We’ve never blamed anyone but ourselves (and tax hungry democrats) for any of our problems. [/quote]
Thats about the part where I stop paying attention. Its all the democrats, man. [/quote]
Yes, there is a systemic problem that needs to be fixed, government interference in people’s lives and choices. Also the lobbying for regulatory injustice, allowing large corporations and unions and special interest groups to eliminate the small business and family businesses, through regulations and tax code. we need to get business out of government and government out of business.
Yes, my wife decided she wanted to be home with the kids, we made adjustments, sold our house, before the market crash of course, bought an old farmhouse with some land and made some other changes to our budget and she can stay home with the kids. We sacrificed the luxuries other people want for what we want.
It is all about prioritization. [/quote]
Exactly. My secretary drives a nicer and newer car than I do. I haven’t had a car payment since the early 2000s, and every “car payment” goes into savings.
But look at the trends that have put so many people in those positions: wealth continues to consolidate to a smaller and smaller portion of the population.[/quote]
Agreed on this.
I don’t necessarily agree with this. I don’t most households are required to as a matter of fact. I think many are required to in order to keep up with the lifestyle they want.
I think a good number of households could downsize their consumption, go cheaper, abandon some luxuries and not have to have both parents work. I keep harping on this, but it’s such an easy symbol - look at the number of working-class and middle-class people who have smartphones. Smartphones, with expensive data plans. How many of them actually need a smartphone? Why wouldn’t a basic flip-phone with no data plan work?
That’s symbolic of the problem. I know plenty of families where only one parent works who drive modest cars, live in modest neighborhoods, and forego many luxuries that many now consider “needs”.
Take that up with teachers’ unions and the professoriate who haven’t justified their lavish income hikes in years (and who delegate the real work to undepaid adjunct professors).
See above - galloping inflation makes this necessary to a certain extent. But, on the other hand, students tend to take out way more than they actually need. Again, there needs to be accountability on both sides, and if high school weren’t such an inefficient provision of education, a number of jobs wouldn’t require a college education - they could take a well-educated high-school graduate and have them apprentice.
Good things - once the hangover wears off and people realize that the heady days of living beyond their means was never sustainable and the deleveraging that results, we’ll see a steadier, more balanced middle class.[/quote]
I’m just going to respond down here instead of interspercing with the previous posts.
Everybody keeps talking about cell phones. Ignoring that perhaps one large purchase was made for the phone (which was probably steeply discounted in exchange for the signing of a contract), you’re looking at how much for the typical plan? 60 dollars a month? Now consider what a cellphone provides: 24/7 emergency access (both for you and in the case you need to be contacted for an emergency, such as involving your child), access to triple-A or someone else if you break down, social connection (getting directions, setting up meetings), the ability to be contacted at any time (especially good if a prospective employer wants to call you back after an interview, or the job you already have needs to call you in or something). Now, call me crazy, but I don’t think paying 2 dollars a day for all those things is some lavish luxury. Driving a brand new car? Sure. Eating out every day? Sure. Blowing hundreds on collectable hobbies or designer clothes? Ok. But can we just back off the cellphones a bit?
The problem with college tuition is the Stafford loans. Its basic bad economic policy to give out high risk loans… yet the Stafford is designed to be a high risk loan - it’s insane.
But, while I do agree about highschool, I think plenty of jobs could do exactly that right now (hire people and give them on the job training). Instead, they’d rather take the guy with the english degree and end up having to train him anyway.
I disagree that good things would happen. I would expect trends would continue as they have been until it got to be too much on the middle class.
Ya know, apbt and thunder(pants), I think we actually slightly agree that a part of the problem is our consumer culture. Of course, I should be careful about bringing that up, lest I suggest you’d agree with my hippy anarchist opinions.
Everybody keeps talking about cell phones. Ignoring that perhaps one large purchase was made for the phone (which was probably steeply discounted in exchange for the signing of a contract), you’re looking at how much for the typical plan? 60 dollars a month? Now consider what a cellphone provides: 24/7 emergency access (both for you and in the case you need to be contacted for an emergency, such as involving your child), access to triple-A or someone else if you break down, social connection (getting directions, setting up meetings), the ability to be contacted at any time (especially good if a prospective employer wants to call you back after an interview, or the job you already have needs to call you in or something). Now, call me crazy, but I don’t think paying 2 dollars a day for all those things is some lavish luxury. Driving a brand new car? Sure. Eating out every day? Sure. Blowing hundreds on collectable hobbies or designer clothes? Ok. But can we just back off the cellphones a bit?[/quote]
Well, note carefully, I said smartphones, not cellphones. I don’t think that cellphones are much of a luxury these days - but look at the number of people who own smartphones - hi-tech, hi-expense phones and their data plans that can surf the web, utilize emails and texting, and have lots of “apps”.
