Recession coming

[Freak Out]

U.S. Home Defaults, Foreclosures Rise 60% in February (Update2)

By Alan Mirabella and Sharon L. Lynch

March 13 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. home foreclosure filings jumped 60 percent and bank seizures more than doubled in February as rates on adjustable mortgages rose and property owners were unable to sell or refinance amid falling prices.

More than 223,000 properties were in some stage of default, or 1 in every 557 U.S. households, Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac Inc., a seller of foreclosure data, said today in a statement. Nevada, California and Florida had the highest rates.

``With declining prices, there is a pervasive problem of not being able to refinance or sell,'' said Susan Wachter, professor of real estate at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School in Philadelphia. ``I'm very concerned.''

About $460 billion of adjustable-rate mortgages are scheduled to reset this year and another $420 billion will rise in 2011, according to New York-based analysts at Citigroup Inc. Homeowners faced higher payments as fourth-quarter home prices fell 8.9 percent, the biggest drop in 20 years as measured by the S&P/Case- Shiller home price index.

``This is continuing to worsen,'' Wachter said in an interview. ``It tells us that we are not at a bottom.''

Foreclosure filings are likely to be ``explosive'' in May and June as more payments jump, after remaining at current levels this month and next, Rick Sharga, executive vice president of RealtyTrac, said in an interview. There may be between 750,000 and 1 million bank repossessions in 2008. Bank seizures rose 110 percent in February from a year ago, he said.

`Vicious Cycle'

``We're in a vicious cycle,'' Sharga said. ``We've got depreciating home values and loans resetting at an outstanding volume just as banks are retrenching. Even people who want to buy a home now are having trouble getting a mortgage.''

February was the 26th consecutive month of year-on-year monthly foreclosure increases, Sharga said. Total filings fell 4 percent last month from the previous month, said RealtyTrac, which compiles statistics from a database of more than 1 million properties and monitors default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions.

A surge in defaults among subprime borrowers spurred the collapse of the U.S. home loan market and has led more than 100 mortgage companies to stop lending, close or sell themselves. As the value of securities tied to mortgages plummeted, lenders and securities firms have written down more than $180 billion in assets tied to home loans.

Rising foreclosures pushed the inventory of existing homes last year to the highest ever, making it more difficult for property owners to sell.

Fed Efforts

Defaults are jumping even as the Federal Reserve has cut the benchmark interest rate five times since September and the Bush administration has urged lenders to help homeowners by modifying mortgage terms.

The Fed, struggling to contain a crisis of confidence in credit markets, said this week it will for the first time lend Treasuries in exchange for debt that includes mortgage-backed securities.

Economists are forecasting the U.S. housing slump will push the economy into a recession this year and there are no signs housing will recover in 2008. U.S. sales of new and existing homes probably will fall to 5 million this year, down 33 percent from the all-time high of 7.46 million in 2005, before rising to 5.23 million in 2009, Freddie Mac said in a March 3 forecast.

Nevada led the nation with the highest foreclosure rate in February. Filings rose 68 percent last month to 6,167 from the year-earlier period. One in every 165 households there was in default or foreclosure, RealtyTrac said.

California, Florida, Texas

California had the second-highest rate with one in every 242 households. Florida was third with one in every 254.

The highest total number of foreclosure actions was in California, followed by Florida and Texas, RealtyTrac said. California reported a total of 53,629 last month, up 131 percent from February 2007. Florida had a total of 32,447, up 69 percent from the year earlier. Texas filings fell 1 percent to 12,261.

The Cape-Coral/Fort Myers, Florida, metropolitan area recorded the highest foreclosure rate of 229 metro areas tracked in the report. Its figure of one per 84 households was almost seven times the national average. Stockton, California, had the second-highest metro area rate.

The Mortgage Bankers Association said March 6 that mortgage foreclosures rose to a record at the end of 2007 as many borrowers with adjustable-rate loans walked away from properties even before their payments increased.

New foreclosures jumped to 0.83 percent of all home loans in the fourth quarter from 0.54 percent a year earlier. Late payments rose to a 23-year high, the Mortgage Bankers said in a report.

Borrowers with adjustable-rate subprime mortgages accounted for 42 percent of new foreclosures in the fourth quarter, according to the report. Those loans accounted for about 7 percent of all mortgages, the report said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Alan Mirabella in New York at amirabella@bloomberg.net; Sharon L. Lynch in New York at sllynchbloomberg.net.
Last Updated: March 13, 2008 11:23 EDT

[Freak Out]

Please clicko the linko..

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/cost_of_war

[Freak Out]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

[Partial]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

I seem to recall that a dem balanced the budget. I seem to recall this president NEVER vetoing any spending bill.

Get serious.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Please clicko the linko..

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/cost_of_war

Have you read Stieglitz's projection?

3 billion conservatively for this fiasco. And, the worst part is Bush and his fake accounting skills.

We are so screwed.

[Partial]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

I seem to recall that a dem balanced the budget. I seem to recall this president NEVER vetoing any spending bill.

Get serious.

This president isn't a true conservative.

The president who balanced the budget also slashed the defense budget into a fraction of what it should have been. 5k Americans were then murdered.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

I seem to recall that a dem balanced the budget. I seem to recall this president NEVER vetoing any spending bill.

Get serious.

This president isn't a true conservative.

The president who balanced the budget also slashed the defense budget into a fraction of what it should have been. 5k Americans were then murdered.

Ok. He ran as a conservative. So, you are calling him a liar.

Slashed defense. LOL.

So, the defense that led us to victory is on Bush? This is just TOO EASY.

"A commander-in-chief leads the military built by those who came before him," then-vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney said during the 2000 campaign. "There is little that he or his defense secretary can do to improve the force they have to deploy. It is all the work of previous administrations. Decisions made today shape the force of tomorrow."

In fact, the Clinton administration actually spent more money on defense than the previous administration of President George H.W. Bush. The smaller outlays during the first Bush administration were developed and approved by then-Defense Secretary Cheney and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell. The Clinton administration did not coast on Reagan-era procurement funding. During the 1990s, the Pentagon invested more than $1 trillion in developing and procuring new weapons and information technology that gave U.S. forces such an unprecedented advantage in the last two U.S. military campaigns. But more significant than the budget increases was the shift that occurred in the mid-1990s. That shift involved much greater emphasis on precision weapons, sensors, robotics, advanced communications, training, readiness, and orienting the intelligence community toward direct support of military operations. It was that shift that produced the superb military that not only swept through Iraq at a rate that defied historical precedent, but used its awesome force with unprecedented precision and effect, unprecedented low collateral damage, and unprecedented low casualty rates. It was the American Revolution in Military Affairs begun in the Clinton administration that was unveiled in Bush's Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Let me remind you of what BUSH CAMPAIGNED ON!!

During his presidential campaign Bush charged that the Clinton administration had overburdened the U.S. military with too many deployments overseas, and he promised to pare those military obligations. "Resources are overstretched," he said. "Frustration is up, as families are separated and strained. Morale is down. Recruitment is more difficult. And many of our best people in the military are headed for civilian life."

5k: Really, interesting that you would blame him for that when intel was clear about it months before. Had nothing to do with defense. Defense has NOTHING TO DO WITH MONITORING TERRORIST ACTIVITIES.

BTW, i'm sure you'll then exonerate Clinton for the WTC.

partial, you don't know jack shit about what really happened. If you are as you say, a college student...you were 8 years old at best when Clinton took over.

[The Leaper]

3 billion conservatively for this fiasco. And, the worst part is Bush and his fake accounting skills.

We are so screwed.

Come on, Ty. Screwed? Over $3B???

Our national debt is approaching $10 TRILLION...and it amounts to roughly $1.75B every DAY!

Our monthly trade deficit alone is $58 billion...and our total trade deficit to date is approaching $150 TRILLION!

$3B is pocket change compared to the real economic issues facing this economy.

[Partial]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

I seem to recall that a dem balanced the budget. I seem to recall this president NEVER vetoing any spending bill.

Get serious.

This president isn't a true conservative.

The president who balanced the budget also slashed the defense budget into a fraction of what it should have been. 5k Americans were then murdered.

Ok. He ran as a conservative. So, you are calling him a liar.

Slashed defense. LOL.

So, the defense that led us to victory is on Bush? This is just TOO EASY.

"A commander-in-chief leads the military built by those who came before him," then-vice presidential candidate Dick Cheney said during the 2000 campaign. "There is little that he or his defense secretary can do to improve the force they have to deploy. It is all the work of previous administrations. Decisions made today shape the force of tomorrow."

In fact, the Clinton administration actually spent more money on defense than the previous administration of President George H.W. Bush. The smaller outlays during the first Bush administration were developed and approved by then-Defense Secretary Cheney and then-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell. The Clinton administration did not coast on Reagan-era procurement funding. During the 1990s, the Pentagon invested more than $1 trillion in developing and procuring new weapons and information technology that gave U.S. forces such an unprecedented advantage in the last two U.S. military campaigns. But more significant than the budget increases was the shift that occurred in the mid-1990s. That shift involved much greater emphasis on precision weapons, sensors, robotics, advanced communications, training, readiness, and orienting the intelligence community toward direct support of military operations. It was that shift that produced the superb military that not only swept through Iraq at a rate that defied historical precedent, but used its awesome force with unprecedented precision and effect, unprecedented low collateral damage, and unprecedented low casualty rates. It was the American Revolution in Military Affairs begun in the Clinton administration that was unveiled in Bush's Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Let me remind you of what BUSH CAMPAIGNED ON!!

During his presidential campaign Bush charged that the Clinton administration had overburdened the U.S. military with too many deployments overseas, and he promised to pare those military obligations. "Resources are overstretched," he said. "Frustration is up, as families are separated and strained. Morale is down. Recruitment is more difficult. And many of our best people in the military are headed for civilian life."

