You all sell the house and split the proceeds. Duh.
You get a return on your money because you're risking it. The risk is that if the debt doesn't get repaid, your fraction of the house might not be worth what you paid for the note.
More risk should equal more return. Pawning off the risk on some third party shouldn't even be on the table.
And after the bank sells the house, the debtor still owes the remainder if there is any (and in a declining market, the remainder will be substantial. In a rising market, a rational debtor would sell the house before foreclosure rears it's ugly head).
There are some remedies for the debtor in this case, but they are all unpleasant to the debtor, and the recent spate of bank failures indicates that the banks themselves weren't prepared (i.e. they were not charging the correct fees to compensate the risk and/or were granting loans they shouldn't have been) either.
Indeed. But if the loans were priced properly, they wouldn't have been able to borrow themselves into so much trouble. The problem is that, although many people got greedy and willfully ignorant about the housing market, they're now stuck with huge remaining debts and no assets to cover them. Plus, they still have to find and pay for some kind of housing, so it's not like they can just keep paying the current premium.
I'm not saying there are bad guys that need to be punished. In fact, it's a case of "too-good" guys in some ways. But the situation needs to be resolved in a way that makes it harder to happen again and bailouts is not going to do that.
If we, the taxpayer, are going to bail out the debtors and therefore save the banks, then the banks need to give us something in return.
*except the folks who lied on their applications. I've got no sympathy for that.
Yes, but knowing it going in, they can price the loans accordingly.
The problem is that their customers (borrowers) are buying business-grade money, but they aren't thinking like businesses about the risk, so they are *far* less prepared for a decline in property values coinciding with a drop in income or increase in interest rates.
But it doesn't solve the kind of problem that makes a "foreclosure assistance bill" seem like a good idea.
What they should do is pass a bill that requires new loans to be made under the following term:
For collateral backed loans, turning over the collateral relieves the debtor's obligation.
That forces the banks to assume the risk of risky loans instead of the borrower. Which is right and proper because they'll have a better understanding of what those risks are, anyway. Of course, they'll have to charge more for their money, and that will mean that some people won't be able to buy the house they want (and housing prices will drop somewhat to accommodate *some* of those people), but those are the people that would have found themselves homeless with thousands of dollars of debt after a pretty-likely future foreclosure, anyway.
I think you'll find that it's 1W ERP (effective radiated power), which takes gain into account. Not merely 1W PEP (peak envelope power).
Further, those aren't the limits I was referring to. The FCC maintains tables (which I am too lazy atm to look up) that specify exposure limits at various distances and power levels. (this is based on ERP or PEP depending on the band. Microwave band would be ERP)
Those limits are for health reasons, and understandably they're lower for bystanders than for operators (i.e. you can sit closer to the antenna because you can control whether it's transmitting, but since bystanders do not have control over it, you must keep them further away.) They're also lower than the "full power limit" for the band/license.
And those are the tables I'd hoped you'd consulted. Because I know you don't want to give anyone burns.
Hydrogen is, indeed, the most abundant element in the universe. However it is not quite as abundant on the surface of the earth. And we need it to eat. Fusion for any long-term use eventually eliminates hydrocarbons and boils off the oceans to feed the hungry reactors.
That was a regular fusion plant. Note the horshoe shape of the building designed apparently to evoke some kind of contorted similarity with the toroidal machines which seemed most promising at the time the game was published.
Sadly, it's not nearly as useful *outside* an atmosphere, as it's principle benefit is its high thrust. Electric propulsion can achieve much higher specific impulse if you don't have to worry about launch phase.
And.. they're not even all that great for bulk things. If there is *any* water nearby, it's usually orders of magnitude more efficient to ship goods.. by ship.
Rail: Almost all the limitations of cargo ships (you *can* build new rail lines to places without navigable waters), and also many of the limitations of trucking: frequent starts and stops, must be carefully coordinated all along the rigid routes, summer heat makes for a bumpy ride....
I haven't found Big Rigs to be driving over the speed limit or dangerously on the road. It's the short haul local trucks that seem to be doing the vast majority of reckless driving.
Frankly, I feel for the big rig guys, spending hour upon hour on the road just trying to make a living safely, when they've got the fragile little minnows drafting or cutting into their carefully maintained gap.
And.. with your extra-directional antenna and boosted signal, you fried someone?
I mean.. You did consult the FCC tables for uncontrolled exposure at 2.4 GHz when setting up your little science project, right?
Of course you did. Or they wouldn't have approved your license request to run an experimental, (i.e. modified to no longer be type-accepted), (and ERP>1W ) setup in the 2.4 GHz band.
In most of those RTS's, you can ctrl-click a point perpendicular to the enemy and your soldiers will go there, shooting at the enemy if they come into range. It's not precisely strafing, but it is tactically similar, especially if the game developers made turning an event that takes time.
In Starcraft, for instance, one of the training levels has the soldiers actually insulting you for not using this feature. "I don't think you know what you're doin"
You could do this on earth, too. Just put them in an neutral-pressure underwater habitat about 45 ft. deep. Shallow enough for deliveries to go smoothly, but deep enough that residents would have to go through *hours* of decompression before surfacing.