I see legions of people with cutting-edge smartphones who simply don’t need them or their capabilities. Oh, they want them, but they don’t need them.
Stafford loans are high-risk loans? How do you mean, exactly?
And I’m generally not upset about that - in addition to having the benefits of traditional education (in theory, having better critical thinking skills, broader knowledge, etc.), a degree is a proof of your ability to accomplish and finish things, i.e., a college grad san see things through. It’s also decent proof of trainability.
That doesn’t mean a high-school grad isn’t those things - it’s just a college degree is better proof that you are.
But, there’s no good reason a high school education shouldn’t be proof of those things - unfortunately, because of the sorry state of education, it’s not. We need to spend a lot of time fixing this.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Ya know, apbt and thunder(pants), I think we actually slightly agree that a part of the problem is our consumer culture. Of course, I should be careful about bringing that up, lest I suggest you’d agree with my hippy anarchist opinions.
[/quote]
No I agree, I am not a hippy anarchist, but there is common ground. We live back in the woods, I operate our small family farm using the tools of permiculture and self sustainable farming. We are organic, produce most of our own food, I have timber and a wood furnace. I work for a large pharma company, but my goal is to pay everything off completely and be retired to the farm full time within the next 5 yrs. Pastured pork and free range beef are a good way to go for a small farm, and the produce we keep for us and the livestock.
Ya know, apbt and thunder(pants), I think we actually slightly agree that a part of the problem is our consumer culture. Of course, I should be careful about bringing that up, lest I suggest you’d agree with my hippy anarchist opinions. :)[/quote]
I am a ferocious critic of consumerism (properly understood), but, as part of that criticism, I lump it in the same family tree as the 1960s hedonism that operates by, in my mind, the exact same self-gratifying impulses.
So, I find myself at odds with a number of lefties and righties who, though they won’t admit it, are really just two sides of the same coin.
No I agree, I am not a hippy anarchist, but there is common ground. We live back in the woods, I operate our small family farm using the tools of permiculture and self sustainable farming. We are organic, produce most of our own food, I have timber and a wood furnace. I work for a large pharma company, but my goal is to pay everything off completely and be retired to the farm full time within the next 5 yrs. Pastured pork and free range beef are a good way to go for a small farm, and the produce we keep for us and the livestock. [/quote]
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Everybody keeps talking about cell phones. Ignoring that perhaps one large purchase was made for the phone (which was probably steeply discounted in exchange for the signing of a contract), you’re looking at how much for the typical plan? 60 dollars a month? Now consider what a cellphone provides: 24/7 emergency access (both for you and in the case you need to be contacted for an emergency, such as involving your child), access to triple-A or someone else if you break down, social connection (getting directions, setting up meetings), the ability to be contacted at any time (especially good if a prospective employer wants to call you back after an interview, or the job you already have needs to call you in or something). Now, call me crazy, but I don’t think paying 2 dollars a day for all those things is some lavish luxury. Driving a brand new car? Sure. Eating out every day? Sure. Blowing hundreds on collectable hobbies or designer clothes? Ok. But can we just back off the cellphones a bit?[/quote]
I can’t speak for everyone. But what I meant was smartphones with expensive ass data plans. I only very recently was able to upgrade beyond an old school flip phone. I chose to spend that money on health insurance (young, healthy, only needed emergency coverage). That’s what I was talking about. How many people protesting would give up their iPhone and data plans? Most won’t. But they’ll demand the government supplies ‘free’ healthcare. That’s where I have a problem. Don’t tell me you’re suffering when trading a WANT for a NEED would definitely ease your burden.
Everybody keeps talking about cell phones. Ignoring that perhaps one large purchase was made for the phone (which was probably steeply discounted in exchange for the signing of a contract), you’re looking at how much for the typical plan? 60 dollars a month? Now consider what a cellphone provides: 24/7 emergency access (both for you and in the case you need to be contacted for an emergency, such as involving your child), access to triple-A or someone else if you break down, social connection (getting directions, setting up meetings), the ability to be contacted at any time (especially good if a prospective employer wants to call you back after an interview, or the job you already have needs to call you in or something). Now, call me crazy, but I don’t think paying 2 dollars a day for all those things is some lavish luxury. Driving a brand new car? Sure. Eating out every day? Sure. Blowing hundreds on collectable hobbies or designer clothes? Ok. But can we just back off the cellphones a bit?[/quote]
Well, note carefully, I said smartphones, not cellphones. I don’t think that cellphones are much of a luxury these days - but look at the number of people who own smartphones - hi-tech, hi-expense phones and their data plans that can surf the web, utilize emails and texting, and have lots of “apps”.
