Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
CoronitaParticipantMy cable bill is $70/month for basic cable, this is with Cox. Cable is just a total rip off. I watch about 7-8 channels that I really like – NGC, Travel channel, Discovery, Discovery Health, History, TLC and CNBC. Unfortunately some of the channels are spread between packages purposely to maximize revenue. Heck, I miss my DirecTV for $49.99/mo for all the channels I want but the stupid apt. I live in will not allow a dish š
Did you mean your apartment complex doesn't allow dishes? If that's what you meant, this might be useful. Take this to the landlord, and tell them to shove their restrictions up their you know where.
Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule
Preemption of Restrictions on Placement of Direct Broadcast Satellite, Broadband Radio Service, and Television Broadcast Antennas
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html
As directed by Congress in Section 207 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission adopted the Over-the-Air Reception Devices (āOTARDā) rule concerning governmental and nongovernmental restrictions on viewers’ ability to receive video programming signals from direct broadcast satellites (“DBS”), broadband radio service providers (formerly multichannel multipoint distribution service or MMDS), and television broadcast stations (“TVBS”).
The rule (47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000) has been in effect since October 1996, and it prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use of antennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to-home satellite dishes that are less than one meter (39.37″) in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cable antennas. The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay or prevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost of installation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptable quality signal.
Effective January 22, 1999, the Commission amended the rule so that it also applies to rental property where the renter has an exclusive use area, such as a balcony or patio.
On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it applies to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless signals. This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.
The rule applies to individuals who place antenna that meet size limitations on property that they own or rent and that is within their exclusive use or control, including condominium owners and cooperative owners, and tenants who have an area where they have exclusive use, such as a balcony or patio, in which to install the antenna. The rule applies to townhomes and manufactured homes, as well as to single family homes.
The rule allows local governments, community associations and landlords to enforce restrictions that do not impair the installation, maintenance or use of the types of antennas described above, as well as restrictions needed for safety or historic preservation. Under some circumstances where a central or common antenna is available, a community association or landlord may restrict the installation of individual antennas. The rule does not apply to common areas that are owned by a landlord, a community association, or jointly by condominium or cooperative owners where the antenna user does not have an exclusive use area. Such common areas may include the roof or exterior wall of a multiple dwelling unit. Therefore, restrictions on antennas installed in or on such common areas are enforceable.
This Information Sheet provides general answers to questions concerning implementation of the rule, but is not a substitute for the actual rule. For further information or a copy of the rule, contact the Federal Communications Commission at 888-CALLFCC (toll free) or (202) 418-7096. The rule is also available via the Internet by going to links to relevant Orders and the rule.
CoronitaParticipantSo, to be able to save for a down payment in a reasonable amount of time, even households earning $100K+ have to: brown bag to work, buy only Bonus Buys at the grocery store and settle for basic cable. But then you look around and find restaurants and bars are packed, malls are over flowing and huge SUVs and BMWs are everywhere. I am missing something?
Nope, that's correct. That's why I see a lot of folks in new homes that aren't furnished up the ying yang, with a beat up toyota camry/honda accord on parked inside the garage, and why I see a lot of folks that drive the BMWs and Mercedes turn into the rental apartments down the street. Also, a lot of the those huge SUVs and BMWS are financed/leased and/or bought by borrowing from a existing home equity.
Nothing wrong with renting and deciding that Bimmer is more important than saving for a home. It's about personal choices. Not everyone can afford everything. If a BMW/Mer is more important to someone, well that's their choice. Nothing wrong with it. But you can't possibly expect folks who spend lavishly to also to be able to afford a decent home? The issue is that a lot of those luxury items are really intended only for a select few folks who actually can sustain that lifestyle.
And those folks that finance their lavish lifestyle I wouldn't consider them to be prospective home buyers in any housing market moving forward. If they can't get into a home with the most relaxed financing in housing history, I can't imagine they would qualify when things tighten up.
