|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on May 19, 2009 5:26:59 GMT -6
Unfortunately, Jakes decorating style forced box makers to add a disclaimer to their product... For one thing, don't waste your money on real furniture. Cinder blocks and old boards make fine shelves, sofas, and tables. And you can generally get them for free from construction sites if you don't mind shopping at night. If you want to put on airs, though, you can always use old bench-style car seats for living room furniture.
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 19, 2009 6:16:11 GMT -6
I asked if I could take a left over coffee table from a HUD apartment last week. I have it up on a hill next to a bench where I enjoy the view of the mountains over the Hudson. Why let the table good to waste? It looks like outdoor furniture anyway. (now that the sun and rain have been beating on it.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on May 19, 2009 7:02:12 GMT -6
I should not single out New York City. I find much of the the northeast corridor to be much the same as far as cost of living. Example: You can drive from here to Virginia on excellent roads without seeing one tollbooth. After that, they are every few miles all the way to New England. Where's the money going? Are the other taxes any lower? No way.
IMHO, Manhattan's high costs are part institutional inefficiency, part market forces driving up the cost of very limited space.
The Northeast doesn't have a monopoly on this either. California is a good example of the public employee unions eating the state out of house and home IMO.
It is likely that one cannot start to understand all the whys and wherefores of NYC without having set up house there for a while. It is probably also true that if you have spent your life there, you assume that everywhere has rent controls and has to pay $125,000 a year for school janitors. If I were to read from a credible source that in another major metro area, the money would go over twice as far, and they had good infrastructure and public services, I would think it a valid question to at least ask why the difference. If the answer is that you are getting some perk for the money that you find to be worth it, that is a good answer. There are a lot of bad answers too.
A friend runs a construction company in the NYC metro area. I sat down with her and compared costs to determine why the same construction that cost $55 a foot in Texas was $150 in suburban NYC. Some of the extra costs in NY:
1) The permitting officer expects something under the table for about 3% for say a $50,000 remodel. In Texas, he would be arrested by Friday and spend a couple of years in prison. 2) If you are working outside your union local, some guy from the local has to sit at your job drawing $25-30 an hour. He does no work and reads the paper.
I suppose that if you don't know anything else, this seems normal.
I can see how I would stay in an area with this kind of dead weight if I were fifty and had lived there all my life and my family was there. If I were 22 and ambitious, it would be time to move on. JMHO.
|
|
|
Post by Exildo Wonsetler Briggs III on May 19, 2009 7:15:42 GMT -6
Tex, I agree. My trusty real estate agent tells me that people used to leave for the south and come back (for various reasons) now they don't come back. Damn Yankees!! Stinking up the South with their shit . . . I wish *someone* would send them home! ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on May 19, 2009 7:19:57 GMT -6
... and the IQ of the general population in both regions increases ;D
|
|
|
Post by Christinko on May 19, 2009 8:22:14 GMT -6
Whew, you guys pay a lot to live and go to work!
And yes, Zilla, I felt zero compassion for that family who did not save, esp. since kids were involved. I believe that parenting takes more planning than that.
Now if he had been earning the paltry sum that I earned when I was working 90 hours a week in my 30s, and not living high on the hog, then I'd feel more sympathy. Seems to me that many people do not live within their means.
I don't have high living costs so I have lots of discretionary income...and having had a high level of savings during my life, I've always had a cushion for any emergencies or extravagances.
Just FYI--the cost of living in my 2-bedroom, 1450 sq ft townhouse in DuPage County (just 35 min. west of the center of Chicago) is only $800/month, which includes RE Tax ($233), utilities ($122), insur. ($40), mortgage ($233), and monthly assessment ($171). Phone lines are another $60. I don't do cable since I haven't watched TV since 1986.
When I was working my butt off in my 20s and 30s, saving up a storm, I took many fewer vacations. I was almost as tight as Jake, in fact. I was preparing to be extravagant in my 40s and beyond on purpose.
When I was a teenager I sat on my bed with a calculator--taking into account avg inflation and realistic interest rates on various investments, I figured out what I'd need.
Granted, I didn't count on this huge downturn, but I'm still covered for the basics AND I'm getting more work these days and coming out of semi-retirement for a few years so I can re-stockpile my savings.
