1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage.
So forget about changing jobs for the next 10 years, because that's how long it will take for housing prices to recover.
And where am I supposed to live during those two years while qualifying for a new house? An apartment? Who's going to rent to someone who welshes on a mortgage? You? I hope so, because every other landlord checks credit, and I don't see them handing out rental agreements to people who dump their mortgages
People owning rental properties have found they can't afford to be as fussy as they used to be, because if they are, then THEY will end up with vacant units that end up being repossessed. The market has changed - and we're only about half-way through the house repossessions - if that.
2. Millions of people like American Idol too, but that doesn't make it a great idea. As Chris Rock says about single parenthood: "Yes, you can do it, but that don't mean it's to be done."
Millions are doing it and reporting less stress, more money for essentials like food and clothing, increased job mobility, and they're able to clear off their other debts while living basically rent-free. They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth.
3. Even if your logic weren't one great big huge nonsequitur, what are all the people who walk away supposed to do for housing and jobs?
They'll be able to take jobs where the work is (and be able to live more comfortably on a lower salary), instead of competing for the same job everyone else is competing for. It opens doors.
Employers aren't suddenly going to look at walk-away people and say, "Oh, these people are doing something good for the economy! Let me ignore my HR department and hire them right away!"
Employers aren't going to look at someone who's qualified and say "don't hire them - they walked away from an under-water mortgage".
4. I shower plenty now, thank you. That was a stupid and mean personal attack from you, and you should be ashamed. Seriously, if you want me to give up my car, you've got to stop coming up with bad ideas and terrible excuses, and start rebuilding the entire infrastructure of this country so that cars simply aren't necessary. I'll help, but I'm not just going to dump my current life and obligations because some would-be Internet Thoreau says I should.
You need to learn some reading comprehension. I never said you didn't shower. Here's, word-for-word, what I wrote - "You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road." The "healthier" was obviously in reference to riding a bike on a daily basis. Duh. The benefits aren't just saving energy.
You're the one who should be ashamed, for lying so brazenly, not me.
There are only two ways to fix the mortgage problem - either everyone walks away, or we get a cram-down mechanism. Nothing else will work. Printing trillions and giving it to the banks isn't working - they're not making loans to people who are under-water (not that I blame them - but they shouldn't have made the original loans either).
The US is just repeating Japan's lost decade. The only difference - and this makes it worse - is that more US debt is held outside the US and has to be rolled over. Think "Chinamerica".
think of how long it takes to boil water to make pasta then instead of dumping the hot water down the drain right after, applying a little heat and boiling the potatoes
I hope you don't cook for other people - that is disgusting. Stay away from anything more complicated than Kraft Dinner, please.
Also, the energy isn't from the potatoes, it's from the zinc. Can't grow zinc.
1. You qualify for a house 2 years after you're discharged. Make the payments for 1 year and you're good.
2. Millions of people are doing it - in fact it's keeping California's economy afloat.
3. Lack of job mobility (because houses are now totally illiquid) is harming the economy. The only way to fix this is for everyone who is underwater to walk away.
4. You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road.
The 200 hit on your credit score is temporary - the extra $200,000 that a homeowner is underwater already has the same effect - they're locked out of the credit market as a bad risk - they have a huge negative worth.
And when you consider that anyone who stops paying their mortgage is going to be living rent-free for almost 2 years, that's a chance to pay down every other bill, get out of debt, and 4 years from now, everything is back where it was, except that they're not upside-down for an additional 5 to 10 years (because there will be no housing recovery this decade).
Studies showed that solar cooking was a flop - for the reasons I cited - almost 40 years ago when they were first introduced. Nothing has changed - days are still too damn hot to cook in the sun.
Simple - the whole of the SRB has to be capable of resisting the pressure of combustion (it's one big combustion chamber) , as opposed to just the smaller combustion chamber and bell housing of liquid fuel rockets.
Seriously, changing jobs in the current U.S. economy and changing houses when one is upside down on the mortgage are nontrivial
It's easy - millions of people are walking away from underwater houses.
