From CNBC:
Baby Boomers resist selling homes, helping to keep prices high and inventory low: Zillow’s Gudell
If you’re looking for a reason the housing market is so tight, perhaps the Baby Boomers are to blame.
For generations, after the kids grew up and moved out, many parents put the big family house up for sale. According to one market watcher, that doesn’t appear to be happening nearly as often nowadays.
“The traditional ’empty nest’ storyline where parents would be downsizing is not happening,” Svenja Gudell, Zillow’s chief economist told CNBC’s “On the Money” in an interview. Research from the real estate data company found the inventory of homes for sale is the lowest in four years.
Gudell said a contributing factor to fewer homes on the market is more baby boomers are staying put in their “home sweet home,” rather than downsizing.
“Baby Boomers have to live somewhere, “Gudell said, “but they are having a hard time downsizing and finding that available inventory. And so it’s tough for people to move into their homes and that is causing that disruption in the normal ‘move-up’ market.”
As a result, Boomers aren’t able to find a home that’s smaller and cheaper than the one they’re in “that would entice them to move,” Gudell explained, “so for many it does not make sense to sell.”
…
According to U.S. Census data, there were 83.1 million millennials born between 1982 and 2000. Meanwhile, the number of baby boomers, those born between 1946 and 1964, is 75.4 million.When it comes to housing, the two groups are on a collision course.
“What it comes down to is we have two very large generations kind of butting heads,” Gudell told CNBC. “…You have millennials that are just entering the market, that are even larger of a generation than the baby boomers, and you really just need more homes.”
“We’re currently dealing with ‘1994-level’ inventory, despite having 63 million more people in the country,” she said. “So at this point we have to build some more homes in order to accommodate all those people.”
If the demand for affordable starter homes is so high, why aren’t those homes being constructed?
“I think a lot of builders will tell you that they’re having a hard time meeting that price point right now given how expensive labor, lumber, and simply regulation costs are,” Gudell stated.
Good Morning New Jersey
From Bloomberg:
Trump Plan Cuts Taxes for Rich and Whacks New York, New Jersey
President Donald Trump and Republican leaders plan to release a tax framework this week that would dramatically cut taxes for corporations and the wealthy, provide a measure of middle-class tax relief and punish some households in Democratic-leaning states like New York and New Jersey.
That summary, based on a list of details that’s circulating among Washington lobbyists, breaks from the president’s recent rhetoric against tax cuts for the rich. It sets the stage for a battle with Democrats and faces a litany of obstacles, including intra-party disputes about whether to pay for the tax breaks upfront or increase the deficit.
The emerging framework includes a proposal to cut the corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent — a costly move in revenue terms that Trump and Republicans say is necessary to create job growth. But its provisions for individual taxes may hit closer to home for many Americans.
Three tax lobbyists familiar with those changes said they include cutting the top individual tax rate to 35 percent and creating a 25 percent rate for certain “pass-through” business owners — both down from the current top rate of 39.6 percent. Such changes would cut taxes substantially for the top 1 percent of earners, said Kyle Pomerleau, an expert with the Tax Foundation, a right-leaning Washington policy group.
…
Trump’s plan would double the standard deduction that benefits many middle-class Americans, making it the centerpiece of the tax relief Trump has promised them. It would also seek to pay for some of the tax cuts by ending the state and local tax deduction, which is used mostly by middle-to-high earners in high-tax states like California, New York and New Jersey. The tax break, which is worth more than $1 trillion over 10 years, is favored by representatives of influential industries, like real estate.
“The emerging framework includes a proposal to cut the corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent — a costly move in revenue terms that Trump and Republicans say is necessary to create job growth. But its provisions for individual taxes may hit closer to home for many Americans.”
It is these type of passages on Bloomberg’s reporting that make me question the objectivity of their institution. Because there is quite a lot of discussion around what would be the ultimate impact of such a change in tax rate. To write something so definitive and directive in the reporting is biased
36 shot in Chicago over the weekend. Nary a mention. Easier to protest the boogey man I suppose.
