Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany

On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany


Looking at more of their videos it appears that Hammer has adopted the
Laguna style band saw guides. Maybe Laguna makes them for Hammer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTu0nY5Hn5c

On 1/13/2017 11:20 AM, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



Looking at more of their videos it appears that Hammer has adopted the
Laguna style band saw guides. Maybe Laguna makes them for Hammer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTu0nY5Hn5c


Well maybe not Hammer rather Felder.

Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet writes:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany


Looking at more of their videos it appears that Hammer has adopted the
Laguna style band saw guides. Maybe Laguna makes them for Hammer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTu0nY5Hn5c

Or maybe Laguna and Hammer buy them from the same Bulgarian factory....

On 1/13/2017 11:48 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet writes:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany


Looking at more of their videos it appears that Hammer has adopted the
Laguna style band saw guides. Maybe Laguna makes them for Hammer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTu0nY5Hn5c

Or maybe Laguna and Hammer buy them from the same Bulgarian factory....


Certainly the saws may be, along with the Italian factories.

I think the Laguna guide is actually an exclusive add on item that they
manufacture, I could be wrong. Laguna saws come from Italy and other
eastern areas like Bulgaria so not all are made in the same factory. I
understood that the Laguna guides were added on after Laguna takes
possession of the saw. And Laguna offers their guides for other brand
saws. Also I have not seed this type ceramic guide on any other brand
until now. I did quite a bit of research on many band saws 10 years
ago, including Hammer/Felder and only Laguna had this type guide when I
bought my Laguna at that time. Laguna also adds on the Baldor motors
after taking possession.

https://lagunatools.com/accessories/...ide-selection/

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 15:19:33 +0000
Spalted Walt wrote:

Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

nice machine

what is cost

i would guess forty thou or maybe fifty

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 15:19:33 +0000
Spalted Walt wrote:

Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this

would have been good punchline at the end to show the small door to his
shop that the hot tub would not fit thru

On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".

On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

On 1/13/2017 10:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



Perfect. I can sell my car and buy the Felder which will fit in the same
garage space where the car was parked.

On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

They may have been able to afford (have enough money to pay for) the initial
purchase, but that doesn't mean that they can afford the total cost of
ownership.

Sure, it's easy (and correct) to say that they should never had made that
original purchase in the first place. However, to drive by someone's house or
look at someone's vehicle (or tools) and make the blanket statement "If they
can afford the (thing) then they can afford the (aftermath)" is making an
assumption that might not be correct. Unless you know their actual financial
situation, you really don't know if they have gotten themselves in over their
head. I'm sure we've all seen that happen.

On 1/14/2017 8:21 AM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/13/2017 10:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany




Perfect. I can sell my car and buy the Felder which will fit in the same
garage space where the car was parked.



I noticed IIRC the saw takes up 2.5 square meters of space. If only it
were perfectly square.

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

On 1/14/2017 11:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."


Apples to oranges comparison. You used examples of personal labor
whereas not for the vehicle. If you stated pool parts or landscape
accessories, then yes. Much depends on the brand, type, neighborhood,
etc. Huge houses have higher expenses than smaller ones. In ground
concrete pools have higher expenses than above ground metal or plastic
pool kits.


They may have been able to afford (have enough money to pay for) the initial
purchase, but that doesn't mean that they can afford the total cost of
ownership.

Sure, it's easy (and correct) to say that they should never had made that
original purchase in the first place. However, to drive by someone's house or
look at someone's vehicle (or tools) and make the blanket statement "If they
can afford the (thing) then they can afford the (aftermath)" is making an
assumption that might not be correct. Unless you know their actual financial
situation, you really don't know if they have gotten themselves in over their
head. I'm sure we've all seen that happen.


The fact is, when purchasing a product, we purchase on many criteria and
one of them is brand name. When purchasing top of the line products,
obviously, top of the line parts will ensue when needed. You cannot
purchase a Mercedes and use cheap parts even if aftermarket, as they are
still expensive. Top of the line products are top of the line because of
the parts they use. Therefore, if someone purchases that product, they
should be expecting to pay higher end costs for repairs. 9.99% of the
time, a person purchasing a brand new top of the line product can afford
it's upkeep.

On 1/14/2017 11:41 AM, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2017 8:21 AM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/13/2017 10:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany





Perfect. I can sell my car and buy the Felder which will fit in the same
garage space where the car was parked.



