[temeculaguy]

If I was a celeb, I’d do the same thing, my hat is off to Seth. For a while many of us have talked about how being personally financially conservative is the new black. In the coming years it will outcool the green movement, seth is wise to pioneer it in the media. As far as anectdotal stories from the frontline (since many of my piggy brothers and sisters are married or shut ins, I will provide them) I can honestly say that underindulgence is all the rage in the singles scene, especially the middle aged scene. Two years ago, I was constantly apologizing for my mediocre ride and rental housing, I pondered a more age appropriate sled, at least a 5 series, probably a 7 series since I had broken 40, luckily cooler heads prevailed. Much to my suprise, the paid off sled and the lack of revolving debt or an upside down mortgage has become cool once again and I don’t see this trend reversing anytime soon. Living within your means is now sexy.

The dude rolling on 22″ rims with the notice of default in the mailbox, is now the one sitting at home wondering where those implants he paid for went. And the meek shall inherit the earth.

[temeculaguy]

If I was a celeb, I’d do the same thing, my hat is off to Seth. For a while many of us have talked about how being personally financially conservative is the new black. In the coming years it will outcool the green movement, seth is wise to pioneer it in the media. As far as anectdotal stories from the frontline (since many of my piggy brothers and sisters are married or shut ins, I will provide them) I can honestly say that underindulgence is all the rage in the singles scene, especially the middle aged scene. Two years ago, I was constantly apologizing for my mediocre ride and rental housing, I pondered a more age appropriate sled, at least a 5 series, probably a 7 series since I had broken 40, luckily cooler heads prevailed. Much to my suprise, the paid off sled and the lack of revolving debt or an upside down mortgage has become cool once again and I don’t see this trend reversing anytime soon. Living within your means is now sexy.

The dude rolling on 22″ rims with the notice of default in the mailbox, is now the one sitting at home wondering where those implants he paid for went. And the meek shall inherit the earth.

[temeculaguy]

If I was a celeb, I’d do the same thing, my hat is off to Seth. For a while many of us have talked about how being personally financially conservative is the new black. In the coming years it will outcool the green movement, seth is wise to pioneer it in the media. As far as anectdotal stories from the frontline (since many of my piggy brothers and sisters are married or shut ins, I will provide them) I can honestly say that underindulgence is all the rage in the singles scene, especially the middle aged scene. Two years ago, I was constantly apologizing for my mediocre ride and rental housing, I pondered a more age appropriate sled, at least a 5 series, probably a 7 series since I had broken 40, luckily cooler heads prevailed. Much to my suprise, the paid off sled and the lack of revolving debt or an upside down mortgage has become cool once again and I don’t see this trend reversing anytime soon. Living within your means is now sexy.

The dude rolling on 22″ rims with the notice of default in the mailbox, is now the one sitting at home wondering where those implants he paid for went. And the meek shall inherit the earth.

[temeculaguy]

If I was a celeb, I’d do the same thing, my hat is off to Seth. For a while many of us have talked about how being personally financially conservative is the new black. In the coming years it will outcool the green movement, seth is wise to pioneer it in the media. As far as anectdotal stories from the frontline (since many of my piggy brothers and sisters are married or shut ins, I will provide them) I can honestly say that underindulgence is all the rage in the singles scene, especially the middle aged scene. Two years ago, I was constantly apologizing for my mediocre ride and rental housing, I pondered a more age appropriate sled, at least a 5 series, probably a 7 series since I had broken 40, luckily cooler heads prevailed. Much to my suprise, the paid off sled and the lack of revolving debt or an upside down mortgage has become cool once again and I don’t see this trend reversing anytime soon. Living within your means is now sexy.

The dude rolling on 22″ rims with the notice of default in the mailbox, is now the one sitting at home wondering where those implants he paid for went. And the meek shall inherit the earth.

