Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

fintail

It's definitely different. It's not just jobs, it is increasing population combined with job issues. There will still be huge amounts of good jobs, but they will be both more expensive to quality for, and competitive to obtain.

Not everyone can have a parent - bankrolled education, down payment, etc.

driver100 said:

I really think this is different. computers and even medical procedures will be done by robots. And not too many employers are offering benefits or pension plans.

I think this time real jobs are disappearing.

fintail

Yup, and much of it obtained in ways that would be illegal if practiced here. Just drive around certain local areas to see it in action. Give us your tired, your poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, how that changed. These purchasers need to be taxed heavily, and the proceeds used to improve infrastructure.

isellhondas said:

Fintail as I'm sure are aware a lot of this money is coming from overseas as family members write fat checks!

fintail

I wonder how many of those purchases are standard mortgages, and not just imported black money. Cash purchases don't get hit by bubbles as hard - no mortgage to pay. It may be a bubble, but different from the dumb 2006 USA bubble.

driver100 said:

We have had bubbles before...but, now there is a new generation who hasn't experienced it yet.

28firefighter

At least in Seattle, the messaging I've been seeing is that is that this current housing boom is supported by actual demand. First is by folks relocating to the Seattle area for jobs and second is by overseas buyers. 

Demand by the former is not going down anytime soon and demand from the latter is different because it is all-cash. 

oldfarmer50

I need someone to explain this to me.

https://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/cto/6091551606.html


Why?

And furthermore, why advertize it 1500 miles away?

Shame?

Mr_Shiftright

This just in:

"According to new information from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, living in some parts of the Bay Area in California consider a salary of $100,000 to be “low income.”

This is for a family of 4.

"Hey, man, the timing belt just broke on my Audi--spare change?"

driver100

2 cases.
1) Home was offered for sale in ritzy area near Toronto for $1.5 million. In the first day they got 12 offers, 7 were from overseas...China, sight unseen, no inspection, sold for $100k over ask.

2) One street in Toronto has 16 houses on the street.....7 have been bought and have sat empty for over a year. Obviously owners are investors and not living in homes that have gone up about 35% to over $1 million in the last year.

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

I need someone to explain this to me.

https://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/cto/6091551606.html


Why?

And furthermore, why advertize it 1500 miles away?

Shame?

Is that a fiberglass copy of a Bentley? Do you put it on top of some other car?
Does look unique and kind of classy.
Sounds like the guy started to build it and got fed up.

You do find some interesting one's OF....

fintail

There should definitely be a regulation against vacant properties, with a penalty involved. Vancouver is on the road to such an idea, I think, but the tax is quite small, not enough to address the issue IMO.

I can't see how countries (both north and south of 49 degrees) that pride themselves on freedom and justice can welcome such money.

driver100 said:

2 cases.
1) Home was offered for sale in ritzy area near Toronto for $1.5 million. In the first day they got 12 offers, 7 were from overseas...China, sight unseen, no inspection, sold for $100k over ask.

2) One street in Toronto has 16 houses on the street.....7 have been bought and have sat empty for over a year. Obviously owners are investors and not living in homes that have gone up about 35% to over $1 million in the last year.

fintail

I suspect FL is the key market for such things

oldfarmer50 said:

I need someone to explain this to me.

https://tampa.craigslist.org/pnl/cto/6091551606.html


Why?

And furthermore, why advertize it 1500 miles away?

Shame?

stickguy

appears to be layered on top of a Sebring.

cdnpinhead

Hey -- it's a world economy.