I see legions of people with cutting-edge smartphones who simply don’t need them or their capabilities. Oh, they want them, but they don’t need them.
Stafford loans are high-risk loans? How do you mean, exactly?
And I’m generally not upset about that - in addition to having the benefits of traditional education (in theory, having better critical thinking skills, broader knowledge, etc.), a degree is a proof of your ability to accomplish and finish things, i.e., a college grad san see things through. It’s also decent proof of trainability.
That doesn’t mean a high-school grad isn’t those things - it’s just a college degree is better proof that you are.
But, there’s no good reason a high school education shouldn’t be proof of those things - unfortunately, because of the sorry state of education, it’s not. We need to spend a lot of time fixing this.[/quote]
“For instance, you’ll pay a total of $3,835.75 in the first two years with your new iPhone 3GS (16GB), or about $160 per month (and that’s excluding the monthly smorgasbord of taxes, fees, and surcharges you’ll pay, which vary from locale to locale). For a lot of folks, the monthly smartphone bill can be as big as, say, a car payment.”
Shit. That’s a good point about the smartphones. I didn’t realize they cost so much a month. I’ll happily concede that point.
Stafford loans are given to virtually everyone, in virtually any amount - isn’t that a high risk loan?
And again, I agree about highschool. However, you just made the case as to why it’s so vital for every young person to go to college and graduate as quickly as possible… which, of course, leads to them getting into massive amounts of debt. The game is set up so that if you don’t enter college directly from highschool, and graduate as quickly as possible, you’re at a huge disadvantage. So I just continue to shake my head at the posters who want to rail about people taking time to work and save up so they don’t have to take loans for college, or blasting them for being in student loan debt.
I remain a non-fan of the Occupy crowd, but I am very sympathetic to the sort of localist/decentralized talk that is cropping up here. Decentralized government, and yes, wealth.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
And again, I agree about highschool. However, you just made the case as to why it’s so vital for every young person to go to college and graduate as quickly as possible… which, of course, leads to them getting into massive amounts of debt. The game is set up so that if you don’t enter college directly from highschool, and graduate as quickly as possible, you’re at a huge disadvantage. So I just continue to shake my head at the posters who want to rail about people taking time to work and save up so they don’t have to take loans for college, or blasting them for being in student loan debt.
[/quote]
I don’t agree with this. I don’t think I’m going to be in any disadvantage. I’ll be 26 when I graduate and have a credential. But, in those six years I was working and saving, I volunteered in classrooms and at a daycare. More recently, I worked as a part time substitute teaching aid for special needs kids. Am currently trying to become a substitute teacher (which you can do in CA as ling as you’re in a program for you’re bachelor degree). I may be four years older than my fellow applicants, but I will have much more practical experience then the vast majority of them. And being debt free with good savings, I’ll be able to last much longer unemployed or underemployed.
Now, I’ll concede that this won’t work for everyone and every goal. But most people, and most goals, don’t need to go straight from high school to a four year university and get 80k in debt. Most people would be fine going to a community college for a couple years. Or taking a few years to work and save.
And if you don’t know what you want to do, go learn a skill/trade and get a good job getting your hands a little dirty while trying to figure it out. Don’t go straight to a four year, get a degree in liberal arts, rack up debt, then become a fire fighter. This is what my friend did, had NO idea what he wanted to do, so he just took out a loan and went to college to major in liberal arts…he could have saved a lot of money had he just learned a trade and worked til he figured it out.
Benos, I think you have a great idea. People SHOULD take a year or more off between high school and college to A) figure out what the hell they should do with their life, and if college is neccessary to do that
and B) save money and get some life experience so they are not the wet behind the ears dumbasses that many of my college contemporaries were.
My brother went to school and majored in japanese. He has always been extremely gifted at using his hands. After 3 years of teaching in japan, he didnt want to use his language or teach. He is now trying to go to watch making school while working as a machinist. I know I had no idea what I wanted to do when i first entered college and thank goodness I had free tuition.
But it does give us and opportunity to understand and appreciate friendship. Hope that ‘might’ turns out to be a ‘does not.’ I’ve had to wait for an answer twice–for two different family members–as you are doing now. It’s not easy. Well wishes to you and your friend.