I noticed IIRC the saw takes up 2.5 square meters of space. If only it
were perfectly square.

Probably difficult to design something that precise into a perfectly
symmetrical shape.

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 15:17:32 -0500, Meanie wrote:

On 1/14/2017 11:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."


Apples to oranges comparison. You used examples of personal labor
whereas not for the vehicle. If you stated pool parts or landscape
accessories, then yes. Much depends on the brand, type, neighborhood,
etc. Huge houses have higher expenses than smaller ones. In ground
concrete pools have higher expenses than above ground metal or plastic
pool kits.


They may have been able to afford (have enough money to pay for) the initial
purchase, but that doesn't mean that they can afford the total cost of
ownership.

Sure, it's easy (and correct) to say that they should never had made that
original purchase in the first place. However, to drive by someone's house or
look at someone's vehicle (or tools) and make the blanket statement "If they
can afford the (thing) then they can afford the (aftermath)" is making an
assumption that might not be correct. Unless you know their actual financial
situation, you really don't know if they have gotten themselves in over their
head. I'm sure we've all seen that happen.


The fact is, when purchasing a product, we purchase on many criteria and
one of them is brand name. When purchasing top of the line products,
obviously, top of the line parts will ensue when needed. You cannot
purchase a Mercedes and use cheap parts even if aftermarket, as they are
still expensive. Top of the line products are top of the line because of
the parts they use. Therefore, if someone purchases that product, they
should be expecting to pay higher end costs for repairs. 9.99% of the
time, a person purchasing a brand new top of the line product can afford
it's upkeep.
Like I've said many times when asked about cars - with some brands
(mostly German, but also Italian and English (now Indian owned) - if
you EVER have to ask the question "how much?", you can't afford one.

Also:"If you want first quality oats, you have to be willing to pay
first quality price - If on the other hand you are willing to settle
for oats that have already been through the horse, they DO come a
little cheaper"

On 1/14/2017 5:31 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 15:17:32 -0500, Meanie wrote:

On 1/14/2017 11:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."


Apples to oranges comparison. You used examples of personal labor
whereas not for the vehicle. If you stated pool parts or landscape
accessories, then yes. Much depends on the brand, type, neighborhood,
etc. Huge houses have higher expenses than smaller ones. In ground
concrete pools have higher expenses than above ground metal or plastic
pool kits.


They may have been able to afford (have enough money to pay for) the initial
purchase, but that doesn't mean that they can afford the total cost of
ownership.

Sure, it's easy (and correct) to say that they should never had made that
original purchase in the first place. However, to drive by someone's house or
look at someone's vehicle (or tools) and make the blanket statement "If they
can afford the (thing) then they can afford the (aftermath)" is making an
assumption that might not be correct. Unless you know their actual financial
situation, you really don't know if they have gotten themselves in over their
head. I'm sure we've all seen that happen.


The fact is, when purchasing a product, we purchase on many criteria and
one of them is brand name. When purchasing top of the line products,
obviously, top of the line parts will ensue when needed. You cannot
purchase a Mercedes and use cheap parts even if aftermarket, as they are
still expensive. Top of the line products are top of the line because of
the parts they use. Therefore, if someone purchases that product, they
should be expecting to pay higher end costs for repairs. 9.99% of the
time, a person purchasing a brand new top of the line product can afford
it's upkeep.
Like I've said many times when asked about cars - with some brands
(mostly German, but also Italian and English (now Indian owned) - if
you EVER have to ask the question "how much?", you can't afford one.

Also:"If you want first quality oats, you have to be willing to pay
first quality price - If on the other hand you are willing to settle
for oats that have already been through the horse, they DO come a
little cheaper"


I think I threw up in my mouth a little bit.

On 1/14/2017 4:44 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 5:31 PM, wrote:

[snip]

it's upkeep.
Like I've said many times when asked about cars - with some brands
(mostly German, but also Italian and English (now Indian owned) - if
you EVER have to ask the question "how much?", you can't afford one.

Also:"If you want first quality oats, you have to be willing to pay
first quality price - If on the other hand you are willing to settle
for oats that have already been through the horse, they DO come a
little cheaper"


One of my personal favorites! Attributed to Will Rogers Jr.

Another: Fast, Cheap, Good. Pick two, because that's all you can have!