Ain't life grand?

jwm40517

An old friend who used to be a postmaster in a fairly small town said it was amazing how many International money orders his office sold to owners and employees of Mexican & Chinese restaurants every week for cash to be sent out of the country. USPS is probably the largest money launderer in the country.

jwm40517

These are not people sending money home to families , these are places that just use a cash register for making change.

graphicguy

Hey.....any Chinese folks who want to buy in a nice neighborhood just northwest of Cincinnati, make me an offer. Make me want to move.

sb55

@abacomike gave a review of a BMW X-5 loaner a few days ago. Well, I got a 2017 X-5 loaner last night while my 535d is getting work done. It had 340 miles on it when I got it, so it's basically brand new. $65K sticker in the glove box.
I kind of agree with his assessment. It's a lot "truckier" than I expected. I drive a full size Chevy pickup that's a lot more comfortable than this BMW. I'm sure that the 19" wheels and shorter wheelbase doesn't help with the bounciness.
Also, I live on a dirt road and it rained last night. The X-5 pretty high. Plan ahead disembarking, or good luck getting out without smearing dirt on your pants! I think that it need running boards. Probably an option that this one doesn't have.

driver100

fintail said:

There should definitely be a regulation against vacant properties, with a penalty involved. Vancouver is on the road to such an idea, I think, but the tax is quite small, not enough to address the issue IMO.

I can't see how countries (both north and south of 49 degrees) that pride themselves on freedom and justice can welcome such money.

driver100 said:

2 cases.
1) Home was offered for sale in ritzy area near Toronto for $1.5 million. In the first day they got 12 offers, 7 were from overseas...China, sight unseen, no inspection, sold for $100k over ask.

2) One street in Toronto has 16 houses on the street.....7 have been bought and have sat empty for over a year. Obviously owners are investors and not living in homes that have gone up about 35% to over $1 million in the last year.

"Selling Our Soul". And foreign money likes a safe haven, with "stable" government.

driver100

sb55 said:

@abacomike gave a review of a BMW X-5 loaner a few days ago. Well, I got a 2017 X-5 loaner last night while my 535d is getting work done. It had 340 miles on it when I got it, so it's basically brand new. $65K sticker in the glove box.
I kind of agree with his assessment. It's a lot "truckier" than I expected. I drive a full size Chevy pickup that's a lot more comfortable than this BMW. I'm sure that the 19" wheels and shorter wheelbase doesn't help with the bounciness.
Also, I live on a dirt road and it rained last night. The X-5 pretty high. Plan ahead disembarking, or good luck getting out without smearing dirt on your pants! I think that it need running boards. Probably an option that this one doesn't have.

Prefer to call that ride "firm", not bouncy. I prefer it to the floating softer ride that is not transferring the feel of the road to the driver. I would describe it as the driver knows the road has bumps, but, the bump is softened, compared to trying to hide the bump by making a floaty ride and you lose some of the feel of the road surface.

Getting out of those tall SUVs seems like a lot of work. I would like to know the psychological reasons for someone wanting to buy an X-5.....usually when I see them it is someone buying groceries.

houdini1

driver100 said:

Fifty years ago, a young couple paid $27,000 for a modest home in Don Mills (part of Toronto). That approximately 1,500-square-foot house sold for $2.3 million, more than $1.15 million over the nearly $1.19 list price on Wednesday.

That house would sell for about $150,000. where I live. It might even be condemned because of the way the lawn looks. It would seem that the biggest driver of home values is the availability of land to build new homes.

houdini1

fintail said:

Build upwards (also probably counting a finished basement). Around here, there is no shortage of cliched 3 story mcmodern boxes to best utilize small lot sizes.

qbrozen said:

7400 sq ft on little more than half an acre? Any grass or does it take up the whole lot?

fintail said:

Build upwards (also probably counting a finished basement). Around here, there is no shortage of cliched 3 story mcmodern boxes to best utilize small lot sizes.

qbrozen said:

7400 sq ft on little more than half an acre? Any grass or does it take up the whole lot?

That would leave you about 15,000 sq. feet of lawn to mow. Enough for a zero turn.

houdini1

dino001 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

oldfarmer50 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

Back in the 50s, for every tax dollar you paid out, corporations paid out $1.50.

In 2017, for every tax dollar you pay out, corporations pay out about .25 cents

This puts most governments into deficit, so they borrow, and if your wages don't go up year after year, then you borrow, too.

