Stock scream room

Discussion of the Stock portion of the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7656
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: next to emotional support peacock
Contact:

Re: Stock scream room

Post by dualstow » Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:10 am

Wow, Willie the Groundskeeper has fallen on hard times.
(I apologize in advance for this comment.I do think about the homeless. I see them daily as well).

Relocation: a Canadian cousin of mine told me they used to bus the homeless to Manitoba whether they wanted to go or not, in the 1960s. From where, I cannot recall. Toronto, I think.
today is treasury bond interest day
The monarch butterfly may go extinct 👣
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Stock scream room

Post by sophie » Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:46 am

Exporting the homeless...wow, talk about "not in my backyard."

I love how people like to blame "lack of affordable housing" - that's a load of B-S. There's always affordable housing, you just have to travel a bit (like, inland in the case of southern California) to find it. The problem is you can't do that if you're mentally ill. I don't care what the official stats say, that's true of the vast majority of homeless and probably virtually all of the long-term homeless. How about passing a law making it easier to declare a person incompetent? Right now, the bar for that is too high. A legacy of "one flew over the cuckoo's nest" apparently.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Stock scream room

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sun Jan 27, 2019 11:01 am

sophie wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:46 am
I love how people like to blame "lack of affordable housing" - that's a load of B-S. There's always affordable housing, you just have to travel a bit (like, inland in the case of southern California) to find it.
I also think it's a mistake to require landlords to maintain rental properties at a certain level. It's not heart-warming, but slummy properties are what really poor people can afford. If you require landlords to spend too much money on properties versus what they're going to be able to collect in rent, they're not going to do it. Ergo, affordable housing crisis. That's at the extreme low-end of the spectrum of course, but I suspect that the "affordable housing crisis" for lower middle class people results from the cognitive dissonance of them thinking they should be able to afford a much nicer property than they can. Or the inverse, they're house poor (rent poor?) because they won't accept living in the type of housing they can afford in their area, which probably leans towards the slummy side of the spectrum. So they spend too much of their income on a property they think they deserve, which leaves too little for everything else, and they think they've been wronged.
The problem is you can't do that if you're mentally ill. I don't care what the official stats say, that's true of the vast majority of homeless and probably virtually all of the long-term homeless. How about passing a law making it easier to declare a person incompetent? Right now, the bar for that is too high. A legacy of "one flew over the cuckoo's nest" apparently.
I think I could agree with this, but with regards to the bolded: why?
Only a few prefer liberty-- the majority seek nothing more than fair masters.
- Gaius Sallustius Crispus
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2515
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Stock scream room

Post by pugchief » Sun Jan 27, 2019 1:12 pm

Kriegsspiel wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 11:01 am

I also think it's a mistake to require landlords to maintain rental properties at a certain level. It's not heart-warming, but slummy properties are what really poor people can afford. If you require landlords to spend too much money on properties versus what they're going to be able to collect in rent, they're not going to do it. Ergo, affordable housing crisis. That's at the extreme low-end of the spectrum of course, but I suspect that the "affordable housing crisis" for lower middle class people results from the cognitive dissonance of them thinking they should be able to afford a much nicer property than they can. Or the inverse, they're house poor (rent poor?) because they won't accept living in the type of housing they can afford in their area, which probably leans towards the slummy side of the spectrum. So they spend too much of their income on a property they think they deserve, which leaves too little for everything else, and they think they've been wronged.
It amazes me that anyone wants to be a landlord in Cali, SF in particular. The taxes make charging adequate rent to be profitable, the local government makes all of the laws pro-tenant / anti-owner, and then they even talk about rent-control. Seriously?
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Stock scream room

Post by Kriegsspiel » Sun Jan 27, 2019 2:47 pm

pugchief wrote:
Sun Jan 27, 2019 1:12 pm
It amazes me that anyone wants to be a landlord in Cali, SF in particular. The taxes make charging adequate rent to be profitable, the local government makes all of the laws pro-tenant / anti-owner, and then they even talk about rent-control. Seriously?
Johnny writes about SF real estate a lot. Like:
The family that just bought [a 3 unit building] purchased it in a completely vacant condition so whoever was renting the two apartments were persuaded to leave before the sale. Empty buildings sell for a serious premium compared to those offered with protected rent controlled tenants. I have no knowledge of the particulars in this case, but the most common arrangement is for the seller to pay old tenants to leave voluntarily. That money is readily regained after the sale. I have several friends who were long time renters who were each paid $100,000 to leave desirable properties. That’s not enough for a down payment on anything here in San Francisco, but it allows people to start over elsewhere if they have a good plan. The pay outs are faster and cheaper than litigation and eviction and an extra couple hundred thousand dollars is a rounding error given the sale price.
The stove was immediately removed from the attic apartment. Without it the attic is merely a collection of extra rooms. Why rent? The legal dynamics make being a landlord in San Francisco extremely unpleasant. Rental income isn’t the primary concern for a family that can afford this sort of house. The basement was never legally rentable anyway so it’s now a storage space. The house is merely reverting to what it was when it was originally built – a comfortable single family home.[/b] link
And this one, which starts off, "Among my many friends here in San Francisco is a guy who works in the field of affordable housing."

Many of his articles make it seem like illegal apartments (like Christina Blasey Ford's) are everywhere along the Californian coast.
Only a few prefer liberty-- the majority seek nothing more than fair masters.
- Gaius Sallustius Crispus
boglerdude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:40 am

Re: Stock scream room

Post by boglerdude » Sun Jan 27, 2019 10:30 pm

Post Reply