5k: Really, interesting that you would blame him for that when intel was clear about it months before. Had nothing to do with defense. Defense has NOTHING TO DO WITH MONITORING TERRORIST ACTIVITIES.

BTW, i'm sure you'll then exonerate Clinton for the WTC.

partial, you don't know jack shit about what really happened. If you are as you say, a college student...you were 8 years old at best when Clinton took over.\

That's correct, I don't remember any of the Clinton campaign. I know that Clinton's budget balancing act led to us getting attacked soon after W took over.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I know that Clinton's budget balancing act led to us getting attacked soon after W took over.
No way, it was the Jews.
But what else do you know for sure?

[Joemailman]

Partial is the Right Wing Tank. Or maybe he is Tank.

[oregonpackfan]

Partial, Clinton's balancing budget had nothing to do with the United States being attacked in the 9/11 tragedy!

Of those 19 terrorists on those 4 hijacked planes, NONE were from Iraq. Fifteen of them were from Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden, the alleged leader of al-Qaida is from Saudi Arabia. On September 11, 2001 the Arab country with the most al-Qaida training camps was Saudi Arabia.

The United States chose to not hold Saudi Arabia accountable because it is the #1 importer of foreign oil to the United States. Securing Iraqi oil is what this war is all about.

The President's own bipartisan 9/11 Commission reported that Saddam Hussain had nothing to do with the 9/11 tragedy nor with al-Qaida. In fact, on September 11, 2001 there was NO al-Qaida in Iraq.

The United States has a $475 billion defense budget which is more than the rest of the world COMBINED! That's right, if you take the defense budgets of the rest of the countries in the world(including China, India, and Russia) add them up, you will find that the USA spends more on defense than the total sum of the rest of the world.

Our year expense of about $145 billion a year for the war in Iraq is NOT included in the annual defense budget. It is ADDITION to the defense budget. Most of the money for the war in Iraq is borrowed money--mostly from China.

Our overly excessive defense budget and the expense for the Iraq war are huge factors in our national debt.

While I am hardly advocating the United States should not have a defense budget, there are many vastly wasteful areas that can be cut. Why do we need 40,000 American troops stationed in Germany and 35,000 American troops stationed in Japan when WWII ended 63 years ago? Those two countries are now our allies. They do no pose a threat to the USA.

One reason why the Soviet Union dissolved was that it was overextending its budget on defense and was becoming involved in wars outside the Soviet Union(if was involved in a major war against Afghanistan at the time). The same think may happen to the America if we keep militarily overexteding ourself, particularly if Bush decides to invade Iran.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

3 billion conservatively for this fiasco. And, the worst part is Bush and his fake accounting skills.

We are so screwed.

Come on, Ty. Screwed? Over $3B???

Our national debt is approaching $10 TRILLION...and it amounts to roughly $1.75B every DAY!

Our monthly trade deficit alone is $58 billion...and our total trade deficit to date is approaching $150 TRILLION!

$3B is pocket change compared to the real economic issues facing this economy.

Leaper,

You are smart...you shoulda recognized my mis..writing. It is 3 trillion, not billion.

Now does that make you a bit worried? Also, that was a conservative estimate..if we started pulling out now.

Go read Stiglitz and see how badly bush and his cronies lied about the costs. Any accountant would be in jail.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I know that Clinton's budget balancing act led to us getting attacked soon after W took over.
No way, it was the Jews.
But what else do you know for sure?

When in doubt, blame the jews!!

[The Leaper]

You are smart...you shoulda recognized my mis..writing. It is 3 trillion, not billion.

I thought the figure sounded pretty low...but I was at work on a Friday and my brain was toast.

Thank God for weekends.

[GrnBay007]

Thank God for weekends.

TGIF....it's been a longggg week!!!

[Freak Out]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

My family and I know its not free.....but that is just ignorant BS and fear mongering. We pay enough in taxes now to defend ourselves and pay for health care as long as we do it wisely....But wisdom is in short supply in this country at times.

[MJZiggy]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

I seem to recall that a dem balanced the budget. I seem to recall this president NEVER vetoing any spending bill.

Get serious.

This president isn't a true conservative.

The president who balanced the budget also slashed the defense budget into a fraction of what it should have been. 5k Americans were then murdered.

Clinton didn't slash the defense budget. It was Bush that cut the funding for services to the vets. Thanks, George. Those guys didn't do anything for you...

[Partial]

Brutal stuff...of course the calvary that is the FED will save the day! Huzzay! Nothing but red........

Freedom ain't free broski. And that deficit is only going to keep growing with Dems and their historical large spending in office. Right now what we need is a true conservative to come in and cut spending big time and keep us safe. You think the economy is shitty now, wait until UniHealth goes live 4 years from now. It'll suck when you pocket 25% of your earnings :lol:

My family and I know its not free.....but that is just ignorant BS and fear mongering. We pay enough in taxes now to defend ourselves and pay for health care as long as we do it wisely....But wisdom is in short supply in this country at times.

They could do both. And you'd take home 25% of what you earn. Than, guys like Harlan will want half of that to go to the poor. Hello socialism.

[The Leaper]

Clinton didn't slash the defense budget. It was Bush that cut the funding for services to the vets. Thanks, George. Those guys didn't do anything for you...

MJ, you have selective memory.

Defense spending was greatly decreased throughout the 1990s...it actually began under Bush Sr. His last budget plan called for a 19% decrease in the defense budget from 1992-1999. During that period under Clinton after Bush was defeated in 1992, the budget actually did decrease 18%.

It was mostly a bipartisan effort...I'm not blaming Clinton for it, nor am I going to be someone who suggests those cuts were the reason for 9/11...but to claim the budget wasn't slashed during Clinton's tenure is hogwash.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Clinton didn't slash the defense budget. It was Bush that cut the funding for services to the vets. Thanks, George. Those guys didn't do anything for you...

MJ, you have selective memory.

Defense spending was greatly decreased throughout the 1990s...it actually began under Bush Sr. His last budget plan called for a 19% decrease in the defense budget from 1992-1999. During that period under Clinton after Bush was defeated in 1992, the budget actually did decrease 18%.

It was mostly a bipartisan effort...I'm not blaming Clinton for it, nor am I going to be someone who suggests those cuts were the reason for 9/11...but to claim the budget wasn't slashed during Clinton's tenure is hogwash.

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

http://www.dallasfed.org/research/eclett/2007/images/0704c2.gif

[Partial]

OK, how can you argue he did not cut it more?!?

Was it not lower after he cut it a lower percentage after Bush SR had already given it a hearty cut?

Is taking off 10% of something after someone takes 20% off of something first not less?

The fact of the matter is he was irresponsible and deemed it unnecessary to have even the amount that Bush cut it to. So he cut it even smaller. Than we were attacked.

[Scott Campbell]

Interesting that Clinton appears to have the slowest rate of total growth.

[The Leaper]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No, I'm not wrong...and your own chart proves my point. Defense spending DECREASED under Clinton. I also mentioned that it began under Bush Sr.

Go back to your smoking your pipe Ty.

[Partial]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No, I'm not wrong...and your own chart proves my point. Defense spending DECREASED under Clinton. That was my point.

After a decrease from a previous regime to boot. Seems like Slick Willy really did not value the safety of people or a progressing society from the chart.

[Freak Out]

Defense spending NEEDS TO DECREASE!

[Harlan Huckleby]

Defense spending NEEDS TO DECREASE!

how can that happen? there is general agreement that the troops are spread too thin. Disengagement from Iraq is going to be slow.

U.S. is caught.

[The Leaper]

After a decrease from a previous regime to boot. Seems like Slick Willy really did not value the safety of people or a progressing society from the chart.

It has nothing to do with that Partial.

Our military spending went up a lot under Reagan, and it had gone up a lot in general even before that because of the Cold War. Once the Cold War was over, it was only logical to vastly reduce the decades of spending increases used because of the Cold War.

As I said...it was a bipartisan effort, and not a foolish one considering the circumstances. The problem was that our government as a whole down its guard when the Berlin Wall fell. We failed to recognize the growing threat terrorism was fostering...and how it would impact us as the remaining world superpower.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No, I'm not wrong...and your own chart proves my point. Defense spending DECREASED under Clinton. I also mentioned that it began under Bush Sr.

Go back to your smoking your pipe Ty.

Unless i''m reading it wrong, it increased from where it was under Bush sr.

How can you say it decreased? what are you comparing it to?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

OK, how can you argue he did not cut it more?!?

Was it not lower after he cut it a lower percentage after Bush SR had already given it a hearty cut?

Is taking off 10% of something after someone takes 20% off of something first not less?

The fact of the matter is he was irresponsible and deemed it unnecessary to have even the amount that Bush cut it to. So he cut it even smaller. Than we were attacked.

Do you even know how to read a chart? Bush Sr. cut it way more than clinton.

And, there is no correlation between a bunch of terrorists flying a plane into buildings a defense budget. That is FBI shit.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

After a decrease from a previous regime to boot. Seems like Slick Willy really did not value the safety of people or a progressing society from the chart.

It has nothing to do with that Partial.

Our military spending went up a lot under Reagan, and it had gone up a lot in general even before that because of the Cold War. Once the Cold War was over, it was only logical to vastly reduce the decades of spending increases used because of the Cold War.

As I said...it was a bipartisan effort, and not a foolish one considering the circumstances. The problem was that our government as a whole down its guard when the Berlin Wall fell. We failed to recognize the growing threat terrorism was fostering...and how it would impact us as the remaining world superpower.

agreed.