Smart move on NJ transit’s part ..renting space for Amazon’s big move here before the big rush …Struggling to stay afloat financially, NJ Transit has spent millions on empty office space …http://www.app.com/story/news/watchdog/2017/09/25/struggling-stay-afloat-financially-nj-transit-has-spent-millions-empty-office-space/669794001/
Government Scorekeepers Are Wrong. Corporate Tax Reform Would Mostly Help Workers, Not the Rich.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/09/22/government-scorekeepers-wrong-corporate-tax-reform-mostly-help-workers-not-rich/
American corporations pay a federal corporate income tax rate of 35 percent—one of the highest in the world. High corporate taxes discourage this kind of investment in American workplaces, thus killing the potential for workers to earn higher wages.
Most of the cost of corporate taxes—between 75 and 100 percent—is passed on to workers in the form of lower wages. This fact is shown in the results of 10 separate economic studies.
On the flip side of the coin, American households would share in the benefits of a corporate tax cut in receiving higher wages.
This is where government scorekeepers like the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office get it wrong.
In contradiction to the relevant economic literature, they maintain that only one quarter of the corporate tax is passed on to workers. The other 75 percent is assumed to go to owners of capital—the corporate owners.
This misguided view is posing an obstacle to tax reform, as government modeling assumptions have a bias toward viewing the wealthy as beneficiaries of corporate tax reform. They do not properly account for the benefits that will accrue to lower-income wage earners.
Contrary to what these government models would suggest, slashing the corporate tax rate would help the poor far more than the rich.
A 20-point reduction of the corporate income tax—from 35 percent to 15 percent—could boost the relative market incomes of the poorest Americans by 2.4 percent. That’s $365 for a household that earns $15,000 a year, and more than twice the 1.1 percent increase for the richest 1 percent.
And that’s not even accounting for the economic growth that would compound over time as a result of tax reform. When accounting for that growth, others have estimated that wages could increase by as much as 28 percent.
You are telling me that they will raise wages with the tax cuts? I don’t believe it.
“American corporations pay a federal corporate income tax rate of 35 percent—one of the highest in the world. High corporate taxes discourage this kind of investment in
American workplaces, thus killing the potential for workers to earn higher wages.
Most of the cost of corporate taxes—between 75 and 100 percent—is passed on to workers in the form of lower wages. This fact is shown in the results of 10 separate economic studies.
On the flip side of the coin, American households would share in the benefits of a corporate tax cut in receiving higher wages.”
nwnj,
Since it was minorities shooting other minorities, there’s no way for the commies to propagandize these shootings.
Really? So slashing the taxes they pay will cause them to use the savings on raising labor costs? Let’s do it!! Just eliminate the corporate tax altogether, it would benefit the poor far more than the rich!
“Contrary to what these government models would suggest, slashing the corporate tax rate would help the poor far more than the rich.”
Only morons still believe trickle down isn’t a pyramid scheme to redistribute wealth to the top. BTW, the actual federal corporate tax rate is closer to 18 percent after deductions. But nice try peddling your bullish!t.
“American corporations pay a federal corporate income tax rate of 35 percent—one of the highest in the world. High corporate taxes discourage this kind of investment in American workplaces, thus killing the potential for workers to earn higher wages.”
“You are telling me that they will raise wages with the tax cuts? I don’t believe it.“
Every penny of tax cut savings to corporations will go directly to shareholders and the executive suite. Source: the last 40 years of history.
It happens naturally. Demand in labor markets. It’s not like they do it out of the kindness of their hearts.
The money paid in taxes by the corporations gets re-invested in the business.
Corporate taxes just motivate international corporations to do their inversions and pay taxes to a lower taxed nation.
There’s article after article…study after study on this. It seems counter intuitive but it is true.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/opinion/abolish-the-corporate-income-tax.html
Making, rather than just stating, this case requires constructing a large-scale computer simulation model of the United States economy as it interacts over time with other nations’ economies, and then seeing how the model reacts when you change the American corporate income tax. I’ve developed such a model with three colleagues through the Tax Analysis Center, a nonpartisan research group. Our findings make a very strong, worker-based case for corporate tax reform.
