Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 14, 2012 at 3:52 PM in reply to: Is it OK to hire an unlicensed handyman? Any issue with liability? Insurance? #745745June 14, 2012 at 3:50 PM in reply to: Is it OK to hire an unlicensed handyman? Any issue with liability? Insurance? #745744
UCGal
ParticipantI agree with both flu and AN.
Hiring a licensed contractor means you have a couple of protections if they take your money and run: the contract, and their bond. And they have to have current insurance.
For painting, I could see hiring an unlicensed person. But I would make sure that I had insurance to cover myself in case they got hurt on my property. I would also be present… I’m not a fan of leaving strangers inside my home when I’m not there. Licensed or not.
Does the $900 include paint, drop clothes, brushes, etc. Does the $150/day include any of that? Did you get an estimate on time? If the handyman works slow, shows up late, leaves early – it might cost you more.
Personally – I’d kill a weekend and do it myself. I’ve got the paint stained clothes all ready to go. Tell some friends to come over with grubby clothes and offer them beer/pizza when the jobs done. Crank up the tunes and have fun.
June 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM in reply to: OT: Indiana First State to Allow Citizens to Shoot Law Enforcement Officers #745734Participant[quote=sdduuuude]Does it apply to someone from the IRS trying to take my money ?[/quote]
That would probably fall under federal law.
But you could probably shoot the state/local tax collectors under this law.June 14, 2012 at 11:49 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745718Participant[quote=harvey]
My claim that shareholders are the root cause of private pension changes is based well-known historical failures of DB pension accounting (GM, USS, airlines, etc.)[Nit-picks have been disabled on this comment. This setting is now the default.][/quote]
You might want to take GM off that list.
As I cited in an article a few pages back the GM pension problem was NOT for the union workers. The workers pension was OVERfunded. The unfunded liabilities were due to the exec pensions – that were not funded at all.I’ll quote my previous post.
[quote=UCGal]Harvey/Pri – here’s an interesting article for you. Again – credible source (WSJ). It outlines how the corporations and media have painted a false picture of the source of pension underfunding.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115103062578188438.html
A snippet
To help explain its deep slump, General Motors Corp. GM -0.16% often cites “legacy costs,” including pensions for its giant U.S. work force. In its latest annual report, GM wrote: “Our extensive pension and [post-employment] obligations to retirees are a competitive disadvantage for us.” Early this year, GM announced it was ending pensions for 42,000 workers.
But there’s a twist to the auto maker’s pension situation: The pension plans for its rank-and-file U.S. workers are overstuffed with cash, containing about $9 billion more than is needed to meet their obligations for years to come.
Another of GM’s pension programs, however, saddles the company with a liability of $1.4 billion. These pensions are for its executives.
This is the pension squeeze companies aren’t talking about: Even as many reduce, freeze or eliminate pensions for workers — complaining of the costs — their executives are building up ever-bigger pensions, causing the companies’ financial obligations for them to balloon.
[/quote]
As for nit-picks. Whatever. You turn nitpicks on/and off. But when you restate points that have already been disputed, I’ll nit-pick it.
Participant[quote=ocrenter]The areas mentioned are mostly older homes.
In these cases, what ever construction defect from the builder that existed is probably less important than the maintenance and upgrades done by the homeowner.
As for newer homes outside of the areas mentioned, just stay away from Cornerstone, they are infamous for cutting corners.[/quote]
I agree with this.
I live in UC in a 1963 house. Until very recently it had the original 1963 kitchen. (((shudder))). Most of the neighbors updated decades ago – and are now looking to update again.The codes in the 60’s were different than now. My husband (a non-California-native and architect) was concerned about sheer wall strength, diagonal bracing, insulation, how it was strapped/bolted to the foundation. He retrofitted all of that over time. After the cedar fires he became more concerned about fire hardness… So we’ve also changed out the screens in the soffets, etc.
We had copper and cast iron waste pipes – the copper pipe failed (corrosion). So any material can fail. That’s part of home ownership.
I’m mentioning all this not to suggest the houses are crappy (or great) in UC… or Clairemont… or < insert neighbhood here >… I’m mentioning it to suggest it’s not the only issue. We’ve been happy with our house.
As sdr said – neighborhood/location etc is probably a bigger concern than construction.
June 14, 2012 at 9:25 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745712ParticipantSince requests have been made for solutions…
Here’s an article that has both statistics and a proposed solution.
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/04/28/3919043/defined-benefits-are-being-re.html
First some statistics:
Thirty years ago, 1 in 2 private-sector workers participated in a defined-benefit pension; at companies with at least 100 employees, 84 percent had one. Today, just 1 in 5 private workers has a pension.
