Gas Prices.... Completely Outrageous!!! How Much Are They Where You Are???

[danax6]

Let's not even get started on that one! :lol: But yes... house prices are just ridiculous over here... let's just face it.. everything is bloody expensive over here!House market is the same here, but I have a three-bedroom apartment for which I only pay €325 a month. €204 after deduction of government funding and since I split the rent with my sister, I pay €100 euro a month. :p (That's around $125)

It pays off to share an apartment with a college student...lots of funding. :D

Ofcourse, I live in Bum****, the Netherlands. There's no way you can get an apartment in Amsterdam or The Hague that cheap.

[JazmenFlowers]

I had people from San Francisco staying with me a couple years ago and they told me my house would sell for close to $1M in that market. I was shocked...the difference in markets is astounding.

[sara1998]

OMG! I'm seriously crying here, laughing at this whole thread.... haahah!!! I'm so sorry... everyone is so worked up. I've read through the entire thing and it's hilarious!!!

... anyhow... I'm paying right at $3 a gallon. I have a 15.5 gallon tank, and my Vue averages around 24 mpg. I get about 340 from a tank, and it hardly lasts me a week. I usually pay around $35 to $40 dollars every time I fill up. Not too bad.

[sara1998]

As far as housing is concerned... I remember going to San Fran and a 3 bed, 2 bath ranch, I'm guessing around 1500 square foot, would go for hunderds of thousands, if not over a million. You can buy that here for less than $100,000. Or, if you get a real nice one, it can be around $150,000. I could only imagine what my 4 bed, 2 1/2 bath with 2200 square foot would run there. It's stunning the difference depending on where you live.

[Sarah]

2.79 for regular here. sorry that it's more for some of you people, but it still pisses me off. it's like, one time i'll fill up and it'll be 2.29. then it's 2.49. then out of nowhere, 2.79 or 2.99. there's never any pattern to it really. it's like i just look over and bam, it's 50 cents more.

yesterday, i put in $25 for 3/4 tank (from empty). usually it's $30 to $35 to fill up from empty. sometimes i have to fill up once a week, sometimes i can make it last a week and a half or more.. it just depends on my work schedule and whether i go out of town to party on the weekends.

we should sue their goddamn asses off.

[GODDESS6]

2.79 for regular here. sorry that it's more for some of you people, but it still pisses me off. it's like, one time i'll fill up and it'll be 2.29. then it's 2.49. then out of nowhere, 2.79 or 2.99. there's never any pattern to it really. it's like i just look over and bam, it's 50 cents more.

yesterday, i put in $25 for 3/4 tank (from empty). usually it's $30 to $35 to fill up from empty. sometimes i have to fill up once a week, sometimes i can make it last a week and a half or more.. it just depends on my work schedule and whether i go out of town to party on the weekends.

we should sue their goddamn asses off.

i just paid 3.09 a gallon this weekend, made me friggin' ill~

[sparky]

I paid 3.43 yesterday. Thankfully my work is close these days. Last year at this time I was spending about 160 a week on gas. Granted I get a vehicle allowance on top of my salary, but the price is still high. It bugs me, but I don't think I am entitled to cheap fuel. Most people everywhere else pay much more for it, and if it bugged me more I suppose I'd go buy an ugly little Prius.

Housing prices? HAH. In LA, you can't get **** for under 500. Thankfully I am selling a house right now and the market just took an upswing. I have no idea how people do it. Looking at offers though, I am seeing people who have around 100-200k in the bank, and have salaries between 80-120 a year. That's what it takes here. Life in the big city.:shrug:

I sometimes think about the house I could live in for the value of mine if I were to move to a smaller town in another state. Rediculous. I'd need a staff of 3 to run the place. In Ohio, Indiana, Montana or Iowa, I could live in a mansion. But consider the location. Snow? Forget it. It was 85 here yesterday. Not happening. I'll pay the prices. Well, kind of. I bought this house 8 years ago when it was 1/3 of what it is worth now. I'll just close my eyes and think of equity when I hit traffic.

[skcin]

As far as housing is concerned... I remember going to San Fran and a 3 bed, 2 bath ranch, I'm guessing around 1500 square foot, would go for hunderds of thousands, if not over a million. You can buy that here for less than $100,000. Or, if you get a real nice one, it can be around $150,000. I could only imagine what my 4 bed, 2 1/2 bath with 2200 square foot would run there. It's stunning the difference depending on where you live.

Exactly! I don't know how people can afford to live in Cali if you're a middle class worker. Seriously. My jaw always drops when I watch Flip That House & shows like that, when people are paying literally a million dollars for a small ranch house. I mean, WTF? :shrug:

My house is a Cape style built in 1948, around 1200 square feet. 3 bedrooms, 1&1/2 bath, rec room in basement. 2 car detached garage, covered patio right off the kitchen. Small yard, nice garden. Very close to neighbors (like, 15 feet away, lol.) Good solid neighborhood. It needed a lot of cosmetic work & updating - we bought it for $55,000 6&1/2 years ago. Yes, you read correctly. Anywhere else in the U.S., it would have been somwhere between $150,000 & $500,000.

We've put about $25,000 into it & the way housing is going around my neighborhood lately, I'm very confident we could get around $100,000. Anywhere else, at least $200,000. Buffalo-Niagara region has some of the best & inexpensive housing in the nation. Of course, our property taxes suck - $3200 extra per year for my tiny 40x120 foot lot.


I thought it was odd to own an apartment too, until I went to Bulgaria. Most of my family members live in apartment buildings. They own their flat, they don't rent. It's very different than here.

[sparky]

Anywhere else in the U.S., it would have been somwhere between $150,000 & $500,000.


It would be 650 if it was in my hood.

[skcin]

It would be 650 if it was in my hood.

Wanna help me move it? :cool:

[sara1998]

IIn Ohio, Indiana, Montana or Iowa, I could live in a mansion. But consider the location. Snow? Forget it.

HEY! The location isn't THAT bad! :lol: Yeah, though, seriously, the prices of the mansions here are around a million... starting off. It blows my mind how much ya'll pay.

[sara1998]

Exactly! I don't know how people can afford to live in Cali if you're a middle class worker. Seriously. My jaw always drops when I watch Flip That House & shows like that, when people are paying literally a million dollars for a small ranch house. I mean, WTF? :shrug:

My house is a Cape style built in 1948, around 1200 square feet. 3 bedrooms, 1&1/2 bath, rec room in basement. 2 car detached garage, covered patio right off the kitchen. Small yard, nice garden. Very close to neighbors (like, 15 feet away, lol.) Good solid neighborhood. It needed a lot of cosmetic work & updating - we bought it for $55,000 6&1/2 years ago. Yes, you read correctly. Anywhere else in the U.S., it would have been somwhere between $150,000 & $500,000.

haha! I don't know how they (the middle class) do it out there, either. The cost of living is more expensive out there, too. I would never make it on my salary.

My home was built in 2003. 2200 square foot, 4 bed, 2.5 bath, 2 story, attached 2 car garage, in a subdivision... $137,000. What would that go for in Cali, Sparky???

[The Catdancer]

Gas over here was $ 3.15 yesterday.

As for housing, the prices over here are ridiculous. I live in a mediocre neighbourhood and there's a house for sale up the street for $ 650.000..... I won't pay that kinda money in this hood.

Montana seems to be cheap and beautiful, we might move there.

[sparky]

haha! I don't know how they (the middle class) do it out there, either. The cost of living is more expensive out there, too. I would never make it on my salary.

My home was built in 2003. 2200 square foot, 4 bed, 2.5 bath, 2 story, attached 2 car garage, in a subdivision... $137,000. What would that go for in Cali, Sparky???

Depends on the hood. In the suburbs - like 909 or near Valencia, might be as low as 399-425. That is where most new houses like that are. The city is too built up for new houses, unless some rips something down. But, sometimes someone will toss a new house up like that in an older hood. In some places in the hills, weho, or in mid town you could probably get 750-800 for it.

[bretonbanquet]

Well, Breton said he paid $1.90 at the pump (US dollars) which translates to approx $7.60gal US.....without knowing what he earned in a month or what percentage of his take home gas represented, it really is hard to make a comparison....

I can say that for me, gas represents about one fifth of my take home. mortgage, a little more than one fourth. But I am lucky, I have a little home, in a pretty remote part of the state, so my home cost is not representative of what most californians pay. Gas, however is high throughout the state, and I do a fair bit of commuting, AND, my car is a gas hog.

And, California is generally more expensive than other states (please see my house price comparison chart a few posts back.)

ETA: Obviously, the cost of living in Europe is crazy. I dont see how people manage, really, unless there are programs there for people to take advantage of that help with costs...London is just beyond crazy. I guess there's even a new tax there because of congestion and whatnot, right? you have to pay just to enter London? Good Grief....

What I earn in a month I'll keep to myself, but my finances aren't representative of anything because I drive for a living, and I use LPG in my work vehicle which is much cheaper than ordinary gas. I cover about 70,000 miles a year, fill up every day, and gas is my biggest outgoing, something like $800 a month.

The London congestion charge is £8 ($16) every day, but I am exempt from that because of my LPG vehicle.

I believe London is the most expensive city in the world to live in. If it is not still number one, it is up there.

Of course, I LOVE London :laugh: But, the Cornish coast is dear to me as well as is Cardiff, which I hear is quite affordable.

Cardiff is much cheaper than London, but houses on the Cornish coast are pretty much at London prices.. that's a whole new argument :mad:

[strandinthewind]

. . . Cardiff is much cheaper than London, but houses on the Cornish coast are pretty much at London prices.. that's a whole new argument :mad:

I think I need to haul myself down there and we can redo Tintagel and live there - remember, I get the room in the tower :nod:

Also, I just loved Cardiff. If is considered a good place to live?

[bretonbanquet]

I think I need to haul myself down there and we can redo Tintagel and live there - remember, I get the room in the tower :nod:

Also, I just loved Cardiff. If is considered a good place to live?

Living there would be a fantastic thing.. I just don't know what you'd do for a living :laugh:

Yeah, Cardiff is a great place to live, I think. Very pleasant, not too big, not too small, nice people :) All of Wales is wonderful, but at least you stand a chance of getting a job in Cardiff :rolleyes:

[strandinthewind]

^^^

We drove all over Wales a few years ago. The country side, the people, the feel, everything - just heavenly!

I am a lawyer. So, we may have to do the extended payment plan on the Cornish coast :laugh:

[sara1998]

Depends on the hood. In the suburbs - like 909 or near Valencia, might be as low as 399-425. That is where most new houses like that are. The city is too built up for new houses, unless some rips something down. But, sometimes someone will toss a new house up like that in an older hood. In some places in the hills, weho, or in mid town you could probably get 750-800 for it.
That just blows my mind.:shocked:

[bretonbanquet]

^^^

We drove all over Wales a few years ago. The country side, the people, the feel, everything - just heavenly!

I am a lawyer. So, we may have to do the extended payment plan on the Cornish coast :laugh:

:lol: hahaha

But yes, Wales is tremendous - I could happily live there :nod:

[strandinthewind]

That just blows my mind.:shocked:

Atlanta is similar. I bought my first real house for $205,000 - it sold eight years later for 1.2 million and it sold in less than an hour at an all cash offer. Granted, I had not lived there for a few years and I no longer owned it - can you say DIVORCE :laugh: - - and it had been renovated for about 400K - but still, that is about a 500K gain. I shoulda stayed with the bastard :laugh:

[strandinthewind]

:lol: hahaha

But yes, Wales is tremendous - I could happily live there :nod:

I still maintain the best Thai rest. I have ever been to in my life is in Cardiff -- and I have made an effort to sample MANY :laugh:

[Sarah]

Atlanta is similar. I bought my first real house for $205,000 - it sold eight years later for 1.2 million and it sold in less than an hour at an all cash offer. Granted, I had not lived there for a few years and I no longer owned it - can you say DIVORCE :laugh: - - and it had been renovated for about 400K - but still, that is about a 500K gain. I shoulda stayed with the bastard :laugh:

sounds like you have too much money. you should send me some. :laugh:

i'm not going to buy a house until my s.o. wins the lottery. i require beach-front property.

:wavey:

[strandinthewind]

sounds like you have too much money. you should send me some. :laugh:

i'm not going to buy a house until my s.o. wins the lottery. i require beach-front property.

:wavey:

I got none of that. I bought the hosue, but only because my credit was better. I then sold it to the ex a year or so later and left a few years later. Such is life.

[sara1998]

I got none of that. I bought the hosue, but only because my credit was better. I then sold it to the ex a year or so later and left a few years later. Such is life.

Are you serious? You were married? :shocked:

[Sarah]

I got none of that. I bought the hosue, but only because my credit was better. I then sold it to the ex a year or so later and left a few years later. Such is life.

:( And now I feel like I should buy you a beer.

[sara1998]

:( And now I feel like I should buy you a beer.

You get the beer, I'll find the shot.

[strandinthewind]

We were, of course, not legally married.

In the end - I made my choices and the chips fell as such. I have no regrets.

I will, though, take the booze :cool:

[Sugar]

Seems to me the really egregious thing about gas prices is how the top three oil makers (in the U.S. anyway) are reporting "record profits" quarter after quarter anymore.

And as to the conversation about costs of living around the world, I'm surprised that no one has brought up health care. I'm not going to say that it's not more expensive to live in smaller nations like the UK, but my understanding that some of those taxes are used to pay for health care (I tried to research but didn't get anywhere fast, so if I'm wrong just say so).

When you consider that some American families are paying $500 a month for their healthcare coverage, it levels the field a bit.

[strandinthewind]

^^^

I agree --

and, unless we compare post tax dollars to post tax dollars, any comparison is bogus. In other words, a person can make $100,000 a year, but take home $45,000 a year once they are taxed and necessary things like ins. payments are considered (most peoples' are taken out of their paycheck and could be pre tax dollars) -- then mtg interest is tax deductible here, but perhaps not elsewhere. Anyway, food for thought.

[irishgrl]

haha! I don't know how they (the middle class) do it out there, either. The cost of living is more expensive out there, too. I would never make it on my salary.

