On 1/9/2024 7:15 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:because they do not go into the Office of Employment and file that they applied for 3 different jobs that week and providing the name of the businesses. Unemployment is so wide spread that even the post office is accepting people that cannot read!
Vying for the tin foil hat award AGAIN? You might as well be showing us SNOPES or other "fact check" data that is the same garbage. Unemployment at 3 1/2% Only someone completely blind would say that. People have been dropped from the workforce count
Hmm. Meanwhile the last couple restaurants I ate in both apologized for
the slow service, saying they are having trouble hiring workers. "Help Wanted" signs abound here. It certainly doesn't seem like tons of
starving people are desperately looking for work.
--
- Frank Krygowski
On 1/9/2024 5:14 PM, John B. wrote:
<snip>
I read that minimum wages in California is now $16.00/hour or $124/8
hour day, or $640 a 40 hour week.
Many cities in California have higher minimum wages than the State
minimum. For example, Sunnyvale is $18.55 per hour, and my city is
$17.55 per hour. But even so, few businesses pay that little because
they can't get enough workers to work for minimum wage. In 'N Out, a
burger chain, starts at $21 per hour in Sunnyvale.
That said, you're not going to be able to rent an apartment, by
yourself, and have any money left over even at $880 per week. A low-paid worker will likely have to share housing with a spouse, partner, or
roommate and will have multiple incomes contributing to living expenses.
Just like a lot of people buying houses require two incomes to pay the mortgage and other expenses.
One congressman keeps repeating "People earning the minimum wage can't
afford a 2BR apartment anywhere in this country. Even while working full-time." That is true, but when did that become the expectation? Yes,
the federal minimum wage is ridiculously low, thanks to Republicans, and should be raised to $15 per hour, but that congressman is way off-base.
The unemployment rate is so low in this area that many businesses that
used to get by paying minimum wage had to either rethink their business model, or close.
If,as you tell us even a growing boy can't get by on that salary tell
us how you make it on your S.S.?
No idea how much "he who must not be named" receives in Social Security, likely about $3000 per month. In his situation, with a paid-off house,
and low property taxes, he could definitely get by with his and his
wife's Social Security, but it would not be a lavish lifestyle, and
based on his prior posts, he did not make wise investments.
--
?If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.??Tin Foil Awards
On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 21:06:18 GMT, Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I made 5 times more money than a years worth of property taxes last month alone and it was a bad month. I pay no income taxes and I watch experts like you complain about sales taxes.
Looking up your property tax history on the Alameda Country site, it
shows that you paid $2,813.95 this year (2023-2024). Five times that
would be:
$2,814 * 5 = $14,070 per month
$14,070 * 12 months/year = $168,840/year income.
To go from $1 million to $2 million "worth" almost overnight, you
would have had to have saved all the money you "made" for 5.9 years
without spending any money on food, taxes, gasoline, bicycle, etc.
That's not very likely.
It's really amazing that you could make that much money in such a
short time without a working knowledge of the arithmetic.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 16:14:19 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 3/5/2024 7:33 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 21:06:18 GMT, Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I made 5 times more money than a years worth of property taxes last month alone and it was a bad month. I pay no income taxes and I watch experts like you complain about sales taxes.
Looking up your property tax history on the Alameda Country site, it
shows that you paid $2,813.95 this year (2023-2024). Five times that
would be:
$2,814 * 5 = $14,070 per month
$14,070 * 12 months/year = $168,840/year income.
To go from $1 million to $2 million "worth" almost overnight, you
would have had to have saved all the money you "made" for 5.9 years
without spending any money on food, taxes, gasoline, bicycle, etc.
That's not very likely.
It's really amazing that you could make that much money in such a
short time without a working knowledge of the arithmetic.
Not to mention how he made all that money in this horrible Biden recession!
Yep, it's all Biden's fault:
01/20/2023 <https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/85qODEJbdFE/m/uHojwq_tAQAJ> "If I had not needed to cash in my stock option to gain cancer
treatments for my mother and then getting a divorce, I would easily
have been a multimillionaire. Instead I am only worth about a million
and a half due to Biden's latest market recession."