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.

On 1/14/2017 2:19 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 11:41 AM, Leon wrote:
On 1/14/2017 8:21 AM, Meanie wrote:
On 1/13/2017 10:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany






Perfect. I can sell my car and buy the Felder which will fit in the same
garage space where the car was parked.



I noticed IIRC the saw takes up 2.5 square meters of space. If only it
were perfectly square.

Probably difficult to design something that precise into a perfectly
symmetrical shape.


That and cutting boards takes up room too.

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.





Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008. In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

So while those home owners technically could afford to buy the houses,
they could not afford the expenses that came with those homes.

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.



So while those home owners technically could afford to buy the houses,
they could not afford the expenses that came with those homes.

The basic problem was they had ARMs and were trapped by falling
values. "Homes will always increase in value."

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.


Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

And yes the ARM was absolutely a problem but in this area the sky
rocketing home values are out pacing incomes, NOW. My property taxes
alone have increased an average of $200.00 per month in the last 3 years.
Fortunately we paid cash for our home and did not buy bigger than we
needed which financing would have afforded us.




So while those home owners technically could afford to buy the houses,
they could not afford the expenses that came with those homes.

The basic problem was they had ARMs and were trapped by falling
values. "Homes will always increase in value."

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

I'm not following you. The costs today are similar to the costs ten
years ago (pre-crash).

And yes the ARM was absolutely a problem but in this area the sky
rocketing home values are out pacing incomes, NOW. My property taxes
alone have increased an average of $200.00 per month in the last 3 years.
Fortunately we paid cash for our home and did not buy bigger than we
needed which financing would have afforded us.

You're in a position in life where you don't need a mortgage. I have
pocket change left on mine but it's not possible for everyone to be in
this position. Some aren't old farts. ;-)

On 1/15/2017 9:46 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Not here, those taxes are all collected to equally supply services to
the land owners.


Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

Well look at this way. Mr. Jones lived in an apartment most of his
life, he suddenly qualifies for a 3600 sq ft home because of the
"government guaranteed loans". He is married and the kids are gone
before he bought the house. He was so marginal on being able to afford
the house in the first place that now he cannot make payments as the
escrow has gone up as a direct result of the home increasing in value
30% in the last 5 years. There was a reason he was in an apartment most
of his adult life, and not the government has provided a way for him to
live in a neighborhood that he would not normally have been able to
afford. He is not moving out until he is forced out. See where I'm
going here... ;~)



This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

I'm not following you. The costs today are similar to the costs ten
years ago (pre-crash).

Housing costs? Some of the new'ish homes that people could barely
afford to begin with need new roofs, fences and values are probably up
25% from pre crash days. We have a unique situation here.


And yes the ARM was absolutely a problem but in this area the sky
rocketing home values are out pacing incomes, NOW. My property taxes
alone have increased an average of $200.00 per month in the last 3 years.
Fortunately we paid cash for our home and did not buy bigger than we
needed which financing would have afforded us.

You're in a position in life where you don't need a mortgage. I have
pocket change left on mine but it's not possible for everyone to be in
this position. Some aren't old farts. ;-)

On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 22:27:42 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/15/2017 9:46 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Not here, those taxes are all collected to equally supply services to
the land owners.

You don't think their kids go to school, their families protected by
police and fire, or colllect welfare?


Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

Well look at this way. Mr. Jones lived in an apartment most of his
life, he suddenly qualifies for a 3600 sq ft home because of the
"government guaranteed loans". He is married and the kids are gone
before he bought the house. He was so marginal on being able to afford
the house in the first place that now he cannot make payments as the
escrow has gone up as a direct result of the home increasing in value
30% in the last 5 years. There was a reason he was in an apartment most
of his adult life, and not the government has provided a way for him to
live in a neighborhood that he would not normally have been able to
afford. He is not moving out until he is forced out. See where I'm
going here... ;~)

Government guarantees (ick) or not, PITI of 30% is about max. The
problem isn't the house but the cars and credit card debt *after* the
home purchase. That's a choice.



This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

I'm not following you. The costs today are similar to the costs ten
years ago (pre-crash).

Housing costs? Some of the new'ish homes that people could barely
afford to begin with need new roofs, fences and values are probably up
25% from pre crash days. We have a unique situation here.