I find it ironic actually. Some of the folks that drive the nicest cars are actually the poorest people.
Cable…Spending $100/month on cable is absurd. Besides TV being a mental drain, it’s also a pocket drain..Sorry, hope it’s worth it.
And if you bought anything at Vons,Albertson,Ralphs at full price at a regular basic, you’re pretty much throwing your money away. Everything at every grocery store goes on sale at different weeks, does it really make a difference whether you buy something 1 week versus another. Take that gimick buy one get one free egg at Vons. Why would anyone buy a carton of eggs from vons at full price, when Vons roughly alternates the buy 1 get one free deal like every other week?
Toilet paper. Why buy that bulk from costco. Yeah, it’s cheaper when you compare to FULL price at other stores. But if happen to be in Vons and spot a sale, why not just stock up on it rather than wait until you’re on your last roll and your ass desperately needs it the next day???
Do people really need to get that $4 Mocha Frapachino at starbucks? You load up on that 3-4 times a week, then you need to spend an extra $60+/month on gym membership to work that weight off.
CoronitaParticipantSo, to be able to save for a down payment in a reasonable amount of time, even households earning $100K+ have to: brown bag to work, buy only Bonus Buys at the grocery store and settle for basic cable. But then you look around and find restaurants and bars are packed, malls are over flowing and huge SUVs and BMWs are everywhere. I am missing something?
Nope, that's correct. That's why I see a lot of folks in new homes that aren't furnished up the ying yang, with a beat up toyota camry/honda accord on parked inside the garage, and why I see a lot of folks that drive the BMWs and Mercedes turn into the rental apartments down the street. Also, a lot of the those huge SUVs and BMWS are financed/leased and/or bought by borrowing from a existing home equity.
Nothing wrong with renting and deciding that Bimmer is more important than saving for a home. It's about personal choices. Not everyone can afford everything. If a BMW/Mer is more important to someone, well that's their choice. Nothing wrong with it. But you can't possibly expect folks who spend lavishly to also to be able to afford a decent home? The issue is that a lot of those luxury items are really intended only for a select few folks who actually can sustain that lifestyle.
And those folks that finance their lavish lifestyle I wouldn't consider them to be prospective home buyers in any housing market moving forward. If they can't get into a home with the most relaxed financing in housing history, I can't imagine they would qualify when things tighten up.
I find it ironic actually. Some of the folks that drive the nicest cars are actually the poorest people.
Cable…Spending $100/month on cable is absurd. Besides TV being a mental drain, it’s also a pocket drain..Sorry, hope it’s worth it.
And if you bought anything at Vons,Albertson,Ralphs at full price at a regular basic, you’re pretty much throwing your money away. Everything at every grocery store goes on sale at different weeks, does it really make a difference whether you buy something 1 week versus another. Take that gimick buy one get one free egg at Vons. Why would anyone buy a carton of eggs from vons at full price, when Vons roughly alternates the buy 1 get one free deal like every other week?
Toilet paper. Why buy that bulk from costco. Yeah, it’s cheaper when you compare to FULL price at other stores. But if happen to be in Vons and spot a sale, why not just stock up on it rather than wait until you’re on your last roll and your ass desperately needs it the next day???
Do people really need to get that $4 Mocha Frapachino at starbucks? You load up on that 3-4 times a week, then you need to spend an extra $60+/month on gym membership to work that weight off.
CoronitaParticipantA couple comments… One, its *very* easy for someone, even with a good career and spending habits, to have savings wiped out due to a significant life event. For me, it was a few bouts of employment. My brother, it was some legal trouble. Two, as everyone here may have noticed by now, RE prices have been outpacing salary growth by leaps and bounds in SoCal. I'm a great example, I only make a few K more annually then I did when I moved here in '99. So there is the perception that one is 'priced out forever', so why bother saving. As an aside, I think the flat this has led to something a friend noticed in SoCal, he referred to it as a land of 'perpetual adolescence'. I know many people in their 30's that are single, renters and spend a good portion of their income in the bars/clubs of Southern California.
