[joec]

I think one point that should be kept in mind is that there isn’t an answer for everyone. It really depends on the 2 people to see what will work out for them. Most of this is dependent on what they grew up with or what they “see” as good/acceptable, etc…Like some people split all bills, some people share, etc…

One thing I have sorta noticed is for both men and women who want to, but aren’t married after 40+, usually there is some issue with them and they may not even realize it. I saw it with guy co-workers who were too “greedy” or was too “worried” about their finances to not lose it all. Maybe they just haven’t met the one they are willing to take the chance on, but pretty common in guys I think if they make decent money…It’s certainly a concern, but it’s to the point of too worried to leap I see.

I could understand if you’re Zuckerberg and you’re a billionaire, but most people aren’t that well off.

All the generalizations of someone should ask for this, do that just doesn’t really make any sense for each individual couple since everyone views things with different importance.

Here’s an interesting read on women making more than men.
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/features/n_9495/index1.html

Read the comments too. The problem with that situation is that society isn’t too kind towards this type of setup. Growing up, I think most guys never expected to be a SAHD or taken care of, but if that happens, society is extremely mean to the guy. Also, you rarely hear of guys telling a wife that she’s a “loser” for not making more money…Just not done really since that’s ingrained in our historical traditional view of the sexes.

Over the long term, I think more men will be sahd since it’s slowly getting more common and women, already make up the majority of college graduates and medical and many other graduate studies. Women will continue to advance in education since girls are generally better able to study/sit still, are less hyper, etc…than boys

In the old days, it was expected that you had to get married to get the sex…Now, that’s totally not the case so more men AND women will probably prefer to be single. There is still the thought of some that marriage is good for the kids and I agree with that too, but you already have people not married and together with kids.

To the parent who stayed together for the kids, I think you didn’t do what’s best for you (clearly), but you did what was best for your kids so that was a sacrifice you did to try to have a stable environment at home.

As strangely as it sounds, I want to watch some old episodes of Married with Children since I think a lot of it is actually relevant to married men. With kids, unless you plan to screw your family over, all the women out there are sorta a waste of time since there’s no point when you are a parent no matter how bad a marriage is.

That said, for divorced parents, other kids are mean and boys, especially without a dad (wife could get re-married and move) are in extremely high risk to end up in jail.

Girls, just guessing, will end up being porn stars…

I think if someone did a poll here, also a lot more people are divorced than people realize. I think at one of my old jobs, nearly ALL (maybe 75%) the other managers in my group were divorced in the past.

That was a long ramble…

[joec]

A lot of these questions and answers are probably due to probably 1 person not being at that point in time to want to get married and looking for a certain/different lifestyle.

We all grow up expecting how our lives should be and if you’re “forced” or “pressured” into getting married when you really don’t want to be married, I would give you guys probably 5 years before a divorce does happen.

One thing I’ve learned in life is that even though you maybe perfect for someone, maybe at this point in time, you guys aren’t really heading in the same journey or looking at the same things from life.

You or whoever wants to know should definitely discuss kids as well and when since kids are a massive sacrifice in terms of lifestyle (you have none for a while) and are insanely expensive…

Kids alone is a deal breaker IMO since your life will change too much if 1 person wants that responsibility and 1 doesn’t. You don’t want a kid stuck in there to parents who don’t want them.

As for the friends, I’d guess you’d know which friend will go where, but it’ll probably be messy and you might have to start over if people “take” the other person’s side. This is pretty tough as making friends are hard to begin with…

Just get married for the right reasons and don’t do it because it’s time. If someone dated for a very long time, maybe it’s not a matter of not wanting to marry, it’s just that they don’t want to marry that person and delay.

It’s REALLY hard to fight all the pressure from her/everyone around you, and you may make it and get on the same page again eventually, but marriage is tough enough without this “marry me or we’re breaking up deal…”

People do make it of course, but if you’re pretty against it, then that’s probably your gut telling you something.