I'm still tired of wah-wahs who didn't plan AT ALL. Basic math isn't that hard.
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 19, 2009 11:34:43 GMT -6
No wonder 103 is reasonable money to you. I haven't lived at that cost level since 1986. We had a co-op and the maintenance was right about $800. But we did have cable, that's where I learned all those good sex moves from Ron Jeremy, Ginger Lynn and Nina Hartley. We rarely rent porn any more, now I garden. ;D ;D
|
|
christinko not logged in
Guest
|
Post by christinko not logged in on May 19, 2009 13:46:08 GMT -6
I think we could learn a lot from cucumbers and ripe tomatoes. Grin!
|
|
|
Post by bigdog8088 on May 19, 2009 18:47:21 GMT -6
Chris..You can critize all you want...Until you raise a Family..You have no Idea what it takes. KIDS are expensive.
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on May 19, 2009 19:27:14 GMT -6
We rarely rent porn any more, now I garden. ;D ;D Gary you could be on to something new. Gardening Porn. ;D ;D ;D Joe.
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 19, 2009 19:29:35 GMT -6
Today the weather broke for real, I'm ready!
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on May 20, 2009 6:33:59 GMT -6
Chris..You can critize all you want...Until you raise a Family..You have no Idea what it takes. KIDS are expensive. Right that... latest estimates are over a quarter million to get a kid (ONE KID) to age 17. That doesnt include college. Link
|
|
|
Post by Irish Stu on May 20, 2009 7:06:58 GMT -6
Chris..You can critize all you want...Until you raise a Family..You have no Idea what it takes. KIDS are expensive. Right that... latest estimates are over a quarter million to get a kid (ONE KID) to age 17. That doesnt include college. LinkIs that all? It feels like a lot more that that!! Chris, as bigdog says, it is easy to criticise, but if you go back to my previous post you will see just some of the many reasons why perhaps one person, or even a couple, can live frugally, but with children it is much, much harder. On what I have earned during the years I was married I could have lived like a king if I had been single, and saved plenty of money, but with two children to support, like many families, we just about got by. And you simply cannot save what you don't have. Simon
|
|
|
Post by Tex on May 20, 2009 7:53:55 GMT -6
Saving was always a very high priority for me since I was in my teens. Even when I was going through some very hard times a couple of decades back, I would work an extra hour a day rather than not save some money. It is in my hard wiring.
The nature of the business in which I engage is such that there are huge ups and downs in income and having a cushion and living well below my means were the best ways that I could devise to deal with the variations without creating chaos in my personal life.
It was hardest when my children were in private school here. I drove an old truck and lived in a shitty little house but kept my finances in order, putting scarce cash to work buying distressed assets. Some of the cunt mothers at my sons' school were the worst during this time. I can't say that I don't derive some devilish pleasure into running into some of these ladies now that the tables have turned. Beyond that, I don't want anything to do with them. My friends are the friends who were with me when I was down.
The first $1,000 that I saved was the hardest. Likewise with the first $10,000, etc. and it got easier after that. Saving is hardest when you don't have much but one advantage is that you usually can invest the money quite well at no risk just by paying off high interest debt.
Edited to add: You really have to swim against the current to save money today. We are constantly bombarded with messages both overt and subtle urging us to spend more. By saving, I'm not speaking of ratholing cash so much as amassing capital. My latest investment is a lake house with a rental on Lake Travis (Austin).
|
|
|
Post by DT on May 20, 2009 22:58:45 GMT -6
Youse two are a low percentage of folks that have made savings a priorty at an early age. In reality most folks don't.
|
|
|
Post by Christinko on May 21, 2009 17:24:50 GMT -6
DT. apparently Tex and I ARE different.
What I said earlier in this thread still stands though as my opinion. Saving $ and planning for the future represents one important aspect of good parenting to me.
Yes, having kids is pricey. But people don't HAVE to live paycheck to paycheck pretty much unless you are making min. wage. This particular couple spent unwisely and didn't save (in my opinion). My taxes ended up paying for their judgment call.
When I have a bad spell (like now when clients aren't hiring so much), I don't get freebies from the gov't since I have too much in savings to receive anything, even though I too have paid taxes for years.
