Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
zk
Participant[quote=EconProf] Our high taxes, draconian regulations, skyrocketing utility bills are what make CA houses cost three times what the same house will cost in Utah, AZ, Texas, etc. [/quote]
Any 7th grader taking an economics class should be embarrassed to make such a ridiculous claim. You can’t seriously be an economics professor. If you really are an econ prof, and you taught any of that nonsense to your students, I feel very sorry for them that they had you for a professor.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Its not as easy as buying a house in FLA and claiming residence there. I have many friends going through this right now. You NEED to spend at least 183 days per year in FLA to claim residency and document it with plane tickets and credit card charges proving you were there. You wanna be a FLA resident? You have to actually live there then[/quote]
I have a friend in the same boat. He lives in his house near Tahoe for summer (and surrounding months) and in his house in Encinitas the rest of the year. He likes it, but I think if he could find a way around it, he might occasionally take advantage of it. If anybody is aware of some kind of trick or loophole, I’d be interested to hear it.
ParticipantI live in San Diego because I love the weather, the culture, the people, the ocean, the recreational opportunities, and that sort of thing. If I lived in Nevada, could I have a bigger house and pay no state tax? Sure. But I’d be living in Nevada. Or Texas or Florida or wherever.
If were somewhat poorer and my options were a studio condo in San Diego or a pretty nice house in Florida, I would still live in San Diego. If I were a lot poorer and my options were renting a room in a house in a not-so-good part of San Diego or a small condo in an inexpensive part of Florida, I would still live in San Diego. If I were trying to live on $800/month and my options were to be homeless in San Diego or to have meager accommodations in Florida…I’d move to Florida. Probably.
If I had $60M (or $30M), there’s no way in hell I would ever dream of living anywhere but San Diego. Or whichever city I would most want to live in. I guess what city they live in is less important to some people. But I think only the tiniest (and most foolish) minority of people worth $60M would decide what city they live in based on money.
What good is money if you can’t even live where you want? So you die with $30M instead of $60M. You’re going to live your life in your second- (or third- or fourth-) favorite state so that you can…what? Have a 30,000 sf house on the ocean (in Florida? Yuck. or Texas?) instead of a 10,000 sf house overlooking the Pacific? Have a bigger jet? Die with more money? None of those options comes remotely close to making any sense to me.
If you like those states better, sure. But to move there to save money when you have that much is unfathomable to me.
To do it “on principle,” as another poster suggested, would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. That’s taking stupid up a notch.
ParticipantThe attempted insurrection on January 6 would never have happened without right-wing media.
Tens of millions of Americans would not believe the lie that the election was stolen without right-wing media. They wouldn’t be living in an alternative-facts universe altogether without right-wing propaganda.
126 House Republicans wouldn’t have signed onto a brief supporting Texas’ lawsuit asking the Supreme Court to overturn the results of the 2020 election if their base hadn’t been whipped into a frenzy by right-wing propaganda.
There wouldn’t have been nearly so much support for state legislatures overturning election results if it weren’t for right-wing propagand.
donald trump would never even have been president without right-wing propaganda, and a couple hundred thousand fewer Americans would be dead right now.
donald trump is obviously a moron and a buffoon and entirely incompetent. And that’s why, despite the support of right-wing media, he wasn’t able to complete his attempts to subvert our system of checks and balances to the degree that he was able to steal this election, despite his best efforts.
But the next demagogue or the one after that might not be such an idiot. And, with the help of right-wing propaganda, demagogue with fascist desires who is more intelligent, competent, and charismatic than trump has a real shot at turning our country into what trump tried to turn it into.
If you still can’t see that right-wing media are destroying our country, you’re either a victim of right-wing propaganda, or you’re just not paying attention.
Participant[quote=Coronita]
Interesting. Maybe as you embark on this project you can increase your umbrella temporarily to say some higher limit, like $10mil. And then when you’re done with the project, bring it back down to whatever you currently have ….added protection. I always say it’s better to be over insured than under insured…[/quote]
Dang, that’s a really good idea.
