Ugh!!

Make sure to read the first comment at the bottom as well.

From stated article: "The state is going to be left with two options to balance future deficits.  Either raise taxes further or cut spending (more job layoffs).  Both cases do not bode well for housing."

I vote for cut spending 

So now I'm paying for liars to get retroactive discounts and 2% interest rates on their house, while I'm still priced out of the market. Gosh, I sure love America.

My understanding is that they have to show income for the permanent modification which is probably one reason there has only been a 3% rate for permanent mod's on these loans.

 I would say this program is a big joke except the joke is on the American taxpayer and it's not funny at all. DrHB does an excellent job expalining this program and it's worth the read.

Did anyone catch the news article about Hawaii cutting the school year by 17days? That's significant. What if that was to happen here? That would cut a lot of teachers salaries and also put a bigger burden on parents when they have to find childcare.

---

JK_1 wrote: 

My understanding is that they have to show income for the permanent modification which is probably one reason there has only been a 3% rate for permanent mod's on these loans.

---

That's what the article says. However, I'm not dancing a jig because they're "only" getting my tax dollars for nothing during the trial period.

Just kicking that can. Kicking, kicking, kicking....

---

STARCHY wrote:

From stated article: "The state is going to be left with two options to balance future deficits.  Either raise taxes further or cut spending (more job layoffs).  Both cases do not bode well for housing."

 

I vote for cut spending 

---

Are you serious?  How much more spending are we going to cut here?  Where's it going to come from?  Education?  Already gone.  Transportation?  If you want roads, freeways, etc... to fall apart, I guess.  What else do you want to slash so you don't have to pay higher taxes?  This thinking by Californians has ruined the state from its former glory.

Think of it as the premium to live in this state.  After all, you're always arguing that the high prices in "desirable" areas are premiums to live there.  Why not the same mentality for the "desirable" area of the country?

---

Z-W wrote:

---

STARCHY wrote:

From stated article: "The state is going to be left with two options to balance future deficits.  Either raise taxes further or cut spending (more job layoffs).  Both cases do not bode well for housing."

 

I vote for cut spending 

---

Are you serious?  How much more spending are we going to cut here?  Where's it going to come from?  Education?  Already gone.  Transportation?  If you want roads, freeways, etc... to fall apart, I guess.  What else do you want to slash so you don't have to pay higher taxes?  This thinking by Californians has ruined the state from its former glory.

 

Think of it as the premium to live in this state.  After all, you're always arguing that the high prices in "desirable" areas are premiums to live there.  Why not the same mentality for the "desirable" area of the country?

 

---

We have to live within our means, and that is apparently impossible. We try to do to much for too many people. Endless social programs while our civil court system crumbles under the weight of a disfunctional society

But I guess I need to ask, what taxes or tax cuts are you referring to- city, county, state or federal?

But to your point: 

Transportation: I got to tell you the roads I see and feel are 100% better than say Chicago.  I have no problem with them at all. but public transportation? Why does our train system not run to the airport? Or to the sea? Why are so many huge buses driving around empty on off rush hour times?

Education? Maybe we should not have blown $500M (thats half a BILLION) on the two new high schools near downtown? 

What about entitlements and pensions? How many retired civil employees are drawing salaries at 3/4 of their last annual salary? 

And the endless parade of wasteful spending on voter initiatives. 

There is NO END to the spending. It has to stop. 

"Think of it as the premium to live in this state.  After all, you're always arguing that the high prices in "desirable" areas are premiums to live there.  Why not the same mentality for the "desirable" area of the country?" 

 

You got the wrong STARCHY there my friend. High prices exist only because people WANT to live "there" (where ever "there" is) - simple supply and demand. If thats what you mean by a premium then you're right.

 

If you want to raise taxes raise the sales tax to discourage consumption and spending.

Just my two cents