Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=flyer] . . . I’m sorry you’re having to deal with the health care situation you’ve described, and I know Medicare & SS still seem far away for those of us still in our 50’s, but we’ll all get there eventually.[/quote]Yeah, I seriously wish I could be a few years older now so I could qualify for Medicare. A nationwide PPO for MC Part B and D (w/brand name drugs, etc) currently costs less than $400 month in our region! In my mind, implementing the ACA was a absolute fiasco and Covered CA is beyond incompetent. It’s unbelievable and wastes so many hours of my time. For the first time in my life, I am made to feel like I’m on “public aid.” And my “subsidy” only covers a little over a third of my monthly premium. I would rather not have it at all and have my old plan back. It would have cost me 3X the monthly premium of my pre-ACA plan to renew my Covered CA plan for 2016 (in it’s 3rd year in existence)! Hence, I had to downgrade a metal level to keep last year’s premium. Meanwhile, as a result of low reimbursements, two of my longtime providers “retired” at the end of last year and a local lab one of my providers always used abruptly quit my plan, leaving me with a $173 “out-of-network” bill which should have been $19 and paid by my carrier! I could go on … and on. Suffice to say, the system is effed up beyond recognition now and there are wa-a-a-ay too many fingers in the pot with the right hand having absolutely no clue what the left hand is doing. Thus, CC customers are receiving letters with conflicting deadlines to “produce documents,” letters retracting previous letters already sent, letters threatening to cancel their plan when they’ve already done what CC asked of them weeks ago, etc, etc. It’s not only me … I’ve seen these letters from several others.
The above is happening all the while these customers have given CC the authority to review their tax return numbers until 2020! CC’s reps have actually stated on my speakerphone with two other witnesses present that they don’t believe the numbers people put on their tax returns! Several people I know have actually “lost” coverage for a period of time after paying their premiums every month. I myself “lost” coverage (I had a Platinum Plan) from 4/20/15 to 4/30/15 while CC was “reviewing” my filed tax return. This is after paying my exorbitant monthly premium for April. I didn’t find out about it until I went to the pharmacy to pick up a prescription and found out I was not covered! When I called my carrier (4/30) to ask why, they told me that CC canceled my coverage. When I called CC and asked why, it was explained to me that they were reviewing my tax return and I was “in the clear” now and they would reinstate my coverage, effective today. How can they legally cancel my coverage mid-month when I paid my premium for the whole month?? There was no apology, no offer to reimburse one-third of my monthly premium …. nothing.
This whole crapfest has really gone wa-a-a-ay too far.
I expect I’ll have to downgrade my plan again for 2017 when my carrier decides to slap me with another $250+ monthly premium increase. We’ll see what happens.
The ACA needs to be scrapped and we need to start all over (making sure those with pre-existing conditions get coverage which is “affordable” for them). That was its main purpose. I’m happy to pay my premium every month but I don’t need or want the grossly incompetent CC in my business and neither does anyone else. Thanks for listening.
/threadjack
ParticipantOh, and btw, my carrier has made over $10K from me in both 2014 and 2015 (the excess of my premiums over my claims they paid).
I’m a “cash cow” for them, yet they have no say in whether they get to “keep me” as a customer … or not!
Participant[quote=flyer]I think it’s very hard to generalize about any particular generation, so I’ll share a little about my own life experience as a Boomer (and similar to most I know) only to help dispel common misconceptions about my generation.
As mentioned before, both my parents (whom, contrary to many comments here, I wanted to be exactly like, with no latchkey kids in either generation) and my wife’s parents, encouraged and emphasized establishing financial freedom ASAP in our lives as they had, and I was involved in investing in real estate even before I went to college. Everyone in my family was into real estate investment, among other things, so it came naturally.
This, among other things, gave us the freedom of not having to be tied to jobs, or at the mercy of employers–unless we chose to pursue careers we enjoyed–which both my wife and I did–she in film, and I in aviation, but we still had, and continue to have quality personal and family time for everything we need and want to do.
I could go on, but my point is, no generation has a “lock” on how to live. Believe me, there are people from every generation and in every age group who are living and have lived the lives they want to live, and some are not–it’s all individual.[/quote]Yes, I agree that we’re generalizing too much here … me included. But flyer, you’ve posted before here that you were a (represented) pilot for a commercial airline and now collect a defined benefit pension which is no doubt heavily contributing to your day to day “security” now. In addition, you’ve posted here that you and your spouse are able to avail yourselves of a nationwide healthcare plan (PPO) negotiated by your union. And rightly so … you deserve it.