Participant[quote=Coronita]
Would be curious what the insurance co says, so do share after you find out :)[/quote]The insurance company said that injuries to workers (which is my primary concern) would be covered under my homeowners/umbrella. She said that ideally they would have their own insurance and I would be secondary. That doesn’t look like it’s going to happen, but she did say that I’m covered.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Also curious as to costs to build. I really want to add 2/2 950 sq ft out back but it’s getting so expensive to build. If house keeps going up as I think it will I wont have a choice as market will be paying for it. Could PM if you prefer[/quote]
There is an existing cabana about 14’x18′. We will be enclosing it and adding to it, resulting in a 450sf adu with a kitchen, laundry closet/hookups, and bathroom. She quoted 38k, which is very, very cheap. Her previous work for us has come in on or under budget.
Part of the reason it’s so inexpensive is that part of the structure is already there (although it’s not enclosed). I’m really not sure how much cheaper that made it. I would also imagine that maybe her reduced insurance and bonding costs due to not being a licensed contractor have something to do with it. And maybe a desire to be competitive, too.
That cost includes the architect, the permits, and the construction, including flooring and fixtures.
It includes the minimum as far as fixtures, flooring, windows, doors, etc. If we want anything fancy, that will increase the cost.
Participant[quote=Coronita]Might be covered by an umbrella insurance policy. Don’t know, check with your underwriter of your umbrella if you have one..
umbrella insurance is pretty affordable: $5-10million policies go for about $1000..
you do need to maintain a minimum liability coverage across all your assets though.
It’s probably around $250k+ for each home and $250k+ for auto and watercrafts (at least that is the case for me)There are some exclusions or limits but none of those I think are relevant to this situation. The primary exclusions/limits these days is apparently liability insurance for slander and libel on social media…I’m not kidding…
I think my umbrella is through a company called RLI. It doesn’t have to be the same as your homeowners and auto, you just need to maintain the minimum liability on the rest of your insurance. I’m sure of that…because I have a hodgepodge of insurance…my primary is through one agency, my rentals through another, most of my cars are through allstate, but two are through Hagerty because they are now old enough to be classified as “classic cars” lol.. it’s a royal pain, but the reason is I have the best coverage this way for the lowest price
.. no issues with the umbrella coexisting with multiple insurance.[/quote]Thanks for the tips. I really appreciate it. I do have an umbrella policy; I’ll see what that covers.
Participant[quote=gzz]Ask your homeowners insurance agent if this is already covered or can be added.
Workplace accident insurance is obscenely expensive compared to the risk, so you could also just self insure (ie not worry about it).[/quote]
Thanks, gzz. I appreciate the ideas.
“self insure (ie not worry about it)”
Never heard it put that way. I like it.
Participant[quote=svelte] If you’re truly a strong performer, you’ll eventually find a place that will let you excel if you keep looking for it.
[/quote]
Totally agree. Some people just have great persistence, drive, energy, people skills, creativity, intelligence, etc, and are bound to end up doing well. But if you’re an average (or below) performer (which, by definition, at least half the people are (somewhat more if you count the rather large bunch toward the middle of any bell curve as “average”)), I think the kinds of questions being asked here are more important.
I say this not to be contrary but to point out that, while truly strong performers will most likely end up doing well (if they keep looking for a place that will let them excel), for most people finding a good landing spot is somewhat harder and will probably require more…I don’t know, planning, preparation, searching, knowledge, wisdom etc. Or maybe it will just require more analysis of what their strengths are. I don’t really know what it requires; I wish I did. But it seems like it would require more of it for average people than for truly strong performers.
ParticipantI was an air traffic controller for 35 years. I very highly recommend that as a career path for anyone who has the aptitude.
It’s a bit hard to tell whether a person has the aptitude or not without giving it try. But if a person is intelligent and quick-thinking, that’s a very good start. By quick thinking, I don’t mean witty or even good on his feet (in conversation). I mean just being a fast thinker. Flexibility (the willingness to change the plan) is also very important.
With a BS degree he is qualified to apply. No specific training or education is required to apply. Although if he does get the job, I’d recommend learning as much as he can about flying and aviation in general (most applicants don’t do that, but they should). Open bids come out every so often. The last one was about 2 or 3 years ago, I think, so the next one might be soon. They have in the past gone a decade between open bids, so if he’s interested, be sure to jump on the first bid that comes out.
