|
Should rename it to the property greased pole. Or property trap door.
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
Am I understanding correctly that this dimwit got conned out of a $270,000 house for $10? Pictured is my schadenfreude-meter upon detecting this news: 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
I mean, possibly, but if she never paid the initial $10, there would be no consideration and it wouldn't pass the consideration test to be a valid contract if I recall my contracts correctly. Edit: It will still take lawyers and fees to fix this mess he made for himself though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:so since the SF real estate market is entirely fueled by low interest debt and the interest price of debt has now risen that means the SF real estate market is a bubble that will now burst or at least slow down significantly since easy money is now less available, right? Prices actually fell slightly in 2016. Or maybe that was rent--either way it's no longer spiking, just unsustainably high.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
John Smith posted:Serious question. As a liberal, are you seriously annoyed by those Conservatives who deny basic science, such as climate change and evolution? Why do you yourself engage in denial of basic economic concepts as supply and demand? Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
https://np.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/63m1l2/returning_clothes_bought_online/quote:Hey there - so I find myself in a bit of a bad spot. I received a box from a company recently, which allows you to try clothes on before deciding what you want to keep and then return what you don't want to buy. In my foolishness I removed the tags while trying the clothes on to see if they would be more comfortable. Out of the £897's worth of clothes I received, I kept one item worth £50 and returned the rest. I wore three items for a full day at the office and the rest only in the comfort of my own home in order to try them on. In the comments, OP says they thought you could remove the tags and wear the clothes for a day and still return them as long as you bought them online.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
What is a quit claim, exactly? I'm confused by that guy's story. Did he sign a contract to sell the house without reading it, and the price was just 10 dollars?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Day Man posted:What is a quit claim, exactly? I'm confused by that guy's story. Did he sign a contract to sell the house without reading it, and the price was just 10 dollars? That is it in a nutshell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
John Smith posted:Serious question. As a liberal, are you seriously annoyed by those Conservatives who deny basic science, such as climate change and evolution? Why do you yourself engage in denial of basic economic concepts as supply and demand? Okay, I'll bite. Belief that prices can become temporarily inflated due to temporary forces aside from supply and demand does not mean that one doesn't believe in supply and demand. It instead implies a belief that supply and demand are not the only forces at work in a market when prices are determined. Prices that rise due to forces such as information asymmetry, mania, fear of missing out, a flood of outside capital into a local market, low interest rates, longer amortization periods, widespread fraud, etc can quickly reverse if these forces suddenly disappear. Pretending these forces don't exist is some econ 101 bullshit, and saying 'that's not a bubble that's the efficient market at work' is pedantic at best and the only real argument I've seen trotted out by the "bubbles don't exist" economists. Implying that there is consensus among economists that efficient market hypothesis means bubbles do not exist is disingenuous at best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Once initiated, bubbles are self propagating for so long as money is cheap and keep inflating until they are popped by a macroeconomic shock. Those shocks are unforeseen so their occurrence is unpredictable. Vancouver has been uncoupled from reality for over a decade. cool I just wanted to find out if you had a remotely falsifiable claim or were just sharing your beliefs
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:Implying that there is consensus among economists that efficient market hypothesis means bubbles do not exist is disingenuous at best. Er... her initial reply was not on EMH. I fully agree that EMH is not (very) settled mainstream science, specifically whether it is true in a strong, semi-strong, or weak form. You have no dispute from me on this. However, her initial reply is outright denying that increasing supply will decrease price on a marginal basis (all else being equal). Which is (very) well established economics.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:https://np.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/63m1l2/returning_clothes_bought_online/ At least OP is realizing they're an idiot and accepting it pretty well, but drat how would you think that taking tags off and wearing clothes wouldn't render them nonreturnable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
quote:I received a box from a company recently, which allows you to try clothes on before deciding what you want to keep and then return what you don't want to buy. So Columbia House finally moved on from CDs, I see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:So Columbia House finally moved on from CDs, I see. Those companies advertise all over podcasts nowadays. It seems the whole podcast industry is awash with BWM stuff - even 99% Invisible plugs Blue Apron.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
KingSlime posted:Everyone knows they're technically worth more than the compensation here, but people are too desperate to get stuff on their resume or climb up within the structure to have any bartering power. If it pays the bills... The smart thing to do is collectively bargain, so that all of you have bartering power as a unit. One employee saying "$15 an hour is not a fair wage for someone with the required skills for this position" can be replaced. ALL of your employees say "$15 an hour is not a fair wage for someone with the required skills for this position" and the boss realizes that it's easier to increase the wage than be out the time, effort, and expense of replacing their entire workforce. (This excludes the trend of exploiting H1B visa holders, because I'll get mad.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
