weeks per month and divide by 35 hours per week you end up with a minimum wage of $14/hr in US dollar terms. In France youth unemployment is about 23.5% compared to the US’s 18.5%.

In Germany youth unemployment is less than 10%. Guess was minimum wage Germany has. That’s right, none. It has a law stating you can’t pay an immoral wage but that’s decided on a case by case basis by the courts. For example a entry level grocery store worker in Germany can be paid the equivalent of $7 US dollars per hour and it’s not immoral.

Also if you’ve every been to France and Germany you’ll know that’s it’s a lot cheaper to live in Germany than in France. Compare Berlin to Paris. Honestly you’d probably be better off in Germany as a cashier in Berlin than a cashier in Paris even though you might get double the monthly salary. It’s all relative.

Can Walmart afford to pay it’s workers $13/hr in San Diego. Sure. With automation, price increases, laying off the weakest performing staff, etc, they’ll make it work. Of course it’s only better for those that happen to work at Walmart and keep they’re job. Also those designing/building those automated systems. Anybody who was already making $15/hr and doesn’t get a corresponding raise loses because they are now forced to pay higher prices for things. In addition those that lose their job to automation are now on the welfare roles somewhere.

People posting here who are making $100K don’t really care. The price increases at the grocery store or restaurant are fairly negligible in their budget. Food/Entertainment is probably less than 10% of their budget so a 10% increase in prices for low skilled labor in restaurants and general goods/foods stores only adds 1% to their overall budget.

While people have linked studies that show minimum wage increases haven’t greatly negatively impacted the economy. Nobody has linked a study that shows major increases in minimum wage greatly improve the overall economy. I thing the realty is at best minimum wage increases changes the winners and loses and prefers experience over youth.[/quote]

+1[/quote]
The problem here is that you are comparing apples and bowling balls.
Other things to note about Germany:
-Very little military
-50% of GDP is government outlay.
-Hiring is very rare because termination carries severe civil penalties.
-essentially zero “at-will” employment

In sum, its not really comparable in any way (other than the fact that it is an economy where labor is a component).

They are not at all an example of the free market in labor practices.

Some good explainers:
http://www.wilmerhale.com/pages/publicationsandnewsdetail.aspx?NewsPubId=90463
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_economy

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=creg horst]Paragon, is by a long shot,the worst MLS system for end users in the United States. Tempo, was so end user friendly that it’s very difficult to get used to a pathetic MLS system like Paragon. MLS providers like Pargon, because it’s cheap and they make a lot more money. Tempo costs more, but, is certainly worth every penny. The Real Estate MLS system operators are, unfortunately, driven by greed, not, by end user satisfaction. Shame, shame, shame, on Sandicor, you lousy rotten people.[/quote]

The sheer wrongness of your position makes my ovipositor quiver.

Tempo required active x controls and was so antiquated it might as well have asked for an AOL login.

Q to the E to the mutherfuckin D.
Stop.
Hammertime.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=EconProf]
UR, you are citing busy fast food places in Hillcrest, but the range of minimum wage workers in America covers a wide swath of industries–agriculture, leisure, lodging, mom and pop stores, etc. The jobs are entry level, and almost no one stays at minimum wage for long. Also, almost never is the minimum wage earner the only income source for the household. The handicapped and the risky hire, especially minority youths and high school dropouts get these jobs at the bottom of the income ladder in order to prove themselves and move up from there. I’d rather not cut off the bottom rung of the income ladder for these people.[/quote]

2 problems with your position:

1: We are not talking about a global increase.
I will not assert that raising wages in Mississippi is important. This conversation is exclusively about the city of SD.

2: The assertion that this removes the lower rung of income is faulty. That minimum has been reduced dramatically in the last few years just from inflation. And not even high or galloping inflation.
By your logic a nonexistent min wage would be preferable for lower-skilled workers.
One has only to look at the fact that virtually every developed economy has adopted min wages to determine the overall benefit (or lack thereof) of this faulty thinking.

Bonus point:
I was not making the assertion earlier that economists are a diverse and non-homogeneous group. That reality is so obvious as to be absurd.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=spdrun]

Another annoying thing is sometimes, some large SUVs practically BLOCK 1/4 – 1/2 your driveway so you can’t get out.

Police won’t ticket people for parking less than x feet from a driveway in SD?[/quote]

Its funny.
I currently live on 32nd and people sometimes park in front of my driveway.
Police will generally not ticket people for that and every time I called for a tow (which has to be authorized by the cops), the responding officer went door to door to try and see if he could avoid towing them.
This was to my chagrin because I was running late to drop off the boy at kindergarten.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=EconProf]We economists are largely in agreement about raising the minimum wage: it will kill jobs.
The recently proposed mild increase in the federal minimum wage would cost about a half-million jobs, according to federal officials.
But the huge jump to $13.09 for San Diego only would have a far more powerful impact on employment within our city limits.[/quote]
Also, I think referring to yourself as “we economists” is a wee bit of a stretch.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=EconProf]We economists are largely in agreement about raising the minimum wage: it will kill jobs.
The recently proposed mild increase in the federal minimum wage would cost about a half-million jobs, according to federal officials.
But the huge jump to $13.09 for San Diego only would have a far more powerful impact on employment within our city limits.[/quote]

EconProf:
That does not make practical sense.
Who works at min wage jobs now?
Its primarily restaurant and very low paid retailers.
Its not as though the Hillcrest McDonalds will become unprofitable because they have an extra hourly cost.
Successful fast food places regularly gross revenues in excess of $500/hr.
If there are 8 crew (a common compliment) all getting a $3/hr raise, that works out to a $24/hr carrying cost increase.
Therefore, its not a great burden.
Furthermore, these workers cannot currently be replaced easily by distant locations or by machines (they are already essentially machine operators and there is no economy in taking lunch in Santee).
Sit-down restaurants will see an increase of similar capacity but, again, this will only be acutely felt in places that overstaff servers (eg: Mr. A’s).
Places like the Olive Garden have a wacky high volume and will not be endangered.
The prices that will rise will be primarily for people who eat out at independent 3 star restaurants.
It will not harm most rank and file min wage workers because they don’t (or at least shouldn’t) eat out very often.
On the retail front: I doubt anyone will be in mourning due to a minor increase in WalMart prices.