Not to mention how partial ignores the success we had fighting in the 'stan and Iraq. That military is the one that Clinton made...as Cheney even said.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Interesting that Clinton appears to have the slowest rate of total growth.

Chart is always fun to use when repubs talk about runaway democratic spending.

Somehow spending for the military industrial complex that Ike warned us about doesn't constitute spending for repubs.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Here is another fun chart for my little republican friends.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pics/deficit.jpg

[The Leaper]

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pics/deficit.jpg


That's a whole lotta downward trending for the Bush family. Someone please take their credit cards away.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pics/deficit.jpg


That's a whole lotta downward trending for the Bush family. Someone please take their credit cards away.

I'm sure, if we ask, that they'll be happy to get us a lucrative position with the Carlyle Group.

[The Leaper]

Do you even know how to read a chart? Bush Sr. cut it way more than clinton.

And I would not disagree. As I clearly pointed out in my first post, the spending cuts BEGAN under Bush Sr.

My point was that Clinton was responsible for significant defense cuts on his watch as well...and he was. I was referring to the following statement:

"Clinton didn't slash the defense budget."

The FACT is that he did...by roughly 3% a year during his tenure in office. In Washington, a 3% decrease in funding is a slash.

[Partial]

OK, how can you argue he did not cut it more?!?

Was it not lower after he cut it a lower percentage after Bush SR had already given it a hearty cut?

Is taking off 10% of something after someone takes 20% off of something first not less?

The fact of the matter is he was irresponsible and deemed it unnecessary to have even the amount that Bush cut it to. So he cut it even smaller. Than we were attacked.

Do you even know how to read a chart? Bush Sr. cut it way more than clinton.

And, there is no correlation between a bunch of terrorists flying a plane into buildings a defense budget. That is FBI shit.

Yes, Bush cut it more. Let's do the math together. Start with 100. Subtract 18% for Bush's cut. Now you're at 82. Subtract say 10% off of that. You're knocking off an additional 8.2, so you're at 73.8.

73.8 < 82.

Therefore, Clinton slashed the hell out of the defense budget.

[Joemailman]

Here is another fun chart for my little republican friends.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pics/deficit.jpg

A more up to date chart

http://www.uuforum.org/Images/deficit.gif

[Partial]

Typical democrat post... You can really blame Bush for the banks crooked ways and the greedy idiot buying a bigger house than he needs. Yep, those two things are Bush's fault. I guess you should blame Bush for the fed reserve bailing those banks out as well and keeping American's employed.

[Scott Campbell]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No, I'm not wrong...and your own chart proves my point. Defense spending DECREASED under Clinton. I also mentioned that it began under Bush Sr.

Go back to your smoking your pipe Ty.

Unless i''m reading it wrong, it increased from where it was under Bush sr.

How can you say it decreased? what are you comparing it to?


Pssst. You are reading it wrong.

Fuggin crackhead.

[The Leaper]

Fuggin crackhead.

What scares me is that someone like Ty is going to be in charge of the US financial situation if Obama gets elected.

I know it might not seem like things could get worse...but they most certainly can.

[Scott Campbell]

The total budget deficit/surplus also included stock option tax revenue from the dot.bomb bubble - an obscene windfall for the government. Thus it completely penalized Bush, and rewarded Clinton. Therefore I don't believe it to be a true barometer of financial performance.

[The Leaper]

The total budget deficit/surplus also included stock option tax revenue from the dot.bomb bubble. Thus it completely penalized Bush, and rewarded Clinton. Therefore I don't believe it to be a true barometer of financial performance.

I would agree with you.

Granted, Bush is a free-spending cowboy who doesn't have the sense to understand even the most simple economic principles...as his speech last week clearly points out. When I can sit on my couch and wonder if I am more intelligent than our president, we are f'd.

However, Clinton got the benefit of an economy running on nitrous oxide...which couldn't possibly be sustainable long term. How that impacts the graphs? I'm not sure...I'm sure it does, although I'm not sure exactly to what extent.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

OK, how can you argue he did not cut it more?!?

Was it not lower after he cut it a lower percentage after Bush SR had already given it a hearty cut?

Is taking off 10% of something after someone takes 20% off of something first not less?

The fact of the matter is he was irresponsible and deemed it unnecessary to have even the amount that Bush cut it to. So he cut it even smaller. Than we were attacked.

Do you even know how to read a chart? Bush Sr. cut it way more than clinton.

And, there is no correlation between a bunch of terrorists flying a plane into buildings a defense budget. That is FBI shit.

Yes, Bush cut it more. Let's do the math together. Start with 100. Subtract 18% for Bush's cut. Now you're at 82. Subtract say 10% off of that. You're knocking off an additional 8.2, so you're at 73.8.

73.8 < 82.

Therefore, Clinton slashed the hell out of the defense budget.

Again, i ask, can you read the chart?

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

[Zool]

A more up to date chart

http://www.uuforum.org/Images/deficit.gif


I always though that you were supposed to make points supporting your POV?

Seems to me that a Democratic run office is better for lowmiddle-middle class and Republican run is better for uppermid and above.

Bring on the Democrats!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Fuggin crackhead.

What scares me is that someone like Ty is going to be in charge of the US financial situation if Obama gets elected.

I know it might not seem like things could get worse...but they most certainly can.

If Tyrone was in charge, you wouldn't have the problem to begin with. Tyrone doesn't start unfounded wars, doesn't have closed door energy policies, and his crackhead friends always keep strict control of their cash..as dealers dont' take CREDIT!

[Partial]

OK, how can you argue he did not cut it more?!?

Was it not lower after he cut it a lower percentage after Bush SR had already given it a hearty cut?

Is taking off 10% of something after someone takes 20% off of something first not less?

The fact of the matter is he was irresponsible and deemed it unnecessary to have even the amount that Bush cut it to. So he cut it even smaller. Than we were attacked.

Do you even know how to read a chart? Bush Sr. cut it way more than clinton.

And, there is no correlation between a bunch of terrorists flying a plane into buildings a defense budget. That is FBI shit.

Yes, Bush cut it more. Let's do the math together. Start with 100. Subtract 18% for Bush's cut. Now you're at 82. Subtract say 10% off of that. You're knocking off an additional 8.2, so you're at 73.8.

73.8 < 82.

Therefore, Clinton slashed the hell out of the defense budget.

Again, i ask, can you read the chart?

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

Perhaps we're both reading it wrong but the chart is measuring % change over time. Since there isn't a standard deviation or any thing like that, you need to look at the change as a net from term to term. Bush cut it down 18% from the previous year. Clinton's net change was cutting it down further. Bush's change was bringing it back up.

I am quite confident I am reading it correctly.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The total budget deficit/surplus also included stock option tax revenue from the dot.bomb bubble. Thus it completely penalized Bush, and rewarded Clinton. Therefore I don't believe it to be a true barometer of financial performance.

I would agree with you.

Granted, Bush is a free-spending cowboy who doesn't have the sense to understand even the most simple economic principles...as his speech last week clearly points out. When I can sit on my couch and wonder if I am more intelligent than our president, we are f'd.

However, Clinton got the benefit of an economy running on nitrous oxide...which couldn't possibly be sustainable long term. How that impacts the graphs? I'm not sure...I'm sure it does, although I'm not sure exactly to what extent.

I'll grant you the NO for Clinton,but then you have to grant the NO for the Bush economy running on military expeditures, inflated oil prices, and the mortgage industry/banking.

[The Leaper]

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

No, YOU are Ty.

See that little line on your graph that says "0"? Anything above that is GROWING, or is being FUNDED. Anything below it is NOT GROWING, or is being CUT.

Clinton's defense spending DECLINED at a rate of around 3% annually according to your graph. It did not grow whatsoever...but keep telling yourself that it did.

What you are pointing out is that Clinton's rate of CUTS were smaller in relation to the budget as a whole than they were for Bush Sr. However, that does not change the fact that Clinton's budget CUT defense spending.

If you honestly believe Clinton increased defense spending by looking at that graph, you are a dumbass.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

No, YOU are Ty.

See that little line on your graph that says "0"? Anything above that is GROWING, or is being FUNDED. Anything below it is NOT GROWING, or is being CUT.

Clinton's defense spending DECLINED at a rate of around 3% annually according to your graph. It did not grow whatsoever...but keep telling yourself that it did.

What you are pointing out is that Clinton's rate of CUTS were smaller in relation to the budget as a whole than they were for Bush Sr. However, that does not change the fact that Clinton's budget CUT defense spending.

If you honestly believe Clinton increased defense spending by looking at that graph, you are a dumbass.

NO, that is exactly my point.

I'm having two conversations. With you i'm in agreement. Perhaps the using the term growth was poor..shoulda said negative growth.

With partial's stupidity, i'm not. He was comparing..and i'm saying that if you you compare...clinton is slashing it less..thus killing it slower.

[Scott Campbell]

The total budget deficit/surplus also included stock option tax revenue from the dot.bomb bubble. Thus it completely penalized Bush, and rewarded Clinton. Therefore I don't believe it to be a true barometer of financial performance.

I would agree with you.

Granted, Bush is a free-spending cowboy who doesn't have the sense to understand even the most simple economic principles...as he speech last week clearly points out.

However, Clinton got the benefit of an economy running on nitrous oxide...which couldn't possibly be sustainable long term. How that impacts the graphs? I'm not sure...I'm sure it does, although I'm not sure exactly to what extent.



Nitrous oxide = Irrational exuberance.

To what extent?

I think it would turn Clinton from winner to loser, and Bush from huge loser into moderate loser. That's just my gut feeling. Its hard to gauge where Bush would be without 9/11, but I freely admit that he doesn't really inspire much confidence.