As far as the shopping cart idea, that sounds like a great way of radically increasing stopping distance and turning radius--and of slinging canned items all over the road when one hits a decent bump or pothole.
Not at all. The turning radius is unaffected, and it actually improves the front-rear balance on breaking, with less weight transfer to the front wheel. I did it last week.
Move closer to work, or change jobs for one closer to home?
Also, it's easy enough to tie one of those folding shopping carts to the back of your bike, balanced on 2 wheels, and it holds a lot more than 2 cubic feet. And you won't even notice it's back there.
I already did! Read the link. The SRBs are more expensive per flight.
A high-pressure liquid fueled series or parallel burn Booster was projected to cost $7 billion to develop and $100 per pound of payload to operate.
A parallel burn Booster utilizing large solid rocket boosters was projected to cost $5.5 billion to develop and $160 per pound of payload to operate.
While the Booster employing large solid rocket boosters would likely be more expensive to operate, NASA opted to take advantage of huge cost savings up front.
Since costs of ultimate operation could be absorbed throughout the life of the Space Shuttle program, the parallel burn Booster using large solid rocket boosters was selected.
The SRBs were actually worse than projected in the above quote. They could not be re-used "100 to 500x each", they wiped out all the dev. savings with the Challenger explosion and then some... and the SRBs were not up to military spec (single-piece body).
They never got anywhere near $160/lb. - not at over $10,000/kg.
It's nowhere near the complexity of the Shuttle. It's great that they can launch a rocket cheaper than NASA can launch a shuttle...but you're comparing the cost of a garage of a Pinto to that of a Lamborghini.
The shuttle was a series of mistakes. First there were the design compromises necessary for accommodating the defense department's wanting to launch bulkier payloads at high angles to the elliptic, for a large reduction in capacity. Then there was the whole fiasco with costs and turn-around times for each launch because it has to practically be re-built each time. So much for 25 to 60 flight a year.
Evem early in the game, the solid booster system was known to result in a cost increase of 60% per pound into orbit.
One problem with load-shifting and leveling peak demand - eventually EVERY time is "peak demand". This doesn't fix the problem, it just kicks the can down the road a year or two.
It also means your power grid now lacks sufficient extra capacity to cope with a failure, like the loss of a main transmission line.
My drier comes with a timer. Just like about every other device in my house (Coffee maker, dishwasher, washer, etc.)
Ever use it? Even if you did, you'd still have to get up in the middle of the night (off-peak hours) to put it away. Leaving the clothes sitting in the dryer just makes them all wrinkly, so you end up running the dryer a second time for 5 minutes to get the wrinkles out - and this also increases the wear and tear on your clothes (all that lint comes from your clothes).
Washing machines make noise (unbalanced loads, etc). For those of us who are light sleepers, the washing machine going on before we want to be woken up just won't work. Also, off-peak is usually at night - you won't be able to run the dryer at breakfast - that's a peak load time. You have people showering, making breakfast, and businesses starting their day cycle.
Your UPS also wastes current. No UPS is 100% efficient.
You're going to be using it at some point, so you can't take just the base draw as the total draw - otherwise, why have a computer? So the system sitting at home is not always going to be idling.
You're also ignoring the extra cooling costs because of that 150 watt heater. That's an additional 500 btus of load.
Plus, let's face it, when you spend more on a better laptop, you get more than just saving electricity. You get a better screen than your el cheapo laptop, better sound, more storage, faster, more ram, and since you're not connecting to your box at home, lower latency and no "dead spots" or "you can't plug that into our network to access your home computer" - all these things have to be taken into consideration.
It's because they are desperate to give people a reason - any reason - to look at the upcoming chrome-browser-based welfarebooks. Just buy a real laptop - you'll save enough energy over the life of the machine to pay for not having to leave a second computer on all the time.
Slashdot Mirror
1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage.
So forget about changing jobs for the next 10 years, because that's how long it will take for housing prices to recover.