I'm surprised however you didn't note how he claims to be making that
much without paying income tax - did tommy just admit to tax fraud?
I did include *taxes*. See below.
To go from $1 million to $2 million "worth" almost overnight, you
would have had to have saved all the money you "made" for 5.9 years
without spending any money on food, *taxes*, gasoline, bicycle, etc.
That's not very likely.
Hmmm... I just took a closer look at Tom's current property tax bill.
After 2011, Tom paid both 1st and 2nd property tax payments before the
1st payment was due, usually between October and December. Very good.
Before 2011, Tom was routinely paying a 10% late fee for paying the
first installment late. This time, he again began paying the 1st
installment late, which again included a 10% ($134) late fee. Is Tom
running out of cash? It's difficult to tell, but something certainly
has changed.
According to CA Govt Code ? 6254.21 (2021), Tom is entitled to hide
his physical address and information in various ways. None of these
ways would stop anyone beyond a total beginner from searching the
internet and finding any public information. However, I'll pretend to
follow the law and not provide URL's.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 13:57:00 -0800, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
On 3/6/2024 2:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
What did I write that would inspire your comment?
Tom is abusing and misusing the term "worth". His favorite self
description is something like "I'm worth $1 million today". The term
"worth" alone means the sum of all his assets without any
considerations for liabilities, cost of sales, taxes, commissions, or
any other costs involved in converting Tom's "worth" into cash. In
other words, a useless description. "Net worth" would be a more
accurate term:
<https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/networth.asp>
"Net worth is the value of the assets a person or corporation owns,
minus the liabilities they owe."
At this time I don't know how deep in dept Tom might be. For all I
know, Tom's "net worth" might be negative.
Using the value of your house as part of your net worth is very
misleading, especially in the Bay Area. That is not real money that you >have access to. You'd have to sell your property and pay a lot of
capital gains taxes, then you'd have to move somewhere else and buy or >rent. There are no taxes on the paper increase in value of your house
until you sell. To claim that that paper profit as income is ludicrous.
There's also a reverse mortgage. Tom might have already done that in
2011. Between 02/17/2010 and 10/23/2011, the house was listed for
sale. The final entry was "listing removed" which means it didn't
sell.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 15:55:59 GMT, Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com>speel?
wrote:
On Wed Mar 6 14:47:49 2024 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 16:14:19 -0500, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On 3/5/2024 7:33 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 21:06:18 GMT, Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I made 5 times more money than a years worth of property taxes last month alone and it was a bad month. I pay no income taxes and I watch experts like you complain about sales taxes.
Looking up your property tax history on the Alameda Country site, it
shows that you paid $2,813.95 this year (2023-2024). Five times that >> >> would be:
$2,814 * 5 = $14,070 per month
$14,070 * 12 months/year = $168,840/year income.
To go from $1 million to $2 million "worth" almost overnight, you
would have had to have saved all the money you "made" for 5.9 years
without spending any money on food, taxes, gasoline, bicycle, etc.
That's not very likely.
It's really amazing that you could make that much money in such a
short time without a working knowledge of the arithmetic.
Not to mention how he made all that money in this horrible Biden recession!
Yep, it's all Biden's fault:
01/20/2023
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/85qODEJbdFE/m/uHojwq_tAQAJ>
"If I had not needed to cash in my stock option to gain cancer
treatments for my mother and then getting a divorce, I would easily
have been a multimillionaire. Instead I am only worth about a million
and a half due to Biden's latest market recession."
I'm surprised however you didn't note how he claims to be making that
much without paying income tax - did tommy just admit to tax fraud?
I did include *taxes*. See below.
To go from $1 million to $2 million "worth" almost overnight, you
would have had to have saved all the money you "made" for 5.9 years
without spending any money on food, *taxes*, gasoline, bicycle, etc.
That's not very likely.
Hmmm... I just took a closer look at Tom's current property tax bill.