There is an important lesson to be learned here.
1) You need to become friends with at least 1 lawyer who's knowledgeable in asset protection.
2) You need to buy as much liability insurance as you possibly can for as many reasons as you can, for as much as you can afford.
I see so many people that are waiting to get wiped out because they decided to buy the cheapest insurance they can get a hold of, even though they can afford more. There's absolutely no reason why any homeowner with sufficient equity built up shouldn't buy the highest auto/homeowner liability coverage AND an umbrella coverage on top of that that they can afford. We live in a litigious society, particular in so cal.
And to my understanding even your primary home is not safe from liability litigation in California.
CoronitaParticipantA couple comments… One, its *very* easy for someone, even with a good career and spending habits, to have savings wiped out due to a significant life event. For me, it was a few bouts of employment. My brother, it was some legal trouble. Two, as everyone here may have noticed by now, RE prices have been outpacing salary growth by leaps and bounds in SoCal. I'm a great example, I only make a few K more annually then I did when I moved here in '99. So there is the perception that one is 'priced out forever', so why bother saving. As an aside, I think the flat this has led to something a friend noticed in SoCal, he referred to it as a land of 'perpetual adolescence'. I know many people in their 30's that are single, renters and spend a good portion of their income in the bars/clubs of Southern California.
There is an important lesson to be learned here.
1) You need to become friends with at least 1 lawyer who's knowledgeable in asset protection.
2) You need to buy as much liability insurance as you possibly can for as many reasons as you can, for as much as you can afford.
I see so many people that are waiting to get wiped out because they decided to buy the cheapest insurance they can get a hold of, even though they can afford more. There's absolutely no reason why any homeowner with sufficient equity built up shouldn't buy the highest auto/homeowner liability coverage AND an umbrella coverage on top of that that they can afford. We live in a litigious society, particular in so cal.
And to my understanding even your primary home is not safe from liability litigation in California.
CoronitaParticipantI use to work in the bay area. But note $200k was double income, not just me alone, and excluded bonuses because they are unpredictable. There was a time when we were dinks (double income no kids). I’m in software engineering field. Despite what others may think, I found this profession to be quite lucrative if you know how to play your cards rights. There’s a lot about of concern about outsourcing, but frankly I think a lot of it is overexaggerated. The key is you have to pick what you are either good at, either enjoy doing and possibly both, and distinguish your skills and abilities from someone that can replace you from india or china. My wife is pretty much in the same field. Also, the sector you work in matters significantly. A software engineer in the IT space versus in R&D don’t necessarily see the same comps for example.
The predictions of the Software Engineering moving forward is that there will be a shortage in the U.S. Namely, there aren’t that many good ones left and we aren’t growing enough of them here. And not all work can be reasonably outsourced. It’s no longer cheap to employ someone from Bangalore, and retaining top talent from Bangalore is equally challenging because folks there hop from one company to another.
I have to warn you though. If you choose this path….You have about 7 years left to develop your skills into either a technical manager/director OR a software architect. 7 years from now, if you’re still stuck doing strict implementation (IE programemr with no power to influence technical decisions), your career will be shortly replaced by younger versions of you. Also, you have to always keep refreshing your knowledge every year. If you don’t keep up, you will quickly become obsolete. The other challenge you will have is that if you end up working at a big bureacratic company and you need to make sure you take care of your career and not expect the company to take care of you..Namely, you must make sure staying 5+years glued to a CO doesn’t pigeon hole you into a obsolete role that is only useful at your current company. Companies love to pigeonhole you..You will find out that 7 years passes fast and you moved nowhere. I’ve worked about 11 years so far in the field because I enjoy it. But I’ve moved companies about 5 times, mainly just to keep up with the opportunities. Some would argue that I lack commitment. But I can prove that my skills are more current then most folks that stay glued to a position 5+years. And usually, the niches I fill are where a company’s skills are lacking. You have to capitalize on this. You have to figure out where the software trends are going, and develop a solid foundation in that area to make yourself “needed”. If you’re stuck in a role and aren’t improving, when you get axed you’re going to take a hit at the next company.
