Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
CitizenKain
May 27, 2001

That was Gary Cooper, asshole.

Nap Ghost

John Smith posted:

So, shall I take it as a heartfelt general feeling that CitizenKain is indeed full of poo poo? And that I was indeed right that the trust *can* be structured accordingly, albeit at significant but necessary expense.

:rolleyes:

John Smith posted:

If it was indeed properly structured, then seems to me that your dad simply couldn't be bothered despite his promise to his dead brother. If you are not willing to eat a lot of poo poo, then you shouldn't promise to eat a lot of poo poo. His brother would at least then have the option of trying to find an alternative.

You are claiming this person's dad simply couldn't be bothered to try, despite him at least a year doing so. At some point she threatened to sue him. What was he supposed to do? You think she would have gone for that? I know normal human interactions are confusing to you, but figure it out.
I feel bad for anyone who has to know you personally.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dr. Eldarion
Mar 21, 2001

Deal Dispatcher

oh my god shut up and take your slapfight elsewhere

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


So here's a thing that I think is bad with money but maybe people will disagree.

People with the means to do so, refusing to setup 529 college funds for their kids because "nah, they can pay for it on their own."

I've run into two people this past week who have said that despite having the wealth and the means to do so, they won't because they see it as a waste. :wtf:

crazypeltast52
May 5, 2010



On the one hand, keeping the kids motivated, but on the other, it's an easy generational wealth transfer you dolts! You'll pay lawyers and accountants piles of money later to transfer money down the family tree that easily, especially if they start early!

EAT FASTER!!!!!!
Sep 21, 2002

Legendary.


:hampants::hampants::hampants:
The Millionaire Next Door - one of the best personal finance books in my opinion, especially because it focuses in laser close on spending - makes a really compelling case that paying for the best school your kids can get into is a really great way of keeping your family wealthy over generations. Forcing your kids to "BOOTSTRAPS!" all over again because you're too cheap to save for their education seems to me to be a decidedly counterproductive way to ensure success for your children, your grandchildren and beyond.

Xenoborg
Mar 10, 2007

antiga posted:

Sounds like Dad wouldn't get to deduct the HELOC interest (that he's not actually paying himself and probably is not eligible to deduct) anymore so that could be why he's opposing it.

Refinancing in the actual owner's name seems like a very obvious Good Decision to me if only for liability reasons. Your Dad is hosed if, for example, Sister has the deed to the property and decides to stop paying interest.

E: no idea if HELOC rates are less than mortgage rates. Maybe you save on closing costs?

I doubt its malice, just ignorance of good financial practice. My dad also invests in individual stocks with HELOC money for example.

There is no my sister has the physical deed, and I think everything is in my dad's name. He would also (grudgingly for sure) pay her rent/mortgage for her if she lost her job or something.

brugroffil
Nov 30, 2015


EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:

The Millionaire Next Door - one of the best personal finance books in my opinion, especially because it focuses in laser close on spending - makes a really compelling case that paying for the best school your kids can get into is a really great way of keeping your family wealthy over generations. Forcing your kids to "BOOTSTRAPS!" all over again because you're too cheap to save for their education seems to me to be a decidedly counterproductive way to ensure success for your children, your grandchildren and beyond.

This influenced my dad to help pay for mine! Thank you, tmnd!

Related content, my dad's friend did not choose this route despite earning a good salary and forced his daughter to pay for herself, which actually meant his wife got a job to pay for their daughter's school. The bwm part was her getting an education degree but giving up searching for a teaching job after two months and then settling into a middling insurance billing job for the next 7 years and counting.

crazypeltast52
May 5, 2010



Plus prestigious schools increase the odds of the ultimate GWM, marrying up!

Zo
Feb 22, 2005

LIKE A FOX
lol taking out a loan for university is now "bootstraps"? has the word lost all meaning now?

anyway im a fan of the hands off safety net style, for university at least (grade school is a different issue and the responsibility there is entirely ​with the parents obviously). and you're always there to catch them if they run into bad luck like medical issues or whatever.