If you listened to Greenspan speak to Congress in the late 90's, he typically wove one metric into his explanation of our our robust economic growth despite the flight of manufacturing from the US. That metric was something like unit output per hour of labor. I never hear it anymore, but it was some government code speak for productivity.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The total budget deficit/surplus also included stock option tax revenue from the dot.bomb bubble. Thus it completely penalized Bush, and rewarded Clinton. Therefore I don't believe it to be a true barometer of financial performance.

I would agree with you.

Granted, Bush is a free-spending cowboy who doesn't have the sense to understand even the most simple economic principles...as he speech last week clearly points out.

However, Clinton got the benefit of an economy running on nitrous oxide...which couldn't possibly be sustainable long term. How that impacts the graphs? I'm not sure...I'm sure it does, although I'm not sure exactly to what extent.



Nitrous oxide = Irrational exuberance.

To what extent?

I think it would turn Clinton from winner to loser, and Bush from huge loser into moderate loser. That's just my gut feeling. Its hard to gauge where Bush would be without 9/11, but I freely admit that he doesn't really inspire much confidence.

If you listened to Greenspan speak to Congress in the late 90's, he typically wove one metric into his explanation of our our robust economic growth despite the flight of manufacturing from the US. That metric was something like unit output per hour of labor. I never hear it anymore, but it was some government code speak for productivity.

Scott,

Though i dont' know you, i at least respect your conservative viewpoint. And, calling Bush a mod loser reaffirmed my belief.

In my mind, calling a conservative like yourself a repub is an insult.

[The Leaper]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

[Partial]

Fuggin crackhead.

What scares me is that someone like Ty is going to be in charge of the US financial situation if Obama gets elected.

I know it might not seem like things could get worse...but they most certainly can.

If Tyrone was in charge, you wouldn't have the problem to begin with. Tyrone doesn't start unfounded wars, doesn't have closed door energy policies, and his crackhead friends always keep strict control of their cash..as dealers dont' take CREDIT!

It's easy to say all this, but when you have a responsibility to 300 million people and their safety it is quite a bit different when implementing it.

It'd be nice to have a better energy policy, but just about everything I have read on this puts the responsibility on businesses and that will end up increasing costs of operation. Business owners aren't going to want to cut profits, so they are either going to raise prices for everyone, cut wages of employees, or more realistically both.

Also, its easy to say alternative fuels are the future but if you haven't noticed there hasn't been a lot of progression in renewable energy. Like fossil fuels, many questions and problems still exist with each potential type.

I am all for using dollars instead of credit. IMO, people should have to have 30% down to buy a house in equity and put at least 20% down in cash. If they screw up their lives and get foreclosed on, then they should have to suffer the consequences of their actions themselves.

[The Leaper]

If you listened to Greenspan speak to Congress in the late 90's, he typically wove one metric into his explanation of our our robust economic growth despite the flight of manufacturing from the US. That metric was something like unit output per hour of labor. I never hear it anymore, but it was some government code speak for productivity.

That productivity increase we saw in the 1990s was also a big reason why we've lost so many jobs. Obama and Clinton try to pin it on NAFTA...but many of the jobs lost around me in Ohio are due to increased productivity because of the rise of computers and technology...especially in manufacturing.

Unions are going to price themselves out of business. They lived fat in much of the last century, but as technology continues to rise, companies aren't going to pay through the nose for unskilled labor when they can buy a machine to do it faster, cheaper and more efficiently.

[Partial]

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

No, YOU are Ty.

See that little line on your graph that says "0"? Anything above that is GROWING, or is being FUNDED. Anything below it is NOT GROWING, or is being CUT.

Clinton's defense spending DECLINED at a rate of around 3% annually according to your graph. It did not grow whatsoever...but keep telling yourself that it did.

What you are pointing out is that Clinton's rate of CUTS were smaller in relation to the budget as a whole than they were for Bush Sr. However, that does not change the fact that Clinton's budget CUT defense spending.

If you honestly believe Clinton increased defense spending by looking at that graph, you are a dumbass.

NO, that is exactly my point.

I'm having two conversations. With you i'm in agreement. Perhaps the using the term growth was poor..shoulda said negative growth.

With partial's stupidity, i'm not. He was comparing..and i'm saying that if you you compare...clinton is slashing it less..thus killing it slower.

The only one here who read it wrong was you. We all know how to read graphs. Except you, evidently.

Bush cut it. Clinton cut it. Therefore, both cut it. Clinton didn't address the fact that it was low enough as is, and failed to raise it up.

I don't get whats hard to understand about that?

[Partial]

If you listened to Greenspan speak to Congress in the late 90's, he typically wove one metric into his explanation of our our robust economic growth despite the flight of manufacturing from the US. That metric was something like unit output per hour of labor. I never hear it anymore, but it was some government code speak for productivity.

That productivity increase we saw in the 1990s was also a big reason why we've lost so many jobs. Obama and Clinton try to pin it on NAFTA...but many of the jobs lost around me in Ohio are due to increased productivity because of the rise of computers and technology...especially in manufacturing.

Unions are going to price themselves out of business. They lived fat in much of the last century, but as technology continues to rise, companies aren't going to pay through the nose for unskilled labor when they can buy a machine to do it faster, cheaper and more efficiently.

Bingo, but I also think its about time they end or renegoiate NAFTA.

[Joemailman]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

Let me try. It looks to me like defense spending was cut during the Clinton years, but the cuts were at a lesser rate than during the Bush Sr. years.

[Partial]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

Let me try. It looks to me like defense spending was cut during the Clinton years, but the cuts were at a lesser rate than during the Bush Sr. years.

Precisely. All that means though is the negative slope of the graph is slightly less than Bush's. Clinton's low point on the graph is below Bush's.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

No, you are misunderstanding...thru my poor communication. Maybe you missed my edit where i said..negative growth.

When i said "rose" i meant the spending decrease was less than before in comparison. Like if we were plotting it on a graph..from Bush (point a) to Clinton (point b) the line would be going up.

Like i said, my miscommunication.

[Scott Campbell]

Scott,

Though i dont' know you, i at least respect your conservative viewpoint. And, calling Bush a mod loser reaffirmed my belief.

In my mind, calling a conservative like yourself a repub is an insult.


Fiscal conservative, social moderate.

And while I know what I don't like, I also know I don't have all the answers.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The chart isn't about slashing..it is about GROWTH. And, it certainly isn't comparing it like you are doing.

Partial, taking a page from lying with statistics.

No, YOU are Ty.

See that little line on your graph that says "0"? Anything above that is GROWING, or is being FUNDED. Anything below it is NOT GROWING, or is being CUT.

Clinton's defense spending DECLINED at a rate of around 3% annually according to your graph. It did not grow whatsoever...but keep telling yourself that it did.

What you are pointing out is that Clinton's rate of CUTS were smaller in relation to the budget as a whole than they were for Bush Sr. However, that does not change the fact that Clinton's budget CUT defense spending.

If you honestly believe Clinton increased defense spending by looking at that graph, you are a dumbass.

NO, that is exactly my point.

I'm having two conversations. With you i'm in agreement. Perhaps the using the term growth was poor..shoulda said negative growth.

With partial's stupidity, i'm not. He was comparing..and i'm saying that if you you compare...clinton is slashing it less..thus killing it slower.

The only one here who read it wrong was you. We all know how to read graphs. Except you, evidently.

Bush cut it. Clinton cut it. Therefore, both cut it. Clinton didn't address the fact that it was low enough as is, and failed to raise it up.

I don't get whats hard to understand about that?

Nothing, except for the fact that YOU WOULD BE WRONG IN BLAMING CLINTON. And, you would be wrong in saying that it was worse under him.

And, if it was low...why do you blame him..not Bush who had cut it worse..clinton slowed the cutting..and as Leaper has said..it WAS BI FUCKING PARTISAN.

And, lastly...you can't even tie in defense budget to 911.

[Scott Campbell]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

No, you are misunderstanding...thru my poor communication. Maybe you missed my edit where i said..negative growth.

When i said "rose" i meant the spending decrease was less than before in comparison. Like if we were plotting it on a graph..from Bush (point a) to Clinton (point b) the line would be going up.

Like i said, my miscommunication.


LOL

You can spin it however you want, but I still think you just fucked up reading the graph. No biggie.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Scott,

Though i dont' know you, i at least respect your conservative viewpoint. And, calling Bush a mod loser reaffirmed my belief.

In my mind, calling a conservative like yourself a repub is an insult.


Fiscal conservative, social moderate.

And while I know what I don't like, I also know I don't have all the answers.

I know that about you.

Like i said, calling you a repub is an insult.

And, at least i feel that you are not a blind party loyalist.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Actually, you would be wrong.

Under Clinton the defense budget ROSE as compared to Bush Sr.

No Ty. You do not agree with me, which is why you said I "would be wrong" and said the defense budget "ROSE" under Clinton.

I was never wrong once in this thread relating to my comments pertaining to defense spending.

As I pointed out, the defense budget was cut 18% from 1992-1999. However, you apparently think that means the defense budget rose.

No, you are misunderstanding...thru my poor communication. Maybe you missed my edit where i said..negative growth.

When i said "rose" i meant the spending decrease was less than before in comparison. Like if we were plotting it on a graph..from Bush (point a) to Clinton (point b) the line would be going up.

Like i said, my miscommunication.


LOL

You can spin it however you want, but I still think you just fucked up reading the graph. No biggie.

I may be forced into calling you a repub...you are bordering close to Rovian/Atwater tactics.

No spinning. I posted the graph..i clearly understand it. I'm at work..on the phone, writing at the same time.

Mea culpa on my poor communication, but to think i can't read a graph is laughable.

I would liken this fuck up to what i always said to my ex wife...we are going broke with savings..when she would show me what a "deal" were going to get.

Norm Crosbyish..but, you get the idea.