In the model, eliminating the United States’ corporate income tax produces rapid and dramatic increases in American investment, output and real wages, making the tax cut self-financing to a significant extent. Somewhat smaller gains arise from revenue-neutral corporate tax base broadening, specifically cutting the corporate tax rate to 9 percent and eliminating all corporate tax loopholes. Both policies generate welfare gains for all generations in the United States, but particularly for young and future workers. Moreover, all Americans can benefit, though by less, if foreign countries also cut their corporate tax rates.
Every penny of tax cut savings to corporations will go directly to shareholders and the executive suite. Source: the last 40 years of history.
I like the part about the savings going to shareholders! Bring it on!
Okay, if we eliminate the corporate tax, who pays the bill for the costs of society that were previously covered under this tax?
And if the theory behind this is that the savings will be invested back in the business/economy, eventually leading to demand for more labor, and followed by a rise in wages with the increase in demand…….how will this work in the current environment of so much capital already looking for places to invest?
“In the model, eliminating the United States’ corporate income tax produces rapid and dramatic increases in American investment, output and real wages, making the tax cut self-financing to a significant extent. Somewhat smaller gains arise from revenue-neutral corporate tax base broadening, specifically cutting the corporate tax rate to 9 percent and eliminating all corporate tax loopholes. Both policies generate welfare gains for all generations in the United States, but particularly for young and future workers. Moreover, all Americans can benefit, though by less, if foreign countries also cut their corporate tax rates.”
Meaning, there is a ton of capital looking for investments already out there. Why isn’t this capital having an impact on wages? How would putting even more capital in the hands of the 1% lead to more demand for investment? If there is already a ton of 1% money searching for investments, and can’t find any, why would giving them more capital have a different result?
“how will this work in the current environment of so much capital already looking for places to invest?”
“costs of society”
“Only morons still believe trickle down isn’t a pyramid scheme to redistribute wealth to the top.”
Wealth is already widely redistributed from the top to the bottom.
The American Left’s main yardstick for any economic policy is that any benefit must favor the dependent class over the productive class. Ideally, for the Left, any policy would actually take from the productive class and redistribute to the dependent class.
Problem for them is that philosophy runs counter to at least 1.8 million years of evolution. From the time we threw rocks at our dinner the productive class has always taken more than the dependent class. For good reason (that even the moronic Left should be able to discern lol).
Deal with it.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w15263.pdf
CORPORATE TAXES AND UNION WAGES IN THE UNITED STATES
R. Alison Felix
James R. Hines, Jr.
Working Paper 15263
http://www.nber.org/papers/w15263
NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH
1050 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02138
Conclusion
High corporate income taxes reduce the after-tax profits of firms earning rents, which are
the same firms that are in positions to pay above-market wages to their employees. Since high
taxes mean that there is less for everyone, it can hardly be surprising that high taxes ultimately
depress union wages, particularly in capital-intensive industries where corporate taxes have the
most impact on a firm’s bottom line.
The evidence that high tax rates reduce union wage premiums does not directly address
the impact of corporate taxes on wages for the majority of U.S. workers who are not union
members. In the case of perfectly competitive labor markets, the incidence of the corporate tax
depends on how the tax affects demand for labor, which in turn is a function of the effects of
taxation on labor-capital substitution and the reallocation of economic activity between sectors of
25
the economy. But to the extent that there is a rent-sharing aspect of wages in settings without
labor unions, it may be reasonable to expect that the same dynamics would appear, in that higher
taxes would be associated with reduced wages. A similar process could apply to executive
compensation, rent and royalty payments, and any other firm expenses that plausibly include
sharing of economic rents. Consequently, the inframarginal burden of the corporate income tax
may be shared among a number of a corporation’s stakeholders, thereby distributing corporate
tax burdens among the parties who normally benefit from surplus produced within the firm.