25%? That's nothing. My house is up almost 100%, if the estimates
(and tax assessments) are to be believed. And, yes, my taxes have
doubled in that five years. That increase in __T_ is small compared
to PI_I.

In article s0go7c1gfgipb6p470ceh0sogdqal82cjj@
4ax.com, says...

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Two years ago I was living on food stamps and
half time minimum wage. Today I'm living on a
full time quant's salary which means I pay more
in income tax than my entire compensation in the
last engineering job I had.

I don't begrudge the services rendered to poor
people nor do I feel that taxing them further
into poverty serves any purpose.

I'd rather pay less tax but not if it means
imposing taxes on the poor that they do not have
the means to pay.

Forcing someone to choose between food, shelter,
and taxes is rather sadistic IMO.

Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

The "needs" of the community can include quite a
lot of cruft that could be done away with.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

Move to where?

This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

I'm not following you. The costs today are similar to the costs ten
years ago (pre-crash).

And yes the ARM was absolutely a problem but in this area the sky
rocketing home values are out pacing incomes, NOW. My property taxes
alone have increased an average of $200.00 per month in the last 3 years.
Fortunately we paid cash for our home and did not buy bigger than we
needed which financing would have afforded us.

You're in a position in life where you don't need a mortgage. I have
pocket change left on mine but it's not possible for everyone to be in
this position. Some aren't old farts. ;-)

On 1/15/2017 10:50 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 22:27:42 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/15/2017 9:46 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Not here, those taxes are all collected to equally supply services to
the land owners.

You don't think their kids go to school, their families protected by
police and fire, or colllect welfare?


Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

Well look at this way. Mr. Jones lived in an apartment most of his
life, he suddenly qualifies for a 3600 sq ft home because of the
"government guaranteed loans". He is married and the kids are gone
before he bought the house. He was so marginal on being able to afford
the house in the first place that now he cannot make payments as the
escrow has gone up as a direct result of the home increasing in value
30% in the last 5 years. There was a reason he was in an apartment most
of his adult life, and not the government has provided a way for him to
live in a neighborhood that he would not normally have been able to
afford. He is not moving out until he is forced out. See where I'm
going here... ;~)

Government guarantees (ick) or not, PITI of 30% is about max. The
problem isn't the house but the cars and credit card debt *after* the
home purchase. That's a choice.



This has have happened now instead of then because of rising costs to
maintain the houses and pay taxes owed. Now the homes need to be
maintained and that expense adds.

I'm not following you. The costs today are similar to the costs ten
years ago (pre-crash).

Housing costs? Some of the new'ish homes that people could barely
afford to begin with need new roofs, fences and values are probably up
25% from pre crash days. We have a unique situation here.

25%? That's nothing. My house is up almost 100%, if the estimates
(and tax assessments) are to be believed. And, yes, my taxes have
doubled in that five years. That increase in __T_ is small compared
to PI_I.



Well 25% is nothing but you said you were paying .5% tax IIRC. So if
your home is valued at 200K now , it was 100k your tax went up a
thousand dollars?

We pay 3% and have had an increase of 25% to say only $250k., so 3% of
50K is 50% more, $1500 than your increase and that has been in the last
3 years.

And these numbers are may be skewed.

But
Below is fact.


A home owner in our neighborhood that has a home valued at $250K pays
$7500 per year in property taxes. And many of those homes are $300k
plus. A 25 percent vlaue increase on a tax that is 3% is quite a chunk.


And if you have any doubts google the complaints Fort Bend county
residents are screaming about concerning raising property values. It
has got the State representatives attention.

Texas can increase values up to 10% each year and they typically catch
up if they missed a year, they can go up 10% for each year that they did
not.

On 1/15/2017 10:46 PM, wrote:



That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.


In theory it works that way. Unfortunately, too many people don't
understand it. When the come around every 10 years (now 5) I hear people
complain that once revalued their tax will go up. The town finance
committee seems willing to make that come true. It is a money grab with
an increased budget.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 06:07:04 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/15/2017 10:46 PM, wrote:



That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.


In theory it works that way. Unfortunately, too many people don't
understand it. When the come around every 10 years (now 5) I hear people
complain that once revalued their tax will go up. The town finance
committee seems willing to make that come true. It is a money grab with
an increased budget.
Not pointing atg you, Ed - but if YOU were a city worker, a cop, a
fireman, or whatever, would YOU want to work for less, just to lower
the tax rate for every other resident of your city by fifty cents?
Do you want to have to wait an hour for a fire truck to arrive,
instead of 7 minutes? Or to wait 20 minutes for a cop to respond to an
emergency instead of 3?