[Partial]

If Clinton is some super-president who did so well with all the is federal, why didn't he recognize the defense budget was too low and raise it up instead of cutting it lower?

Like I said, all he did is slow the rate of the change. It is slightly less negative under him. That doesn't mean that the graph doesn't dip far lower under him, though.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If Clinton is some super-president who did so well with all the is federal, why didn't he recognize the defense budget was too low and raise it up instead of cutting it lower?

Like I said, all he did is slow the rate of the change. It is slightly less negative under him. That doesn't mean that the graph doesn't dip far lower under him, though.

again, what is your point?

You keep trying to link a terrorist attack to defense budget. Nobody, but you would ever do that. Stupid.

The attacks were an INTEL issue, not defense issue.

Again, i ask, why not ask that of bush sr. for the WTC attacks.

Finally, if the defense was hurt under clinton..how do you account for our spectacular success in both 'stan and Iraq..militarily speaking?

[Scott Campbell]

..........but to think i can't read a graph is laughable.


I doubt anyone believes you can't read a graph.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

..........but to think i can't read a graph is laughable.


I doubt anyone believes you can't read a graph.

Ty never loved math..cept for charts, graphs or geometry.

Ty even when taking mba class grew to love the symetry of accounting and basic finance. Ty loves talking about TVOM!

[The Leaper]

LOL

You can spin it however you want, but I still think you just fucked up reading the graph. No biggie.

I think Ty just got a big Johnson while talking about getting a fat condo in another thread...and the rush of blood away from the brain left him powerless.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

LOL

You can spin it however you want, but I still think you just fucked up reading the graph. No biggie.

I think Ty just got a big Johnson while talking about getting a fat condo in another thread...and the rush of blood away from the brain left him powerless.

I hate to say that i'm taking pleasure in the pain of others...but, i am. Screw the developers.

[Scott Campbell]

..........but to think i can't read a graph is laughable.


I doubt anyone believes you can't read a graph.

[MJZiggy]

Oh, screw it. Never mind.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I am all for using dollars instead of credit. IMO, people should have to have 30% down to buy a house in equity and put at least 20% down in cash. If they screw up their lives and get foreclosed on, then they should have to suffer the consequences of their actions themselves.



Ah, more fun with partial. Do you even think before you post?

Hmm, let's say you graduate at have a starting salary of 40k. I know from your brilliant posts that you will be socking some of that away for retirement. I'll give you 10%. Now i don't live in Wisco, so i'm gonna say around at least 13k you aren't going to see..as you pay taxes, ss, wisco taxes, etc. That leaves you with 24k. Of course, i'm sure you'll want to live wity your parents after you get your new job. :roll: But, humor me and let's say you live with a roommate. Let's call it an even 6 bills for rent, cable, power, utilities..and i'm being kind. Let's add a modest 200 a month for food..that is all cooking in..no eating out. Let's call that 10k.

Now we are down to 14K. I'm sure that most college students don't have cars, but will need them upon graduation. So, let's just say 350 a month. Add in a modest 100 bucks a month insurance. Call it 5k.

You'll need gas for the car. Prices at the pump are high. Call it 200 a month. 2500k.

Down to 7500k.

Since you are fairly normal (being kind) i'm assuming you'll want to entertain the ladies or your special lady. We'll call that 100 bucks a month...gifts, dinners, movies, etc. And, she'll be looking at you like a tightwad.

BTW, i'm sure you'll want to buy some birthday and Xmas presents. We'll call that 500 for the year. You are a cheap guy, but people will understand as you need to save 40k.

Now at 5800. Hey, will you be needing any new clothes? Any suits or work apparel..or new jackets for the winter. How about 500 for the year.

5300.

You like taking vacations. So, let's call that 1000 for the year.

4300.

BTW, there are many things i haven't even accounted for...friends weddings, tux rentals, bachelor parties, cleaning supplies, DRINKING!, going to sporting events, ISP, computer, etc.

So, leaving your 4300 for the year...bam...9 years to get to 40k. Of course, you will get raises, but if you are like most normal people as you income increases so do your expenses.

So, let's cut it to 7 years. Of course, i'm giving you the bennie of not adjusting for inflation on the cost of the home, etc.

Exactly how long do you figure it will take you to save 40K for your 20% in cash on a 200k house?

And, how long will it take those who don't make 40k..let's say teachers. Let's day they wanna buy 150k house?

I'm sure you want to mandate that they don't have children before they buy that house as that will affect their savings rate.

Partial, you want to single handedly destroy the housing market.

[Scott Campbell]

Don't forget, Mad charges him $2500/year to subscribe to PackerRats.

[Partial]

20% down would require people to practice better money manangement. I am not all about the housing industry being a huge industry where the rich get richer. I am all about everyone learning to live within their means. That to me will have a chain reaction and people will get smarter with their careers and make more money, be better at investing it, etc, and we can get rid of this stupid social security plan and let everyone sink or swim on their own.

Realistically, when taking a look at kids my age, its kind of disgusting. Most of my friends are going to school on their parents dime yet they don't have any money of their own. Hell, some even have credit card debt. That's ridiculous. One of my friends who is good with managing his money has 40 grand in the bank, several acres of land that he bought up north, bought his own car, and is graduating from marquette without any debt on his own dime. I see no reason these kids who's parents pay for everything shouldn't have some big time cash sitting in the bank.

Partial is sitting at a few grand in the bank right now because he has been paying off the few student loans he had from the semesters he dinked around. Other than that, he is poised to do quite well financially this next year as he has about 6 grand in total expenses over the year with a pretty good amount of income. Partial will soon be seeking the advice of others on what is a fairly risk free investment for 5 grand.

[GBRulz]

Oh no, not another rat starting to talk in third person. :bang:

[The Leaper]

Leaper is gonna have to get Leaper some.

Wow. That IS refreshing.

[GBRulz]

I am all for using dollars instead of credit. IMO, people should have to have 30% down to buy a house in equity and put at least 20% down in cash. If they screw up their lives and get foreclosed on, then they should have to suffer the consequences of their actions themselves.

Partial, the problem with foreclosers is not because someone didn't put 20%down on their house, it's mostly because they live beyond their means. The banks handing money out like candy is part of the problem, too. When I bought my house 6 years ago, I was shocked at what the bank pre-qualified me for. Um, hello? I want to be able to live outside of paying for my mortgage. I also took in account that "what if" I lost my job? (I worked in telecommunications, I know better) I bought something in a nice neighborhood that I was comfortable in and could still afford even on a rainy day. I only put down 10% on my house.

Two months later, my company downsized and I lost my job. What if I put the 20 or 30% down like you insisted and then had no savings to fall back on?

The problem is two-fold. I partially blame the banks for overextending credit. I also blame people for not being disciplined enough. The combination of the two is why foreclosures are up. As a homeowner, it concerns me because MY home is the one dropping in value right now.

[GBRulz]

Leaper is gonna have to get Leaper some.

Wow. That IS refreshing.

GBR is going to start kicking someone's @ss :lol:

[oregonpackfan]

Oh no, not another rat starting to talk in third person. :bang:

My sentiments exactly, GBR!

Partial, you are going to have major problems in the "Real World" if you consistently refer yourself in the third person.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Oh no, not another rat starting to talk in third person. :bang:

My sentiments exactly, GBR!

Partial, you are going to have major problems in the "Real World" if you consistently refer yourself in the third person.

Tyrone doesn't worry about the "real world." Tyrone lives in construct of his mind.

Tyrone doesn't like all of you jumping Ty's train. Only Tyrone speaks in the 3rd person. Tyrone did this as a LITERARY choice (how else can he justify an english undergrad degree?).

BTW, tyrone like many of you is excited about Bush giving him money. Bush has said it will help those of us with housing problems. For 600 bills, i'm looking at an ultra modern cardboard box.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

20% down would require people to practice better money manangement. I am not all about the housing industry being a huge industry where the rich get richer. I am all about everyone learning to live within their means. That to me will have a chain reaction and people will get smarter with their careers and make more money, be better at investing it, etc, and we can get rid of this stupid social security plan and let everyone sink or swim on their own.

Realistically, when taking a look at kids my age, its kind of disgusting. Most of my friends are going to school on their parents dime yet they don't have any money of their own. Hell, some even have credit card debt. That's ridiculous. One of my friends who is good with managing his money has 40 grand in the bank, several acres of land that he bought up north, bought his own car, and is graduating from marquette without any debt on his own dime. I see no reason these kids who's parents pay for everything shouldn't have some big time cash sitting in the bank.

Partial is sitting at a few grand in the bank right now because he has been paying off the few student loans he had from the semesters he dinked around. Other than that, he is poised to do quite well financially this next year as he has about 6 grand in total expenses over the year with a pretty good amount of income. Partial will soon be seeking the advice of others on what is a fairly risk free investment for 5 grand.

Nice strawman, but it has nothing to do with your requirement for 40k.

Housing: Who is talking about the rich getting richer. I guess you'll be happy paying higher taxes and increased crime as unemployment is going to go WAY up when all the subs don't have any work. Not to mention banks not making money on loans. You won't be happy till you kill the housing sector.

BTW, you will notice that you have now changed the argument to kids whose parents pay for school. Great.

What about those whose parents didn't and now are paying off student loans? Have they not demonstrated being resposible by paying off their loans? And, that 5000k of savings...pretty much gone if they have student loans.

And, that is why people have a credit rating. I guess you want to change that as well. No more loans for people with good credit.

Come back and talk with us when you don't live with mommy and daddy and have to pay REAL bills. Otherwise you should STFU and let us wonder if you are an idiot, rather than confirming it.

[Partial]

See the argument of kid graduating a 20k a year college with 40k in the bank. Realistically I am starting thinking that student loans should only be granted if a student works say 25 hours a week or something.