After 2011, Tom paid both 1st and 2nd property tax payments before the
1st payment was due, usually between October and December. Very good.
Before 2011, Tom was routinely paying a 10% late fee for paying the
first installment late. This time, he again began paying the 1st
installment late, which again included a 10% ($134) late fee. Is Tom
running out of cash? It's difficult to tell, but something certainly
has changed.
According to CA Govt Code ? 6254.21 (2021), Tom is entitled to hide
his physical address and information in various ways. None of these
ways would stop anyone beyond a total beginner from searching the
internet and finding any public information. However, I'll pretend to
follow the law and not provide URL's.
So, according to Liebermann, after I had my head injury and had severe memory failures I was screwing up on my taxes. And after I started getting clear of that damage I started paying my taxes on time or early, Do you all have his intensely interested
On Dec 12, 2016, you posted a message announcing that you had crashed
on or before Dec 18, 2009. However, the message has disappeared or
expired: <https://medium.com/@cyclintom/on-dec-18-2009-i-was-riding-my-bicycle-with-a-group-and-we-were-coming-off-of-a-bicycle-trail-9f9d582a9b42>
It's rather odd that you should wait about 6 year to announce that you
had crashed.
<https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6912346811772932096/
"I got a severe concussion in 2010 that led to a type of seizures that
I didn't remember afterwards. This wasn't discovered and treated
properly until 2012 after 4 car wrecks luckily without any injuries"
I really don't know the sequence of events, but if these postings are correct, you should have had plenty of time to sign obtain the reverse mortgage before you crashed, before the big banks exited the market in 2011-2012, and before you resumed paying your taxes (1st payment) on
time.
Busy for a day or three.
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
On 3/7/2024 2:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<snip>
There's also a reverse mortgage. Tom might have already done that in
2011. Between 02/17/2010 and 10/23/2011, the house was listed for
sale. The final entry was "listing removed" which means it didn't
sell.
Possible, but unlikely, that he would fall for the reverse-mortgage scam.
Banks are so picky right now that they're not going to lend a lot of
money to someone with no job, no assets other than some home equity, and
only income from Social Security.
--
?If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.??Tin Foil Awards
On 3/7/2024 6:50 PM, sms wrote:
On 3/7/2024 2:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<snip>
There's also a reverse mortgage. Tom might have already done that in
2011. Between 02/17/2010 and 10/23/2011, the house was listed for
sale. The final entry was "listing removed" which means it didn't
sell.
Possible, but unlikely, that he would fall for the reverse-mortgage scam.
wait...you remember this is kunich we're talking about...the guy who
thinks there was no recession before obama took office and thinks the secretary of the treasury directs the chairman of the fed.....is
unlikely to fall for a financial scam?
Setting aside that imo tommy is probably the _most_ likely person in
this forum to get scammed, I don't think reverse mortgages are any more susceptible to fraud or mismanagement than any other mortgage-type of financial tool. Certain types of reverse mortgages are sponsored and guaranteed by the government.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/reverse-mortgages/
Banks are so picky right now that they're not going to lend a lot of
money to someone with no job, no assets other than some home equity, and only income from Social Security.
Actually, someone with no job, no assets other than some home equity,
and only income from Social Security are exactly the demographic that
reverse mortgages target, especially those run by less reputable companies.
--
Add xx to reply
On 3/7/2024 6:50 PM, sms wrote:
On 3/7/2024 2:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
<snip>
There's also a reverse mortgage. Tom might have already done that in
2011. Between 02/17/2010 and 10/23/2011, the house was listed for
sale. The final entry was "listing removed" which means it didn't
sell.
Possible, but unlikely, that he would fall for the reverse-mortgage scam.
wait...you remember this is kunich we're talking about...the guy who
thinks there was no recession before obama took office and thinks the secretary of the treasury directs the chairman of the fed.....is
unlikely to fall for a financial scam?