And where am I supposed to live during those two years while qualifying for a new house? An apartment? Who's going to rent to someone who welshes on a mortgage? You? I hope so, because every other landlord checks credit, and I don't see them handing out rental agreements to people who dump their mortgages
People owning rental properties have found they can't afford to be as fussy as they used to be, because if they are, then THEY will end up with vacant units that end up being repossessed. The market has changed - and we're only about half-way through the house repossessions - if that.
2. Millions of people like American Idol too, but that doesn't make it a great idea. As Chris Rock says about single parenthood: "Yes, you can do it, but that don't mean it's to be done."
Millions are doing it and reporting less stress, more money for essentials like food and clothing, increased job mobility, and they're able to clear off their other debts while living basically rent-free. They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth.
3. Even if your logic weren't one great big huge nonsequitur, what are all the people who walk away supposed to do for housing and jobs?
They'll be able to take jobs where the work is (and be able to live more comfortably on a lower salary), instead of competing for the same job everyone else is competing for. It opens doors.
Employers aren't suddenly going to look at walk-away people and say, "Oh, these people are doing something good for the economy! Let me ignore my HR department and hire them right away!"
Employers aren't going to look at someone who's qualified and say "don't hire them - they walked away from an under-water mortgage".
4. I shower plenty now, thank you. That was a stupid and mean personal attack from you, and you should be ashamed. Seriously, if you want me to give up my car, you've got to stop coming up with bad ideas and terrible excuses, and start rebuilding the entire infrastructure of this country so that cars simply aren't necessary. I'll help, but I'm not just going to dump my current life and obligations because some would-be Internet Thoreau says I should.
You need to learn some reading comprehension. I never said you didn't shower. Here's, word-for-word, what I wrote - "You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road." The "healthier" was obviously in reference to riding a bike on a daily basis. Duh. The benefits aren't just saving energy.
You're the one who should be ashamed, for lying so brazenly, not me.
There are only two ways to fix the mortgage problem - either everyone walks away, or we get a cram-down mechanism. Nothing else will work. Printing trillions and giving it to the banks isn't working - they're not making loans to people who are under-water (not that I blame them - but they shouldn't have made the original loans either).
The US is just repeating Japan's lost decade. The only difference - and this makes it worse - is that more US debt is held outside the US and has to be rolled over. Think "Chinamerica".
I hope you don't cook for other people - that is disgusting. Stay away from anything more complicated than Kraft Dinner, please.
Also, the energy isn't from the potatoes, it's from the zinc. Can't grow zinc.
1. You qualify for a house 2 years after you're discharged. Make the payments for 1 year and you're good.
2. Millions of people are doing it - in fact it's keeping California's economy afloat.
3. Lack of job mobility (because houses are now totally illiquid) is harming the economy. The only way to fix this is for everyone who is underwater to walk away.
4. You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road.
But why don't you do the opposite - show a study that shows people use solar power in 110F heat to cook their meals.
It's easy enough to find the failures. People have been pushing them for 50 years ...
Better yet, why don't *you* use one if it's so practical?
The 200 hit on your credit score is temporary - the extra $200,000 that a homeowner is underwater already has the same effect - they're locked out of the credit market as a bad risk - they have a huge negative worth.
And when you consider that anyone who stops paying their mortgage is going to be living rent-free for almost 2 years, that's a chance to pay down every other bill, get out of debt, and 4 years from now, everything is back where it was, except that they're not upside-down for an additional 5 to 10 years (because there will be no housing recovery this decade).
Studies showed that solar cooking was a flop - for the reasons I cited - almost 40 years ago when they were first introduced. Nothing has changed - days are still too damn hot to cook in the sun.
Simple - the whole of the SRB has to be capable of resisting the pressure of combustion (it's one big combustion chamber) , as opposed to just the smaller combustion chamber and bell housing of liquid fuel rockets.
That's also a lot more dead weight.
