Opportunity in Bayview! Buyer To Investigate To Their Satisfaction
Today’s feature caught our eye on a political site’s discussion area that doesn’t usually get into real estate. The topic was those disadvantaged $250K a year families who are going to get dinged with new taxes, which is so unfair! These put-upon engines of economic advancement are hardly making it! Why after spending all their take-home pay on a high-priced mortage or rent payments, private school or college tuition for the kiddies, sky-high taxes, fully funding their retirement plans, restaurants, gifts, vacations, clothing, cable (of course including HBO and Showtime), utilities, cleaning services (housekeeper and pool) 16 cell phone lines, internet, car payments for the new BMW, the current Mercedes and the old (2011) Audi, why before you know it these unfortunate folks in the top 5% are barely clearing anything!
Fortunately, one of the respondents noted that living in San Francisco really did not have to cost so much. We thank our political participants for pointing us to this house.
1055 Gilman Avenue
San Francisco CA 94124
Price: $200,000Bedrooms: 2
Bathrooms: 1
63 days on Trulia
3,442 views
Property type: Single-Family Home
Size: 950 sqft
Lot: Ask agent
Price/sqft: $211/sqft
Year built: 1908
MLS/ID: 401812
Neighborhood: Bayview, 94124Opportunity In Bayview! Close To Gilman Rec, Brete Harte Elementary And Steps To Candlestick Park. Some Interior Walls And Flooring Have Been Removed. Buyer To Investigate To Their Satisfaction. Property Is Not Being Shown At This Time, Please Check Back After October 29Th.
While the property is still Not Being Shown At This Time, seeing is believing!
This home has potential all over, especially In The Electrical Wiring. You’ll have no trouble confirming this, what with Some Interior Walls and Flooring helpfully Removed.
December 12th, 2012 at 6:59 am
“Buyer To Investigate To Their Satisfaction”
As if there is a line of ‘Buyer.’
December 12th, 2012 at 8:20 am
status – withdrawn. another teaser that we can’t have? rats!
and it’s such a gem, diamond in the rough, rough piece of carbon, recently dropped meteorite… pile of crap. all for a mere $200K? buy 2 and still be under ‘not a lot of money’.
steps to candlestick? yep – about 100 steps or so. you’ll enjoy the joyous sounds of sports, and sports fan fights & robberies.
December 12th, 2012 at 8:43 am
Brevity is the soul of wit.
December 12th, 2012 at 8:45 am
Not being shown? How about being told?
December 12th, 2012 at 9:02 am
#3: this is me being brief. Or had you forgotten?
December 12th, 2012 at 9:10 am
#5, your definition of brevity is similar to Obama’s, Pelosi’s, Reid’s, Boner’s et al definition of ethics.
see sarcasm (n.)
December 12th, 2012 at 9:16 am
Those “broke” people making $250k crack me up. What whiny losers. If you want to complain about taxes, go right ahead – it’s practically human nature – but when you earn more than 95-98% of your fellow citizens, it’s time to stop pretending you have it so bad.
December 12th, 2012 at 10:06 am
#7 But is it fair to constantly punish those who work hard? To which degree should we redistribute?
When politicians can buy votes by promising to take from the fewer and give to the many, it turns our democratic system on its head.
For every 3 working Americans, there is 1 who lives off those 3 taxpayers. When a non-working household receives the same economic benefits through the government as a family with $58K in annual earned income, we have a broken system. (Reference for these data points will be furnished upon request)
December 12th, 2012 at 10:38 am
#8, how taxes are levied is an entirely different conversation, and not one I care to participate in. My sole point is that high earners should not make their arguments on how hard it is for them to survive on more money than 98% of the rest of the population earns. It’s a dead end that makes them look like whiny losers.
I do agree that our current system is broken. Hopefully someday the government will finally overhaul it. (However, I don’t see how a non-working family wouldn’t get more benefits from the gov’t than one earning $58k (e.g., unemployment/welfare, food stamps).)
December 12th, 2012 at 10:56 am
#9,
I’m not sure you fully understand my comments regarding government benefits.
A family on government benefits end up with the same economic benefits as a family making $58K. In other words, if you make less than 58K, you’d be better off sitting at home collecting welfare.
Also, taxes are intrinsic to our perception of income and wealth. You expect the top 2% earners not to whine when they’re constantly being labeled as rich and casted as greedy in the class warfare??
Income wealth.
December 12th, 2012 at 10:56 am
“but when you earn more than 95-98% of your fellow citizens, it’s time to stop pretending you have it so bad.”
And by “fellow citizens” I’m sure you mean “RBA citizens.” Please recall that $500k is ‘not a lot of money’ in the RBA.
December 12th, 2012 at 11:08 am
“A family on government benefits end up with the same economic benefits as a family making $58K. In other words, if you make less than 58K, you’d be better off sitting at home collecting welfare.”
If you are suggesting that there is at least one family that is better off collecting welfare than making $58k per year, then ok, I’m not going to dispute that. I’d need additional proof to be convinced that it is generally true.
Sure Welfare Mothers make better lovers, but $58k worth of benefits? Probably $50k to the government workers and $8k to the family.
December 12th, 2012 at 11:26 am
In other words, if you make less than 58K, you’d be better off sitting at home collecting welfare.
I’m trying not to be drawn in on this, but I’d be fascinated to learn more about that statement.
