Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 30, 2012 at 3:04 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744559May 30, 2012 at 8:18 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744530
SK in CV
Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=AN][quote=SK in CV]Why should they work in 911 centers or schools or in the office if they can afford and prefer being retired? You think they should be forced to work? Should everyone be forced to work until they’re over 60 or just cops and firemen?[/quote]
How many profession in the private sector can afford to retire before 60?[/quote]
How many professions in the private sector put their lives on the line every day and typically have MUCH less than stellar working conditions (clean cubicle/office, multi-line phone, computer and gadgets at their constant disposal, restroom and lunch nearby, etc, etc).AN, do you think hanging out on the streets of San Diego County (or its fwys) are more “fun” than what you, as a “white collar” worker are doing everyday?
IIRC, jimmyle’s neighbor is living close to the SD substation where EVERY SD street cop begins his/her “lofty” career:
Drive to SE Division Stn. Park in the parking lot. Lock your “luxury” car. Start walking eastbound. Get to know the folks out there. And … have a nice life![/quote]
I note nobody has actually answered my question of whether everyone should be forced to work until their over 60 or just cops and firemen. I don’t know the circumstances of the retired cop in the original post. Maybe he has a rich wife. Or he saves pretty well.
What I do know is that BG is right. It’s only anectodotal, but my brother has been a SD cop for over 30 years. He’s 55 years old. He’s had 2 knee surgeries, 2 back surgeries, 2 shoulder surgeries, and needs a knee replacement and a shoulder replacement. It’s been more than 15 years since he went to sleep pain free. Every one of those injuries are work related. He’s been shot at twice, had a brick dropped on his head, and hit with a baseball bat in the back. He’s worked SE, and vice, and robbery, and homicide and arson. I’ve been trying to convince him to retire on disability, but he likes his work, so he hasn’t.
His wife has been a cop for about a year less. For the last 15 years or so, she’s been working with CPS, pulling kids out of dangerous homes. She’s had at least 4 surgeries from work related injuries. She comes from a family of addicts, so she doesn’t drink or take pain meds for fear that she’ll get addicted. So she sucks it up every night, despite the pain from her torn rotator cuff surgery. She could retire on disability too, but she likes her work.
Both of them will be retiring before they’re 60. Between the two of them, they’ll have pensions a bit over $100K a year. Somebody here really think they haven’t earned it?
May 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #744495ParticipantWhy should they work in 911 centers or schools or in the office if they can afford and prefer being retired? You think they should be forced to work? Should everyone be forced to work until they’re over 60 or just cops and firemen?
Participant[quote=enron_by_the_sea]
The joke is that FB will have to do a second IPO now because all the float in the market is now again owned by the underwriter, Morgan Stanley.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/19/facebook-morgan-stanley-idUSL1E8GIER020120519[/quote]
That makes no sense at all. Even if Morgan Stanley does own all the float (which, if true, means they own all non-restricted shares), an absurd claim on its face, FB still got the proceeds of this IPO that they bargained for. (I think somewhere around $7 billion, less costs.) Why would they have to do a new offering?
Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]
Wow, couldn’t even make it 24 hours… bye now.[/quote]Markie, we hardly knew ye.
ParticipantBefore you buy, make sure to check dell’s scratch and dent site. Inventory is not always predictable, but if they have what you want, it will generally be priced pretty well, and often includes software that you’ll probably need anyway. (Pay no attention to those who say their products suck. They do have a couple very decent lines.) The other great benefit of buying scratch & dents is quick shipping. Everything is already packed and ready to go. I ordered my current laptop at 4:00 PM, it was delivered by noon the next day.
Another consideration is skipping the desktop altogether and go with a laptop, a larger monitor and wireless keyboard and mouse. That way you have all the luxuries of a desktop but you’re always using the same computer. I haven’t touched my desktop in a year, the only reason i have it is that my printer is neither wireless nor network compatible, so it’s plugged into the desktop.
May 2, 2012 at 3:02 PM in reply to: Ron Paul Wins Alaska and Washington State + Several State GOP Chairman Positions #742712Participant[quote=markmax33] Heck I can scan a package of meat with my IPhone and collect a mountain of information on it already.[/quote]
I just scanned my burger from costco. Siri responded with “why do people ask me that?” I think she misunderstood the question. Is my burger safe to eat?
P.S. My burger was wearing a bun, a slice of cheese, mustard, and slice of tomato.
May 2, 2012 at 2:51 PM in reply to: OT: Can we talk something about real estate on this blog… Please??? #742711Participant[quote=flu]
One question though… For a primary residence, if you sell your home less than it’s worth, you can’t write it off.. So if I understand you correctly, with a home office deduction, than this becomes possible (as an offset to whatever gain was reported in the depreciation of the home office)?[/quote]Yep, it does. Keep in mind that most home offices are pretty small. Like the 10′ by 12″ office in your massive estate might only be 3 or 4% of the total space. So the write off of a loss isn’t nothing, but it’s pretty small in comparison to the total loss.
Edit added: Sell for less than it’s worth? I assume you mean less than it cost?
Participant[quote=pri_dk]
“argue with a fool proves there are two”[/quote]touché.
