[CA renter]

Think your eldest could manage it? Are you going to do it?

Personally, I’ve known some kids who were raised by their older siblings. It’s a beautiful thing. They were well cared for in every case that I can think of.

Kudos to you for raising good kids who love and care for each other.

[CA renter]

[quote=flu]
99.5% of the population aren’t Bill Gates or Larry Ellison who don’t need college because (1) they are exceptionally brilliant AND (2) because their parents had money and were well connected.

As much as we would all like to think our kids are brilliant or exceptional, most likely they are average to above average at best and no where close Gates/Ellison. For the remainder of the 99.5% of us, it’s hard to argue that not going to college opens more doors/opportunities than those that do.

Often times, folks like to take the most success cases and extrapolate that as it is more common than the norm. For every Bill Gates/Ellison that didn’t “need” college there are several thousands that arguably could have done much better with better education. IF that wasn’t the case, this country wouldn’t have so many folks struggling financially working at a dead end minimum wage job indefinitely or the majority of people in this country stating that the american dream is dead. If you look at a lot of these cases, you can’t help but ask if these folks would have been better off with some better education, because many of them barely graduated from high school. What we do know is with their limited education and limited skill set, they remained stuck at their predicament.

Even IF you were able to succeed without higher education decades ago, that was then. This is now. This world will increasingly get more competitive. The world is a lot smaller, with more people hungry competing for the same resources. It’s estimated than in Asia, top rank universities are pumping out 1 million highly educated STEM degree graduates EVERY YEAR, not including them ones from Eastern Europe, Russia,etc. These are people who are going to be more educated and more knowledgeable over the next decade. Call it evolution or call it modern day version of darwinism.

So, yes, you will need to help your kid(s) out as much as you can by opening as many doors as you possibly can, without breaking your wallet.

This is especially the case if your kid(s) don’t have the personality to compete or driven to complete something no matter how difficult something may be nor understand that moving forward things aren’t going to be easily “given” to them on the global scale, as it might have been more readily “given” to their parents or grandparents, when there was much less competition. My kid is one of with a personality that unless something drastically changes, my has zero competitive bone in their body, so things are going to be tough for my kid, unless somehow we can even the score a bit.

Two part plan is

(1) helping open doors for your kid(s) to survive on their own in their endeavors, whatever it maybe
and
(2) as a backup plan, setting up a trust fund for your kid(s) and teaching them how to manage their money well so they can live off of it case whatever reason things from plan #1 goes south, which these days is an increasing possibility.

#1 is under attack by global competition and #2 is under attack by those that haven’t planned for their kids future and now wants to wealth redistribute it back to make up for deficiencies, some of which was self-inflicted by being facetious and giving up opportunities that were available when times were good, simply because “(someone) didn’t like it”.

Folks that want to gamble with those odds and think their kids are going to be in that exceptionally 0.5% brilliant category also have the money to back up their kid’s dreams and forgo college because they think “they don’t need it”…Go for it. Good luck.

No politician from any party is ever going to “fix” this, because it’s not a problem that probably can be “fixed”

FWIW: founder of GoPro graduated from UCSD. While also brilliant, part of his success can be attributed to his dad’s help: his dad is/was an investment banker. Bill Gates parents were close friends with Warren Buffett. This is not to detract these brilliant people’s accomplishments, because even with that much help, majority of folks from (wealthier) background still wouldn’t have obtain the successes of Gates/Ellison etc. But let’s face it. With that sort of financial support from their parents, it’s kinda hard for them to screw up, short of a being a drug addict.[/quote]

Agree that college can usually open up more doors for your average student. Just pointing out that the elite universities cherry pick the students who are already most likely to succeed. Even state colleges filter out those who are least likely to succeed; though their standards are less stringent than the Ivies, they still require certain GPAs and SAT scores in most cases.

So, do colleges create better, more successful people, or do they simply certify those who are already smarter, more driven, and more likely to succeed?

FWIW, “globalization” has existed for most of human history. And societies consisting of a few wealthy people/families who are served by the remainder of the population who lives in relative poverty has also been the norm throughout history, with a few notable exceptions. We (the masses of working people) are not getting poorer because of increased competition, we’re getting poorer because wealth and power are being concentrated into fewer and fewer hands as the benefits of increased productivity get “redistributed” from the workers to the owners of capital.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic][quote=flyer]I do believe connections and family support are extremely important, and do make a difference in our kids lives, but I can also tell you that, from my kids experience, (two of whom graduated Ivy) as well some of their friends who did also, their degrees have also heavily contributed to their success.

As was mentioned, attending schools like LJ Country Day, Bishop’s, etc., don’t hurt either, and, of course, many who attend other schools and colleges may do equally as well, but I can only speak from the experiences of my own kids and their friends.

Diplomas in and of themselves are just pieces of paper, but, when properly utilized, their practical value can translate into millions of dollars. That’s not to say a few won’t “make it” in the world without them, but the stats show those individuals are few and far between.

