Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (540784)	1/5/2010 12:32:39 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576003

Free markets strike again....isn't capitalism grand? Montana's big sky views become bigger tax burdens One region in the northwest fears it's the next Vail, Colo., as celebrities and new money move in, forcing property values up and longtime residents out. By Kim Murphy January 3, 2010 E-mail Print Share Text Size Reporting from Whitefish, Mont. - Charles Abell grew up here in the Flathead Valley in a rustic log cabin his parents built during their honeymoon out on Whitefish Lake. When he married, Abell bought a small house on another part of the lake, leaving the old family cabin for his brother. He paid $35,000 for the house in 1967, raised his two boys there, and until lately figured he'd probably die in the same tidy house with the metal awning over the porch, the collection of souvenir spoons and beer steins hanging like sweet memories in the small kitchen. That was until the tax bill came this fall. Abell already knew that property values in the Flathead -- a new romping ground for Hollywood celebrities, sports stars and international CEOs -- far exceeded what they were when he graduated from Whitefish High School. His 70-year-old house in the tax appraisal in 2002 was worth a stunning $553,900, thanks to its location right on the lake. Now, though, the Montana Department of Revenue says Abell's property is worth $2.64 million. The old cabin his brother's living in? That one, because it sits on 4 acres, is worth $4.2 million. Abell, who recently retired as president of the Whitefish Credit Union at the age of 70, just wrote a check for $9,200 for this year's property taxes. He expects to owe at least twice that amount every year when the new appraisals take full effect in 2014 -- an obligation that will quickly empty his modest retirement account. His brother faces an annual tax bill of $30,462, which exceeds his entire annual income. Abell can be forgiven if he sometimes feels like roadkill on the highway to the New West. "There's no relationship between these tax bills and your ability to pay. It's just that we're the beginning of the food chain," said Abell one recent afternoon, sitting in work shirt and suspenders. "They tell us, 'You're sitting on a couple million dollars; why don't you sell it?' But this is where I raised my children. It's not for sale. It's my home." What is happening in northwest Montana, along with other newly tony areas of the state like Bozeman and the Paradise Valley, has transformed the country since frontier days: New money moves in, older homes get bulldozed. What has been unsettling in Montana this year has been the speed with which tax bills in the most desirable parts of the state have hit the stratosphere. Some homeowners around Flathead Lake and the many surrounding waterways have seen valuations -- undertaken by state law every six years -- go up 400%, 600%, even 1,000% over last year's rates. Most Montanans are getting relatively small property tax increases this year -- some, in declining areas like eastern Montana, are actually seeing their tax bills go down. But nearly 36,000 property owners have protested hikes in their tax valuations based on the skyrocketing land values that have turned much of western Montana into a real estate gold mine over the last decade. Across Montana, residential property values are up 54% over the last six years, state officials said. Northwest Montana, once an outback for hunting, fishing and family trips to Glacier National Park, in recent years has seen celebrities including Kiefer Sutherland, Julia Roberts, John Lithgow, Emilio Estevez and Charlie Sheen drop occasional anchors. Lakers coach Phil Jackson has spent most summers of the last 30 years at his vacation home on Flathead Lake. Longtime residents say it's not unusual to see three or four old houses along the lake razed and replaced with a massive private lodge. Wine bars, gourmet pizza bistros and boutiques now sit between the saloons at the base of the ski slopes in rustic downtown Whitefish. "We saw an influx 15 years ago of the Hollywood elite, celebrities and athletes. They sold out and started moving away about seven or eight years ago, and the real money started moving in right after that. The ones that have multiple vacation homes, the investment portfolios," said Scott Williams, regional manager for the Department of Revenue in the Flathead Valley. Though the out-of-state millionaires probably won't even think about their tax bills, those who have considered the Flathead home for much of their lives now face the prospect of mortgaging to pay the taxes -- if they can -- or moving. "There's a neighbor of mine, she's close to 90. Her property went from $540,000 to $2.1 million. And her tax bill is going from $5,500 to $14,200 in 2014," said Arthur Buckley, who inherited an old three-bedroom house on Flathead Lake from his parents and moved there from Chino, Calif., to retire in 1998. read more...... latimes.com