High taxes? It’s high spending so much so we run massive deficits and play a ponzi scheme to fund it.
D-Fens,
How does one define “productive” vs “dependent?”
Workers can be both productive at work, yet dependent to their employer.
The productive class loves a productive dependent employee….
“The American Left’s main yardstick for any economic policy is that any benefit must favor the dependent class over the productive class.”
Weiner gets 21 months prison.
Productive v. Dependent.
I would avoid any subjective measures like “fair” or relative earnings (the CEO makes however many times the average). They involve opinions on value and the Left uses these arguments to cloud the basic issue of productive v dependent. Not necessary.
My benchmark is objective and pretty simple. Net income taxes. If you make direct payments to the Feds in excess of the direct payments you receive from the Feds you are productive, ie. contributing to the common wealth. If you make no net payments or receive direct net payments you are dependent, ie. taking from the common wealth.
Pretty straightforward.
you’re quoting leftwing…not me.
Phoenix says:
September 25, 2017 at 10:42 am
D-Fens,
How does one define “productive” vs “dependent?”
Workers can be both productive at work, yet dependent to their employer.
The productive class loves a productive dependent employee….
“The American Left’s main yardstick for any economic policy is that any benefit must favor the dependent class over the productive class.”
LW,
It is straightforward but lacking because certain industries wouldn’t exist if not for the government, and of the ones that are highly but not entirely dependent they would be a shell of their former selves.
leftwing says:
September 25, 2017 at 11:00 am
Productive v. Dependent.
I would avoid any subjective measures like “fair” or relative earnings (the CEO makes however many times the average). They involve opinions on value and the Left uses these arguments to cloud the basic issue of productive v dependent. Not necessary.
My benchmark is objective and pretty simple. Net income taxes. If you make direct payments to the Feds in excess of the direct payments you receive from the Feds you are productive, ie. contributing to the common wealth. If you make no net payments or receive direct net payments you are dependent, ie. taking from the common wealth.
Pretty straightforward.
Joyce, I propose that is a red herring. Accept the framework – none is ever going to be perfect and it is forever changing.
Within the existing framework, from one’s labors is one a net cash contributor (productive) or a net cash recipient (dependent)?
Anything else is noise, often generated by the Left to distract from that basic and most important of distinctions. It allows them to consolidate power for the dependent class to the detriment of every productive person out there.
Murphy + Trump’s reduction in the property tax deduction is going to destroy the middle class in NJ, both through higher income taxes and lower property values.
I’m pretty tired this morning, so tell me if I am calculating this wrong.
Personally, I pay $30K in property taxes. Standard Deduction was $12.6K in 2016. So if my income was $200K (for example), I average about $50K in total deductions. So I am taxed on $150K. AMT + tax would equal about $37K at 25% tax rate.
Double the standard deduction to $25K. So now I only have $20K in deductions taking out the $30K in property taxes. I am now taxed on $175K since it’s larger than my itemized. Tax rate goes up to 28%. $49K without calulating AMT.
So I would owe a minimum of $12K more this year?
I haven’t paid estimated this year since Gator has not been working, taking care of the “D” mostly. Actually, she’s managed some self employment, so I’ll find some krap to deduct there, but it won’t be $12K.
Am I missing something? I highly doubt my wages are going up here.
[url=https://essaywritingservices.us.com/]essays writing services[/url]
I think the tax rates change too Lib. Is that in your calculation?
On a more mundane note. Anybody have any suggestions on where I might find someone reputable to move a piece of heavy furniture from upstairs bedroom to basement and remove and haul away and old washing machine? Thanks.
Republicans as a group are not very good at bare knuckle politics. They are too comfortable and complacent.
From a purely political perspective jamming a hot poker up the butt of CA and NY is long overdue. They are one-third of the votes needed to win the electoral college and will never go Red.