I certainly would not have had any loans if I had a job during the first two years of college during the year instead of just during the summer. It makes you wonder why more people cannot do this. They'd be in far better shape financially and know how to manage money if this occured.

Credit is a good thing to be able to use but people misuse it. It is pretty disgusting that the average american has credit card debt.

I stand by my 20% down. Every wealth accumulation book I have read says this is a rule of thumb to turning your house into a money-making assert versus a liability. Sure, it may take a little longer for people to save for a house, but it seems to be a good idea as they will then have plenty of savings ready in the event of an emergency. By requiring 30% in equity, than they will have plenty of savings as well to cover an emergency.

By doing something like this, it would force people to either A) make better choices and attempt to save quite a bit more money or B) people won't be able to buy houses.

I suppose nothing like this would ever fly, but it would be a good idea for most people to practice.

And Ty, criticizing me for living at home is retarded. That is one of the big reasons that I WILL be able to pay off a house quickly.

As for real bills, I don't think you need to worry about that. I live cheaply. In May when I move out, I have 520 budgeted on expenses (rent, dish, cell, food) and once I'm out of school I will have another 200 monthly in car insurance and health insurance. Add another 5 grand a year in random expenses. According to my calculations, that is approximately 20 grand a year in savings. Add an additional income on top of that while only adding say 300 more a month in expenses gives some phat savings.

[3irty1]

The rates on loans for anything are all competitive, If you had to pay more down on a house, banks would make less interest, and people would be forced to rent longer and thus gain assets slower. Its a lose-lose accept for landlords.

Oh yeah, and there'd be a lot more landlords.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

See the argument of kid graduating a 20k a year college with 40k in the bank. Realistically I am starting thinking that student loans should only be granted if a student works say 25 hours a week or something.

I certainly would not have had any loans if I had a job during the first two years of college during the year instead of just during the summer. It makes you wonder why more people cannot do this. They'd be in far better shape financially and know how to manage money if this occured.

Credit is a good thing to be able to use but people misuse it. It is pretty disgusting that the average american has credit card debt.

I stand by my 20% down. Every wealth accumulation book I have read says this is a rule of thumb to turning your house into a money-making assert versus a liability. Sure, it may take a little longer for people to save for a house, but it seems to be a good idea as they will then have plenty of savings ready in the event of an emergency. By requiring 30% in equity, than they will have plenty of savings as well to cover an emergency.

By doing something like this, it would force people to either A) make better choices and attempt to save quite a bit more money or B) people won't be able to buy houses.

I suppose nothing like this would ever fly, but it would be a good idea for most people to practice.

And Ty, criticizing me for living at home is retarded. That is one of the big reasons that I WILL be able to pay off a house quickly.

As for real bills, I don't think you need to worry about that. I live cheaply. In May when I move out, I have 520 budgeted on expenses (rent, dish, cell, food) and once I'm out of school I will have another 200 monthly in car insurance and health insurance. Add another 5 grand a year in random expenses. According to my calculations, that is approximately 20 grand a year in savings. Add an additional income on top of that while only adding say 300 more a month in expenses gives some phat savings.

You obviously don't understand strawman.

Student loans only to those who work. Sigh. Just when i thought you couldn't be more stupid or a bigger prick, you rise to the occasion.

Credit: Again another strawman. You never answer about those who haven't abused their credit. And, who are you to determine their credit worthiness or if they make a mistake? Suppose i turn it around on you and say i wouldnt' hire anyone who didn't attend the top state school in their state..that would mean you never can work for my company. YOu would complain and say i was young and i've improved.

Asset: dude, i highly doubt you've read half the stuff you say you have..as you are an expert on way to many things for a college student who has schoolwork and a job. BTW, if you know anything about housing..it is not a real good investment.

And, again, i guess people won't be having children before they buy a house as that effects their accumulation rate. Nor will anyone who earns less than 30k.

Criticism: Sorry, but you are wrong. Until you are in the real world you shouldn't be making judgements on others. You are living with your parents in an "unreal" situation..and living with a safety net that others don't have. It shapes your perspective.

520: LOL. You must be living in a piece of shit. congrats..you are a huge success. I guess living with 4 guys makes you a winner.

[MadtownPacker]

Look P, I got some homies that want to flood your nice town with meth. You just gotta help turn everyone into tweakers. Then you can buy your house by next year with this plan.

So what do you say?


:lol:

[Partial]

You obviously don't understand strawman.

Student loans only to those who work. Sigh. Just when i thought you couldn't be more stupid or a bigger prick, you rise to the occasion.

Why? I don't understand why everyone cannot work during college. I have a challenging major, work close to full time, and still have plenty of time for fun and academic success.

I don't see why everyone in college can't work 25 hours. 16 hours can be done on weekends, and 9 hours can be done during the week. That isn't asking too much, and it will teach students money management, more responbility, etc.

My guess is you didn't work during college because you have rich parents. How can you possibly argue this is not a good idea?!?!?!?


Credit: Again another strawman. You never answer about those who haven't abused their credit. And, who are you to determine their credit worthiness or if they make a mistake? Suppose i turn it around on you and say i wouldnt' hire anyone who didn't attend the top state school in their state..that would mean you never can work for my company. YOu would complain and say i was young and i've improved.

What the hell is with the strawman?? In any case, I'd rather be a strawman, whatever that may be, than a pompous ass. I don't see a correlation between the school metaphor and any discussion about credit. If I'm a lender, I am going to see to it that I get paid back. Therefore, I want someone who save up 30% at least.


Asset: dude, i highly doubt you've read half the stuff you say you have..as you are an expert on way to many things for a college student who has schoolwork and a job. BTW, if you know anything about housing..it is not a real good investment.

Not right now obviously, but housing can be an asset. How many have made millions selling real estate??!? My fathers current house has quadrupled in value in 10 years. I consider than an asset.


And, again, i guess people won't be having children before they buy a house as that effects their accumulation rate. Nor will anyone who earns less than 30k.

Then they can rent. Again, I don't care what others do, but if people want to be idiots and lose money on their house by not having the downpayment, why not rent? It will work out for some, but I am not about throwing money away. Evidently I am just not as big of a baller or as smart as you, though.


Criticism: Sorry, but you are wrong. Until you are in the real world you shouldn't be making judgements on others. You are living with your parents in an "unreal" situation..and living with a safety net that others don't have. It shapes your perspective.

How am I wrong about my own finances, exactly? You're wrong. Clearly our priorities in life are different. You're a single guy with rich parents so you probably have some good money to blow around. I am saving my money so I can have a nice family and a modest home some day. Difference strokes for different folks I guess.



520: LOL. You must be living in a piece of shit. congrats..you are a huge success. I guess living with 4 guys makes you a winner.

You laugh all you want. My guess is your rich parents paid your rent in college since its evident to me you never had to have a job! Personally, I would rather have roomates and live cheaply than live alone and pay quite a bit more. It's a personal preference, so why would you criticize?

The reason I will do that until I am married is because I am save an assload of money and be able to have a modest house paid off by the time I am 30. Did you have your house paid off by 30? To each his own, I suppose, but while it may seem crazy to you I am doing exactly what I want.

My dad did pretty much the same thing. He has told me countless times that he can right me a check for whatever amount I would ever need. He is 57 years old. My goal is to be able to do the same. Perhaps that isn't for everyone, but its something that I would like to be able to do, and I'll do whatever it takes to accomplish.

[Partial]

Look P, I got some homies that want to flood your nice town with meth. You just gotta help turn everyone into tweakers. Then you can buy your house by next year with this plan.

So what do you say?


:lol:

LOL, lets do it. Than I can be a winner per Ty's standards!!

[Zool]

LOL, lets do it. Than I can be a winner per Ty's standards!!

Way to aim high.

[Partial]

I do shoot for moon.

In any case, who here is looking to invest in real-estate once the market bottoms out?

Here is an interesting take on the housing crisis:


My manager was discussing this with a faculty member at Harvard Business School, and they had an interesting take: it's generational.

Every 20ish years, some portion of the financial sector goes through a meltdown. This is a time period just long enough for the greyhairs from the previous crisis to retire, and for the next generation to be entrenched.

And, that new generation generally gains their experience during the post-crash runup, when risk is rewarded with tremendous bonuses, not concern.

When the risk-adverse old generation retires, and the risk-takers move into the management positions, there's an institutional inertia and culture of shooting for the moon, all the time. The problem is, while that works during high growth times, it is suicidal during a slump... but "It won't happen this time" or "It might happen, but not to *our* sector, we *learned*" then become the mantras.

Setting up another crisis.

It's easy to point the finger and say "Oooooh, greedy bastards!" but y'know, for certain time periods, it frickin *works* to go balls out. (.com bubble anyone?) Everyone applauds you, and you live the high life. (And anyone who says that no part of them wouldn't want to is lying.)

The trick is to recognize when the landscape is changing, and alter your behavior accordingly. When the boom times have lasted for much of the active portion of an industry's career, it's hard to turn the boat.

This crisis will pass, a lot of people will lose fortunes and savings, and then in a couple of years a new boom will start from the pieces of this crash... and the cycle will start over.

See you in 20 years.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Look P, I got some homies that want to flood your nice town with meth. You just gotta help turn everyone into tweakers. Then you can buy your house by next year with this plan.

So what do you say?


:lol:

I say they are looking to move in on my turf. I RUN this town.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

You obviously don't understand strawman.

Student loans only to those who work. Sigh. Just when i thought you couldn't be more stupid or a bigger prick, you rise to the occasion.

Why? I don't understand why everyone cannot work during college. I have a challenging major, work close to full time, and still have plenty of time for fun and academic success.