[temeculaguy]

5yes, I appreciate what you do, I am eternally grateful, my kids are a product of your work and they are already smarter than me. I also live where I do based in large part on the work you and your colleages do. As I mentioned before, attacking your compensation is off point, the focus should be on the benefactor of your labor. If you were overcompensated, then there would be a huge line to be a teacher, people only scrutinize when their industry is having a bad time, three years ago there wasn’t a peep. It’s a tortoise/hare career decision, some years it’s good to have steady work and in others it sucks that everyone else is making big bucks. If anyone wants to complain about someone’s compensation, then go be one. I laughed at the complaints about the prison guard salaries, fine, I’m sure they’ll hire you, knock yourself out. The most under paid job in the world is the guy who pumps the poop out of the porta potties and septic tanks, if that guy made more money than me, I’m fine with it, cause i don’t want to do that.

DWCAP, sorry I screwed with your head for two days.

Let’s look at making babies and education, but not at what teachers make. Why is it that the more kids you have the more tax deductions you get (meaning the less you pay) and the more you cost the system. How does anyone not see that fundamental flaw and what other system works that way? If I order more food at a restaraunt than you, is my tab lower. If I drive a car that gets worse milege, do I pay less per gallon, If i use more electricity than you, should my rate per kw be lower. But if I stick more kids in school than you, I get money back, why is there an incentive to to be inefficient and cause a net loss, shouldn’t it be the opposite. I still don’t have the answer, I’ve tried to think up a bifurcated education and health care system, where you get services based on how much you have paid in taxes, but I get lost in the design and the result, it feels unamerican to create a caste system.

I still keep going back to controlling procreation through regulation, I keep going back to the water supply birth control thing, having tests for prospective parents and a qualification system like qualifying for a mortgage, you can’t buy three houses because you can’t afford it so you can’t have three kids until you can afford it, because the rest of us are sick of paying the freight, but then it feels all science fictiony and weird, plus the way european amd some asian countries handle socialized medicine has a “logan’s run” feel to it, after a certain age they will help with pain control but they won’t fix much because they’ve done a cost benefit analysis, it makes sense but doesn’t make me feel good.

The Lakers last minute loss and trying to solve the problems in society are just too much for me, I’m gonna have to drink and play golf all weekend, just to clear my head.

[temeculaguy]

5yes, I appreciate what you do, I am eternally grateful, my kids are a product of your work and they are already smarter than me. I also live where I do based in large part on the work you and your colleages do. As I mentioned before, attacking your compensation is off point, the focus should be on the benefactor of your labor. If you were overcompensated, then there would be a huge line to be a teacher, people only scrutinize when their industry is having a bad time, three years ago there wasn’t a peep. It’s a tortoise/hare career decision, some years it’s good to have steady work and in others it sucks that everyone else is making big bucks. If anyone wants to complain about someone’s compensation, then go be one. I laughed at the complaints about the prison guard salaries, fine, I’m sure they’ll hire you, knock yourself out. The most under paid job in the world is the guy who pumps the poop out of the porta potties and septic tanks, if that guy made more money than me, I’m fine with it, cause i don’t want to do that.

DWCAP, sorry I screwed with your head for two days.

Let’s look at making babies and education, but not at what teachers make. Why is it that the more kids you have the more tax deductions you get (meaning the less you pay) and the more you cost the system. How does anyone not see that fundamental flaw and what other system works that way? If I order more food at a restaraunt than you, is my tab lower. If I drive a car that gets worse milege, do I pay less per gallon, If i use more electricity than you, should my rate per kw be lower. But if I stick more kids in school than you, I get money back, why is there an incentive to to be inefficient and cause a net loss, shouldn’t it be the opposite. I still don’t have the answer, I’ve tried to think up a bifurcated education and health care system, where you get services based on how much you have paid in taxes, but I get lost in the design and the result, it feels unamerican to create a caste system.

I still keep going back to controlling procreation through regulation, I keep going back to the water supply birth control thing, having tests for prospective parents and a qualification system like qualifying for a mortgage, you can’t buy three houses because you can’t afford it so you can’t have three kids until you can afford it, because the rest of us are sick of paying the freight, but then it feels all science fictiony and weird, plus the way european amd some asian countries handle socialized medicine has a “logan’s run” feel to it, after a certain age they will help with pain control but they won’t fix much because they’ve done a cost benefit analysis, it makes sense but doesn’t make me feel good.

The Lakers last minute loss and trying to solve the problems in society are just too much for me, I’m gonna have to drink and play golf all weekend, just to clear my head.

