[davelj]

[quote=CA renter][quote=davelj]I was unaware that I “always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults.” You sure about that? Please, reference specific posts where I’ve engaged in ad hominem and not brought specific data to the table. Now, I do like to point out hypocrisy – of which there is plenty – when I see it (and I quite enjoy the “snarky” – as you put it – riposte in that regard)… but I don’t consider those insults. I also like to point out when someone simply has no clue as to what they think they’re talking about (and, as you’re aware, I provide detailed analysis to back these instances up) – plenty of that as well. But if one is insulted by data and logical inconsistencies unveiled… then there’s nothing I can do about that. So, I doubt you’re going to get much support on your view here.

[/quote]

Dave,

I specifically quoted your response to Scarlett in my post:

[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.

Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]

As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]

Perhaps you don’t think that what you said was rude/obnoxious/snarky/arrogant, but I can assure you that most people would be offended by your attitude and assertion there. Scarlett has NEVER made any indication that she was the type to “keep up with the Jonses,” nor has she ever said anything to my knowledge that would indicate a superiority complex or any such thing. There was no reason, whatsoever, for you to take that tone in your response. [/quote]

Oh, I absolutely think it was snarky – no denying that. And I admit that I like to provoke folks here at times. But that’s not “insulting” them, as you said. Those two words have different meanings, as I’m sure you’re aware. I believe Scarlett in another post further clarified her housing desires which was a perfectly adequate response to my “snarkiness.” I doubt she cried herself to sleep that night. I’ve been at the Pigg for over 5 years and in all of that time only a very few posters have had an issue with my “attitude” – not that I mind, of course. But if you’re trying to tell me that you’re particularly thin-skinned then I’ll duly note it.

[quote=CA renter]
I also mentioned that you had said almost the exact same thing to me in another post or thread, which I ignored, and you’ve made a number of comments to me and others that were totally inappropriate and offensive — and you meant them to be offensive.[/quote]

Something about “in the eyes of the beholder” comes to mind. Again, I recall very few complaints. But, tell you what – the next time I see Rich I’ll be sure to ask him if he wants me to alter my posting style… it being his site and all. (However, my bet – and it’s only my view of course – is that he’s chuckling at this post if he reads it at all.)

[quote=CA renter]
It’s just funny that you’re accusing a decent and more humble poster of trying to “keep up with the Joneses” when your username is the one with “LJ” in it. I’m assuming it stands for “La Jolla,” no? [/quote]

I’ve never lived in La Jolla (albeit nearby for a couple of years), never intimated that I did, nor do I have any desire to (although it’s a fine area). I’d imagine that if I wanted folks to think I lived in La Jolla I’d be davelajolla, yes? But, please, keep guessing – I’ll let you know when you get it right.

[quote=CA renter]
You’ve also mentioned something about living in or buying a penthouse condo/apartment. So, it seems to me that the only one trying to “keep up” with anything around here is you. And yet, you’ve said that you like to point out hypocrisy.[/quote]

No hypocrisy on this issue at all. Keeping up with the Joneses is relative to the lifestyle of the Joneses whom are your peers, yes? If I were keeping up with my set of Joneses, I would not be living in a 1200 sq.ft. mid-rise downtown penthouse; I’d be living in a 3,000+ sqft home in La Jolla (which, again, I have no desire to do). Now, if that’s a haughty response, just recall that you brought the issue up, not me.

[quote=CA renter]
I’m not trying to get into a pissing match with you, and I’ve stated on multiple occasions that your knowledge, input, and perspective is much appreciated, especially when the conversation revolves around banking. But many of us have had to correct people’s assumptions about things, and most of us manage (or try to) do so in a tactful and respectful way. The arrogant tone in many of your posts does not add anything to the discussions, and it does not make you look smarter or superior to anyone else. Do realize that most of the posters here are higly educated and very intelligent people with their own history and knowledge about certain topics; almost everyone brings something valuable to the discussion, even if it’s something you or I don’t agree with. It would really add to the quality of our discussions/debates if everyone would stick to the topics, stay away from personal attacks, and remain as respectful as possible with one another.[/quote]

Again, I think you’re in the vast minority in your view here that many folks feel insulted by my posts. Again, maybe you’re a touch thin-skinned, I don’t know. I’m of the mind that I couldn’t possibly be insulted by anything posted on the internet because… well… it’s the internet, and I’m almost impossible to insult. In order to be insulted by someone, after all, you have to hold that person’s views in high enough regard to care what they think of you. How does one find such people on the internet, of all places? So, I think we’re just not on the same page on this issue.

