Obama Wiretapping Trump

[89Hen]

Should be pretty soon, but nobody has that crystal ball. Boomers have not moved as quickly as previous generations. I'm sure it's party to do with the lack of pensions and retirement earnings and many simply can't afford to move to where they want. But as they're forced to move, the inventory WILL go up and prices will probably fall.

Reason I was asking, is my neighbor and his neighbor both have their homes for sale. We were planning on selling in April. Both their houses need more work than ours, and we were planning on listing below what they are listed at. KInd of a local glut.

I wouldn't take anything I say to heart in your individual case. I know nothing of your market and a lot would depend if they get theirs sold before yours. If they do and your house is in better shape, that could make for a faster sell on your part.

Around here, when people price too aggressively, they sometimes end up getting less in the end than if they had priced lower and created some excitement or urgency on the buyers. Price reductions are often seen as "what is wrong with the house?"

[89Hen]

HP 12C. Hasn't changed in 40 years and still the best for my biz. The reverse Polish notation gives the average calculator user fits. I struggle when I pick up a regular calculator to do simple math.

That reverse notation is the reason I stopped using it. 3+3 seems more natural than 33+.

It is. But once you're used to it, it's hard to go back to the more conventional way.

[Ibanez]

That reverse notation is the reason I stopped using it. 3+3 seems more natural than 33+.

It is. But once you're used to it, it's hard to go back to the more conventional way.

Agreed. My dad can't use a regular calculator.

[Ibanez]

Reason I was asking, is my neighbor and his neighbor both have their homes for sale. We were planning on selling in April. Both their houses need more work than ours, and we were planning on listing below what they are listed at. KInd of a local glut.

I wouldn't take anything I say to heart in your individual case. I know nothing of your market and a lot would depend if they get theirs sold before yours. If they do and your house is in better shape, that could make for a faster sell on your part.

Around here, when people price too aggressively, they sometimes end up getting less in the end than if they had priced lower and created some excitement or urgency on the buyers. Price reductions are often seen as "what is wrong with the house?"

I should show you this house that's been on the market for almost a year. It's a huge lot, 1 house and 1 mobile home (income producing.) THe price drops every few weeks. It started around $300k and is now around $240k. There's a train track in the front and the property itself is far from anything. Why pay $300k out there for a lot of land and two shitty houses when that $300k can buy you something newer, nicer and closer to things like paved roads and grocery stores. I'm all for living in the country, but the value has to be right.

[89Hen]

I should show you this house that's been on the market for almost a year. It's a huge lot, 1 house and 1 mobile home (income producing.)

Good luck getting a mortgage on that. Mobile home would have to be removed most likely.

[Ibanez]

I should show you this house that's been on the market for almost a year. It's a huge lot, 1 house and 1 mobile home (income producing.)

Good luck getting a mortgage on that. Mobile home would have to be removed most likely.

You'd think. I've seen things like that sell before, but that was in 2006/07 before the crash. It's a pain in the ass and each time it was mortgaged as investment and not primary.

[Baldy]

Sucker.

I know you know, but price per square foot means jack shit. You're buying land. One of my agents just brought this house on the market today. $475,000. Many folks here would choke on that price, but this is a MUCH lower cost area of the county.

I was just trollin' Chizz.

I've never bought a home based on price per square foot, either. However, when building, cost per square foot is another thing.

[Chizzang]

I know you know, but price per square foot means jack shit. You're buying land. One of my agents just brought this house on the market today. $475,000. Many folks here would choke on that price, but this is a MUCH lower cost area of the county.

I was just trollin' Chizz.

I've never bought a home based on price per square foot, either. However, when building, cost per square foot is another thing.

Price per square foot is a great tool for measuring homes against each other in near proximity



It's meaningless from county to county
it works as a good neighborhood tool

[CAA Flagship]

I was just trollin' Chizz.

I've never bought a home based on price per square foot, either. However, when building, cost per square foot is another thing.

Price per square foot is a great tool for measuring homes against each other in near proximity



It's meaningless from county to county
it works as a good neighborhood tool

Zimmerman had a neighborhood tool...

[89Hen]

Price per square foot is a great tool for measuring homes against each other in near proximity



It's meaningless from county to county
it works as a good neighborhood tool

Only in somewhat homogeneous hoods. We have a lot of infills here. McMansion next to one that is going to be a McMansion in the near future, next to a McSelfie that was poorly done. But I get what you're saying.

[JohnStOnge]

John,
I'll cherry pick from your article that uses that ^ graph

"Americans are paying about 70% more today for a median-priced new house on an inflation-adjusted basis compared to a 1973 house.."

That's fine. But the point is that if you just compare a 1973 house to a 2017 house, on average, you're comparing different sized houses.

For whatever reason, when people of today buy a new house, they are buying a bigger house on average. That's what accounts for most of the difference in what they're paying for a house.

[SDHornet]

"Potential 'smoking gun' showing Obama administration spied on Trump team, source says

Republican congressional investigators expect a potential “smoking gun” establishing that the Obama administration spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the president-elect himself, will be produced to the House Intelligence Committee this week, a source told Fox News.....

.....The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump, according to sources.

The key to that conclusion is the unmasking of selected U.S. persons whose names appeared in the intelligence, the sources said, adding that the paper trail leaves no other plausible purpose for the unmasking other than to damage the incoming Trump administration.

The FBI hasn’t been responsive to the House Intelligence Committee’s request for documents, but the National Security Agency is expected to produce documents to the committee by Friday. The NSA document production is expected to produce more intelligence than Nunes has so far seen or described – including what one source described as a potential “smoking gun” establishing the spying......."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 ... -says.html

Take this to the wiretapping thread...this is the home shopping thread.