John Smith posted:Er... her initial reply was not on EMH. I fully agree that EMH is not (very) settled mainstream science, specifically whether it is true in a strong, semi-strong, or weak form. You have no dispute from me on this. Fair enough. I'm used to people with names like yours being econ 101 libertarian fundies who know less than my lay understanding of these topics so I jumped the gun then, mea culpa.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:The smart thing to do is collectively bargain, so that all of you have bartering power as a unit. Yeah but my coworkers are dumb and I benefit more by doing my own thing vs sticking my neck out for others (some of whom I don't really like). I'm also in Texas so lol at the idea of collective bargaining, I know there's merit to what you're saying but it would never play out in our favor in any realistic setting within the US. What makes you think they wouldn't replace the whole team? Remember, the majority of employees in tech are contract employees, myself included. This is also why I have no qualms about pursuing my own success outside of my day job versus being invested in the dynamics at play here (and it's paying off!) KingSlime fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The housing supply has not grown even 10% of the rate it should have to accommodate the new demand. Instead, prices have just shot up 100% and every surrounding suburb of SF is now getting more expensive as people go there. There are tens of thousands of vacant units in San Francisco, but they're being held off the market as investment properties, second or third homes, airbnb income generators, or "gently caress you" landlordism. Per the coalition on homelessness, there are at least enough vacant units to give every homeless person in San Francisco a home. Now, if you wanna talk hosed up housing in SF, look at Midtown Park. Tenants were moved there after the city cleared their homes during the "urban renewal" of the Fillmore in the 60s. The complex belongs to the city because the city financed building the apartment complex, but the city gave tenants a contract which said tenants would own the building after they paid off the cost of building it via their rent payments, and then could turn it into a coop. Now the cost of building it has been paid off, and the city has changed its mind and is trying to force these families out so they can demolish midtown and build multi-million dollar condos.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
I am BWM and want to ask this community a few questions. How much of your net income goes to your house (mortgage, taxes, insurance, fees, maintenance) or rent (etc)? Apparently I'm around 16%-20%. How does that compare with this community? Also, I read several pages back about the dangers of buying a house that is poorly maintained. I can google house maintenance guides and it is usually a bunch of poo poo like "vacuum your refrigerator coils, change your HVAC filter, clean gutters, etc." That isn't helpful to me, I already know how to clean my house. Does anyone have any recommendations on where to go to read things that might not be so obvious so I don't turn into a seller that one day tries to sell a lovely unmaintained house? Or just mention them here so I can be extra lazy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:I am BWM and want to ask this community a few questions. Net income, meaning take home? That would get into discussions of what parts of gross income that you take out of net income, e.g. 401k payments or medical insurance taken out pre-tax. Gross income is much easier to calculate and avoids those discussions. I spend 4.6% of gross on mortgage, 3.8% on property taxes, 0.35% on insurance, and around 2% on home maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:How much of your net income goes to your house (mortgage, taxes, insurance, fees, maintenance) or rent (etc)? Apparently I'm around 16%-20%. How does that compare with this community? I am paying around 10-12% of my net income. Fairly modest.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
Honestly a lot of it is really obvious. My parents' house is falling apart, and it's just because they put repairs off until they get worse and worse, and it becomes hard/expensive/impossible to repair things back to "good as new". They're not lazy, just cheap (my father always insists he can fix it himself, just not *this* weekend, he'll get around to it next weekend...) and it definitely costs them more money in the long run to not keep up on repairs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
KingSlime posted:Remember, the majority of employees in tech are contract employees Wait, what? This isn't something I'm aware of at all and google doesn't seem to reveal any conclusive data.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:Those companies advertise all over podcasts nowadays. It seems the whole podcast industry is awash with BWM stuff - even 99% Invisible plugs Blue Apron. Blue Apron isn't BWM though. It's part of the subscription service fad and sure, it's not GWM, but they provide a product that is actually needed and the cost is transparent. It certainly beats using chowhound to deliver food daily from the ice cream shop or restaurant half mile away though. Columbia House used to do those "8 CDs for a penny!" ads in magazines all the time, where you purchase that "great deal" but then get hit with a huge shipping and handling charge. Afterwards it auto-bills you for a 24.95 monthly recurring membership that's a pain in the rear end to cancel. It's more akin to gyms running a free trial but charging you after, and then you go to cancel it so they comp you a free month, but hey you really do need to work out more so maybe paying $20 will motivate you... and it's not like it's that much... and going in to the gym to cancel is a pain in the rear end.... and so on and so on until eventually you've spent $200 on a gym that you visited four times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Wait, what? This isn't something I'm aware of at all and google doesn't seem to reveal any conclusive data. Really? I thought it was common knowledge but I could be wrong. FTE's are still a thing, they just happen to compose an increasingly smaller percentage of the population. Apple, Dell, Cisco, IBM, etc just to name a tiny handful, all have their ranks stuffed with contract employees, at least from what I've seen gotta skirt them labor laws somehow
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Net income, meaning take home? That would get into discussions of what parts of gross income that you take out of net income, e.g. 401k payments or medical insurance taken out pre-tax. Gross income is much easier to calculate and avoids those discussions. Yeah, net as in marginal tax rate I guess. Maybe it makes more sense to look at gross, so in that case I am ~10%.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Teeter posted:Blue Apron isn't BWM though. It's part of the subscription service fad and sure, it's not GWM, but they provide a product that is actually needed and the cost is transparent. It certainly beats using chowhound to deliver food daily from the ice cream shop or restaurant half mile away though. Yeah these are just luxury goods. Not any more BWM than having someone else mow your lawn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