My home was built in 2003. 2200 square foot, 4 bed, 2.5 bath, 2 story, attached 2 car garage, in a subdivision... $137,000. What would that go for in Cali, Sparky???
I can vouch for that....when I was living in the Bay Area (while I was going to Law School) I was astounded at what apartment rents were going for! I had section 8 (subsidized housing) so I was only paying $650/mo for a dirtbag 2bdrm apt. the nicer ones were going for $1000/mo easy. and thats RENT!!!

and that was even out in the outskirts of the bay, too! not even in SF...

my little 2bdrm 2bath manufactured home could sell for almost $200k!!! and I am in the mountains, not anywhere special :shrug:

but the commute to Chico kills me. :distress: We've been paying over $3/gal for awhile now. California has the highest gas prices (and the highest overall home values/sticker prices) in the nation. Unfortunately without two incomes, or a profession that pays really well, a lot of people go under if they were stupid enuff to go for that crappy creative financing (I just think adjustable mortgage rates with balloon payments or anything that follows prime is a bad BAD thing.)

Sara, please see the link I posted about the comparison between housing costs in several states...its an eye opener. Your home could fetch a million or more depending on where you live....

ETA: here's the link:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/26/real_estate/costliest_housing_cities_for_middle_managment/index.htm

[irishgrl]

^^^

I agree --

and, unless we compare post tax dollars to post tax dollars, any comparison is bogus. In other words, a person can make $100,000 a year, but take home $45,000 a year once they are taxed and necessary things like ins. payments are considered (most peoples' are taken out of their paycheck and could be pre tax dollars) -- then mtg interest is tax deductible here, but perhaps not elsewhere. Anyway, food for thought.
I actually addressed some of that, I was talking net take home. And health care IS a huge bite out of our budget and car insurance and home insurance and so many other things...agreed.

[irishgrl]

by the way, I did say this awhile back (like close to the beginning lol!) that the real Bahstids in this whole mess are the big oil companies. Like I said, Chevron just posted an 18% PROFIT in the most recent quarter, solely based on prices at the pump. Thats SICKENING. No matter what side of the pond you live on, the Oil Companies are GOUGING us. And thats the REAL story here...IMO...

[MacMan]

^^^
then mtg interest is tax deductible here, but perhaps not elsewhere. Anyway, food for thought.

Mortgage interest isn't tax deductible in Canada, I know that much. Plus isn't it true in the US you can get a loan for a house and only pay the interest as your payments - and nothing towards your principle?

I saw something on the news a few months ago about housing sales and how they are falling in the US, along with forclosures and they were talking about interest rates and how people are buying these huge expensive houses they wouldn't normally be able to afford only because the way the banks are working their mortgages with interest payments only or something like that..

[strandinthewind]

. . . (I just think adjustable mortgage rates with balloon payments or anything that follows prime is a bad BAD thing.) . . . .

It really just depends. Homes across America have tripled and quadrupled or more in price over the last ten or so years and some major markets show no signs of significant slowing down. So, if you bought a house like I did and can sell it eight years later for four time or more than what you paid for it, the 100% financing or balloon pmt financing made you several hundred thousand dollars of post tax money (which you could multiply by about 1.3%) to compare it to pretax dollars (again, the law allows a $250,000 tax exemption in gain per owner occupant every two years) -- The trick now is to buy in an up and coming area and pay below market. Yes, it is still a gamble, but it is a slightly less risky one because as long as you can make the payment, you have a place to live as opposed to losing your cash in the market. And, you can always keep refinancing every three years (most ARMS come in then) until the market gets better and if you cannot afford the .05% (usual) increase in the interest rate. the cost of the gain in the sale in five or so years after that usually will more than compensate for the cost of refinancing, which is deductible.

Real estate is a very wise investment if you know what you are doing.

[MacMan]

by the way, I did say this awhile back (like close to the beginning lol!) that the real Bahstids in this whole mess are the big oil companies. Like I said, Chevron just posted an 18% PROFIT in the most recent quarter, solely based on prices at the pump. Thats SICKENING. No matter what side of the pond you live on, the Oil Companies are GOUGING us. And thats the REAL story here...IMO...

Apparently (and correct me if I'm wrong) if the US adopted the same standards as Europe where vehicles have to get 40-50mpg, the US wouldn't be dependent or need oil from OPEC or in other words Oil from over seas.... And the reason it doesn't change in that direction is because of the influencial lobby groups in bed with the government...

[strandinthewind]

Mortgage interest isn't tax deductible in Canada, I know that much. Plus isn't it true in the US you can get a loan for a house and only pay the interest as your payments - and nothing towards your principle?

I saw something on the news a few months ago about housing sales and how they are falling in the US, along with forclosures and they were talking about interest rates and how people are buying these huge expensive houses they wouldn't normally be able to afford only because the way the banks are working their mortgages with interest payments only or something like that..

The amount of foreclosures is up and some of the major markets are slowing. However, I read somewhere that even with the slowing of the market and the foreclosures (which could be due to a myriad of reasons - remember, the US allows one to discharge almost all their unsecured debt and still keep their house in a bankruptcy if they can still afford the payment) -- the amount of gain in the real estate market is still significant. I think much of the trouble is that people get 100% + loans and never pay them down. It takes time for property to appreciate to cover that excess even in the US market of the last ten years.

[strandinthewind]

Apparently (and correct me if I'm wrong) if the US adopted the same standards as Europe where vehicles have to get 40-50mpg, the US wouldn't be dependent or need oil from OPEC or in other words Oil from over seas.... And the reason it doesn't change in that direction is because of the influencial lobby groups in bed with the government...

I still maintain that although oil companies initially fought the higher MPG - they now embrace it because they see the final drop of oil being mined in the next 30 or so years. Higher MPG = that 30 years becoming 50-60 years, equalling more time they can make money. Clearly, John Galt knows of a better way to power a car and a country. But, oil is the status quo and a highly profitable one. So, why reinvent the wheel when you do not have to. Well, morals aside that is.

[markolas]

You can still find housing in Austin for under $100k, just not in the "hip" parts of town (and you'll be looking at nothing much over 1000 square feet). What they're doing in central/downtown Austin, is taking apartments that were previously going for $500-600 a month (which is reasonable) and turning them into condos and selling them for hundreds of thousands of dollars. In a couple of more years, you probably won't be able to live there at all if you don't make $100k a year or more. It's tough to do now.

Small town living would be great if I were straight and Christian, but seeing as how I'm not, it's not an option.

[irishgrl]

The amount of foreclosures is up and some of the major markets are slowing. However, I read somewhere that even with the slowing of the market and the foreclosures (which could be due to a myriad of reasons - remember, the US allows one to discharge almost all their unsecured debt and still keep their house in a bankruptcy if they can still afford the payment) -- the amount of gain in the real estate market is still significant. I think much of the trouble is that people get 100% + loans and never pay them down. It takes time for property to appreciate to cover that excess even in the US market of the last ten years.
well, the reason the foreclosures are up is because buyers were being offered deceptive financing and they figured they'd be making increasingly more wages to offset the anticipated increase in interest from the ARM. Sadly, jobs are going away or being outsourced or eliminated due to budget cuts, and people are left holding the bag. People in the Bay Area who USED TO make good $$$ either have only one income left to do the work of two or in some cases, no income at all. Its just not realistic. I HATE HATE HATE ARM's. I dont believe in gambling with your HOME. you need to know up front whether or not you can afford something, and if you cant, then WAIT!!

some people cry the blues because they took the bait and then suffered an economic loss or had to pay increasing interest (surprise!) that they signed on the dotted line for, and I say its just criminal what I've heard agents get away with. The weird thing is, people get all feverish when they have a home on the line they are in love with and they indulge in this "oh I know we can make it work, we'll save here and scrimp there, and you're gonna get a raise, and really, how much can the interest rates rise anyway" attitude, and boy are THEY in for a shock.....

[irishgrl]

Apparently (and correct me if I'm wrong) if the US adopted the same standards as Europe where vehicles have to get 40-50mpg, the US wouldn't be dependent or need oil from OPEC or in other words Oil from over seas.... And the reason it doesn't change in that direction is because of the influencial lobby groups in bed with the government...
I hate the big oil and the car industry lobbies. (as well as others LOL!)

ETA: I wish it were MANDATORY to build more cars that ran on something other than oil, whether it be bio fuel or electricity or whatever.....methane, I dont care. We need to find an alternative and make it mandatory and make it NOW.

Global warming is for REAL.

[irishgrl]

remember, the US allows one to discharge almost all their unsecured debt and still keep their house in a bankruptcy if they can still afford the payment)

this is not exactly true by the way. with the new bankruptcy laws in place you may not qualify for a total forgiveness of debt if you make more than your state's median income. you have to take a test first (its on the DOT website) to see if you qualify for the chapter 7 bankruptcy total elimination.

you can thank the Repubs and the credit card companies for that one. Jerks.

[irishgrl]

I still maintain that although oil companies initially fought the higher MPG - they now embrace it because they see the final drop of oil being mined in the next 30 or so years. Higher MPG = that 30 years becoming 50-60 years, equalling more time they can make money. Clearly, John Galt knows of a better way to power a car and a country. But, oil is the status quo and a highly profitable one. So, why reinvent the wheel when you do not have to. Well, morals aside that is.
can I just say, that's bad bad policy? we DO need to re-invent the wheel. we DO.

[strandinthewind]

well, the reason the foreclosures are up is because buyers were being offered deceptive financing and they figured they'd be making increasingly more wages to offset the anticipated increase in interest from the ARM. Sadly, jobs are going away or being outsourced or eliminated due to budget cuts, and people are left holding the bag. People in the Bay Area who USED TO make good $$$ either have only one income left to do the work of two or in some cases, no income at all. Its just not realistic. I HATE HATE HATE ARM's. I dont believe in gambling with your HOME. you need to know up front whether or not you can afford something, and if you cant, then WAIT!!

some people cry the blues because they took the bait and then suffered an economic loss or had to pay increasing interest (surprise!) that they signed on the dotted line for, and I say its just criminal what I've heard agents get away with. The weird thing is, people get all feverish when they have a home on the line they are in love with and they indulge in this "oh I know we can make it work, we'll save here and scrimp there, and you're gonna get a raise, and really, how much can the interest rates rise anyway" attitude, and boy are THEY in for a shock.....


Anyone who argues they did not know up front that their ARM could rise in three or so years is liar - it says so in the documents they sign. In fact, it says so in like five of them and I believe there is a special document explaining it :rolleyes:

As for gambling with your home, you should not. But, not all ARM's are that. If you can aford the initial payment and that initial payment can save $300 a month for three years in an ARM and then after the third year, your pmt goes up $50 a month for the next two or so years, then you have not lost money nor have you gambled :shrug: Rather, you have been a smart investor. Plus, they can always sell the house at that time for a significant gain in the current market and buy a less expensive one if it comes to that.

But, many people cannot see this and they think paying that $300 more a month is the right and smart way to go. If that works for them, then great -- but that comfort zone does not equate to a smart shopper.

Actually, the smartest thing to do is take the ARM and put that extra $300 a month of "free money" (you pay no interest on that money "borrowed" ) on the mortgage -- that way, in three years, you owe about $4,000 less on your mortgage.

[strandinthewind]

can I just say, that's bad bad policy? we DO need to re-invent the wheel. we DO.

No, it is a smart economic means -- at least for now. The proof, they say, is in the pudding.

Note - I do not agree with them and think the person who develops the better fuel source will be the king of the world. But, that will not happen until the oil companies want it to happen, which IMO will not be until the last drop of oil is drained. In other words, they will continue to make huge amounts of money on the status quo - right or wrong. But, that policy certainly works now doesn't it? And, the minute it does not, they will change it.

[irishgrl]

Anyone who argues they did not know up front that their ARM could rise in three or so years is liar - it says so in the documents they sign. In fact, it says so in like five of them and I believe there is a special document explaining it :rolleyes:

As for gambling with your home, you should not. But, not all ARM's are that. If you can aford the initial payment and that initial payment can save $300 a month for three years in an ARM and then after the third year, your pmt goes up $50 a month for the next two or so years, then you have not lost money nor have you gambled :shrug: Rather, you have been a smart investor. Plus, they can always sell the house at that time for a significant gain in the current market and buy a less expensive one if it comes to that.

But, many people cannot see this and they think paying that $300 more a month is the right and smart way to go. If that works for them, then great -- but that comfort zone does not equate to a smart shopper.

Actually, the smartest thing to do is take the ARM and put that extra $300 a month of "free money" (you pay no interest on that money "borrowed" ) on the mortgage -- that way, in three years, you owe about $4,000 less on your mortgage.
actually, the problem out here is, the house payment takes two incomes and many times, people think their wages are going to rise with the interest rates, and sadly that doesnt happen. Thus, the bottom dropping out. Especially with companies cutting costs and outsourcing and eliminating positons and a hiring freeze and just a myriad of things that add up to a really BAD initial decision, betting on the come. (gamblers term for hoping to get lucky in future) It just isnt worth it. Most people dont have that kind of $$$$ to throw away but they THINK they'll be able to do it based on today's circumstances and a belief that there will be automatic raises etc.

Just BAD BAD policy.

[irishgrl]

No, it is a smart economic means -- at least for now. The proof, they say, is in the pudding.

Note - I do not agree with them and think the person who develops the better fuel source will be the king of the world. But, that will not happen until the oil companies want it to happen, which IMO will not be until the last drop of oil is drained. In other words, they will continue to make huge amounts of money on the status quo - right or wrong. But, that policy certainly works now doesn't it? And, the minute it does not, they will change it.
Well, the artic ice is melting 3X faster than anyone thought it would. Global warming is more real than anyone expected. Bad Bad policy to continue putting greenhouse gasses in the air. much smarter to switch now to something more eco-friendly.

PS: by the time everyone realizes that we should have throttled Big Oil, it will be (most likely) too late. Pretty stupid.

[strandinthewind]

well, the reason the foreclosures are up is because buyers were being offered deceptive financing and they figured they'd be making increasingly more wages to offset the anticipated increase in interest from the ARM.

Actually, it's more like the staggering amount of credit card debt in this country :shrug: Again, a $50 to $100 increase in a morgage likely will not cause a foreclosure unless other serious problems are there.

