Re: Evony (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
I played it and burned out on it. Decided it was more a barbarian hack and slash than I wanted. Starship Commander at least prevents your planets from being taken over. Evony launched with massive Internet advertising, with many of the images stolen. On Sunday, October 24, 2010, Rceeberger rceeber...@comcast.net wrote: On 10/24/2010 4:06:59 PM, Lance A. Brown (la...@bearcircle.net) wrote: Rceeberger said the following on 10/22/2010 9:23 PM: I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just haven't had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Evony? Really? I didn't think anyone actually played that game... Apparently there are quite a few playing..thousands on my server alone. xponent PrimeTime Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com -- Gary Denton Increase your vocabulary game - feed the poor: http://www.freerice.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Evony (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
still play it on ss52 when i have time but RL too busy at the moment, its not bad but jave no idea how people can stay on so long it will takve over your life if ya let it! http://www.gogan.com/blog/ On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Gary Denton garyden...@gmail.com wrote: I played it and burned out on it. Decided it was more a barbarian hack and slash than I wanted. Starship Commander at least prevents your planets from being taken over. Evony launched with massive Internet advertising, with many of the images stolen. On Sunday, October 24, 2010, Rceeberger rceeber...@comcast.net wrote: On 10/24/2010 4:06:59 PM, Lance A. Brown (la...@bearcircle.net) wrote: Rceeberger said the following on 10/22/2010 9:23 PM: I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just haven't had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Evony? Really? I didn't think anyone actually played that game... Apparently there are quite a few playing..thousands on my server alone. xponent PrimeTime Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com -- Gary Denton Increase your vocabulary game - feed the poor: http://www.freerice.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Evony (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Rceeberger said the following on 10/22/2010 9:23 PM: I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just havent had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Evony? Really? I didn't think anyone actually played that game... --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Evony (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On 10/24/2010 4:06:59 PM, Lance A. Brown (la...@bearcircle.net) wrote: Rceeberger said the following on 10/22/2010 9:23 PM: I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just haven't had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Evony? Really? I didn't think anyone actually played that game... Apparently there are quite a few playing..thousands on my server alone. xponent PrimeTime Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
I played Evony for a while, until other powers decided to farm the crap out of my cities, and my alliance disintegrated while I watched. That pretty much killed any enjoyment I had from the game... On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Rceeberger rceeber...@comcast.net wrote: On 10/22/2010 8:13:45 AM, Charlie Bell (char...@culturelist.org) wrote: On 22/10/2010, at 1:41 PM, Rceeberger wrote: One at a time please. Xponent Insert GOATSE Here Maru Rob LOL!!! Rob, I've missed you. I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just havent had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Xponent Addictive Gaming Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 10/23/2010 9:41:08 AM, Damon Agretto (damon.agre...@gmail.com) wrote: I played Evony for a while, until other powers decided to farm the crap out of my cities, and my alliance disintegrated while I watched. That pretty much killed any enjoyment I had from the game... The thing about Evony that is maddening, you have to play every day and playing as many hours as you can provides many bonuses. As it stands...I'm about to break 5 mil prestige and am prepared to dump nearly 3 mil honor on an enemy who deserves it. Evony has been merging servers together for the last year, and the maps are larger than they used to be. Which server did you play on? I was on S72 when an alliance named ELITE was doing pretty much what you describe to us and anyone who stood up to them. We managed to fight back with some success which was surprising since ELITE was rife with botters and we were more or less outclassed. Since then, we have learned a few tricks of our own. How to feed troops for free. How to move any troop at scout speed. How players can trade heroes. Learning how to exploit some of Evony's many bugs has helped a lot. Flash is kinda crappy, but their implimentation is especially bad. xponent THE Host Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Again, the problem of perspective: That the bank factors in a rate that amounts to insurance (for the bank) is not the same thing as the borrower's loan being insured. It is calculated based on what might never be recovered from loans. The borrower can consider his payments insured if he, separately, buys insurance to make sure it is paid. Then he can take the attitude that his debt is covered. Insurance is one-sided; it isn't about covering both sides of an agreement. The bank's insurance against default does not benefit the borrower. Mitch [from mePad] On Oct 21, 2010, at 4:32 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com wrote: If I am paying for insurance for the lender in case I don't pay it back, why is it immoral to accept the penalty for not paying it back, knowing that I prepaid insurance for the lender. I answered this in another post, but I'll explain a little bit differently here. I see the mortgage insurance as insurance against the borrower being UNABLE to pay back the money, not just choosing to default. If your insurance agreement makes it clear that it is factoring in the chance that you choose to default ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Rob wrote: Insert GOATSE Here Maru Every time I think I've completely excised the sight of that picture from my mind forever, someone reminds me of it. Seriously, getting stealth linked to that was one of the less pleasant shocks of my life. Jim JESUS, WHAT IS THAT?! Maru ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On 22/10/2010, at 2:39 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: There is no question that lenders have violated the law in many ways -- look at the foreclosure mess right now. The reason they have panicked and stopped foreclosures is because they realized that they took illegal shortcuts. Well, that and the fact that the on-selling of risk that led to the meltdown has led to situations where noone is sure who actually owns the security (ie the title) on many properties anymore... And yes, I've heard of enough cases in the States where foreclosures have been attempted, through ineptness or confusion, on properties that were not in arrears. It's a Big Giant Mess. Charlie. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On 22/10/2010, at 9:07 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: And yes, by the way, we're having a tough time financially right now. I was laid off from LiveWorld a couple of years ago and I've been building up consulting and developing some new analytics tools, but it's hard. And we have a daughter who moved back in full-time and four grandkids with us half time. Dude, I hope it gets better for you. As someone who's been through somewhat ridiculous extremes through life (overprivileged education and childhood, depression and homelessness in early adulthood, and living in both hemispheres) I have an appreciation of the fear of losing one's home. Peace, man. C. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 22/10/2010, at 1:41 PM, Rceeberger wrote: One at a time please. Xponent Insert GOATSE Here Maru Rob LOL!!! Rob, I've missed you. Charlie. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