In sum:
Very few business will be seriously affected because most are not that weak and their services cannot be easily replaced or relocated.

As per usual, your understanding of the relevant economics is pedestrian at best and foolishly misleading at worst.

[urbanrealtor]

Generally, min wage increases do not have a big impact upon business.

Its not as though this increase will harm fast food firms (or their workers).

Honestly if increasing waiters’ salaries is a burden, then your biz is already circling the drain.

I own a business and have done restaurant budgets when I was in that line of work.

Out of curiosity, which of you is a small business owner?

[urbanrealtor]

Some CC&Rs are enforceable without an HOA.
For example, the owner down the hill from my client in La Jolla has palm trees that are starting to block the view of the ocean.
He can enforce the view provisions but will need an attorney.
An HOA would provide an alternative resolution (putting a buffer between you and the other owner).
My favorites are the CC&R’s from the 20’s and 30’s prohibiting occupancy to “Jews and non-caucasians”.

I have sold houses to a few Piggs that included those.

My granddad once explained to me (his dad started the family business) that CC&R’s originated in the 1880s to keep Italians and Irish out of respectable neighborhoods.

[urbanrealtor]

Agree with spdrun.

Its generally legal to rent out some (or even all) rooms in a house.

Even the mini-dorm restrictions (put in place in 2006-2007) are of dubious quality and probably would not stand up to a challenge.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CA renter][quote=scaredyclassic]

I resisted this concept. I now embrace it grudingly. Price is meaningless. What you pay each month is all that matters.[/quote]

But price, along with interest rates, is what determines what you will pay each month.[/quote]

Its not that its totally unrelated but that its a secondary (or tertiary) consideration in determining effective demand.

I frankly could give a shit about the overall price of the place I buy.
I know what people focus on but it makes no sense.

Lets take an example:

The price is 2 mil on a 3br/2BA place in NP (say Morley field near the park).

The loan is a 15 year IO at 1% (call it crazy seller financing)and you qualify for it.

The house is clearly overpriced but you would be fool not to buy it on those terms.

At that price you could get rich just renting it out.

The overall price here would be immaterial.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=no_such_reality][quote=Happs]I think you hit the nail on the head regarding resistant to change. They are cliquish but I am still perplexed why they are reluctant to put an item on the agenda and vote it down 5-0 if they don’t like them? It’s not like many people even attend the Board meetings.[/quote]

Because you’re a PITA and once they put yours on, then you submit another. Then other people with submit others and then you have a whole bunch of people trying to backseat drive the budget.

Basic cable is provided by the HOA. Board members probably are getting ‘courtesy’ upgrade packages. Removing the cable with have the board dealing with the other 500 tenants minus 1 about why they now get a bigger cable bill.[/quote]

I actually think vendor contracts are supposed to be done in executive. I think whether or not to provide a service to the membership is an open meeting thing but generally vendor contracts (eg: cable, plumbing, landscaping) are specifically mentioned as something that can be done secretly.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=Jazzman]The one element that is consistently absent in these articles is price declines. It is completely incompatible with the current delusional mindset that home prices must always go up, or be forced up. I know there is plenty of evidence that suggests interest rates and home prices do not necessarily move in opposite directions, but it does no harm to give it a mention. If rates do go up, then homes become more affordable if prices go down. What is the problem with that? Many homes are over-priced anyway? If more inventory becomes available, whether from owners no longer being under water or foreclosures being pushed through more quickly, that could also put further pressure on prices. Now that WOULD be news worth celebrating! Perhaps then homes will be affordable in the normal sense of the word. We should be welcoming that, hoping for that, and trying to engineer that, not fearing it.[/quote]

While I do not disagree, I think your point misses a much bigger point in housing.
Specifically, housing in the US is a finance market more than a property market.
The effective demand is best understood in terms of payments rather than in prices.
That is why dropping prices in 92105 by 55% was not enough to get things selling in 2009.
Even at the dramatically lower prices, the lack of loans made those places not affordable.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=scaredyclassic]magic 8 ball…dust for a dust bath…[/quote]

zipgun

dimebag

ears from an enemy I felled in combat

buttplug

jewlers loop

monkey paw

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=EconProf]The whole article was scary and apocalyptic, which made me wonder why we haven’t heard more about this medical condition. The article claimed massive harm, increasing at a frightening rate, so why haven’t we heard more about it in the news?
I really stopped reading when they reported a family that had six-inch deep dust accumulating near openings in their house, dust so thick they had to wear dust masks inside their house, and dust so bad they could not see each other across the living room. This was a middle-class family, and I really doubt they would stay in such a house. Sorry, New Yorker Magazine, I’m not buying it till I see collaborating evidence.[/quote]

Good Christ.
Do this:
Type “valley Fever” into Google News.
Or even just google.
It will help you deal with your skepticism.

Also, I think you mean corroborating and not collaborating.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=spdrun]HOA’s make sense where they make sense — in condos which share common structure and mechanicals. Otherwise, yeah, I’d sooner make sweet love to a methed-out Orangutan than live in a detached house in a HOA-infested area…[/quote]

Don’t knock it till you’ve tried it.

The orangutan I mean….

[Author]

Posts