Now - are banks loaning money to non-qualified people? Of course they are. But, many of those people are minorities or people who qualify for some program that mandates they be given the money. I am unsure however what percentage that entails. The mtg. lending rules are, however, pretty strict regarding qualification, though they can be played with by a smart buyer.

Sadly, jobs are going away or being outsourced or eliminated due to budget cuts, and people are left holding the bag. People in the Bay Area who USED TO make good $$$ either have only one income left to do the work of two or in some cases, no income at all. Its just not realistic. I HATE HATE HATE ARM's. I dont believe in gambling with your HOME. you need to know up front whether or not you can afford something, and if you cant, then WAIT!!

In that job loss case, it would make no difference what kind of mortgage you had and, quite frankly, the ARM would be better for you if your income dropped because the monthly payment under that ARM likely would not reach the usually much higher fixed rate payment for 7 or so years :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

Well, the artic ice is melting 3X faster than anyone thought it would. Global warming is more real than anyone expected. Bad Bad policy to continue putting greenhouse gasses in the air. much smarter to switch now to something more eco-friendly.

PS: by the time everyone realizes that we should have throttled Big Oil, it will be (most likely) too late. Pretty stupid.

I am not arguing with you here.

[irishgrl]

Anyone who argues they did not know up front that their ARM could rise in three or so years is liar - it says so in the documents they sign. In fact, it says so in like five of them and I believe there is a special document explaining it :rolleyes:

As for gambling with your home, you should not. But, not all ARM's are that. If you can aford the initial payment and that initial payment can save $300 a month for three years in an ARM and then after the third year, your pmt goes up $50 a month for the next two or so years, then you have not lost money nor have you gambled :shrug: Rather, you have been a smart investor. Plus, they can always sell the house at that time for a significant gain in the current market and buy a less expensive one if it comes to that.

But, many people cannot see this and they think paying that $300 more a month is the right and smart way to go. If that works for them, then great -- but that comfort zone does not equate to a smart shopper.

Actually, the smartest thing to do is take the ARM and put that extra $300 a month of "free money" (you pay no interest on that money "borrowed" ) on the mortgage -- that way, in three years, you owe about $4,000 less on your mortgage.
by the way: your inference that people will save (bank) that extra money that they benefitted from with the ARM is GOOFY! people will always find a way to spend "found" money! oh yeah, Ive always wanted a big screen tv, or I've always wanted to travel, or say, wouldnt it be cool to have a nice backyard patio/bbq set? Nope, sorry, people just dont really look ahead and/or save for a rainy day any more...I mean why should they? they think they can still file bankruptcy :shrug: what fools...

[irishgrl]

Actually, it's more like the staggering amount of credit card debt in this country :shrug: Again, a $50 to $100 increase in a morgage likely will not cause a foreclosure unless other serious problems are there.

Now - are banks loaning money to non-qualified people? Of course they are. But, many of those people are minorities or people who qualify for some program that mandates they be given the money. I am unsure however what percentage that entails. The mtg. lending rules are, however, pretty strict regarding qualification, though they can be played with by a smart buyer.



In that job loss case, it would make no difference what kind of mortgage you had and, quite frankly, the ARM would be better for you if your income dropped because the monthly payment under that ARM likely would not reach the usually much higher fixed rate payment for 7 or so years :shrug:
you're missing the point in the "job case" what Im saying is, people think their future is going to resemble today only better somehow, and in many cases, that just isnt true!! I know that in the Bay Area, particularly in the Silicon Valley, people are becoming unemployed at an amazing rate! and they USED to hold fantastic jobs and could afford dream homes! but no more :shrug:

[strandinthewind]

by the way: your inference that people will save (bank) that extra money that they benefitted from with the ARM is GOOFY! people will always find a way to spend "found" money! oh yeah, Ive always wanted a big screen tv, or I've always wanted to travel, or say, wouldnt it be cool to have a nice backyard patio/bbq set? Nope, sorry, people just dont really look ahead and/or save for a rainy day any more...I mean why should they? they think they can still file bankruptcy :shrug: what fools...

That has nothing to do with their qualification for a mortgage. You implied it was all the evil mtg companies fault. I responded to that. In the instant example, I know lots of people who chose the lower mtg rate and pay extra on that as a way to avoid paying more interest and as a safe haven in case something goes wrong and they could not make the higher fixed rate payment. On edit - but even if they blow the money, it would still take seven or so years for the ARM payment to reach the fixed rate payment.

As for bankruptcy, they can still file it. If they make more than $35,000 or so a year, they ordinarily cannot 100% discharge their unsecured debt in a 7 and will be put into a five year 13 plan, in which they will pay pennies on the dollar in their unsecured debt. Under either scenario, they ordinarily can keep their house (and their car for that matter) if they can show they can pay for it. If they give their house back in a 7 or a 13, FHA will allow them to buy another in about a year if they have income and have been the remaining debt (car, rent, etc. ) on time. So, bankruptcy is a viable option to this day. The govt. just made the 100% discharge in Ch. 7 less available to those making more money.

[strandinthewind]

you're missing the point in the "job case" what Im saying is, people think their future is going to resemble today only better somehow, and in many cases, that just isnt true!! I know that in the Bay Area, particularly in the Silicon Valley, people are becoming unemployed at an amazing rate! and they USED to hold fantastic jobs and could afford dream homes! but no more :shrug:

Thus, my point that it would not matter what mtg they took - they likely would lose their house under both, though the they may be able to hold on to it in the pmt was several hundred dollars less a month in an ARM. But, if they have no way to pay either mtg - they would lose their house. So, how is the ARM a bad choice here :shrug:

[irishgrl]

That has nothing to do with their qualification for a mortgage. You implied it was all the evil mtg companies fault. I responded to that. In the instant example, I know lots of people who chose the lower mtg rate and pay extra on that as a way to avoid paying more interest and as a safe haven in case something goes wrong and they could not make the higher fixed rate payment. On edit - but even if they blow the money, it would still take seven or so years for the ARM payment to reach the fixed rate payment.

As for bankruptcy, they can still file it. If they make more than $35,000 or so a year, they ordinarily cannot 100% discharge their unsecured debt in a 7 and will be put into a five year 13 plan, in which they will pay pennies on the dollar in their unsecured debt. Under either scenario, they ordinarily can keep their house (and their car for that matter) if they can show they can pay for it. If they give their house back in a 7 or a 13, FHA will allow them to buy another in about a year if they have income and have been the remaining debt (car, rent, etc. ) on time. So, bankruptcy is a viable option to this day. The govt. just made the 100% discharge in Ch. 7 less available to those making more money.
oh BOY are you wrong about THAT one (the ch 11 or 13 "pennies on the dollar" spiel)

my best bud did a ch 13, paid 80% of his debt, the trustee made about 50k off of him, and at the end, his credit score is the same as if he had discharged the whole thing. People dont realize that for the most part, they wont qualify for a ch7, and yet, even if they pay their debt, creditors look at you like you DID file ch7. Plus, anyone can come in any time until your debt is discharged and put a lien on your assets. It totally sucks now how the system is set up. I highly recommend people find any other way out of a financial mess than bankruptcy. The chances of people qualifying for a ch7 are pretty slim unless you make squat in the job dept.

[irishgrl]

Thus, my point that it would not matter what mtg they took - they likely would lose their house under both, though the they may be able to hold on to it in the pmt was several hundred dollars less a month in an ARM. But, if they have no way to pay either mtg - they would lose their house. So, how is the ARM a bad choice here :shrug:
my point is, at least in the SF Bay Area, and surrounding comunities, people can only afford homes (because of inflated home prices) WITH 2 incomes and WITH creative financing. The days of a fixed 30yr mortgage (around here) are about gone.

and sadly, when people NEED a home, and they find one they love, they convince themselves that its possible. They find out later (3-5 yrs later) that they were wrong (because in the meantime, Jenny needed braces and Jeff wants to go to a good school, etc)

[sara1998]

I can vouch for that....when I was living in the Bay Area (while I was going to Law School) I was astounded at what apartment rents were going for! I had section 8 (subsidized housing) so I was only paying $650/mo for a dirtbag 2bdrm apt. the nicer ones were going for $1000/mo easy. and thats RENT!!!

and that was even out in the outskirts of the bay, too! not even in SF...

my little 2bdrm 2bath manufactured home could sell for almost $200k!!! and I am in the mountains, not anywhere special :shrug:

but the commute to Chico kills me. :distress: We've been paying over $3/gal for awhile now. California has the highest gas prices (and the highest overall home values/sticker prices) in the nation. Unfortunately without two incomes, or a profession that pays really well, a lot of people go under if they were stupid enuff to go for that crappy creative financing (I just think adjustable mortgage rates with balloon payments or anything that follows prime is a bad BAD thing.)

Sara, please see the link I posted about the comparison between housing costs in several states...its an eye opener. Your home could fetch a million or more depending on where you live....

ETA: here's the link:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/26/real_estate/costliest_housing_cities_for_middle_managment/index.htm

Funny, my home falls into that exact profile. I think that's amazing. I remember going to San Francisco a couple years back, and being astounded by the amount of rent I saw in a apartment window. A 1500 square foot efficiency went for $1500/month!!! That's $600 more then my mortgage a month!!!

[irishgrl]

Funny, my home falls into that exact profile. I think that's amazing. I remember going to San Francisco a couple years back, and being astounded by the amount of rent I saw in a apartment window. A 1500 square foot efficiency went for $1500/month!!! That's $600 more then my mortgage a month!!!
consider yourself lucky my dear :nod:

[sara1998]

consider yourself lucky my dear :nod:

More then you know.... :o

[Sarah]

healthcare. lol. lolol.

i work 2 jobs. 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, some weeks 7. i have no insurance of any sort other than car insurance. what a ****ing joke. and i mean, i have problems. and then people wonder why i'm all bad and buy **** on the street. assholes.

i'm not bitter. in fact, it's easier this way. i just get paid. it's just like.. i'm glad i don't have a kid.. i feel really bad for people scraping to take care of a family the way that i have to scrape to take care of my own idiotic self.

[irishgrl]

healthcare. lol. lolol.

i work 2 jobs. 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, some weeks 7. i have no insurance of any sort other than car insurance. what a ****ing joke. and i mean, i have problems. and then people wonder why i'm all bad and buy **** on the street. assholes.

i'm not bitter. in fact, it's easier this way. i just get paid. it's just like.. i'm glad i don't have a kid.. i feel really bad for people scraping to take care of a family the way that i have to scrape to take care of my own idiotic self.
gosh....what can anyone say? :shrug: Im sorry you have problems...

[strandinthewind]

oh BOY are you wrong about THAT one (the ch 11 or 13 "pennies on the dollar" spiel)

my best bud did a ch 13, paid 80% of his debt, the trustee made about 50k off of him, and at the end, his credit score is the same as if he had discharged the whole thing. People dont realize that for the most part, they wont qualify for a ch7, and yet, even if they pay their debt, creditors look at you like you DID file ch7. Plus, anyone can come in any time until your debt is discharged and put a lien on your assets. It totally sucks now how the system is set up. I highly recommend people find any other way out of a financial mess than bankruptcy. The chances of people qualifying for a ch7 are pretty slim unless you make squat in the job dept.

Ummm -- I did it for a living :shrug:

If he was able to pay 80% of his debt as well as $50,000 to the trustee ($833 a month is not really accurate unless his debt was huge and he still amde a ton of money - - he had no business in a Ch. 13 plan. He likely should never have filed. But, there could be facts untold, etc.

Also, FHA does not look at credit scores for the most part when lending money. Go here for some info. - to wit:

A last option, and perhaps the best one, is an FHA loan. FHA’s approach to bankruptcy allows a borrower to purchase or refinance a home after one year of perfect payments into the plan as long as you have perfect credit outside the plan and have the trustee’s permission. Also, if a borrower has an existing FHA loan, they can streamline-refinance it as long as they have been no more than 60 days late in the last year. In addition, this method actually keeps the bankruptcy in force, preserving the plan’s payment schedule and protection.

http://abiworld.net/crackingthecode/index.php?p=34 Obtaining the Trustee's permission is not that difficult as long as you have the income to support the payment. I know many people who have done this and when they emerge from the Ch. 13 plan, conventional mortgage companies are willing to deal with them, though the FHA loan was at the market rate of someone with good credit. FHA loans are slightly more because the borower has to pay an insurance fee per month of roughly $50, which allows the FHA to loan to people not based solely on the credit score.


See also --

How long after filing bankruptcy will I be able to get a loan to buy a house? Will the interest be "sky high"? What are some of the other credit effects of filing bankruptcy?

The short answer to your question is that you may be able to finance the purchase a home two years after you have gotten your discharge in bankruptcy, but you may qualify as early as one year after filing Chapter 13, or one year after discharge in Chapter 7.

Since a large proportion of home loans depend on FHA or VA loan guarantees, your ability to qualify for those guarantees may determine when you are able to obtain a home loan.

FHA will insure mortgages to individuals who have filed Chapter 7 liquidation bankruptcy two years after the discharge if "the borrower has re-established good credit (or has chosen not to incur new credit obligations), and has demonstrated an ability to manage financial affairs."

To obtain a loan within one year after the discharge, the borrower must show that "the bankruptcy was caused by extenuating circumstances beyond his or her control and has since exhibited an ability to manage financial affairs and the borrower's current situation is such that the events leading to the bankruptcy are not likely to recur."

FHA regulations also specify that a borrower still in a Chapter 13 debt adjustment who has satisfactorily completed one year of plan payments and gets court approval of the transaction. [U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development, Office of Housing, Handbook No.: 4155.1 REV-4 CHG-1, September 28, 1995. Chapter 2-3, E]

VA has similar regulations. The VA handbook for lenders includes provisions that "If the bankruptcy was discharged more than 2 years ago, it may be disregarded."

If the discharge was between 1 and 2 years, the guarantee may still be granted if the applicant or spouse has obtained consumer items on credit subsequent to the bankruptcy and has satisfactorily made the payments over a continued period and the bankruptcy was caused by circumstances beyond the control of the applicant or spouse such as unemployment, prolonged strikes, medical bills not covered by insurance, etc.