There is a period of training in Oklahoma City, then on-the-job training at an actual facility. If he doesn’t have the aptitude, he will probably fail one of those two training programs. (I say probably because some with very weak aptitude do make it through, unfortunately. If you don’t have the aptitude and you do make it through, you might not enjoy the job all that much.) If he fails then he’ll have to fall back on his degree.
The pay is very good (more than most college graduates), and the job security and pension are fantastic. You work with sharp, fun, and very interesting people. There is never work to take home. When your shift is over, you’re done. The work itself is very rewarding and, for me (and for the majority of controllers who are good at their job), extremely fun. I really, really loved it. If I had to do it over again, and my options didn’t include things like baseball player or internet billionaire, I’d pick the same career.
Feel free to ask me any questions here or via pm.
Participant[quote=svelte]
The misinformation is at a level I have never seen before. [/quote]
Or never noticed.
[quote=svelte][quote=zk]For a long time I’ve been saying that the right-wing media is destroying our country. This is what I’m talking about:
Republican voters, being human and therefore credulous and gullible, believe whatever they hear on Fox Propaganda (and Breitbart and the rest of the right-wing media). They support republicans and con man don no matter what they do, because Fox Propaganda tells them republicans and con man don are doing a great job no matter what they do.
As I’ve said before, I don’t think right-wing voters are more credulous than left-wing voters or anybody else. The difference is that there is a massive industry dedicated to right-wing propaganda.
Sure, the left has some propaganda available. But there are big differences between what’s available on the left and what’s available on the right. Mainly Fox Propaganda, but there is a lot more. Fox Propaganda is propaganda masquerading as real, hard, actual news. And it’s the go-to “news” outlet of tens of millions of Americans. The left has nothing like that. [/quote]
The more that things change, the more they stay the same.
This is nothing new. It has been around well over 100 years and is a part of what made William Randolph Hearst rich…or more accurately what kept him rich. Only a lot of it was Democratic back then. Ever hear of Yellow Journalism?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
“Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers.[1] Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering or sensationalism”
Hmmm…sounds very familiar.
“The term was coined in the mid-1890s to characterize the sensational journalism that used some yellow ink in the circulation war between Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World and William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal. The battle peaked from 1895 to about 1898, and historical usage often refers specifically to this period. Both papers were accused by critics of sensationalizing the news in order to drive up circulation, although the newspapers did serious reporting as well. An English magazine in 1898 noted, “All American journalism is not ‘yellow’, though all strictly ‘up-to-date’ yellow journalism is American!”
As I said, the more that things change, the more they stay the same.
Take a chill pill. The sun will come up tomorrow. And 100 years from now, our decendants will be complaining that the Thought Permeating Devices (TPDs) are filling our heads with political propaganda from the newly formed SpaceCadet party. TPDs having replaced the internet of the early 2000s, which replaced the newspapers of the 1900s…[/quote]
Has it been around a hundred years? Or is it at a never-before-seen level?
What they’re doing to Kamala is no different from what they’ve been doing to Hillary for the past 20 years.
Participantscaredy using a bunch of caps. Must be serious.
ParticipantThere are so many kinds of smart and so many kinds of stupid. And maybe certain kinds of smart and stupid are more common in men and certain kinds are more common in women.
In most species males and females have different roles as a result of natural selection. There is absolutely no reason to think that humans are any different.
In some species, males spend a lot of time trying to attract mates where females spend a lot of time caring for offspring. Those males don’t do that because they’ve come up with logical reasons for it. And the females aren’t thinking, “why does Jim get to fly around strutting his stuff all day while I’m stuck at home slaving over these screeching brats?” They do their thing because that’s what their instincts tell them to do.
I’m not saying that these are the roles that humans naturally have, and I’m definitely not saying that humans need to behave this way. My point is that nature gave male humans and female humans different roles. And nature did that by giving the male of the species different instincts than the female of the species. Male brains work a little differently from female brains, because those differences were selected by nature for optimal survival of the species.
No matter how much some of us would like there to be no difference between our brains, that just isn’t the case. None of this is to say that we can’t have a society that gives males and females equal opportunity or equal treatment. We can and, in my opinion, we should.
While men and women in general are different, it’s not a binary situation, and there is some overlap. So we can’t judge any individual by their sex. But we can generalize. And, if we want to understand the human condition, I think we must.
-
AuthorPosts