114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Apr, 2011 07:22 pm
@Irishk,
Bernanke announced that 2011 will see a high rate of foreclosures; that's old news! At least one-third of all households are underwater on their mortgages. It's not rocket science to figure out that foreclosures in this economic climate is going to remain high, and that the construction industry will be in the doldrums for many years to come.

0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Apr, 2011 07:27 pm
@talk72000,
I noticed that side discussion, talk72 and okie. I would like to see that expanded on.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Apr, 2011 07:43 pm
@realjohnboy,
The issues are played out in most places where people travel to their work. For most folks it's the affordability of housing, good schools for children, job availability, good neighborhood, and location to shopping and other entertainment venues.

When the high tech industry was booming, many bought homes in Merced, over a two hour drive each way, because housing was more affordable there. When the Great Recession hit, Merced was one of the first newly developed communities to become a ghost town.

This was the headline of their local paper.
Quote:
Thursday, Jan. 14, 2010
Grim real estate statistics: Merced County leads state in foreclosures, #6 in nation
In 2009, 1 out of 10 properties got bank repossession filings

Read more: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/2010/01/14/1269527/grim-real-estate-statistics-merced.html#ixzz1IboKBkc0
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 Apr, 2011 08:44 pm
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:

It doesn't, so they were granted a one year waiver by HHS. Of course, the Republicans are all over this waiver business.
Are there any friends of Obama that haven't yet received a waiver?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 5 Apr, 2011 08:57 pm
@realjohnboy,
I think it is a matter of good personal choices. When I was transferred to a large city in the West once, my wife and I checked out the home market in areas that we thought were economically located, so that the commute was easy, only about 15 to 20 minutes. It worked out well. I worked with people that lived mostly an hour or more commute, some with even more. Car pooling was also commonplace with some of my fellow employees, but sadly not enough to make a huge difference.

I once did an analysis of how much fuel it took for the mass transit system in a place like Denver to transport people around within the city, and found that the average ridership or occupancy of the buses were such that if everyone riding the buses drove a car by themselves, and if each car got 35 mpg, everyone would actually break even or save fuel because buses typically take you out of your way in order to get to the point that you want to go. In other words, I believe it is a myth that mass transit is efficient. I do not believe that it is. In fact, I tried the buses a bit, but it did not take long to give up on it because it was very impractical.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 5 Apr, 2011 09:47 pm
@okie,
okie, That's because you never learned to take the direct route like most people. How many transfers did you make? Was the route circular like your thinking?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 05:26 am
@cicerone imposter,
During the soaring climb of real estate prices, I heard from several young couples who were weighing the issue of where to live. It was obvious to me, when my ex and I were looking to move from our first house to one that allowed him easier access to work, that the quality of a school system was the strongest determinant of housing costs in any community. It was no secret that the top ten school systems were also among the most expensive housing markets. A few months ago, a rightie here misunderstood that statement and used it as an opportunity to lob a cheap shot at the left when all I was talking about was supply and demand.

At that time, I was a regular volunteer at Club Passim, the legendary Cambridge coffeehouse where Dylan, Baez and Rush got their starts. That gave me many opportunities to speak with home shoppers. The further out from Boston one traveled, the lower the prices but the longer commute. Even in the days of under $2/gallon gasoline, the cost of commuting was still a concern. The other factor was the further out one went, in general, the more one was likely to find a mediocre school system. There were, of course, exceptions.

parados
 
  3  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 07:49 am
@okie,
Quote:
I once did an analysis of how much fuel it took for the mass transit system in a place like Denver to transport people around within the city, and found that the average ridership or occupancy of the buses were such that if everyone riding the buses drove a car by themselves, and if each car got 35 mpg,

Cars averaged 35 mpg in city driving when you lived in Denver? What year was that okie?

I'm guess your math is about as good as ican's is okie. Your facts certainly seem to be.

35 mpg in city driving? (10 years ago or more I'll bet) Rolling Eyes
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 09:35 am
@parados,
parados, okie is always confused about current and past events, and proceeds to make statements only he understands. 35 mpg 10 years ago? ROF Hey, maybe, he already had a hybrid - or a motorcycle.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 09:41 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

Quote:
I once did an analysis of how much fuel it took for the mass transit system in a place like Denver to transport people around within the city, and found that the average ridership or occupancy of the buses were such that if everyone riding the buses drove a car by themselves, and if each car got 35 mpg,

Cars averaged 35 mpg in city driving when you lived in Denver? What year was that okie?

I'm guess your math is about as good as ican's is okie. Your facts certainly seem to be.