VA regulations allow granting of the loan guarantee to a person in a Chapter 13 when the plan payments are finished satisfactorily, or after 12 months payments and the Trustee or the Bankruptcy Judge approves of the new credit. [Veterans Benefits Administration VA Pamphlet 26-7, Change 34, November 13, 1997]

If you obtain home loan financing with a loan guarantee, the loan rate should be based on the guarantee status of the loan. As a result, I would not expect that the rate would be affected by the bankruptcy.

Other effects of bankruptcy on credit are difficult to assess. Credit is extended by individual lenders, and is not generally regulated by law. Lenders do not generally make their criteria public. We do know that there are two factors which are important to creditors in extending credit.

Ability to make payments. Any lender will want to be sure that you have the ability to pay back a loan before extending you credit. The discharge in a bankruptcy should improve your ability to make payments. You will no longer owe the debt that you did when you filed, and you will no longer be subject to judgments, garnishment and other collection activities which would impair your ability to pay back the new loan. In addition, the restriction against you filing a Chapter 7 for 6 years from the filing of your previous case may give the creditor some assurance of their ability to collect new debt.
Credit history. Lenders look at the way you have paid your bills in the past as an indication of how you will pay your bills in the future. A bankruptcy is an adverse rating in this respect, but creditors can also see how your credit was before the circumstances which caused the bankruptcy. If you had a good credit history and paid your bills on time before the bankruptcy, you may find that it is easier to re-establish credit than if you were perpetually behind on your payments and had judgments against you.

http://doney.net/faq_credit.htm

Finally, your statement:

Plus, anyone can come in any time until your debt is discharged and put a lien on your assets.

is wholly incorrect unless the creditor moves for relief from the automatic stay in place immediately after the bankruptcy is filed - also student loans (for the most part) and other things like income tax non payment are exempt for the most part - though they can usually be included for 100% payment in a Ch. 13 plan. But, usually, only mortgage companies can get a motion for relief granted and then only when the homeowner intends to surrender the property in lieu of paying the secured debt.

Here is some general info on the differences between Chpaters 7 and 13.

http://www.totalbankruptcy.com

here is another

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/bankruptcy/chapter_13_bankruptcy.html

to wit:

Chapter 13 Bankruptcy - "Wage Earner Bankruptcy"

By Aaron Larson

Law Offices of Aaron Larson
April, 2005

Contents
Introduction
Is Chapter 13 The Right Choice?
The Automatic Stay
The Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Process
Dismissal of the Petition
Summary

Notice: Due to the complexity of bankruptcy law, and the difficulty of determining which form of bankruptcy will apply to any given situation, most people will benefit from consulting with a qualified bankruptcy lawyer before filing for bankruptcy.

Introduction

In simple terms, a Chapter 13 bankruptcy involves the reorganization of a debtor's financial affairs. The goal is to create a payment plan for the benefit of the creditors, while protecting the debtor from foreclosure, garnishment, levy, or similar consequences.

In order to qualify for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, the debtor must have an income that exceeds the debtor's reasonable living expenses, as it is necessary that the debtor have sufficient means to provide repayment to creditors of past debts. In some cases repayment may be for the full amount of the debt, while in others the debtor may pay off only a small percentage of certain debts - perhaps as little as ten percent. Debtors must also meet with a credit counselor at some point during the six months prior to applying for bankruptcy, and must attend money management classes at their own expense before a final order will be issued by the bankruptcy court.

This form of bankruptcy is commonly referred to as a "wage earner plan".

A Chapter 13 bankruptcy will appear on your credit report for up to ten years.

Is Chapter 13 The Right Choice?

Most debtors will benefit from consulting with a qualified financial professional before considering a Chapter 13 filing, and create a list of obligations which will be subject to repayment under a Chapter 13 plan, and map out a possible budget. Some debtors will realize at that time that they cannot realistically live under that type of budget. Others may discover that they will be better served by trying to resolve their debts with their individual creditors outside of the bankruptcy process, as opposed to going through a formal bankruptcy.

The Chapter 13 bankruptcy tends to be favored by debtors who have fallen behind on secured loan payments, such as mortgages and car loans, as it enables the debtor to keep possession of the property while catching up on payments through a court-approved repayment plan. It may also be preferred by a debtor who has valuable non-exempt property that would be liquidated in the course of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

Some debtors will choose not to file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, as they do not wish to live under the scrutiny of the bankruptcy court which will result from a successful petition. Many debtors lack the discipline to abide by a Chapter 13 repayment plan. Only about 35% of debtors successfully complete their plans. If you do not think that you can live under the plan's budget, you may wish to reconsider a Chapter 13 filing.

Under recent reforms in bankruptcy law, effective in October, 2005, many debtors are disqualified from filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection, and thus will have to file for Chapter 13 protection. If the debtor earns in excess of the state median income, and is able to repay 25% of his or her "nonpriority unsecured debt", the debtor will be ineligible for Chapter 7 protection and must proceed under Chapter 13.

The Automatic Stay

Once a debtor files for bankruptcy, the debtor's estate is protected by the "automatic stay", which bars creditors from trying to collect debts without the permission of the bankruptcy court. This provides immediate protection against foreclosure, repossession of your car, eviction from your apartment, garnishment of your wages or bank accounts, cut off your electricity, or other measures creditors may take to try to recover monies owed.

The Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Process

After filing for Chapter 13 protection, a debtor will propose a repayment plan for any debts and obligations. The proposal will be reviewed by a bankruptcy court. If the plan is approved, the court will appoint a trustee to collect the debtor's payments, to distribute them to creditors, and to supervise the debtor's compliance with the court-approved repayment plan. The debtor will be required to pay the trustee's fee.

During the repayment period, the bankruptcy trustee will have control over the debtor's personal finances, and the debtor must submit any credit-related matters to the trustee for review and approval.

The repayment period typically lasts from three to five years. During this time, the bankruptcy court will not permit the debtor to spend money on anything it deems "nonessential", and the debtor will have to live under a strict, court-imposed budget.

Dismissal of the Petition

Some persons who file for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection simply wish to buy some time in order to prevent a foreclosure, or repossession of a vehicle. If the debtor is able to regain firm financial footing before the bankruptcy is resolved, the debtor may opt to petition for discharge of the bankruptcy petition and then to pay off the arrearages in full. In the alternative, a debtor may use the time to sell certain property, such as a house, prior to foreclosure or repossession, as foreclosure sales often do not result in the recovery of full market value.

Summary

In a "Chapter 13" Bankruptcy:

You will propose a repayment plan for your debts;

If approved by the court, a trustee will be appointed to collect your payments, distribute them to your creditors, and to supervise your compliance with the repayment plan.

You will have to pay the trustee's fee, which can be substantial.

Debtors whose debts exceed certain limits are barred from seeking Chapter 13 bankruptcy. (At the time of this writing, in order to file a "Chapter 13" bankruptcy, you must owe less than $269,250 in noncontingent, liquidated, unsecured debts, and less than $807,750 in noncontingent, liquidated, secured debts. You will most likely be unable to file a "Chapter 13" bankruptcy if you have filed and dismissed a "Chapter 13" petition in the last 180 days, and should discuss any prior filing with your attorney. You should also take care to propose a reasonable budget, as most debtors find themselves unable to comply with the strict enforcement of their "Chapter 13" plans, and end up dropping out of bankruptcy before their plan is completed.

This type of bankruptcy can be particularly useful when a debtor believes that his financial crisis is temporary, and that his income will continue to grow in the future. Corporations and partnerships cannot file a "Chapter 13" bankruptcy.

[strandinthewind]

my point is, at least in the SF Bay Area, and surrounding comunities, people can only afford homes (because of inflated home prices) WITH 2 incomes and WITH creative financing. The days of a fixed 30yr mortgage (around here) are about gone.

and sadly, when people NEED a home, and they find one they love, they convince themselves that its possible. They find out later (3-5 yrs later) that they were wrong (because in the meantime, Jenny needed braces and Jeff wants to go to a good school, etc)

I do not think I was talking about that -- you were talking about the evil finance companies. If someone bites off more than they can chew - who the fool :shrug:

[irishgrl]

I do not think I was talking about that -- you were talking about the evil finance companies. If someone bites off more than they can chew - who the fool :shrug:
yes, granted, but that is the crazy housing market in the Bay Area...people are nutz.

as for your bankruptcy info, Im aware of most of that info, but FHA WAS looking at his credit score and a year after his bankruptcy was discharged there were unexplained bits and pieces that the trustee didnt clean up. And the lending companies and credit companies are treating him as if he had discharged his debt completely, instead of paying 80%. He believes he was given bad legal advice and was not represented in Court (the attorney wouldnt tell him his court dates and then didnt show himself, and my friend got taken to the cleaners as a result.) I overstated the amount the Trustee got, it was 30k not 50k. still a huge sum of $$$

[strandinthewind]

. . . a year after his bankruptcy was discharged there were unexplained bits and pieces that the trustee didnt clean up. And the lending companies and credit companies are treating him as if he had discharged his debt completely, instead of paying 80%. He believes he was given bad legal advice and was not represented in Court (the attorney wouldnt tell him his court dates and then didnt show himself, and my friend got taken to the cleaners as a result.) I overstated the amount the Trustee got, it was 30k not 50k. still a huge sum of $$$

Well, he did discharge more than 20% of the debt because he likely saved tens of thousands in interest as interest cannot be charged or accrue in a 13 plan save for some exceptions like student loans, income tax, etc. So, creditors will never look at him as if he did anything other than bankrutpcy under either chapter, though 13 generally is considered slightly better.

As a general rule and with few excpetions, any and all creditors listed as such when he filed will be included in the discharge order. If these creditors are not accordingly reporting the debt on his credit report, they are in violation of the court's order. Mailing a copy of the listing of the creditors as well as the dischrage order as proof of the dispute to the credit reporting company should remedy this. If the creditor refuses, then they could be consrued as being in violation of the court's order, which usually means sanctions. Having said that, any unrelated negative items on his credit report will be up to him to remedy, and that is not that easy of a process, though it has gotten better.

And, yes, given those facts, it sounds like your friend got bad legal advice becuase the amount he paid in five years likely could have paid his debt off in full and left him with some money.

[Sarah]

gosh....what can anyone say? :shrug: Im sorry you have problems...

no no. i'm not looking for anyone to say anything. i just have to laugh every time someone mentions health care.

both of my parents work for the government. you'd at least think there'd be some sort of family plan. i suppose that's why Americans are encouraged not to think. :laugh:

sit down, shut up, and watch this tv! here's american idol. here's 56 channels of it!

[DrummerDeanna]

no no. i'm not looking for anyone to say anything. i just have to laugh every time someone mentions health care.

both of my parents work for the government. you'd at least think there'd be some sort of family plan. i suppose that's why Americans are encouraged not to think. :laugh:

sit down, shut up, and watch this tv! here's american idol. here's 56 channels of it!

Indeed. I NEVER talk about health care because I've been so so lucky in my life to always have insurance..and right now I don't even pay for my insurance, work does. Amazing.

But I also realize there are millions upon millions without insurance, it's a huge problem...and I've got many friends who are in the same situation as you...it's crazy.

[skcin]

I know we're way off topic now, but I found this. Still acknowledges that the borrowers are paritally to blame, that they should have done more research. But the last statement says a lot, IMO.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/05/01/real_estate/bubble_buyers.moneymag/index.htm

The buyers: The Quams and the too-good-to-be-true mortgage
Stretched by their loan, the newlyweds rented out their second bedroom to pay the bills.
By Amanda Gengler, Money Magazine writer-reporter
May 2 2007: 2:48 PM EDT


(Money Magazine) -- Newlyweds Erik and Brandi Quam can't really afford their home. The monthly carrying costs on their two-bedroom condo in Arlington, Va. run about $2,500 a month, and they fear the bill could go higher still as their adjustable mortgage resets to higher interest rates. It's already a tight squeeze: They've taken in a roommate to help pay the bills.

Unfortunately, they can't afford to sell either. Thanks to a falling housing market and a prepayment penalty of about $11,500, they'd owe the bank more than their place is worth. "It makes me want to cry every month," says Brandi, 26. The irony is that the Quams should be able to afford their place: It cost just $219,000 when a still-single Brandi, fresh out of the Air Force, bought it.


So how did they get themselves in such a mess? More puzzling still, why did lenders let them - along with millions of other homeowners, many of whom, unlike the Quams, are in immediate danger of foreclosure?

In the answer to that question lies the real story behind the once dizzying, now fizzling housing boom. Sure, record-low interest rates, boomers buying vacation homes and immigrants grabbing for the American dream all did their bit to push up prices.

But what really supercharged the market was the mortgage industrial complex - a machine with cogs called brokers and bankers, fueled by money poured in by investment banks, bond traders and hedge fund managers. The system prospered and grew, introducing new players into the financing transaction and transforming the roles of others.

Finally it ran amok, creating huge incentives at every level of a home sale or a refi to sacrifice prudence in pursuit of a killing. Market checks and balances should have prevented the process from getting out of control. But they were corrupted, co-opted or simply steamrollered.

Too much money. Too little restraint. This is the story of how all the important players in the market decided that they had too much at stake to shout, "Stop!" We've been here before: Remember when Wall Street analysts told us Amazon.com was worth $400 a share?

And as with the tech bubble, it may not be only speculators who get hurt. As home prices unwind from unsustainable highs, we may all feel at least a little bit poorer. That could be a drag on the economy. It's already a real drag for the Quams.

The primary mortgage on the Quams' condo was fixed at 5.25 percent, but Brandi had also taken out a smaller variable-rate loan. As rates rose in 2005, she went looking for a better deal and entered her contact information into a few Web sites.

Shortly thereafter, she says, she got a call from broker Robert Hoover of CPA Mortgage in Maryland. He found her a new loan with what she says she understood to be an initial 1 percent rate, with only small increases in the first five years. And since she had equity (her condo had appreciated), she could even take a little cash out to pay off some bills. The transaction earned the broker and his firm about $12,600.

