Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]toots: I think there needs to be a distinction between liberals and left-wingers. I think the word “liberal” is a good word, and not a pejorative, but I loathe left-wingers.
As I’m sure gandalf would be the first to tell you, I am extremely conservative, in the old school Goldwater Republican camp. I would never accuse a liberal of hating their country, but would accuse a left-winger of doing so.
It is much akin to Susan Sontag opining after 9/11 that we “deserved” it. While I feel that our foreign policy in the Middle East has run between complete ignorance and ineptitude, claiming that Osama bin Laden was justified in his actions is beyond the pale and contemptible.
I don’t hold that we are above criticism. To the contrary, I believe that we need to change our approach in that part of the world and that the past 50 years have shown significant errors in our relationships and our strategies. Support for countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt are going to come back to haunt us, and we need to see that part of the world in a whole new way.
All of that being said, however, I don’t feel that either of the candidates is a good choice for that particular job. I have McCain on one hand openly advocating the bombing of Iran and Obama on the other completely missing the point as to why Iran should not have The Bomb.
[/quote]Again, irritated that you do not do these wonder posts more often.
This leads me to other questions (you are good at doing that).
1:
I consider myself a member of the liberal left. I don’t consider myself a member of the radical left nor do I consider myself particularly reactionary. But clearly, with my opinions on social programs and economics, I am generally to the left of the current government in the US. What about leftism do you find contemptible? Perhaps a better question would be, what do you see as left? It is a polysemous term.2:
Why do you find Iran dangerous? They have a weak president, a strong legislature, and a super-strong judiciary. The only person that seems to noisily chant about the US and Israel is the weak president. Is the president the problem or are prior actions indicative of current intent or what exactly?
I don’t necessarily disagree but the silliness of my debate with Surveyor made me think about Iran and what the real danger there is. It really feels like we are just hating on a grudge (kind of like Cuba).
Sound off.
Anyone with an actual opinion, I would be interested in hearing it. If you are just a hater spouting vitriol, then not so much.Participant[quote=Navydoc]I’m not sure condescending is quite the right word, but the way we use the term implies someone who believes the market has bottomed despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There may actually be nothing wrong with being a knife catcher in real estate in the future. Every person who buys an automobile, unless it’s a rare collector car, is buying a depreciating asset. I have a feeling that someday we may start to view buying a home as more similar to buying a car.[/quote]
I agree actually.
Very much.
I am currently helping a friend look at places in 92126. It is currently the best selection of development in a small geographic where the market is one of the most perfect.
By perfect I mean that there are lots of houses with identical floorplans and relatively large percentage of distress sales. That means that you are dealing with a Wal-Mart effect. I have good insurance but deal with all my optical at Wal-Mart because they are dramatically cheaper than Kaiser (not interested in hearing your opinion on Kaiser).
When making offers there (Mira Mesa), I just take the lowest comp (usually a model match) and present it with my offer. Makes for a VERY buyer-centric market.Whether or not my clients are fools for making offers is frankly irrelevant. They can totally afford a 30-year fixed and they can rent it out (should they need to down the road) for more than the price of mortgage.
They are getting a place they like which has the capacity to generate positive cash flow. I do not like to predicate value based on expectations of future profit, but these places are unlikely to continue to depreciate indefinitely. This is especially true considering their proximity to UCSD and positive cash flow capacity.
Participant[quote=Navydoc]I’m not sure condescending is quite the right word, but the way we use the term implies someone who believes the market has bottomed despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There may actually be nothing wrong with being a knife catcher in real estate in the future. Every person who buys an automobile, unless it’s a rare collector car, is buying a depreciating asset. I have a feeling that someday we may start to view buying a home as more similar to buying a car.[/quote]
I agree actually.
Very much.
I am currently helping a friend look at places in 92126. It is currently the best selection of development in a small geographic where the market is one of the most perfect.