Doing so doesn’t really hurt Repubs base which is generally in low income tax, low property tax states. Pair it with the higher standard deduction and you keep the local Repubs protected even for these states higher income earners. Will there be collateral damage including NJ, yeah.
3b, your local UHaul rental agency probably has some business cards they can give you.
They aren’t part of UHaul and UHaul won’t endorse them but they are also not dumb enough to hand you someone who can be problematic.
Thanks left wing.
Are you advocating for sticking it to the producers of this economy?
“From a purely political perspective jamming a hot poker up the butt of CA and NY is long overdue. They are one-third of the votes needed to win the electoral college and will never go Red.
Doing so doesn’t really hurt Repubs base which is generally in low income tax, low property tax states. Pair it with the higher standard deduction and you keep the local Repubs protected even for these states higher income earners. Will there be collateral damage including NJ, yeah.”
“I think the tax rates change too Lib. Is that in your calculation?”
I’ll have to look into that, but I think this stab is going to kill small-time landlords and me even prick the RE bubble a bit. Like Grim said, a positive side effect might be a shrinking of local government once people get up in arms over the tax increase combined with the reduction in value of their properties. Then you got Murphy, who wants to raise taxes to cover the pension shortfall and NJ might really take an economic hit. Why would any business or individual move here? NY’s cachet only takes one so far. Though on the bright side of things, when I do depart for a country that doesn’t get all crazy about such asinine and ineffective protests, like kneeling, when they are continuously and systematically being raped financially by the fat cats in both parties. The amount of savings will be monumental.
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=Costa+Rica&city1=New+York%2C+NY&city2=Tamarindo
Agree to disagree
leftwing says:
September 25, 2017 at 11:29 am
Joyce, I propose that is a red herring. Accept the framework – none is ever going to be perfect and it is forever changing.
Within the existing framework, from one’s labors is one a net cash contributor (productive) or a net cash recipient (dependent)?
Anything else is noise, often generated by the Left to distract from that basic and most important of distinctions. It allows them to consolidate power for the dependent class to the detriment of every productive person out there.
“Finite Pie” thinking is the downfall of many arguments against tax reform.
The fire hose argument is much better. There is water pressure, and also the ability to tap the main line of the fire hose to shunt water in another direction.
The main purpose of the fire hose is to fight fires.
Redistributists are going to argue that there are people that need water for other reasons (e.g., water the plants, let the kids play on a hot day), but bottom line, the main purpose is to fight fires, and every deviation ultimately puts the core mission in peril to some large or small degree.
Redistributists’ big mistake is assuming that the water source is infinite. What they don’t understand is that free individuals have choice to use any fire hose they want.
At a certain point, the answer to any new entrepreneur is “why should I use the U.S. fcuking fire hose to put out fires?”
So they use another hose! Think what would happen if the next Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple said there is no way I will HQ in the U.S.? If this reality is not readily apparent, then you are an idiot…… oh wait….
The Great Pumpkin says:
September 25, 2017 at 9:47 am
Okay, if we eliminate the corporate tax, who pays the bill for the costs of society that were previously covered under this tax?
And if the theory behind this is that the savings will be invested back in the business/economy, eventually leading to demand for more labor, and followed by a rise in wages with the increase in demand…….how will this work in the current environment of so much capital already looking for places to invest?
Just playing a little devil’s advocate. Since middle class professionals run this society, why not give them tax breaks, this way they can save some money and actually start small businesses of their own based on their professional skills.
All the focus is always on business owners being the producers of society, when in fact, it’s the top workers/professionals that are the true producers of society. These are the people that run the business for the owners, these are the people that provide for emergency services, these are the people that run the numbers in finance, and these are the people that build and maintain our society. So why do we stick it so damn hard to the worker in this country?
NO OWNERSHIP = NO CAPITAL RISK
The Great Pumpkin says:
September 25, 2017 at 12:43 pm
Just playing a little devil’s advocate. Since middle class professionals run this society, why not give them tax breaks, this way they can save some money and actually start small businesses of their own based on their professional skills.