[temeculaguy]

5yes, I appreciate what you do, I am eternally grateful, my kids are a product of your work and they are already smarter than me. I also live where I do based in large part on the work you and your colleages do. As I mentioned before, attacking your compensation is off point, the focus should be on the benefactor of your labor. If you were overcompensated, then there would be a huge line to be a teacher, people only scrutinize when their industry is having a bad time, three years ago there wasn’t a peep. It’s a tortoise/hare career decision, some years it’s good to have steady work and in others it sucks that everyone else is making big bucks. If anyone wants to complain about someone’s compensation, then go be one. I laughed at the complaints about the prison guard salaries, fine, I’m sure they’ll hire you, knock yourself out. The most under paid job in the world is the guy who pumps the poop out of the porta potties and septic tanks, if that guy made more money than me, I’m fine with it, cause i don’t want to do that.

DWCAP, sorry I screwed with your head for two days.

Let’s look at making babies and education, but not at what teachers make. Why is it that the more kids you have the more tax deductions you get (meaning the less you pay) and the more you cost the system. How does anyone not see that fundamental flaw and what other system works that way? If I order more food at a restaraunt than you, is my tab lower. If I drive a car that gets worse milege, do I pay less per gallon, If i use more electricity than you, should my rate per kw be lower. But if I stick more kids in school than you, I get money back, why is there an incentive to to be inefficient and cause a net loss, shouldn’t it be the opposite. I still don’t have the answer, I’ve tried to think up a bifurcated education and health care system, where you get services based on how much you have paid in taxes, but I get lost in the design and the result, it feels unamerican to create a caste system.

I still keep going back to controlling procreation through regulation, I keep going back to the water supply birth control thing, having tests for prospective parents and a qualification system like qualifying for a mortgage, you can’t buy three houses because you can’t afford it so you can’t have three kids until you can afford it, because the rest of us are sick of paying the freight, but then it feels all science fictiony and weird, plus the way european amd some asian countries handle socialized medicine has a “logan’s run” feel to it, after a certain age they will help with pain control but they won’t fix much because they’ve done a cost benefit analysis, it makes sense but doesn’t make me feel good.

The Lakers last minute loss and trying to solve the problems in society are just too much for me, I’m gonna have to drink and play golf all weekend, just to clear my head.

[temeculaguy]

5yes, I appreciate what you do, I am eternally grateful, my kids are a product of your work and they are already smarter than me. I also live where I do based in large part on the work you and your colleages do. As I mentioned before, attacking your compensation is off point, the focus should be on the benefactor of your labor. If you were overcompensated, then there would be a huge line to be a teacher, people only scrutinize when their industry is having a bad time, three years ago there wasn’t a peep. It’s a tortoise/hare career decision, some years it’s good to have steady work and in others it sucks that everyone else is making big bucks. If anyone wants to complain about someone’s compensation, then go be one. I laughed at the complaints about the prison guard salaries, fine, I’m sure they’ll hire you, knock yourself out. The most under paid job in the world is the guy who pumps the poop out of the porta potties and septic tanks, if that guy made more money than me, I’m fine with it, cause i don’t want to do that.

DWCAP, sorry I screwed with your head for two days.

Let’s look at making babies and education, but not at what teachers make. Why is it that the more kids you have the more tax deductions you get (meaning the less you pay) and the more you cost the system. How does anyone not see that fundamental flaw and what other system works that way? If I order more food at a restaraunt than you, is my tab lower. If I drive a car that gets worse milege, do I pay less per gallon, If i use more electricity than you, should my rate per kw be lower. But if I stick more kids in school than you, I get money back, why is there an incentive to to be inefficient and cause a net loss, shouldn’t it be the opposite. I still don’t have the answer, I’ve tried to think up a bifurcated education and health care system, where you get services based on how much you have paid in taxes, but I get lost in the design and the result, it feels unamerican to create a caste system.

I still keep going back to controlling procreation through regulation, I keep going back to the water supply birth control thing, having tests for prospective parents and a qualification system like qualifying for a mortgage, you can’t buy three houses because you can’t afford it so you can’t have three kids until you can afford it, because the rest of us are sick of paying the freight, but then it feels all science fictiony and weird, plus the way european amd some asian countries handle socialized medicine has a “logan’s run” feel to it, after a certain age they will help with pain control but they won’t fix much because they’ve done a cost benefit analysis, it makes sense but doesn’t make me feel good.