It took a few months before Brandi realized what she had done. The mortgage was something called an option ARM. It was true that Brandi could make initial minimum payments of about $800. But those weren't enough to cover the interest she was actually being charged, which was higher than the rate used to calculate required payments. The unpaid interest was added to the loan balance, a phenomenon called negative amortization.

The Quams have decided to start paying at least the interest on the loan, but even so, the balance has grown by $7,000. Barring a market turnaround, they're stuck for at least another year and a half until the prepayment penalty phases out. They've had to turn down job offers because they can't move.

Who is to blame here? Yes, Brandi should have asked more questions and scrutinized the fine print. The idea of a mortgage with a 1% rate seems, on its face, too good to be true. Brandi says she did know she'd eventually have to make higher payments, but she planned to move before that happened.

Exactly how Hoover described the mechanics of the loan, or what she thought he meant, is impossible to know for sure now. Hoover declined to speak with MONEY, and his firm sent an e-mail saying that it couldn't comment on a client but that "ultimately, it is the consumer that makes the choice they feel is best."

But based on the documents Brandi showed us for her loan - and documents MONEY has seen for other option ARMS - it is easy to see how a person could be confused.

A payment schedule is shown on the federally mandated truth-in-lending form, but it is based on minimum payments and a steady interest rate, rather than the variable rate the Quams are charged.

An "adjustable-rate note" first says the Quams will be charged a yearly rate of 1 percent. The next subsection says that rate "may" change almost immediately. The first payment coupons show only the minimum, negatively amortizing payment.

A spokeswoman for the original lender, BankUnited of Miami Lakes, Fla., said she couldn't specifically comment on Brandi's loan. But she said that borrowers aren't approved unless their "credit score will support the fully indexed rate." All borrowers, she added, acknowledge receipt of numerous documents disclosing every aspect of the loan, including a four-page form that describes the terms "in plain English" and warns borrowers of the possibility of negative amortization.

Keep in mind, complex loans like option ARMs are new to most people, and they are radically different from 15- and 30-year fixed-rate loans. Consumer advocates say that the truth-in-lending disclosure rules are outdated and that borrowers like the Quams are being asked to climb a steep learning curve - with their homes at stake.

"The disclosures on adjustable-rate mortgages have never been any good, and option ARMs are particularly terrible," says Jack Guttentag, professor emeritus of finance at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School.

In any case, the loans are popular. In the first half of 2006, option ARMs were 15 percent of mortgage originations, reports the Mortgage Bankers Association. In theory, the loan can be a useful tool for people with irregular income, such as entrepreneurs.

But low payments are the rule, not the exception. Today more than 80 percent of borrowers in securitized option ARMs pay less than their interest charges, according to Fitch Ratings. Their loan balances are rising. That might not be so bad in a rising market, but it's potentially a disaster in a falling one.

It's obvious that a lot of homeowners could have used better advice about how to find an affordable loan. But good advice has gotten harder to come by in the mortgage game. That's because the person across the desk or on the other end of the telephone getting you a mortgage probably doesn't work for the bank that's putting up the money. He may not care if you can pay.

"Consumers thought that when they qualified for a loan, that meant they had a reasonable prospect to repay the loan unless some type of illness or catastrophe hit the family," says Michael Calhoun, president of the Center for Responsible Lending. "That is no longer the case."

[Musicman408]

Guys, I have a quick question. I have been away from the comp for several days because of performances and Physical therapy and was just wondering if anyone knew why gas jumped 25 cens or so today. It's 3.19 here........

Missed Ya Guys,
Ethan

[JazmenFlowers]

Guys, I have a quick question. I have been away from the comp for several days because of performances and Physical therapy and was just wondering if anyone knew why gas jumped 25 cens or so today. It's 3.19 here........

Missed Ya Guys,
Ethan
I heard that Bush lost a poker game and his bet was our economy. :shrug:

[Macfanforever]

From Yahoo Canada


Conservatives reject opposition call for public inquiry into gasoline prices.

Wed May 2, 5:53 PM

By Terry Pedwell


OTTAWA (CP) - Rejecting explanations from big oil companies, the opposition parties are demanding the federal government investigate why gasoline prices have been surging.

But there's little Ottawa can do to curb prices at the pumps, say the Conservatives. The NDP demanded a public inquiry after gasoline prices reached as high as $1.28 a litre in Vancouver on Tuesday, and only slightly lower in other parts of Canada. Pump prices have since dropped but remained just under $1.10 a litre in many regions.

"Yesterday, Imperial Oil reported a 31 per cent increase in quarterly profits, on the very same day that gas prices went through the roof," New Democrat Judy Wasylycia-Leis said in the Commons on Wednesday.

"So here we have big oil companies making big profits and consumers still paying big prices. It doesn't add up," she said.

"Why doesn't this government take on these big gas makers?"

Ottawa has limited ability to counter rising gasoline pump prices, said Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn.

"There have been six federal studies of gas prices and each and every time the Competition Bureau has found there's been no price fixing," said Lunn.

"If the member has information and would like another investigation, they're welcome to bring that forward."

Lunn also cited Conservative government measures to mitigate the effects of higher gasoline prices.

"We brought in the $2-billion biofuels strategy," he told the Commons. "We're providing incentives for Canadians to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles ... and we have lowered the GST."

Rather than look at price fixing, the federal government should instead investigate why oil companies have been closing gasoline refineries, said Bloc MP Robert Vincent.

"The sharp increase in gas prices is not explained by international factors alone," he said. "It's also due to the intentional closure of some refineries.

"We know prices at the pump come under provincial jurisdiction, but can't the federal government check the profit margin of refining since that's under its jurisdiction?"

Oil companies and industry observers have blamed rising gas prices on everything from unrest in oil-rich Nigeria and tensions in the Middle East to high demand and low inventories. The cost of buying gasoline also moved higher in the United States, with an average gallon of gas at American pumps rising Tuesday to US$2.96, up nearly 80 cents US a litre.

The national average price of gas in Canada on Tuesday was just over $1.10 a litre, up nearly five cents from the average price in March, and 19 cents higher than the average price in January, said MJ Ervin and Associates Inc., a Calgary-based consulting firm.

-

First quarter and annual returns for Canada's big five oil and gas companies

By The Canadian Press

Here are some recent earnings from Canada's Big Five oil companies:

Imperial Oil Limited (TSX:IMO)

Net profits 2007: $774 million. 2006: $591 million

Increase: 31 per cent

Annual net income 2006: $3.04 billion. 2005: $2.6 billion

Increase: 17 per cent

Petro-Canada (TSX:PCA)

Net profits 2007: $590 million. 2006: $206 million

Increase: 186 per cent

Excluding one-time losses/gains:

Net profits 2007: $580 million. 2006: $486 million

Percentage increase: 15 per cent

Annual net income 2006: $1.74 billion. 2005: $1.79 billion

Percentage decrease: 3 per cent

Husky Energy Inc. (TSX:HSE)

Net profits 2007: $650 million. 2006: $524 million

Increase: 24 per cent

Annual net income 2006: $2.73 billion. 2005: $2.00 billion

Increase: 26.5 per cent

EnCana (TSX:ECA)

Net profits 2007: $491 million. 2006: $1.47 billion

Decrease: 66 per cent

Excluding one-time losses/gains:

Net profits 2007: $858 million. 2006: $694 million

Increase: 29 per cent

Annual net income 2006: $5.65 billion. 2005: $3.43 billion

Increase: 65 per cent

Suncor (TSX:SU)

Net profits 2007: $551 million. 2006: $713 million

Decrease: 23 per cent

Excluding one-time losses/gains:

Net profits 2007: $539 million. 2006: $509 million

Increase: 6 per cent

Annual net income 2006: $2.97 billion. 2005: $1.16 billion

Increase: 156 per cent



Copyright © 2007 Canadian Press
Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! Canada Co. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy - Terms of Service
Need help? Want to send feedback?

[irishgrl]

Paula, that article nicely explains what has been happening in the world of creative financing. Yes the buyers are partly to blame, but they optimistically think they will be getting raises or that the interest rate wont be THAT high...

Sorry Jason, as that article points out, I DO think the mortgage industry is to blame. They got greedy and they were going to make their commissions, regardless of whether or not down the line the borrower would go under, and that seems heartless to me. I personally wouldnt EVER go for an adjustable rate mortgate, much better to know what you have to pay each month from now till its paid off....but thats just me.

Macfan4ever, your article underscores what I said earlier about Big Oil being the real culprits here. Its just disgusting, and it should be stopped.

[irishgrl]

Well, he did discharge more than 20% of the debt because he likely saved tens of thousands in interest as interest cannot be charged or accrue in a 13 plan save for some exceptions like student loans, income tax, etc. So, creditors will never look at him as if he did anything other than bankrutpcy under either chapter, though 13 generally is considered slightly better.

As a general rule and with few excpetions, any and all creditors listed as such when he filed will be included in the discharge order. If these creditors are not accordingly reporting the debt on his credit report, they are in violation of the court's order. Mailing a copy of the listing of the creditors as well as the dischrage order as proof of the dispute to the credit reporting company should remedy this. If the creditor refuses, then they could be consrued as being in violation of the court's order, which usually means sanctions. Having said that, any unrelated negative items on his credit report will be up to him to remedy, and that is not that easy of a process, though it has gotten better.

And, yes, given those facts, it sounds like your friend got bad legal advice becuase the amount he paid in five years likely could have paid his debt off in full and left him with some money.
just so you know, the items on the credit report werent unrelated, they were the exact items that were included, but for some unexplained reason each of them had up to $200 still showing and this was AFTER (a YEAR after mind you) the bankruptcy was discharged.

Any creditor who moans and groans about a lost 20% when they got paid 80% is an ASS.

Yes my friend got bad advice. He regrets this more than you know. He says that considering the way he's being treated in the credit world, he'd have been better off going the ch7 route (he says he qualified). They say no good deed goes unpunished, and I agree.

[strandinthewind]

Paula, that article nicely explains what has been happening in the world of creative financing. Yes the buyers are partly to blame, but they optimistically think they will be getting raises or that the interest rate wont be THAT high...

Sorry Jason, as that article points out, I DO think the mortgage industry is to blame. They got greedy and they were going to make their commissions, regardless of whether or not down the line the borrower would go under, and that seems heartless to me. I personally wouldnt EVER go for an adjustable rate mortgate, much better to know what you have to pay each month from now till its paid off....but thats just me.

Macfan4ever, your article underscores what I said earlier about Big Oil being the real culprits here. Its just disgusting, and it should be stopped.

Whatever, you hate the concept of individual responsibility. If you buy a house and think you will be able to afford it in the future, you have no one to blame for yourself :rolleyes:

I mean here is a cite with sample disclosure statements https://www.everbankwholesale.com/FormsAndDisclosures.asp#

They are very clear cut and if the buyer does not read them, how is that anyone's fault but their own.

Finally, even if the ARM rises after the first five years and even if the idiot buyer did not know it would, they have still saved gobs of money and will continue to do so for severalk years over a fixed rate loan because the raise in the rate on a typical ARM is capped per year.

Note - if someone loses their job, that is a horrible thing and I fell sorry for them. But, to blame their subsequent inability to pay the mortgage on the lender is ridiculous in that everyone can lose their job --- so no mortgages should be made :shrug: Of course not -- the mtg companies go with the information they are given and the reasonable expectation of stability in employment. I mean the mtg. company wants to make money on the loan.

[strandinthewind]

just so you know, the items on the credit report werent unrelated, they were the exact items that were included, but for some unexplained reason each of them had up to $200 still showing and this was AFTER (a YEAR after mind you) the bankruptcy was discharged.

Any creditor who moans and groans about a lost 20% when they got paid 80% is an ASS.

Yes my friend got bad advice. He regrets this more than you know. He says that considering the way he's being treated in the credit world, he'd have been better off going the ch7 route (he says he qualified). They say no good deed goes unpunished, and I agree.


It was not just 20% - they lost likely thousands in interest. And, I think everyone who owes you money in the future should pay you at 80% and with no interest they contracted to pay and on which you base your income. Better yet, your employer should pay you 80% of your contracted wage. Let's see how you like that :rolleyes:

Having said that, I am sorry your friend went through this. And, I suggest contacting the credit reporting agencies and disputing the items -- then provide them with a copy of the dischage. That should remedy it.

Also, if he gets a credit card (even one requiring a deposit) and charges a little on it every month and pays it off each month -- maybe leave a balanace every other month, his credit will begin rebuilding itself. I know people two or so years out of a seven or 13 who get mortgages at market rates, especially if they have a good income. The trick is to shop around.

[irishgrl]

It was not just 20% - they lost likely thousands in interest. And, I think everyone who owes you money in the future should pay you at 80% and with no interest they contracted to pay and on which you base your income. Better yet, your employer should pay you 80% of your contracted wage. Let's see how you like that :rolleyes:

Having said that, I am sorry your friend went through this. And, I suggest contacting the credit reporting agencies and disputing the items -- then provide them with a copy of the dischage. That should remedy it.

Also, if he gets a credit card (even one requiring a deposit) and charges a little on it every month and pays it off each month -- maybe leave a balanace every other month, his credit will begin rebuilding itself. I know people two or so years out of a seven or 13 who get mortgages at market rates, especially if they have a good income. The trick is to shop around.
80% is 4X 20% so I dont feel sorry for any creditor. And if someone owed me money and the best I could get was 80%, you betcha, I'd go for it.

As for the other, he is in the process of doing just that. He knows he can dispute this stuff and that is what he plans to do.

As for personal responsibility, you show me a typical housebuyer who takes the time to read the fine print or even if they do, who UNDERSTANDS it!
get real Jason! :lol:

As Paula's article points out, falling house values coupled with penalties prevent many people from even being able to find a way out. Lets face it, these documents are NOT written in a consumer's best interests, but rather to benefit the BANKS and by extension, the Mortgage Brokers. Who cares is thousands of people get fleeced eh Jason?

[strandinthewind]

. . . As for personal responsibility, you show me a typical housebuyer who takes the time to read the fine print or even if they do, who UNDERSTANDS it!
get real Jason! :lol: . . . .