And who lends everyone the money? Exactly.

Ain't life grand?

But is that because corporate taxes have gone down or because individual taxes have gone up? Statistics can be made to say many things.

Both have gone down on the higher end of the income scale.

If you made $50K a year:

1953--25.2%
2012--17.1%

If you made $500K a year:

1953--60%
2012--30%

If you made $10 million a year:

1953--90%
2012--34%

So the more you make, the larger the better the tax break...this is what we call a "regressive tax" system.

The marginal rates are very deceptive. There were many, many more income income writeoffs in 1953 then today. Essentially nobody paid anywhere near 90 percent and nobody should. That's no longer tax, it's confiscation. BTW, last I checked, 34 percent is still more than 17.1, so no that DOES NOT constitute a regressive tax. I can dream up 150 percent tax, give you a half off and then call it a "regressive tax break for the rich", but you'd still pay 75 percent.

BTW, 34% of 10 million is $3.4M. 17 percent of $50k is $18.5k. One can argue rich guy gets more from the government in terms indirect protection. This may be true, but I think he pays s fair share. We could and may have to ask him for more at some point, when we get seerious about paying off our debt (not happening soon), we but should at least ask nicely and not beat up on him saying he's not paying his fair share.

Yes, very deceptive, especially since about 50% pay no income tax. I look at it like buying in bulk. The guy who spends $3.4M should get a better deal than the guy who spends $8.5K,

houdini1

dino001 said:

driver100 said:

I like your comments Dino. I think growing up where you did taught you a lot....it may have been difficult but you are a much better person for it. The new attitude seems to be "I am entitled to have whatever you have", then we can all be equal.

I call it "what's mine, is mine, what's yours is also mine" mentality.

Reminds me of my old expense acct. days. What was mine was mine, and what was their's was some of mine.

houdini1

abacomike said:

Sometimes, it is very difficult to resist an urge - like buying a new car when it makes no sense at all - or just getting on a plane and take a last minute vacation to an exotic destination like Perth, Australia or the Canary Islands.  Well, this morning, I had to fulfill an urge to get a motorcycle.

So I drove over to the local Harley Davidson dealer here in Ft. Lauderdale and walked into the showroom.  A 1200 Custom caught my eye.  Brought back many memories from the 1980's when I had a Honda 1000 custom.  A "very" young man walked over to me and asked if I needed some assistance as I flipped my right leg over the motorcycle and sat down in the seat - hands on the throttle and clutch.  I asked him if the cycle I was sitting on came in red.  He said it sure did and he said he had one in the shop they just finished putting the finishing touches on.  I told him I had not driven a bike in over 35 years - he said it's like riding a bicycle - you never forget.

He took me in the back to the shop and there it was - faring and saddle bags (metal and plastic).  Even had a stereo radio system that bluetoothed right into the helmet.  Awesome!  He told me to straddle it and take it for a spin.  I did!  A little sloppy changing gears at first and trying to get accustomed to the weight distribution.  The helmet was a bit cumbersome at first.  But I was in heaven after about driving it a couple of miles.

Got back to the dealership and I was anxious to get a price.  He said that the bike I was sitting on with all the options was $16,500+++.  He said it was a rare bike equipped as it was.

After reminiscing the many close calls I had on my 1000 custom coupled with the fact that I was no longer 40 years old with excellent reflexes, I decided I should think more about making this move.  I thanked the young man for his time and his expertise and got into my car.  Ahhhhh, the comforts of a BMW 740i compared to the smells and fumes and lack of protection from the elements in/on the Harley - it didn't take me long to pat myself on the back for not making yet another dumb decision I would quickly regret.

Home now and enjoying the satisfaction of driving a Harley but not buying one.  All in all, not a bad day!!!  