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


crazypeltast52 posted:

On the one hand, keeping the kids motivated, but on the other, it's an easy generational wealth transfer you dolts! You'll pay lawyers and accountants piles of money later to transfer money down the family tree that easily, especially if they start early!

The ironic thing is one of these people comes from a wealthy family and has a sizeable nest egg themselves. Their parents also paid for both their BA and MA degrees (as well as the BA/MA and PHD for three other kids), but they still think this is the best route.

However, they seem to think that when their parents pass on their wealth, that they are going to get more of it because of "grandchildren". Despite the fact they've been told several times, that the estate is being split up evenly between each sibling, and no one is going to get more just because they have kids.

I'm so glad I won't have to deal with any of this poo poo (with my family at least).

therobit
Aug 19, 2008

I've been tryin' to speak with you for a long time
Financing a second property with a heloc can be good with money if you can afford it. It keeps the payments down and if he is declaring the rental income and it is anywhere in the neighborhood of market rent he can write off the interest and maintenance costs. Is the house ultimately going to belong to your dad as an investment or to your sister as her home? By keeping the monthly payment low he can make it more feasible to keep umtil renting to someone else or until she can afford a regular payment.

EAT FASTER!!!!!!
Sep 21, 2002

Legendary.


:hampants::hampants::hampants:

Zo posted:

lol taking out a loan for university is now "bootstraps"? has the word lost all meaning now?

anyway im a fan of the hands off safety net style, for university at least (grade school is a different issue and the responsibility there is entirely ​with the parents obviously). and you're always there to catch them if they run into bad luck like medical issues or whatever.

NOT paying for a 529 if you have the money to do so is bad with money and selfish.

Here's why - you're taking after tax dollars at 2017 value and compounding them for however many years before bequeathing them to your progeny. If the market returns a fair price for your tolerance of risk, you'll earn the tax you paid on these dollars off and many more. Your child gets this money to attend a prestigious institution of higher learning - among the highest ROI activities a young person can undertake - without subjecting them to crippling amounts of debt which will compound at very similar rates of interest to the investment you made when they were tiny tots!

The money they'll have to use to pay off this debt is after tax dollars in 2037-2052 or whatever, and won't have been compounded by a 20 year bath in the market before being used (tax free!) to pay for education!

Like what part of this sounds like a good idea to you?

I understand if you're too poor to fund a 529 - it's not the top of anyone's list of "needs" for example. Food, water, shelter, I get it. But to treat it as optional if you're going to have children and want them to do well is insanely backwards to me.

Real meaningful wealth probably includes the ability to pay for your kids to have a better chance at success than you did, and that includes the halls of the Ivy League.

EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Jun 1, 2017

Krispy Wafer
Jul 26, 2002

I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat

Grimey Drawer

Handsome Ralph posted:

So here's a thing that I think is bad with money but maybe people will disagree.

People with the means to do so, refusing to setup 529 college funds for their kids because "nah, they can pay for it on their own."

I've run into two people this past week who have said that despite having the wealth and the means to do so, they won't because they see it as a waste. :wtf:

I keep telling family and friends to do 529 plans and as far as I can tell no one has ever taken my advice.

And to a person, they start getting that panicked look in their eyes around their kid's junior year. None of those people actually went to college, so their choices, while stupid, are at least consistent. But gently caress anyone who went to college that doesn't at least try to help their kids. I paid for my college working so many minimum wage jobs, I didn't get laid for years. Bootstraps suck.

LLCoolJD
Dec 8, 2007

Musk threatens the inorganic promotion of left-wing ideology that had been taking place on the platform

Block me for being an unironic DeSantis fan, too!
529 plans are awesome, but what if your 4-year-old daughter needs tumbling lessons, tumbling gear, and designer doll outfits?


I don't endorse the snake oil product or the disgraceful behavior of those women, but gut health is pretty drat important to more than just your digestion.

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


Krispy Kareem posted:

I keep telling family and friends to do 529 plans and as far as I can tell no one has ever taken my advice.

