Tesla Model S

Tesla Model S has been unveiled by Tesla as the “world’s first mass-produced, highway-capable EV”. With an electronically limited top speed of 130 mph and 0 to 60 mph acceleration time of 3.9 seconds, Tesla Model S sedan has a range of 300 miles.

Tesla Model S electric can be re-charged from any 120V, 240V or 480V outlet, which taking 45 minutes from the 480V outlet for a full re-charge. Tesla also offers a range of batteries for the Tesla Model S, with an autonomy of 160, 230 or 300 miles per charge.

Tesla Model S powertrain is mounted under the floor which offers extra luggage space under the hood, while the storage space offers the possibility to carry a 50-inch television, a mountain bike, and also a surfboard simultaneously.

As have been announced by the company, Tesla Model S price will starts at $49,900.

Read the rest entry of this news?

Why Not Get Student Loan Consolidation?

You hear commercials about consolidation loans all the time on the radio and see them on TV. These are usually ads for debt consolidation loans that are typically used to consolidate consumer debt, such as credit cards, car loans, or store charge cards. The main advantage here is that you can replace many high interest loans with a single loan at a much lower interest rate. The disadvantage is that you have to put your house on the line as security for the new loan.

That’s where student consolidation loans differ from standard consumer debt consolidation loans. Because most student loans are insured by the federal government, you are not required to use any security in order to consolidate them. You do however, get the same advantages you get with other consolidation loans; lower monthly payments and more convenience because you’re replacing many loans with only one. Therefore, you’ve got fewer possibilities for errors that can cause late or incorrect payments.

A major difference between consumer consolidation loans and student consolidation loans is that, in order to consolidate student loans a credit check is not required. In fact, the process is relatively easy, and well worth doing, as there is basically no down side. You get all the advantages of consolidating consumer loans without getting a credit check or putting up a home or other real estate as collateral.

According to recent government statistics, the average undergraduate college student now graduates with approximately $27,000 in student loans. This is because the dramatically increasing cost of a college education. This trend towards higher education costs is showing no sighs of slowing, so in the future students may have even a higher loan burden upon graduation. If that proves to be the case, the demand for student loan consolidation, and the payment relief it provides can only grow.

Can Government Solve the Foreclosure Problem?

Foreclosures are up nationwide, and will continue to rise as prices continue to go flat in many markets. For some, the problem is painful. Ask New Century Financial Corporation, the nation’s second largest sub-prime lender, who recently filed for bankruptcy. Ask the guy down the block from you whose house is in foreclosure.

Foreclosures are up nationwide, and will continue to rise as prices continue to go flat in many markets. For some, the problem is painful. Ask New Century Financial Corporation, the nation’s second largest sub-prime lender, who recently filed for bankruptcy. Ask the guy down the block from you whose house is in foreclosure. Some pundits think the rising foreclosures will bankrupt our economy, causing pain for people who lose their business or job as a ripple effect of all these foreclosures. Others think that the rise in foreclosures is a healthy adjustment to the end of a long real estate boom, and is nature’s way of taking care of a free-market economic cycle. Who’s right? Time will tell, but it’s alarming to see politicians trying to fix this problem. Here are some of their solutions.

Give People Money Tax the rich, give to the poor. The federal government now wants to fund programs to help people stay in their homes. Second foreclosure-prevention bill introduced in Senate A new bill in the Senate proposes giving money to people who can’t pay their loans. We taxpayers are confused. If these people are in trouble because they never should have been given such a loan, why should taxpayer money be used to keep them in their homes that they could not otherwise afford? Maybe someone in Washington has the answer to that question?

Regulate Foreclosure Investors I have written extensively about the assault on foreclosure investors that have been initiated by consumer advocate groups, resulting in a tsunami of new “Foreclosure Protection” laws across the country. A Review of the NCLC’s “Dreams Foreclosed” Report While protecting innocent homeowners from unethical investors is a good idea, new legislation is not always the answer. Enforcement of existing consumer protection laws and prosecution under existing criminal laws is certainly a better option than creating new laws that limit the options of a seller in foreclosure. The best solution to a foreclosure epidemic is a free market that allows investors to gobble up inventory. By hamstringing investors with complicated, punitive regulations, it will only discourage transactions and result in more properties in lender inventory. More lender inventory forces them to sell at lower prices, which hurts the entire real estate market.

Stop the Foreclosure Process The Government of the State of Massachusetts just handed the State Banking Division the authority to put up to a two month delay on any lender foreclosure. All a homeowner has to do is file a complaint with that office. State Orders Foreclosure Delays It is not year clear on how many lenders this will affect, but certainly this move is troubling. If the government’s action is based on a consumer complaint, what kind of complaint deserves the kind of government involvement that stops a lender from collecting on its debt?

Certainly, any homeowner whose legal rights have been violated under state or federal law can stop or delay a foreclosure with a court order. Opponents, of course, will argue that since these people in foreclosure can’t afford lawyers, they won’t have the means to seek this remedy. Such is life, that people who are in debt can’t afford lawyers to protect their legal rights. Do people in $1,000,000 homes deserve the same protection as people in $100,000 homes? Do lenders and their shareholders have the right to foreclose and get their collateral back? And, think about the next logical step… will the government stop allowing landlords to evict if the problem gets bad enough?

Stop the Lenders from Lending Nobody can seriously deny that lenders got sloppy in how they lent mortgage money over the last 10 years. As a result, many people got into loans they couldn’t pay back, and we now see the consequences. Conversely, with the exception of gross overreaching by mortgage brokers, it’s hard to deny that most people didn’t understand the risk involved in borrowing money they couldn’t pay back. If you buy a house with no money down and a negative amortizing loan, you are gambling that you will make more money in the future and/or the price of your home will increase. If you are wrong, you lose your home. That’s the gamble. It’s like Vegas, except for one thing - the house doesn’t win when the customer loses. Everybody loses, except the attorneys who get paid to foreclose.

Should the government stop lenders from offering “risky” loans? The answer, I believe, is emphatically “NO”. If lenders go too far, they suffer financially. Thus, the market will take care of itself, in that lenders who lose profits will tighten up loan regulations, and Wall Street will downgrade or reject portfolios of risky loans. Before you get too excited by this last paragraph, I do believe that some regulation is appropriate to protect the consumers and shareholders from getting duped in the process. Additional disclosures to both homeowners and Wall Street investors are appropriate considering the large number of defaulting sub-prime loans. However, if people want to borrow money under risky terms and lenders want to lend under a high risk of loss, why should the government stop them? Pawn shops, check-cashing stores and used car lots all operate on a high-level of risk.

Step Up Enforcement of Existing Laws Instead of stopping the business, I believe the government should throw money at enforcement. Prosecute the bad people and leave the options open for people who want to do business under their own terms. There are enough existing laws that give the state and federal prosecutors plenty of room to go after bad operators, and many of them already have.

The government can put band-aids on it, but only the market can solve it the foreclosure problem. When demand exceeds supply in a given market, prices will go back up, and people will have enough equity to sell their homes. Somehow, I don’t imagine people will learn their lesson and, thus will continue the same cycle in the future. But, most Americans believe it is not the government’s job to stop people from willingly doing stupid things. When it comes to your financial decisions, be responsible, read the fine print, and remember… “buyer beware”.