By perfect I mean that there are lots of houses with identical floorplans and relatively large percentage of distress sales. That means that you are dealing with a Wal-Mart effect. I have good insurance but deal with all my optical at Wal-Mart because they are dramatically cheaper than Kaiser (not interested in hearing your opinion on Kaiser).
When making offers there (Mira Mesa), I just take the lowest comp (usually a model match) and present it with my offer. Makes for a VERY buyer-centric market.Whether or not my clients are fools for making offers is frankly irrelevant. They can totally afford a 30-year fixed and they can rent it out (should they need to down the road) for more than the price of mortgage.
They are getting a place they like which has the capacity to generate positive cash flow. I do not like to predicate value based on expectations of future profit, but these places are unlikely to continue to depreciate indefinitely. This is especially true considering their proximity to UCSD and positive cash flow capacity.
Participant[quote=Navydoc]I’m not sure condescending is quite the right word, but the way we use the term implies someone who believes the market has bottomed despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There may actually be nothing wrong with being a knife catcher in real estate in the future. Every person who buys an automobile, unless it’s a rare collector car, is buying a depreciating asset. I have a feeling that someday we may start to view buying a home as more similar to buying a car.[/quote]
I agree actually.
Very much.
I am currently helping a friend look at places in 92126. It is currently the best selection of development in a small geographic where the market is one of the most perfect.
By perfect I mean that there are lots of houses with identical floorplans and relatively large percentage of distress sales. That means that you are dealing with a Wal-Mart effect. I have good insurance but deal with all my optical at Wal-Mart because they are dramatically cheaper than Kaiser (not interested in hearing your opinion on Kaiser).
When making offers there (Mira Mesa), I just take the lowest comp (usually a model match) and present it with my offer. Makes for a VERY buyer-centric market.Whether or not my clients are fools for making offers is frankly irrelevant. They can totally afford a 30-year fixed and they can rent it out (should they need to down the road) for more than the price of mortgage.
They are getting a place they like which has the capacity to generate positive cash flow. I do not like to predicate value based on expectations of future profit, but these places are unlikely to continue to depreciate indefinitely. This is especially true considering their proximity to UCSD and positive cash flow capacity.
Participant[quote=Navydoc]I’m not sure condescending is quite the right word, but the way we use the term implies someone who believes the market has bottomed despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There may actually be nothing wrong with being a knife catcher in real estate in the future. Every person who buys an automobile, unless it’s a rare collector car, is buying a depreciating asset. I have a feeling that someday we may start to view buying a home as more similar to buying a car.[/quote]
I agree actually.
Very much.
I am currently helping a friend look at places in 92126. It is currently the best selection of development in a small geographic where the market is one of the most perfect.
By perfect I mean that there are lots of houses with identical floorplans and relatively large percentage of distress sales. That means that you are dealing with a Wal-Mart effect. I have good insurance but deal with all my optical at Wal-Mart because they are dramatically cheaper than Kaiser (not interested in hearing your opinion on Kaiser).
When making offers there (Mira Mesa), I just take the lowest comp (usually a model match) and present it with my offer. Makes for a VERY buyer-centric market.Whether or not my clients are fools for making offers is frankly irrelevant. They can totally afford a 30-year fixed and they can rent it out (should they need to down the road) for more than the price of mortgage.
They are getting a place they like which has the capacity to generate positive cash flow. I do not like to predicate value based on expectations of future profit, but these places are unlikely to continue to depreciate indefinitely. This is especially true considering their proximity to UCSD and positive cash flow capacity.
Participant[quote=Navydoc]I’m not sure condescending is quite the right word, but the way we use the term implies someone who believes the market has bottomed despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
There may actually be nothing wrong with being a knife catcher in real estate in the future. Every person who buys an automobile, unless it’s a rare collector car, is buying a depreciating asset. I have a feeling that someday we may start to view buying a home as more similar to buying a car.[/quote]
I agree actually.