Setting aside that imo tommy is probably the _most_ likely person in
this forum to get scammed, I don't think reverse mortgages are any more susceptible to fraud or mismanagement than any other mortgage-type of financial tool. Certain types of reverse mortgages are sponsored and guaranteed by the government.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/mortgages/reverse-mortgages/
Banks are so picky right now that they're not going to lend a lot of
money to someone with no job, no assets other than some home equity, and only income from Social Security.
Actually, someone with no job, no assets other than some home equity,
and only income from Social Security are exactly the demographic that
reverse mortgages target, especially those run by less reputable companies.
--
Add xx to reply
On 3/8/2024 4:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/8/2024 12:24 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
After Obama's Great Recession, which Flunky does not believe in, (BTW,
this is a pure indication that Flunky does not have any investments)
my investments went from $880,000 to $330,000 or more aptly, I was
ruined.
What in HELL did you invest in? It must not have been U.S. stocks. See https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/stock-market-by-president/index.html
Tommy didn't invest in anything. He has no investments other than his
house which his mom gave to him. He never lost anything during the bush/cheney recession because he didn't have anything invested.
He's so brole he can't even afford to replace the clogged faucets in his house, and he's such a cuckold his wife wouldn't let him spend the money
on it anyway.
IOW, he was ruined before he ever got a start.
--
Add xx to reply
On 3/10/2024 12:39 AM, sms wrote:
On 3/8/2024 1:53 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 3/8/2024 4:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/8/2024 12:24 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
After Obama's Great Recession, which Flunky does not believe in,
(BTW, this is a pure indication that Flunky does not have any
investments) my investments went from $880,000 to $330,000 or more
aptly, I was ruined.
What in HELL did you invest in? It must not have been U.S. stocks. See >>> https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/stock-market-by-president/index.html
Tommy didn't invest in anything. He has no investments other than his
house which his mom gave to him. He never lost anything during the
bush/cheney recession because he didn't have anything invested.
He's so brole he can't even afford to replace the clogged faucets in
his house, and he's such a cuckold his wife wouldn't let him spend the
money on it anyway.
IOW, he was ruined before he ever got a start.
He?s just confused about what the market did and when.
Clinton
-------
1993 9.97%
1994 1.33%
1995 37.20%
1996 22.68%
1997 33.10%
1998 28.34%
1999 20.89%
2000 -9.03%
Obama
-----
2009 +25.94%
2010 +14.82%
2011 +2.10%
2012 +15.89%
2013 +32.15%
2014 +13.52%
2015 +1.38%
2016 +11.77%
Biden
-----
2021 +28.70%
2022 -25.00%
2023 +26.29%
It was 2001-2008, during the George W. Bush presidency, when the market
had some steep declines due to the Republican-caused recession. The root cause of the recession was defaults on mortgage loans, caused by
Republican deregulation of the banking industry. It was Republicans that sought to weaken bank regulation.
Historically, the stock market has done better under Democratic administrations, ?the S&P 500 returned 8.4% annually on average under Democrats, versus 2.7% under Republicans, a difference of 5.7%
percentage points.?
However it's important to understand that the stock market is not necessarily the best indication of how the economy is doing. The
employment rate and unemployment rate are also important. Employment
went up by 0.13% under W, 1.04% under Obama, fell 0.51% under Trump, and has gone up by 4.3% under Biden. For unemployment, the unemployment rate fell under Democratic presidents by an average of 0.8 percentage points, while it increased under Republican presidents by an average of 1.1 percentage points.
I know that, you know that, tom knows that. Pretty much everyone knows
that. Tom isn't confused, he's lying.
On 3/8/2024 1:53 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 3/8/2024 4:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/8/2024 12:24 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
After Obama's Great Recession, which Flunky does not believe in,
(BTW, this is a pure indication that Flunky does not have any
investments) my investments went from $880,000 to $330,000 or more
aptly, I was ruined.
What in HELL did you invest in? It must not have been U.S. stocks. See
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/stock-market-by-president/index.html
Tommy didn't invest in anything. He has no investments other than his
house which his mom gave to him. He never lost anything during the bush/cheney recession because he didn't have anything invested.