[joec]

We know a teacher who teaches in another district and she really dislikes common core and how schools are generally taught now. A lot of school now it sounds like is to teach towards the middle since you can’t go advanced for the super ahead kids or go slow for the dumb kids…Also, all that prepping for the testing.

The idea of the new school I think is fast kids can actually take classes with higher students so they will always feel challenged and be ahead while people who need more time can be pulled aside to catch up, etc…

I hear this is done for some schools already in the bay area…

It probably depends on the kid, but no idea if this is a good thing and it’s so new, it may blow up in their face until they work out all the issues like you say.

[joec]

I just watched this film:
http://inequalityforall.com/

and was wondering the thoughts of other piggy’s on it.

I liked it a lot since I think it’s so relevant now.

It’s probably too biased and one sided for the ultra wealthy right, but I sorta agreed with a lot of the points.

Maybe since I’m not part of the 1% or even 5%, I enjoyed it more than others.

[joec]

On a related note, can you limit how many people live in your rental? I assume the standard forms would have some restriction, but wasn’t sure if that would apply if these people were related…

I assume number of people aren’t a protected class, but probably a newborn son/daughter would definitely be. Of course, nothing stops you from raising rent to insane levels (unless rent controlled), but it seems like it would be a nightmare if multiple families lived in your house…or even super super large families (more wear and tear).

[joec]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=spdrun]Quibble: Assuming you were a full year tardy, you’d pay the 3% on the 50% tax (assuming the state rate is similar) NOT the full value of the house. So the penalty hit would be $60,000, not $120,000.[/quote]

I’m not sure what you mean by tardy. If I win the house today, I don’t owe anything substantially different than I otherwise would have owed, until 4/15 of next year. And there will be no penalties.[/quote]

I think you’re supposed to pay estimated tax…That’s where the penalty is from.

[joec]

I agree that if you win, you should hire someone to at least run some numbers or double check your work, even if you are an expert on tax…

Everyone also has a different situation so if you have an awesome pension or double retirement (retired military), working another job now with another pension, then maybe income is already very high in retirement, etc…

These are all good problems to have if you win! Only(!) $150 per ticket….

I’m sticking to my money down the toilet lotto.

[joec]

This is not tax advice for anyone’s situation so consult your tax adviser first…

The 3% varies based on what interest rates are currently…Obviously, if you have other debt higher than 3%, you might want to consider it, but you can’t deduct underpayment penalties like student loans or mortgage debt or business debt…A business might just get other loans and just deduct it against income which maybe better to overall minimize taxes.

I’m not sure if taking the annuity is better. Remember that after 20 years, that 104k is no where near what it is today. You also have to look at how much income a lump sum can generate vs. an annuity of 100k per year vs. taking say 1.2 mil after taxes.

It’s probably overall the same, but with the cost of money and inflation and lack of control, I think people who can manage their finances are probably better off taking the lump sum.

[joec]

[quote=pencilneck]If I recall correctly, a few years ago (2009?) they failed to make the reserve to have the grand prize drawing. They nearly certainly won’t have the same problem this year, but I’m still not overly fond of this sort of raffle.

“A minimum of 61,375 tickets must be sold by 11:59 p.m., May 2, 2014 for the Grand Prize winner to have a choice of the House or the $2,100,000 annuity or a onetime $1,400,000 cash payment. If fewer than 61,375 tickets are sold by 11:59 p.m. Friday May 2, 2014, the raffle will be held as scheduled, and prizes will be awarded as advertised with the exception that the Grand Prize winner will receive a choice between a sum equal to 50% of the Net Raffle Proceeds paid as an annuity over 20 years, not to exceed $1,300,000 or a onetime cash payment of 70% of the annuity value, not to exceed $900,000.”[/quote]

Every year I see this raffle/ad, I am tempted to buy. But after looking at the price of $150. I always figure I can get the same dream/high with a $1-2 mega millions or power ball ticket…

I end up not winning neither

You also need to spend $400 or something on this to get entered in the bonus drawings probably to make it worthwhile since the odds of the grand prize is less likely I’d guess…

[joec]

[quote=zk]
I’ve had two great dogs, and, yes, the choice is very easy for me. I wouldn’t for a second even consider letting a human die before either of those dogs.