Basically, this situation says to me: Don't save! Spend to the hilt! Uncle Sam (taxpayers) will bail your sorry ass out.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on May 21, 2009 18:51:01 GMT -6
Unfortunately, it says that to many people. And that is a bad way to run a society.......Jake
|
|
|
Post by Irish Eyes on May 21, 2009 19:07:00 GMT -6
DT. apparently Tex and I ARE different. What I said earlier in this thread still stands though as my opinion. Saving $ and planning for the future represents one important aspect of good parenting to me. Yes, having kids is pricey. But people don't HAVE to live paycheck to paycheck pretty much unless you are making min. wage. This particular couple spent unwisely and didn't save (in my opinion). My taxes ended up paying for their judgment call. When I have a bad spell (like now when clients aren't hiring so much), I don't get freebies from the gov't since I have too much in savings to receive anything, even though I too have paid taxes for years. Basically, this situation says to me: Don't save! Spend to the hilt! Uncle Sam (taxpayers) will bail your sorry ass out. I've been holding off on responding to this thread, but now I have to. First, I call BULLSHIT on the original post. Not bullshit on you Chris if you are simply repeating what you 'heard', but bullshit on this family, or their enabling newspaper or whatever you found this on. I would actually like to know where this came from and I will respond to them too. There is NO way to get foodstamps, or Medicaid, in SIX WEEKS. Unless they already had a special needs child who was already receiving Medicaid and Food Stamps (because, yes, high earners DO get government help to take care of their autistic or ADD kids - even millionaires)(BTW, YES, millionaires are able to put an imperfect child's inheritance into an irrevocable trust so that Medicaid will pay for their long-term care. But we don't talk about that here). But generally, BULLSHIT. Second, as to saving. Yes, saving is good. But sometimes milk or quarters for the laundrymat is more important. Actually, for a young family, milk and laundrymat money is way more frequently important than savings. I haven't made minimum wage since I was 15, and every apartment I had until I was 25 was either a converted garage, or a converted basement, or a converted shed - fine accomodations, but not excessive by any means. I didn't throw my spare ch-ch-change in a water bottle - I counted it out at the grocery store. And for Little League (bats, gloves, pads, uniforms, 50/50s, etc.). And the 10 gal aquarium. And school trips, and the circus. And the town fair. And a tux for prom (+ limo, corsage, prom bids, etc.). There's lots I could have said NO to, but I didn't, and don't think many others did either. And Tex, you used your spare money to buy distressed properties??? WTF??? I LIVED in distressed properties and paid $500/month for the privilege in 1988!! Admittedly, there are way more opportunities to pull oneself up by the bootstraps in Texas than in the NY metro area. I think most here will agree that marriage and kids came way before building a portfolio. Everyone pretty much agreed that it was tough, and expensive, but nobody has any regrets. You just get on with it. Heck, if everybody waited until they had "enough" money to raise a child, there wouldn't be anymore children. And, as you surely see now, saving "enough" is no guarantee. Finally, Chris, as to your complaints about YOUR tax dollars supporting this family, I call bullshit on that too. With your minimal income, you pay WAY less taxes than this family, or me, or pretty much anyone else on this board. And let me preempt the rallying cry of tax deductions for kids - it ain't all that!!! A couple thousand per kid - even if it was $10,000 per kid (which it ain't even close, but it's been some years so I don't remember), they're still paying more in taxes than you.
|
|
|
Post by Irish Eyes on May 21, 2009 21:04:13 GMT -6
This is what I mean by bloated. Perhaps there's a better word or phrase to use. (red tape?, excessive bureaucracy?) There's more parking directions taped to the pole. Gary, that might seem complicated to an out-of-towner, but it makes perfect sense to me. The picture of the broom on the top sign kind of explains the reason why - and it's a good reason, and it couldn't be done properly if cars were there. If they didn't set aside a time for street sweeping, it would be convenient for us to park in a filthy city. It's about keeping our city clean. The other sign says 2 hour parking until 7pm, which also makes sense because most apartment buildings' ground floor are businesses, that need parking. After they close, fine, park and go to sleep. But wake up in time to move your car to the other side of the street! Part and parcel of NYC living.
|
|
|
Post by Tex on May 21, 2009 22:15:12 GMT -6
IMHO, saving money is some fourth grade math and a lot of discipline. As for the distressed properties that I bought, I was living in a dump that was worse than any of them. Now life is mo bettah. Saving or not is a personal choice and is none of anyone's business until someone expects them to contribute. I would agree that Texas is easier for a bootstrap operation than NYC, but as much as the low taxes and business climate, it is that the established business people tend to throw business your way and cut you some slack if they see you working hard and late.