Now Pri/Harvey would say the trend is because of shareholders… I would argue that BODs are not listening to shareholders as evidenced by the now mandated non-binding compensation for CEO votes. I don’t think any company has followed through with cutting compensation after a shareholder vote suggests this should be done.
And a proposed solution that does not mandate eliminating pensions altogether.. (Something that will for sure disappoint Pri/Harvey.)
Surely, there’s room for a middle ground, somewhere between no pension at all and one that’s unsustainable.
The stakes are high, because most workers desperately need another retirement vehicle, and most taxpayers won’t stomach another round of financial bailouts. What remains to be seen is whether the corporate world has the imagination to develop an alternative and the public side can muster the political courage for a fix.
There is cause for optimism. Around the country, advocates for working people and businesses are designing new pensions aimed at bolstering retirement without overwhelming employers. In February, at a Washington conference on “re-imagining pensions,” experts described adjustable plans, cash-balance funds and other hybrids.
The common theme was spreading the risk, so if plans didn’t deliver as hoped, the sponsor didn’t bear all the responsibility. In the adjustable model, for instance, a smaller benefit is guaranteed, based on a 5 percent annual return. If investments perform better, retirees get a bump; if not, employers don’t get a nasty surprise.
The beauty of this approach: Workers know the floor on payouts and employers know the ceiling. Everything else is gravy.
Sharing the risk is a good solution.
I’m sure the usual suspects will poke holes in it.
ParticipantAlexx Varga has two absentee judgements recorded against him/her. (Does two x’s make it feminine?)
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx?FileNum=20090467830&OldSearch=1
http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/services/grantorgrantee/search.aspx?FileNum=20090106970&OldSearch=1
There is a CA corp for Cornerstone Investments – registered to HOOSHIAR MAX SAEDI in Laguna Niguel.
There are 12 registries for corporations that have “Cornerstone” and “Investments” in their name. None based in San Diego.There’s a cancelled LLC based in San Diego: Cornerston Capital Investments (entity #200307710030)
There are 16 LLC’s registered in Ca with Cornerstone and Investments in their name.There are 422 LLCs registered with the word cornerstone in their name. There are 1113 corporations registered in CA with the words Cornerstone in their name. I did not click through all of them.
(Based on a corporation search on the secretary of State’s website: http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/ )
He’s not listed on the DRE state website as a licensed realtor. Seems like flipping houses, it would save commision to have a realtor involved.
June 13, 2012 at 2:32 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745619Participant[quote=harvey]Now that you mention it, I think it was you.
Do you only agree with Jerry that there is a problem, or do you also agree with his proposed solution?
http://gov.ca.gov/docs/Twelve_Point_Pension_Reform_10.27.11.pdf%5B/quote%5D
Not SK and hesitating to re-engage with you… but I also agree with Brown’s proposals.For one it acknowledges that 401(k)s put 100% of the risk on the employee – and he proposes a hybrid. I’m fine with that.
It also specifically addresses spiking and bases pension on regular pay (no overtime/bonuses in the calculations)…I joined this thread because you keep saying that everyone should be on 401ks – that pensions are bad. I tried to point out the risk of that.
This proposal acknowledges the risk of 401(k) only being entirely born by the employee and mitigates it by keeping defined benefit pensions as part of the plan.
Stepping back out.
ParticipantSo is svtechie an alter-ego of one of the regular posters?
Usually piggs are nicer…
I’ve been laughing at a lot of this thread… but if svtechie is a real person… perhaps we should be nicer.
June 12, 2012 at 10:03 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745538ParticipantYou are accusing me of basing everything on one book. That’s not the case. I suggested one book – but it’s not the only one I’ve read. It happens to be one full of documentation so I thought it was a good source… but I’m not going to bother giving you my reading list on the subject going back through the years – you’ll just find some other way to belittle my point of view. You’ll switch the topic and accuse me of something else.
Pensions have problems – but so do 401ks. That was why I entered this thread – to point out the riskiness of putting your entire retirement plan in the stock market.
But don’t bother responding. We will not agree.
I’m out. I’m no longer going to engage with you because I’m talking to a wall. A wall that sometimes has a mean streak.
June 12, 2012 at 9:36 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745534ParticipantHarvey/Pri – here’s an interesting article for you. Again – credible source (WSJ). It outlines how the corporations and media have painted a false picture of the source of pension underfunding.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115103062578188438.html
A snippet
To help explain its deep slump, General Motors Corp. GM -0.16% often cites “legacy costs,” including pensions for its giant U.S. work force. In its latest annual report, GM wrote: “Our extensive pension and [post-employment] obligations to retirees are a competitive disadvantage for us.” Early this year, GM announced it was ending pensions for 42,000 workers.