I really have trouble believing what I’m hearing here. You think that the average person would blame outsourcing (or whatever) on an individual foreigner and save their dog over that person partially for that reason. The troubling part is that you’re obviously correct.

The average person is a real schmuck.

Let me ask you this, joec and flyerinhi and anybody else who would save their dog:

Say you can only save one of: your dog or a foreign tourist. You save your dog. You find out that the foreign tourist had two kids. Those kids loved him dearly. They cry every night because they miss him so much. Their lives are permanently (negatively) affected by the pain of his death and the lack of his guidance. Not an unlikely scenario at all. Would you feel you’d made the right choice? Would you feel guilty? Would you still (assuming you do now) feel that you were a moral human being? If you’re religious, do you think your god would approve? Would you lose any sleep? Would you ever think about the 12-year-old girl and the 7-year-old boy whose father you let die?[/quote]

1st, as I mentioned before, I don’t have a dog and said in this or another thread that I actually HATE dogs. I can’t stand how out of control I see dogs are in general around the neighborhood. Not to mention them being a financial drain. Didn’t grow up with a dog and don’t see a need for them in my life.

That said, I think my problem is I probably don’t put a huge value on all human life. I KNOW people die every single day, probably every few seconds so someone, while I write this just died…

I am not religious, even though I grew up in a religious household, but if I am to be condemned by god/God, then more power to him for having that power to do his will on me if that’s his desire…

I assume you are religious since that would be a very good reason to save/value all life since that’s what’s taught a lot. At least a human life, from your g[G]od’s eye is more valuable than a dog.

I can’t say how I would feel for 2 little kids, but maybe, the “tourist” killed was actually a child rapist instead? At the end of the day, we can come up with any sob story of who the victim is and I don’t think that was the “point” on the survey. Bottom line are people are schmucks or in my case, a self admitted asshole who doesn’t care for most of the rest of the world perhaps, but again, I think the survey has a lot of truth in how little care most of society has for other society people. This divisive topic sorta clearly states that.

The 40% in the survey and the 46% of women (more women than men) making that choice or feeling this way is clearly a sign that it’s simply probably the society we live in and we’re all a product of our surroundings/environment…

I don’t know if I would lose sleep if it was 2 little kids, but again, what if the tourist was a psycho serial killer? Maybe I would feel like I did society a good thing. Bottom line, a lot of these questions are fun to discuss, but until it happens, I think it’s actually “hard” to see what people will do in actuality.

My main point is that people die every day, I can’t or don’t care to save everyone. We all have our own problems. 1 less person, no matter how dramatic you make it feel, has very little overall impact on your life. That’s my point. Losing your dog will impact you and your kids probably a ton more than some foreigner you or your kids don’t know or don’t care about. I suppose I’d rather not be “inconvenienced” with having to deal with a non-existent dead dog. I don’t have time for that. Of course, if you knew the family, that’s not the same question. I suppose in my case, it doesn’t have to be “foreigner” since I dislike people here just as much as foreigners in general.

In the time it took you to read my message, probably 300-400 people just died. It’s a part of life. Live all you can each day with the people you care about and if it happens, so be it.

http://www.ask.com/question/how-many-people-die-per-second

http://www.hebrew4christians.com/About_HFC/Death_Rate/death_rate.html

[joec]

[quote=6packscaredy]I doubt that the myth of the dog in general matches up to dog reality both in terms of how good the dog is and how much time a nd interaction actually occurs. The dog carries a lot of psychological baggage for people.

I am not mak ing sense.