That's what you are asking for when you ask for reduced taxes (of
course a small prtion could be reduced by reducing real waste and
corruption at higher levels in some jurisdictions)

wrote in newso2q7c1u4ri4rrbmis7caf38tde1afv5pg@
4ax.com:

Not pointing atg you, Ed - but if YOU were a city worker, a cop, a
fireman, or whatever, would YOU want to work for less, just to lower
the tax rate for every other resident of your city by fifty cents?
Do you want to have to wait an hour for a fire truck to arrive,
instead of 7 minutes? Or to wait 20 minutes for a cop to respond to an
emergency instead of 3?

That's what you are asking for when you ask for reduced taxes (of
course a small prtion could be reduced by reducing real waste and
corruption at higher levels in some jurisdictions)

OTOH, are we really talking about 50 cents? Tax rates don't just go up
by the cost of postage stamps, they tend to jump.

I'm happy to give the road dept, fire fighters, sheriff what they want
(within reason). Those guys make my life better. Education, OTOH, is a
huge money sink and I really don't know that we're getting anywhere close
to the thousands of dollars they charge in value from them. They waste
time with mandatory fun days, shift classes to computers where a textbook
and notebook is all they really need, eliminate shop classes because of
insurance, and so on.

Puckdropper
--
http://www.puckdroppersplace.us/rec.woodworking
A mini archive of some of rec.woodworking's best and worst!

On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 11:01:19 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.



You seem to be in favor of property taxes as a set fee. Everyone pays the exact same price. Taking the "flat tax" philosophy to an extreme. Everyone should pay the exact same dollar amount of taxes regardless of their income. No progressive to it.

Found a website about Houston city property taxes that said this:

"The property tax provides more tax dollars for local government services in Texas than any other source. Property taxes help pay for public schools, city streets, county roads, police, fire protection, and many other services."

With streets and maybe police and fire, maybe, everyone should get the exact same service regardless of income or wealth or property value. But most property tax money is used for public schools. In my city the wealthier suburbs with nice homes have much, much, much nicer schools than the ghettos. I would guess it is the exact same in Houston too. People with million dollar homes want their little children to go to nice schools. Nice schools with swimming pools, new football stadiums, new basketball courts, performing arts centers, no lead pipes for drinking water, indoor plumbing with automatic flush toilets, solariums, etc. So it would be pretty hard to pay for those nice schools in the millionaire areas if property taxes are not based on home value.

Unless you are also proposing that we tax everyone the same, poor, rich, does not matter, everyone pays the exact same tax amount. Then we give the vast majority of that total money to the rich kids so they can have nice schools. Poor kids should be happy with a shack and outhouse.

On 16 Jan 2017 19:26:29 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in newso2q7c1u4ri4rrbmis7caf38tde1afv5pg@
4ax.com:

Not pointing atg you, Ed - but if YOU were a city worker, a cop, a
fireman, or whatever, would YOU want to work for less, just to lower
the tax rate for every other resident of your city by fifty cents?
Do you want to have to wait an hour for a fire truck to arrive,
instead of 7 minutes? Or to wait 20 minutes for a cop to respond to an
emergency instead of 3?

That's what you are asking for when you ask for reduced taxes (of
course a small prtion could be reduced by reducing real waste and
corruption at higher levels in some jurisdictions)

OTOH, are we really talking about 50 cents? Tax rates don't just go up
by the cost of postage stamps, they tend to jump.

I'm happy to give the road dept, fire fighters, sheriff what they want
(within reason). Those guys make my life better. Education, OTOH, is a
huge money sink and I really don't know that we're getting anywhere close
to the thousands of dollars they charge in value from them. They waste
time with mandatory fun days, shift classes to computers where a textbook
and notebook is all they really need, eliminate shop classes because of
insurance, and so on.

Puckdropper
Having been part of the education system "in a previous life" I'll
agree a lot of money is wasted - but watching this last election cycle
in the USA I'd say not NEARLY enough emphasis is put on "education"

"Education" needs to be a priority, and money spent on "education" is
never wasted. Money spent on the "education system" is almost by
default wasted.\

What needs to be figured out is how to provide an adequate "education"
without wasting money on the "education system"

Teachers and schools are an investment. School Districts, School
Boards, etc, are a large money waster.

On 1/16/2017 2:13 PM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 11:01:19 PM UTC-6, Leon wrote:
Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays
less than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why
should some one in a million dollar home pay more property tax than
some in a $250,000 home. Is the guy in the million dollar home
getting 4 times as many services. Probably not. Property taxes
should not be based on value of the property. Everyone should pay
the same amount for the same services.



You seem to be in favor of property taxes as a set fee. Everyone
pays the exact same price. Taking the "flat tax" philosophy to an
extreme. Everyone should pay the exact same dollar amount of taxes
regardless of their income. No progressive to it.


Found a website about Houston city property taxes that said this:

I live in an unincorporated area of Ft. Bend county, west of Houston.




"The property tax provides more tax dollars for local government
services in Texas than any other source. Property taxes help pay for
public schools, city streets, county roads, police, fire protection,
and many other services."

With streets and maybe police and fire, maybe, everyone should get
the exact same service regardless of income or wealth or property
value. But most property tax money is used for public schools. In
my city the wealthier suburbs with nice homes have much, much, much
nicer schools than the ghettos. I would guess it is the exact same
in Houston too. People with million dollar homes want their little
children to go to nice schools. Nice schools with swimming pools,
new football stadiums, new basketball courts, performing arts
centers, no lead pipes for drinking water, indoor plumbing with
automatic flush toilets, solariums, etc.


So it would be pretty hard
to pay for those nice schools in the millionaire areas if property
taxes are not based on home value.

How do you figure that? Every one pays the same tax, with some
exemptions, for the very poor, and all money goes to pay the budget. If
every one is paying the same it will be harder for the government to
hide misuse of funds. Every one will be affected if the tax goes up.
FWIW school taxes are collected but are a separate entity of property tax.



Unless you are also proposing that we tax everyone the same, poor,
rich, does not matter, everyone pays the exact same tax amount.

That is what I am proposing, just like everything else, sales tax,
merchandise etc.


Then
we give the vast majority of that total money to the rich kids so
they can have nice schools. Poor kids should be happy with a shack
and outhouse.


No, all money goes into a general fund and is distributed equally to all
schools depending on the population of students.

If rich people want something special for their kids schools they can
get involved with something like the PTA to collect for special amenities.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 23:19:11 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/15/2017 10:50 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2017 22:27:42 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

snipped to make some pussies happy, here.

Housing costs? Some of the new'ish homes that people could barely
afford to begin with need new roofs, fences and values are probably up
25% from pre crash days. We have a unique situation here.

25%? That's nothing. My house is up almost 100%, if the estimates
(and tax assessments) are to be believed. And, yes, my taxes have
doubled in that five years. That increase in __T_ is small compared
to PI_I.



Well 25% is nothing but you said you were paying .5% tax IIRC. So if
your home is valued at 200K now , it was 100k your tax went up a
thousand dollars?

Double those numbers but, yes.


We pay 3% and have had an increase of 25% to say only $250k., so 3% of
50K is 50% more, $1500 than your increase and that has been in the last
3 years.

What's the tax (T) increase as a percentage of PITI?

And these numbers are may be skewed.

But
Below is fact.


A home owner in our neighborhood that has a home valued at $250K pays
$7500 per year in property taxes. And many of those homes are $300k
plus. A 25 percent vlaue increase on a tax that is 3% is quite a chunk.

As a percentage of the Principle + Interest + Tax + Insurance costs?
It's only the tax part that's increasing.

OK, a 30-year mortgage on 250K, at 4%, is roughly $14K per year
(assuming no PMI). Add the tax ($7500), and insurance ($2K) and the
total is $23.5K. If the value of the home goes up 25%, the taxes
increase to $9375, or a little under $2K. This portion of owning the
house has gone up around 8.5%, surely less than a rental during the
same time (not only their taxes are going up but their value). If the
owner can't absorb this increase, over 3(?) years, they're in way over
their heads, even without tax increases. They'd probably be in worse
shape without the home.



And if you have any doubts google the complaints Fort Bend county
residents are screaming about concerning raising property values. It
has got the State representatives attention.

Texas can increase values up to 10% each year and they typically catch
up if they missed a year, they can go up 10% for each year that they did
not.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 00:08:44 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

In article s0go7c1gfgipb6p470ceh0sogdqal82cjj@
4ax.com, says...

On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 23:01:02 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 18:08:43 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 5:23 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2017 10:47:45 -0600, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote:

On 1/14/2017 10:04 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-5, Meanie wrote:
On 1/14/2017 12:11 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Leon wrote:
On 1/13/2017 9:19 AM, Spalted Walt wrote:
Home Depot was all out of Siberian Larch lumber so I **** canned this
project. ^º^

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xj4gSMdaaxE?autoplay=1

Shipping cost for a used one from Lohmar, Germany?
https://www.machinio.com/listings/15...lohmar-germany



I love those videos

At 15:35 he makes a zero clearance insert. What do you think that
pre-drilled - complete with leveling screws - blank is made from?

What do you think spares for different sized zero clearance inserts cost?

I vote for "not cheap".


It's similar to buying a luxury vehicle such as Mercedes, BMW or a
higher end brand. If they can afford it, they can afford the parts and
service when needed.

I have never subscribed to that argument. It all depends on how you are
using the word "afford", which is usually defined as "to have enough money
to pay for".

"If they can afford a pool, they can afford a pool maintenance man."
"If they can afford a house with a huge lawn, they can afford a landscaper."
"If they can afford luxury car, they can afford the parts."

Correct

Buying and affording are very different animals.

Many people buy vehicles or homes but mostly on credit because they
cannot afford/don't have the cash to buy any other way.

I imagine that exceedingly few buy their first house with cash. I
don't have an issue with mortgages.

Neither do I but during the government guaranteed loans fiasco a very
large number of people qualified for homes that they should not have
qualified for. They were strapped for every penny and when things
happened and there was not enough money to make a mortgage payment it
all went to hell in a hand basket.

If they had a fixed mortgage, it wouldn't have mattered. If I lost my
job, I would have had a problem, too. The issue wasn't mortgages that
were too large, rather people were sold ARMs. At the cost of money,
at the time, ARMs were downright stupid.


Think about the housing mortgage crisis 9 years ago.

What about it? I had no issues, even bought an sold a house. If you
had good credit, there was no issue. Some fools had ARMs. They
didn't do so well, of course.


It did not bother or my wife either, but we were not buying or trying to
sell in 2008.

I did (sold at the end of '07 and bought in August '08). No issues. I
did lose $30K in '11/'12 on my house but I'll more than make that up
on this one (it was a foreclosure - now "worth" almost twice what I
paid for it).

In Houston housing prices dipped to what they should be
and selling was tough as there were many foreclosures that were dirt cheap.
Either way there are many people that were able to keep their homes but
are finding that with demand going back up and property values going up
it is causing taxes to go way up. They can no longer afford those
homes. I pay about 3% in property taxes each year. Many near by places
have a higher rate.

Then the property taxes should have been going down when the values
tanked. I pay about 1%. It was more like .5% on my last house. ;-)
Taxes were on the list of the reasons we left Vermont. There was no
way I could retire, given that cost of living. I don't see a reason
to live where it's more expensive than necessary.

Believe me if you pay property taxes and know some one that pays less
than you do, you may be paying more than necessary. Why should some one
in a million dollar home pay more property tax than some in a $250,000
home. Is the guy in the million dollar home getting 4 times as many
services. Probably not. Property taxes should not be based on value of
the property. Everyone should pay the same amount for the same services.

Why? Because it's "progressive". Why should I pay more income tax
than a hamburger flipper? They're almost assuredly getting more
government services than I.

Two years ago I was living on food stamps and
half time minimum wage. Today I'm living on a
full time quant's salary which means I pay more
in income tax than my entire compensation in the
last engineering job I had.

What's a "quant"? Your last engineering job must have sucked. ;-)

I don't begrudge the services rendered to poor
people nor do I feel that taxing them further
into poverty serves any purpose.

Not to the point.

I'd rather pay less tax but not if it means
imposing taxes on the poor that they do not have
the means to pay.

Forcing someone to choose between food, shelter,
and taxes is rather sadistic IMO.

The level of taxation on everyone is sadistic but, again, irrelevant.

Yes the taxes did go down with property values but remember that the
economy tanked also and people lost their jobs. And while these homes
did go down in value when the crisis hit they have now rebounded with a
vengeance and have sky rocketed way past the values when originally bought.