Shoot, you could at least get a moped or electric bike !

dino001

sb55 said:

@abacomike gave a review of a BMW X-5 loaner a few days ago. Well, I got a 2017 X-5 loaner last night while my 535d is getting work done. It had 340 miles on it when I got it, so it's basically brand new. $65K sticker in the glove box.
I kind of agree with his assessment. It's a lot "truckier" than I expected. I drive a full size Chevy pickup that's a lot more comfortable than this BMW. I'm sure that the 19" wheels and shorter wheelbase doesn't help with the bounciness.
Also, I live on a dirt road and it rained last night. The X-5 pretty high. Plan ahead disembarking, or good luck getting out without smearing dirt on your pants! I think that it need running boards. Probably an option that this one doesn't have.

During the factory delivery in Spartanburg, BMW puts everybody into X5 in the afternoon and runs them through a fairly decent short off-road obstacle course, from water trench, to three-wheeled tip-over, to steep hill descent. They tried to instill on people that X5 is a legitimate off-road vehicle. I'm sure those capabilities came at cost of comfort.

fintail

Lack of land definitely is an impact, or a lack of land within reasonable distance of employment centers and amenities. There's plenty of affordable housing in WA, but few want a 3+ hour each way commute.

It also helps to be trendy. People have been running to certain PNW or west coast spots for 30+ years now - Seattle has been booming all of my adult life and even before. People were complaining about Californians when I was a kid. Every other youngster with silly facial hair and a murse (and often a trust fund or allowance well into adulthood) wants to come here. Demand is an issue along with supply, and with the unregulated offshore component, it will likely remain. Prices may not increase as much every year forever. but I can't imagine a Las Vegas/AZ/inland CA/southeast style bubble pop.

That old house in my zipcode could easily also be over 1MM (greenbacks not loonie Monopoly money), even for land value only - esp if a lot is maybe 8000 sq ft or more.

houdini1 said:

That house would sell for about $150,000. where I live. It might even be condemned because of the way the lawn looks. It would seem that the biggest driver of home values is the availability of land to build new homes.

fintail

The 50% number itself is very deceptive, and has huge caveats - but at least it involves someone who eventually had the cojones to release his tax data

houdini1 said:

Yes, very deceptive, especially since about 50% pay no income tax. I look at it like buying in bulk. The guy who spends $3.4M should get a better deal than the guy who spends $8.5K,

fintail

My last rental car in Europe ended up being an X5 (not what I reserved). It was amusingly big for many streets, but I didn't have much problem squeezing it through. It was comfortable compared to most small cars, and the diesel wafted along without effort. Low curbs made parking a breeze, just hop the curb

sb55 said:

@abacomike gave a review of a BMW X-5 loaner a few days ago. Well, I got a 2017 X-5 loaner last night while my 535d is getting work done. It had 340 miles on it when I got it, so it's basically brand new. $65K sticker in the glove box.
I kind of agree with his assessment. It's a lot "truckier" than I expected. I drive a full size Chevy pickup that's a lot more comfortable than this BMW. I'm sure that the 19" wheels and shorter wheelbase doesn't help with the bounciness.
Also, I live on a dirt road and it rained last night. The X-5 pretty high. Plan ahead disembarking, or good luck getting out without smearing dirt on your pants! I think that it need running boards. Probably an option that this one doesn't have.

fintail

I don't know if that's the standard definition of money laundering - in that case, the money is likely being sent home to help low income family members. IMO, anything connected to real estate is the key facilitator of money laundering both here and abroad. There's very little oversight.

jwm40517 said:

An old friend who used to be a postmaster in a fairly small town said it was amazing how many International money orders his office sold to owners and employees of Mexican & Chinese restaurants every week for cash to be sent out of the country. USPS is probably the largest money launderer in the country.

dino001

50 percent number may be deceptive, but if something like 70 percent of the income tax revenue comes from top 10 percent earners and top 1 percent pays 38 percent of the revenue. One interesting thing is, even though their marginal rate is high, their effective rate is quite a bit lower, but still almost twice rate of the bottom 50% (27% vs 14%, respectively). BTW, bottom 50% of people pay only 3 percent of the revenue. That's of course, one type of tax. There are others. Other taxes are different - FICA (Soc Sec and Med), you'll see effective rate going down - but in theory, it's not a tax, it's "insurance". Sales taxes, or property taxes are paid by the poor, too - but I'll also venture to say chances are the rich people pay more, as they consume more. So, it's not fair to say 50 percent don't pay anything, but it is fair to say the contribution from those 50 percent is nothing in comparison to the top 5 or 1 percent.