Therefore, you have “paid your dues” with an “establishment” job which you had to “show up for” in earlier decades of your life.
You are very fortunate, flyer, in that your same healthplan IS offered by MY retirement association but it would cost me over $2100 month and that is far more than my monthly pension! Hence, I have an “obamacare” plan and all of the several-times-per-year BS that Covered CA puts me though in order to keep my plan “active.” It’s absolutely ridiculous and I HATE having to deal with it. I wish I had my old (grandfathered) plan back that was taken away from me due to the ACA. The PTB could have just dealt with the group with pre-existing conditions and figured out a way to get THEM coverage and give THEM a subsidy to pay their high monthly health plan premiums. They didn’t need to mess with the plans the rest of us had. We in the group which had to “medically qualify” for our plans were happy with them.
Participant[quote=yamashi1][quote=The-Shoveler]
Yes there are Boomers who live this life style too, maybe 5% or so.[/quote]What lifestyle do you keep referring to? I think he’s just referring to ways of doing the same job more productively and creatively. I think in any job you can find ways to improve processes and/ technology to make your personal life better. Anyone can bitch and complain about anything, like that it’s only for the 5%, but not many can come up with solutions to why the other 95% can’t do it.[/quote]You’re asking so I’ll tell you. Gubments (incl police and fire agencies), utility and road workers, hospital workers, food service and hotel workers and any other worker position that is traditionally “represented” in CA doesn’t want to hear about all your “good ideas” to “save face-time” at work. H@ll, some of those employers still use time cards! Believe me, the wheel was invented before you were born and the “rulebooks” were written long ago. They’ve heard every excuse in the book why you can’t be at work today and have to “see your kid” in the middle of the biz day or whatever. If one of their “processes” could have been “improved” without the agency or dept suffering other ill consequences, it would have already happened. Employers are not in the business of making YOUR personal life better.
Sometimes I think millenials act as if they’re the only ones who ever thought that work tasks could be done more efficiently, lol …..
Participant[quote=yamashi1][quote]yamashi, I take it your kids ARE currently in daycare/afterschool care?
And were you aware of this public (K-8) school about 3.5 miles north of dtn SD?
https://www.sandiegounified.org/schools/grant
http://www.greatschools.org/california/san-diego/6151-Grant-Elementary-School/%5B/quote%5D
All of the elementary schools in our district currently rate a 10 or better. The middle school is a 10 and the high school is a 9. My daughter’s elementary school also has a GATE Seminar program which is also a +. In addition, my commute to work in the morning is against traffic and takes me between 20-25 minutes. I personally would never move more than 30 minutes away from my job. Downtown is fun, but I don’t think its a place where I want my kids to be playing. I’ll wait until they are older before exposing them to transients and dead people on the sidewalk from meth/heroin overdose.
[quote]Actually, yamashi, millenials weren’t the first generation to have both parents working. I myself (and my siblings) grew up in a household in the ’50’s, ’60’s and ’70’s with both parents working and we weren’t alone. [/quote]
I’m not saying they were, I’m saying that is what I remember growing up. Also, McMansions are a product that happened during my time. 50’s-70’s homes were for the most part less than 2,000 sq ft. Not like the huge homes we have today.[quote]If you’re speaking here of CA housing prices, yamashi, RE prices didn’t go up over the years in CA due ….[/quote]
Your rationale is all BS. Costs don’t determine prices, people do. To qualify for these higher mortgages people need to have dual incomes to cover the mortgage. Simple as that. All this other crap you talk about has nothing to do with anything. Large developers make products that people can afford. Without absorption, then the developers cannot find financing to finance their projects. I used to finance large developments (KB, Lennar, Pulte, etc) and the first thing I review is the feasibility of the absorption. This is prior to looking at the budget, hard and soft cost contingencies etc. If people can’t afford it, I could care less how much the developer spends; in many of the cases, this requires dual income. One person loses a job and bam 2008 happens all over again.[/quote]Then you know that developers don’t build for free … they build for a profit. They MUST be able to get all of their expenses back out of the sale of all the units in a subdivision or it is not even worth it for them to apply for a subdivision permit. It has been VERY costly to build in CA since the inception of the MR Act (year varies by county). A builder doesn’t have to worry about “absorption” in a CA coastal county. They WILL sell all of their units upon each phase they release as SoCal (esp coastal counties) has a “captive audience” and always have. Buyers aren’t setting prices of new construction. Builders are. And they have often used “creative financing” (such as builder-funded second TD’s) to make their prices more “palatable” to those buyers who have to get a mortgage but can’t qualify for enough to purchase.
