Texsox

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I think these two have something to hide. Perhaps they are terrorists.

George Costanza: So, did you get your new plates? Cosmo Kramer: Oh... yeah. I got my new plates. But they mixed them up. Somebody got mine and I got their vanity plates. George Costanza: What do they say? Cosmo Kramer: Assman. Jerry: Assman? Cosmo Kramer: Yeah. Assman, Jerry. I'm Cosmo Kramer, the Assman! Jerry: Who would order a license plate that says "Assman"? George Costanza: Maybe they're Wilt Chamberlain's. Jerry: It doesn't have to be someone who gets a lot of women. It could be just some guy with a big ass. Cosmo Kramer: Yeah, or it could be a proctologist. Jerry: Yeah. Proctologist. George Costanza: Come on! No doctor would put that on his car. Cosmo Kramer: Have you ever met a proctologist? Well, they usually have a very good sense of humor. You meet a proctologist at a party, don't walk away. Plant yourself there, because you will hear the funniest stories you've ever heard. See, no one wants to admit to them that they stuck something up there. Never! It's always an accident. Every proctologist story ends in the same way: "It was a million to one shot, Doc. Million to one."

I guess they don't have a DH in piloting

QUOTE(Soxy @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:51 PM) Everything I need to know I learned from Iron Maiden Thank you, that's five minutes of my life, never to be recovered.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 01:00 PM) #'s 1and 2 specifically inquire about saving money for the chosen "major expense" and preparing a budget based on expected income. NOYB, IMO. Let's move on. #1 They discuss how to save. Not well can your family afford that, what does your dad make etc, that would be creepy. Instead they break down the cost and look at the interest rates of CDs, simple savings accounts, and the difference between investing and saving. If you put away this amount for X months you would have this much. If you change the principle, the interest, etc. this is the result. If you borrow the money, via credit cards, etc, the item will now cost this. Never personal family finances. There is no point in that. #2 is the kids allowance and how to budget it. Not the families. So the kid learns how to work with his $5 a week. He learns to keep "books" and track income and expenses. All very good skills. I doubt the counselor really cares about Juan and his weekly allowance, the skills to manage it is what is being taught. They never discuss actual family finances. That would be creepy. I'll move on. Actually the kids to enjoy this merit badge. The counselor takes them (along with a buddy or parent, never one on one) to the executive board room at the bank. Way up at the top. Private elevator. Makes them feel like a big shot. He's very entertaining. Of course YMMV, not every merit badge conselor is that good. Just a great resource I developed.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:47 PM) Yes, very creepy. Family finances are family issues and none of anyone's business that doesn't contribute to the paying of the bills or a paid financial advisor who the family seeks for help. This requirement for this merit badge is nothing more than being nosey, IMO. You are correct, that would be creepy, if it was true. I don't see where they are discussing family finances. Do you mean discussing how to save money for a purchase? They never discuss the family's finances. They counselor talks about various saving vehicles, CDs, passbook accounts, mason jars, etc. I don't see how that is creepy. Where else can a 16 year old talk to a CPA for a couple hours for free?

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:30 PM) Discussing family finances with a boy scout counselor.. that is just plain creepy, IMO. The counselor we use the most happens to be a Senior VP at a bank here, the other is a CPA with one of the better accounting firms. Still creepy? BSA does not approve merit badge counselors unless they pass a background check and demonstrate knowledge in the area they will be counseling. QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:34 PM) If you have a severe comprehension problem, perhaps. People will still accept the risks. They will believe that promotion will happen. They will believe that interest rates will decline in five years. They will believe their home will appreciate in value at the current rate. They will believe in anything. And some will have a comprehension problem.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:26 PM) Kids are not concerned or interested with buying a house while still in school. That would be the "catch up on sleep class". There should be a idiot proof packet that every bank, broker, and home builder gives out to any potential buyer. Pats them on the ass, sends them home to study, and they return when they can tell the bank, broker, and seller what they want. Absolutely right. In the auto industry they have the simple to understand form that is required by law. I guess I thought the mortage industry was also required to follow that. However, even with that, ARMs would still attract a number of victims.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 12:03 PM) Now that is a good point, which we have discussed before. Much of the quick recovery from the 2001-2002 recession was NOT from any government program, contrary to what some want to believe. It was people taking advantage of really low interest rates to take out equity or re-fi their mortgages or get into bigger, more expensive homes. That particular ingredient will not be such a dominant force in the coming decade. As I said in the post... sex ed, for example, doesn't need the attention in public schools that it gets, in my opinion. I don't think it buys the students much. Just my opinion. As for other areas, I'd have to see a curriculum sample before giving you more ideas. Sex ed isn't split out, it's part of health, which also covers the nutrition you mentioned earler. There is a one semester required adult living class, but it doesn't go into much length but does talk about personal finances, but not to the depth of explaining the various types of mortgages. How much time would you spend teaching kids about mortages? One hour? A week? What is being proposed here is that every graduating high school student should know how to buy a house. They should be versed in the various ways to finance a house. SHould it go so far as to teach them how to evaluate market conditions and comparable values, etc.? Again, if the text book talked about the advantages of ARMs, would you agree that teaching this stuff is a good idea in the schools? And which teacher would you hire to teach a personal finance course? The Math teacher? Social Studies? Football coach? This is part of preparing your child to live on their own and parents have to be parents at some point. IMHO, this is one of the best way for kids to learn personal management.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 11:46 AM) You are lumping in personal and family issues (ethics, drugs, sex) with issues that can be educated (finance, consumerism, nutrition and fitness). The latter category belongs in the schools. The former does not. Then what are schools currently teaching that you would take out to fit this in? You wouldn't mind in this example of teaching kids that ARMs are a great way to buy their first home? That getting a VISA as soon as possible is a great way to build a credit history? Once you put it in the schools anything happens.