And to a person, they start getting that panicked look in their eyes around their kid's junior year. None of those people actually went to college, so their choices, while stupid, are at least consistent. But gently caress anyone who went to college that doesn't at least try to help their kids. I paid for my college working so many minimum wage jobs, I didn't get laid for years. Bootstraps suck.

Yeah, one of the people in this situation might be in a place where they can't really afford to, or at least they think it's pointless cause all they could throw in is like 50 bucks a month at most. They also didn't get a degree beyond an associate's with some tech certs (that work paid for), so I can chalk it up to either inexperience in how expensive it really is or just being stretched financially right now (that's a whole other BWM post).

The other got a degree in English then decided to be a veterinarian. Their parents paid for both degrees. That whole situation is going to be a massive shitshow in 15 years. Sooner if their parents both die before then and they realize their parents weren't kidding about each kid getting an equal share of the estate regardless of grandchildren.

brugroffil
Nov 30, 2015


Zo posted:

lol taking out a loan for university is now "bootstraps"? has the word lost all meaning now?

anyway im a fan of the hands off safety net style, for university at least (grade school is a different issue and the responsibility there is entirely ​with the parents obviously). and you're always there to catch them if they run into bad luck like medical issues or whatever.

This is probably true to some extent, my wife got zero help from her parents but had infinitely more work ethic than I do at least partially because of it.

I dunno we're definitely opening a 529 very soon for our daughter and piling some money into it.

BEHOLD: MY CAPE
Jan 11, 2004

Krispy Kareem posted:

I keep telling family and friends to do 529 plans and as far as I can tell no one has ever taken my advice.

And to a person, they start getting that panicked look in their eyes around their kid's junior year. None of those people actually went to college, so their choices, while stupid, are at least consistent. But gently caress anyone who went to college that doesn't at least try to help their kids. I paid for my college working so many minimum wage jobs, I didn't get laid for years. Bootstraps suck.

If you have lots of family and friends who are in a position to save more than $47,000 a year post tax then saving in a 529 is great advice, otherwise most normal people can't really afford a 529 and it is generally a mistake to fund a 529 before maxing household 401k and IRA limits. For the most part 529 plans are a nice bonus for people who can already pretty much afford college for their kids.

OctaviusBeaver
Apr 30, 2009

Say what now?
The way I see it, if they get into a top tier school like Harvard or MIT then the savings don't matter too much, because those schools have tons of financial aid and the kid is going to make way more than I ever will anyway so some debt won't hurt. If you don't get into a school like that then you may as well go to a state school where the costs are manageable and scholarships are common. If they insist on going to a private college then that's on them and I wouldn't blame any parent for not contributing to that boondoggle.

BEHOLD: MY CAPE
Jan 11, 2004

OctaviusBeaver posted:

The way I see it, if they get into a top tier school like Harvard or MIT then the savings don't matter too much, because those schools have tons of financial aid and the kid is going to make way more than I ever will anyway so some debt won't hurt. If you don't get into a school like that then you may as well go to a state school where the costs are manageable and scholarships are common. If they insist on going to a private college then that's on them and I wouldn't blame any parent for not contributing to that boondoggle.

Actually I think that any education savings plan (i.e. 529 plans) that primarily benefits wealthy high net worth savers and is therefore more likely to be spent on prestigious private secondary and post secondary schools is will have the net effect of driving up private school tuitions and making them less affordable. It's probably bad policy despite good intentions.

Zo
Feb 22, 2005

LIKE A FOX

EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:

NOT paying for a 529 if you have the money to do so is bad with money and selfish.

Here's why - you're taking after tax dollars at 2017 value and compounding them for however many years before bequeathing them to your progeny. If the market returns a fair price for your tolerance of risk, you'll earn the tax you paid on these dollars off and many more. Your child gets this money to attend a prestigious institution of higher learning - among the highest ROI activities a young person can undertake - without subjecting them to crippling amounts of debt which will compound at very similar rates of interest to the investment you made when they were tiny tots!