All of these decisions are predicated on what your kids want to do with their lives, and everyone can roll the dice for their kids as they choose, but in the “new world” of global competition, imo, kids need every advantage they can possibly get. As a friend commented on this topic, “Why send someone to war without weapons?”[/quote]

the analogy to war is frightening. Perhaps our little soldiers will turn the weapons on themselves.

Suicide watch among hs. Students in Palo also during college admissions season.[/quote]

That was a great article, scaredy.

[CA renter]

[quote=ucodegen][quote CA renter]Interesting info, SD Squatter. What’s surprising to me is that we (apparently) had greywater systems that were available in 1982…and nothing was mandated for all the new building since then??? That’s insane. We’ve always had droughts in California; why aren’t greywater (and solar!) systems mandated for new homes and buildings? [/quote]I lived in a house that had a greywater system in it since about 1968 (at the foot of the mountains north of LA). It was installed after construction, but was easy to install because of raised floor construction. With slab, it is a completely different story.

As for why it is not mandated? I can’t answer other than maybe the builders don’t want to shell out more for something they can’t use to increase their asking price.[/quote]

What was it like living with a system like that? Any downsides?

I’m bummed that this technology has been around for that long without being utilized more.

And I agree about the builders not wanting to shell out more money for something that they think won’t give them a return on their money, but that’s why it needs to be mandated.

[CA renter]

[quote=nla][quote=CA renter][quote=AN]Since, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg are all college drop outs…

A piece of paper can’t feed you but the millions/billions in the bank can… for a very long time.[/quote]

Just wanted to add Michael Dell and Larry Ellison.

Here’s an opinion piece that lists many others who never received a college degree, but succeeded, nonetheless:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/30/opinion/schmitz-college/%5B/quote%5D
But how many kids are the next Larry Ellison or Bill Gates?[/quote]

Very, very few, of course. But that’s the case whether or not they graduate from an elite university. These universities screen specifically for the traits that are most likely to be found among the most successful people.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN]Since, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg are all college drop outs…

A piece of paper can’t feed you but the millions/billions in the bank can… for a very long time.[/quote]

Just wanted to add Michael Dell and Larry Ellison.

Here’s an opinion piece that lists many others who never received a college degree, but succeeded, nonetheless:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/30/opinion/schmitz-college/

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]CAr, when you think of it, netmetering is inherently unfair — what you might call a subsidy to solar.

People on solar are relying on the power-grid, but they are paying a smaller share, or none at all.

From the power-producers’ point of view, why should they be forced to net meter at all?[/quote]

Solar power generators help increase capacity, usually during peak usage. This enables utility companies to use their (solar) customers’ power production capacity instead of having to build it themselves. Solar customers also help the utility companies meet their renewable energy mandates.

I don’t have a problem with everyone helping to support the grid infrastructure, but it should be based on actual costs. Personally, if SDG&E/Sempra’s profits are rising, I feel that they are in no position to ask for higher rates or other fees from their customers. Of course, as you can imagine, I think that utility companies should not be for profit; they should be owned/controlled by the government.

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/nov/04/sempra-earnings-up-bigtime/

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=Clifford]AN,
I’m in Tier 2 most of the year (I rarely go into Tier 3). Financially, would it be worth it to install solar panels ?[/quote]I would say no. It’s only worthwhile if you’re constantly in Tier 4. Solar is getting cheaper and better, so it might be worthwhile to just want, since you’re not paying very much to SDG&E. The general number is, if your electricity bill is >$150/month, that’s when the number really make sense.[/quote]

Also take into consideration the fact that
SDG&E is trying to flatten the tiered pricing structure, going from four tiers back to two, like we had before the “energy crisis” in the early 2000s.

This will change the calculations for many people. With the 4-tier pricing, solar is an absolute no-brainer for people who are consistently in the 3rd and 4th tiers (we were almost always deep into tier 4 in this house). After flattening the tiers, the once higher-paying customers won’t benefit as much as under the 4-tier structure (still a good idea to go solar, though), but it might start to make even more sense for those in the lower tiers to go solar.

http://www.sdge.com/tiered-rates

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/feb/28/fixed-electricity-fee-coming/

They claim that they are doing this to make the pricing “fairer” for the higher-paying customers, but the real reason is because those VERY profitable customers are fleeing to solar in relatively large numbers. They are trying to recoup some of that lost money and slow/stop the bleeding.

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Squatter][quote=CA renter][quote=SD Squatter]Pretty much all the water used for washing (sinks, showers, washing machine) is perfectly fine for landscaping with no treatment. Right now it’s all mixed up with toilet and down the sever it goes (to the ocean).

Why is the reclaimed water usage for on-property landscaping not mandatory yet? Why are still new houses being build with no mandatory graywater reclamation systems build-in? Why does the government make it so difficult to retro-fit existing on-property sever lines for graywater reclamation? (I tried once, but gave up after seeing all ridiculous regulations and permit hoop jumping required.)

What about rainwater from your roof?