And.. I guess anything goes in international water?
I suppose you could argue that C-3PO did some bumbling, but it was pretty quick and typically involved disassembly on his part rather than just getting hit on the noggin and mugging the camera.
And anyway, goldenrod was only even there to give a exposition for the mute clown*, R-2D2. *almost harlequin, if you read too much into it (you can map almost anything onto commedia dell'arte if you're not careful)
I think you're right though. In the prime-three, he polished some rocks and got diamonds. In the "first" three, he went looking for diamonds and found glass.
When they weren't going to support it at all (and considering their counter-offfer, OOXML) they were acting pretty scummily. Scummily enough to be obviously scummy. Slashdotters rejoiced at their failure because it would be an obvious one.
Now that they seem like they will support it, cynical slashdotters, questioning MS's motives for such things (and burned by MS's treatment of Java), wonder what evil plans MS has up their sleeves here.
Only time will tell if their cynicism is correct. Based on past experience, though, it is certainly justified.
Ah.. I read that as "moderate yet progressive presidents tend to be the most effective and popular in the long run."
I'd still take issue with that, but I'd have less footing. Certainly, progressive policies have been quite popular. On the effectiveness front, only the TVA comes to mind as a progressive policy that's actually been successful. Terribly, frighteningly, wildly successful. And that's what the President who started it thought.
But I guess that depends on what you're claiming the policies were effective at.
not really. You wouldn't put a fission plant in the cars. Too many moving parts, and you'd need to train mechanics as nuclear engineers. Not very practical.
What you might do, though, is stick a 5 kWe RTG in the back. After an accident, the very robust ceramic pellets could be collected and re-used in the unlikely chance the rest of the structure is breached.
As an added benefit, when you arrive at home, you'd plug your house into your car, since radioisotope decay doesn't stop when the car stops, so you might as well use that energy.
Slashdot Mirror
You all sell the house and split the proceeds. Duh.
You get a return on your money because you're risking it. The risk is that if the debt doesn't get repaid, your fraction of the house might not be worth what you paid for the note.
More risk should equal more return. Pawning off the risk on some third party shouldn't even be on the table.
And after the bank sells the house, the debtor still owes the remainder if there is any (and in a declining market, the remainder will be substantial. In a rising market, a rational debtor would sell the house before foreclosure rears it's ugly head).
There are some remedies for the debtor in this case, but they are all unpleasant to the debtor, and the recent spate of bank failures indicates that the banks themselves weren't prepared (i.e. they were not charging the correct fees to compensate the risk and/or were granting loans they shouldn't have been) either.
Indeed. But if the loans were priced properly, they wouldn't have been able to borrow themselves into so much trouble. The problem is that, although many people got greedy and willfully ignorant about the housing market, they're now stuck with huge remaining debts and no assets to cover them. Plus, they still have to find and pay for some kind of housing, so it's not like they can just keep paying the current premium.
I'm not saying there are bad guys that need to be punished. In fact, it's a case of "too-good" guys in some ways. But the situation needs to be resolved in a way that makes it harder to happen again and bailouts is not going to do that.
If we, the taxpayer, are going to bail out the debtors and therefore save the banks, then the banks need to give us something in return.
*except the folks who lied on their applications. I've got no sympathy for that.
Yes, but knowing it going in, they can price the loans accordingly.
The problem is that their customers (borrowers) are buying business-grade money, but they aren't thinking like businesses about the risk, so they are *far* less prepared for a decline in property values coinciding with a drop in income or increase in interest rates.
But it doesn't solve the kind of problem that makes a "foreclosure assistance bill" seem like a good idea.
What they should do is pass a bill that requires new loans to be made under the following term:
For collateral backed loans, turning over the collateral relieves the debtor's obligation.
That forces the banks to assume the risk of risky loans instead of the borrower. Which is right and proper because they'll have a better understanding of what those risks are, anyway. Of course, they'll have to charge more for their money, and that will mean that some people won't be able to buy the house they want (and housing prices will drop somewhat to accommodate *some* of those people), but those are the people that would have found themselves homeless with thousands of dollars of debt after a pretty-likely future foreclosure, anyway.
I think you'll find that it's 1W ERP (effective radiated power), which takes gain into account. Not merely 1W PEP (peak envelope power).
Further, those aren't the limits I was referring to. The FCC maintains tables (which I am too lazy atm to look up) that specify exposure limits at various distances and power levels. (this is based on ERP or PEP depending on the band. Microwave band would be ERP)
Those limits are for health reasons, and understandably they're lower for bystanders than for operators (i.e. you can sit closer to the antenna because you can control whether it's transmitting, but since bystanders do not have control over it, you must keep them further away.) They're also lower than the "full power limit" for the band/license.
And those are the tables I'd hoped you'd consulted. Because I know you don't want to give anyone burns.