I answered this in another post, but I'll explain a little bit differently here. I see the mortgage insurance as insurance against the borrower being UNABLE to pay back the money, not just choosing to default. Well you can see things however you wish, that is your prerogative. However, if you were in charge of deciding who gets what loan rates, that would be a very bad assumption to make. In a market economy, different borrowers can obtain different loan rates from lending institutions for one reason: they have different risks of defaulting on the loan, being late, or otherwise costing the bank money in getting payments on the loan. If a bank loses $200,000 on the loan, the moral state of the person who borrowed the loan has no effect on the bank's bottom line. Thus, loan rates reflect every reason for default. It is true that banks can misjudge these probabilities, markets, are uncertain, etc. People sometimes pay or less interest than they would if perfect knowledge was available. But, that is why different people and different companies are charged different rates. It's not just Brad and me that are saying that. It is also derivable from these two assumptions: banks compete for profitable loans and borrowers look for the best rate. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:41 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.com wrote: That suggests that you are not going to strategically default. I wonder if there are any other clues that the lender was able to glean that suggested you would not strategically default. I'm curious strategically defaulting moral in your world-view?\ No. How about non-strategically defaulting? What do these terms mean? A strategic default is a somewhat more formal term for walking away, i.e., choosing to stop making mortgage payments and let the property be foreclosed upon, usually because the property is worth less than the outstanding mortgage. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: I answered this in another post, but I'll explain a little bit differently here. I see the mortgage insurance as insurance against the borrower being UNABLE to pay back the money, not just choosing to default. Well you can see things however you wish, that is your prerogative. However, if you were in charge of deciding who gets what loan rates, that would be a very bad assumption to make. No, we were discussing behavior of the borrower. The rest of your comment was irrelevant, so snipped. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 10/22/2010 8:13:45 AM, Charlie Bell (char...@culturelist.org) wrote: On 22/10/2010, at 1:41 PM, Rceeberger wrote: One at a time please. Xponent Insert GOATSE Here Maru Rob LOL!!! Rob, I've missed you. I've been here...I read the conversations and more or less keep up. I just havent had much worth adding recently. Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. Xponent Addictive Gaming Maru rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 23/10/2010, at 12:23 PM, Rceeberger wrote: Mostly I spend my online time playing Evony, where I am the host of Bavaria, a top 10 alliance on SS51. We use Skype in Bavaria so I can be found there pretty much every night under Xponent. Drop by and chat sometime if any of you get a spare few. :) I have a lalpile of games at the mo. Mainly playing Red Dead Redemption recently. Charlie. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 21/10/2010, at 8:08 AM, John Williams wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org wrote: You can leave the troll. It's taken only a few posts for me to realise that John has zero interest in engaging with any point, just repeating his own point over and over, and then using _ad hominem_ like he's doing in response to Brad. Thought I'd see if the previous 3 years demonstration that deregulation completely failed had mellowed him or changed his mind, but it apparently hasn't. I did not ad hominem anyone. The only person I have seen to consistently engage is personal attacks is you. Other than implying that Brad censors his blog of disagreement and Nick is dishonest, you mean? And for the record, _ad hominem_ is not personal attack. It is failing to respond to an argument, or using a person's attributes as a reason why their argument is wrong. Right up with the other logical fallacies. And pointing out that you're trolling is likewise not a personal attack, it's a description of your behaviour, just as describing someone as angry or strident or fallacial is not a personal attack. All I can do is respond to the writing you post, and that writing is weak and your reasoning poorly explained. That's not a personal attack either. I would LOVE to see someone post well-reasoned arguments for the conservative right position in the States, but I'm not seeing them here (or anywhere else, for that matter). Thought you might have learnt to explain your reasoning and stopped resorting to assumptions by now, but as you can't be bothered, neither can I. Cheers, Charlie. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:09 PM, David Hobby hob...@newpaltz.edu wrote: Hi. I'm with Keith on this. A mortgage is not an absolute promise to pay back the loan. Rather, the deal is that if the borrower does not keep up payments, the lender can take back the property. I'm not sure why you imply that I disagree with that, assuming we are talking about a nonrecourse loan, which is what I assume Nick has. But the issue is that Nick, for whatever reason, is not walking away. Instead, it seems he tried to get the lender to accept payback of less than he borrowed, but the lender did not agree to it. Then there was some story filed with the Justice department, which I do not know the details of, but it sounds like it must be complaints about the lender refusing to accept being paid back less than the amount that was borrowed. Nick, feel free to jump in here if I have something wrong. Another complication is that many of the mortgages are now owned, directly or indirectly, by the Federal government. That is what I meant when I wrote earlier that not paying back the full loan amount can ultimately result in the average taxpayer footing the bill. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:39 AM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org wrote: Other than implying that Brad censors his blog of disagreement and Nick is dishonest, you mean? Brad called me a troll and tried to incite people to censor me, which is not polite. I replied to that insult rather politely, in that I asked him why he thinks he has the power to censor people on this email list, as he does on his blog. As for censorship on his blog, do you mean to imply that you think he does not delete comments he disagrees with? Because I know for a fact that he does, and he has done it to the comments of many people who have tried to post polite opinions that did not agree with Brad's agenda. As for Nick, we were having a discussion about how honest people deal with borrowing and paying back money. Given that the discussion had started by Nick mentioning his attempts at loan modification, it would be virtually impossible to discuss the situation without it being possible for people to see some implications. But that does not constitute an ad hominem argument, since the discussion was actually about the ethics of the situation. And for the record, _ad hominem_ is not personal attack. I am well aware of the meaning. You used it ambiguously. Literally, the Latin translates as to man or to the man, which could of course refer to about anything about a man or humanity in general. It is generally used as a modifier, such as ad hominem attack or ad hominem argument. Since you did not specify, I made a guess at what you meant. It is failing to respond to an argument, or using a person's attributes as a reason why their argument is wrong. Right up with the other logical fallacies. So you meant ad hominem argument. And pointing out that you're trolling is likewise not a personal attack, it's a description of your behaviour, An incorrect description of my behavior, to which I replied with a question about Brad's censorship behavior. All I can do is respond to the writing you post, and that writing is weak and your reasoning poorly explained. That's not a personal attack either. How do you categorize responding to a post you disagree with by writing FUCK YOU and saying that you are going to kill file the poster? I would LOVE to see someone post well-reasoned arguments for the conservative right position in the States, but I'm not seeing them here (or anywhere else, for that matter). If you think that I can be categorized as the conservative right, then you do not understand my views at all. Not surprising, since your past behavior has been to get extremely angry about my weak writing and poor explaining, and then to stop reading my posts. Which is of course your prerogative, but it seems odd that you become so upset just from reading such worthless arguments. I would think the more natural response would be boredom and skipping to the next thing to read. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Dan Minette wrote: In hindsight, the housing bubble is obvious. It was obvious to _me_, back in the 1990s, when I read that the average american had debts that were of the magnitude of 3x their actual possessions. I think I saw that in this list (I certainly said that in the brazilian lists). Here in Brazil, where interest rates used to be 15% _a month_ + inflation correction (the banks now are not so much greedy; they offer money at 5% a month, and don't even bother to correct inflation), nobody believed in my doomsdays scenarios. Heck, at the time, I knew there was a housing bubble, and if you look at Brin-l archives, you will see that I wrote it. Ah, the files. How hard to find anything there :-( Alberto Monteiro PS: and I am glad that my _other_ prophetic doomsday scenario is still in the Future. PPS: OTOH, my local doomsday scenario was an epic fail ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
John Williams wrote: Only if you consider honesty and keeping your word to be ridiculous. An honorable person would not agree to borrow money from anyone, even a loan shark, if they thought that there was any possibility that they would not be able to honor their agreement and pay back the money that they borrowed. I think here you crossed the line between being argumentative and being a troll. There's no way anyone can predict all futures. _Every_ borrowing implies a risk of not being able to honor it - even if I tell my workmate to lend me R$ 1.50 because I don't have exchange and I want to buy a candy, there's a risk that I will die in the next 10 minutes and not honor it. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Mailing lists are evil, why they must be eradicated [was: Starting Engineer's Salaries]
John Williams wrote: Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discussions that go X is good. I agree. Me too. Count me in. +1. I agree. But, seriously, mailing lists are dying. It seems that as time goes by, _less_ people knows how to reply in an adequate format, quoting relevant parts and trimming the message to the necessary minimum. Top-posting is a plague much worse than trolling; if I were sworld dictator/s list administrator I would not ban anyone for an occasional trolling, but I would ban for top-posting. Also, it seems that everybody loves blogs, even He seldom comes here but is active in His blog - what's the point of a Brin-l list that does not discuss anything Brin-related? And young people don't use e-mail; they prefer those awful MSNs, Orkuts, Facebooks, etc. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Dan Minette wrote: But having said that, it is true that the occasional flair up of posts here and on Culture have usually coincided with someone bringing in a non-norm opinion, and numerous people on the list arguing with that one personor that argument spurring side discussions. I also know that this list has made its more conservative, vocal members feel less than welcome after years of feeling welcome. It also trimmed the other extreme, the anti-american, anti-capitalist and green members also were banned. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
John Williams wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:09 PM, David Hobby hob...@newpaltz.edu wrote: Hi. I'm with Keith on this. A mortgage is not an absolute promise to pay back the loan. Rather, the deal is that if the borrower does not keep up payments, the lender can take back the property. I'm not sure why you imply that I disagree with that, assuming we are talking about a nonrecourse loan, which is what I assume Nick has. John-- Oh? How about this quote: John Williams wrote: Only if you consider honesty and keeping your word to be ridiculous. An honorable person would not agree to borrow money from anyone, even a loan shark, if they thought that there was any possibility that they would not be able to honor their agreement and pay back the money that they borrowed. It sounds like disagreement to me. But the issue is that Nick, for whatever reason, is not walking away. Instead, it seems he tried to get the lender to accept payback of less than he borrowed, but the lender did not agree to it. Not speaking for Nick, but it certainly seems reasonable to point out to the lender that you could just default on the loan, leaving them in an even worse position than simply reducing the payments. You can't make them bargain, but it could well be in the mortgage holder's best interest. ... Another complication is that many of the mortgages are now owned, directly or indirectly, by the Federal government. That is what I meant when I wrote earlier that not paying back the full loan amount can ultimately result in the average taxpayer footing the bill. That is unfortunate. ---David ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Some clarifications. The problems I had with our lender regarding the loan modification had nothing to do with whether or not they were willing to make one. It was the way they behaved as we qualified for it and then the way that they screwed it up so that we have to re-qualify all over again. The short version is that we did everything to qualify, received a letter stating so, but due to a very confusing letter, sent them $40 less than they wanted (out of a $2,000+ payment) and they tossed out the whole thing without even telling us and demanded that we start the entire process over again, insisting, among other things, that they interpreted the check that was $40 short as a statement from us that we did not want the modification (ridiculous). They lied to by saying they had no choice because the loan owner would not allow them to make the modification, admitted that another division of their own company owns it, then tried to tell us that they could not disclose who owns it. And on and on. There are good, solid reasons for the existence of the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. Like many, many other people who have renegotiated their loans, I believe that our lender violated some parts of one or both of those laws. And I think they violated them in the process of the loan modification. There is no question that lenders have violated the law in many ways -- look at the foreclosure mess right now. The reason they have panicked and stopped foreclosures is because they realized that they took illegal shortcuts. I don't feel great about seeking a lower interest rate, but indeed I have threatened to walk away from the house if they continue to screw us around. They stand to lose a couple of hundred thousand dollars... which I could save us right now by walking away. Believe me, that is tempting. But I do think it would be unethical to do that unless they really treat us extremely unfairly. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Nick, Your clarification makes things sound quite different to me. I'll agree that being off by 2% on a payment due to a misunderstanding is not reasonable grounds for breaking a deal especially if they fouled up substantially. If all you are asking is for an interest rate that matches the present low interest rate, they are not acting in the best interest of the bank not to take you up on it. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: They lied to by saying they had no choice because the loan owner would not allow them to make the modification, admitted that another division of their own company owns it, then tried to tell us that they could not disclose who owns it.' So who does own the loan, and what are their policies on modification? You say they lied rather than they made a mistake. So I guess you must know more about the details than you wrote above, since most of what you described (some I snipped) sounds like incompetence to me, not malice. I don't feel great about seeking a lower interest rate, but indeed I have threatened to walk away from the house if they continue to screw us around. They stand to lose a couple of hundred thousand dollars... which I could save us right now by walking away. Believe me, that is tempting. But I do think it would be unethical to do that unless they really treat us extremely unfairly. If what you have described does not qualify as treating you extremely unfairly, then what does? To me, it sounds like they are incompetent (although in their defense, all of the loan securitizations have made the situation complicated). But since you want to modify an agreement in your favor, you more or less need to jump through their hoops, even if they are ridiculous. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:02 PM, John Williams wrote: But since you want to modify an agreement in your favor, you more or less need to jump through their hoops, even if they are ridiculous. John, do you believe in negotiation/ old fashion bargaining? There is always the option to walk away from the deal/house if you do not care to jump through their hoops. Part of the initial contract, I am sure, was a very clear discussion of the grounds for foreclosure which go into effect when you decide not to jump through their hoops. As it is part of the contract, I do not think it is dishonorable for one party or the other to cause the clause to be implemented. Tough on lenders in a depressed real estate market, tough on the borrower's credit rating in this world of impersonal automated credit ratings, not to mention the borrower's net worth, but not dishonorable. Chris Frandsen ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Chris Frandsen lear...@mac.com wrote: On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:02 PM, John Williams wrote: But since you want to modify an agreement in your favor, you more or less need to jump through their hoops, even if they are ridiculous. John, do you believe in negotiation/ old fashion bargaining? Yes. I wrote if you want to modfiy the agreement. I do not consider stopping payments and leaving the house as modifying the agreement. Part of the initial contract, I am sure, was a very clear discussion of the grounds for foreclosure which go into effect when you decide not to jump through their hoops. As it is part of the contract, I do not think it is dishonorable for one party or the other to cause the clause to be implemented. Note that in many states, it is the law that mortgages are nonrecourse, meaning that the lender cannot pursue the borrow to recover the debt. If I understand you, then you are saying that since the mortgage specified what happens when the borrower defaults on repayment (foreclosure), and since it is a nonrecourse loan, then it is okay for the borrower to make a strategic default. Legally, of course, that is true. But morally, choosing to not repay the money is not okay. If I borrow money, then I am giving my word that I will do everything within my power to pay it back. It is that simple. It makes no difference whether the agreement specifies what happens if I fail to keep my word, I am still honor bound to try to keep my word. I may know that the penalty for stealing a car is X years in jail, then if I steal a car and serve my time, I have still done something dishonorable. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
-Original Message- From: brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com [mailto:brin-l-boun...@mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of John Williams Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 3:34 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries) On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Chris Frandsen lear...@mac.com wrote: On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:02 PM, John Williams wrote: But since you want to modify an agreement in your favor, you more or less need to jump through their hoops, even if they are ridiculous. John, do you believe in negotiation/ old fashion bargaining? Yes. I wrote if you want to modfiy the agreement. I do not consider stopping payments and leaving the house as modifying the agreement. Part of the initial contract, I am sure, was a very clear discussion of the grounds for foreclosure which go into effect when you decide not to jump through their hoops. As it is part of the contract, I do not think it is dishonorable for one party or the other to cause the clause to be implemented. Note that in many states, it is the law that mortgages are nonrecourse, meaning that the lender cannot pursue the borrow to recover the debt. If I understand you, then you are saying that since the mortgage specified what happens when the borrower defaults on repayment (foreclosure), and since it is a nonrecourse loan, then it is okay for the borrower to make a strategic default. Legally, of course, that is true. But morally, choosing to not repay the money is not okay. If I borrow money, then I am giving my word that I will do everything within my power to pay it back. It is that simple. If I am paying for insurance for the lender in case I don't pay it back, why is it immoral to accept the penalty for not paying it back, knowing that I prepaid insurance for the lender. I may know that the penalty for stealing a car is X years in jail, then if I steal a car and serve my time, I have still done something dishonorable. Com on Johnyou say I stretch things? How many car owners get the thief to pay for theft insurance? That's what a premium over T-bills is; default insurance. I agree that walking away just because it's profitable is dishonorable. One should make every reasonable attempt to pay one's bills. But, if both parties sign a legal agreement, then the bank did it with it's eyes open, and if the house is under water and the payments will bankrupt someone, mailing in the keys is a reasonable option. _Both parties_ agreed to it, so it's a free agreement the bank entered into to accept the house if the owner feels that it's in there best interest to mail in the keys. Again, I understand how strategic retreats in a debate can be difficult. But, none of us have perfect understanding. You really do have an interesting take on things. I appreciate the fact that your viewpoint doesn't fit into one of the stereotype dittohead viewpoints that I hear too often. You have much to offer in a discussion between reasonable people. But, in this case, you have not made a strong argumentjust a black and white one. I agree with you that one has a moral obligation to make every reasonable effort to pay a mortgagethat's the spirit of the law. The objectivist I mentioned who made money at the taxpayer's expense by allowing a foreclosure when he could easily pay the loan and when the house would probably bounce back to more than his buying price (it actually did...but at the time one could only give a high probability to it happening) acted dishonorably IMHO, even though he followed the letter of the law. He broke the spirit of the agreement. But, someone who is floundering under water and mails in the keys because they see no other way outor uses the leverage of that to get the bank to keep an agreement it madeis not honor bound to do everything conceivable to pay the mortgage. They already paid an agreed upon fee to insure the banks risk. If it wasn't sufficient, it's the banks mistake. They signed the agreement and are bound by it...both legally and morally. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 12:02 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: To me, it sounds like they are incompetent (although in their defense, all of the loan securitizations have made the situation complicated). But since you want to modify an agreement in your favor, you more or less need to jump through their hoops, even if they are ridiculous. So, you think that violations of TiLA and RESPA are properly described as incompetence? How about civil liability for negligence instead? I can see describing their failure to know the value of the CDSs, etc., gross incompetence - I see that as a market failure that should have been prevented via regulation (or, more correctly, enabled via deregulation). But not following the cornerstone regulations for real estate transactions? That's not just incompetence. Meanwhile, today, I'm taking a break from running an orbital floor sander that I'm using to refinish the floor in one of the rooms of this house that some people say I should walk away from. We continue to make improvements. And yes, by the way, we're having a tough time financially right now. I was laid off from LiveWorld a couple of years ago and I've been building up consulting and developing some new analytics tools, but it's hard. And we have a daughter who moved back in full-time and four grandkids with us half time. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Nick wrote: I see that as a market failure that should have been prevented via regulation (or, more correctly, enabled via deregulation). First, I'm sorry you are stuck in a bad situation. That's sucks. But, I'm curious as to how the deregulation caused the real estate bubble. Now one could argue that it made it worse, since banks packaged sub-prime mortgages, did smoke and mirrors, and sold it as solid investments. But, the problem with the Risk Assessment model was not a regulation problem, the banks just wouldn't believe that national housing prices could fall more than 10% because the odds were, historically, 2%...which the Risk Assessment Model rounded to zero. But, given the fact that California deliberately kept housing prices up by making it near impossible to build affordable houses, and given the tax laws that works like NYC rent control, there were stronger reasons for the housing market to be artificially built up. Add to that low interest rates, a recent Wall Street bubble burst, and money looking for a place to go, property was an obvious candidate for a bubble. It's _always_ a good investment, everybody knows it. The last time average values of property went down appreciably in the US was 90 years ago. So, let's assume that the government was doing its job right, requiring proper reserves for investment banks, and requiring banks to disclose what was in their bundled offerings. That would only take care of the sub-prime part of the mess. But, the overwhelming majority of people presently under water are not sub-prime borrowers. Even with regulations, I went through two local housing slumps, the second of which put me well under water. I escaped, but lots of folks saw their house values go down 25%-50% in the oil bust, when Houston went into a near depressionand the small recession of '91-'92 was enough to drop Conn. prices 25% in a year. So, it happened with regulation, and was bound to happen with California. But, unless you go to a planned economy, I'm not sure how you eliminate the inherent risk of bubbles in a market. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: Nick wrote: I see that as a market failure that should have been prevented via regulation (or, more correctly, enabled via deregulation). First, I'm sorry you are stuck in a bad situation. That's sucks. Thanks for saying so. I do keep the perspective that it is only material stuff and not as important as many other things. But, I'm curious as to how the deregulation caused the real estate bubble. Now one could argue that it made it worse, since banks packaged sub-prime mortgages, did smoke and mirrors, and sold it as solid investments. But, the problem with the Risk Assessment model was not a regulation problem, the banks just wouldn't believe that national housing prices could fall more than 10% because the odds were, historically, 2%...which the Risk Assessment Model rounded to zero. Richard Posner's A Failure of Capitalism explains it far better than I ever could. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism Some of the causes of the depression that Posner cites are the lack of enforceable usury http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usury laws, which would discourage risky loans,[10]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_p._291-9 the FDIC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDIC and central banks taking risks,[11]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._45-46.2C_130-10securitization of mortgages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_loan,[12]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-11 illiquidity and insolvency of the banking system,[13]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-12 the housing bubble,[14]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._77-78-13 blindness to warning signs of a crisis,[15]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._118-138-14 and the preconceptions of ideology.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._134-136.2C_310-316-15 16http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._134-136.2C_310-316-15 ]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Posner.2C_pp._134-136.2C_310-316-15 And I must quote this section, which includes comments from Brad: The *New York Review of Bookshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Review_of_Books * said that it is at best a partial success; it gets some things right and some things wrong, and the items on both sides of the ledger are important. [8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Solow-7 In the *Review*, Nobel-prize-winning economist Robert Solowhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Solow praises the author quite faintly: I have to say that the prose in this book often reads as if it were written, or maybe dictated, in a great hurry. There is some unnecessary repetition, and many paragraphs spend more time than they should on digressions that seem to have occurred to the author in mid-thought. If not exactly chiseled, the prose is nevertheless lively, readable, and plainspoken. The haste may have been justified by the pace of the events he aims to describe and explain. Posner has an extraordinarily sharp mind, and what I take to be a lawyerly skill in argument. But I also have to say that, in some respects, his grasp of economic ideas is precarious. —Robert M. Solow[8]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-Solow-7 Solow's review itself was notable to some degree, according to Brad DeLonghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_DeLong, who critiqued Posner's logic along the way: Yet while Posner insists on saving the appearance of individual rationality, he is willing to jettison the Chicago Schoolhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_School's conclusion that markets are everywhere and always perfect. As Robert Solow observed: If I had written that, it would not be news. From Richard Posner, it is. Abandoning the conclusion of market perfection opens the door to the idea that government needs to properly check, balance, and regulate markets in order to help them function as well as possible. But clinging to the assumption of individual rationality forces Posner’s view of what regulation is appropriate into a very awkward straightjacket.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-DeLong-51 52http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-DeLong-51 ] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Failure_of_Capitalism#cite_note-DeLong-51 Sounds dead on to me. Summary from the publisher: http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674035140 And from a review on Amazon.com: Posner recognizes that competition carries the seeds of capitalism's destruction - bankers, etc. realize that if they don't participate in whatever current fad is popular, they risk becoming unemployed and their firm bought out by others who ride the fad to higher
RE: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
Nick wrote Some of the causes of the depression that Posner cites are...the housing ^^ bubble... I hope my pointing to causes worked out. I won't argue the point, I agree with it. But, he's saying the housing bubble is a cause of the problem, not an effect. Which I think, to first order, is the right place to put it. And, I agree with what Brad said. But, what I did not see stated is that the housing bubble is an effect of the crisis, rather its one of the causes. One real difficulty with government regulations is that they can indeed be straightjackets. Those of us who favor regulated markets, to be fully intellectually honest, need to admit that regulations have often tended to be Byzantine, and have been used as a tool to do dangerous things (like help create the housing bubble in California). But, at the same time, the repeated failure of the free market to handle fat tails, let alone financial black swans shows that some regulation is needed. After the stock market crash of 1929, the margin buying of stocks was limited. Banks have long been required to keep a certain percentage of capital in reserve. The two big financial messes that cost the government hundreds of billions (the SL fiasco and the latest mess) have both involved regulators who didn't want to believe in regulation and violations of this reserve requirement. One simple way to handle this would be to enforce real reserve requirements on all of these banksand allow no fancy footwork to get out of them. I would argue that it's simple, easy to understand, and would have, at the very least, tremendously reduced the damage from the sub-prime crisis. The only way (at least as far as I knowBrad can jump in with better ideas) the Federal government had to reduce the housing bubble (short of dictating housing prices by fiat) would have been to raise interest rates to discourage the buying of houses. In California, it would have been much simpler, the citizens could have stopped the concerted effort to artificially raise housing prices by putting multiple roadblocks in front of development of affordable housing. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
You did a poor job of quoting there, Dan. It would be helpful if you could just quote the directly relevant parts. If I am paying for insurance for the lender in case I don't pay it back, why is it immoral to accept the penalty for not paying it back, knowing that I prepaid insurance for the lender. I answered this in another post, but I'll explain a little bit differently here. I see the mortgage insurance as insurance against the borrower being UNABLE to pay back the money, not just choosing to default. If your insurance agreement makes it clear that it is factoring in the chance that you choose to default, then I see no moral problem. I think that would be hard to pin down in a written contract, though. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 10/20/2010 1:52:45 PM, John Williams (jwilliams4...@gmail.com) wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discussions that go X is good. X is very good. My entire alliance agrees! I agree. I'm gratified Me too. Nice! Count me in. Okie Dokie +1. One at a time please. Xponent Insert GOATSE Here Maru Rob ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