My only defense, though weak, is that some people apparently buy into this drivel. They shouldn’t.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
LOL… removing limitations and exceptions from the current audits isn’t expanding the scope? I guess we’ll leave that up to the Piggs to decide! checkmate![/quote]I’m reasonably sure that Piggs don’t get to decide what laws mean. And no, removing the limitations on the scope does not increase the scope all by itself. Not even close. All it does is allow for an increased scope. What would increase the scope would be to add language to the bill which increases the scope. He didn’t do that. The bill doesn’t even specify a scope. Which makes it an idiotic bill. One of the many reasons it’s unlikely to ever become law.
May 2, 2012 at 2:20 PM in reply to: Ron Paul Wins Alaska and Washington State + Several State GOP Chairman Positions #742703ParticipantThey might be excellent points, if they were all actually true. But Captain Hyperbole has struck again.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
You did research??!I have proven to you several times that all of the programs in the Federal Reserve are not audited and you claimed they were. You must concede that point first.
“The crucial issue of Federal Reserve transparency requires an analysis of 31 USC 714, the section of US Code which establishes that the Federal Reserve may be audited by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) but which simultaneously severely restricts what the GAO may in fact audit. Essentially, the GAO is only allowed to audit check-processing, currency storage and shipments, credit facilities (limited) and some regulatory and bank examination functions, etc. The most important matters, which directly affect the strength of the dollar and the health of the financial system, are immune from oversight.
Currently, the GAO is prohibited from auditing:
1. transactions for or with a foreign central bank, government of a foreign country, or nonprivate international financing organization;
2. deliberations, decisions, or actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations
3. transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee; or
4. a part of a discussion or communication among or between members of the Board of Governors and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System related to clauses (1)-(3) of this subsection of US Code.The GAO is also prevented from conducting on-site examinations of banks or bank holding companies without the written consent of the appropriate regulatory agency.
HR 459 and S 202, The Federal Reserve Transparency Act, would eliminate these restrictions and mandate a thorough GAO audit of the Fed, finally delivering answers to the American people about how our money is being spent.”
http://www.auditthefed.com/about-the-audit/
Since you didn’t understand how the current “audit” process worked in the first place you couldn’t have understood the bill.[/quote]
Typically, you’ve misrepresented what I’ve said. Which not that all of the programs of the Fed have been audited, only that a financial audit is performed and the report published each year.
Paul’s bill DOES emiliminate those limitations. But it doesn’t call for any specific audit. Just “an audit”. There is no such thing as a “complete audit”. It would be prohibitively expensive. So without identifying a specific scope, Paul’s bill does nothing. It doesn’t increase the scope of existing audits.
The difference between what you understand in this space, and what I understand, is like the difference between someone who reads Mad Magazine and thinks they know what they’re talking about, and someone whose actually dealth with federal regulations on a day to day basis for more than 30 years. Sorry to be so condescending, but you don’t know WTF you’re talking about.
May 2, 2012 at 1:51 PM in reply to: OT: Can we talk something about real estate on this blog… Please??? #742696Participant[quote=flu]
I have a dumb question… If you take these sort of home office deductions, how are things affected when you end up selling your home. (Just a general discussion, to get an idea)…[/quote]
Not a dumb question at all. In fact a very good one.
Theoretically, when you sell, the portion that’s been depreciated doesn’t qualify as personal residence, so doesn’t get the personal residence exemption. Sales price has to be allocated between personal residence and depreciable business property. Depreciation gets recaptured as ordinary income (I can’t remember for sure on this, maybe slightly better than ordinary rates) and the balance is taxable as a long term capital gain.
I say theoretically because sometimes this gets ignored or forgotten, even by tax professionals. Unless of course the home is sold at a loss. In which case the loss attributed to the business portion is fully deductible as an ordinary loss and not subject to capital loss limitations.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
You really have no understanding of what’s going on. You do try hard. There has never been a full audit of the Federal Reserve presented to the public on all of their programs. He is presenting a bill that will do it. Stop slandering in cyber space again.[/quote]No mark, you have no clue, because you never do any research yourself. If Ron Paul says it, you think it must be true. It isn’t. He is either misinformed, or lies pretty regularly. I read the bill. I know what’s in it, and more importantly, what is not. Go read the bill. Go find where in the bill it does the things you want it to do. Quote the section for me that gives you what you want.
And learn what slander is before making accusations you can’t back up.
May 2, 2012 at 1:09 PM in reply to: OT: Can we talk something about real estate on this blog… Please??? #742682Participant[quote=captcha]If home office remodel is deductible and you add a room to your house and move your existing home office to the new room can you deduct the full cost of addition?
How is it possible that the county destroys blueprints 90 days after the work is done? What’s stopping me from making an unpermitted modification (something that’s not visible from the outside) and claiming that’s how the things were as long as I don’t get caught during construction?[/quote]
No, and good question.
You’d have to depreciate the cost of the remodeling, not write off the whole thing in the year you do it.
I’ll take your word for it that blueprints are destroyed after 90 days. (does the city do that too?) My old house in poway had tons of work done that was only partially permitted. It was done before the city took over administration of permits from the county. The only thing their records showed was the approximate square footage, and that there was electrical and plumbing. The guy who I bought it from, had built a 1800 square foot, 2 bedroom guest house. I strongly suspect with no permits at all. I don’t remember the exact circumstances, but I had to do something to it, got a permit, and they essentially confirmed the whole thing was permitted, because the records they inherited from the county were so incomplete. So I think it might be possible.
-
AuthorPosts