“2008” can’t happen “all over again” unless lending standards are relaxed to the level they were from 2004 to 2008 and I doubt that will happen again. “2008” had little to do with with job loss of individual homeowners and everything to do with “qualifying” buyers for homes which they were unqualified to purchase and allowing same (unqualified) homeowners to remove equity from their homes, plain and simple.
As for downtown SD, I worked down there for over 25 years and never saw “dead people on the sidewalk from meth/heroin overdose,” nor have I recently and I have to go down there and park 1-2x month. The areas I suggested to you were in 92103 which is, for the most part, very quiet (in the residential areas). Not only that, it has beautiful architecture and streetscape and is prestigious and coveted by buyers from all over the world. PLENTY of “professionals” (mostly attorneys) I worked with downtown raised their kids in that area!
yamashi, you never told us if your kids are in daycare/afterschool care NOW and/or if you managed to “escape” from the lifestyle your parents provided for you. Inquiring minds are wondering ….
February 19, 2016 at 1:42 PM in reply to: OT: Yet another reason to never take out a student loan – They will hunt you down! #794522Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]The arrest wasn’t for the failure to pay. I think it was off a warrant post judgment for a debtors examination he failed to appear for…
He probably got used to blowing off notices. Some u can some u can’t…[/quote]Thanks for your insight, scaredy. This story (sensationalized by the local news) didn’t sound right to me, either. Seems as if a boatload of private (delinquent) student loans in that region were turned over to Sallie Mae, who paid the lending banks the guarantee on them and is now attempting to collect as much as possible from these delinquent borrowers. And there will always be their SS payments to garnish if they haven’t yet begun to do so.
…Sallie Mae previously originated federally guaranteed student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP).[3] and worked as a servicer and collector of federal student loans on behalf of the Department of Education. ..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sallie_Mae
Of course, with the above experience and due to the age of these loans, Sallie Mae has the blessing (and likely, the resources) of the Federal Government available to them such as the US Marshal’s Office, lol ….
Yes, a LOT of people just “blow off” collection notices, thinking that they’ll just eventually “go away.” Especially old student loans and old medical bills. Alas, nothing could be further from the truth :-0
Participant[quote=yamashi1]As a millennial we grew up in an era where the growing majority of households had two working adults; and for the most part not raised by our parents but by daycare providers or no one at all! Personally, I remember walking home at age 6 with my younger sister to an empty house, preparing a PB&J sandwich and either throwing on the TV or jumping on my bike to go play with the neighborhood kids. I miss those days, but as an adult I’ve come to realize that I don’t want to be like my parents. I created children because I want to be with them, want to spend time with them and watch them grow to become responsible adults. For the first time in human history, technology has enabled us to do all of this.[/quote]
[quote=yamashi1] . . . My wife and I work downtown and I am able to enjoy it, but probably not a great place to raise children. I’m sure that I’m not the only one that feels this way. It seems pretty normal for young professionals to live in the city and move to the suburbs once they start having children. Options for me are sending my kids to private school and living in the city, or moving to the suburbs and going the public route. I chose suburbs cause my wife was a product of private and is not a fan.[/quote]
yamashi, I take it your kids ARE currently in daycare/afterschool care?
And were you aware of this public (K-8) school about 3.5 miles north of dtn SD?
https://www.sandiegounified.org/schools/grant
http://www.greatschools.org/california/san-diego/6151-Grant-Elementary-School/
This school currently rates a “9” and could have gotten your kids thru to HS, at which time they could choose from Mission Bay High or SD High (which has a renowned IB program) OR you could have applied for a zone transfer for them one-by-one, which isn’t as difficult to successfully obtain with a Hillcrest or Mission Hills address. Once the first kid gets admitted to a particular HS in SDUSD, it is MUCH easier for the other kids in the same family to follow.
There are a few more very good elementary schools within ~10 miles of dtn SD (rated 8 or 9).