I agree that there are a number of very knowledgeable posters here (on all sorts of different subjects) – I certainly learn stuff here. However, there are also a number of complete morons who post here. And I, for one, get a good chuckle when they are taken to task by other posters.

[davelj]

[quote=CA renter][quote=davelj]I was unaware that I “always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults.” You sure about that? Please, reference specific posts where I’ve engaged in ad hominem and not brought specific data to the table. Now, I do like to point out hypocrisy – of which there is plenty – when I see it (and I quite enjoy the “snarky” – as you put it – riposte in that regard)… but I don’t consider those insults. I also like to point out when someone simply has no clue as to what they think they’re talking about (and, as you’re aware, I provide detailed analysis to back these instances up) – plenty of that as well. But if one is insulted by data and logical inconsistencies unveiled… then there’s nothing I can do about that. So, I doubt you’re going to get much support on your view here.

[/quote]

Dave,

I specifically quoted your response to Scarlett in my post:

[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.

Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]

As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]

Perhaps you don’t think that what you said was rude/obnoxious/snarky/arrogant, but I can assure you that most people would be offended by your attitude and assertion there. Scarlett has NEVER made any indication that she was the type to “keep up with the Jonses,” nor has she ever said anything to my knowledge that would indicate a superiority complex or any such thing. There was no reason, whatsoever, for you to take that tone in your response. [/quote]

Oh, I absolutely think it was snarky – no denying that. And I admit that I like to provoke folks here at times. But that’s not “insulting” them, as you said. Those two words have different meanings, as I’m sure you’re aware. I believe Scarlett in another post further clarified her housing desires which was a perfectly adequate response to my “snarkiness.” I doubt she cried herself to sleep that night. I’ve been at the Pigg for over 5 years and in all of that time only a very few posters have had an issue with my “attitude” – not that I mind, of course. But if you’re trying to tell me that you’re particularly thin-skinned then I’ll duly note it.

[quote=CA renter]
I also mentioned that you had said almost the exact same thing to me in another post or thread, which I ignored, and you’ve made a number of comments to me and others that were totally inappropriate and offensive — and you meant them to be offensive.[/quote]

Something about “in the eyes of the beholder” comes to mind. Again, I recall very few complaints. But, tell you what – the next time I see Rich I’ll be sure to ask him if he wants me to alter my posting style… it being his site and all. (However, my bet – and it’s only my view of course – is that he’s chuckling at this post if he reads it at all.)

[quote=CA renter]
It’s just funny that you’re accusing a decent and more humble poster of trying to “keep up with the Joneses” when your username is the one with “LJ” in it. I’m assuming it stands for “La Jolla,” no? [/quote]

I’ve never lived in La Jolla (albeit nearby for a couple of years), never intimated that I did, nor do I have any desire to (although it’s a fine area). I’d imagine that if I wanted folks to think I lived in La Jolla I’d be davelajolla, yes? But, please, keep guessing – I’ll let you know when you get it right.

[quote=CA renter]
You’ve also mentioned something about living in or buying a penthouse condo/apartment. So, it seems to me that the only one trying to “keep up” with anything around here is you. And yet, you’ve said that you like to point out hypocrisy.[/quote]

No hypocrisy on this issue at all. Keeping up with the Joneses is relative to the lifestyle of the Joneses whom are your peers, yes? If I were keeping up with my set of Joneses, I would not be living in a 1200 sq.ft. mid-rise downtown penthouse; I’d be living in a 3,000+ sqft home in La Jolla (which, again, I have no desire to do). Now, if that’s a haughty response, just recall that you brought the issue up, not me.