ChickenOfTomorrow posted:There are tens of thousands of vacant units in San Francisco, but they're being held off the market as investment properties, second or third homes, airbnb income generators, or "gently caress you" landlordism. Per the coalition on homelessness, there are at least enough vacant units to give every homeless person in San Francisco a home. The vacancy rate for Oakland/SF is 2.9%. You could increase the number of vacant units in the area to 400% of its current level and it would still have fewer vacants than the national average.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
CmdrRiker posted:How much of your net income goes to your house (mortgage, taxes, insurance, fees, maintenance) or rent (etc)? Apparently I'm around 16%-20%. How does that compare with this community? 30% renting just outside of Toronto. When I owned a house further from Toronto, 40% per month or so. If I bought a house in my current neighbourhood it would be around 60% of my take home if I managed 20% down payment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
John Smith posted:I am paying around 10-12% of my net income. Fairly modest. Jesus Christ. What is your situation like? Did you buy a fixer upper? Do you go for incredibly minimal square footage? Do you live in a rural town and work remote for a company based in NYC? Sometime I wonder if I should do the latter. I work remote in a place with a pretty high cost of living, though my income is reasonable for my location. Maybe that makes me even more BWM.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
We're like 40/40/10 on FTE/Contract("to hire")/Consultants Always fun to see who gets invited to the employee shindigs
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
KingSlime posted:Really? I thought it was common knowledge but I could be wrong. FTE's are still a thing, they just happen to compose an increasingly smaller percentage of the population. I'd like to hear an actual source for this other than goonsay ChickenOfTomorrow posted:There are tens of thousands of vacant units in San Francisco, but they're being held off the market as investment properties, second or third homes, airbnb income generators, or "gently caress you" landlordism. Per the coalition on homelessness, there are at least enough vacant units to give every homeless person in San Francisco a home. I'd like to hear an actual source for this other than goonsay too
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Housing costs are sort of difficult because they are going to scale differently depending on what your income is and where you are living. Most places have a housing floor where you just can't find housing below that amount, so if you're broke your options are to pay too much of your income for housing or live in a car. And on the other side, if you are high-earning/rich you are going to have to go bonkers to continually spend significant amounts of your income on housing. Someone who makes $30,000 is simply going to have to spend a higher % on housing even if they make the best possible decisions compared to someone who makes $75,000 or $500,000. A family who makes a million dollars a year can make ridiculously bad decisions and still end up lower percentage than someone who is eking it out at minimum wage/poverty level with the most rigorous and careful budget. I currently spend ~15% of gross income on housing. The worst I've ever paid as a choice was around 50%. I don't recommend it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
John Smith posted:I am paying around 10-12% of my net income. Fairly modest. That's wild and far outside of US norms. Good for you! I thought I was doing pretty well to be spending 20% of net, although I'm about to be spending much more by moving somewhere with a higher cost of living.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:30% renting just outside of Toronto. 60%. Lol. Are you BWM or am I just very unfamiliar with Canada? Guess that hot real estate market is really hot right now huh. How do the local (non-Chinese) homeowners feel about it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
John Smith posted:I am paying around 10-12% of my net income. Fairly modest. sup, GWM bro 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
6.25% gross income for rent in the bay area (~9.5-10.5% net?) because I'm youngish/single/cheap and want to retire early so I rent an individual spare room in someone's house. I know other people who do this to even more extremes (bunkbeds and such, or couples who manage to rent a cheap spare room in someones house and split the price) and spend even less. I had a money talk with my father a few years ago who said he was spending over 50% of his take-home income on a house at one point in the early 90s  I asked if he even considered that he was taking out way too big of a loan than he could afford and it somehow seems like he never even considered it until it was too late and he was broke/scraping by/stressed all the time. thankfully it worked out for him. smart people make BWM decisions.
Blinky2099 fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Apr 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
KingSlime posted:Really? I thought it was common knowledge but I could be wrong. FTE's are still a thing, they just happen to compose an increasingly smaller percentage of the population. I work remote and have a membership at a local co op facility. Another one of my BWM things, actually. It costs $200/month and my work doesn't reimburse it. But I like seeing other human beings during the day so I just eat it. (Homeless shelter for contract/remote programmers) I get the idea that contracting for big and medium companies is definitely a prevalent thing for my local tech community. My sample size is a little biased though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I'd like to hear an actual source for this other than goonsay Then you're in the wrong thread, go do your own research. I'm just telling you what I know after being in the tech bubble in austin for over 2 years and having worked for a few of the tech giants whose names you see on a daily basis and am not interested in convincing anyone
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
monster on a stick posted:I'd like to hear an actual source for this other than goonsay I don't know about overall, but new positions around here are majority contracts. If that's still goonsay, look on dice.com for Colorado and count contracts vs full time hires. Denver is better than the smaller cities.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2017 20:43
|
|