All the focus is always on business owners being the producers of society, when in fact, it’s the top workers/professionals that are the true producers of society. These are the people that run the business for the owners, these are the people that provide for emergency services, these are the people that run the numbers in finance, and these are the people that build and maintain our society. So why do we stick it so damn hard to the worker in this country?
Pumpty……. who owns your multi? You, or the renters? They live there…..they pay all the bills…..
“Are you advocating for sticking it to the producers of this economy?”
Two different issues.
There is a class war going on but it is not between billion(million)aires and everyone else. It is producer v dependent. The sooner the producing class realize this and make internecine fights secondary the better off they (and the country) will be. The Left has been very successful in dividing and conquering the producing class.
Tax changes banging NY and CA was an observation in the vacuum of politics. As you know I am ardently anti-tax on most fronts. My point was different, if one were to play bare knuckle politics on a national level, Blue v Red, whacking the state/local deduction is an easy one.
You can also tell them to find another consumer base to sell to, just like China does.
“So they use another hose! Think what would happen if the next Amazon, Google, Facebook, Apple said there is no way I will HQ in the U.S.? If this reality is not readily apparent, then you are an idiot…… oh wait….”
In china, business kisses govt a$$.
In America, govt kisses business’s a$$.
If China can do it, why don’t we? Haven’t they had the fastest growing economy in the world?
Has to be some sort of balance, why is it one way or the other? Has to be a middle ground that is better for everyone.
I’m not saying we become like China either, I just wish that our society didn’t make business the king of our society. Whatever happened to equality, why do certain individuals get the key to the city, and others not allowed in?
How is a working professional less of a contributor than a business owner? Why does our tax system punish the worker at the expense of the business owner or individual living off passive investment?
Kaepernick is maybe the new Curt Flood? Kaepernick will never work again, but within a couple years players will be able to take dump on the American flag while live-streaming their bowel movement during the National Anthem, maybe?
The Subject – PUERTO RICO
As in – What is going to be privatize as h3ll.
In other word – Gentrification is coming to PR…
My prediction:
Wall Street boys are salivating. Bankrupt everything + very legally/illegally pliable elected leader = Privatization bonanza. For those neo-libertarians / free market types – this is the place to keep your eyes on.
The reality of how PR functions/not functions is that is old fashion crony municipal/local bossism. I expect this system to get wreck.
Expect privatize Electric/Gas/Water/Sewers/Schools – charter schools up the gazoo /Privatize Fire Dept -Ambulance -Prisons/ And so much toll roads (expect metering of car miles as a Road Tax to appear here first) that will make NJ Tpke look like a road in the wild west. Only thing not privatize will be cops and justice functions and they will lose their present pension benefits.
Is that what your Mom called it when she caught you doing it and told you had to go live at Nana’s house?
Hahahahahaha
The Great Pumpkin says:
September 25, 2017 at 12:43 pm
Just playing a little devil’s advocate.
Is there anything that prevents residents of our territories (PR, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, etc.) from just coming to the mainland and applying for citizenship?
I have no issue with the kneeling. They have the right to do so. I take no issue with the neo-nazi gathering in Charlottesville either. If you are against one and not the other, then you are simply a moron.
Enjoy the crumbs.
“Is there anything that prevents residents of our territories (PR, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa, etc.) from just coming to the mainland and applying for citizenship?”
Yes, they can’t afford the plane ticket.
OT (like nearly everything isn’t lol):
I know we have some hockey guys on here. Anyone interested in sharing a FlexPlan for the Devils? Basically take a handful of games (you pick them, location, number of seats) for a cost between STH and face. No Ticketmaster fees which saves an additional 20%.
I’m such a moron. All PR citizens are already American citizens. The only thing different is that they are also Puerto Rican citizens, a privilege not allowed to people like me. That’s OK. I wouldn’t be sad if I was disallowed from every being a citizen of Camden either.