Lastly, your career will probably go into steady decline as you get closer to 40ies. So by the time your 38ish, you should be thinking about plan B. IE like building a tech company. I’m hoping in about 5 years that things go as planned so that I have enough to do just that. Because I really don’t think I can continue doing this for another 20+ years. This is also we’re not spending too much these days. Everything goes into make our dollars work.
CoronitaParticipantI use to work in the bay area. But note $200k was double income, not just me alone, and excluded bonuses because they are unpredictable. There was a time when we were dinks (double income no kids). I’m in software engineering field. Despite what others may think, I found this profession to be quite lucrative if you know how to play your cards rights. There’s a lot about of concern about outsourcing, but frankly I think a lot of it is overexaggerated. The key is you have to pick what you are either good at, either enjoy doing and possibly both, and distinguish your skills and abilities from someone that can replace you from india or china. My wife is pretty much in the same field. Also, the sector you work in matters significantly. A software engineer in the IT space versus in R&D don’t necessarily see the same comps for example.
The predictions of the Software Engineering moving forward is that there will be a shortage in the U.S. Namely, there aren’t that many good ones left and we aren’t growing enough of them here. And not all work can be reasonably outsourced. It’s no longer cheap to employ someone from Bangalore, and retaining top talent from Bangalore is equally challenging because folks there hop from one company to another.
I have to warn you though. If you choose this path….You have about 7 years left to develop your skills into either a technical manager/director OR a software architect. 7 years from now, if you’re still stuck doing strict implementation (IE programemr with no power to influence technical decisions), your career will be shortly replaced by younger versions of you. Also, you have to always keep refreshing your knowledge every year. If you don’t keep up, you will quickly become obsolete. The other challenge you will have is that if you end up working at a big bureacratic company and you need to make sure you take care of your career and not expect the company to take care of you..Namely, you must make sure staying 5+years glued to a CO doesn’t pigeon hole you into a obsolete role that is only useful at your current company. Companies love to pigeonhole you..You will find out that 7 years passes fast and you moved nowhere. I’ve worked about 11 years so far in the field because I enjoy it. But I’ve moved companies about 5 times, mainly just to keep up with the opportunities. Some would argue that I lack commitment. But I can prove that my skills are more current then most folks that stay glued to a position 5+years. And usually, the niches I fill are where a company’s skills are lacking. You have to capitalize on this. You have to figure out where the software trends are going, and develop a solid foundation in that area to make yourself “needed”. If you’re stuck in a role and aren’t improving, when you get axed you’re going to take a hit at the next company.
Lastly, your career will probably go into steady decline as you get closer to 40ies. So by the time your 38ish, you should be thinking about plan B. IE like building a tech company. I’m hoping in about 5 years that things go as planned so that I have enough to do just that. Because I really don’t think I can continue doing this for another 20+ years. This is also we’re not spending too much these days. Everything goes into make our dollars work.
CoronitaParticipantAsia, I agree that it is theoritically possible for someone to save that much. However, the frugal living and high income combination you speak of are very unrealistic. You are basically making the point for me, the percentage of people in this boat is extremely small.
Asia's viewpoint is probably skewed somewhat just like mine because I guessing a good portion of her friends are asian. My observation is that a good portion of Asians do tend to be more penny pinchers than others. Not saying all are like this, but a good portion of them. Several of them also have pretty decent jobs, so i think that's way they can sort of stretch to buy. To put it in prespective both my wife and I were close to about $200k by mid 20s, but we also saved like mad (no cable, 1 cell phone, no land line phone,etc very rarely do we eat out).Ā Today our salaries have stagnated to about $300k (and will probably decline gradually as we are gradually replaced by younger talent…) but we still only only get the $12.99 cable, no land line, and shop at bargain basements. In fact I'm considering getting rid of the cable because most of the TV channels stink these days andĀ I can get HD signal over the air. Also, we rarely buy anything that isn't on sale, even when it comes to food. The main expenses we have are a large mortgage and paying for childcare. The former was because we wanted a place to live and didn't want to buy outright because we felt we could beat a 5.7% mortgage. The later is because neither she or I wants to give up our careers completely.
