[bearishgurl]

[quote=Ren]Condos usually give a better return than SFRs, even with $200+ HOA fees. And don’t forget what you get for those fees (new roof when needed, no need to pay a gardener $40/month, etc.). HOA and all other maintenance is deductable, as is depreciation of the structure itself. Condos are obviously more risky than SFRs, but not nearly as bad as most people think…[/quote]

Ren, more often than not, a new roof in a condo complex is usually partially or entirely funded by a special assessment of the owners (esp in a small complex). As a condo-landlord, you would need to also factor in occasional special assessments, depending on the age and condition of the premises and financial health of the HOA.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Ren]Condos usually give a better return than SFRs, even with $200+ HOA fees. And don’t forget what you get for those fees (new roof when needed, no need to pay a gardener $40/month, etc.). HOA and all other maintenance is deductable, as is depreciation of the structure itself. Condos are obviously more risky than SFRs, but not nearly as bad as most people think…[/quote]

Ren, more often than not, a new roof in a condo complex is usually partially or entirely funded by a special assessment of the owners (esp in a small complex). As a condo-landlord, you would need to also factor in occasional special assessments, depending on the age and condition of the premises and financial health of the HOA.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Ren]Condos usually give a better return than SFRs, even with $200+ HOA fees. And don’t forget what you get for those fees (new roof when needed, no need to pay a gardener $40/month, etc.). HOA and all other maintenance is deductable, as is depreciation of the structure itself. Condos are obviously more risky than SFRs, but not nearly as bad as most people think…[/quote]

Ren, more often than not, a new roof in a condo complex is usually partially or entirely funded by a special assessment of the owners (esp in a small complex). As a condo-landlord, you would need to also factor in occasional special assessments, depending on the age and condition of the premises and financial health of the HOA.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=EconProf]Newly unemployed workers do not want to admit it when they are worth less than what they earned in their previous jobs. It is a blow to their ego, and a failure to recognize that the labor market has changed and this is the new normal. Sadly, they sit in the unemployment pool for months or years holding unrealistic expectations while their work skills and mental and physical condition deteriorates.
Over-50 job seekers that claim discrimination should realize that employers have many choices available to them. Employers understandably pick younger workers with years of increasing productivity ahead of them instead of years of decreasing productivity. PS: I’m in the latter category.[/quote]

EconProf, I think the rampant age discrimination in hiring (in SD Co especially) has more to do with cost of health ins than any other reason, especially for small biz, who don’t get the best rates. The baby boomer set is infinitely more qualified for most jobs than succeeding generations just by virtue of experience. You can’t get this experience and vast institutional knowledge from school.

The problem is that the over-50 monthly health premium can be 3+ times that of their younger counterparts. If the biz is very small, the workers policies must be underwritten. I’ve seen them as high as $1120 mo for a 61 year-old who, in the 18 mos I worked with them, only missed an occasional 1/2 day of work at a time, solely due to (preventative) medical appts.

Law firms, for instance, desperately NEED highly experienced personnel because their clients (corporate, sm biz AND individuals) demand not to be charged for every task at attorney billing rates. If they hire a young, cheap, green candidate, they pay much less and don’t have the experience (which you can’t learn in school), thus have a long, steep training curve here. If they pay thru the nose for a health policy to hire a candidate that can do everything but show up in court and advise clients, their firm is better off in the long run, IMO. As an employer, you always take that chance that an older employee will sustain more injuries than their younger counterpart or become ill. But you take a MUCH BIGGER chance that a younger female employee will skate thru a pregnancy on “doctor-ordered” light duty and take extended FML for maternity leave (FML was not avail to most boomers; if they didn’t return after 6 wks + any remaining saved leave, they were terminated). After this employee collects ALL their SDI, has taken ALL their FML and exhausted ALL of their leave and their employer has held their job open for up to 6 mos (hiring expensive temps to fill in), they have the legal right to decide to quit and stay home with their baby. If the employer “hires” a contractor, like me, they can pay for piecework on a case when needed and then hire the contractor again, when needed. The drawback is that they cannot require any hours or any particular work hours of the contractor within their office. This works for a lot of small firms and sole practitioners.

When hiring, employers in general, even law firms, seem to be “fixated,” on a bachelor-degreed candidate, when what they really need is an individual with the CA Code of Civil Procedure and CA Rules of Court (as well as any local rules and poss Federal Rules) chained to their brain. A newly-minted “Psychology” or “Bus Admin” degree isn’t going to help either the candidate or the firm in this regard. This is the case with any area of specialized business. The nuts and bolts of a particular biz are learned working in it and not in school.

Not every “unemployed” (lol) baby boomer is out of shape, sitting around depressed, reading mags and drinking their sorrows away. Many are fit, some VERY fit, taking “side jobs” and living within their means. Most of the boomers I know (incl myself) and fitter and trimmer than their much younger counterparts. We also have cars and a closetful of (respectful) business attire.