Just sayin … there WERE alternatives for you to moving out to a suburb/exurb when you really didn’t want to be there. Even if you thought it must be “normal” to do so at your “stage of life.”
[quote=yamashi1][quote-bearishgurl]And btw, my kids were NEVER “latchkey kids.” They went to afterschool care thru the 6th grade and then a homework assistance program in 7th grade and transitioned back to extracurricular activities/home in 8th grade. They are far apart in age so my “child-rearing years” spanned a longer period of time than that of most parents.[/quote]I never meant it personally. I’m just speaking for my generation. For the most part, we were the first group to grow up in single parent/dual income households. Latchkey kids/afterschool care became the norm. Because of this, housing prices and sq ft. of homes and mini mcmansions increased exponentially further complicating the problem as single income families were priced out of good areas and therefore dual income became a requirement.[/quote]Actually, yamashi, millenials weren’t the first generation to have both parents working. I myself (and my siblings) grew up in a household in the ’50’s, ’60’s and ’70’s with both parents working and we weren’t alone. We never had daycare (nor could we afford it) but my mom didn’t work FT until my youngest sibling was in 1st grade and one of us had to walk him home from school.
If you’re speaking here of CA housing prices, yamashi, RE prices didn’t go up over the years in CA due to the composition of working parents in Big Development’s supposed “target buyer” households. Residential RE prices exploded (esp in CA coastal counties) due to the scarcity (and as a byproduct, cost) of acquiring and developing buildable land and the steady rise of the cost of construction materials. It costs a fortune to set up a CFD and develop an entire “master-planned” community in the manner the developer has agreed to with the respective city or county it is located in. Not only that, it takes YEARS to finally break ground, which may or may not include litigating several lawsuits with environmental groups, etc. The proliferation of “mini-mansions” today is simply a compensating factor for the typical small size of SFR lots subdivided by and offered for sale Big Development since the inception of the creation of CFDs pursuant to the Mello-Roos Act (mid 1987 and later in SD County). At the same time, the concept of “master planned communities” was created by “Big D” to make buyers feel better about buying a newly constructed larger-than-standard home crammed onto a smaller-than-standard and even minuscule lot (in comparison to residential lot sizes in long-established neighborhoods). The more square feet the home had, the higher price they could command for it … lot size be damned.
If your theory was true, then established city neighborhoods (where you state that millenials generally don’t want to raise their families in and which may instead be full of “retirees”) would not have escalated in value at such a rapid rate over the past two decades. Developers DON’T CARE how many jobs are in a buyer-household. They only care about 1-4 things in qualifying a buyer, depending upon terms of sale (1) total of buyers’ monthly household income, exclusive of occasional overtime; (2) total of buyers’ recurring monthly debt; (3) FICO score for all borrowers who will be listed on the the deed; and, (4) how much the buyer will be putting down. In the case of an “all-cash” buyer, all they care about is proof of certified funds. They don’t give a rat’s a$$ how many people in a household are bringing in income … only what the total of that (steady and customary) monthly income is in relation to mortgage size applied for. Ditto for sellers of resale homes.
No one is “conspiring” against millenials (or any other generation) to “price-fix” on “mini-mansions” in the distant suburbs because they perceive “both parents” are working in a household with minor kids at home. Believe me, developers (or any seller, for that matter) would rather accept a (competitive) all-cash offer than bother with a buyer who must qualify for a mortgage as a condition of their purchase offer. Nor do any developers of “mini-mansions” CARE one whit what the composition of the household who will buy it from them is (or whether they will actually occupy said dwelling … or not).
ParticipantOf COURSE, seniority means everything! It DOESN’T MATTER if millenials “think” they are smarter than their superiors because they were “educated” and “know how to dive for data.” They aren’t getting paid as much because they don’t deserve it …. yet. That’s what the “merit system” is in place for.
Imho, millenials would do well not to judge their superiors unless they have actually walked in their shoes. Since they haven’t … and in many cases, don’t want to, they may never find out. They have absolutely no clue the grit it took for them to attain their (lofty or not-so-much) positions they have today. And that’s okay. If Gen Y doesn’t end up vesting for a pension cuz they can’t work exactly the way they want to when they want to, then that’s on them. All their attrition does is create less competition for internal promotional opportunities for the workers who stay 🙂
ParticipantYamashi, I personally don’t see NYC or CA turning into another Detroit. The conditions which caused Detroit property values to plummet have never existed in NYC or CA and will never exist because their economies are far more diversified than Detroit and the whole of MI ever was.