That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.

The "needs" of the community can include quite a
lot of cruft that could be done away with.

Sing it, brother! Though saying it doesn't change reality.

People always lose jobs. I can't imagine everyone being able to
absorb a (long term) job loss without having to move. It's not a
reasonable expectation.

Move to where?

Out of where they are living (the mortgage is predicated on working,
no?). To? Well, to where there *is* a job, would be a suggestion.
I've done it several times, though I won't do chase a job again
because there will be no need.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 06:07:04 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/15/2017 10:46 PM, wrote:



That seems to be one area that Vermont actually did better. They had
a "Grand List" of all property in the town. The tax rate was set at
the annual budger divided by the "Grand List". If property values
tank, the rate goes up. The total tax is the same (in theory). Here,
the taxes colllected vary with property taxes. Seems they should vary
by the "needs" of the community.


In theory it works that way. Unfortunately, too many people don't
understand it. When the come around every 10 years (now 5) I hear people
complain that once revalued their tax will go up. The town finance
committee seems willing to make that come true. It is a money grab with
an increased budget.

My point was that it doesn't work like that here. It's the tax rate
that's "fixed", not the budgets.

On 16 Jan 2017 19:26:29 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in newso2q7c1u4ri4rrbmis7caf38tde1afv5pg@
4ax.com:

Not pointing atg you, Ed - but if YOU were a city worker, a cop, a
fireman, or whatever, would YOU want to work for less, just to lower
the tax rate for every other resident of your city by fifty cents?
Do you want to have to wait an hour for a fire truck to arrive,
instead of 7 minutes? Or to wait 20 minutes for a cop to respond to an
emergency instead of 3?

That's what you are asking for when you ask for reduced taxes (of
course a small prtion could be reduced by reducing real waste and
corruption at higher levels in some jurisdictions)

OTOH, are we really talking about 50 cents? Tax rates don't just go up
by the cost of postage stamps, they tend to jump.

I'm happy to give the road dept, fire fighters, sheriff what they want
(within reason). Those guys make my life better. Education, OTOH, is a
huge money sink and I really don't know that we're getting anywhere close
to the thousands of dollars they charge in value from them. They waste
time with mandatory fun days, shift classes to computers where a textbook
and notebook is all they really need, eliminate shop classes because of
insurance, and so on.

Considering that education is 2/3 of the budget and the education
being provided, it's not easy to say we're getting our money's worth.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:54:51 -0500, wrote:

On 16 Jan 2017 19:26:29 GMT, Puckdropper
puckdropper(at)yahoo(dot)com wrote:

wrote in newso2q7c1u4ri4rrbmis7caf38tde1afv5pg@
4ax.com:

Not pointing atg you, Ed - but if YOU were a city worker, a cop, a
fireman, or whatever, would YOU want to work for less, just to lower
the tax rate for every other resident of your city by fifty cents?
Do you want to have to wait an hour for a fire truck to arrive,
instead of 7 minutes? Or to wait 20 minutes for a cop to respond to an
emergency instead of 3?

That's what you are asking for when you ask for reduced taxes (of
course a small prtion could be reduced by reducing real waste and
corruption at higher levels in some jurisdictions)

OTOH, are we really talking about 50 cents? Tax rates don't just go up
by the cost of postage stamps, they tend to jump.

I'm happy to give the road dept, fire fighters, sheriff what they want
(within reason). Those guys make my life better. Education, OTOH, is a
huge money sink and I really don't know that we're getting anywhere close
to the thousands of dollars they charge in value from them. They waste
time with mandatory fun days, shift classes to computers where a textbook
and notebook is all they really need, eliminate shop classes because of
insurance, and so on.

Puckdropper
Having been part of the education system "in a previous life" I'll
agree a lot of money is wasted - but watching this last election cycle
in the USA I'd say not NEARLY enough emphasis is put on "education"

"Education" needs to be a priority, and money spent on "education" is
never wasted. Money spent on the "education system" is almost by
default wasted.\

What needs to be figured out is how to provide an adequate "education"
without wasting money on the "education system"

Teachers and schools are an investment. School Districts, School
Boards, etc, are a large money waster.

Oh, good Lord. Education is a *LOCAL* issue. The federal government
should have *nothing* to do with it. The Department of Education
should be abolished.