Very much.
I am currently helping a friend look at places in 92126. It is currently the best selection of development in a small geographic where the market is one of the most perfect.
By perfect I mean that there are lots of houses with identical floorplans and relatively large percentage of distress sales. That means that you are dealing with a Wal-Mart effect. I have good insurance but deal with all my optical at Wal-Mart because they are dramatically cheaper than Kaiser (not interested in hearing your opinion on Kaiser).
When making offers there (Mira Mesa), I just take the lowest comp (usually a model match) and present it with my offer. Makes for a VERY buyer-centric market.Whether or not my clients are fools for making offers is frankly irrelevant. They can totally afford a 30-year fixed and they can rent it out (should they need to down the road) for more than the price of mortgage.
They are getting a place they like which has the capacity to generate positive cash flow. I do not like to predicate value based on expectations of future profit, but these places are unlikely to continue to depreciate indefinitely. This is especially true considering their proximity to UCSD and positive cash flow capacity.
Participant[quote=gandalf]butler, do you have anything to contribute here? In fairness, I understand the problems you had with Obama’s *opponent* in the Illinois senate race. That guy Ryan was legitimately CREEPY.
But what’s your beef with Obama?
Unless you can point to something substantive, we’ll just chalk you up as another brainwashed right-wing dipshit. Not a grain of reality or common sense in your fucking head. Facts, please.
What’s your beef with Obama?
FYI, you don’t hear me crapping on McCain. I think he’s a good candidate. I think Obama is better, but I’m not making shit up about McCain’s skin cancer, time in captivity, adopted babies and cripple-arm. In truth, I would be okay with a McCain presidency. This, in spite of his post-Bush sellout to the goofball evangalicals and republican right.
Also, I just want to point out: Bush junior and these “new-age” fruit-job Republicans are responsible for the largest entitlement program since Medicare, the biggest deficit in the history of the country, as well as the largest (corporate) welfare program in the history of this country. Ron Paul is EXACTLY right. You are NOT who you think you are.
[/quote]Wow. You had me right up until the Ron Paul.
(you had me at hello, wizard)
(I heart u)
Sorry this is what happens when mojitos and Jerry Maguire mix.
Don’t tell my wife.Participant[quote=gandalf]butler, do you have anything to contribute here? In fairness, I understand the problems you had with Obama’s *opponent* in the Illinois senate race. That guy Ryan was legitimately CREEPY.
But what’s your beef with Obama?
Unless you can point to something substantive, we’ll just chalk you up as another brainwashed right-wing dipshit. Not a grain of reality or common sense in your fucking head. Facts, please.
What’s your beef with Obama?
FYI, you don’t hear me crapping on McCain. I think he’s a good candidate. I think Obama is better, but I’m not making shit up about McCain’s skin cancer, time in captivity, adopted babies and cripple-arm. In truth, I would be okay with a McCain presidency. This, in spite of his post-Bush sellout to the goofball evangalicals and republican right.
Also, I just want to point out: Bush junior and these “new-age” fruit-job Republicans are responsible for the largest entitlement program since Medicare, the biggest deficit in the history of the country, as well as the largest (corporate) welfare program in the history of this country. Ron Paul is EXACTLY right. You are NOT who you think you are.
[/quote]Wow. You had me right up until the Ron Paul.
(you had me at hello, wizard)
(I heart u)
Sorry this is what happens when mojitos and Jerry Maguire mix.
Don’t tell my wife.Participant[quote=gandalf]butler, do you have anything to contribute here? In fairness, I understand the problems you had with Obama’s *opponent* in the Illinois senate race. That guy Ryan was legitimately CREEPY.
But what’s your beef with Obama?
Unless you can point to something substantive, we’ll just chalk you up as another brainwashed right-wing dipshit. Not a grain of reality or common sense in your fucking head. Facts, please.
What’s your beef with Obama?
