Entries from July 2009 ↓

Last week I celebrated my 26th birthday with my family.  First the hubby’s family had a party full of meat and games at his aunt’s house.  Then my parents made a trip to San Mateo and we went to a Chinese restaurant nearby.  Finally on my actual birthday the hubby took me out to The Village Pub, which is a Michelin starred restaurant that is practically down the street from where we live.  Needless to say I enjoyed spending time with my family and eating everything very much.

The hubby and I have not been to a fine dining  restaurant for this entire year  so it was really a fun treat  to go out.  The hubby actually convinced me to go because I was a bit hesitant about spending on my birthday this year with the recession and the coming of the baby.  In reality we are still saving around 50% of our income and neither of us got a reduction in income.  So we could afford to celebrate without worrying.  The hubby was a little apprehensive about the dress code since our experience with Picasso in Las Vegas, but we read some reviews of the Village Pub and found that they allow jeans and shirts.  After all, we are back in Northern California.

On the way to the restaurant the hubby said that if they try to turn us away due to dress then he would say something like, “can you really afford to turn customers away?  In this economic climate?”  When we got there we found that the whole place was packed, and most people were dressed quite well, but there were a few people in jeans and Hawaiian shirts.  The servers were quite prompt with us and there was not a problem even though we showed up in jeans.   The hubby sat down, looked around,  and said, “well, I guess they can afford to turn us away.”  We opened the menu and found that it was not overly expensive.  Each appetizer was a bit under $20, and entrees were between $20 and $40.  So it was possible to eat pretty well for under $75 per person.  So the hubby concluded, “I guess maybe  this is recession dining for the rich.”

We both agreed that we always find the appetizers and desserts the most memorable at these “fancy” places, and The Pub was no different. The hubby had a mushroom and sweetbread salad topped with a poached egg for his appetizer.  I had a shaved foie gras salad with plums.  Both were seasoned just right and the ingredients tasted very fresh.  I had a rack of pork for the entree and the hubby had a spring lamb in three preparations.  I think the hubby’s lamb was better than my pork.  The pork was well cooked and seasoned, but it was a bit boring.  Finally for dessert I had a plate of strawberries prepared in several different ways.  One preparation was in a beignet, one was a frozen bar of strawberry with cream, and then there were a bunch of fresh strawberries on french toast.  It was really a very large dessert.  The hubby had a peach dessert that was prepared like a cobbler and also a frozen manner.  Overall we enjoyed our meal very much and it was a very good birthday for me.

Looking back on the past few months I think we do have a lot of reasons to celebrate.  We both still have our  jobs and a wonderful family and we are also expecting to add a little boy soon enough.  I think that the horrid state of economy and the coming of the baby did add a bit of anxiety to our lives, but when I write it all down it seems that we are worrying for nothing much.   As my old roomie Cathy used to say, “all you need are faith, family, and friends”, and we have all three.

Anyway, I guess what I am trying to say is that I  think everyone who has a reason to celebrate this year should go ahead and do it as long as it is affordable.  There is no point in worrying about things you cannot control, and life really passes by faster than you can enjoy it.

Share This

Apparently the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston conducted a study and found that lenders are hesitant to modify loans because it means losing money.  Lets see, if I were promised $10 for something last week, would I run out today  and  ask for $5 for the same thing?  Of course lenders would lose money on loan modifications and they  would not cut their profits if they did not have to!  It really does not take a study to see that lenders would try to delay or avoid loan modifications if they could.

One of the authors of the study says that the $75 billion Obama mortgage plan would have been more effective  if the money was given to borrowers rather than lenders.   That is probably true.  The Obama mortgage plan touted that they would help 3 to 4 million borrowers who are delinquent through modifications.  If you spread  $75 billion out to   3 million borrowers each person would get $25,000.  In some areas that money could probably pay off someone’s entire mortgage debt.  Of course this would be too obvious of a government handout and probably would be even less popular than the current ill conceived plan.  Who would not be pissed off if their financially delinquent neighbors just got a check for $25,000 for the sake of being delinquent?