Some questions to ask our local goverment.[/quote]

This has long been one of my pet peeves, too. I do not favor “toilet to tap,” but think that every house built over the past 10-20 years should have been mandated to have a dual plumbing/wastewater system where the grey water is recycled, at least for outdoor/irrigation use. There is no reason for people to have to water with perfectly good, potable water unless they have a fruit/vegetable garden. Even then, filtered grey water (a simple charcoal filter, or something similar) should work for most applications.[/quote]

More on the greywater issue in this Huffington Post article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/greywater-california-drought_n_7026350.html

Some intresting facts from it:

• If just one in ten Southern Californians were to install a greywater system in their home, the state would conserve as much potable water as it expects to generate through the massive $1 billion Carlsbad desalination plant.
• During Governor Brown’s first term, the state offered tax credits to Californians who installed greywater systems (the incentives ended in 1982).
• The City of Tucson, AZ reimburses residents up to $1,000 for the construction of greywater systems, and requires that newly constructed houses be plumbed for greywater.
• The City and County of San Francisco publishes a manual for designing and constructing a residential greywater system, and offers rebates for permits for installations that require them. The city even provides free parts and loans out tools for the purpose.

[/quote]

Interesting info, SD Squatter. What’s surprising to me is that we (apparently) had greywater systems that were available in 1982…and nothing was mandated for all the new building since then??? That’s insane. We’ve always had droughts in California; why aren’t greywater (and solar!) systems mandated for new homes and buildings?

It’s difficult to retrofit, but we’re probably going to look into this some more. It would be nice if they could offer tax credits again.

[CA renter]

[quote=bibsoconner]”Definitely. My sister and I would walk to the corner market when we were 4-6 years old. Walked to and from school by ourselves”

Just walked to the market and school? Luxury!
You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t’ mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi’ his belt.*

-Dave

*Possibly shamelessly stolen from Monty Python[/quote]

Love Monty Python! 🙂

As for the California lifestyle, it’s funny to see how people’s faces light up here on the east coast when you say you’re from California. And some of these people live in the desirable areas in NYC, too. I’ve heard others who’re in groups we’ve been with mention they’re from a variety of countries and states, but when we mention that we’re from California, that seems to be the biggest deal. It’s interesting to note this.

[CA renter]

I have to agree with Joe. Renters aren’t going to pay much of a premium for your solar system, so you might as well wait until you move in their eventually for all the reasons stated above. You can replace your roof at the same time, too, and be done with the whole thing for life if you’re retiring there.

[CA renter]

That looks nice, LA. Thanks for sharing.

[CA renter]

Agreed, rockingtime.

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi]We went to the old spaghetti factory last night (bad food, never go there, but cheap and family oriented). Some kids running around In the restaurant were playing peek a boo with the guys. The mom didn’t mind but the dad clearly didn’t like it.[/quote]

I’m all for kids having freedoms, but they should have to earn their freedom by showing a sense of responsibility. Knowing how to behave in various venues is a big part of that. Personally, I hate it when kids run around screaming in restaurants. We started bringing our kids to restaurants when they were a few weeks old and taught them from day one how to behave. Not saying they are always perfect, but we’ve always gotten compliments from other patrons and servers/managers regarding their behavior, even at a very young age. We’ve never had any complaints or even gotten the evil stare from others, and we have two kids who had a difficult time with sitting still/managing different environments. If they acted up, we took them outside immediately. It was tough for awhile, but worked out well in the end.

It is NEVER acceptable to let one’s kid ruin another person’s night out. It might be that person’s only chance to get out in a month or so. It might be a very special occasion for them. Not okay to ruin that under any circumstances. We’ve been out with other families who never discipline their kids or teach them to be considerate of others. Not fun. This is a huge pet peeve of ours.

[CA renter]

[quote=JohnAlt91941][quote=The-Shoveler][quote=spdrun]
It’s also pretty common for kids over 8 or 9 to walk or take public transport to school, and travel to other countries with friends by age 16 or 17. Helicopter parenting isn’t as common as in the US — kids grow up more independent.[/quote]

If kids were raised today like most of the boomers grew up, they would have the parents locked up for neglect LOL.

There was no day care in those days.[/quote]

I walked home alone from kindergarten. By 8-9 definitely on my own.[/quote]

Definitely. My sister and I would walk to the corner market when we were 4-6 years old. Walked to and from school by ourselves (maybe with some friends, too) when we were 6-7 years old (took the school bus before that…mom didn’t walk us to/from the bus after the first couple of days to be sure we knew where to go). Stayed by ourselves while our parents went out to eat when we were around 7-8 years old. Definitely “neglect” by today’s standards. From the kids’ perspective, we enjoyed our freedoms very much! I feel that this kind of upbringing gave me a sense of confidence and independence that I would never have had if raised by helicopter parents.

Not sure if you guys saw this story about some parents who were totally harassed and threatened with arrest and losing their kids because they let the kids lead a healthy lifestyle. It’s sickening.

http://www.today.com/parents/maryland-parents-investigated-neglect-after-letting-their-kids-walk-alone-1D80430594

[Author]

Posts