The Lakers last minute loss and trying to solve the problems in society are just too much for me, I’m gonna have to drink and play golf all weekend, just to clear my head.

[temeculaguy]

5yes, I appreciate what you do, I am eternally grateful, my kids are a product of your work and they are already smarter than me. I also live where I do based in large part on the work you and your colleages do. As I mentioned before, attacking your compensation is off point, the focus should be on the benefactor of your labor. If you were overcompensated, then there would be a huge line to be a teacher, people only scrutinize when their industry is having a bad time, three years ago there wasn’t a peep. It’s a tortoise/hare career decision, some years it’s good to have steady work and in others it sucks that everyone else is making big bucks. If anyone wants to complain about someone’s compensation, then go be one. I laughed at the complaints about the prison guard salaries, fine, I’m sure they’ll hire you, knock yourself out. The most under paid job in the world is the guy who pumps the poop out of the porta potties and septic tanks, if that guy made more money than me, I’m fine with it, cause i don’t want to do that.

DWCAP, sorry I screwed with your head for two days.

Let’s look at making babies and education, but not at what teachers make. Why is it that the more kids you have the more tax deductions you get (meaning the less you pay) and the more you cost the system. How does anyone not see that fundamental flaw and what other system works that way? If I order more food at a restaraunt than you, is my tab lower. If I drive a car that gets worse milege, do I pay less per gallon, If i use more electricity than you, should my rate per kw be lower. But if I stick more kids in school than you, I get money back, why is there an incentive to to be inefficient and cause a net loss, shouldn’t it be the opposite. I still don’t have the answer, I’ve tried to think up a bifurcated education and health care system, where you get services based on how much you have paid in taxes, but I get lost in the design and the result, it feels unamerican to create a caste system.

I still keep going back to controlling procreation through regulation, I keep going back to the water supply birth control thing, having tests for prospective parents and a qualification system like qualifying for a mortgage, you can’t buy three houses because you can’t afford it so you can’t have three kids until you can afford it, because the rest of us are sick of paying the freight, but then it feels all science fictiony and weird, plus the way european amd some asian countries handle socialized medicine has a “logan’s run” feel to it, after a certain age they will help with pain control but they won’t fix much because they’ve done a cost benefit analysis, it makes sense but doesn’t make me feel good.

The Lakers last minute loss and trying to solve the problems in society are just too much for me, I’m gonna have to drink and play golf all weekend, just to clear my head.

[temeculaguy]

The lawsuit can cause all lenders to balk, not just fha. The prices have that built into them a little because it doesn’t allow those that live there to buy them even if they are cheaper than rent. I have a relative that couldn’t get financing with 40% down on a rental due to a condo lawsuit, that case it was about 100k for a 1200-1300 rental, so it would cash flow right away, they couldn’t get all the cash together in time and an investment group bought em up (there were a few in the complex at that price), certain investment groups love these litigation units, especially if the litigation isn’t that big of a deal. Rent neutral is a good sign, that is a good area to have a rental because of the many yuppie type jobs and demographics. I’m kinda suprised at the reaction of the piggies, the fundamental values and price assumptions made a year or two ago get reached and then some and people say they are overpriced, that 1999 nominal prices are now fair. So if they hit, let’s say 125k or 100k, I’ll be willing to bet a beer that someone posts that they should be 75k and don’t be a knife catcher. It’s a starter place that can be bought on a starter salary, I don’t like 1br rentals either, but it’s in an area that has a demographic that kinda likes them. After college I had a few buddies get jobs in utc and they were sick of having roommates, so they each rented a 1br in utc, right by work and knocked out a few years of working 70 hour weeks while establishing themselves in their career, close meant more than space to them at the time, after a few years, they moved. The lucky ones bought and when it was time to get a wife and a house in the burbs they sold and parlayed it into a sizable downpayment, the really lucky one kept his as a rental (which he now owes zero on, lucky bastard, I can say that because he’s my dumbest friend and also the richest, lucky bastard, damn). 20 years ago I thought they were nuts, now I’m green with envy sometimes.