…constantly being labeled as rich and casted as greedy in the class warfare
Compared to 98% of the country, they are rich(er). I don’t think anyone is calling them/us greedy.
December 12th, 2012 at 12:05 pm
The greedy ones are the plutocrats funding the think tanks that came up with this class warfare nonsense in the first place. They’re now just pissed off because the non-0.1% are now fighting back against their race to the bottom: lower taxes, less government, less infrastructure, less civic service, less community. Take a look at the history of taxation in the US. Corporate taxes are at a low not seen by anyone posting here’s lifetime. Marginal Fed tax rates are also at lows last seen in the thirties.
Are things tougher for the 95-99.5% than they used to be? Yes. And to which I say, so? It’s far, far worse for the sub-95%. Huge segments of our population have zero wealth. Yes, zero. Most of these segments had some net assets before the bubble popped and the economy tanked. Now we have a winner-take-all economy run by psychotic Randian fascists and a government terrified to reign them in. I know that may sound over-the-top to some of you, but I’m calling it like I see it.
I just hope California showing that they can pass higher taxes is the leading edge to the end of The Reign of Norquist/Jarvis/Destruction. Take a look at Somalia if you think having no government is a better solution.
December 12th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
Also Psychotic Randian Fascists would make a great name for a rock band.
December 12th, 2012 at 1:53 pm
See last night’s The Daily Show for more on the race to the bottom. It was in the context of Michigan’s governor signing off on Right to Work legislation. Next up: another recall campaign.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-december-11-2012/union-jacked—race-to-the-bottom
December 12th, 2012 at 2:25 pm
#15 yep! let’s do a weekend open thread on best band names ever.
here’s a start:
- throbbing gristle – my fave
- box of frogs – a friend’s fave
- pearl harbor and the explosions
names from the 80′s are hard to beat.
December 12th, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Back in the D, I knew a guy in a band called The Battered Fish. We all appreciated the double meaning.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
#12, I didn’t say that welfare mothers get $58K in economic benefits.
http://www.aei.org/files/2012/07/11/-alexander-presentation_10063532278.pdf
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/11-15-2012-MarginalTaxRates.pdf
#14, spoken like a true Obamabot.
December 12th, 2012 at 5:50 pm
Best housing markets are generally on the West:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100306069
December 12th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
#19- From page 8 from the aei.org link, “The single mom is better off earning gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income & benefits of $57,045.”
Just to correct your claim, the single mom must gross $29k plus the untaxed welfare benefits.
It’s a very posh life for single moms. You know, such an easy life.
Better lovers!
December 12th, 2012 at 10:45 pm
AEI Sucks, reason number 644: Charles Murray (flaming racist) is their idea of an intellectual. They pay him to write crap like Why Aren’t Asians Republicans?
BUNUS – Comments from Asians laughing at him. And voting Dem. Again.
December 13th, 2012 at 6:40 am
#21, looking at the same chart, the welfare mom can get 45K in benefits + 0 wage. There were some other calculations I came across but can longer recall the source.
#22, AEI may suck but the data was originally presented by the Secretary of Public Welfare of Pennsylvania, a Republican bastion.
This got sent to the moderation queue. Our ace Bitter Hag suspects email addys that haven’t posted since this new algorithm kicked in get sent there automagically. Stick to one addy and your comments are more likely to sail on through. –ed.
December 13th, 2012 at 12:12 pm
#23- Are welfare moms allowed to live in the RBA?
December 13th, 2012 at 12:32 pm
#22, AEI may suck but the data was originally presented by the Secretary of Public Welfare of Pennsylvania, a Republican bastion.
#23, you’re right, so it may be unreliably partisan. The 2012 campaign year has shown the Republican Party has demonstrated aversion toward facts. Must be a gut thing.
Governance of Pennsylvania
Governor Tom Corbett, R
Lt Governor Jim Cawley, R
Attorney General Linda Kelly, R note: to be succeeded by Kathleen Kane, D
Congressional Delegation (incoming for 2013):
– Senate (1 R, 1 D)
– House of Reps (13 R, 5 D)
State Legislature:
– Senate (30 R, 20 D)
– House of Reps (109 R, 90 D, 3 vacant)
You were saying?
December 13th, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Maybe we can poll any readers who used to earn around $58k and then spent some time unemployed during the Great Recession to find out if their standard of living stayed the same. We’ll have to limit it to rentards though, because we’ve already heard enough foreclosure stories and Alex would argue that overhanging mortgage debt ruins his claim.
December 13th, 2012 at 12:51 pm
My daughter is top 2%. She work 80 hours a week. She is too busy to have kids, too busy to have a family. I got no grand kids. After tax which include state, fed, property, sale ,social security and 401K (she does not plan to be supported by tax payer when she retired), medical and donation she has very little left no more than those people who do not work at all. She got medical but not the time to see Dr. It use to be : you work hard so you can have money to give to what you think is important not you work hard so lots of stupid people can waste they life without procution. I taught her to help those who is handicap in life. Been stupid and lazy is not one of them.
December 13th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
FB interns make about that much, Google interns make a little more.
December 16th, 2012 at 3:47 pm
“It’s a dead end that makes them look like whiny losers.”
Heh. The whiny losers are the people who follow this blog. Coming here for a pathetic diet of envy, jealousy and schadenfreude doesn’t exactly enhance the soul, does it?
This went to moderation, but the whiny loser on duty released it in lieu of soul enhancement. –ed.