As I already said, what irks me the most is the class warfare language blasting those people that somehow they don't pay their fair share. We should thank them for paying as much as they are. Again, in need we MIGHT ask them to pay even more - but we should ASK NICELY and show WHY we need the money, e.g. pay down debt, not fund another boondoggle.

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2015-update/

fintail

Of course, what percentage of income or wealth are held by those top 10% or top 1%? We've been told trickle down lies for decades, and it aint happening. I remember Romney's rate from 2011, it wasn't especially impressive.

I still don't buy "class warfare". If one wants to analyze socio-economic trends of the past 40 years or so, there is indeed a war taking place, but it might not be the war some might imagine. Those who benefit most from the status quo should pay the most to maintain it, and shouldn't expect to be coddled and kissed to pay it forward. Luckily for that group, the US embraces the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" ideal, so it likely won't go far. Sorry, one (usually lucky) group shouldn't receive a kinder request or a more detailed ask than you or I.

houdini1

I guess I will never understand why people in this country who so devoutly espouse socialism or communism don't just move to a country more in line with their beliefs.

That reminds me of the story of two guys discussing politics and one said he thought they should divide everything in the country up and give everyone an equal share. The other guy said that wouldn't work because soon the smart rich people would own everything again. The first guy said you don't understand, I mean divide it up every Saturday.

dino001

What I find even more fascinating,

fintail said:

Of course, what percentage of income or wealth are held by those top 10% or top 1%? We've been told trickle down lies for decades, and it aint happening. I remember Romney's rate from 2011, it wasn't especially impressive.

I still don't buy "class warfare". If one wants to analyze socio-economic trends of the past 40 years or so, there is indeed a war taking place, but it might not be the war some might imagine. Those who benefit most from the status quo should pay the most to maintain it, and shouldn't expect to be coddled and kissed to pay it forward. Luckily for that group, the US embraces the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" ideal, so it likely won't go far. Sorry, one (usually lucky) group shouldn't receive a kinder request or a more detailed ask than you or I.

Yes, their income percentage in a total is high. Does not mean the rest of us is entitled to simply take it away, just because it somehow violates our sense of justice? I agree that very high income inequality may lead to many problems. I worry about the disparities, I happen to think the bigger problem is executive compensation than say high income of people got rich by inventing something, or starting a company.

But that does not mean we devise the system that confiscates the "excess" just because some guy in Washington (and his electorate) deems some value as "excess". Again - these guys make a lot, but they pay in the system EVEN MORE in all numbers - absolute, rate, percentage. They essentially pay our tab. We (the nation, voters) want more, for whatever reason (some want more free stuff, others want to pay off the debt). We should be going to these guys and say, thanks we appreciate what you put in, we need more, please be generous and pay a bit more. Do we do that? No - we call them thieves, mooches, we blast them for "not paying", contrary to the evidence. That's what upsets me - not the rates themselves.

I happen to think we as nation should start taking our debt seriously and all should pay in, rich and poor. Rich will pay more, just because of simple math. I'm sure if the reason of the extra tax was the debt repayment, there will be many people who would agree to bite the bullet. Not all, obviously, but many. But of course we will wait until the markets force us, not a day less. That's an unfortunate side of republic, or democracy.

houdini1

Changing the subject a little bit, does anyone watch the show, "Little Bigshots"? Great kid show, and it is hosted by the hardest working, most versatile, and best comedian there is, Steve Harvey. My wife said yesterday that he would make a really good car salesman, and I agree. Ford, GM, or Chrysler should hire him as a spokesperson.

roadburner

dino001 said:

What I find even more fascinating,

fintail said:

Of course, what percentage of income or wealth are held by those top 10% or top 1%? We've been told trickle down lies for decades, and it aint happening. I remember Romney's rate from 2011, it wasn't especially impressive.