I know a metallurgist (yes, a bona-fide engineer) who dropped out of HS. He recently retired from a well-known US govm’t contractor with a generous defined benefit plan after 33 yrs service. He rec’d his GED at about age 40 and went onto college at night, recieving his Bachelor of Science at age 50. He already possessed the classification of engineer prior to obtaining his GED. His educational goals were for personal enrichment and to obtain a supervisory position. His company paid all his educational expenses. Of course, we all know those days are gone but what I’m trying to say here is that intelligence, skill and ambition has nothing to do with having or not having a “college degree.”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pfflyer]I have several kids approaching HS age so am very concerned about how to get them college educated (if really needed) without becoming overly indebted. It is so lame because I could teach them how to run a business better than some professor. However this country still is in love with the degree even though it has become so devalued. Also we talk regularly about which job categories will be growth oriented in the future and which are dying out. A tough time to be a father…[/quote]

pfflyer, there’s nothing wrong with showing your kids how to run a biz. I’ve seen several local top-producing RE agents and one enrolled agent tax preparer around here put their newly licensed kid to work sitting open houses and acting as their transaction coordinator and/or Spanish translator. The tax preparer has their newly minted HS grad (now CC student) answering phones, copying and setting up appts in their office during tax season and beyond. They don’t even teach these practical skills in the (expensive) Wharton School of Business! It doesn’t hurt for a 19 yo to get up in the am, dress for biz, turn off their texting/twitter/ipod, etc and pretend like they’re in the “real world” for a few hrs a day.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pfflyer]I have several kids approaching HS age so am very concerned about how to get them college educated (if really needed) without becoming overly indebted. It is so lame because I could teach them how to run a business better than some professor. However this country still is in love with the degree even though it has become so devalued. Also we talk regularly about which job categories will be growth oriented in the future and which are dying out. A tough time to be a father…[/quote]

pfflyer, there’s nothing wrong with showing your kids how to run a biz. I’ve seen several local top-producing RE agents and one enrolled agent tax preparer around here put their newly licensed kid to work sitting open houses and acting as their transaction coordinator and/or Spanish translator. The tax preparer has their newly minted HS grad (now CC student) answering phones, copying and setting up appts in their office during tax season and beyond. They don’t even teach these practical skills in the (expensive) Wharton School of Business! It doesn’t hurt for a 19 yo to get up in the am, dress for biz, turn off their texting/twitter/ipod, etc and pretend like they’re in the “real world” for a few hrs a day.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pfflyer]I have several kids approaching HS age so am very concerned about how to get them college educated (if really needed) without becoming overly indebted. It is so lame because I could teach them how to run a business better than some professor. However this country still is in love with the degree even though it has become so devalued. Also we talk regularly about which job categories will be growth oriented in the future and which are dying out. A tough time to be a father…[/quote]

pfflyer, there’s nothing wrong with showing your kids how to run a biz. I’ve seen several local top-producing RE agents and one enrolled agent tax preparer around here put their newly licensed kid to work sitting open houses and acting as their transaction coordinator and/or Spanish translator. The tax preparer has their newly minted HS grad (now CC student) answering phones, copying and setting up appts in their office during tax season and beyond. They don’t even teach these practical skills in the (expensive) Wharton School of Business! It doesn’t hurt for a 19 yo to get up in the am, dress for biz, turn off their texting/twitter/ipod, etc and pretend like they’re in the “real world” for a few hrs a day.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pfflyer]I have several kids approaching HS age so am very concerned about how to get them college educated (if really needed) without becoming overly indebted. It is so lame because I could teach them how to run a business better than some professor. However this country still is in love with the degree even though it has become so devalued. Also we talk regularly about which job categories will be growth oriented in the future and which are dying out. A tough time to be a father…[/quote]

pfflyer, there’s nothing wrong with showing your kids how to run a biz. I’ve seen several local top-producing RE agents and one enrolled agent tax preparer around here put their newly licensed kid to work sitting open houses and acting as their transaction coordinator and/or Spanish translator. The tax preparer has their newly minted HS grad (now CC student) answering phones, copying and setting up appts in their office during tax season and beyond. They don’t even teach these practical skills in the (expensive) Wharton School of Business! It doesn’t hurt for a 19 yo to get up in the am, dress for biz, turn off their texting/twitter/ipod, etc and pretend like they’re in the “real world” for a few hrs a day.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pfflyer]I have several kids approaching HS age so am very concerned about how to get them college educated (if really needed) without becoming overly indebted. It is so lame because I could teach them how to run a business better than some professor. However this country still is in love with the degree even though it has become so devalued. Also we talk regularly about which job categories will be growth oriented in the future and which are dying out. A tough time to be a father…[/quote]

pfflyer, there’s nothing wrong with showing your kids how to run a biz. I’ve seen several local top-producing RE agents and one enrolled agent tax preparer around here put their newly licensed kid to work sitting open houses and acting as their transaction coordinator and/or Spanish translator. The tax preparer has their newly minted HS grad (now CC student) answering phones, copying and setting up appts in their office during tax season and beyond. They don’t even teach these practical skills in the (expensive) Wharton School of Business! It doesn’t hurt for a 19 yo to get up in the am, dress for biz, turn off their texting/twitter/ipod, etc and pretend like they’re in the “real world” for a few hrs a day.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]BG
Sorry but I think I’ll pass on culinary advice from soemone who shops the 7 day old bread shelves.[/quote]

Actually, the bread I get for .99 to $1.49 in the early am in the county’s 3 biggest chain-supermarkets has JUST been removed from the regular ($2.79 – $5) shelves and is 1 to 1.5 days older than bread that has just been put out.

Do you use an entire loaf of bread within 1.5 days of purchasing it, sdr?? Just wondering.

It won’t bother me a bit if you pay $5 for a loaf of bread OR decide not to try “Home” . . . your loss :={

[bearishgurl]

[quote=sdrealtor]BG
Sorry but I think I’ll pass on culinary advice from soemone who shops the 7 day old bread shelves.[/quote]

Actually, the bread I get for .99 to $1.49 in the early am in the county’s 3 biggest chain-supermarkets has JUST been removed from the regular ($2.79 – $5) shelves and is 1 to 1.5 days older than bread that has just been put out.

Do you use an entire loaf of bread within 1.5 days of purchasing it, sdr?? Just wondering.

It won’t bother me a bit if you pay $5 for a loaf of bread OR decide not to try “Home” . . . your loss :={

[Author]

Posts