[Gil Dobie]

Price per square foot is a great tool for measuring homes against each other in near proximity



It's meaningless from county to county
it works as a good neighborhood tool

Only in somewhat homogeneous hoods. We have a lot of infills here. McMansion next to one that is going to be a McMansion in the near future, next to a McSelfie that was poorly done. But I get what you're saying.

Same here. Price per square foot works great for similar homes with similar lots. We have houses a block in the from the lake that are 1/3 to 1/5 of the price. If I look at zillow and they use non-water front homes as comparables for water front homes.

[JohnStOnge]

The main thing is that when you're comparing the average cost of a house in 1973 to the average cost of a house now you have to take into account that houses are much bigger on average now.

Yes price per square foot varies with location and other factors but the national average cost per square foot over time does tell you something. It tells you that, when adjusted for house size, the average inflation adjusted cost of a house hasn't changed much since 1973. In inflation adjusted terms the average cost of a house of some given size hasn't changed much since 1973.

[CID1990]

The main thing is that when you're comparing the average cost of a house in 1973 to the average cost of a house now you have to take into account that houses are much bigger on average now.

Yes price per square foot varies with location and other factors but the national average cost per square foot over time does tell you something. It tells you that, when adjusted for house size, the average inflation adjusted cost of a house hasn't changed much since 1973. In inflation adjusted terms the average cost of a house of some given size hasn't changed much since 1973.

You just basically said that since diesel engines can run 1 million miles (if you change the oil regularly), you should be able to drive a diesel powered pickup truck to the moon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[89Hen]

The main thing is that when you're comparing the average cost of a house in 1973 to the average cost of a house now you have to take into account that houses are much bigger on average now.

Yes price per square foot varies with location and other factors but the national average cost per square foot over time does tell you something. It tells you that, when adjusted for house size, the average inflation adjusted cost of a house hasn't changed much since 1973. In inflation adjusted terms the average cost of a house of some given size hasn't changed much since 1973.

Welcome to a week ago.

[dal4018]

Surprised there's no thread on this since it is the biggest political scandal of the last few decades (if true ).

A special prosecutor needs to be appointed so we can get to the bottom of this... and follow it wherever it may lead...

Please spare me Trump has ZERO evidence to support his lies!!!!!

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 ... -team.html

[JohnStOnge]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 ... -team.html

Based on your past tendencies I'm assuming you posted that because you think the story and the embedded video favor Trump's case. I don't think they do.

[SeattleGriz]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03 ... -team.html

Based on your past tendencies I'm assuming you posted that because you think the story and the embedded video favor Trump's case. I don't think they do.

How does Obama changing rules so all the information collected on Team Trump could be widely disseminated throughout 17 agencies not help Trump's claim?

Thus allowing "anonymous officials" to leak said details to the press and feed the liberal goal of claiming Trump's presidency as similar to Bush - doesnt really belong there.

[Skjellyfetti]

How does Obama changing rules so all the information collected on Team Trump could be widely disseminated throughout 17 agencies not help Trump's claim?

We've known about that since before Trump took office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/p ... tions.html

He could have reversed the order if he wanted to.

And, it just facilitates sharing of data between agencies. There's nothing illegal about it.

And, it has nothing to do with his claims:

[SeattleGriz]

How does Obama changing rules so all the information collected on Team Trump could be widely disseminated throughout 17 agencies not help Trump's claim?

We've known about that since before Trump took office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/p ... tions.html

He could have reversed the order if he wanted to.

And, it just facilitates sharing of data between agencies. There's nothing illegal about it.

And, it has nothing to do with his claims:

Then why didn't Obama do it sooner?

It's pertinent because it is all part of the whole process. Also because it is proof that Trump was wiretapped.

[Skjellyfetti]

How is it proof that Trump was wiretapped by Obama?

I think it's pretty clear that some of Trump's associates (and, possibly Trump as well... though, nothing confirmed I don't believe) were picked up in surveillance.

Everything we've seen so far indicates incidental collection. Even the big "bombshell" that Nunes announced last week was incidental collection.

They were intercepting communications between foreign intelligence targets. Trump's associates made calls to them. They were surveilled because of it.


Is Comey in on it? Maybe he is now the leader of the Deep State?

With respect to the president's tweets about alleged wiretapping directed at him by the prior administration, I have no information that supports those tweets. And we have looked carefully inside the FBI. The Department of Justice has asked me to assure you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components

Maybe Richard Burr as well?

"Based on the information available to us, we see no indications that Trump Tower was the subject of surveillance by any element of the United States government either before or after Election Day 2016

Spicer said two weeks ago that they would produce evidence to backup Trump's tweets in two weeks.

It's been two weeks... and, so far the best they can do is Nunes's statement on incidental collection.

[JohnStOnge]

Based on your past tendencies I'm assuming you posted that because you think the story and the embedded video favor Trump's case. I don't think they do.

How does Obama changing rules so all the information collected on Team Trump could be widely disseminated throughout 17 agencies not help Trump's claim?

Thus allowing "anonymous officials" to leak said details to the press and feed the liberal goal of claiming Trump's presidency as similar to Bush - doesnt really belong there.

I didn't see anything in that article or the embedded video saying Obama changed any rules. All I saw was a lady saying they were concerned about preserving intelligence.

[Skjellyfetti]

I didn't see anything in that article or the embedded video saying Obama changed any rules. All I saw was a lady saying they were concerned about preserving intelligence.

I think he (and she) was talking about this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/p ... tions.html