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 21, 2009 22:33:05 GMT -6
I don't know if the signs are complicated or not but it's an example of bloat in my opinion so I posted the photo trying to make a point. The more rules and regulation, the more costly in time and money, to me that's bloat.
New York has this problem because of it population size and I imagine some of it is necessary and some of it is effective. Although Donald Trump came to the rescue years ago as the city stumbled over itself in regulation while trying to rebuild Wollman rink. Trump came in and rebuilt it in record time and on budget. According to the Donald himself.
|
|
|
Post by Irish Stu on May 22, 2009 8:31:57 GMT -6
Irish, I had a feeling you hadn't completely deserted us.
Simon
|
|
|
Post by Exildo Wonsetler Briggs III on May 22, 2009 20:52:48 GMT -6
Gary, that might seem complicated to an out-of-towner, but it makes perfect sense to me. The picture of the broom on the top sign kind of explains the reason why - and it's a good reason, and it couldn't be done properly if cars were there. If they didn't set aside a time for street sweeping, it would be convenient for us to park in a filthy city. Funny. Where I grew up there WAS no street cleaning. Then again, we didn't throw our shit all over expecting someone else to clean it up. One of those differences between the North and the South I guess. ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 23, 2009 6:10:22 GMT -6
Actually, it's the overwhelming "people volume" that necessitates the need for street cleaning. Out here in the suburbs there isn't that much litter and I'd call it typical, just like any other bedroom community. AND as a Yankee , I despise seeing people through stuff on the ground, anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on May 23, 2009 10:57:22 GMT -6
Next to the idiocy that is the penny, my biggest peeve in life are smokers who regard the world as their ashtray and flick the cig butts out onto the road, parking lot, etc. Street cleaning could be cut down to a small fraction of what it is if those people would use the ashtray in their car (and NOT dump that out in parking lots or at stop lights)
|
|
|
Post by innit Geezer on May 23, 2009 12:55:39 GMT -6
You can imagine Anita's relief that she has nothing to do with any collateral damage from cigarettes anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Merlot Joe on May 23, 2009 18:01:31 GMT -6
Next to the idiocy that is the penny, my biggest peeve in life are smokers who regard the world as their ashtray and flick the cig butts out onto the road, parking lot, etc. Street cleaning could be cut down to a small fraction of what it is if those people would use the ashtray in their car (and NOT dump that out in parking lots or at stop lights) Add another $1.00 tax to each pack just to clean the streets of AmericaAlos another $1.00 per cigar (Joe trying to piss Jake off ;D ;D) Joe
|
|
|
Post by Irish Eyes on May 23, 2009 19:31:10 GMT -6
Next to the idiocy that is the penny, my biggest peeve in life are smokers who regard the world as their ashtray and flick the cig butts out onto the road, parking lot, etc. Street cleaning could be cut down to a small fraction of what it is if those people would use the ashtray in their car (and NOT dump that out in parking lots or at stop lights) I think most of NYC's litter is fast food wrappers. Actually, check out any highway - mostly fast food wrappers and bottles and cans. I smoke, and used to be guilty of the butt toss. What I do now is break off the lit end, which is bio-degradable and will probably be gone in a day, and stash the filter in a pocket or car ashtray. (Putting the cigarette out in the car ashtray is, IMHO, what makes the car stink).
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Jake on May 24, 2009 0:40:31 GMT -6
Hey, I dispose of my cigar butts appropriately! Don't need no extra dollar tax. And even if I didn't, a cigar is nothing but LEAVES, which the ground is full of already.......Jake
|
|
|
Post by Ardbeg... innit on May 24, 2009 4:58:21 GMT -6
Hey, I dispose of my cigar butts appropriately! Don't need no extra dollar tax. And even if I didn't, a cigar is nothing but LEAVES, which the ground is full of already.......Jake Very true, cigarette filters, however, are synthetic and take about 20 years to break down. They arent as visible as fast food wrappers/containers, but if you walk along any rural highway they are there, thousands per mile.
|
|