Since 2007, the Government of Puerto Rico has been issuing “Certificates of Puerto Rican Citizenship” to anyone born in Puerto Rico or to anyone born outside of Puerto Rico with at least one parent who was born in Puerto Rico. The Spanish Government recognizes Puerto Ricans as a people with Puerto Rican, “and not American,” citizenship. It also provides Puerto Rican citizens privileges not provided to citizens of several other nations.
leftwing,
I’m a big devil fan, but not at those prices. You are much better off waiting for the Gr0upon deals. My issue is that the cheap seats are lousy and you can find seats downstairs for nearly the same as the cheap seats at full price when they get discounted. Sure, you won’t get the rivalries, but the Devils have a few more years before they will beat the likes of the Rangers and Islanders at home with regularity.
Captain Cheapo says, “Look out for their leadership series seminars again.” Gator Jr. and I saw 5 games last year (four of them in the lower tier for $40 total). Yes, that is not a typo. Worked out to $4 a game per seat. Games included the Penguins, Montreal and the Senators too, if I am not mistaken. You have to sit through a half-hour lecture given by either ex-players, current management or sports spec1alists on topics like sports-medicine, discipline, nutrition, psychology, etc. But they include a nice buffet of appetizers and drinks. Seminars were at 6pm for a 7pm game time. Also, you can sneak a few bottles of water/soda into your pocket at the seminar so you need not buy any at the game. If you park for free a block away from the arena, you get a meal, excellent seats and you don’t get stuck in traffic on the way out since you are not parking in their $30 lots. All this for $4.
I’m 99% sure they plan to do it again. Still want to share a plan?
https://www.nhl.com/devils/community/leadership-series
Trump has figured out a way to make his opponents kneel before him.
Might be time to cash out in Texas. How long can this growth keep up before it crashes?
“You would think oil is $100 a barrel the way the real estate market is going,” said Victoria Printz, a Midland-based agent representing properties selling for more than $1 million. The average new-home sales price in the metro area shot up 8.5 percent in the past year, and permits for new construction climbed 76 percent. “This is extraordinary—even for Midland.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-25/in-world-s-hottest-oil-patch-jitters-mount-that-a-bust-is-near
Pumps,
No.
Midland is the 24th largest city in Texas. It is the equivalent of Wayne.
So will Weiner get suicided in prison or will it be just your garden variety weight lifting accident?
I was just doing a mental exercise trying to relate stolen Equifax credit records to tranches of collateralized mortgage products. If you were a buyer of stolen credit records and there was a free market to trade them, which are the best “tranches”? I’m thinking 850 credit scores are not that valuable and neither are 650. The sweet spot is probably somebody around 670-710, lots of credit cards, lots of balance transfers, lots of late fees, right? I figure a 690 credit score that is kind of kept up to snuff could be run for the most additional credit lines before the affected person or persons notice? OTOH, somebody who is 80 years old with a 760 credit score might be even easier to take advantage of and give enough runway room?
If I were banks offering credit and I wanted to catch and/or thwart credit thieves (btw, I’m not 100% they want to actually stop credit abuse), wouldn’t you just look for a couple thing:
1. Sudden address change (when other account don’t change).
2. Wide swarm of new activity in credit products that don’t match the previous profile of the customer.
I wonder how many of the banks would love to see just a nice controlled amount of fraud slip through. The afflicted pay the bills without knowing and everyone else wins.
Stu, like I’ve said before, I’d like to bottle and sell Captain cheapo. TY.
BTW, maybe 9 months ago I found some small charges, two I think. The ID line said something like “Girl Scout Cookies”. Both of my daughters are actually in girl scouts. I forgot if the charges were $20, $40, or $50 each, I just remember there were two of them. Instead of asking my wife I called up my bank and they were on it like white on rice; they obviously had something on their list that sent up a red flag. They reversed both charges immediately and sent me new cards.
