[utcsox]

[quote=Rich Toscano][quote=utcsox]
You can read the whole report here:

[utcsox]

[quote=flu]Just monitoring rent prices in Mira Mesa. Looks like 1/1 condos have broken through to $1300/month 1 year leases.

http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4885784878.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4888996252.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4888958798.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4862974116.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4888188144.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/apa/4882848024.html%5B/quote%5D

According to Zillow research, Mira mesa rent index has shown 5.9% YoY increase. That is slightly higher than annual average change in its rent index (4.5%) of San Diego.

You can read the whole report here:

http://files.zillowstatic.com/research/public/rental/ZRI.San%20Diego.395056.pdf

[utcsox]

Everything from 1991 Radio Shack ad I now do with my phone.

http://www.trendingbuffalo.com/life/uncle-steves-buffalo/everything-from-1991-radio-shack-ad-now/

[utcsox]

[quote=AN][quote=utcsox]The point to bring this thread back is to look back things that were said in 2012. Was BLS faking the number? Was the tax increase and Obamacare prevent business to hire? Was the “real inflation” rate as high as 10% if you factor in food cost?

I think the answer is pretty obvious. Of course, now we want to talk about something else….[/quote]The answer is obvious in what way? “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”?[/quote]
Hey, whatever make you sleep better at night.

[utcsox]

[quote=AN]Are these chart adjusted for population size? How about GDP growth, isn’t that a better metric than S&P appreciation? How about income inequality? How about the % of the population on food stamp and welfare? What about labor participation rate? What about the fed pumping money and fed fund rate being at 0% affect S&P appreciation? What about the deregulation of the banking sector under Clinton? Doesn’t that also affect the volatility of the stock market? How about real income growth? S&P appreciation tells me richer people are getting even richer. Is that your point?[/quote]

The point to bring this thread back is to look back things that were said in 2012. Was BLS faking the number? Was the tax increase and Obamacare prevent business to hire? Was the “real inflation” rate as high as 10% if you factor in food cost?

I think the answer is pretty obvious. Of course, now we want to talk about something else….

[utcsox]

[quote=svelte][quote=utcsox]
Relax. This was supposed to be funny. LOL.[/quote]

Give me a break! I may have been born at night, but not last night![/quote]

I don’t think anyone will seriously argue that one president record is superior because it created more government sector jobs especially one that is known to shrink the size of the government. I thought that was obvious.

[utcsox]

[quote=svelte][quote=utcsox]

[img_assist|nid=20558|title=Public Sector Payroll Jobs: Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=700|height=330]

Reagan actually created a lot of public sector jobs for the first 72 months in the office. Obama, the job destroyer, lost tons of public jobs for the same 72-months window.[/quote]

Caught you red-handed spinning the data, mofo!

I notice that you didn’t show the graph right above the one you posted:

[img_assist|nid=20560|title=Private Sector Job Creation By President – Feb 2015|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=972|height=634]

Your eyes had to glance at it before they saw the graph YOU inserted…you PURPOSELY slanted the data!!!

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2015/02/public-and-private-sector-payroll-jobs.html

So…the full story is that while Obama and Reagan had BOTH created private (not Government!) jobs at roughly the same rate, only *Reagan* added GOVERNMENT jobs!

And you spin that to insinuate Reagan’s record is better by omitting data!

Either you believe Big Government is a great thing, or you are so full of BS you stink.

Go back to your corner and think about what you’ve done, young man. I wouldn’t trust anything I hear from you.[/quote]

Relax. This was supposed to be funny. LOL.

[utcsox]

[quote=svelte]And for added enjoyment of those Republican mouthpieces out there…
[img_assist|nid=20557|title=Reagan vs Obama SP500 growth|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=639|height=330]

[img_assist|nid=20556|title=Reagan vs Obama Unemployment Rates|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=631|height=341][/quote]

[img_assist|nid=20558|title=Public Sector Payroll Jobs: Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=700|height=330]

Reagan actually created a lot of public sector jobs for the first 72 months in the office. Obama, the job destroyer, lost tons of public jobs for the same 72-months window.