But there’s a twist to the auto maker’s pension situation: The pension plans for its rank-and-file U.S. workers are overstuffed with cash, containing about $9 billion more than is needed to meet their obligations for years to come.
Another of GM’s pension programs, however, saddles the company with a liability of $1.4 billion. These pensions are for its executives.
This is the pension squeeze companies aren’t talking about: Even as many reduce, freeze or eliminate pensions for workers — complaining of the costs — their executives are building up ever-bigger pensions, causing the companies’ financial obligations for them to balloon.
June 12, 2012 at 9:32 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745532Participant[quote=harvey]
So, I’ll take you up on the book recommendation if you can tell me this: Does it offer solutions? Because that’s what I would need to hear before my position changes.[/quote]It offers some solutions – in rolling back some of the regulatory changes.
But it also highlights how the system was gamed… how big corporate lobbying worked to change the regulations… How corporations gamed the legal system to sue pensioners – shopping states with more favorable courts, hoping pensioners would die before the case was heard. It was very effective. All of this is legal, but not right. (My employer is a case example – they miscalculated pension benefits for a whole class of their pensioners. Unfortunately for Motorola, the pensioner kept meticulous records and lived to his 90’s – so he survived the 15+ years of delay of his day in court. He prevailed for Motorola Pensioners.)
It highlights how the media has been gamed as well. How we’re told that pension obligations were bankrupting companies, even when some of the accused pensions were OVERFUNDED. (Often the unfunded executive deferred compensation was the issue, not the pensions governed by ERISA/PGBC).
If you want to blindly believe what you read in the media, ignoring the data… that’s your prerogative. Or you can read a well documented book by a creditable author. The facts might not change your opinion… but they might change some of your arguments.
Participant[quote=squat250]cactus make good pets. i understand when they stick me. i got too close. they need space.[/quote]
Favorite line from a Brave Combo song
“It takes a lot of practice
to polka with a cactus.”June 12, 2012 at 7:59 AM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745523ParticipantHarvey/Pri – I strongly reccomend you read a book called “Retirement Heist” by Ellen Schultz. It’s available at the public library.
She’s a former WSJ reporter who covered pension and retirement issues for years. She details exactly how corporations legally gamed the system to extract money from the private corporation pensions. What they did was legal – but not fiscally responsible knowing they had pension obligations. She outlines case after case of how corporations lobbied for relaxed funding standards, a relaxed regulatory environment that let them legally underfund pensions.
There’s a big difference between legal and right.
It’s a very good read with lots of data.
edited to add a link to the book on Amazon.
June 11, 2012 at 9:23 PM in reply to: My next door neighbor was a cop, still under 60, been retired for more than 5 yrs #745507Participant[quote=harvey][quote=UCGal]FYI – you can retire at 50 in the private sector too – just takes a lot of saving/planning/debt reduction and a Live Below Your Means lifestyle.[/quote]
This is another one of the odd “false equivalence” arguments we get in this debate.
If we follow the logic, we can claim that anyone can retire at any age. Just stop working, and you are “retired!”
The distinction – and the issue – deals with the income and and the risk that comes with retiring at a particular age.
I’m sure you’ll be pretty happy when you retire at 55, but also a little nervous.
What happens if you live longer than you expect, or your investments don’t yield the returns you planned?
Public-sector retirees don’t have any of those risks. In fact, you are bearing the risk for them. If their pension investments fall short, you will pay for it from the savings you scrimped through your Live Below Your Means lifestyle.
Why would we continue to promote such an unfair system?[/quote]
You are making a point that is important. The stock market has risk. But you and others promote putting our entire retirement eggs into the stock market. My parents generation were given pensions by their private employers. My first few jobs, in the 80s had pensions but I did not stay long enough to vest… enticed into job jumping to up my salary.401(k) plans didn’t come into existence till 1978. Now it’s the only game in town.
My employer chose to freeze my pension. They chose to under fund it. Rather than be mad that other people have a less risky vehicle for retirement income I choose to be mad that everyone has been forced to put their savings at risk in the stock market. I don’t begrudge those that have pensions… I’m pissed I no longer have that option.
Imagine if you were in your mid 60s with hopes of retiring… and it was late 2007….. would you be happier with a pension or an imploding 401(k) balance.
The unfairness is that corporations diverted funds from the pensions or eliminated them. The unfairness is that governments were not required to properly fund the pensions they agreed to pay.
But I suspect we will never agree on this. I like pensions, and want mine back. You like the riskiness of the market. I work with what I have… so, yeah, I Max out my 401(k)…. but I’d rather have my old pension unfrozen.
-
AuthorPosts