[quote=CA renter]
I’m not trying to get into a pissing match with you, and I’ve stated on multiple occasions that your knowledge, input, and perspective is much appreciated, especially when the conversation revolves around banking. But many of us have had to correct people’s assumptions about things, and most of us manage (or try to) do so in a tactful and respectful way. The arrogant tone in many of your posts does not add anything to the discussions, and it does not make you look smarter or superior to anyone else. Do realize that most of the posters here are higly educated and very intelligent people with their own history and knowledge about certain topics; almost everyone brings something valuable to the discussion, even if it’s something you or I don’t agree with. It would really add to the quality of our discussions/debates if everyone would stick to the topics, stay away from personal attacks, and remain as respectful as possible with one another.[/quote]

Again, I think you’re in the vast minority in your view here that many folks feel insulted by my posts. Again, maybe you’re a touch thin-skinned, I don’t know. I’m of the mind that I couldn’t possibly be insulted by anything posted on the internet because… well… it’s the internet, and I’m almost impossible to insult. In order to be insulted by someone, after all, you have to hold that person’s views in high enough regard to care what they think of you. How does one find such people on the internet, of all places? So, I think we’re just not on the same page on this issue.

I agree that there are a number of very knowledgeable posters here (on all sorts of different subjects) – I certainly learn stuff here. However, there are also a number of complete morons who post here. And I, for one, get a good chuckle when they are taken to task by other posters.

[davelj]

[quote=CA renter][quote=davelj]I was unaware that I “always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults.” You sure about that? Please, reference specific posts where I’ve engaged in ad hominem and not brought specific data to the table. Now, I do like to point out hypocrisy – of which there is plenty – when I see it (and I quite enjoy the “snarky” – as you put it – riposte in that regard)… but I don’t consider those insults. I also like to point out when someone simply has no clue as to what they think they’re talking about (and, as you’re aware, I provide detailed analysis to back these instances up) – plenty of that as well. But if one is insulted by data and logical inconsistencies unveiled… then there’s nothing I can do about that. So, I doubt you’re going to get much support on your view here.

[/quote]

Dave,

I specifically quoted your response to Scarlett in my post:

[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.

Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]

As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]

Perhaps you don’t think that what you said was rude/obnoxious/snarky/arrogant, but I can assure you that most people would be offended by your attitude and assertion there. Scarlett has NEVER made any indication that she was the type to “keep up with the Jonses,” nor has she ever said anything to my knowledge that would indicate a superiority complex or any such thing. There was no reason, whatsoever, for you to take that tone in your response. [/quote]

Oh, I absolutely think it was snarky – no denying that. And I admit that I like to provoke folks here at times. But that’s not “insulting” them, as you said. Those two words have different meanings, as I’m sure you’re aware. I believe Scarlett in another post further clarified her housing desires which was a perfectly adequate response to my “snarkiness.” I doubt she cried herself to sleep that night. I’ve been at the Pigg for over 5 years and in all of that time only a very few posters have had an issue with my “attitude” – not that I mind, of course. But if you’re trying to tell me that you’re particularly thin-skinned then I’ll duly note it.

[quote=CA renter]
I also mentioned that you had said almost the exact same thing to me in another post or thread, which I ignored, and you’ve made a number of comments to me and others that were totally inappropriate and offensive — and you meant them to be offensive.[/quote]

Something about “in the eyes of the beholder” comes to mind. Again, I recall very few complaints. But, tell you what – the next time I see Rich I’ll be sure to ask him if he wants me to alter my posting style… it being his site and all. (However, my bet – and it’s only my view of course – is that he’s chuckling at this post if he reads it at all.)

[quote=CA renter]
It’s just funny that you’re accusing a decent and more humble poster of trying to “keep up with the Joneses” when your username is the one with “LJ” in it. I’m assuming it stands for “La Jolla,” no? [/quote]

I’ve never lived in La Jolla (albeit nearby for a couple of years), never intimated that I did, nor do I have any desire to (although it’s a fine area). I’d imagine that if I wanted folks to think I lived in La Jolla I’d be davelajolla, yes? But, please, keep guessing – I’ll let you know when you get it right.