I still don't buy "class warfare". If one wants to analyze socio-economic trends of the past 40 years or so, there is indeed a war taking place, but it might not be the war some might imagine. Those who benefit most from the status quo should pay the most to maintain it, and shouldn't expect to be coddled and kissed to pay it forward. Luckily for that group, the US embraces the "temporarily embarrassed millionaire" ideal, so it likely won't go far. Sorry, one (usually lucky) group shouldn't receive a kinder request or a more detailed ask than you or I.

Yes, their income percentage in a total is high. Does not mean the rest of us is entitled to simply take it away, just because it somehow violates our sense of justice? I agree that very high income inequality may lead to many problems. I worry about the disparities, I happen to think the bigger problem is executive compensation than say high income of people got rich by inventing something, or starting a company.

But that does not mean we devise the system that confiscates the "excess" just because some guy in Washington (and his electorate) deems some value as "excess". Again - these guys make a lot, but they pay in the system EVEN MORE in all numbers - absolute, rate, percentage. They essentially pay our tab. We (the nation, voters) want more, for whatever reason (some want more free stuff, others want to pay off the debt). We should be going to these guys and say, thanks we appreciate what you put in, we need more, please be generous and pay a bit more. Do we do that? No - we call them thieves, mooches, we blast them for "not paying", contrary to the evidence. That's what upsets me - not the rates themselves.

I happen to think we as nation should start taking our debt seriously and all should pay in, rich and poor. Rich will pay more, just because of simple math. I'm sure if the reason of the extra tax was the debt repayment, there will be many people who would agree to bite the bullet. Not all, obviously, but many. But of course we will wait until the markets force us, not a day less. That's an unfortunate side of republic, or democracy.

I instinctively hold on to my wallet a bit tighter when politicians start talking about everyone paying their "fair share" of taxes. Likewise, I detest politicians and activists telling me what I need or don't need. That is MY choice...

houdini1

Why does any tax cut have to be "revenue neutral"? When taxes are increased that subject never comes up !

thebean

graphicguy said:

Hey.....any Chinese folks who want to buy in a nice neighborhood just northwest of Cincinnati, make me an offer. Make me want to move.

They would, but they hate spaghetti with chili.

Mr_Shiftright

stickguy said:

Job types have been disappearing for centuries as new technology comes along. People love to focus on jobs eliminated, without looking at other job types created that didn't exist before.

Exactly....consider the rise of Uber and all the autonomous car technology being developed. That's going to put about 3.5 million people on the unemployment rolls. No one is preparing us for that either.

driver100

Uber! What about Air B&B, Amazon, etc. Soon we won't need check out people at the grocery stores....a scanner will read all the bar codes in your cart.......that will replace millions. All these office workers at this insurance company will be on the job market....what kind of work are they capable of - and will it pay them the same salary? Sure new jobs are being created, but, most are temporary or very menial.

fintail

Is it being "taken" simply out of justice, or because the funds are needed to keep the ship afloat. I know one side likes to claim it is about justice, but I don't know if they are any more believable than the pity the rich contingent on the other side. Income inequality may lead to problems? Historically, it leads to problems in every instance, and there's a chance it will happen again. This is a significant force behind guillotines and revolutions. Is progressive taxation really confiscation, or simply those who benefit most from the (often devolving) status quo paying the most to maintain it? Some of this sounds too much like Ayn Rand prattle for me. Paying the most because one benefits the most should not entitle one to special recognition. Nobody here has called anyone a thief, but I see no problem with a legitimately progressive tax structure. Trickle down doesn't work, we've tried it multiple times with the same results - it only serves to widen the gap. Sadly, I see this system becoming more of an oligocracy than any kind of republic or democracy.

