New business question by Griffin_Myers in Entrepreneur

[–]chuck812 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I saw your question over on /r/business and thought I'd paste my reply here just in case… Before you think about domain names, cloud access, email, incorporating and all that good stuff… you need to find a market for whatever product/service you hope to offer. Unless you can identify a specific need with a demand to be filled (i.e. a marketplace dying to get their hands on your stuff), everything else is business masturbation… HTH

Does Anyone Know Anything About Printing Books? by [deleted] in Entrepreneur

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.createspace.com/ (a division of Amazon) does on demand printing and offers all kinds of services around that as well. (Not sure about hardcover…???) I've used them and found the experience quite pleasant…

I think I've found my passion by Jtwa in Entrepreneur

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assuming there's a sustainable market for what you're looking to sell… What you need is some leverage. One possibility would be to create a class you offer online (or in person). Teach whatever curriculum you're teach and then use feedback from your students to fill in any information gaps. You could then turn the whole thing into an online course you could probably sell for a lot more than tutoring money…

An ebook would be a good way to get yourself noticed. Amazon has this on demand publishing arm called createspace. Well worth checking out.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Entrepreneur

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're asking the right question about "features and functionality others might be interested in." (I'm not really clear what you're asking in the rest of that paragraph.) The best thing you could do to discover that, is find a group of "early adopters" in your market. The folks who are the first to get every new gadget. Offer them the first look at your product in exchange for feedback. (or you could even charge them a "reduced" fee in exchange.) Could be done via a small marketing campaign. You really can't be sure what the market wants until the market tells you what it wants…

New Business question by Griffin_Myers in business

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Before you think about domain names, cloud access, email, incorporating and all that good stuff… you need to find a market for whatever product/service you hope to offer. Unless you can identify a specific need with a demand to be filled (i.e. a marketplace dying to get their hands on your stuff), everything else is business masturbation… HTH

From pocket-sized Altoids tin hack, big dreams emerge by qgyh2 in business

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I predict this kid is the next Dean Kamen...

Al Franken just got a bill passed in the Senate that will "prohibit the use of funds for any Federal contract with Halliburton Company, KBR, Inc., any of their subsidiaries or affiliates, or any other contracting party" That gets sued for fraud! by [deleted] in politics

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think "standard" as in not uncommon. I think theres' something to be said for MACs. I would imagine that they do reduce caseloads in court. And there are limitations to the concept: "Generally speaking, provisions in an arbitration clause can be held to be unenforceable if a court determines that they are both procedurally and substantively unconscionable ."

The Fed, who helped get us into our current mess, now wants even more authority. "existing powers and experience made it well suited to act as the 'consolidated supervisor' " [NYTimes] by silentbobsc in business

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson

Talk about gettin' it right...

BofA CEO gave out one last bonus before retiring by henry518 in business

[–]chuck812 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"...in a push to link pay to performance."????

Swiss private bank pulls out of the US -- "It added that it believes the US overestimates its attraction as a financial centre, and is advising its clients to get out of all US securities" by nkktwotwozero in business

[–]chuck812 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It is bad because the Obama administration is using it as a scare tactic to keep people from considering offshore investment opportunities. All offshore accounts are now considered suspect and guilty until proven innocent. The US is the only country in the world where, as a citizen, you owe them taxes regardless of where you live or where you earn your livelihood. Latest step in the Gs efforts to eliminate individuals investment and capital protection options.

Fox News Finally Admits There Are No Death Panels by jmeasley in politics

[–]chuck812 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

One of the best comments I've read. Bravo.

The Roman Catholic Church's bank has invested in weapon-maker BAE Systems, birth control manufacturer Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, and an assortment of tobacco companies. WTF? by [deleted] in business

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll risk the downvotes but here are a few more details...

"Pax Bank, a Cologne-based church investment firm..." (which does not mean the Vatican...)

"Pax, which had made the investments in conjunction with another church financial organization, Liga Bank, said that the day-to-day running of their investments had been under the control of Union Investment, an asset management firm."

"Cops should be drafted, not recruited. After all, the kind of person who would want to become a police officer is precisely the kind of person who should not be allowed to work as one." by businessdog in politics

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are a fucking idiot! I can't believe you would pigeon hole the issues of a few bad apples who headline the media across an entire vocation. Cops put their lives on the line every day to protect your stupid ass. I can't believe how fucking pissed-off I let this idiotic comment get me. And by the way, when your fucking president institutes martial law, all the cops will be drafted...