[utcsox]

[quote=CA renter][quote=SK in CV][quote=poorgradstudent]Looks like unemployment is finally starting to catch up in what has been a largely jobless recovery.

[/quote]

Largely jobless? Something like 12 million private sector jobs in the last 5 years, and more than 5.5 million in the last 2 years is jobless?[/quote]

But most of those new jobs are in lower-paying sectors than the ones that disappeared during the recession. It probably feels pretty “jobless” when people are making around half of what they were making just a few years ago. We know a few people who are literally making that much less![/quote]

From the from the BLS: “In January, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 12 cents to $24.75, following a decrease of 5 cents in December. Over the year, average hourly earnings have risen by 2.2 percent.” With CPI that is under 2%, there has been some real wage growth.

Persons working part time for economic reasons and long term unemployed (> 26 weeks) are still much higher than historical data. However; they are both trending down rapidly. We might see some real wage growth in 2015 if the recovery continue.

[utcsox]

If September 2012 Jobs Report “Very Suspicious”, what do you say about January 2015 Report?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 257,000 in January.
…
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was revised from +353,000 to +423,000, and the change for December was revised from +252,000 to +329,000.
…
After accounting for the annual adjustments to the population controls, the civilian labor force rose by 703,000 in January. The labor force participation rate rose by 0.2 percentage point to 62.9 percent .

752k jobs created in two months: November and December. The unemployment rate actually ticks up from 5.6% to 5.7%. BLS must be faking its number again!! LOL

[utcsox]

[quote=SK in CV]
That’s silly. Vaccinations are an important part of healthcare. It is not all of healthcare. 110 years ago, the supreme court ruled that state mandated vaccinations are legal. And smallpox was eradicated. Do you think that was a bad idea?
[/quote]

Most agree both mandatory vaccinations and health care insurance are good public health policies. The issue is politics, whether or not the government can coerce you to immunize. If so, then it sure can force you to carry health insurance. I think this is going to be a huge election issue in the Republican primary 2016.

[utcsox]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=poorgradstudent]
Clearly Rand Paul is pandering to anti-science fools rather than sticking to the less onorous personal liberty approach.[/quote]

It’s also remotely possible that Rand Paul knows the personal liberty approach is a dead end. The supreme court already ruled on it. 110 years ago. State mandated vaccines are legal.[/quote]

State-mandated vaccination program is by definition the government take over of health care. The Republican party talking points have been that medical decisions are between you and your doctors and not some bureaucrats in Washington (CDC). I mean if they have to acquiesce with the mandatory vaccine program, I mean what’s next? The real government take over health care program, Obamacare? LOL..

[utcsox]

I will recommend buy vs. rent calculator from NY Times. This is an excellent tool for you run different scenarios.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent-calculator.html

[utcsox]

$500k a year will make you comfortable within 1% in the United States ($388,905).

http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/04/pf/taxes/top-1-taxes/

Even in San Diego ($428,000), you are well ahead of 1%er.

http://gis.mtc.ca.gov/home/images/motm/motm212.pdf

Just since when is top 1% income “ain’t that rich”?

[utcsox]

I think you also need to included the social security and medicare taxes into the calculation:

Compared to self-employees, employers paid 7.65% up to $118,500 and 1.45% of medicare tax after that.

So, let’s use the $500k income high salary w-2 employees as example, employer(s) will contribute about ~$21k pre-tax money on their behalf.

In addition, the two high w-2 employees will have health care benefits, let’s assume employer contribute $14,000 a year.

How about 401k matching? let’s say employer match dollar per dollar, and that is $17,500 pre-tax money.

That’s about ~50K of pre-tax benefit that self-employee who is making $500k need to deduct to get the same benefits as high w-2 people. If we assume tax rate of 40%, you need to find a way to deduct ~$125K a year to match that? Is this feasible? Sure. Is it likely? You guys tell me.

[Author]

Posts