35 mpg in city driving? (10 years ago or more I'll bet) Rolling Eyes


Right. The truth is that cars in the city probably average closer to 15 than they do 35.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 09:45 am
@plainoldme,
Quote:
The other factor was the further out one went, in general, the more one was likely to find a mediocre school system.


What's a mediocre school system pom. If you go further out do the schools get even better?

Benjamin Braddock went to a good school and it took him a few anxiety ridden days to work out what to do with Mrs Robinson.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:04 pm
@talk72000,
I want to come back to "The End of Suburbia" which Talk72000 and Okie's response about commuting to the urban core. This weekend, perhaps.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:18 pm
@plainoldme,
Before we moved to IL from CA when I got a promotion to work in Chicago, a good friend recommended we consider Naperville, a suburb of Chicago, because of their reputation for good schools. We did end up there, and had a beautiful brick and cedar home built in a new housing development. Our children went to school there, and I took the one hour Burlington into Chicago, and my office was across the street from Union Station.

Both our children graduated college with honors - like their mother. Our older son graduated summa, and our younger son cum laude.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:20 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

I want to come back to "The End of Suburbia" which Talk72000 and Okie's response about commuting to the urban core. This weekend, perhaps.


Me too. I AM the young urbanite that seeks things like walk-ability and the 'neighborhood' feeling within a city. And I'm willing to pay for it.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:35 pm
I did want to play post office with yall today (do any of you know what that expression once meant?)
The USPS is on target to racking up a deficit of $6.4BN for fiscal 2011 after of a record deficit in 2010. It will soon bump into a debt ceiling of $15BN and may have to default on a $5.5BN contribution to fund retiree health care benefits.
The popular perception is that the federal government subsidizes the USPS but that is not entirely true. The government kicked in $29MN (million) to cover things like mail delivery to the blind and to servicing ballots from overseas voters. That is out of an overall USPS budget of $67BN.
A problem for the USPS is that, according to testimony in a hearing today in Congress, there is a 535 member board of directors (i.e = to the total members of Congress). As far back as 1970, Congress inserted a mandate into the rules covering the USPS that stated that "No small post office shall be closed solely because it was operating at a deficit."
So the problem must be the unions, right? The American Postal Workers Union (APWU) represents 1/3 of the USPS's 572,000 employees, which is down 100K from 2 years ago.
The new APWU contract, to be voted on soon, freezes wages for 2 years followed by an average 1.2% increase over each of the next 3 years.
Sorry for flitting around from one sub-topic to another.
Actually, I am not sorry. I said that just to sound nice.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:40 pm
@realjohnboy,
realjohnboy wrote:

I did want to play post office with yall today (do any of you know what that expression once meant?)


You want to play a kissing game with us? Shocked Embarrassed

Quote:
The USPS is on target to racking up a deficit of $6.4BN for fiscal 2011 after of a record deficit in 2010. It will soon bump into a debt ceiling of $15BN and may have to default on a $5.5BN contribution to fund retiree health care benefits.
The popular perception is that the federal government subsidizes the USPS but that is not entirely true. The government kicked in $29MN (million) to cover things like mail delivery to the blind and to servicing ballots from overseas voters. That is out of an overall USPS budget of $67BN.
A problem for the USPS is that, according to testimony in a hearing today in Congress, there is a 535 member board of directors (i.e = to the total members of Congress). As far back as 1970, Congress inserted a mandate into the rules covering the USPS that stated that "No small post office shall be closed solely because it was operating at a deficit."
So the problem must be the unions, right? The American Postal Workers Union (APWU) represents 1/3 of the USPS's 572,000 employees, which is down 100K from 2 years ago.
The new APWU contract, to be voted on soon, freezes wages for 2 years followed by an average 1.2% increase over each of the next 3 years.
Sorry for flitting around from one sub-topic to another.
Actually, I am not sorry. I said that just to sound nice.


Hah!

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:40 pm
@realjohnboy,
rjb, You're sure throwing a lot of nuts into the pot; it's hard enough trying to keep up with the handful we try to stay active in - and trying to cut our a2k time to a couple hours/day. LOL
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 04:58 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I will try to be quiet, Tak. I suspect that this is what happens when one becomes newly semi-retired.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 05:24 pm
@realjohnboy,
rjb, You can't kid me! I know your kind of "semi" retirement; it really doesn't mean much, because you love work - like my wife who volunteers at the hospital and local library.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Apr, 2011 05:40 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Benjamin Braddock went to a good school and it took him a few anxiety ridden days to work out what to do with Mrs Robinson.


Here's spendius' problem. He lives through a series of old movies. Ronald Reagan did as well.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 10/24/2025 at 06:27:04