The money they'll have to use to pay off this debt is after tax dollars in 2037-2052 or whatever, and won't have been compounded by a 20 year bath in the market before being used (tax free!) to pay for education!

Like what part of this sounds like a good idea to you?

I understand if you're too poor to fund a 529 - it's not the top of anyone's list of "needs" for example. Food, water, shelter, I get it. But to treat it as optional if you're going to have children and want them to do well is insanely backwards to me.

Real meaningful wealth probably includes the ability to pay for your kids to have a better chance at success than you did, and that includes the halls of the Ivy League.

I'd rather raise a good person than a rich person, but of course that's a false dilemma you're presenting in the first place.

if somebody can get into an ivy, loans are not going to stop them. i also like the "crippling" comment. what is it about loans that you think is inherently crippling? do your legs spontaneously shatter when you take out a mortgage?

BEHOLD: MY CAPE
Jan 11, 2004
Crippling maybe isn't the correct word to use but certainly graduating college with the sticker price $250k+ of student loan debt to attend a high priced private school will change one's career outlook significantly. For example public sector or even volunteer work that is widely considered to be of great value to society is a lot less appealing with Navient sending you a six figure student loan statement every month.

EAT FASTER!!!!!!
Sep 21, 2002

Legendary.


:hampants::hampants::hampants:
edit: you know what this is a derail I don't think we need to be having. I think not funding a 529 if you can afford it is bad with money, and we don't really need to bicker about it.

EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jun 1, 2017

Zo
Feb 22, 2005

LIKE A FOX
yeah there's not much to bicker about anyway, you raise your kids how you want

on another topic, the guy from many pages ago who was thinking about buying an empty lot came out of it shockingly gwm

quote:

Hello all!
I had a post about a month ago on this subreddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/69cchg/buying_empty_lot_adjacent_to_my_house_to_keep_it/
That a few people have expressed an interest in an update to.
I did all the legwork required to go through with the purchase (talked to a banker and pre-approved a loan, etc) and then had my realtor reach out to the owner of the property to discuss.
As I somewhat expected, he was tough to get ahold of. Realtor ended up going to his house in a town about 40 minutes from here to get ahold of him as the number we had didn't seem to be any good. Long and short of it: He's not interested in selling unless it's "For the right price" which he wouldn't say what that was, kept saying "Give me a number and I'll give you an answer". Prior to this I had established my ground rules - I wasn't willing to pay more than 30k for the lot, though I'd prefer to be closer to 20-25. I said "25k" and he said double it, and we agreed we were too far apart.
He was reasonable, and understood my reasoning behind wanting to buy it to keep it empty, and knew it was not currently worth what he wanted but since he owned it outright he'd just hold onto it and wait for it to mature.
In the end, he agreed to sign a lease for $1 a month so that I can have use of the lot - with the understanding that I don't make any changes, I'm just responsible for mowing the grass, and I can put a play structure on it if I like. I also have right of first refusal when he does decide to sell - we signed a 3-year lease that's got a 2-month notice and no penalty for ending early.
I talked to my agent and the property is included in my umbrella policy, so I'm covered there.
So, in the end, I have the peace of mind that I want that it'll stay empty for the foreseeable future, and I don't have to spend a bunch of money. All-in-all, I think it worked out well.
Thanks for all the answers and insights on the original post!
Quick edit: I did in also speak with my city administrator about the park situation/option - the lot is too small for what the city considers reasonable for a park, and they have future expansion plans in the current cornfields/future development area behind my house to include a park there as one of the cities goals is to have a park within 1/4 mile of everyone, and my closest one is almost 3/4 of a mile away now.

crazypeltast52
May 5, 2010



That's a pretty good deal, although i take exception to calling something a three year lease when there is a 60 day mutual termination option. There better be some tenant rep comission in there for the dude's broker though, talk about legwork!

22 Eargesplitten
Oct 10, 2010



Does anyone have the link for that "500k is just scraping by" article from the last thread? I need it for another thread.

BEHOLD: MY CAPE
Jan 11, 2004

crazypeltast52 posted:

That's a pretty good deal, although i take exception to calling something a three year lease when there is a 60 day mutual termination option. There better be some tenant rep comission in there for the dude's broker though, talk about legwork!