I have two kids in High School. If you look at their course load, there is no time for classes like this. The parents have to be parents at some point. Sorry kid if your parents suck, but guess what, the teacher you get may suck also. Some parents can't teach ethics, so the school should. Some parents can't reach consumerism, so the schools should. Some parents can't teach nutrition and fitness, so the schools should. Some parents don't talk to their children about drugs, so the schools should. Some parents don't talk to their children about sex, so the schools should. I have to disagree. Who is raising these children? The schools are not a replacement for parenting. TV is not a replacement for parenting. Parents have to be parents. And imagine this. Kids, today we will talk about ARMs. ARMs are a great way to buy your first home. They allow you to buy the home that will accomodate your growing family, while preserving you cash to pay back the student loans and VISA debt you will rack up in college . . .

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:59 AM) No bank is giving anyone $5 without some type of collateral no matter what your credit history, job history, or credit score to take to an auction and maybe buy a house. I should have been clearer, the $25,000 difference was the down payment. And I was thinking more along the lines of conventional purchase than auction. At auctions, and I have known a couple people who have been in this line of work, the bidders I've known have lines of credit established, secured by other equity. You are correct, getting approved for an auction sale would be almost impossible without independent collateral.

Linky Runaway Bride Sues Ex-Fiance for $500K Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:40 PM EDT The Associated Press By JOHN C. CLARK LAWRENCEVILLE, Ga. (AP) — The runaway bride is taking her former fiance to court, claiming he took advantage of her hospitalization to defraud her of her share of the proceeds from a book deal about their adventure. Jennifer Wilbanks' lawsuit follows a dispute in recent months over personal items — such as a new vacuum cleaner, a ladder, a gold-colored sofa and various wedding shower gifts — that she claims ex-boyfriend John C. Mason never returned. Wilbanks, then 32, ran off four days before she was to be married in a lavish wedding in 2005. She turned up in New Mexico, claiming she had been abducted and sexually assaulted. She later recanted, saying she fled because of personal issues, and pleaded no contest to telling police a phony story. She was sentenced to two years' probation and performed community service that included mowing the lawns at public buildings. In a lawsuit filed Sept. 13, she and her lawyer said that while she was hospitalized and under medication, she granted Mason power of attorney to negotiate the sale of the couple's story to a publisher in New York, and Mason struck a deal for $500,000. But she said Mason used the money to buy a house in his name only, and later evicted Wilbanks from the home. She is seeking $250,000 as her share of the home, and $250,000 in punitive dam

John Lennon's Killer Denied Parole Again Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:48 PM EDT The Associated Press ATTICA, N.Y. (AP) — John Lennon's killer was denied parole for a fourth time Tuesday because of the "bizarre nature" of his crime. Mark David Chapman, 51, must remain at Attica Correctional Facility for at least two more years for gunning down the former Beatle outside his Manhattan apartment building in 1980. "The panel remains concerned about the bizarre nature of this premeditated and violent crime," the board wrote in a one-page decision issued shortly after Chapman's appearance before the three-member panel at Attica. function iFrameCallback1() { var oIframe = document.getElementById("iFrame1"); var oDoc = (oIframe.contentWindow || oIframe.contentDocument); if (oDoc.document) { oDoc = oDoc.document; } document.getElementById('ads1').innerHTML = oDoc.getElementById('results').innerHTML; return true; } The hearing lasted 16 minutes, said Scott Steinhardt, spokesman for the state Division of Parole. A transcript of the hearing was not immediately available."While the panel notes your satisfactory institutional adjustment," the decision said, "due to the extremely violent nature of the offense, your release would not be in the best interest of the community." The decision came one day after what would have been Lennon's 66th birthday. Chapman has been in prison for 25 years. He became eligible for release after serving 20 years of a maximum life sentence. His next appearance before the parole board will be in October 2008.

QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Oct 10, 2006 -> 05:55 PM) But there was virtually no "Lennon/McCartney". It's been said that the two really never wrote together. They just slapped the double names on for whatever reason. I believe it started out as the two as a team, but quickly stopped. From what I've read there was influence based on what would get on an album. They each knew how far to push their agendas and writing. It might not have been live together in perfect harmony, side by side on the piano keyboard, but you know what I mean.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:47 AM) While the money might be easy to get - which I don't believe from what I know - getting into the auction is not. Those interested must meet a set of qualifications to participate. There are registration materials and a collateral or a bond must be provided. The money depends on your credit history and resources. Buying a home with a good downpayment, decent credit score, and work history is easy if you aren't stretching too far. If the bank loans you $175,000 on a $200,000 home, it is almost impossible for them to lose money on the mortgage. Remember, they keep the equity. I agree on the auction route. IMHO those auctions are not for amatuers. Too easy to get caught up in the auction excitement and really over pay. Best route is finding a good Real Estate Broker who will actually look out for your interests. They are out there.