Hydrogen is, indeed, the most abundant element in the universe. However it is not quite as abundant on the surface of the earth. And we need it to eat. Fusion for any long-term use eventually eliminates hydrocarbons and boils off the oceans to feed the hungry reactors.
That was a regular fusion plant. Note the horshoe shape of the building designed apparently to evoke some kind of contorted similarity with the toroidal machines which seemed most promising at the time the game was published.
Sadly, it's not nearly as useful *outside* an atmosphere, as it's principle benefit is its high thrust. Electric propulsion can achieve much higher specific impulse if you don't have to worry about launch phase.
And.. they're not even all that great for bulk things. If there is *any* water nearby, it's usually orders of magnitude more efficient to ship goods.. by ship.
Rail: Almost all the limitations of cargo ships (you *can* build new rail lines to places without navigable waters), and also many of the limitations of trucking: frequent starts and stops, must be carefully coordinated all along the rigid routes, summer heat makes for a bumpy ride....
I haven't found Big Rigs to be driving over the speed limit or dangerously on the road. It's the short haul local trucks that seem to be doing the vast majority of reckless driving.
Frankly, I feel for the big rig guys, spending hour upon hour on the road just trying to make a living safely, when they've got the fragile little minnows drafting or cutting into their carefully maintained gap.
If it didn't crash into a Milk truck, it isn't news.
If rail is so efficient, how come the price is the same for a rail trip from Boston to DC as it is for a commuter flight for the same trip?
I used to have a $30 SWR meter that did that. No way $500 is anywhere near necessary for a simple line fault test.
And.. with your extra-directional antenna and boosted signal, you fried someone?
I mean.. You did consult the FCC tables for uncontrolled exposure at 2.4 GHz when setting up your little science project, right?
Of course you did. Or they wouldn't have approved your license request to run an experimental, (i.e. modified to no longer be type-accepted), (and ERP>1W ) setup in the 2.4 GHz band.
In most of those RTS's, you can ctrl-click a point perpendicular to the enemy and your soldiers will go there, shooting at the enemy if they come into range. It's not precisely strafing, but it is tactically similar, especially if the game developers made turning an event that takes time.
In Starcraft, for instance, one of the training levels has the soldiers actually insulting you for not using this feature. "I don't think you know what you're doin"
You could do this on earth, too. Just put them in an neutral-pressure underwater habitat about 45 ft. deep. Shallow enough for deliveries to go smoothly, but deep enough that residents would have to go through *hours* of decompression before surfacing.
And.. I guess anything goes in international water?
Well.. perhaps because the robots didn't *bumble*
I suppose you could argue that C-3PO did some bumbling, but it was pretty quick and typically involved disassembly on his part rather than just getting hit on the noggin and mugging the camera.
And anyway, goldenrod was only even there to give a exposition for the mute clown*, R-2D2. *almost harlequin, if you read too much into it (you can map almost anything onto commedia dell'arte if you're not careful)
I think you're right though. In the prime-three, he polished some rocks and got diamonds. In the "first" three, he went looking for diamonds and found glass.
When they weren't going to support it at all (and considering their counter-offfer, OOXML) they were acting pretty scummily. Scummily enough to be obviously scummy. Slashdotters rejoiced at their failure because it would be an obvious one.
Now that they seem like they will support it, cynical slashdotters, questioning MS's motives for such things (and burned by MS's treatment of Java), wonder what evil plans MS has up their sleeves here.
Only time will tell if their cynicism is correct. Based on past experience, though, it is certainly justified.
Huh? The movie itself gave away the ending in the first ten minutes.
People were arrested.. for wearing anti-bush T-shirts.. in the fenced-off protest area.. of the Democratic National Convention?
"Perhaps they thought Orwell was writing an instruction manual?"
People thought Machiavelli was writhing an instruction manual, too.
In a sense, they both were.
Ah.. I read that as "moderate yet progressive presidents tend to be the most effective and popular in the long run."
I'd still take issue with that, but I'd have less footing. Certainly, progressive policies have been quite popular. On the effectiveness front, only the TVA comes to mind as a progressive policy that's actually been successful. Terribly, frighteningly, wildly successful. And that's what the President who started it thought.
But I guess that depends on what you're claiming the policies were effective at.
Plant placement: only goes where there is wind, which may or may not be near the people that actually want to use the energy
Plant construction: not every design is actually energy-positive over the expected lifetime
Variability of wind even in windy areas
Energy transport and storage to non-windy areas/times (if you want to go more than 10% wind)
Kennedys: don't want their "view" spoiled. Unfortunately, Joe was both prolific and very wealthy.
Just to name a few.
not really. You wouldn't put a fission plant in the cars. Too many moving parts, and you'd need to train mechanics as nuclear engineers. Not very practical.
What you might do, though, is stick a 5 kWe RTG in the back. After an accident, the very robust ceramic pellets could be collected and re-used in the unlikely chance the rest of the structure is breached.
As an added benefit, when you arrive at home, you'd plug your house into your car, since radioisotope decay doesn't stop when the car stops, so you might as well use that energy.