CoronitaParticipantAsia, I agree that it is theoritically possible for someone to save that much. However, the frugal living and high income combination you speak of are very unrealistic. You are basically making the point for me, the percentage of people in this boat is extremely small.
Asia's viewpoint is probably skewed somewhat just like mine because I guessing a good portion of her friends are asian. My observation is that a good portion of Asians do tend to be more penny pinchers than others. Not saying all are like this, but a good portion of them. Several of them also have pretty decent jobs, so i think that's way they can sort of stretch to buy. To put it in prespective both my wife and I were close to about $200k by mid 20s, but we also saved like mad (no cable, 1 cell phone, no land line phone,etc very rarely do we eat out).Ā Today our salaries have stagnated to about $300k (and will probably decline gradually as we are gradually replaced by younger talent…) but we still only only get the $12.99 cable, no land line, and shop at bargain basements. In fact I'm considering getting rid of the cable because most of the TV channels stink these days andĀ I can get HD signal over the air. Also, we rarely buy anything that isn't on sale, even when it comes to food. The main expenses we have are a large mortgage and paying for childcare. The former was because we wanted a place to live and didn't want to buy outright because we felt we could beat a 5.7% mortgage. The later is because neither she or I wants to give up our careers completely.
CoronitaParticipantfatty boom-boom, You wrote: "But living in CV doesn't help because while I really don't want to be like so many other CV folks, I really don't want my kid to grow up with esteem issues that may happen if I don't at least partly play the game. So, I'm going to have to figure out this one." … and i couldnt agree more. I grew up right there in that area, went to TPHS. It was actually pretty difficult when most kids had cars (brand new or drove their parents BMWs and even a Maserati) at 16, had Rolex watches, went "shopping" for fun and spent hundreds and hundreds of $$ while I stood by feeling completely weak and passive (I didnt know I was learning an excellent lesson), etc. My brother lives there now and is frugal, his daughter suffers and struggles with his 'rules' about spending. I was so immature that i thought the reason we didnt have money was because my mother didnt work hard enough. I seriously resented her for it. She was single with FIVE children. Three in college at the time I remember thinking this way (did I already mention how immature I was???). Anyway, this exact issue is another of the BIG REASONS we decided to pack up and leave San Diego in '02, at least for the school months of the year. The materialistic atmosphere was just getting worse and worse. Happily, it is not an issue here.
Unfortunately, i think the issues are pretty much going to be everywhere. In NY, I believe your got the Hampton folks which are worse imho. You probably won't see them in upstate though.
CoronitaParticipantfatty boom-boom, You wrote: "But living in CV doesn't help because while I really don't want to be like so many other CV folks, I really don't want my kid to grow up with esteem issues that may happen if I don't at least partly play the game. So, I'm going to have to figure out this one." … and i couldnt agree more. I grew up right there in that area, went to TPHS. It was actually pretty difficult when most kids had cars (brand new or drove their parents BMWs and even a Maserati) at 16, had Rolex watches, went "shopping" for fun and spent hundreds and hundreds of $$ while I stood by feeling completely weak and passive (I didnt know I was learning an excellent lesson), etc. My brother lives there now and is frugal, his daughter suffers and struggles with his 'rules' about spending. I was so immature that i thought the reason we didnt have money was because my mother didnt work hard enough. I seriously resented her for it. She was single with FIVE children. Three in college at the time I remember thinking this way (did I already mention how immature I was???). Anyway, this exact issue is another of the BIG REASONS we decided to pack up and leave San Diego in '02, at least for the school months of the year. The materialistic atmosphere was just getting worse and worse. Happily, it is not an issue here.