Now think about this. Let’s say you have millions of card numbers and you just hit each one for $80 once. That probably works out to a lot of money going somewhere it shouldn’t without hardly causing a stir.
know someone who executed on a ‘business plan’ in college that consisted of sending bills to larger corporations for ‘industry newsletter’ for $89. he actually sent weekly a one page summary cropped from public news to be legit. corps never requested it, it added no value to anyone even if it hit the right desk, but at that cost A/P never looked twice and just paid. got up to nearly 100 ‘subscriptions’ at one point. lol, easier beer money than working in the dining hall.
I knew a guy who used to do the same thing, but it involved shipping garbage bags out and invoicing for them.
LOL. It wasn’t until I graduated and got into the workforce that I discovered my buddy was seriously underpricing his imaginary services. Banks at least didn’t blink at invoices for information back then unless they broke a grand.
Two WSJ articles on oft discussed topics:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-hartford-mulls-bankruptcy-bond-insurer-offers-to-help-postpone-payments-1506337301?mod=djemMoneyBeat_asia
https://www.wsj.com/articles/study-says-u-s-economic-expansion-is-unevenly-spread-1506344400?mod=djemMoneyBeat_asia
Here’s a better one. Call up companies and get someone to read you the serial numbers from their biggest printer(s). Bill them for toner cartridges and include the make, model, and serial number on the invoice of the printers that supposedly consumed them.
I didn’t think of this, I was alerted to it from a company email telling us “DON’T GIVE ANYONE THE SERIAL NUMBERS OF OUR PRINTERS!”
Ha. I like it. Need a bigger ticket item than toner though. Ideas?
^^^ I wonder if scams like that didn’t open up the door for Minolta bizHubs and other such items where you just pay one big check to one company for all of your printing and faxing needs.
One day my company tried me to sign off on the delivery of 35 huge printers that just arrived. I told them no way. My staff maintains and guarantees the data on servers, not the fools who like to print it out 99 different ways.
get me to sign off.
Just saw this post now…busy day.
You are absolutely correct. Thank you.
chicagofinance says:
September 25, 2017 at 12:43 pm
NO OWNERSHIP = NO CAPITAL RISK
Point made. Thank you again for pointing out where I was wrong. Risk must be rewarded, or system self implodes. Sometimes it’s not about how hard you work, but what you risk.
chicagofinance says:
September 25, 2017 at 12:45 pm
Pumpty……. who owns your multi? You, or the renters? They live there…..they pay all the bills…..
There was some guy who sent invoices to all the school districts for test prep materials. He hit several hundred thousand dollars before a single business admin picked up on it.
I knew a guy who used to do mail order horoscopes. Was rolling in it….g
I helped run the outbound program for Access Resource Services Inc.
I wrote the scripting used for the outbound recontact programs. Agents would call previous customers to entice them to call again. It always revolves around a special message. We usually hit 40% recontact rate – Meaning 40% of the people we called would call the 900 number again.
They send us thousands of people to call every day, we couldn’t even make a dent in the lists. We did the math and realizing they were making more than $50-75k a day.
I learned a lot about people.
https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/2002/02/arscmp.pdf
some heavy rotation out of FANG’s today. when this market sells off, and it will…
Saw that too. Oils creeping up as well.
I saw and did nothing about HES at $38; twice. Shame on me. That’s okay though, I am just starting to get back into more active trading and didn’t trust myself yet.
Also, had a procedure done under general at Englewood Hosp on Friday. My incision site was closed with a non-opioid pain control device? lozenge? injection? It was amazeballs, I literally did not feel anything in incision vicinity for 24 hours, no need to break out the percocet….I literally woke up, they wheeled me down to valet and I hopped into the truck my wife just pulled up in. She gave me the “are you seriously feeling this good” look? I was so, so very good. Twenty four hours of bliss and then the pain and percocet started. Anyhow, at my 2 week checkup I am going to ask about what they closed me up with. There’s a need for non-opioid post op pain control. This is a direct response to the backlash of opioid scripts being written. I’m doing some cursory research, some NJ pharma companies in the game.
abeiz,
They probably used Marcaine or Exparel.
Exparel should last longer than 24 hrs, however, and is 100x more expensive.