The current plan gives incentives to servicers and lenders to modify loans, but that incentive is relatively small compared to an interest cut or principal cut on a big loan.   Also, if servicers really wanted to ramp up on loan modifications they would need to hire a lot more staff, and it is not profitable to do so.  Additionally, if a borrower is still paying their debt then there is really no incentive for a lender to change the rates voluntarily.  This new study also echos past data that a large percentage of those who get modification redefault very quickly.     As I have said before, this whole mortgage bailout  is simply prolonging the mess because it sort of give banks a lifeline to delay the processing of bad loans, and borrowers who have no capacity to pay back their loans simply delay their ability to repair their credit.  I am glad that now there is fairly concrete evidence that supports my conclusion.

Share This

Well, in the last month my belly has really popped out and I am noticeably pregnant now. Many people have asked me if we are now looking for a new place to live for the coming of the baby, and the answer is a definite no. We just recently got a reduction on our rent and renewed our lease at our current condo. Since so many people asked me whether or not I am moving it seems that people expect new parents to get a new place. However, is it really necessary to move a larger place for the sake of a new baby?

My husband and I already live in a two bedroom condo so if we wanted to give the baby his own room we could vacate our office, but I think it is pretty unnecessary. First of all, the baby is not going to be walking around right after he is born and he will spend most of his time sleeping. We have enough room in our bedroom for a good sized crib and we plan to just keep the baby in our room. Since the baby is going to need attention during the night so it seems silly to put him in a separate room. Most books I have read recommend that the baby sleep in the same room as the parents for at least a few months. I think that makes a lot of sense. Most babies do not start walking until they are almost one year old, and even then it seems that they do not need a whole bedroom to themselves.

Personally I did not really get my own room until I was in high school, and it was not really a big deal to me. Basically, I think it is kind of pointless to give the baby his own room because he will not be able to appreciate it until he is older anyway. I know that many expecting moms are into creating a beautiful and cute little nursery for their little ones, but I am really not into that. I think that is mostly for the enjoyment of the adults rather than the baby who is going to be half blind and sleeping 20 hours a day.

At this point we are not quite sure where we will be in a year or two. It is possible that we might move out of the area so there is no point in dealing with a move and the birth of a new baby. I think many people feel the need to get more space for a baby but in actuality they do not need the space since a baby is pretty tiny and immobile. Eventually the kid might get old enough to need his own bed and room, but it is going to take at least a couple years, and waiting to upgrade saves money.

Share This

It is already July, and the ludicrous budget plan I wrote about  a week ago did not end up passing.  Now California is starting to issue IOUs for many of its obligations.  These IOUs are actually called “registered warrants”, and they will yield a 3.75% annual interest rate.  The state plans to repay them in October.  So what happens if you receive one?

Apparently many IOUs would be sent to residents who are still owed a tax refund.  Many small businesses that sell to the state will also receive them.  A full list of the various agencies and groups that will be paid with IOUs is here. Right now the large banks such as Bank of America, Chase, and Wells Fargo are willing to cash the IOUs for customers.  However, this only lasts until July 10th, so this means that if you need the money now you better hope that you receive your IOU before then and get it to the bank.

It is also possible to sell the IOU to other lenders and investors.  Afterall, whoever holds the IOU at the time of maturity will collect the interest accrued. There is a risk of default from the state, but I can see some people getting into the business of buying up IOUs from people who need the cash.  Most likely these folks will pay less than the value of the IOU since they want to make a profit.

If you do not need the cash right away it might be best just to hold on to the IOU because the interest accrued is not taxable.  3.75% tax free is a lot better than any CDs and bank accounts out there now, but it really means nothing if you need to pay your bills right now.

I hope that the state gets its act together by July 10th because otherwise many people may have to resort to less safe venues to cashing their IOUs.   Small businesses may not even be able to survive without the ability to keep the lights on and making payroll.  Needless to say, this is a complete debacle, and I hope it does not cause too much damage.  Additionally, this round of IOUs for those who have a tax refund is further proof that it is better to owe the government money.  If you are in this group it is probably a good idea to withhold less from your checks.

Share This