I don't see why everyone in college can't work 25 hours. 16 hours can be done on weekends, and 9 hours can be done during the week. That isn't asking too much, and it will teach students money management, more responbility, etc.

My guess is you didn't work during college because you have rich parents. How can you possibly argue this is not a good idea?!?!?!?


Credit: Again another strawman. You never answer about those who haven't abused their credit. And, who are you to determine their credit worthiness or if they make a mistake? Suppose i turn it around on you and say i wouldnt' hire anyone who didn't attend the top state school in their state..that would mean you never can work for my company. YOu would complain and say i was young and i've improved.

What the hell is with the strawman?? In any case, I'd rather be a strawman, whatever that may be, than a pompous ass. I don't see a correlation between the school metaphor and any discussion about credit. If I'm a lender, I am going to see to it that I get paid back. Therefore, I want someone who save up 30% at least.


Asset: dude, i highly doubt you've read half the stuff you say you have..as you are an expert on way to many things for a college student who has schoolwork and a job. BTW, if you know anything about housing..it is not a real good investment.

Not right now obviously, but housing can be an asset. How many have made millions selling real estate??!? My fathers current house has quadrupled in value in 10 years. I consider than an asset.


And, again, i guess people won't be having children before they buy a house as that effects their accumulation rate. Nor will anyone who earns less than 30k.

Then they can rent. Again, I don't care what others do, but if people want to be idiots and lose money on their house by not having the downpayment, why not rent? It will work out for some, but I am not about throwing money away. Evidently I am just not as big of a baller or as smart as you, though.


Criticism: Sorry, but you are wrong. Until you are in the real world you shouldn't be making judgements on others. You are living with your parents in an "unreal" situation..and living with a safety net that others don't have. It shapes your perspective.

How am I wrong about my own finances, exactly? You're wrong. Clearly our priorities in life are different. You're a single guy with rich parents so you probably have some good money to blow around. I am saving my money so I can have a nice family and a modest home some day. Difference strokes for different folks I guess.



520: LOL. You must be living in a piece of shit. congrats..you are a huge success. I guess living with 4 guys makes you a winner.

You laugh all you want. My guess is your rich parents paid your rent in college since its evident to me you never had to have a job! Personally, I would rather have roomates and live cheaply than live alone and pay quite a bit more. It's a personal preference, so why would you criticize?

The reason I will do that until I am married is because I am save an assload of money and be able to have a modest house paid off by the time I am 30. Did you have your house paid off by 30? To each his own, I suppose, but while it may seem crazy to you I am doing exactly what I want.

My dad did pretty much the same thing. He has told me countless times that he can right me a check for whatever amount I would ever need. He is 57 years old. My goal is to be able to do the same. Perhaps that isn't for everyone, but its something that I would like to be able to do, and I'll do whatever it takes to accomplish.

My god, you really are an idiot. You dismiss something without even understanding what it is. That just shows your level of intellect.

Work: Again, you miss the point. Plenty of people work and still make mistakes. However, the point is that you work and live at home. Thus, you aren't the norm. Most people can't do this..therefore your life isn't a good example.

BTW, I worked all the way thru school..including working the graveyard shift. You should just stop making assumptions..because they only further reinforce what most here know about you. That you are young, dumb and full of it.

And, living with others is fine, but at some point it just shows that you can't survive on your OWN. And, you will quickly find that most women view that as well. A couple of years of a roommate is fine, but after that...LOSER.

Strawman: Well, you prove it again. One you don't even understand what it is. Two, you are too lazy to find out. Three, you constantly invent them.

The point, is that you make arbitrary rules as you go. As if having saved money is a better indicator of ability to pay. Banks certainly have stayed in business by making loans. You are just a freakin moron.

And, you can't EVER once explain how low wage earners would EVER finance a home.

Asset: As i watch you retreat, i laught. And, your father's house quadrupuled. Unless you can provide me with the county assesor or something to that effect, i'm inclined not to believe you.

But, you don't even understand the basics of investing and how a house falls into the schema. As for investing, a house is not at the top of the list. The housing buble is over. The benefits of home ownership have been vastly oversold. If you buy a place and plan on selling it in 10 years it will bring in money because of inflation, it won't likely have appreciated.

Finally, you expose the fundamental truth. Your dad can help you out. If you can't see how that affects your worldview and the decisions you make then you are truly clueless. Most folks don't have that.

And, my parents have provided me with anything in I would guess in 20 years. That includes even things like airline tickets to visit them. That is why i can say what i say, because i live it. I don't rely on anybody.

You, on the otherhand, are a young kid, who has barely experienced life and has yet to make your mark. Come back when you have actually accomplished something...like LIVE ON YOUR OWN WITHOUT DEPENDING ON OTHERS.

[Partial]

My god, you really are an idiot. You dismiss something without even understanding what it is. That just shows your level of intellect.

I don't have the time nor the inclination to look up some of the BS you say.


Work: Again, you miss the point. Plenty of people work and still make mistakes. However, the point is that you work and live at home. Thus, you aren't the norm. Most people can't do this..therefore your life isn't a good example.

Accept I did the same thing in Platteville when living on my own.. I reiterate, I don't see any reason why someone cannot work 25 hours while attending school and come out in much better shape than they would be otherwise.


BTW, I worked all the way thru school..including working the graveyard shift. You should just stop making assumptions..because they only further reinforce what most here know about you. That you are young, dumb and full of it.

OK. Good.


And, living with others is fine, but at some point it just shows that you can't survive on your OWN. And, you will quickly find that most women view that as well. A couple of years of a roommate is fine, but after that...LOSER.

Except I am sure you lived with others when you were 22. I don't think my girlfriend will think I am a loser living with my best friends until I tie the knot. Why would I waste all that money renting my own place? That is just dumb. I don't waste energy worrying about what other people or women think. I have enough to worry about.


Strawman: Well, you prove it again. One you don't even understand what it is. Two, you are too lazy to find out. Three, you constantly invent them.

OK Ty, I would say that you do the same stuff.


The point, is that you make arbitrary rules as you go. As if having saved money is a better indicator of ability to pay. Banks certainly have stayed in business by making loans. You are just a freakin moron.

Yeah.. I'm not worried about whats good for the banks. Many banks are staying in business right now because of the tax payers. I am talking about whats good for people, or if I was a bank how I would conduct my business.


And, you can't EVER once explain how low wage earners would EVER finance a home.

If they cannot afford to save their money, than they cannot afford the house. duh. I don't get whats so complicated about that? If you can't save up 20%, than you cannot afford the house you're looking at. There are plenty of modest homes for 150k in the suburbs of Milwaukee or Waukesha. If you cannot save up 20-30% of this in a few years simply by being responsible with your spending, than you cannot afford that home and should rent.


Asset: As i watch you retreat, i laught. And, your father's house quadrupuled. Unless you can provide me with the county assesor or something to that effect, i'm inclined not to believe you.

Much of brookfield and new berlin blew up in this time. I doubt its worth that much now, but thats what it was at its peak. He did make many improvements via equity hours, though.


But, you don't even understand the basics of investing and how a house falls into the schema. As for investing, a house is not at the top of the list. The housing buble is over. The benefits of home ownership have been vastly oversold. If you buy a place and plan on selling it in 10 years it will bring in money because of inflation, it won't likely have appreciated.

Ty, it all depends of where you live, how much you put in, how fast you pay it off, etc. Ask Scott Campbell.. I seem to recall he took a hearty risk on a house and it paid off big time.


Finally, you expose the fundamental truth. Your dad can help you out. If you can't see how that affects your worldview and the decisions you make then you are truly clueless. Most folks don't have that.

That's a true statement if the situation became truly horrible, but I would never go that route. If something tragic ever happened to me, just like anyone else, it'd be tough to recover. I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


And, my parents have provided me with anything in I would guess in 20 years. That includes even things like airline tickets to visit them. That is why i can say what i say, because i live it. I don't rely on anybody.

I would hope not. I will be the same way as soon as college is done.


You, on the otherhand, are a young kid, who has barely experienced life and has yet to make your mark. Come back when you have actually accomplished something...like LIVE ON YOUR OWN WITHOUT DEPENDING ON OTHERS.

What does that have anything to do with this discussion? I don't see how any of this stuff as any barring. My statement is people don't spend their money wisely and don't know how to save money. By forcing them to, it'd be a good thing for those individuals long term. What exactly is your point?

[SkinBasket]

I can't believe Partial is doing this... AGAIN.

I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.

[BallHawk]

I can't believe Partial is doing this... AGAIN.

I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.

It's a weekly occurrence.

[SkinBasket]

He must be running out of things to be clueless about. We just covered this only weeks ago.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I can't believe Partial is doing this... AGAIN.

I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry.

It isn't an either or...feel free to do both. I'm crying because i'm laughing so hard.

[SkinBasket]

I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


I listen to my Dad before anyone else. One smart cookie. Makes over 6 figures at his job and he says he typically makes more in interest than in Comission. I am in line to take over his job.

Recently he purchased an investment that pays 65k profit per year. I will get to take over that as well.

My grandfather worked very hard and started up a successful business and that has trickled down and helped every member of my family when purchasing a house, having a wedding, etc.

I wish I had this kind of "back up plan." Especially since it isn't much different than most other people's. Well, most people except for those fucking bums. Always harassing me for a piece of my hard earned back up plan.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


I listen to my Dad before anyone else. One smart cookie. Makes over 6 figures at his job and he says he typically makes more in interest than in Comission. I am in line to take over his job.

Recently he purchased an investment that pays 65k profit per year. I will get to take over that as well.

My grandfather worked very hard and started up a successful business and that has trickled down and helped every member of my family when purchasing a house, having a wedding, etc.