Well you know real estate agents have worked very hard to make one month's rent a standard fee for leasing, so here you go *slides dollar across the table*

EIDE Van Hagar
Dec 8, 2000

Beep Boop

EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:

The Millionaire Next Door - one of the best personal finance books in my opinion, especially because it focuses in laser close on spending - makes a really compelling case that paying for the best school your kids can get into is a really great way of keeping your family wealthy over generations. Forcing your kids to "BOOTSTRAPS!" all over again because you're too cheap to save for their education seems to me to be a decidedly counterproductive way to ensure success for your children, your grandchildren and beyond.

Yeah rich people have been insulating themselves from failure for generations through networking at ivy league schools, if you can get in on that you don't even need a trust fund.

Nail Rat
Dec 29, 2000

You maniacs! You blew it up! God damn you! God damn you all to hell!!

EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:

The Millionaire Next Door - one of the best personal finance books in my opinion, especially because it focuses in laser close on spending - makes a really compelling case that paying for the best school your kids can get into is a really great way of keeping your family wealthy over generations. Forcing your kids to "BOOTSTRAPS!" all over again because you're too cheap to save for their education seems to me to be a decidedly counterproductive way to ensure success for your children, your grandchildren and beyond.

This presupposes that generational wealth and classism is a good thing. I don't think your kids or my kids deserve a better shot than children of poor parents even if they don't work for it but hey that's me.

Bootstraps is a funny thing to quote because it's used by the rich to say the poor should work harder. If the rich didn't transfer wealth and opportunity to their children, a true meritocracy would actually be possible.

Just pretend I derail birded myself.

Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 13:29 on Jun 1, 2017

Academician Nomad
Jan 29, 2016

EAT FASTER!!!!!! posted:

Real meaningful wealth probably includes the ability to pay for your kids to have a better chance at success than you did, and that includes the halls of the Ivy League.
Yes, if you're using "Ivy League" as shorthand for "great university" and not meaning it literally. The actual Ivy League is tiny (119,000 students across the 8 universities, including grad students; in comparison, the University of California system has 250,000 across 10 campuses, and Cal State system has another 480,000 across 23 campuses). You'll get an equally powerful return investing in tons of other universities. Non-Ivy League schools: MIT, Stanford, Chicago, Johns Hopkins, CalTech, UC Berkeley (and other UCs), etc., etc.

Looking at 20-year ROI including financial aid, using their actual salary data, Payscale doesn't have an Ivy League school in the top 10 http://www.payscale.com/college-roi

BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:

Actually I think that any education savings plan (i.e. 529 plans) that primarily benefits wealthy high net worth savers and is therefore more likely to be spent on prestigious private secondary and post secondary schools is will have the net effect of driving up private school tuitions and making them less affordable. It's probably bad policy despite good intentions.
Universities don't really do the supply-and-demand thing on their tuition, generally speaking, at least not directly. Demand always far exceeds spots. Profit isn't their incentive, they want prestige. That means the best students, best faculty, and (for research universities) the best research. That means they would like to maximize faculty salaries (by far the biggest expense), research support, and then student experience. Tuition is only one of their funding sources though, and raising tuition (without raising financial aid equally) makes the university less diverse and hurts ability to recruit the best students, and in general can knock you down on formalized prestige things like the US News rankings.

You definitely want to soak the very rich students, including those from overseas, but only if you can offset that for poorer students. That's why sticker price is sky-high but actual costs are much lower at many top universities. For Harvard, sticker price is $63k including room and board, but the average student pays only $12k per year, and anyone whose family makes under $65k/year pays nothing. So even if there were a calculation about how much the wealthy can pay and these 529s had a meaningful impact, it wouldn't have a big impact on driving up real tuition for working class people. The main thing keeping high-performing, low-income students away from top universities is ignorance about the process and opportunities, which is clearly not their fault but is hard to fight.