[temeculaguy]

The lawsuit can cause all lenders to balk, not just fha. The prices have that built into them a little because it doesn’t allow those that live there to buy them even if they are cheaper than rent. I have a relative that couldn’t get financing with 40% down on a rental due to a condo lawsuit, that case it was about 100k for a 1200-1300 rental, so it would cash flow right away, they couldn’t get all the cash together in time and an investment group bought em up (there were a few in the complex at that price), certain investment groups love these litigation units, especially if the litigation isn’t that big of a deal. Rent neutral is a good sign, that is a good area to have a rental because of the many yuppie type jobs and demographics. I’m kinda suprised at the reaction of the piggies, the fundamental values and price assumptions made a year or two ago get reached and then some and people say they are overpriced, that 1999 nominal prices are now fair. So if they hit, let’s say 125k or 100k, I’ll be willing to bet a beer that someone posts that they should be 75k and don’t be a knife catcher. It’s a starter place that can be bought on a starter salary, I don’t like 1br rentals either, but it’s in an area that has a demographic that kinda likes them. After college I had a few buddies get jobs in utc and they were sick of having roommates, so they each rented a 1br in utc, right by work and knocked out a few years of working 70 hour weeks while establishing themselves in their career, close meant more than space to them at the time, after a few years, they moved. The lucky ones bought and when it was time to get a wife and a house in the burbs they sold and parlayed it into a sizable downpayment, the really lucky one kept his as a rental (which he now owes zero on, lucky bastard, I can say that because he’s my dumbest friend and also the richest, lucky bastard, damn). 20 years ago I thought they were nuts, now I’m green with envy sometimes.

[temeculaguy]

The lawsuit can cause all lenders to balk, not just fha. The prices have that built into them a little because it doesn’t allow those that live there to buy them even if they are cheaper than rent. I have a relative that couldn’t get financing with 40% down on a rental due to a condo lawsuit, that case it was about 100k for a 1200-1300 rental, so it would cash flow right away, they couldn’t get all the cash together in time and an investment group bought em up (there were a few in the complex at that price), certain investment groups love these litigation units, especially if the litigation isn’t that big of a deal. Rent neutral is a good sign, that is a good area to have a rental because of the many yuppie type jobs and demographics. I’m kinda suprised at the reaction of the piggies, the fundamental values and price assumptions made a year or two ago get reached and then some and people say they are overpriced, that 1999 nominal prices are now fair. So if they hit, let’s say 125k or 100k, I’ll be willing to bet a beer that someone posts that they should be 75k and don’t be a knife catcher. It’s a starter place that can be bought on a starter salary, I don’t like 1br rentals either, but it’s in an area that has a demographic that kinda likes them. After college I had a few buddies get jobs in utc and they were sick of having roommates, so they each rented a 1br in utc, right by work and knocked out a few years of working 70 hour weeks while establishing themselves in their career, close meant more than space to them at the time, after a few years, they moved. The lucky ones bought and when it was time to get a wife and a house in the burbs they sold and parlayed it into a sizable downpayment, the really lucky one kept his as a rental (which he now owes zero on, lucky bastard, I can say that because he’s my dumbest friend and also the richest, lucky bastard, damn). 20 years ago I thought they were nuts, now I’m green with envy sometimes.

[temeculaguy]

The lawsuit can cause all lenders to balk, not just fha. The prices have that built into them a little because it doesn’t allow those that live there to buy them even if they are cheaper than rent. I have a relative that couldn’t get financing with 40% down on a rental due to a condo lawsuit, that case it was about 100k for a 1200-1300 rental, so it would cash flow right away, they couldn’t get all the cash together in time and an investment group bought em up (there were a few in the complex at that price), certain investment groups love these litigation units, especially if the litigation isn’t that big of a deal. Rent neutral is a good sign, that is a good area to have a rental because of the many yuppie type jobs and demographics. I’m kinda suprised at the reaction of the piggies, the fundamental values and price assumptions made a year or two ago get reached and then some and people say they are overpriced, that 1999 nominal prices are now fair. So if they hit, let’s say 125k or 100k, I’ll be willing to bet a beer that someone posts that they should be 75k and don’t be a knife catcher. It’s a starter place that can be bought on a starter salary, I don’t like 1br rentals either, but it’s in an area that has a demographic that kinda likes them. After college I had a few buddies get jobs in utc and they were sick of having roommates, so they each rented a 1br in utc, right by work and knocked out a few years of working 70 hour weeks while establishing themselves in their career, close meant more than space to them at the time, after a few years, they moved. The lucky ones bought and when it was time to get a wife and a house in the burbs they sold and parlayed it into a sizable downpayment, the really lucky one kept his as a rental (which he now owes zero on, lucky bastard, I can say that because he’s my dumbest friend and also the richest, lucky bastard, damn). 20 years ago I thought they were nuts, now I’m green with envy sometimes.

