- This topic has 261 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 11 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 17, 2012 at 9:15 AM #736095January 17, 2012 at 9:48 AM #736099
NotCranky
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=Jacarandoso]Ignore This![/quote]
Wha-a-a-at . . .??
You don’t want a bottle of “decent wine?”
I’m sure it will be delivered to you all sealed up :=P[/quote]
Actually, I think Markmax33 won!
January 17, 2012 at 10:01 AM #736100bearishgurl
Participant[quote=Jacarandoso][quote=bearishgurl][quote=Jacarandoso]Ignore This![/quote]
Wha-a-a-at . . .??
You don’t want a bottle of “decent wine?”
I’m sure it will be delivered to you all sealed up :=P[/quote]
Actually, I think Markmax33 won![/quote]
Rus, I think you’re right!! You came in so close that I didn’t look down the thread :=0
edit: my eyes are playing tricks on me. markmax33 stated $245K, NOT $254K.
Rus, don’t you appear to be the winner?
January 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM #736033(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant$ 253,897.13
January 17, 2012 at 10:15 AM #736103Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan]$ 253,897.13[/quote]
You guys must have missed this stuck in the middle of the Wall street versus public servant discussions.
January 17, 2012 at 10:17 AM #736104Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]$ 253,897.13[/quote]
You guys must have missed this stuck in the middle of the Wall street versus public servant discussions.[/quote]
LOL!January 17, 2012 at 10:19 AM #736105Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]$ 253,897.13[/quote]
You guys must have missed this stuck in the middle of the Wall street versus public servant discussions.[/quote]
Congrats FSD!! I wonder if this means you’ll be getting a “lesser decent” bottle of wine, due to shipping costs ….
January 17, 2012 at 10:19 AM #736106Participant[quote=Jacarandoso]253,597.14[/quote]
You just missed it, Jac
January 17, 2012 at 10:23 AM #736107Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=Jacarandoso]253,597.14[/quote]
You just missed it, Jac[/quote]
By $299.99 … LOL
January 17, 2012 at 10:23 AM #736108Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=Jacarandoso]253,597.14[/quote]
You just missed it, Jac[/quote]
Two buck chuck for me! Congrats!January 17, 2012 at 11:38 AM #736123UCGal
ParticipantCongrats FSD.
I still want to know (from sdr) if it’s typical for potential clients to show private financial info to a prospective realtor. Not just talking in rough numbers, but showing paystubs or year end pay statements. That still strikes me as very odd.
For those still debating pension stuff. (although not limited to public pensions). I will recommend a book I’ve mentioned before.
“Retirement Heist: How Companies Plunder and Profit from the Nest Eggs of American Workers” by Ellen Shultz – a former writer for the WSJ.
Confession I only read about half of it before I had to return it to the library (and put in on reserve again so I can finish reading it.)
Every time you hear some corporation like GE mentioning that Pension obligations cost them 13 cents a share, remind yourself that they did NOT mention when pension over funding added 14 cents a share to the bottom line in previous years. It’s a book full of data about how the message was managed to make us hate pensions as evil and how companies manipulated the pensions, actuarial data, projected earnings and liabilities to whatever ends they wanted at the time. Piggs like data, right? This book is full of data… that may not fit your anti-pension mind sets.
January 17, 2012 at 11:39 AM #736124sdrealtor
Participantwill send you a PM
January 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM #736127Anonymous
Guest[quote=UCGal]This book is full of data… that may not fit your anti-pension mind sets.[/quote]
The debate really is not about pensions (defined benefit retirement plans) vs. other “retirement” plans.
The debate is about public expenditures and public spending priorities, specifically compensation of public employees.
Thanks for the book suggestion, but it doesn’t really apply to the debate here. Private pensions are just that: private. I don’t much care what private companies do, unless I’m an employee of one or planning on investing. And those are my personal choices.
There are three basic questions:
1) How much should public employees be compensated for their services? (compensation in ALL forms)
2) How can we ensure that costs/compensation are transparent to the public? (this one is where pensions come into play – there is WAY too much going on with pensions for the average voter to know what they are really costing.)
3) Who bears the market risk if compensation is based upon future/unknown events (such as investment returns) – employer (taxpayer) or employee? (some of what is in your book probably applies to this one since private pensions must deal with this issue also.)
It’s not really about whether compensation includes a pension, or 401K matching, or free wine. It’s about the cost, transparency, and risk.
BTW: sdr is probably doing mortgages on the side.
January 17, 2012 at 12:03 PM #736130ParticipantI dont do mortgages. Its a conflict of interest. The financial info is needed to evaluate for a short sale or walk away strategy
January 17, 2012 at 2:03 PM #736139tdelamater
Participant[quote=FormerSanDiegan][quote=FormerSanDiegan]$ 253,897.13[/quote]
You guys must have missed this stuck in the middle of the Wall street versus public servant discussions.[/quote]
Yeah, but you guessed $325,724.68 before that (third post of the thread).
I demand a recount! I see a hanging chad!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.