He's so brole he can't even afford to replace the clogged faucets in his house, and he's such a cuckold his wife wouldn't let him spend the money
on it anyway.
IOW, he was ruined before he ever got a start.
He?s just confused about what the market did and when.
Clinton
-------
1993 9.97%
1994 1.33%
1995 37.20%
1996 22.68%
1997 33.10%
1998 28.34%
1999 20.89%
2000 -9.03%
Obama
-----
2009 +25.94%
2010 +14.82%
2011 +2.10%
2012 +15.89%
2013 +32.15%
2014 +13.52%
2015 +1.38%
2016 +11.77%
Biden
-----
2021 +28.70%
2022 -25.00%
2023 +26.29%
It was 2001-2008, during the George W. Bush presidency, when the market
had some steep declines due to the Republican-caused recession. The root cause of the recession was defaults on mortgage loans, caused by
Republican deregulation of the banking industry. It was Republicans that sought to weaken bank regulation.
Historically, the stock market has done better under Democratic administrations, ?the S&P 500 returned 8.4% annually on average under Democrats, versus 2.7% under Republicans, a difference of 5.7%
percentage points.?
However it's important to understand that the stock market is not
necessarily the best indication of how the economy is doing. The
employment rate and unemployment rate are also important. Employment
went up by 0.13% under W, 1.04% under Obama, fell 0.51% under Trump, and
has gone up by 4.3% under Biden. For unemployment, the unemployment rate
fell under Democratic presidents by an average of 0.8 percentage points, while it increased under Republican presidents by an average of 1.1 percentage points.
--
?If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.??Tin Foil Awards
On 3/10/2024 12:39 AM, sms wrote:
On 3/8/2024 1:53 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
On 3/8/2024 4:36 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/8/2024 12:24 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
After Obama's Great Recession, which Flunky does not believe in,
(BTW, this is a pure indication that Flunky does not have any
investments) my investments went from $880,000 to $330,000 or more
aptly, I was ruined.
What in HELL did you invest in? It must not have been U.S. stocks. See >>> https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/stock-market-by-president/index.html
Tommy didn't invest in anything. He has no investments other than his
house which his mom gave to him. He never lost anything during the
bush/cheney recession because he didn't have anything invested.
He's so brole he can't even afford to replace the clogged faucets in
his house, and he's such a cuckold his wife wouldn't let him spend the
money on it anyway.
IOW, he was ruined before he ever got a start.
He?s just confused about what the market did and when.
Clinton
-------
1993 9.97%
1994 1.33%
1995 37.20%
1996 22.68%
1997 33.10%
1998 28.34%
1999 20.89%
2000 -9.03%
Obama
-----
2009 +25.94%
2010 +14.82%
2011 +2.10%
2012 +15.89%
2013 +32.15%
2014 +13.52%
2015 +1.38%
2016 +11.77%
Biden
-----
2021 +28.70%
2022 -25.00%
2023 +26.29%
It was 2001-2008, during the George W. Bush presidency, when the market
had some steep declines due to the Republican-caused recession. The root cause of the recession was defaults on mortgage loans, caused by
Republican deregulation of the banking industry. It was Republicans that sought to weaken bank regulation.
Historically, the stock market has done better under Democratic administrations, ?the S&P 500 returned 8.4% annually on average under Democrats, versus 2.7% under Republicans, a difference of 5.7%
percentage points.?
However it's important to understand that the stock market is not necessarily the best indication of how the economy is doing. The
employment rate and unemployment rate are also important. Employment
went up by 0.13% under W, 1.04% under Obama, fell 0.51% under Trump, and has gone up by 4.3% under Biden. For unemployment, the unemployment rate fell under Democratic presidents by an average of 0.8 percentage points, while it increased under Republican presidents by an average of 1.1 percentage points.
I know that, you know that, tom knows that. Pretty much everyone knows
that. Tom isn't confused, he's lying.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 299 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 82:39:18 |
| Calls: | 6,696 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,229 |
| Messages: | 5,347,908 |