Heck, if the enforcement community would go after turn signal violations, crosswalk violators, and distracted driving issues, the debt issue could probably be solved right there

dino001 said:

Yes, their income percentage in a total is high. Does not mean the rest of us is entitled to simply take it away, just because it somehow violates our sense of justice? I agree that very high income inequality may lead to many problems. I worry about the disparities, I happen to think the bigger problem is executive compensation than say high income of people got rich by inventing something, or starting a company.


I happen to think we as nation should start taking our debt seriously and all should pay in, rich and poor. Rich will pay more, just because of simple math. I'm sure if the reason of the extra tax was the debt repayment, there will be many people who would agree to bite the bullet. Not all, obviously, but many. But of course we will wait until the markets force us, not a day less. That's an unfortunate side of republic, or democracy.

fintail

It's also a headache of a flight from Shanghai to Ohio - where you can fly from YVR or SEA or LAX to PVG nonstop every day, often for attractive prices.

thebean said:

graphicguy said:

Hey.....any Chinese folks who want to buy in a nice neighborhood just northwest of Cincinnati, make me an offer. Make me want to move.

They would, but they hate spaghetti with chili.

isellhondas

fintail said:

Yup, and much of it obtained in ways that would be illegal if practiced here. Just drive around certain local areas to see it in action. Give us your tired, your poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, how that changed. These purchasers need to be taxed heavily, and the proceeds used to improve infrastructure.

isellhondas said:

Fintail as I'm sure are aware a lot of this money is coming from overseas as family members write fat checks!

Don't get me going!

isellhondas

graphicguy said:

Hey.....any Chinese folks who want to buy in a nice neighborhood just northwest of Cincinnati, make me an offer. Make me want to move.

They wouldn't like it there! No Microsoft, Amazon, Costco, Google etc....

Mr_Shiftright

driver100 said:

Uber! What about Air B&B, Amazon, etc. Soon we won't need check out people at the grocery stores....a scanner will read all the bar codes in your cart.......that will replace millions. All these office workers at this insurance company will be on the job market....what kind of work are they capable of - and will it pay them the same salary? Sure new jobs are being created, but, most are temporary or very menial.

They have a word for economic disruptors like Uber and AirBnB--it's called "the sharing economy"....you get a slightly cheaper room or ride and "they" get no health plan, no pension, no sick leave, no nothin'.

Undercover journalists have worked as Uber drivers to test Uber's claim that you can gross $74,000 a year doing this.

They made about $9 an hour.

andres3

driver100 said:

I really think this is different. When the car came along, people worried about the black smith and the buggy whip maker disappearing. But, the car actually made more jobs, making cars, gas stations, motels, highways, garage repair shops etc.

But, this is a lot of jobs at one time and computers can do most of the work that people were doing. It was true in the past, when jobs disappeared new and better jobs were created. But you don't need many new jobs to send things out from one warehouse (Amazon), but that will kill 100000s of jobs in retail stores. It is happening now.....stores are closing and going bankrupt.

And what are the new replacement jobs really going to be like, unless you are the guy pushing the button in a huge factory you will be waiting tables or be an Uber driver. I understand a lot of legal work will be done by computers and even medical procedures will be done by robots. And not too many employers are offering benefits or pension plans.

I think this time real jobs are disappearing.

Certainly bailing out failed auto companies is an indirect subsidy for tow truck companies and auto repair shops. I feel by the age of 25 I had already contributed at least a lifetime's worth of money to support those two industries. Certainly more than my fair share.

Insurance companies seem to have a tendency to privatize profits and make losses go public. Same with banks. Seems like two industries where everyone overpays themselves until it is no longer sustainable.

Good restaurants always seem to be full in my area.