Of course you're right that it's bad policy in general to have more tax breaks primarily used/usable by the wealthy, simply because it's regressive. The money would be far better spent investing in state universities. States clawing back their support for public universities (because baby boomers are sociopaths) is the #1 reason by a mile that tuitions and student debt are up so much.

Academician Nomad fucked around with this message at 13:26 on Jun 1, 2017

Pryor on Fire
May 14, 2013

they don't know all alien abduction experiences can be explained by people thinking saving private ryan was a documentary

Academician Nomad posted:

(because baby boomers are sociopaths)

This will be the copy/paste used all over the place 1,000 years from now when archaeologists are trying to figure out what the gently caress happened

Pryor on Fire fucked around with this message at 13:34 on Jun 1, 2017

Krispy Wafer
Jul 26, 2002

I shouted out "Free the exposed 67"
But they stood on my hair and told me I was fat

Grimey Drawer

Pryor on Fire posted:

This will be the copy/paste used all over the place 1,000 years from now when archaeologists are trying to figure out what the gently caress happened

The only possible advantage to 8 years of Donald Trump would be him as the last Baby Boomer President.

Solice Kirsk
Jun 1, 2004

.

Krispy Kareem posted:

The only possible advantage to 8 years of Donald Trump would be him as the last Baby Boomer President.

Not a bad trade off all things considered.

epic bird guy
Dec 9, 2014

Academician Nomad posted:

Tuition is only one of their funding sources though, and raising tuition (without raising financial aid equally) makes the university less diverse and hurts ability to recruit the best students, and in general can knock you down on formalized prestige things like the US News rankings.

You definitely want to soak the very rich students, including those from overseas, but only if you can offset that for poorer students. That's why sticker price is sky-high but actual costs are much lower at many top universities. For Harvard, sticker price is $63k including room and board, but the average student pays only $12k per year, and anyone whose family makes under $65k/year pays nothing. So even if there were a calculation about how much the wealthy can pay and these 529s had a meaningful impact, it wouldn't have a big impact on driving up real tuition for working class people. The main thing keeping high-performing, low-income students away from top universities is ignorance about the process and opportunities, which is clearly not their fault but is hard to fight.

Of course you're right that it's bad policy in general to have more tax breaks primarily used/usable by the wealthy, simply because it's regressive. The money would be far better spent investing in state universities. States clawing back their support for public universities (because baby boomers are sociopaths) is the #1 reason by a mile that tuitions and student debt are up so much.

Another thing that raises tuition (in small liberal arts colleges, specifically), is a keeping up with the Joneses idea that they need to remain in the same prestige class. If college A raises tuition then Colleges B and C will probably follow suit so that they seem to be in the same class. This primarily harms students who are in the gulf between "poor enough to get financial aid for nearly everything" and "Rich enough where it doesn't matter". The former is really a pretty small group because of the reasons you've mentioned, and the latter serves to increase cashflow to the school.

Academician Nomad
Jan 29, 2016

SCA Enthusiast posted:

Another thing that raises tuition (in small liberal arts colleges, specifically), is a keeping up with the Joneses idea that they need to remain in the same prestige class. If college A raises tuition then Colleges B and C will probably follow suit so that they seem to be in the same class. This primarily harms students who are in the gulf between "poor enough to get financial aid for nearly everything" and "Rich enough where it doesn't matter". The former is really a pretty small group because of the reasons you've mentioned, and the latter serves to increase cashflow to the school.
Sure, though small liberal arts colleges (SLACs) really shouldn't be the top priority in public policy. Public universities / colleges / community colleges account for 73% of students, 16% in private non-profits including both places like Stanford and SLACs, with cancerous for-profit diploma mills at 9% and rising. The top 10 liberal arts colleges on US News taken together educate under 19,000 students, compared to UC Berkeley's 27,000 undergrads.

Back when public universities were treated like the mostly-public goods they are, even as late as 1990, places like UVA had in-state tuition of $700 and total cost (including room/board/etc.) of $5600. With inflation that would be about $10k per year, before any financial aid or grants. In comparison, actual costs at UVA today are about $30k/yr. If public universities (and community colleges, which are also super important, and trade schools which are important though overblown in today's "plumbers not philosophers" nonsense culture) were as cheap as they used to be, SLACs could remain a luxury good for those who can afford them.