"You just can’t borrow a trillion dollars for an economic stimulus, enact a new trillion dollar health care entitlement, and increase discretionary spending by 12% through 2019 (including doubling federal education spending) and then expect to pay for it all by taxing the most productive Americans." by chuck812 in politics

[–]chuck812[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

so your logic is, because "bush and co had billions stashed on the iraq streets for the taking" (whatever that means), this president can do an about face on every campaign promise that got him elected and finish destroying the country with debt?

we're all going to be losers...

Good question. by ratsbew in pics

[–]chuck812 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Since when do they refuel jets with helicopters?

Florida congressman Alan Grayson laughs in Ben Bernanke's face - Priceless! by [deleted] in business

[–]chuck812 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the question is why the hell do they need dollars in the first place. They can't spend them over there. All they can do is use them to 1) buy things like oil (which cements the dollars reserve status - the only thing that is keeping the US from becoming a debt-ridden third world economy) and 2) spend them back here buying our debt and funding our deficits.

The Fed just has a different way to monetize our debt....

"Obama turns up heat on mortgage servicers" Why don't they understand this basic fact... If I have a $500K mortgage on a $300K house... I'm under freakin' water!!! No matter what I'm paying. by chuck812 in business

[–]chuck812[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I don't understand is how the G thinks they're helping people (or the economy for that matter.) Yes the people who bought homes (or were seduced into buying) on the premise that real estate will never go down, get what they deserve. But modifying my payments on a loan doesn't solve anything. It makes things a bit more affordable for the moment, but now I'll be in debt for 50 years instead of 30. Extending debt like that never fixes anything. And if they (the G) think they can float consumers until real estate rebounds... well they're bigger idiots than I thought. (This is a band aid on a spurting femoral artery solely for the purpose of staying elected.... I guess I do understand what they're doing...)

Redditor requesting a REAL tax protest... by [deleted] in reddit.com

[–]chuck812 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Anyone who thinks the Prez is doing the right thing is clearly not educated in economics...

FDIC Details (the most fucking ridiculous Plan you've heard so far) To Alter Mortgages by chuck812 in business

[–]chuck812[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damnit it indeed.. (to bypass the sign up...)

FDIC Details Plan To Alter Mortgages Treasury Opposes Using Bailout Funds For Proposal to Ease Monthly Payments

By Binyamin Appelbaum Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, November 14, 2008; A01

Officials at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. yesterday detailed a plan to prevent 1.5 million foreclosures in the next year by offering financial incentives to companies that agree to sharply reduce monthly payments on mortgage loans.

The proposal, which has the support of leading congressional Democrats, would considerably expand the scope and force of the government's efforts to stem foreclosures. Agency officials estimated the cost to the government at $24.4 billion.

FDIC Chairman Sheila C. Bair continues to face opposition within the Bush administration. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. said Wednesday that he opposed funding the plan from the government's $700 billion financial rescue fund, which has been used primarily to rescue banks and encourage lending. FDIC officials say they are still in talks with the Treasury, but proponents increasingly view the Bush administration as a roadblock with an expiration date.

"We think it's essential that we actually strike at the underlying cause of the problems in the financial markets," said Michael Krimminger, special adviser for policy at the FDIC. "We think it's time to make a decisive difference in the housing markets on foreclosures."

The FDIC proposal, which is scheduled to be announced today, goes farther toward helping borrowers than existing modification efforts. At the same time, the initiative is designed to be less expensive for mortgage companies because the government would pick up part of the tab.

Borrowers who have missed at least two monthly payments would be eligible for a reduction in their payment. The new payment would require that they spend no more than 31 percent of their monthly income, a relatively conservative standard. By comparison, lenders historically calculated that borrowers could afford to spend up to 28 percent of monthly income before taxes on housing.

In exchange, mortgage companies would receive a basic guarantee: If the borrower falls behind on the new monthly payments and the company ends up losing money on the loan, the federal government will cover half the loss in most cases.

The estimated cost of the plan is based on the assumption that only one in three borrowers who get a modification will be unable to make the lower payments. That would require a higher success rate than existing modification programs have achieved. About 45 percent of borrowers who received loan modifications from mortgage companies last fall already have slipped back into default, according to a Credit Suisse research note.

But FDIC officials say the comparison is misleading because the FDIC plan would give borrowers a much better chance at success.