So, you think that violations of TiLA and RESPA are properly described as incompetence? I cannot answer that without a lot more details which are probably impractical for you to provide to me. Meanwhile, today, I'm taking a break from running an orbital floor sander that I'm using to refinish the floor in one of the rooms of this house that some people say I should walk away from. We continue to make improvements. That suggests that you are not going to strategically default. I wonder if there are any other clues that the lender was able to glean that suggested you would not strategically default. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Loan modifications (was Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries)
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:41 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: That suggests that you are not going to strategically default. I wonder if there are any other clues that the lender was able to glean that suggested you would not strategically default. I'm curious strategically defaulting moral in your world-view? How about non-strategically defaulting? What do these terms mean? Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Rceeberger rceeber...@comcast.net wrote: X is very good. My entire alliance agrees! I agree. I'm gratified Me too. Nice! Count me in. Okie Dokie +1. One at a time please. I'm SOL (Snorting Out Loud, one click down from LOL). Possibly out of luck, too, now that I think about that acronym. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:36 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: they give the average starting salary for an EE in the US as 59,646, but in the SF area it is about 74,700. So, that is about a 25% premium. At simplyhired.com they state that the average EE salary in the SF area is $87k/year. That's not bad money, but you can't buy a million dollar house with it. Housing prices are about 6x higher in the Bay area than in the Austin area. Salaries for engineers are 25% higher. It sounds like the SF Bay area is more likely to appeal to single engineers willing to live in a small apartment and spend all their time at work. As compared to Austin, which sounds like it may appeal more to a young married couple just starting a family. I wonder if the SF tech firms are counting on that. I'm not sure how common those jobs really are around here. I suspect that the vast majority of engineering jobs around here (Silicon Valley), especially these days, are for experienced engineers, with salaries from $90K to $150 or so. In other words, I don't think average starting salary is a good proxy for average salary. Glassdoor.com tells me that salaries for EEs in Santa Clara range from $81K to $130K, so the median would be around $110K. But we have more software engineers around here, I think. Glassdoor actually reports the median - $99K. But most of what is shown is over $90K and many over $100K. The media for software engineers in Austin is $75K. They don't seem to have much data on EEs. So, this data suggests that for software engineers, the premium is about 33 percent. For somebody with a family, it is not easy to get by around here on less than $100K, which is surely one reason there are many, many families where both spouses work. And the reason is simple - housing costs, as Dan pointed out. That has eased for people buying now, but some of us are stuck with fat mortgages for houses that are under water, which is very, very frustrating. I could tell the horror story of our efforts at loan modification, but I'll just say that it is one of the stories submitted to the Justice Department by the House California Caucus. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: I could tell the horror story of our efforts at loan modification, but I'll just say that it is one of the stories submitted to the Justice Department by the House California Caucus. If by loan modification, you mean getting someone else to pay back some of the money that you borrowed, you might want to consider that it is likely that it will ultimately be average taxpayers footing the bill, and whether it is fair that taxpayers who did not agree to your mortgage should have to pay some of it off. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:49 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: I could tell the horror story of our efforts at loan modification, but I'll just say that it is one of the stories submitted to the Justice Department by the House California Caucus. If by loan modification, you mean getting someone else to pay back some of the money that you borrowed, you might want to consider that it is likely that it will ultimately be average taxpayers footing the bill, and whether it is fair that taxpayers who did not agree to your mortgage should have to pay some of it off. The average taxpayer elected officials who deregulated the financial industry so much that it became impossible for the average taxpayer to be able to know the actual value of a house. We got the government we deserved and the price of it. None of which really has anything to do directly with the lender's behavior today. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: The average taxpayer elected officials who deregulated the financial industry so much that it became impossible for the average taxpayer to be able to know the actual value of a house. We got the government we deserved and the price of it. So it is someone else's fault that you borrowed money and now do not want to pay it all back yourself? ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Starting Engineer's Salaries
The average taxpayer elected officials who deregulated the financial industry so much that it became impossible for the average taxpayer to be able to know the actual value of a house. We got the government we deserved and the price of it. None of which really has anything to do directly with the lender's behavior today. In hindsight, the housing bubble is obvious. Heck, at the time, I knew there was a housing bubble, and if you look at Brin-l archives, you will see that I wrote it. I understand why deregulation allowed for tremendous leveraging, so that financial institutions no longer held proper reserves. When the panic hit, TARP was used to keep them from going under. One interesting thing about the bailout of the banks is that it is now, mostly, paid back, and that the government earned over 4% per year on the TARP money http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-Street-Bailout-Returns-bloomberg-28797969 06.html?x=0sec=topStoriespos=5asset=ccode= http://tinyurl.com/232xzu2 But, that's a tangent. What I don't understand is why the bubble can be blamed on this. It seems that the tremendous amount of cash looking for a home, and the stupid Risk Assessment Model (developed by solid state physicists) that said that average US housing values can't go down more than 1-2% (because they haven't in about 90 years) led to the bubble. I have owned houses in two local downturns, Houston in '85-'86 and Conn. in '89-'92. In both, there were many folks, including me, under water. In the second downturn, I sold my house for 75% of my purchase price. With the first, I bought an inexpensive house (~45 dollars/square foot) and lost little in the salewhich was more than made up by my sign on bonus at my new company (I wouldn't have moved without it). With the second house, I saw the market as overpriced, but rents for any house big enough for my family were so high that 3 years of the difference between the cost of renting and the cost of buying would have been about as large as what I lost. I also thought that, if I was force to move because of a buyout, the buying company would cover most of my losses, since I knew I was a key employee for any sale. That happened, and the new company covered all but $3000 of my loss. But, without that, I would have lost enough so that bankruptcy was probably the best option. So, I'm finally at my point, if someone buys a house that is clearly overvalued, as houses in the SF area still are, why should someone else pay their loss? Is it any different than putting one's retirement money into a NASDAC index fund in 1999? Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:49 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: The average taxpayer elected officials who deregulated the financial industry so much that it became impossible for the average taxpayer to be able to know the actual value of a house. We got the government we deserved and the price of it. So it is someone else's fault that you borrowed money and now do not want to pay it all back yourself? I didn't say it was someone else's fault. I'm a taxpayer, too. I am also responsible for the bad policies. Please explain why nobody but borrowers should have responsibility for a market failure, which seems to be what you are implying. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't say it was someone else's fault. I'm a taxpayer, too. I am also responsible for the bad policies. So, if it is not someone else's fault, why do you think someone else should pay for money that you borrowed? It sounds like you are trying to blame others in some form of collective guilt, and therefore get out of paying back all of the money that you borrowed. Please explain why nobody but borrowers should have responsibility for a market failure, which seems to be what you are implying. No, you seem to be assuming that borrowers were losers, and the only losers, in the housing bubble. But regardless, it is a simple concept. Honor, honesty, integrity, whatever you want to call it. If a person agrees to something voluntarily, then they should keep their word. I'm pretty sure you voluntarily agreed to borrow money and pay it back. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: In hindsight, the housing bubble is obvious. Heck, at the time, I knew there was a housing bubble, and if you look at Brin-l archives, you will see that I wrote it. It was clear that values were high. That was always clear to me. But HOW high? And for how long would they stay high? Aside from a handful of people who, by intelligence or luck - and we can't know which - profited from the mortgage crisis, the experts who made a business of making loans, failed, badly. When somebody who underwrites real estate loans for a living can't value property, how can an ordinary person be expected to do so? The industry still doesn't really know the values. My mistake was to trust the market and the industry. If the industry had done nothing wrong, then the market would not have over-valued real estate. So, I'm finally at my point, if someone buys a house that is clearly overvalued, as houses in the SF area still are, why should someone else pay their loss? Is it any different than putting one's retirement money into a NASDAC index fund in 1999? Yes, it is quite different. For one thing, housing is not a investment for most people. More to the point, retirement isn't borrowed money. When the stock market has had the equivalent of appraisers (analysts) inflating their valuations to whatever price the buyer and seller agreed on, they have been successfully sued in class actions. Yet that sort of thing was rampant in the mortgage market. Loans for buying stock are highly regulated so that when a bubble breaks, it has to be an enormous drop (compared with the drop in housing values) to leave the borrower under water. There's nothing like 100 percent financing in the stock market, at least not legally. If a stock broker followed the predatory lending practices of mortgage companies, they'd be drowning in litigation because of the way that industry is regulated. And there are huge differences in disclosure regulations... but the mortgage industry couldn't even possibly meet any disclosure requirements because the selling of default swaps and such make it impossible even for them to know the value of the properties on which they made loans. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:34 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: But regardless, it is a simple concept. Honor, honesty, integrity, whatever you want to call it. If a person agrees to something voluntarily, then they should keep their word. I'm pretty sure you voluntarily agreed to borrow money and pay it back. Is that true for people who borrow from loan sharks? Does the lender's behavior matter not? Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: Is that true for people who borrow from loan sharks? Does the lender's behavior matter not? An honorable person would not borrow from anyone, loan shark or otherwise, and then attempt to renege on the pay back agreement. It is really not a difficult concept. An honest person keeps their word. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: It was not an easy decision to seek a loan modification. But the ethics of it are not as black-and-white as you say. It absolutely is that simple. A honest, responsible person does not make an agreement and then refuse to honor it. An honest person admits that they made the agreement of their own free will, a responsible person accepts the consequences of their actions, and an honorable person does everything in their power to keep their word. The question would be black-and-white if the lenders had behaved ethically and honestly, but I think it is obvious to everyone at this point that they did not. In what way did the lender fail to honestly keep the agreement you made with them? Did they attempt to charge a higher interest rate than was agreed to? No. Did they say that you borrowed more than you actually did? No. Did they charge an illegal interest rate? No. Did they send someone to break your legs because you missed a payment? No. Your lender obviously does not fit the legal definition of a loan shark. And it sounds like they are only trying to get the money back that they lent you, and that you voluntarily agreed to pay back to them. The idea that a person has a moral obligation to pay back a loan shark on the loan shark's terms is ridiculous. Only if you consider honesty and keeping your word to be ridiculous. An honorable person would not agree to borrow money from anyone, even a loan shark, if they thought that there was any possibility that they would not be able to honor their agreement and pay back the money that they borrowed. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Could we get this troll--Mr. Williams--out of here please? Foreclosures are currently running at 3 times their normal rates not because there has been an outbreak of cheating and dishonesty on the part of America's borrowers, but because the unemployment rate is not its normal 5% but is instead 10%, and housing prices are not at the prices that borrowers and lenders both expected them to be five years ago but are rather 30% lower. We collectively have a choice. 1. We could refinance a huge chunk of mortgages in America to levels that people--many of them unemployed, most of them with significantly lower earnings prospects now than lenders counted on and expected when they made their loans--will pay. 2. We could put 1/4 of the houses in America through the default-and-foreclosure process, in which homeowners default on their mortgages, banks foreclose, and then everybody moves one house to the right and buys the house next to the one they used to own at a lower price. The second costs us all about $40K extra in waste, legal fees, paperwork, moral hazard, etc. If we do the first, then we all collectively have an extra $1T of real wealth to use on things that actually make us better off rather than on paperwork, etc. Yours, Brad DeLong On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:45 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: It was not an easy decision to seek a loan modification. But the ethics of it are not as black-and-white as you say. It absolutely is that simple. A honest, responsible person does not make an agreement and then refuse to honor it. An honest person admits that they made the agreement of their own free will, a responsible person accepts the consequences of their actions, and an honorable person does everything in their power to keep their word. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Brad DeLong brad.del...@gmail.com wrote: Could we get this troll--Mr. Williams--out of here please? What gave you the idea that this email list is like your blog, where you can censor anyone who does not agree with you, Brad? ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:45 AM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: Only if you consider honesty and keeping your word to be ridiculous. An honorable person would not agree to borrow money from anyone, even a loan shark, if they thought that there was any possibility that they would not be able to honor their agreement and pay back the money that they borrowed. I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Brad DeLong brad.del...@gmail.com wrote: Could we get this troll--Mr. Williams--out of here please? Foreclosures are currently running at 3 times their normal rates not because there has been an outbreak of cheating and dishonesty on the part of America's borrowers, but because the unemployment rate is not its normal 5% but is instead 10%, and housing prices are not at the prices that borrowers and lenders both expected them to be five years ago but are rather 30% lower. We could, but we have a high tolerance for argument other than personal attacks... though with the list being so quiet lately, I'm tempted to revise my standards. Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. Nick ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arn...@gmail.com wrote: Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discussions that go X is good. I agree. Me too. Count me in. +1. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
RE: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discussions that go X is good. I agree. Me too. Count me in. +1. I think that is only part of it. I think that the general trend away from email lists to twitter is a strong factor. For example, the Culture list is a lot quieter than it was 6 years ago, even though the mix of folks hasn't changed that much. 8-9 years ago, there were 100 emails/day here, and most of it wasn't due to clashes between viewpoints as different as yours and the median of this list's viewpoints. But having said that, it is true that the occasional flair up of posts here and on Culture have usually coincided with someone bringing in a non-norm opinion, and numerous people on the list arguing with that one personor that argument spurring side discussions. I also know that this list has made its more conservative, vocal members feel less than welcome after years of feeling welcome. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: I think that is only part of it. I think that the general trend away from email lists to twitter is a strong factor. For example, the Culture list is a lot quieter than it was 6 years ago, even though the mix of folks hasn't changed that much. 8-9 years ago, there were 100 emails/day here, and most of it wasn't due to clashes between viewpoints as different as yours and the median of this list's viewpoints. Is the email list falloff in average traffic strongly correlated with the rise of twitter? To me, twitter does not seem like a close substitute. A closer substitute might be web discussion forums, which have been growing steadily for years. The closest substitute to a book email discussion list that I can think of would be the discussion boards on goodreads.com. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Nick Arnett nick.arnett at gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:52 AM, John Williams jwilliams4200 at gmail.comwrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Nick Arnett nick.arnett at gmail.com wrote: Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. It looks to me like this email list is usually quiet because the vast majority of the members have self-selected so that they have many of the same opinions. You do not get many interesting discussions that go X is good. I agree. Me too. Count me in. +1. I disagree! We should disagree to agree. I think Nick should disagree with this. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On 21/10/2010, at 5:44 AM, Nick Arnett wrote: On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Brad DeLong brad.del...@gmail.com wrote: Could we get this troll--Mr. Williams--out of here please? Foreclosures are currently running at 3 times their normal rates not because there has been an outbreak of cheating and dishonesty on the part of America's borrowers, but because the unemployment rate is not its normal 5% but is instead 10%, and housing prices are not at the prices that borrowers and lenders both expected them to be five years ago but are rather 30% lower. We could, but we have a high tolerance for argument other than personal attacks... though with the list being so quiet lately, I'm tempted to revise my standards. Hard to know if the quiet was due to trolling or some externality. You can leave the troll. It's taken only a few posts for me to realise that John has zero interest in engaging with any point, just repeating his own point over and over, and then using _ad hominem_ like he's doing in response to Brad. Thought I'd see if the previous 3 years demonstration that deregulation completely failed had mellowed him or changed his mind, but it apparently hasn't. But there's of course a solution to trolls - to not read or respond when it becomes clear they're trolling. Easy, and civilised. Charlie. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Charlie Bell char...@culturelist.org wrote: You can leave the troll. It's taken only a few posts for me to realise that John has zero interest in engaging with any point, just repeating his own point over and over, and then using _ad hominem_ like he's doing in response to Brad. Thought I'd see if the previous 3 years demonstration that deregulation completely failed had mellowed him or changed his mind, but it apparently hasn't. I did not ad hominem anyone. The only person I have seen to consistently engage is personal attacks is you. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
John Williams wrote: ... Please explain why nobody but borrowers should have responsibility for a market failure, which seems to be what you are implying. No, you seem to be assuming that borrowers were losers, and the only losers, in the housing bubble. But regardless, it is a simple concept. Honor, honesty, integrity, whatever you want to call it. If a person agrees to something voluntarily, then they should keep their word. John-- Hi. I'm with Keith on this. A mortgage is not an absolute promise to pay back the loan. Rather, the deal is that if the borrower does not keep up payments, the lender can take back the property. I was reading something a few months ago that said richer borrowers were more prepared to default on a mortgage when the property was under water, and that poorer borrowers tried harder to keep up the payments. (Not that I think that richer people are less moral. I bet it's because richer people have more exposure to the business world, as well as access to better legal and financial advice.) ---David ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Starting Engineer's Salaries
Well, I decided to answer my own question. At www1.salary.com they give the average starting salary for an EE in the US as 59,646, but in the SF area it is about 74,700. So, that is about a 25% premium. At simplyhired.com they state that the average EE salary in the SF area is $87k/year. That's not bad money, but you can't buy a million dollar house with it. Housing prices are about 6x higher in the Bay area than in the Austin area. Salaries for engineers are 25% higher. Dan M. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: they give the average starting salary for an EE in the US as 59,646, but in the SF area it is about 74,700. So, that is about a 25% premium. At simplyhired.com they state that the average EE salary in the SF area is $87k/year. That's not bad money, but you can't buy a million dollar house with it. Housing prices are about 6x higher in the Bay area than in the Austin area. Salaries for engineers are 25% higher. It sounds like the SF Bay area is more likely to appeal to single engineers willing to live in a small apartment and spend all their time at work. As compared to Austin, which sounds like it may appeal more to a young married couple just starting a family. I wonder if the SF tech firms are counting on that. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Starting Engineer's Salaries
Don't get me wrong. I like Austin a lot. But if--after her last summer's trip to Austin and dinner at the Salt Lick--I were to propose to my wife that we move from Berkeley to Austin so that we could double the size of our house and live fifteen minutes closer to the center... well, I don't want to do that... Yours, Brad DeLong On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 6:36 PM, John Williams jwilliams4...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Dan Minette danmine...@att.net wrote: they give the average starting salary for an EE in the US as 59,646, but in the SF area it is about 74,700. So, that is about a 25% premium. At simplyhired.com they state that the average EE salary in the SF area is $87k/year. That's not bad money, but you can't buy a million dollar house with it. Housing prices are about 6x higher in the Bay area than in the Austin area. Salaries for engineers are 25% higher. It sounds like the SF Bay area is more likely to appeal to single engineers willing to live in a small apartment and spend all their time at work. As compared to Austin, which sounds like it may appeal more to a young married couple just starting a family. I wonder if the SF tech firms are counting on that. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