John Smith
Feb 26, 2015

by LITERALLY AN ADMIN

Academician Nomad posted:

Back when public universities were treated like the mostly-public goods they are, even as late as 1990
Wasn't aware that in the 1990s, universities lacked the ability to exclude enrolling students and the marginal cost of another additional unit of consumption was zero. Man, things sure have changed now that these goods are rival and excludable.

cowofwar
Jul 30, 2002

by Athanatos
Horses: BWL, Canada so not as BWM and didn't cause a medical bankruptcy.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-dog-honoured-as-purina-hero-after-rescuing-owner-arizona-desert-1.4139351

Academician Nomad
Jan 29, 2016

John Smith posted:

Wasn't aware that in the 1990s, universities lacked the ability to exclude enrolling students and the marginal cost of another additional unit of consumption was zero. Man, things sure have changed now that these goods are rival and excludable.
What? I said they how they were *treated* (as public goods or not) has changed. Their status as semi-public goods has not changed since the 90s. Educations are (and have always been) at least partially public goods, even if they are not purely so. There are major social benefits to you getting an education that don't accrue just to you, and that you can't exclude society from having unless you want to go live in a cave or something. Your higher earning potential supports our taxes. Your better contextual awareness of the world and ability to use evidence makes you a better voter (in theory). Higher percentages of educated people in an area draw in employers. Educations are also non-rivalrous, in that you being better educated doesn't take anything away from me being better educated (in fact, we're both better off in that case). There's a small degree to which me getting into the University of Michigan makes it harder for you to get in, but that's individual universities, not the university system (and thus education) as a whole.

However, there has been a political / rhetorical shift over the past few decades (as boomers get further from their own educations) to pretend that a university education is a purely private good, benefiting only the recipient, and thus the recipient should be the only one who pays for it. It's dumb and bad economics.

Barry
Aug 1, 2003

Hardened Criminal
We should probably just move this thread to D&D and be done with it. Why can't we just post hilarious BWM schadenfreude to laugh at?

https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/6em3h0/i_make_great_money_but_i_am_broke/

quote:

I am married with four kids and my wife stays at home. Despite making really good money, we find a way to spend more than we make each month. Does anyone have any suggestions for staying on a budget or managing money with a big family? I feel like we could not save a dollar if we tried. I should not feel this broke!

Later in the thread:

quote:

9200 take home (after 8% 401k + 3% ESOP)
2800 mortgage
500 car
170 HOA
150 Gas for house
150 electric
175 cable
275 cell phone (4 lines, 1 phone payment)
80 water
100 lawn service (April - Oct)
1500 groceries
1000 eating out
300 gas for cars
60 dry clean
250 gym
60 gymnastics
The rest goes to some combination of kids activities, home or auto repairs, gifts, clothes, medical expenses. Usually to the tune of 1000 over take home. We do not really travel much.
I do realize that the food is a major expense. We have kids activities everynight of the week which makes it hard to eat at home or sometimes even get to the store. Would definitely appreciate advice on how to reduce some of these categories.

$2500 on food per month with a stay at home parent, lol

Paying for lawn service when you have 4 children, lol

monster on a stick
Apr 29, 2013

Academician Nomad posted:

However, there has been a political / rhetorical shift over the past few decades (as boomers get further from their own educations) to pretend that a university education is a purely private good, benefiting only the recipient, and thus the recipient should be the only one who pays for it. It's dumb and bad economics.



Nail Rat posted:

Just pretend I derail birded myself.

:rip: "no last word" thread policy

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Nail Rat
Dec 29, 2000

You maniacs! You blew it up! God damn you! God damn you all to hell!!

monster on a stick posted:




:rip: "no last word" thread policy

No, I'm just saying I'm apologizing for the derail. It can continue, I should know better but I just couldn't help myself :negative:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply