Friday, July 10, 2009
Disembodied Colby Head
Colby wanted to lay on the deck, but he also wanted to watch us eat dinner. This was the result.
Thursday, July 9, 2009
I don't understand the housing market
Everyone has heard about the number of foreclosures and short sales on the market today. Short sales being when the homeowner owes the bank more than what the house is worth. I've had a number of realtors tell me the foreclosures are selling first, especially with the first time home buyer tax credit of $8000. The same realtors also refuse to show short sale homes.
Why? Because the homeowner priced the house at below market value in order to dump his bad investment. So you look at the place, which is usually in good condition since the people are still living there, you make an offer, and the bank refuses it. Why do they refuse it? Because the mortgage is still on the books. The homeowner is still required to pay, unlike a foreclosure situation. The bank is not going to take less money that what is owed them. If you want to buy a short sale home, you have to find out how much the owner owes and offer at least that, guaranteeing you are paying more than market value.
Now here comes the part I don't understand. The government is allowing people to refinance if they owe 1-25% more than what the home is worth. Sounds good, right? To keep people in their homes? Refinancing lowers the interest rate and the payments. Well, and I'm showing my ignorance here, great but the homeowner is still stuck with that bad investment. Is everyone hoping the market artificially inflates itself back to the point that started this problem? I get that the government is trying to keep these short sales from turning into foreclosures, causing families to find a new place to live.
However. If you don't allow them to go into foreclosure, no one can ever buy the property, and the homeowner will never see a return on their bad investment. Which is fine by me. They made a dumb decision and shouldn't be bailed out for it. I'm fine with them refinancing, but eventually the homeowner is going to realize they keep making payments they will never get back. These homeowners will never be able to sell it for more than what they bought. Unless home prices soar again, which I guess is what the government is hoping for. High home prices = expensive, risky mortgages = deja vu = another recession.
So doesn't it make sense to avoid soaring home prices? Am I reading this completely wrong? As for the people with short sales, why are we refinancing a bad investment? Why not work with the banks to allow people to buy those homes? Make the banks cut their losses as well as the homeowners.
As for the first home buyer tax credit, I don't know why we're giving money to people that may not be able to afford a home yet. I know we want people to buy foreclosures and first time home buyers are 40% of the market. But we want them to afford it more to prevent foreclosures. I understand a lot of these houses are in bad shape and the $8000 will help to fix them up. But as a taxpayer, what about the homes that aren't in foreclosure? Can we give the $8000 to anyone that buys a foreclosure instead?
I admit I don't really know that much about finance. But it seems to me the government made some poor choices when it comes to fixing the market crisis.
Why? Because the homeowner priced the house at below market value in order to dump his bad investment. So you look at the place, which is usually in good condition since the people are still living there, you make an offer, and the bank refuses it. Why do they refuse it? Because the mortgage is still on the books. The homeowner is still required to pay, unlike a foreclosure situation. The bank is not going to take less money that what is owed them. If you want to buy a short sale home, you have to find out how much the owner owes and offer at least that, guaranteeing you are paying more than market value.
Now here comes the part I don't understand. The government is allowing people to refinance if they owe 1-25% more than what the home is worth. Sounds good, right? To keep people in their homes? Refinancing lowers the interest rate and the payments. Well, and I'm showing my ignorance here, great but the homeowner is still stuck with that bad investment. Is everyone hoping the market artificially inflates itself back to the point that started this problem? I get that the government is trying to keep these short sales from turning into foreclosures, causing families to find a new place to live.
However. If you don't allow them to go into foreclosure, no one can ever buy the property, and the homeowner will never see a return on their bad investment. Which is fine by me. They made a dumb decision and shouldn't be bailed out for it. I'm fine with them refinancing, but eventually the homeowner is going to realize they keep making payments they will never get back. These homeowners will never be able to sell it for more than what they bought. Unless home prices soar again, which I guess is what the government is hoping for. High home prices = expensive, risky mortgages = deja vu = another recession.
So doesn't it make sense to avoid soaring home prices? Am I reading this completely wrong? As for the people with short sales, why are we refinancing a bad investment? Why not work with the banks to allow people to buy those homes? Make the banks cut their losses as well as the homeowners.
As for the first home buyer tax credit, I don't know why we're giving money to people that may not be able to afford a home yet. I know we want people to buy foreclosures and first time home buyers are 40% of the market. But we want them to afford it more to prevent foreclosures. I understand a lot of these houses are in bad shape and the $8000 will help to fix them up. But as a taxpayer, what about the homes that aren't in foreclosure? Can we give the $8000 to anyone that buys a foreclosure instead?
I admit I don't really know that much about finance. But it seems to me the government made some poor choices when it comes to fixing the market crisis.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Warehouse 13
I gave Warehouse 13 a try last night. It was the pilot show on the renamed channel, SyFy. That's such a stupid name. It doesn't mean anything. As a Department of Defense employee, I'm pretty good at acronyms. SciFi was easy to get. Science Fiction channel. SyFy is the phonetic way to say SciFi, but it doesn't stand for Science Fiction anymore. I'm not sure what's it's supposed to abbreviate.
The premise of Warehouse 13 is similar to the Area 54 myth. All kinds of supernatural artifacts are stored in a warehouse in the desert. Except Warehouse 13 is in the South Dakota Badlands. There is one scientist guy as the keeper and researcher of the artifacts. Two Secret Service agents who go on assignment to collect and tag the artifacts. Apparently these two agents get killed a lot, and that's why there was a job opening. The two protoganists were reassigned against their will to this warehouse in South Dakota. They were selected for their unique skills: the guy has instinctual vibes that tell him when something is wrong, the woman pays attention to all the small details to the point where she is compared with Sherlock Holmes.
The part I liked about the show was the characters' depths. The woman had something terrible happen to her in Denver where her lover was killed and she was given awards. The guy lost his firefighter father when he was just a kid because he didn't speak up about one of his vibes.
Overall, it wasn't bad. My only concern is the possible repetition in plot. Scientist identifies artifact, agents go to get it, agents get in trouble, agents get out of trouble, return home. I don't think this will happen, because the characters were given depths that need exploring, but you never know. I'm going to watch and find out.
The premise of Warehouse 13 is similar to the Area 54 myth. All kinds of supernatural artifacts are stored in a warehouse in the desert. Except Warehouse 13 is in the South Dakota Badlands. There is one scientist guy as the keeper and researcher of the artifacts. Two Secret Service agents who go on assignment to collect and tag the artifacts. Apparently these two agents get killed a lot, and that's why there was a job opening. The two protoganists were reassigned against their will to this warehouse in South Dakota. They were selected for their unique skills: the guy has instinctual vibes that tell him when something is wrong, the woman pays attention to all the small details to the point where she is compared with Sherlock Holmes.
The part I liked about the show was the characters' depths. The woman had something terrible happen to her in Denver where her lover was killed and she was given awards. The guy lost his firefighter father when he was just a kid because he didn't speak up about one of his vibes.
Overall, it wasn't bad. My only concern is the possible repetition in plot. Scientist identifies artifact, agents go to get it, agents get in trouble, agents get out of trouble, return home. I don't think this will happen, because the characters were given depths that need exploring, but you never know. I'm going to watch and find out.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Michael Jackson
With the complete OVERLOAD of internet coverage of Michael Jackson, I'm going to hit you with more. That's right. No blog would be complete without a post about Michael Jackson.
It's a shame the guy died so young. I was sad about it...for a few minutes. I love Thriller, Billie Jean, Man in the Mirror...all of them. Even the Jackson Five. That doesn't mean I'm camping out at Neverland or holding up signs that say "You are not alone". Honestly, I was sadder when Steve Irwin died.
Don't get me wrong, I liked Michael Jackson's work. I respect every artist that is so completely different than everyone else. No one moved like Michael or sang like him. Just as no one moved like Elvis. That's what makes them memorable and great.
However, I live in a world of what-did-you-do-for-me-lately? It was tragic that he died so young, but let's not say the world lost a great artist. The world lost a great artist years ago. It's not like he was coming out with any new stuff. Sure he had those concerts lined up in London, but that was because he needed money.
I respect what Michael did for pop music. I know he wasn't going to do anything more. It was a sad, sad death but so is every other 50 year old that dies from a heart attack.
I'm not sure why a quarter million people are crowded around the Staples center, and millions watching the service online. Yes, he was loved. But if he was this loved when he was alive, why the heck did he flee to Dubai?
I'm just saying enough already. You, nutcase on the television, stop crying. You were five when he sang Thriller. The world lost a great talent years ago. It just happens to be today we bury him.
It's a shame the guy died so young. I was sad about it...for a few minutes. I love Thriller, Billie Jean, Man in the Mirror...all of them. Even the Jackson Five. That doesn't mean I'm camping out at Neverland or holding up signs that say "You are not alone". Honestly, I was sadder when Steve Irwin died.
Don't get me wrong, I liked Michael Jackson's work. I respect every artist that is so completely different than everyone else. No one moved like Michael or sang like him. Just as no one moved like Elvis. That's what makes them memorable and great.
However, I live in a world of what-did-you-do-for-me-lately? It was tragic that he died so young, but let's not say the world lost a great artist. The world lost a great artist years ago. It's not like he was coming out with any new stuff. Sure he had those concerts lined up in London, but that was because he needed money.
I respect what Michael did for pop music. I know he wasn't going to do anything more. It was a sad, sad death but so is every other 50 year old that dies from a heart attack.
I'm not sure why a quarter million people are crowded around the Staples center, and millions watching the service online. Yes, he was loved. But if he was this loved when he was alive, why the heck did he flee to Dubai?
I'm just saying enough already. You, nutcase on the television, stop crying. You were five when he sang Thriller. The world lost a great talent years ago. It just happens to be today we bury him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