Mr_Shiftright

If the winning poker player takes too much money out of the game, the game stops.

abacomike

To change the subject for just a few minutes, when I visited my brother back in March, he mentioned to me that he gets a "pedicure" every two weeks. Before responding to his comment, I thought about what a pedicure consists of and what the cost of one would be. I asked him what he pays - I think, IIRC, he said $30.00 + tip. We didn't go into the specifics or details, but I assumed he found the experience worthwhile.

I have had diabetes since I was 23 years old and have taken insulin since then. Eventually, the nerves in the feet cause tremendous discomfort - pins and needles all the time - numbness - and even some pain - especially at night when I am trying to sleep. So, when I entered the mall this morning, I noticed a large "nail spa" type business right off the entrance. I poked my nose in and asked about a pedicure and he said they start at $29.00. I asked, "...start at $29.00? Like how are these priced?" He responded that they go up to $70.00. So I thanked him and was just about to start my walk when I said to myself - why not? What the heck? Just "DO IT!"

So I walked in and I was introduced to Michele who asked me to follow her. I was the only guy in the place except for some of the pedicurists and manicurists who were males. I sat down and she took off my shoes and socks. She asked me to place my feet into the "tub" which was circulating warm water with various soaps and fragrances. One of the major problems I have is that I don't take baths because of the dangers involved in getting in and out of the tub - especially at my age. Thus, I take showers - but getting to my feet to scrub them is very difficult - so my feet and ankles suffer the most from being scoured and properly cleaned. Sorry for digressing, but I wanted to explain why I decided to finally just to this to find out if it was worthwhile.

After 35 minutes and lots of touchy-feely massaging and brushing and cleaning and moisturizing and toe-nail clipping, etc., I was finished. I could not believe the result. My feet and toes felt refreshed (those toes that I could still feel due to the nerve damage from the diabetes) and my skin felt smooth. The pedicure involved heavy cleaning and cleansing of my calf and leg up to the knee joint. I gave her a $10.00 tip and felt great - in fact, I still do.

It was probably the best $40.00 I have spent in many months - maybe even more than that. It sure made a tremendous difference in my walk and the way my feet felt. I do heartily recommend that everyone get a pedicure for the best feeling from the knees down you can get - for $40.00 or so. Thanks for letting me change the subject from housing, taxes and politics.

oldfarmer50

Mr_Shiftright said:

driver100 said:

Uber! What about Air B&B, Amazon, etc. Soon we won't need check out people at the grocery stores....a scanner will read all the bar codes in your cart.......that will replace millions. All these office workers at this insurance company will be on the job market....what kind of work are they capable of - and will it pay them the same salary? Sure new jobs are being created, but, most are temporary or very menial.

They have a word for economic disruptors like Uber and AirBnB--it's called "the sharing economy"....you get a slightly cheaper room or ride and "they" get no health plan, no pension, no sick leave, no nothin'.

Undercover journalists have worked as Uber drivers to test Uber's claim that you can gross $74,000 a year doing this.

They made about $9 an hour.

We're finally getting Uber in upstate NY (evidently the right pay offs were finally made) and I wonder about the fine print in their agreements with drivers.

stickguy

To me, the biggest issue with a new model economy is old model health coverage. A sharing, piece work type of economy would work better with universal healthcare. Really can't have a corpoarate based system with non corporate workers.

Would also greatly enable small, start up, entrepreneurial companies get employees on board!

graphicguy

fintail said:

It's also a headache of a flight from Shanghai to Ohio - where you can fly from YVR or SEA or LAX to PVG nonstop every day, often for attractive prices.

thebean said:

graphicguy said:

Hey.....any Chinese folks who want to buy in a nice neighborhood just northwest of Cincinnati, make me an offer. Make me want to move.

They would, but they hate spaghetti with chili.

Minor details. I'll even make them a deal....3K sq ft for $1.5M.

stickguy

Uber is like a pyramid scheme. They duck drivers in, and by the time they realize the money isn't there and quit, they expect to replace them with fresh patsies.