Pulling for the A's but really just want a great series and could pull for either team.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:36 AM) Damn, well, I guess I'll have to wait until my inheritance gets to me from my grandparents. No way I can just go buy a foreclosed house with cash on hand. and it's too hard to get a loan and HOPE you can get the house you wanted. Actually not as hard as you might expect. Most lenders will have a pre-approval process. But the foreclosure market is not as easy as it looks. You are against professionals who do this for a living. They have trained eyes for spotting issues, and know the market conditions.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:32 AM) wait, so to get a foreclosed home, I have to have a check ready to pay? I cant take out my own loan? Two different processes that could have someone lose their home via forclosure. One is defaulting on the mortage. The bank will make certain the taxes are paid so they can gain back their loan. These almost never show up on tax sales. The bank sells the property and either realizes a gain or a loss on the money that was loaned. Usually it's about a break even after fees, etc. It really depends on the amount of the down payment and the current market conditions when the bank sells. Two is not paying the property taxes. These homes are usually paid off and the people can't pay the taxes. These are the ones the government would be selling. You are competing against full time speculators with lots of experience. Good luck and buyer beware.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:22 AM) I have no idea how the bank foreclosure stuff works. At least here, some of the banks have real estate division that sell off these homes. Typically the homes are vacant for a number of months, on up to a year as the forclosure process moves ahead. Other banks and mortgage companies will go through a real estate firm to sell them. I believe that Texas State Bank actually has a group that maximizes income on these properties by leasing some and selling others. It's a separate income center as far as I know. QUOTE(mreye @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:27 AM) Don't lie. You built your first house with logs. When I was looking to relocate to Wisconsin, I found a beautiful log home. I would have loved that house. 2,500 sq ft, on five wooded acres, cool loft.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:14 AM) You are absolutely right, but a lot of times, in a high pressure sales situation, people don't think. Yes, it's let the buyer beware, but really, how much of that is really true? I remember when I was buying my first house. I received some good intended advice to stretch a little a buy a little more house than was comfortable to pay for today, because each year my income would be growing. Because it was the owner of the company I was working for telling me this, I followed the advice. But there was a difference of a 30 year fixed and an ARM. I knew what my payments would be, I also had a good guess about the tax situation and figured on a couple increases over the next couple years. Bottom line, I was glad I did that. The extra room was great once we started having kids. Without stretching I would have been moving again in a couple years. I was also careful in staying within reason. I knew too many people that were house rich and cash poor. So I understand how some people fall into the siren song of a nicer house than they can afford today. I also understand how the seemingly logical statement of your income will be increasing every year works. It doesn't even have to be high pressure. Just have the person stand in the four bedroom house with the big deck, three car garage, and huge master suite then in the three bedroom, two bath, with the 2 1/2 car garage, and no deck and ask them which place they want to live in today for the same money?

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:09 AM) An individual is responsible for their own actions. Exactly. But too often we go crying to the government for protection from our own stupidity.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 09:04 AM) I've said this in here before... our current curriculum in high schools (private AND public) around the country has a big hole in the middle of it - HOW TO FUNCTION AS AN ADULT. And I don't mean socially, or in the workplace - I mean day to day things like basic finance, basic practical nutrition, etc. High school students should be required to take a course in basic personal finance. Do that, and you give them all the tools to spend and save defensively. I've said it before, probably not here, it's the parents job to teach their children to function as adults. We are shifting parenting responsibilities to the schools. Parents should teach their kids about family finances, how to balance a checkbook, how to purchase items, how to finance stuff, how to unclog a drain, lease an apartment, patch a hole in a wall, grocery shop, plan meals, ec.

QUOTE(Steff @ Oct 11, 2006 -> 08:09 AM) Seriously. It's common friggin sense. It's common friggin sense why the lender should protect the consumer, or it is common friggin sense that the consumer should understand their loan before signing? As Jas mentioned there are sound reasons for going with an ARM. And as have also been noted, there are disasters waiting to happen. If the lender is willing to take the risk that they could wind up with a house instead of payments and the borrower is willing to take the risk that their income will not increase to handle the larger payments down the road, who has the responsibility to step in and tell them it is a bad deal?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Oct 10, 2006 -> 05:04 PM) How much does anyone want to bet me that Lou Dobbs or some other idiot will get on TV and somehow blame the President for this and start another class-warfare cry-fest. Score another point for living within your means. Or just have the party faithful start the comments, why wait. The finance close is the fastest and easiest close in the world. Works for all big ticket items. Look at cars. Six year auto loans. I remember when three was the standard and four almost unheard of. Why? To sell lower payments and get people into more expensive vehicles. Historically, mortages are about the safest loan banks can make. The properties generally increase in value to the point that the banks can get out with a profit if the people default.