ParticipantI understand what you’re saying, yamashi1 and FIH. But by being able to walk in on a Friday morning and say “hi” to your coworkers and then leave for skiing (without having it come off your vacation balances), you are trading lifetime job security for an at-will position. I hope you are preparing well for when the time comes that you are out of work and no one will hire you anymore. In spite of advances in technology over the past ~20 years, the working conditions of a “represented gubment employee” are not much different today than they were before the advent of the internet. They still have to “show up” in proper attire (whether that be a uniform or strict dress code) and work a full day or 8 or more hr shift, depending on classification. If they leave early, it will come off their leave balances. This is especially true for employees within agencies which serve the public. These employees will eventually earn a defined benefit pension (although with less generous formulas then in the past but computed on higher salaries) but you won’t. Ditto for medical personnel. In SD, Sharp Healthcare and Scripps Health both offer generous funds-matching retirement pkgs, generous annual leave after a certain number of years of service and lifetime job security but in order to attain these perks for yourself, you have to “show up” each and every day and every time you are called in with 20 mins notice.
Yamashi, the “freedom” you are allowed to take today is coming at a huge cost in my mind which could be the difference between you being able to support yourself when you are eventually hung out to dry from the “hiring pool” …. or not (not sure if you are the sole support of your family). You say here that you have 3 young kids and moved far out into the suburbs (exurbs?) after your third kid was born … but you and your spouse don’t really want to be there. If you don’t mind my asking, why didn’t you just buy a place in the city and raise your kids there?
You stated that when your last kid enters college, you and your spouse are going to sell and beat feet back to the city so you can “enjoy yourselves” again. Well, that’s what I thought 1.5 years ago when my youngest left for college. I wanted to move to a ski-area (S. Lake Tahoe) so I could ski anytime I wanted to and possibly work a PT gig for socialization and grocery/utility money. Even though the housing is still quite reasonably priced up there, I have lots of equity in my home (at least 70%) a steady income and plenty of assets, practically speaking, it’s not as easy to do as I thought. The “math” keeps me in place for the time being as I am still helping my youngest thru college (room & board only). You have THREE kids you may need to put thru college! You have a l-o-o-ong road ahead of you and I hope it all works out for you and you can afford to move back to the city as you envision and life’s surprises don’t get in the way of your goals.
And btw, my kids were NEVER “latchkey kids.” They went to afterschool care thru the 6th grade and then a homework assistance program in 7th grade and transitioned back to extracurricular activities/home in 8th grade. They are far apart in age so my “child-rearing years” spanned a longer period of time than that of most parents.
[end of lecture]
February 19, 2016 at 9:23 AM in reply to: OT: Yet another reason to never take out a student loan – They will hunt you down! #794495Participant[quote=mixxalot] . . . My BA degree has not opened doors.[/quote]If you don’t mind my asking, mixxalot, what did you major in?
Participant[quote=flyer]Everyone has a different life experience, and there really is no right or wrong.
As Boomers, one of our major goals as a couple, and later as a family, was to create financial freedom as early as possible, so we could pursue whatever we considered to be important in life–rather than waiting for a later “retirement” scenario. Investing in real estate at a young age, among other things, enabled us to do so.
We enjoy our home life, and can’t imagine not having a stable home base, but we also enjoy having extreme mobility, which, for us, has worked out to be the best of both worlds.
Regardless of what each of us chooses to do with our lives–everything in this lifetime is temporary–so enjoy it while you can.[/quote]So true, flyer. I never in a million years thought when I was younger that so many of my family members (and longtime friends) would be gone long before I even reached “retirement age.” I feel fortunate to wake up each day and have my health and will continue to do all I can to ensure it continues.
Yes, we also invested in RE at a young age and none of our properties were in anywhere near “perfect” shape when we bought them nor were any of them situated in “perfect” parts of town (if there IS such a thing). But had we not done that hard slog (and had I not showed up for work every day for decades), I wouldn’t be where I am today … with the freedom to travel when I want/need to.
One can’t earn a guaranteed pension in this life if they don’t “show up” for work consistently through all the ups and downs (and politics) over the years.