FYI, you don’t hear me crapping on McCain. I think he’s a good candidate. I think Obama is better, but I’m not making shit up about McCain’s skin cancer, time in captivity, adopted babies and cripple-arm. In truth, I would be okay with a McCain presidency. This, in spite of his post-Bush sellout to the goofball evangalicals and republican right.
Also, I just want to point out: Bush junior and these “new-age” fruit-job Republicans are responsible for the largest entitlement program since Medicare, the biggest deficit in the history of the country, as well as the largest (corporate) welfare program in the history of this country. Ron Paul is EXACTLY right. You are NOT who you think you are.
[/quote]Wow. You had me right up until the Ron Paul.
(you had me at hello, wizard)
(I heart u)
Sorry this is what happens when mojitos and Jerry Maguire mix.
Don’t tell my wife.Participant[quote=gandalf]butler, do you have anything to contribute here? In fairness, I understand the problems you had with Obama’s *opponent* in the Illinois senate race. That guy Ryan was legitimately CREEPY.
But what’s your beef with Obama?
Unless you can point to something substantive, we’ll just chalk you up as another brainwashed right-wing dipshit. Not a grain of reality or common sense in your fucking head. Facts, please.
What’s your beef with Obama?
FYI, you don’t hear me crapping on McCain. I think he’s a good candidate. I think Obama is better, but I’m not making shit up about McCain’s skin cancer, time in captivity, adopted babies and cripple-arm. In truth, I would be okay with a McCain presidency. This, in spite of his post-Bush sellout to the goofball evangalicals and republican right.
Also, I just want to point out: Bush junior and these “new-age” fruit-job Republicans are responsible for the largest entitlement program since Medicare, the biggest deficit in the history of the country, as well as the largest (corporate) welfare program in the history of this country. Ron Paul is EXACTLY right. You are NOT who you think you are.
[/quote]Wow. You had me right up until the Ron Paul.
(you had me at hello, wizard)
(I heart u)
Sorry this is what happens when mojitos and Jerry Maguire mix.
Don’t tell my wife.Participant[quote=gandalf]butler, do you have anything to contribute here? In fairness, I understand the problems you had with Obama’s *opponent* in the Illinois senate race. That guy Ryan was legitimately CREEPY.
But what’s your beef with Obama?
Unless you can point to something substantive, we’ll just chalk you up as another brainwashed right-wing dipshit. Not a grain of reality or common sense in your fucking head. Facts, please.
What’s your beef with Obama?
FYI, you don’t hear me crapping on McCain. I think he’s a good candidate. I think Obama is better, but I’m not making shit up about McCain’s skin cancer, time in captivity, adopted babies and cripple-arm. In truth, I would be okay with a McCain presidency. This, in spite of his post-Bush sellout to the goofball evangalicals and republican right.
Also, I just want to point out: Bush junior and these “new-age” fruit-job Republicans are responsible for the largest entitlement program since Medicare, the biggest deficit in the history of the country, as well as the largest (corporate) welfare program in the history of this country. Ron Paul is EXACTLY right. You are NOT who you think you are.
[/quote]Wow. You had me right up until the Ron Paul.
(you had me at hello, wizard)
(I heart u)
Sorry this is what happens when mojitos and Jerry Maguire mix.
Don’t tell my wife.ParticipantHey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.htmlhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml
http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539
Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.
Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?
ParticipantHey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.htmlhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml
http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539
Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.
Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?
ParticipantHey Casca,
You have made some pretty harsh allegations.
Here are some links regarding Obama’s early legislation:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262.htmlhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/17/politics/main2369157.shtml
http://video.chicagotribune.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?clipid1=1226539
Also, it is pretty common to have new lawyers to a firm (especially ones without a real resume) to start basically as assistants. If you have seen how the firms push these guys I don’t think you would criticize that he is lazy.
Do you really consider the work as a legislator in the last 11 years to be totally irrelevant?
-
AuthorPosts