1. It's a contract - rad it - it provides for doing exactly that. p. 2. I sold a long time ago ...
It's easy - millions of people are walking away from underwater houses.
Not at all. The turning radius is unaffected, and it actually improves the front-rear balance on breaking, with less weight transfer to the front wheel. I did it last week.
Move closer to work, or change jobs for one closer to home?
Also, it's easy enough to tie one of those folding shopping carts to the back of your bike, balanced on 2 wheels, and it holds a lot more than 2 cubic feet. And you won't even notice it's back there.
Depends - do you want fries with that?
News flash: Most 3rd-world countries don't use solar cookers - it's too damn hot to cook in the middle of the day!
And the energy to boil the potato? Far more than the zinc-copper reaction will release.
The SRBs were actually worse than projected in the above quote. They could not be re-used "100 to 500x each", they wiped out all the dev. savings with the Challenger explosion and then some ... and the SRBs were not up to military spec (single-piece body).
They never got anywhere near $160/lb. - not at over $10,000/kg.
The shuttle was a series of mistakes. First there were the design compromises necessary for accommodating the defense department's wanting to launch bulkier payloads at high angles to the elliptic, for a large reduction in capacity. Then there was the whole fiasco with costs and turn-around times for each launch because it has to practically be re-built each time. So much for 25 to 60 flight a year.
Evem early in the game, the solid booster system was known to result in a cost increase of 60% per pound into orbit.
The cheap rate is at night (except in areas where electricity is used to heat in the winter, when off-peak is "anything above -12c" or some such).
I'll stick with doing my clothes during the day and hanging them in the sun to dry (and maybe throwing them in the dryer for a bit to "fluff" them).
Your clothes will last longer, you'll save energy, and you'll be kinder to the environment.
They wanted to be able to fax you a summary of the morning paper (for an extra fee, of course). Nobody bit.
Why would I want to print it out anyway? How many people are going to buy a printer who don't already have a computer?
One problem with load-shifting and leveling peak demand - eventually EVERY time is "peak demand". This doesn't fix the problem, it just kicks the can down the road a year or two.
It also means your power grid now lacks sufficient extra capacity to cope with a failure, like the loss of a main transmission line.
Or you could trade the judge an HP printer for his/her old one ...
Ever use it? Even if you did, you'd still have to get up in the middle of the night (off-peak hours) to put it away. Leaving the clothes sitting in the dryer just makes them all wrinkly, so you end up running the dryer a second time for 5 minutes to get the wrinkles out - and this also increases the wear and tear on your clothes (all that lint comes from your clothes).
Washing machines make noise (unbalanced loads, etc). For those of us who are light sleepers, the washing machine going on before we want to be woken up just won't work. Also, off-peak is usually at night - you won't be able to run the dryer at breakfast - that's a peak load time. You have people showering, making breakfast, and businesses starting their day cycle.
So you put it off for 4 hours, then ... oops, I fell asleep ...
Ever let damp laundry sit overnight?
You end up wasting a LOT more energy when you have to wash it again.
Easier (and cheaper) to keep an eye on the weather and do most of your laundry on sunny days.
They did not "originally show up". Get your facts straight.
Your UPS also wastes current. No UPS is 100% efficient.
You're going to be using it at some point, so you can't take just the base draw as the total draw - otherwise, why have a computer? So the system sitting at home is not always going to be idling.
You're also ignoring the extra cooling costs because of that 150 watt heater. That's an additional 500 btus of load.
Plus, let's face it, when you spend more on a better laptop, you get more than just saving electricity. You get a better screen than your el cheapo laptop, better sound, more storage, faster, more ram, and since you're not connecting to your box at home, lower latency and no "dead spots" or "you can't plug that into our network to access your home computer" - all these things have to be taken into consideration.
It's because they are desperate to give people a reason - any reason - to look at the upcoming chrome-browser-based welfarebooks. Just buy a real laptop - you'll save enough energy over the life of the machine to pay for not having to leave a second computer on all the time.
"Oh, but I can access my data!"
Use a USB key.