[temeculaguy]

The lawsuit can cause all lenders to balk, not just fha. The prices have that built into them a little because it doesn’t allow those that live there to buy them even if they are cheaper than rent. I have a relative that couldn’t get financing with 40% down on a rental due to a condo lawsuit, that case it was about 100k for a 1200-1300 rental, so it would cash flow right away, they couldn’t get all the cash together in time and an investment group bought em up (there were a few in the complex at that price), certain investment groups love these litigation units, especially if the litigation isn’t that big of a deal. Rent neutral is a good sign, that is a good area to have a rental because of the many yuppie type jobs and demographics. I’m kinda suprised at the reaction of the piggies, the fundamental values and price assumptions made a year or two ago get reached and then some and people say they are overpriced, that 1999 nominal prices are now fair. So if they hit, let’s say 125k or 100k, I’ll be willing to bet a beer that someone posts that they should be 75k and don’t be a knife catcher. It’s a starter place that can be bought on a starter salary, I don’t like 1br rentals either, but it’s in an area that has a demographic that kinda likes them. After college I had a few buddies get jobs in utc and they were sick of having roommates, so they each rented a 1br in utc, right by work and knocked out a few years of working 70 hour weeks while establishing themselves in their career, close meant more than space to them at the time, after a few years, they moved. The lucky ones bought and when it was time to get a wife and a house in the burbs they sold and parlayed it into a sizable downpayment, the really lucky one kept his as a rental (which he now owes zero on, lucky bastard, I can say that because he’s my dumbest friend and also the richest, lucky bastard, damn). 20 years ago I thought they were nuts, now I’m green with envy sometimes.

[temeculaguy]

To envy the salary of a state employee is missing the point and the facts. Here is the budget.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf

If you close every court, every prison and get rid of every state employee and their pension, you won’t balance the budget.

70% of the budget goes to three things, k-12 education, higher education and health and human services (ie. welfare, medical for the poor).

At some point you need to to realize that prisons, cops, fireman, judges and everything else that pisses you off isn’t where the real money goes, it goes to poor people, sorry.

If you really want to solve the budget problem, put birth control chemicals in the water supply and only give the anti-dote to people who can prove they have health insurance and a certain income. Require parents of students in both k-12 (40% of the state budget) and higher education pay the full expense of their offspring’s education, no sliding scales, no freebies, pay to play, if you can’t afford them don’t have them. You may not agree but the poorer someone is, the more kids they have, and many get free money, more than the employees of the state when totaled up.

Take every pension away, fire them all and you still wont solve the problem. Socially it hurts to admit it, spiritually it hurts as well, but at some point you have to admit that you need to come up with a different system. A system that does not spend ten times the total lifetime taxes collected on a person’s education or health care. We are fooling oursleves to say that we are better. We give out too much free money, we refuse to let poor people die even if it costs us more in a week than we will collect from them in a lifetime.

I hate being the downer, but the OP mentioned “non salary cuts” because the state salaries is but a fraction of the expenditures, the state employee is anectdotal, it makes you feel good to attack it, but that is not where the fundamental problem lies.

And no I don’t have the answer, it hurts my heart as much as anyone to tell poor people that they can’t have that lifesaving medicine or surgery or that poor people can’t have a bunch of kids and send them all to college for free, feed them for free or that economic refugees can’t come here and fulfill a dream like my ancestors did, but you need to realize that the real money is going there, thank god I don’t have make these decisions now that there isn’t enough money to go around.

[Author]

Posts