To: TimF who wrote (540784)	1/5/2010 7:06:32 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576003

Americans' job satisfaction falls to record low By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer Jeannine Aversa, Ap Economics Writer 26 mins ago WASHINGTON – We can't get no job satisfaction. Even Americans who are lucky enough to have work in this economy are becoming more unhappy with their jobs, according to a new survey that found only 45 percent of Americans are satisfied with their work. That was the lowest level ever recorded by the Conference Board research group in more than 22 years of studying the issue. In 2008, 49 percent of those surveyed reported satisfaction with their jobs. The drop in workers' happiness can be partly blamed on the worst recession since the 1930s, which made it difficult for some people to find challenging and suitable jobs. But worker dissatisfaction has been on the rise for more than two decades. "It says something troubling about work in America. It is not about the business cycle or one grumpy generation," says Linda Barrington, managing director of human capital at the Conference Board, who helped write the report, which was released Tuesday. Workers have grown steadily more unhappy for a variety of reasons: • Fewer workers consider their jobs to be interesting. • Incomes have not kept up with inflation. • The soaring cost of health insurance has eaten into workers' take-home pay. If the job satisfaction trend is not reversed, economists say, it could stifle innovation and hurt America's competitiveness and productivity. And it could make unhappy older workers less inclined to take the time to share their knowledge and skills with younger workers. Nate Carrasco, 26, of Odessa, Texas, says he's been pretty unhappy in most of his jobs, including his current one at an auto parts store. "There is no sense of teamwork in most places any more," Carrasco gripes. When the Conference Board's first survey was conducted in 1987, most workers — 61 percent — said they were happy in their jobs. The survey of 5,000 households was conducted for the Conference Board by TNS, a global market research company. One clue that may explain workers' growing dissatisfaction: Only 51 percent now find their jobs interesting — another low in the survey's 22 years. In 1987, nearly 70 percent said they were interested in their work. Workers who find their jobs interesting are more likely to be innovative and to take the calculated risks and the initiative that drive productivity and contribute to economic growth, Barrington says. "What's really disturbing about growing job dissatisfaction is the way it can play into the competitive nature of the U.S. work force down the road and on the growth of the U.S. economy — all in a negative way," says Lynn Franco, another author of the report and director of the Conference Board's Consumer Research Center. Conference Board officials and outside economists suggested that weak wage growth helps explain why workers' unhappiness has been rising for more than 20 years. After growing in the 1980s and 1990s, average household incomes adjusted for inflation have been shrinking since 2000. Also, compared with 1980, three times as many workers contribute to the cost of their health insurance — and those contributions have gone up. The average employee contribution for single-coverage medical care benefits rose from $48 a month to $76 a month between 1999 and 2006. Workers under 25 expressed the highest level of dissatisfaction. Roughly 64 percent of workers under 25 say they were unhappy in their jobs. The recession has been especially hard on young workers, who face fewer opportunities now and lower wages, some analysts say. The most satisfied were those ages 25 to 34, who may see some opportunities for upward mobility as baby boomers retire. Around 47 percent of workers 25 to 34 say they were happy in their jobs. Some other key findings of the survey: • Forty-three percent of workers feel secure in their jobs. In 2008, 47 percent said they feel secure in their jobs, while 59 percent felt that way in 1987. • Fifty-six percent say they like their co-workers, slightly less than the 57 percent who said so last year but down from 68 percent in 1987. • Fifty-six percent say they are satisfied with their commute to work even as commute times have grown longer over the years. That compares with 54 percent in 2008 and 63 percent in 1987. • Fifty-one percent say their are satisfied with their boss. That's down from 55 percent in 2008 and around 60 percent two decades ago. Carrasco said he wishes his bosses would take time to listen to workers' ideas — and their difficulties on the job. "Most of the time they only listen to what their bosses are saying," he says. "Bosses need to come down to the employee level more and see what actually goes on, versus what their paperwork tells them is happening in the stores." It wouldn't be fair to blame low job satisfaction solely on bad bosses, Barrington says. "It is two-way responsibility," she says. "Workers also have to figure out what they should be doing to be the most engaged in their jobs and the most productive."