February 18, 2016 at 10:01 PM in reply to: OT: Yet another reason to never take out a student loan – They will hunt you down! #794491Participant[quote=paramount][quote=bearishgurl]
It is better NOT to go to college (or go to a much cheaper college or nearly “free” ROP job training program) than to take out a student loan which will ruin your life right out of the gate, just as you’re trying to start it. I don’t believe in them.[/quote]
I generally agree unless were talking Harvard, MIT, Princeton, etc…
I wonder how many of these people arrested for not paying their student loans went to football schools or for-profit schools.[/quote]In spite of several tuition fee hikes in the past decade (but not in recent years), I feel the CSU is still reasonable in cost for an in-state student. If your student can carry a 12-23 hr week job while attending FT, they can pay some of their expenses (incl gas, parking and some books, if necessary). It isn’t that costly for room/board if your student shares with 3 roommates as they will only owe 1/4 the rent and utilities every month. And some of the CSU campuses are located in cheaper inland and/or rural areas of the state where housing costs less.
I think the CSU is a good value and has an incredible amount of degree programs to choose from in comparison to similarly-situated state college systems in other states. It’s undoubtedly the biggest public university system in the nation and cranks out more bachelor degrees than any other. And your student doesn’t have to have a 4.0+ GPA in HS to get accepted to most campuses … although that bar keeps rising every year.
Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]Works OK for some software Gigs’s not so well for Doctors nurses, firemen etc…
The whole world does not run on piecemeal gig’s
Call me old, But I still think 90% of success is showing up and being there.
Mark Cuban had a good take on this subject, need to find that again[/quote]If we didn’t have our smiling faces there for the “headcount” at 8:00 am five days per week, we had to call in with a plausible-sounding “sick” excuse by 8:15 am (and not make a habit of this on Mondays). If you were out of sick leave (or only had enough SL on the books to cover part of the day), your leave was deducted from your annual leave balance. If you didn’t have enough to that to cover the day, your paycheck would be shorted and you would likely be “counseled” as to why you’re not keeping any leave on the books. If you didn’t call in by 8:15 am, you were technically “AWOL” and subject to disciplinary action. Not only that, but you better be dressed and groomed properly or you would be sent home to do so and annual leave would be deducted from your balance accordingly. This meant a PRESSED pair of dockers or better for men and a PRESSED shirt. PANTYHOSE for women and no fallen hems in our (mid-knee-length) skirts and clothes CLEAN and pressed. No flashy, BIG jewelry, chains, cleavage, tank tops, short skirts, tight clothes, incl leggings, jeans of any kind (for both sexes). PRESSED DRESS pants were allowed 2-4X month for women. In the ’90’s, women were able to wear PRESSED DRESS pants almost every day with a PRESSED blouse or shirt tucked in and a belt, with which we could attach a NON-BEEPING pager. You could hang a non-tattered cardigan sweater on the back of your chair.
Damn straight.
I go back to these same (public offices) a few times per month today and I can’t believe what these millenial workers get away with! OMG, if we had tatoos peeking out from the back of tight pants and armfuls of tattoos peeking out from shirtsleeves, we would have NEVER BEEN HIRED (or terminated if we got them AFTER we were hired)! And I worked across the street from SIX tattoo parlors in dtn SD for at least a dozen years! At least today’s local gubment workers have to take out their nose, lip and tongue rings before reporting to work (I can see the holes where they wear them and so can everyone else).
The Gen Y worker-bee group bitches and complains a lot about everything and claims they’re constantly “victimized” whilst coming and going to/from work at whim and “telecommuting” at least half the workweek at home to collect their 40 hours pay. I know this cuz one of my kids is a human resource specialist. Yeah, yeah, I know you’re “working” at home while taking breaks to mow the lawn and take care of your baby so you don’t have to pay someone else to do it.
I wish I had that kind of “flexibility” when I was raising a family. I had to pick up my kid(s) from daycare by 6:00 pm or I was “fined” $1.00 per minute after that. I even carried an ice chest with ice in it in my trunk almost every Thursday for 15 years so I could go thru the commissary express lane (5 mins away) during lunch hour and scare up some groceries for my family, stop at the base cleaners (to get my “pressed” clothing back) and gas up, making sure I was parked and arrived back in my office chair within the hour.
In part due to a plethora of worker-friendly laws (both state and Federal), today’s workers have it so much better than we boomers ever did … exponentially. They have absolutely NOTHING to complain about.
-
AuthorPosts