Unfortunately, i think the issues are pretty much going to be everywhere. In NY, I believe your got the Hampton folks which are worse imho. You probably won't see them in upstate though.
CoronitaParticipantSomeone made a comment above about kids and cell phones. Both my children have cell phones, not because they want them but because I want them to have them. It is a safety/security/peace of mind issue. I can contact them whenever I want, no matter where they are. They can also call me if they are having a problem. When they are at a friend's house, I can call them directly and instantly know what they are doing and who else is over there playing. When my son gets out of school and isn't sure if he is supposed to ride the bus or wait for me, he pulls out his phone and calls me right there. He has also ridden the bus when he was not supposed to (he was to go home with another kid). He ended up at the bus stop all alone and at a place where a very suspicious guy has been observed watching and following kids. He pulled out his phone and called me. I was there in 5 minutes. Problem solved. Now when one of my children is supposed to go home with a friend, I can call and confirm that everything happened as it was supposed to happen. I will never take my children's phone away as punishment. It allows me constant access to them. In fact, their next phones will have GPS trackers in them. The world is a different place than when we were kids. Parents need to be vigilant. They also need to give their children all available tools to help them stay safe.
I guess the thing i have with this is that we never needed them before. Why do we need them more so now? I guess one could argue it's a much more dangerous place. But if your someone is going to nab your kid, the gps in the cell phone isn't going to help. Now, if you actually want to buy a gps device that's embeddable in a shoe,clothes, etc, that seems to be a more plausible safety device. But the cell phone thing imho just gives parents a false sense of security.
CoronitaParticipantSomeone made a comment above about kids and cell phones. Both my children have cell phones, not because they want them but because I want them to have them. It is a safety/security/peace of mind issue. I can contact them whenever I want, no matter where they are. They can also call me if they are having a problem. When they are at a friend's house, I can call them directly and instantly know what they are doing and who else is over there playing. When my son gets out of school and isn't sure if he is supposed to ride the bus or wait for me, he pulls out his phone and calls me right there. He has also ridden the bus when he was not supposed to (he was to go home with another kid). He ended up at the bus stop all alone and at a place where a very suspicious guy has been observed watching and following kids. He pulled out his phone and called me. I was there in 5 minutes. Problem solved. Now when one of my children is supposed to go home with a friend, I can call and confirm that everything happened as it was supposed to happen. I will never take my children's phone away as punishment. It allows me constant access to them. In fact, their next phones will have GPS trackers in them. The world is a different place than when we were kids. Parents need to be vigilant. They also need to give their children all available tools to help them stay safe.
I guess the thing i have with this is that we never needed them before. Why do we need them more so now? I guess one could argue it's a much more dangerous place. But if your someone is going to nab your kid, the gps in the cell phone isn't going to help. Now, if you actually want to buy a gps device that's embeddable in a shoe,clothes, etc, that seems to be a more plausible safety device. But the cell phone thing imho just gives parents a false sense of security.
CoronitaParticipantWork hard and you'll get ahead Let's even assume you are doing that for a Great American Corporation, are nice to people you work with, and don't sabotage your career in any obvious way. Even adding those extras to working hard does anyone believe it is a passport to career success? I'm reasonably successful, and I've been told by many I work harder than average, am more efficient, and implement high standards in my work. Blah blah blah. That's not why I've achieved the success I have. I spent the first few years of my careers watching why people get promoted in Corporate America, and how each story contrasted strongly with the ethical ālessonā of Work hard and you'll get ahead People get ahead because they work hard AND – more importantly – they know how to work the system, politically. Many get ahead by simply working the system, and they don't find that working hard is even a prerequisite. Anyone agree about my observations?
Ā The management euphenism for this is called "working smarter".What folks need to learn is the "working smarter" has a double meaning. It often means, "find others to do the grunt work for you".
-
AuthorPosts