[quote=CA renter]
You’ve also mentioned something about living in or buying a penthouse condo/apartment. So, it seems to me that the only one trying to “keep up” with anything around here is you. And yet, you’ve said that you like to point out hypocrisy.[/quote]

No hypocrisy on this issue at all. Keeping up with the Joneses is relative to the lifestyle of the Joneses whom are your peers, yes? If I were keeping up with my set of Joneses, I would not be living in a 1200 sq.ft. mid-rise downtown penthouse; I’d be living in a 3,000+ sqft home in La Jolla (which, again, I have no desire to do). Now, if that’s a haughty response, just recall that you brought the issue up, not me.

[quote=CA renter]
I’m not trying to get into a pissing match with you, and I’ve stated on multiple occasions that your knowledge, input, and perspective is much appreciated, especially when the conversation revolves around banking. But many of us have had to correct people’s assumptions about things, and most of us manage (or try to) do so in a tactful and respectful way. The arrogant tone in many of your posts does not add anything to the discussions, and it does not make you look smarter or superior to anyone else. Do realize that most of the posters here are higly educated and very intelligent people with their own history and knowledge about certain topics; almost everyone brings something valuable to the discussion, even if it’s something you or I don’t agree with. It would really add to the quality of our discussions/debates if everyone would stick to the topics, stay away from personal attacks, and remain as respectful as possible with one another.[/quote]

Again, I think you’re in the vast minority in your view here that many folks feel insulted by my posts. Again, maybe you’re a touch thin-skinned, I don’t know. I’m of the mind that I couldn’t possibly be insulted by anything posted on the internet because… well… it’s the internet, and I’m almost impossible to insult. In order to be insulted by someone, after all, you have to hold that person’s views in high enough regard to care what they think of you. How does one find such people on the internet, of all places? So, I think we’re just not on the same page on this issue.

I agree that there are a number of very knowledgeable posters here (on all sorts of different subjects) – I certainly learn stuff here. However, there are also a number of complete morons who post here. And I, for one, get a good chuckle when they are taken to task by other posters.

[davelj]

[quote=CA renter][quote=davelj]I was unaware that I “always try to turn debates into a volley of personal insults.” You sure about that? Please, reference specific posts where I’ve engaged in ad hominem and not brought specific data to the table. Now, I do like to point out hypocrisy – of which there is plenty – when I see it (and I quite enjoy the “snarky” – as you put it – riposte in that regard)… but I don’t consider those insults. I also like to point out when someone simply has no clue as to what they think they’re talking about (and, as you’re aware, I provide detailed analysis to back these instances up) – plenty of that as well. But if one is insulted by data and logical inconsistencies unveiled… then there’s nothing I can do about that. So, I doubt you’re going to get much support on your view here.

[/quote]

Dave,

I specifically quoted your response to Scarlett in my post:

[quote=davelj][quote=Scarlett]Back in the 1950 and 1960, the median home price was roughly just below TWO times the median household income – which was then predominantly ONE income.

Nowadays, the median home price is roughly THREE times the median household income – which is at least 1.5 full-time incomes, if not close to TWO incomes. In San Diego that ratio is probably even larger.
[/quote]

As has been pointed out here before, this is largely a matter of choice. The size of the average house in the U.S. has more than doubled since 1960. So, people CHOOSE to spend more today on housing than they used to – wisely or not, mind you. I’m quite certain that if you cut your housing (size) expectations in half (to live like those folks in the ’50s and ’60s)… the ratios will follow accordingly. But I’m betting you have no interest in doing so… what with the Jones’ big house and all…[/quote]

Perhaps you don’t think that what you said was rude/obnoxious/snarky/arrogant, but I can assure you that most people would be offended by your attitude and assertion there. Scarlett has NEVER made any indication that she was the type to “keep up with the Jonses,” nor has she ever said anything to my knowledge that would indicate a superiority complex or any such thing. There was no reason, whatsoever, for you to take that tone in your response. [/quote]