Good Lord woman - do you ever read anything? Read the ARM disclosure pages in that cite above. It is not not fine print -- it is a sep. fukning page specifically setting out in detail and in regular size print the results of an ARM. What do want, the lender to tatoo it on the closing agent's ass and have them moon the buyer prior to signing :laugh:

Also, may companies such as ditech do not use pre payment penalties and they are illegal in many states. Are they fair - well, that depends on who asks the question. Most are one to two years. If you were the finance company and you structured your income model on each loan lasting 5 or more years, then yes they are. if you are the consumer, you hate them, but still want the loan at a cheaper rate, which is caused by the income plan. Interestingly, almost all contracts you sign have these a la cell phones plans. But, they are going away and loans will cost more as a result.

Better yet, let's let everyone who cannot pay for their house just keep it until they get a job allowing them to pay for it at their leisure -- or, the fed.'s could pay the P&I while the consumer is unemployed - more welfare, why not and this time not based on financial need - just that you lost your job :rolleyes:

Again and finally, if you are stupid enough to buy a house you cannot afford at the time of purchase, you have no one to thank but yourself.

[irishgrl]

Good Lord woman - do you ever read anything? Read the ARM disclosure pages in that cite above. It is not not fine print -- it is a sep. fukning page specifically setting out in detail and in regular size print the results of an ARM. What do want, the lender to tatoo it on the closing agent's ass and have them moon the buyer prior to signing :laugh:

Also, may companies such as ditech do not use pre payment penalties and they are illegal in many states. Are they fair - well, that depends on who asks the question. Most are one to two years. If you were the finance company and you structured your income model on each loan lasting 5 or more years, then yes they are. if you are the consumer, you hate them, but still want the loan at a cheaper rate, which is caused by the income plan. Interestingly, almost all contracts you sign have these a la cell phones plans. But, they are going away and loans will cost more as a result.

Better yet, let's let everyone who cannot pay for their house just keep it until they get a job allowing them to pay for it at their leisure -- or, the fed.'s could pay the P&I while the consumer is unemployed - more welfare, why not and this time not based on financial need - just that you lost your job :rolleyes:
Where did this come from???
Again and finally, if you are stupid enough to buy a house you cannot afford at the time of purchase, you have no one to thank but yourself.
I think ARM's are evil. The way housing prices have climbed, the mortgage behemoth sensed a killing and boy did they. I have yet to meet anyone who actually puts the money they save from an ARM onto the principal of the house. as I said, most people pay bills, take a vacation, buy a car, get braces for the kids etc. And if your job is in a certain place you are behooved to buy a HOME there too. so you are stuck with the housing prices in your job area :shrug: What a crappy attitude you have Jason, very um, well....."elitist" comes to mind.....

I would NEVER go for an ARM. NEVER. I told my broker I could afford X amount to pay for a mortgage and no more. He worked with me and I found something I could afford. I know what I have to pay for the next 25 years. I got lucky tho, I found the last decent affordable house in my area. its the commute to work that kills me. I pay two-thirds as much for gas as I do for my house. Thats just crazy.

[Stew_Matthews]

Macfan4ever, your article underscores what I said earlier about Big Oil being the real culprits here. Its just disgusting, and it should be stopped.

I was trying not to get drawn into a discussion about the oil companies, in part because I work for one of them, but the proposition that gas prices are increasing so that oil companies can make more money is at best, simplistic, but in truth, demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how the industry works or the factors that influence the pricing. For better or worse here are some things to consider….

First up, you will be aware from your newspaper and TV that commentators always talk about oil in terms of what is costs per barrel. The price of crude oil this morning in the US is $64 per barrel. A barrel contains 159 litres (or 42 gallons). How much profit do the oil companies make on that? The answer is around 5%. It varies depending on where the crude oil is coming from. If it’s the Middle East the margins are higher than say Russia or Nigeria.

I posted earlier about what the production costs are so the next question is where does the bulk of that $64 a barrel go? In fact it goes to the Government of the country that owns the oil. Oil companies pay a levy to extract oil. I work for the Chinese company Sinopec and we extract oil in Siberia and pay over half the barrel income to Russia. The rest of the barrel price after profit/costs goes in tax and the agents fees in handling the sale of the oil.

So if what I say is true, why is it that oil company profits are rising? Two reasons. One is that more oil is being sold, so although profit margins are reducing, the volume of sales gives the impression of increasing profits. The second factor relates to the way in which commodities are traded. Although the oil price is $64, to buy it you make a bid. The oil companies then weigh up the offer and consider the volume, the frequency of order and where they are shipping it and work out the most favourable bid to them. Sometimes they sell well below the barrel price because of the size of order. However around two years ago the United States made a decision to significantly increase it’s oil reserves and has encouraged US refineries (who turn the crude oil into gas etc) to outbid other countries in the market place. This surge in demand as any economist knows will drive up price, particularly when only 77 million barrels of oil can be on the world market each day. No oil company is going to turn down an extra $20 a barrel if someone is stupid enough to offer it.

A couple of other things to consider. China used to sell alot of cheap oil but now it needs to buy to sustain its economy. So there is less cheap oil coming onto the market but more demand. This allows countries (not just oil companies) to make a few more dollars. Also the quality of crude oil outside of the middle east is more expensive to turn into gas and increasingly refineries are having to buy this because they can’t obtain enough ‘light’ crude for the reasons above.

But finally, the most immoral act happens at the end of this sorry chain of money making. Governments add tax to the gas price. In the US 30 – 50% and in the UK about 80%. That’s the real scandal not the oil firms.

...but hey I'm an engineer not an economist:)

[strandinthewind]

I think ARM's are evil. The way housing prices have climbed, the mortgage behemoth sensed a killing and boy did they. I have yet to meet anyone who actually puts the money they save from an ARM onto the principal of the house. as I said, most people pay bills, take a vacation, buy a car, get braces for the kids etc. And if your job is in a certain place you are behooved to buy a HOME there too. so you are stuck with the housing prices in your job area :shrug: What a crappy attitude you have Jason, very um, well....."elitist" comes to mind.....

I would NEVER go for an ARM. NEVER. I told my broker I could afford X amount to pay for a mortgage and no more. He worked with me and I found something I could afford. I know what I have to pay for the next 25 years. I got lucky tho, I found the last decent affordable house in my area. its the commute to work that kills me. I pay two-thirds as much for gas as I do for my house. Thats just crazy.


Your disdain of ARM's shows you know nothing of finance and the ability to make money in the housing market. Again, it for the most part would take seven to ten years for an ARM to reach the usually much higher rate of a fixed rate mortgage, if it ever gets there because some ARM's are capped at like 2%. But, whatever.

As for the elitist - how is holding someone liable to what they signed that. I am sick and fukcing tired of the lack of personal responsibility in America. You, obviously are not and think that people should have no liability for making poor choices or a choice that is made poor by a subsequent event, such as losing your job, not getting a raise, etc.

I mean if I get drunk as a skunk and go to a strip club and spend thousands of dollars, who do I have to blame in the morning - the hottie who took the cash with a glint in their eye - or me for being stupid enough to do that. The answer is me.

Yet, you seem to be saying that people bought houses that they qualified for (using conventional and other mortgages mind mind you - not the ARM's you ignorantly demonize) and then they lost their jobs and can't pay the mortgage (any kind) anymore. That sucks and I hate that for these poor people, but how is that in any way the mtg company's fault :shrug:

Moreover and for the last time, if they lose their job and have an ARM as opposed to a fixed rate mtg. , they likely can make the lower payment an ARM provides if they can make any payment at all. So, why are you demonizing ARM's? To me, that makes you sound ignorant on this issue.

Anyway - last word is your's :rolleyes:

[irishgrl]

Your disdain of ARM's shows you know nothing of finance and the ability to make money in the housing market. Again, it for the most part would take seven to ten years for an ARM to reach the usually much higher rate of a fixed rate mortgage, if it ever gets there because some ARM's are capped at like 2%. But, whatever.

As for the elitist - how is holding someone liable to what they signed that. I am sick and fukcing tired of the lack of personal responsibility in America. You, obviously are not and think that people should have no liability for making poor choices or a choice that is made poor by a subsequent event, such as losing your job, not getting a raise, etc.

I mean if I get drunk as a skunk and go to a strip club and spend thousands of dollars, who do I have to blame in the morning - the hottie who took the cash with a glint in their eye - or me for being stupid enough to do that. The answer is me.

Yet, you seem to be saying that people bought houses that they qualified for (using conventional and other mortgages mind mind you - not the ARM's you ignorantly demonize) and then they lost their jobs and can't pay the mortgage (any kind) anymore. That sucks and I hate that for these poor people, but how is that in any way the mtg company's fault :shrug:

Moreover and for the last time, if they lose their job and have an ARM as opposed to a fixed rate mtg. , they likely can make the lower payment an ARM provides if they can make any payment at all. So, why are you demonizing ARM's? To me, that makes you sound ignorant on this issue.

Anyway - last word is your's :rolleyes:
There is such a thing as USUARY and blatant taking advantage of a person's need (and buying a house is a NEED, not a want!!) I loathe the greed behind it all. It wasnt that long ago that integrity was prized. now, its the almighty bottom line and how much PROFIT can we make from Joe Schmoe. It isnt a matter of personal responsibility but the Snake Oil sellers making a killing on the public at large, thinking that they'll worry about the bubble bursting later...thats just sick. Nobody sees the end of a job coming....or a bad accident that might put someone in the hospital and wipe out a family's savings :shrug: We're not all wheeler-dealers ya know...

I am not a real estate dabbler. Im doing good to own my own home in this uncertain day and age. Your defense of gambling on something so necessary as a family home is baffling to me :shrug:

also, you are twisting my words. I never said that people bought homes on fixed rates, that hardly happens any more. I was one of the lucky ones, but most people I know either have, or knows someone who has utilized the ARM. Many of them live to regret it.

[irishgrl]

I was trying not to get drawn into a discussion about the oil companies, in part because I work for one of them, but the proposition that gas prices are increasing so that oil companies can make more money is at best, simplistic, but in truth, demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how the industry works or the factors that influence the pricing. For better or worse here are some things to consider….

First up, you will be aware from your newspaper and TV that commentators always talk about oil in terms of what is costs per barrel. The price of crude oil this morning in the US is $64 per barrel. A barrel contains 159 litres (or 42 gallons). How much profit do the oil companies make on that? The answer is around 5%. It varies depending on where the crude oil is coming from. If it’s the Middle East the margins are higher than say Russia or Nigeria.

I posted earlier about what the production costs are so the next question is where does the bulk of that $64 a barrel go? In fact it goes to the Government of the country that owns the oil. Oil companies pay a levy to extract oil. I work for the Chinese company Sinopec and we extract oil in Siberia and pay over half the barrel income to Russia. The rest of the barrel price after profit/costs goes in tax and the agents fees in handling the sale of the oil.

So if what I say is true, why is it that oil company profits are rising? Two reasons. One is that more oil is being sold, so although profit margins are reducing, the volume of sales gives the impression of increasing profits. The second factor relates to the way in which commodities are traded. Although the oil price is $64, to buy it you make a bid. The oil companies then weigh up the offer and consider the volume, the frequency of order and where they are shipping it and work out the most favourable bid to them. Sometimes they sell well below the barrel price because of the size of order. However around two years ago the United States made a decision to significantly increase it’s oil reserves and has encouraged US refineries (who turn the crude oil into gas etc) to outbid other countries in the market place. This surge in demand as any economist knows will drive up price, particularly when only 77 million barrels of oil can be on the world market each day. No oil company is going to turn down an extra $20 a barrel if someone is stupid enough to offer it.

A couple of other things to consider. China used to sell alot of cheap oil but now it needs to buy to sustain its economy. So there is less cheap oil coming onto the market but more demand. This allows countries (not just oil companies) to make a few more dollars. Also the quality of crude oil outside of the middle east is more expensive to turn into gas and increasingly refineries are having to buy this because they can’t obtain enough ‘light’ crude for the reasons above.

But finally, the most immoral act happens at the end of this sorry chain of money making. Governments add tax to the gas price. In the US 30 – 50% and in the UK about 80%. That’s the real scandal not the oil firms.

...but hey I'm an engineer not an economist:)
I appreciate your take on the big oil question, however, when you read that oil companies post profits for the quarter in the BILLIONS of dollars, its a bit hard to stop and think about all the other players on the field.

[strandinthewind]

I was trying not to get drawn into a discussion about the oil companies, in part because I work for one of them, but the proposition that gas prices are increasing so that oil companies can make more money is at best, simplistic, but in truth, demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how the industry works or the factors that influence the pricing. For better or worse here are some things to consider….

First up, you will be aware from your newspaper and TV that commentators always talk about oil in terms of what is costs per barrel. The price of crude oil this morning in the US is $64 per barrel. A barrel contains 159 litres (or 42 gallons). How much profit do the oil companies make on that? The answer is around 5%. It varies depending on where the crude oil is coming from. If it’s the Middle East the margins are higher than say Russia or Nigeria.

I posted earlier about what the production costs are so the next question is where does the bulk of that $64 a barrel go? In fact it goes to the Government of the country that owns the oil. Oil companies pay a levy to extract oil. I work for the Chinese company Sinopec and we extract oil in Siberia and pay over half the barrel income to Russia. The rest of the barrel price after profit/costs goes in tax and the agents fees in handling the sale of the oil.

So if what I say is true, why is it that oil company profits are rising? Two reasons. One is that more oil is being sold, so although profit margins are reducing, the volume of sales gives the impression of increasing profits. The second factor relates to the way in which commodities are traded. Although the oil price is $64, to buy it you make a bid. The oil companies then weigh up the offer and consider the volume, the frequency of order and where they are shipping it and work out the most favourable bid to them. Sometimes they sell well below the barrel price because of the size of order. However around two years ago the United States made a decision to significantly increase it’s oil reserves and has encouraged US refineries (who turn the crude oil into gas etc) to outbid other countries in the market place. This surge in demand as any economist knows will drive up price, particularly when only 77 million barrels of oil can be on the world market each day. No oil company is going to turn down an extra $20 a barrel if someone is stupid enough to offer it.

A couple of other things to consider. China used to sell alot of cheap oil but now it needs to buy to sustain its economy. So there is less cheap oil coming onto the market but more demand. This allows countries (not just oil companies) to make a few more dollars. Also the quality of crude oil outside of the middle east is more expensive to turn into gas and increasingly refineries are having to buy this because they can’t obtain enough ‘light’ crude for the reasons above.

But finally, the most immoral act happens at the end of this sorry chain of money making. Governments add tax to the gas price. In the US 30 – 50% and in the UK about 80%. That’s the real scandal not the oil firms.

...but hey I'm an engineer not an economist:)


Be careful - you will be labeled an elitist for presenting a well reasoned and supported economic argument :wavey:

Also, on the final end, the govt. gets another take in the form of gas tax and excise tax on vehicles with poor gas mileage.

[irishgrl]

Be careful - you will be labeled an elitist for presenting a well reasoned and supported economic argument :wavey:

Also, on the final end, the govt. gets another take in the form of gas tax and excise tax on vehicles with poor gas mileage.
actually Jason, I thanked him for that perspective, its very enlightening.

I appreciate the stuff you post too, you old grouch!

[Musicman408]

actually Jason, I thanked him for that perspective, its very enlightening.

I appreciate the stuff you post too, you old grouch!

Old grouch????:shrug: :laugh: jk... Yeah, this discussion has been great and very enlightening.

[JazmenFlowers]

Yeah, this discussion has been great and very enlightening.
you think so?

hmmm. maybe I need to re-read the thread. wait...ehhh...nahhh.

[Musicman408]

you think so?

hmmm. maybe I need to re-read the thread. wait...ehhh...nahhh.

Well I mean, some very complicating political issues have been discussed. I think that is cool. :nod:

[Musicman408]

healthcare. lol. lolol.

i work 2 jobs. 12 hours a day, 6 days a week, some weeks 7. i have no insurance of any sort other than car insurance. what a ****ing joke. and i mean, i have problems. and then people wonder why i'm all bad and buy **** on the street. assholes.

i'm not bitter. in fact, it's easier this way. i just get paid. it's just like.. i'm glad i don't have a kid.. i feel really bad for people scraping to take care of a family the way that i have to scrape to take care of my own idiotic self.

We all need healthcare. Hopefully the Dems can give that to us.

[Musicman408]

Ok, I hate to bring this back to the top, but gas is up to 3.36 here and I was just curious how much it was where you live. I don't understand why my city is so much more above the national average........

[mikeschmike]

Ok, I hate to bring this back to the top, but gas is up to 3.36 here and I was just curious how much it was where you live. I don't understand why my city is so much more above the national average........

We're averaging about 3.39 here, so I don't know where the hell they are getting this "national average".

I blame the Crystal Visions setlist for this.

[Gypsy-Rhiannon]

Oh god... let's not start this again!

And am I the only one freaked out by irishgrls sig picture?

[carrie721]

We're averaging about 3.39 here, so I don't know where the hell they are getting this "national average".

I blame the Crystal Visions setlist for this.

PAHAHA word.

there are many sites out there that will give you different rates for different locations. no need to open this can of worms again. :wavey:

[Musicman408]

PAHAHA word.

there are many sites out there that will give you different rates for different locations. no need to open this can of worms again. :wavey:

My bad. I haven't read through the WHOLE thread, so I don't know of what can of worms you are speaking of...... Sorry

[mikeschmike]

My bad. I haven't read through the WHOLE thread, so I don't know of what can of worms you are speaking of...... Sorry

Pages 1-11 should give you the main part of what Carrie is talking about. Everything after that is just blabbing.

Make a bowl of popcorn and enjoy the show...

[Macfanforever]

The problem with the gas is Political corruption, corrupt Petroleum man paying them off.that goes for the insurance, cable tv, and the medical industry.that another topic all together.

[Livia]

We just hit $3.00/gallon for the first time.

I shouldn't complain, living in Texas, our average has consistently been lower than the rest of the world.

[JazmenFlowers]

We just hit $3.00/gallon for the first time.

I shouldn't complain, living in Texas, our average has consistently been lower than the rest of the world.
same here.

it was $3.06 yesterday and is now $2.99 :mad: :(

wtf?

it takes $50 to fill up my car. I'm going broke buying effin gas.

[Gypsy-Rhiannon]

Just cost me £45 to fill up my beetle! Totally ridiculous!

BTW... not looking for a debate on the value of the dollar to the pound or anything. Just commenting :cool:

[estranged4life]

Hey Pip, how much is a gallon now costing in the UK? People in the US should feel fortunate ompared to European prices.

Between $3.14-$3.29 here is Hellhole, Oklahoma

[BTFLCHLD]

There will come a time when we have no gas...then what?

[estranged4life]

There will come a time when we have no gas...then what?
We walk, or purchase a bicycle and hope the hell the seat doesnt burn our asses too bad :shrug:

:laugh:

Personally the US govt. will produce autos that run on "fart power", trust me - there's no shortage of THAT gas!!!

[sara1998]

Our gas went up today to $3.59/gallon. Thank God I have 3/4 of a tank. Maybe they'll go down this week. I doubt it with Memorial Day Weekend coming.... le sigh. :rolleyes:

[DrummerDeanna]

Our gas went up today to $3.59/gallon. Thank God I have 3/4 of a tank. Maybe they'll go down this week. I doubt it with Memorial Day Weekend coming.... le sigh. :rolleyes:

yeah, they're not going down. But analysts and such say they won't hit $4 so :shrug:

I don't know what the latest prices here are - I haven't driven in a few days - I've been biking. BUT I have to pick up a friend in Denver Thursday...and will have to fill up first...boo...not looking forward to that :(

[sara1998]

Makes last weeks $3.19 seem like a bargain. :laugh:

[estranged4life]

Our gas went up today to $3.59/gallon. Thank God I have 3/4 of a tank. Maybe they'll go down this week. I doubt it with Memorial Day Weekend coming.... le sigh. :rolleyes:

sucks I have to drive 500+ miles roundtrip...Guess I will come back from the vacation without an arm and leg since that is what gas prices will probably be by then...

So I guess I will leave a trail of blood at the May 30th Stevie/Eye-sack show (in OKC) from my newly severed limbs so other Ledgies in attendance can hunt me down :lol:

[markolas]

I'm spending $100 a week on gas, and I just can't afford that. I'm looking for a job closer to where I live so I can ride the bus. I'm getting rid of my car once it's paid off at the end of this year.

[MacMan]

A pretty good site for checking prices in cities, states and cities and provinces in Canada is: http://www.gasbuddy.com/

They have historical charts which shows the fluctuations during the different seasons: http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?time=24

The price where I am is anywhere from 1.19 to 1.23 a litre, which if you convert to a US gallon is: 3.785 Liters = 1 U.S. Gallon or in other words.

1.23 x 3.785 litres = $4.66 a US gallon :shocked:

[Gypsy-Rhiannon]

Hey Pip, how much is a gallon now costing in the UK? People in the US should feel fortunate ompared to European prices.

Between $3.14-$3.29 here is Hellhole, Oklahoma

Ooh... not sure actually. Ours is priced by the litre... I'm sure someone else will be able to convert if they join the discussion again! I just fill the tank when I have to! All I know is it cost me £45 to fill it completely.

[GODDESS6]

3.29 here for the cheap gas, which i don't use since i got a new car. it cost me 15.00 to fill my tank from 3/4's to a full tank~ they just said on the news that where i live in nebraska it is the 4th highest for gas in the US...WTF!!!:mad: ~

[sara1998]

3.29 here for the cheap gas, which i don't use since i got a new car. it cost me 15.00 to fill my tank from 3/4's to a full tank~ they just said on the news that where i live in nebraska it is the 4th highest for gas in the US...WTF!!!:mad: ~

So, I wonder if that puts Indiana as the highest. It's still $3.59 this morning. :mad:

[Sarah]

a couple days ago, it was 3.05 here. i'm not sure what it is today (other than too much).

[Gailh]

Ooh... not sure actually. Ours is priced by the litre... I'm sure someone else will be able to convert if they join the discussion again! I just fill the tank when I have to! All I know is it cost me £45 to fill it completely.

1 gallon = 3.8 litres (apparently)

In the Uk we are paying just less than £1 per litre which would be just less than £3.80 a gallon. At a rough conversion that makes a gallon in the UK about $7.00.

think yourselves lucky

Gail

[nickay]

Gas here in mudlville is gone down again !! $3.19 a gallon :)

[estranged4life]

Gas here in mudlville is gone down again !! $3.19 a gallon :)

who is going to be cruising happily around "Mudville" now :rolleyes:

[GypsySorcerer]

I saw it for $2.99 yesterday, but most places are running around $3.10 for regular.

[Madness Fades]

OK could you all STOP complaining about the price of fuel.
Come to Ireland or England |Fuel costs £1 per Litre. There are roughly just under 5 Litres in a Gallon. The cost of 1 Gallon of fuel here is £4.80 (Sterling)
Which is roughly $9.40 in US Dollars.

So you guuys have it pretty good !!!!!!!!

[Gypsy-Rhiannon]

OK could you all STOP complaining about the price of fuel.
Come to Ireland or England |Fuel costs £1 per Litre. There are roughly just under 5 Litres in a Gallon. The cost of 1 Gallon of fuel here is £4.80 (Sterling)
Which is roughly $9.40 in US Dollars.

So you guuys have it pretty good !!!!!!!!

Please don't tempt that debate again!!

[Gypsy-Rhiannon]

1 gallon = 3.8 litres (apparently)

In the Uk we are paying just less than £1 per litre which would be just less than £3.80 a gallon. At a rough conversion that makes a gallon in the UK about $7.00.

think yourselves lucky

Gail

Thanks Gail :)

[carrie721]

I saw it for $2.99 yesterday, but most places are running around $3.10 for regular.

i'm moving to kentucky!

Please don't tempt that debate again!!

seeeeriously. jesus. :laugh:

[NoSpeedLimit]

Wow compard to other places 3.62 per gallon isn't anything!

[estranged4life]

OK could you all STOP complaining about the price of fuel.
Come to Ireland or England |Fuel costs £1 per Litre. There are roughly just under 5 Litres in a Gallon. The cost of 1 Gallon of fuel here is £4.80 (Sterling)
Which is roughly $9.40 in US Dollars.

So you guuys have it pretty good !!!!!!!!

since I can remember when this subject was brought up in the past when gasoline was heading towards $2 a gallon here in the U.S., I thought of y'all overseas and the $5-$6 per litre petro costs.

I know Pip remembers those good ol' times here on "Chit Chat" - Just wait about a year or so another thread similar to this one will appear "Remember when gasoline was $6 a gallon back in 2007 - Oh the good ol' days"

Hey, Im going to have to drive so I dont care how much it is :nod:

[estranged4life]

i'm moving to kentucky!


women from Kentucky 'are purdy' :rolleyes:

I likes 'em Kentucky women, yessireebillybob!!!

Brian "I aint no Oklahoma Redneck - I is ed-ju-ma-cated" j.

[GypsySorcerer]

i'm moving to kentucky!


:wavey: I even wear shoes and have all my teeth! :]

[carrie721]

:wavey: I even wear shoes and have all my teeth! :]

:laugh: i'm so there. :woohoo:

[DrummerDeanna]

Just went to fill up - it was $2.27...and I got a $0.03 discount...so $3.24

Yuck.

[estranged4life]

:wavey: I even wear shoes and have all my teeth! :]

so does my friend (and new Ledgie) nickay, she's originally from Kentucky too...But she's an 'educated city girl' from Kentucky!

[carrie721]

^^ that's some crazy math, dee! :lol:

[DrummerDeanna]

^^ that's some crazy math, dee! :lol:

fuuuuuck. Now you know why I'm a journalist and not a mathmetician. :laugh: :laugh:


So lets begin again.

It was $3.27 but with my $0.03 discount it was $3.24.


Hello, my name is Deanna and I'm a math retard.

[seeker007nmss]

^^ that's some crazy math, dee! :lol:

I don't know, it kinda fits.

Kentucky Lottery Winner

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a88/Dreamtimezzz/kentucky-lottery-winner.jpg

[seeker007nmss]

so does my friend (and new Ledgie) nickay, she's originally from Kentucky too...But she's an 'educated city girl' from Kentucky!

She's had book learnin'? wow! :laugh:

[carrie721]

fuuuuuck. Now you know why I'm a journalist and not a mathmetician. :laugh: :laugh:


So lets begin again.

It was $3.27 but with my $0.03 discount it was $3.24.

Hello, my name is Deanna and I'm a math retard.

:laugh: you journalists and your fuzzy math ;)

I don't know, it kinda fits.

Kentucky Lottery Winner

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a88/Dreamtimezzz/kentucky-lottery-winner.jpg

:laugh: well dee's not from kentucky, but it's still funny.

[DrummerDeanna]

:laugh: you journalists and your fuzzy math ;)



Yeah....actually it's sad....you should see us trying to like time things out during pledge drives, it is actually very pathetic...we're ALL math retarded. To a pitiful degree.



:laugh: well dee's not from kentucky, but it's still funny.

I thought the same thing :lol: I HAVE all my teeth...it must be Michelle he's thinking of ;)

[GypsySorcerer]

Well, you know what they call a room full of Kentuckians..... a full set of teeth. :thumbsup: :rolleyes: :sorry:

[carrie721]

Well, you know what they call a room full of Kentuckians..... a full set of teeth. :thumbsup: :rolleyes: :sorry:

:lol: :lol:

i'm telling michelle! :D

[mikeschmike]

:lol: :lol:

i'm telling michelle! :D

speaking of which, where the hell has she been lately?:shrug:

[carrie721]

speaking of which, where the hell has she been lately?:shrug:

i don't know!! i need to call that bitch.

[Musicman408]

Was just wondering, why is gas so much more expensive than the US around the world???

[estranged4life]

Well, you know what they call a room full of Kentuckians..... a full set of teeth. :thumbsup: :rolleyes: :sorry:

people from Kentucky know what the internet is - I betcha they think it's something you catch fish with :rolleyes:

[mikeschmike]

Was just wondering, why is gas so much more expensive than the US around the world???

It's a lot of things.