Dogs mean something I don’t get currently. Being a dog hater is just a few steps up from child molest or nowadays I’d say. It wasn’t always this way.[/quote]

This is probably because your dog just bit someone needing 50 stitches and there will probably be some insurance claim. For people who have had great dogs, the choice is very easy, especially if, say, they just got messed with in a foreign country (more hate for foreigners) or, say loss their job to outsourcing, whatever…

I think the situation just leads to feeling one way vs. the other…

[joec]

I suppose I have the minority view that I don’t really see neighbors or any random person as my close/good friend. Pretty much any other person in the world competes with everyone else in a world with limited resources/jobs/wealth/women/ you name it. Even with that said, you have plenty of annoying dog owners in any area that I could care less about, such as that case in the other thread of the newspaper thief, or the guy who wants to shoot you if you hurt his dog, etc…Or Kim Kardasian (who I labeled with the “C” word) who has a charity event and hypes it up, but gives a mere 10% and pockets the rest for herself as profit and gets richer…All these people, I’d take a dog (if I had one) or my laptop or my car and could care less if they bit the bucket. I suppose I understand that people die everyday and maybe I don’t feel it’s in my power to save everyone or maybe I simply don’t value ALL life as much as the next guy since I understand people die unfortunately (or fortunately)…

Perhaps I live a sad sad life, but from generally reading enough of everything, I think the survey is correct and more people are of this mindset (40% and 46% of women) than people think and most people I feel simply don’t want to admit, they will do the same probably.

Think when the shit hits the fan…You’ll see a lot of crazy, sick shit I’d think…

[joec]

The thing with the human vs. your dog is because your dog is yours and has a direct impact on your own life. Maybe the world has become a world of selfish bastards, but I’d say I’d do the same if it was something of mine. Heck, it could be my laptop probably and I could care less for the foreign tourist. My laptop gets destroyed, I’m now stuck with coming up with another 1-2k dollars to get a new one and I’m pissed. The tourist is gone, no affect at all on my well being or life, financially or emotionally.

You could say 300 million people from China could simply disappear and I doubt I’d bat an eye…Yes, it’s sad and I’m probably part of the 40% or part of the problem, but….

…people die everyday. Maybe I have a very harsh view of the world, but other people dieing that I don’t know has very little, if ANY impact of my life. Maybe it’s sad there was some earthquake in the Philippines and thousands of people died and all that, but I knew NONE of those people and my own selfish life wasn’t affected at all.

Overall, maybe it’s my general view of society or generally being a product of my environment now, tough life, rough times, etc…or me just being an asshole, who knows, but things that affect you simply has more value than things that don’t. Like trade 1 life you are close to for 2 billion in both China and India and most people would vote to probably get rid of the 2 bil…

They probably think those 2 counties took their jobs too to sweeten the pie…

None of this is that surprising IMO.

[joec]

I actually hate dogs myself as well and you aren’t alone. I agree that the owners are even worst since like a kid, a dog is a dog and will act stupid, kids, you expect to act a bit better. I gotta say I hate owners who “think” their dog can be off leash, but their dogs are always running at me or across the street and I can’t be happier if they got ran over.

Some dogs are super mellow and are very well trained and behaved, but I think the majority are just annoying and is a 20k/ (just checked) 30k lawsuit waiting to happen.

I actually brought data as well!
http://www.iii.org/dog-bite-claims-infographic.html

Nearly 30k per claim avg and you can bet your insurance company will DUMP YOU after you get sued and they pay out.

Good luck trying to get coverage for your larger dog (if you have one of those) afterwards…

Also read some states like NY, a minor can still sue you years after till they are 18 if there is scarring.

For the few people who have super well trained dogs who never misbehave and can be controlled and listen to directions, great! For the 99% others, keep them on a leash!

[joec]

[quote=spdrun]

I miss the old days when you can just get in a fight and people understood you have at least some rights to defend your property / yourself without overthinking the situation when clearly, someone is in the wrong here…

If the thief somehow ends up with a nosebleed, who’s to say that he didn’t trip and fall while stealing the paper…? Of course, then he could sue for the “victim” having unsafe front steps. *sigh*[/quote]

So true…get robbed by gun point, robber trips and sues you for “unsafe” steps in your house during his getaway…

only in America…

[Author]

Posts