Oh, I absolutely think it was snarky – no denying that. And I admit that I like to provoke folks here at times. But that’s not “insulting” them, as you said. Those two words have different meanings, as I’m sure you’re aware. I believe Scarlett in another post further clarified her housing desires which was a perfectly adequate response to my “snarkiness.” I doubt she cried herself to sleep that night. I’ve been at the Pigg for over 5 years and in all of that time only a very few posters have had an issue with my “attitude” – not that I mind, of course. But if you’re trying to tell me that you’re particularly thin-skinned then I’ll duly note it.

[quote=CA renter]
I also mentioned that you had said almost the exact same thing to me in another post or thread, which I ignored, and you’ve made a number of comments to me and others that were totally inappropriate and offensive — and you meant them to be offensive.[/quote]

Something about “in the eyes of the beholder” comes to mind. Again, I recall very few complaints. But, tell you what – the next time I see Rich I’ll be sure to ask him if he wants me to alter my posting style… it being his site and all. (However, my bet – and it’s only my view of course – is that he’s chuckling at this post if he reads it at all.)

[quote=CA renter]
It’s just funny that you’re accusing a decent and more humble poster of trying to “keep up with the Joneses” when your username is the one with “LJ” in it. I’m assuming it stands for “La Jolla,” no? [/quote]

I’ve never lived in La Jolla (albeit nearby for a couple of years), never intimated that I did, nor do I have any desire to (although it’s a fine area). I’d imagine that if I wanted folks to think I lived in La Jolla I’d be davelajolla, yes? But, please, keep guessing – I’ll let you know when you get it right.

[quote=CA renter]
You’ve also mentioned something about living in or buying a penthouse condo/apartment. So, it seems to me that the only one trying to “keep up” with anything around here is you. And yet, you’ve said that you like to point out hypocrisy.[/quote]

No hypocrisy on this issue at all. Keeping up with the Joneses is relative to the lifestyle of the Joneses whom are your peers, yes? If I were keeping up with my set of Joneses, I would not be living in a 1200 sq.ft. mid-rise downtown penthouse; I’d be living in a 3,000+ sqft home in La Jolla (which, again, I have no desire to do). Now, if that’s a haughty response, just recall that you brought the issue up, not me.

[quote=CA renter]
I’m not trying to get into a pissing match with you, and I’ve stated on multiple occasions that your knowledge, input, and perspective is much appreciated, especially when the conversation revolves around banking. But many of us have had to correct people’s assumptions about things, and most of us manage (or try to) do so in a tactful and respectful way. The arrogant tone in many of your posts does not add anything to the discussions, and it does not make you look smarter or superior to anyone else. Do realize that most of the posters here are higly educated and very intelligent people with their own history and knowledge about certain topics; almost everyone brings something valuable to the discussion, even if it’s something you or I don’t agree with. It would really add to the quality of our discussions/debates if everyone would stick to the topics, stay away from personal attacks, and remain as respectful as possible with one another.[/quote]

Again, I think you’re in the vast minority in your view here that many folks feel insulted by my posts. Again, maybe you’re a touch thin-skinned, I don’t know. I’m of the mind that I couldn’t possibly be insulted by anything posted on the internet because… well… it’s the internet, and I’m almost impossible to insult. In order to be insulted by someone, after all, you have to hold that person’s views in high enough regard to care what they think of you. How does one find such people on the internet, of all places? So, I think we’re just not on the same page on this issue.

I agree that there are a number of very knowledgeable posters here (on all sorts of different subjects) – I certainly learn stuff here. However, there are also a number of complete morons who post here. And I, for one, get a good chuckle when they are taken to task by other posters.