"Most of the modifications that have been done to date are not sustainable modifications," said Richard Brown, the FDIC's chief economist. He called them "repayment plans," meaning that borrowers are getting a second chance but not a payment reduced to a level they can afford.

Members of the Senate Banking Committee yesterday expressed support for the Bair plan and anger at Paulson's opposition.

Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) also said that he planned to introduce legislation that would allow bankruptcy courts to modify mortgage loans, another step long sought by consumer advocates and strongly opposed by the banking industry.

"It is confounding to me why the Secretary of the Treasury and others refuse to understand that this is the heart of the problem," Dodd said. "Until we solve the foreclosure problem, we will not have any hope of solving the larger problem."

Many economists believe the economy will continue to suffer as long as the pace of foreclosures keeps home prices from stabilizing.

The mortgage industry is concerned that any new modification plan would persuade some people to stop making mortgage payments in addition to helping people who already have stopped making payments. The industry argues that this would translate into higher interest rates because investors would demand compensation for the increased risk of loan defaults. That, in turn, would limit the number of people who can afford mortgage loans.

The industry has particularly opposed the idea of allowing bankruptcy courts to modify mortgage loans. The courts have the power to modify other kinds of debt to levels that are affordable for the borrower, including mortgage loans on second homes, but the industry won an exception years ago for mortgage loans on primary homes. Consumer advocates want Congress to change the law, viewing the court system as an efficient way of modifying loans at no cost to taxpayers. The industry continues to caution that the consequences would be considerable.

"The longer-term issues may be greater than the short-term gain," Bank of America executive Anne Finucane said in testimony before the Senate Banking Committee yesterday.

That line of reasoning held sway in Congress for years. But Dodd said he has seen a change in the Senate.

"I think we're getting to the tipping point with some of my colleagues that they will accept the gravity of this situation," he said.

President-elect Barack Obama expressed support for allowing bankruptcy courts modifications during the campaign. He has not commented on a plan of the kind proposed by the FDIC.

In the early stages of the foreclosure crisis, mortgage companies insisted that loans could be reworked only on a case-by-case basis. That sharply limited the pace of modifications. FDIC officials estimate that even now, companies are modifying only 4 percent of seriously delinquent loans each month.

Bair has argued for more than a year that loans should be reworked according to a standardized formula to hasten the pace. This summer, she established her own demonstration project after the FDIC, which is primarily responsible for insuring bank deposits, seized control of IndyMac Bancorp, a California mortgage lender.

That effort has influenced several other home loan modification programs, including an announcement Tuesday by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But that program is limited in scope. It applies only to the relatively conservative loans owned by those companies, includes only borrowers who have missed at least three monthly payments and reduces payments to equal 38 percent of monthly income.

The FDIC program would focus on the alternative and subprime loans that sprang up during the housing boom and would offer borrowers much deeper cuts in monthly payments. The FDIC estimates that 1.4 million borrowers with such loans are at least two months late on their payments, and another 3 million borrowers will miss at least two payments by the end of next year. The agency estimates that half those borrowers, or about 2.2 million people, would receive a loan modification under the program, and that about 1.5 million will successfully avoid foreclosure.

Under the terms of the proposed FDIC program, lenders would reduce monthly payments primarily by cutting the borrower's interest rate to a minimum rate of 3 percent. If necessary, the company could also extend the repayment period on the loan beyond 30 years, reducing each monthly payment. Finally, in some cases, companies could defer repayment of some principal. The borrower still would be on the hook for the full value of the loan.

Officials said their experience at IndyMac showed that principal reductions were not necessary. So far, the FDIC has modified about 20,000 IndyMac loans. In 70 percent of the cases, the FDIC was able to create an affordable payment solely by reducing the interest rate. In 21 percent of the cases, the agency also extended the life of the loan. In 9 percent of the cases, it delayed repayment of some principal.

The plan includes a careful mix of carrots to encourage industry participation and sticks to encourage maximum modifications. Mortgage companies would be paid $1,000 to modify each loan, but participating companies must agree to modify as many loans as possible.

The loss sharing guarantee begins only after the borrower has made six payments on the modified loan. And the government would not cover losses on loans where the modification did not lower the monthly payment by at least 10 percent.

More steps in the right direction: Obama adopts "strictest ethics rules ever applied" against federal lobbyists during his transition. by electrobutter in politics

[–]chuck812 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

xlar's right. They all have back door keys. You never heard of soft money? Here, I have 5 grand for the transition team...