Location of the oil/refineries
Shipping
Volume (we use more, therefore get a better deal)
Politics

China gets a pretty good price too, as their economy is exploding upwards and outwards.

[Livia]

Texas is full of black gold...Texas tea...

(Everybody sing)

Well, the first thing ya know, Old Jed's a millionaire
The kinfolk said, "Jed, move away from there!"
Said, "California is the place ya oughta be!"
So they loaded up the truck and they moved to Beverlyyyyy
Hills...that is...swimmin' pools...movie stars.

Seriously, the Texas gulf coast is full of oil refineries - Hurricane Katrina took out a few, so that didn't help matters...

[Musicman408]

I don't know, it kinda fits.

Kentucky Lottery Winner

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a88/Dreamtimezzz/kentucky-lottery-winner.jpg

:laugh: When I saw this, I about died.

[nickay]

Hey thats just not right ! I'm from Kentucky and yes we do no what the internet is and you know what we also have fax machines . how else do you think the men there end up married ? Sure as hell isnt on there own !!!:laugh: :]

[seeker007nmss]

how else do you think the men there end up married ? Sure as hell isnt on there own !!!:laugh: :]

I thought they just cruised family reunions. :eek: :p

[Musicman408]

Hey thats just not right ! I'm from Kentucky and yes we do no what the internet is and you know what we also have fax machines . how else do you think the men there end up married ? Sure as hell isnt on there own !!!:laugh: :]

:laugh: I'm from KY too. I know it isn;t right.

[Macfanforever]

Will lets update this thread to today 04/09/2012 .5 years later.The gas is $3.95 today at BJ's wholesale in town.By the time we hit the road for Stevie's upcoming tour this summer.The gas probably be about $4.50 gal.I hope not.

Probably that little snarky remark that I made with the word"corruption" probably did not help matters.

[HomerMcvie]

$4.08 here.:mad:

[vivfox]

$3.77-$3.83 here.

[chriskisn]

$3.77-$3.83 here.

In Australia we are paying the equivalent of about $6.

[mylittledemon]

Here in NZ it's roughly $2.20 per litre. I guess we're paying about $9-10 a gallon. :shocked:

[Macfanforever]

In Australia we are paying the equivalent of about $6.

Here in NZ it's roughly $2.20 per litre. I guess we're paying about $9-10 a gallon. :shocked:

Holy crap.:shocked:We are complaining about $4.00 here in the USA.You guys abroad got soaked with prices $6.00 to $10.00 in us dollars.:eek:

[vivfox]

Holy crap.:shocked:We are complaining about $4.00 here in the USA.You guys abroad got soaked with prices $6.00 to $10.00 in us dollars.:eek:


They never seem to complain about their ridiculous gas prices like we Americans do. I wonder why that is?

[Aussie W/Heart]

LPG gas jumped from 65c per litre to 96c over the past 3 weeks:mad:
Yesterday i payed LPG 89c per litre, & petrol is around 154c per litre.

I pay roughly $80 per week traveling to work & back, mostly using LPG, if my car was not fitted with the option of LPG, my petrol bill would at least be $150 per week..

Just read from page 2 onwards, the most funniest back and forth comments , one hour of entertainment right there:))

[skcin]

Will lets update this thread to today 04/09/2012 .5 years later.The gas is $3.95 today at BJ's wholesale in town.By the time we hit the road for Stevie's upcoming tour this summer.The gas probably be about $4.50 gal.I hope not.

Probably that little snarky remark that I made with the word"corruption" probably did not help matters.

I love you for reviving this.

We're paying about $4.15 here. :(

[KarmaContestant]

Denver, Alameda & Broadway. $3.79. Not bad, really. I only drive three days a week and take the train the the other two so I spend about $60 a month on gas. City living for the win!

[louielouie2000]

I really don't pay attention to gas prices anymore since we've become a car-free household. All we have now are a motorcycle & a scooter... the motorcycle gets about 50 mpg & the scooter gets upwards of 70 mpg. Both are plenty fast to take on Interstate Highways, too. Because we also chose to live close to where we work (vs a sprawling suburban homestead), gasoline prices have very little effect on our budget.

It's time Americans started adapting to a world of higher gas prices. We're the last real holdout... our days of cheap gas are dwindling. And that's being exacerbated by Americans who think it's their God given right to drive horribly inefficient tanks which are guzzling up the world's finite supply of petroleum; yet decry increasing gas prices. :rolleyes:

[Enchanted_Stevi]

$3.83-$3.89 around Leominster, Ma area...

[KarmaContestant]

It's time Americans started adapting to a world of higher gas prices. We're the last real holdout... our days of cheap gas are dwindling. And that's being exacerbated by Americans who think it's their God given right to drive horribly inefficient tanks which are guzzling up the world's finite supply of petroleum; yet decry increasing gas prices. :rolleyes:

^^^ Quoted for truth!

[mylittledemon]

I really don't pay attention to gas prices anymore since we've become a car-free household. All we have now are a motorcycle & a scooter... the motorcycle gets about 50 mpg & the scooter gets upwards of 70 mpg. Both are plenty fast to take on Interstate Highways, too. Because we also chose to live close to where we work (vs a sprawling suburban homestead), gasoline prices have very little effect on our budget.


Yep. I would've rather not bought a car, but it's nice to at least take weekend trips. I try to walk or take the bus during the week. We bought a Honda Civic that's rated 5-stars in terms of fuel efficiency... so we do get quite good mileage out of it. I still hate paying the petrol prices though. Costs us about $80 to fill it, and we go roughly 2 weeks days between fill-ups. :\

[chriskisn]

Here in NZ it's roughly $2.20 per litre. I guess we're paying about $9-10 a gallon. :shocked:

Ouch you are worse off that we are...although I guess our $ is stronger than the NZ one (our $ is stronger than pretty much anything right now :lol:)

[estranged4life]

$3.77 a gallon here in Bible-belt central.

Thinking about buying a sail and turning my Trailblazer into a wind powered auto, lol!

[skcin]

I really don't pay attention to gas prices anymore since we've become a car-free household. All we have now are a motorcycle & a scooter... the motorcycle gets about 50 mpg & the scooter gets upwards of 70 mpg. Both are plenty fast to take on Interstate Highways, too. Because we also chose to live close to where we work (vs a sprawling suburban homestead), gasoline prices have very little effect on our budget.

It's time Americans started adapting to a world of higher gas prices. We're the last real holdout... our days of cheap gas are dwindling. And that's being exacerbated by Americans who think it's their God given right to drive horribly inefficient tanks which are guzzling up the world's finite supply of petroleum; yet decry increasing gas prices. :rolleyes:

While I agree with the "you made your bad, now lie in it" tone of your post in theory, there's only so much some people can do. :shrug: A family with a kid probably can't live with just a scooter. Public transportation is not readily available to many people - if I were to take a bus to my job, it would take 3 transfers & a total if 1.25 hrs one way; my commute by car takes 12 minutes. It's great that this works for you & your family, but you can't assume it will work for everyone else.

I grew up in the suburbs; should I move to the city where I'm not familiar? Living close to work is not an option for everyone (esp. if you work in a shady area.) I agree it's kind of ridiculous to buy a 8 or 10 cylinder truck these days unless you truly need it for a work purpose. But there are plenty of people who have older/smaller vehicles that don't get the best mileage & can't afford to buy something newer/better.

[louielouie2000]

While I agree with the "you made your bad, now lie in it" tone of your post in theory, there's only so much some people can do. :shrug: A family with a kid probably can't live with just a scooter. Public transportation is not readily available to many people - if I were to take a bus to my job, it would take 3 transfers & a total if 1.25 hrs one way; my commute by car takes 12 minutes. It's great that this works for you & your family, but you can't assume it will work for everyone else.

I grew up in the suburbs; should I move to the city where I'm not familiar? Living close to work is not an option for everyone (esp. if you work in a shady area.) I agree it's kind of ridiculous to buy a 8 or 10 cylinder truck these days unless you truly need it for a work purpose. But there are plenty of people who have older/smaller vehicles that don't get the best mileage & can't afford to buy something newer/better.

Living in Texas, ALL I see are full size trucks & SUVs... all of which accelerate & speed absurdly aggressively over & around the big hills of Austin... carrying invariably only their driver. It's just absurd. I can't sit at an intersection without one of those mega trucks/SUV's catching rubber when a light turns, that's how aggressively people drive here. Folks lined up idling for a mile in their Tahoes & Expeditions to retrieve their kids from school, when the child could just ride a bus. I can't imagine how much fuel all these type people use in a week, rocketing through Austin's tall hills & canyons like that; backing up traffic through unnecessary driving, etc. I just don't see the need for such massive, inefficient vehicles, either. The rest of the world is making due with smaller vehicles; vehicles with smaller/more efficient engines; etc. I just don't get people who decry gas prices, while guzzling through gasoline at frightfully unsustainable rates. I totally respect and champion our citizens ability to chose whatever type of transportation they want... I just have no sympathy for those who contribute hugely to the problem, while blaming everyone but themselves for the gasoline addicted state we're in.

I truly understand some folks need larger vehicles, and not everyone wants to live in urban areas either. But there are plenty of 4 & 6 cylinder trucks, SUVs, vans, & crossovers which are plenty capable of doing exactly the same thing as their 8 & 10 cylinder counterparts. Diesel engines use something like 40% less fuel than their gasoline counterparts, while often making twice the torque... yet Americans have long eschewed diesels. I'm not even bringing up hybrids, because I think they're junk technology. And yes, mass transit is only available to a very small amount of working Americans, but almost anyone living anywhere can start or join a commuting carpool. There are so many ways to decrease one's gasoline consumption rather than getting rid of a car like I did. But it seems most Americans would rather throw a tantrum than shift their way of doing things in the slightest manner. If we don't start getting real about our oil addiction, we're going to see some pretty frightening things during our lifetimes.

[vivfox]

If we don't start getting real about our oil addiction, we're going to see some pretty frightening things during our lifetimes.

Ooooh, this sounds exciting. Care to elaborate on some of those frightening prospects?

[HejiraNYC]

I think it's one thing to have high gas price like they do in Europe and other developed areas of the world. But it's another thing entirely to have high gas prices in the U.S. For one thing, the high gas prices abroad are not directly linked to market forces as much as they are linked to taxes- taxes that are used to help fund infrastructure as well as social entitlements like healthcare, paid leave and pensions. Yes, the gas taxes in the U.S. are much lower than the rest of the developed world, but they does not contribute to any social entitlements. As such, high gas prices in the U.S. can only be attributed to "market forces," e.g., market speculation and greed. Although cartels are technically illegal in the U.S., the U.S. oil/gas industry is indeed a cartel and they manipulate the market in unison along with their counterparts on Wall Street.

Don't get me wrong; I personally am in favor of high gas prices in the U.S.- it forces people to adopt more responsible transportation habits. However, I am not in favor of high gas prices when it consists mostly of profits going to Wall Street and the U.S. oil cartel. High gas prices are only justifiable when they are due to high gas taxes that are used to fund public transportation initiatives, alternative green energy development and public healthcare and education. IMHO, the future is electric and we still have a LONG way to go before we have anything close to a viable/sustainable/practical electrical infrastructure. The sooner we support its development, the better.

[KarmaContestant]

Ooooh, this sounds exciting. Care to elaborate on some of those frightening prospects?

One scenario that is frequently mentioned by experts in the energy sector is the near-complete breakdown of the world's food transportation system.

Think of it like this - the next time you go to a grocery store, see how many things in it you can find that come from less than 10 miles away. Also, look at the little stickers on produce and see how much of it is grown in your state - or even in this country. I'll tell you already - almost nothing. Without cheap fuel to transport food, prices will skyrocket OR the food won't be transported at all. For much of the rural United States that means no out-of-season fruit or vegetables (most people take for granted that they can get strawberries and avocados, for example, all year long), for almost all of the urban areas, that means no fruit or vegetables AT ALL unless they're grown locally - I live in an largely agricultural state and the nearest apples and peaches are grown 232 miles away in Palisade. For nearly all of the United States this means no frozen/canned/boxed/bagged goods. Even then, the factories that produce frozen/canned/boxed/bagged goods probably won't be getting their supplies delivered and could shut down production alltogether because they have no product to ship to stores. Animals will not be transported to slaughterhouses, which means no meat in the stores for our carniverous friends.


No cat food.
No dog food.
No grain for livestock, unlesss you grow it yourself (few meat producers do)
Not even food for the fish in your aquarium once existing supplies sell out.

Our entire global food distribution network is dependent upon cheap petroleum, and almost no one in America eats food produced locally.

Empty stores = pretty frightening.

When I was in Europe, particularly when flying over Germany to Italy, I noticed something very practical about their infrastructure - the cities and towns were mostly all surrounded by farms. Presumably to grow produce to sell to the people who live in those cities and towns. Conversely, America's farms have been sold off and developed into urban sprawl.

[bretonbanquet]

What a fantastic thread this was, and was it really that long ago? :shocked:

At today's average prices, one US gallon of unleaded costs US$8.52 in the UK.

[mylittledemon]

At today's average prices, one US gallon of unleaded costs US$8.52 in the UK.

That's insane eh. So even if Americans were paying $5-6 a gallon, they're gettin' off light! ;)

[bretonbanquet]

That's insane eh. So even if Americans were paying $5-6 a gallon, they're gettin' off light! ;)

I think that's where this thread came in :laugh: Where's Mary when you need her?

[michelle2677]

What a fantastic thread this was, and was it really that long ago? :shocked:

At today's average prices, one US gallon of unleaded costs US$8.52 in the UK.

quit complaining-you make twice as much as us :mad:

[bretonbanquet]

quit complaining-you make twice as much as us :mad:

Because our money's worth twice as much, that's right :laugh: DON'T YOU SEE?? haha sheer class.

[GypsySorcerer]

quit complaining-you make twice as much as us :mad:

For real. They make more BY EXTENSION because their money is twice as valuable as ours! :p

[mylittledemon]

quit complaining-you make twice as much as us :mad:

And they don't have as far to drive because their island is small. :lol:

[Macfanforever]

It's a ripoff everywhere.No control anywhere.OPEC is king .they can get away with it.In the meantime in New York .Wall street is business as usual with speculators.