[davelj]

Now, this chart doesn’t take into account “shadow rentals” (that is, empty houses waiting on foreclosure that could enter the rental market), but… it does suggest that the traditional apartment market is gaining strength. This makes some sense simply because hardly anything’s been built over the last few years and the population continues to increase.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/forecast-rising-rents-to-slow-house.html

[davelj]

Now, this chart doesn’t take into account “shadow rentals” (that is, empty houses waiting on foreclosure that could enter the rental market), but… it does suggest that the traditional apartment market is gaining strength. This makes some sense simply because hardly anything’s been built over the last few years and the population continues to increase.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/forecast-rising-rents-to-slow-house.html

[davelj]

Now, this chart doesn’t take into account “shadow rentals” (that is, empty houses waiting on foreclosure that could enter the rental market), but… it does suggest that the traditional apartment market is gaining strength. This makes some sense simply because hardly anything’s been built over the last few years and the population continues to increase.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/forecast-rising-rents-to-slow-house.html

[davelj]

Now, this chart doesn’t take into account “shadow rentals” (that is, empty houses waiting on foreclosure that could enter the rental market), but… it does suggest that the traditional apartment market is gaining strength. This makes some sense simply because hardly anything’s been built over the last few years and the population continues to increase.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/forecast-rising-rents-to-slow-house.html

[davelj]

Now, this chart doesn’t take into account “shadow rentals” (that is, empty houses waiting on foreclosure that could enter the rental market), but… it does suggest that the traditional apartment market is gaining strength. This makes some sense simply because hardly anything’s been built over the last few years and the population continues to increase.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/forecast-rising-rents-to-slow-house.html

[davelj]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I will have no problem divulging to the Joneses, or the Rodriguezes, for that matter, that my kid, “Muffy” is currently enrolled in “community college.” Everyone is aware that admission is much easier for an entering junior with an associate degree under their belt (and all their GE’s taken care of) :=][/quote]

Community College! Harrumph! Clearly you have an insufficient desire to social climb…

[davelj]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I will have no problem divulging to the Joneses, or the Rodriguezes, for that matter, that my kid, “Muffy” is currently enrolled in “community college.” Everyone is aware that admission is much easier for an entering junior with an associate degree under their belt (and all their GE’s taken care of) :=][/quote]

Community College! Harrumph! Clearly you have an insufficient desire to social climb…

[davelj]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I will have no problem divulging to the Joneses, or the Rodriguezes, for that matter, that my kid, “Muffy” is currently enrolled in “community college.” Everyone is aware that admission is much easier for an entering junior with an associate degree under their belt (and all their GE’s taken care of) :=][/quote]

Community College! Harrumph! Clearly you have an insufficient desire to social climb…

[davelj]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I will have no problem divulging to the Joneses, or the Rodriguezes, for that matter, that my kid, “Muffy” is currently enrolled in “community college.” Everyone is aware that admission is much easier for an entering junior with an associate degree under their belt (and all their GE’s taken care of) :=][/quote]

Community College! Harrumph! Clearly you have an insufficient desire to social climb…

[davelj]

[quote=bearishgurl]
I will have no problem divulging to the Joneses, or the Rodriguezes, for that matter, that my kid, “Muffy” is currently enrolled in “community college.” Everyone is aware that admission is much easier for an entering junior with an associate degree under their belt (and all their GE’s taken care of) :=][/quote]

Community College! Harrumph! Clearly you have an insufficient desire to social climb…

[davelj]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=davelj]
I think you’re including books and supplies for SD State (just to clarify) – here are the numbers for 2010/2011:

http://www.howtogetin.com/colleges/san-diego-state-university/expenses.php

[/quote]

I was looking at the wrong year, for 2011-2012, from the SDSU website, it’s $5,990.

http://www.sa.sdsu.edu/fao/1-Application_Process/COA.html%5B/quote%5D

And then there’s San Diego City College, which is $46/unit plus a $17/semester health care fee. That’s about $1,400/year (for 30 units). I’ve said this before… if money is an issue, and you’re almost automatically admitted to one of the UC-system full-time universities if you do well at the CC level… why not save a few bucks and spend that first two years at San Diego City College (or equivalent)? I think most folks with tight budgets who choose not to do that, do so because they don’t want to have to explain to the Joneses that Muffy’s in Community College – regardless of the sound financial logic involved.

[Author]

Posts