I wish I had this kind of "back up plan." Especially since it isn't much different than most other people's. Well, most people except for those fucking bums. Always harassing me for a piece of my hard earned back up plan.

Could you also research his dad's pad? I seem to recall that partial was saying how the neighborhood was terrible..yet, now it is highly desirable area that has quadrupuled in value.

[Partial]

I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


I listen to my Dad before anyone else. One smart cookie. Makes over 6 figures at his job and he says he typically makes more in interest than in Comission. I am in line to take over his job.

Recently he purchased an investment that pays 65k profit per year. I will get to take over that as well.

My grandfather worked very hard and started up a successful business and that has trickled down and helped every member of my family when purchasing a house, having a wedding, etc.

I wish I had this kind of "back up plan." Especially since it isn't much different than most other people's. Well, most people except for those fucking bums. Always harassing me for a piece of my hard earned back up plan.

Could you also research his dad's pad? I seem to recall that partial was saying how the neighborhood was terrible..yet, now it is highly desirable area that has quadrupuled in value.

Since when is Brookfield/New Berlin border a bad area? I doubt it is still quadrupled, but he was convinced he could get that much for it last year when he was considering moving to a house on a golf course. I don't really get what is hard to understand about it at all. Right after my folks got a divorce 12 years ago or so, he bought a cheap, shitty house. It was in a good area, and he has fixed it up, put an addition on, finished the basement, made a backyard, re-roofed it, etc. About 4 years ago, the housing boom and milwaukee county tax were moving everyone and their mother (like skin) to Waukesha county. Really, its not unrealistic at all. Perhaps he was being a little generous with the 4x estimate, but that is what he thought so who am I to argue. One of his friends who was a contractor stayed with him for about 6 months after he got a divorce and he redid the kitchen, bathroom and put in the skylights free of charge in exchange for a room.

Marquette is the terrible area. My family doesn't live around the thugs.

Again, simply because a family has a successful business does not mean they get to take advantage of it. The deal is I need to have a masters degree and have made a success of myself on my own before given anything. Christ, you guys act like anyone can be an F off and get taken care of.

I don't see how any of this is relevant. You are claiming its crazy talk to expect someone to save 20% before buying a house. What does any of this have to do with that???

This is a discussion about doing what it takes and making sacrifices to get 20% down. My family has some money, but I would NEVER take a handout from them. Like you claim to be (emphasis on claim), I'm my own man with a great deal of pride.

Instead of defending the fact that if someone cannot save 20% that they cannot afford a house, you've decided to attack me personally calling me naive, etc. Yet I have provided a clearly laid out plan that contradicts just about everything you're saying. Yet instead of providing reasons why my plan is flawed, you just say I am dumb, etc.

[Partial]

I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


I listen to my Dad before anyone else. One smart cookie. Makes over 6 figures at his job and he says he typically makes more in interest than in Comission. I am in line to take over his job.

Recently he purchased an investment that pays 65k profit per year. I will get to take over that as well.

My grandfather worked very hard and started up a successful business and that has trickled down and helped every member of my family when purchasing a house, having a wedding, etc.

I wish I had this kind of "back up plan." Especially since it isn't much different than most other people's. Well, most people except for those fucking bums. Always harassing me for a piece of my hard earned back up plan.

Your **** is a ******. What more of a back-up plan do you need?!? It's not any different than mine.. Except the difference is mine isn't a back-up plan, I have to get a masters degree, and be deemed a success to take over. Yours is far more of a sure thing. I have to compete with his two brothers kids (4 others) and my sister. It's certainly not set in stone.

[SkinBasket]

I don't think my parents ability to help me out is any different than yours at the current stage in your life. If you became a paraplegic and your insurance didn't cover your bills, your parents would probably help you out some. Same here. That's about the extent of a backup plan they provide. I highly doubt its any different then most other people's.


I listen to my Dad before anyone else. One smart cookie. Makes over 6 figures at his job and he says he typically makes more in interest than in Comission. I am in line to take over his job.

Recently he purchased an investment that pays 65k profit per year. I will get to take over that as well.

My grandfather worked very hard and started up a successful business and that has trickled down and helped every member of my family when purchasing a house, having a wedding, etc.

I wish I had this kind of "back up plan." Especially since it isn't much different than most other people's. Well, most people except for those fucking bums. Always harassing me for a piece of my hard earned back up plan.

Your **** is a ******. What more of a back-up plan do you need?!? It's not any different than mine.. Except the difference is mine isn't a back-up plan, I have to get a masters degree, and be deemed a success to take over. Yours is far more of a sure thing. I have to compete with his two brothers kids (4 others) and my sister. It's certainly not set in stone.

You're right, it's not your back-up plan, it's your master plan. Your god-given right to a "successful" life, built on the sweat and tears and blood of your forefathers. Very romantic stuff. I bet your girl gets a stiffy just thinking about it before she pushes it in you.

Nice to see you still are completely oblivious to what a family is, too. I understand your family fell apart years ago. It's sad. Really, it is. If you continue to hold the same views you do now, whatever family you try to make in the future probably will suffer the same fate. Not trying to dig you, just warn you for your potential retarded children's sake.

The "potential" refers to you being able to produce children by the way, not the part about them being retards.

http://smartcanucks.ca/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/04.jpg
Partial says, "Nothing's set in stone. Except for the fact I'm rich bitches!!!!"

[Partial]

I disagree.

[SkinBasket]

I disagree.

Good for you. Nice to see all the stars out tonight.

[BallHawk]

Your **** is a ******.

Censorship? :|

For that?

[SkinBasket]

Your **** is a ******.

Censorship? :|

For that?

I was trying to figure it out too. I think it's because I've never divulged that info here, only at the previous site, and I guess it could be considered personal information.

[Zool]

Your **** is a ******.

Censorship? :|

For that?

I was trying to figure it out too. I think it's because I've never divulged that info here, only at the previous site, and I guess it could be considered personal information.

Retard

[SkinBasket]

Retard

Whore.

[SkinBasket]

http://www.diabloii.net/characters/druid/hurricane-icon.jpg
DRUID HURRICANE!

Just try to recover from that one.

[Zool]

Retard

Whore.

I dont charge anyone but you, so that makes me a slut not a whore.

[SkinBasket]

I've seen faghags before, but never a tardslut.

[Zool]

Its like charity work for me.

[SkinBasket]

http://www.htloz.net/forums/grill/gifs/fire.gif
Recession resmession.

[Freak Out]

http://www.htloz.net/forums/grill/gifs/fire.gif
Recession resmession.

Mother fucking ouch! What a stupid fuck.

[Zool]

http://www.htloz.net/forums/grill/gifs/fire.gif
Recession resmession.

Further proof that medical science is going to destroy the earth. This guy should have fallen victim to himself before now.

[MJZiggy]

Partial, a couple of thoughts. First, has it ever occurred to you that they don't require students to work 25 hours a week because they're SUPPOSED to be focusing on their studies? You can do it, yippee for you, but there are people out there who don't learn things as quickly as others who are working their asses off to barely squeak through school. Are you saying they should be denied academic viability because you are able to work 25 hours a week while they struggle with devoting full time to their studies?

Secondly, the fact that they don't ask for 20% down anymore (they used to) might be because the government wants to be able to tout home ownership as a statistic of the success of the administration. They get more people into houses, they look good because America is prosperous. Actually, I think the requirement that lenders summarize the terms of the loans for their clients to be a good thing. Hopefully they will be required to explain in simple terms that the loan includes a $10k balloon payment or that after 3 or 5 years the percentage rate is likely to escalate and that the payment will go up.

It seems people have been signing loan papers without understanding these things and things like if the taxes go up, so does the payment. I would like to see lenders be a little more strict in terms of the amounts they will approve and the types of loans they offer, but it's up to homeowners to understand what they're getting into as well. They aren't children, but on the flip side, they shouldn't be deceived and misinformed either.

Have you noticed, P, that the people who are telling you to slow down before you make judgments are the members of the forum who have been out living life for a number of years? Have you noticed that not one person who has been out on their own for any length of time has posted that your ideas are correct? Why do you think that is?

You've created an incredible amount of unity and agreement in opinion. That's rare, the only problem is that what they seem to agree on that you're being overly rigid (and judgmental) in your thinking and your ideas on this stuff are wrong.

[Partial]

Partial, a couple of thoughts. First, has it ever occurred to you that they don't require students to work 25 hours a week because they're SUPPOSED to be focusing on their studies? You can do it, yippee for you, but there are people out there who don't learn things as quickly as others who are working their asses off to barely squeak through school. Are you saying they should be denied academic viability because you are able to work 25 hours a week while they struggle with devoting full time to their studies?

That's exactly what I am saying. If they cannot manage their time wisely enough, than thats there problem. Seriously. Who cannot squeeze 25 hours into a week?!? There is AMPLE time to study still. 5+ hours available every day.

Secondly, the fact that they don't ask for 20% down anymore (they used to) might be because the government wants to be able to tout home ownership as a statistic of the success of the administration. They get more people into houses, they look good because America is prosperous. Actually, I think the requirement that lenders summarize the terms of the loans for their clients to be a good thing. Hopefully they will be required to explain in simple terms that the loan includes a $10k balloon payment or that after 3 or 5 years the percentage rate is likely to escalate and that the payment will go up.

It seems people have been signing loan papers without understanding these things and things like if the taxes go up, so does the payment. I would like to see lenders be a little more strict in terms of the amounts they will approve and the types of loans they offer, but it's up to homeowners to understand what they're getting into as well. They aren't children, but on the flip side, they shouldn't be deceived and misinformed either.

Have you noticed, P, that the people who are telling you to slow down before you make judgments are the members of the forum who have been out living life for a number of years? Have you noticed that not one person who has been out on their own for any length of time has posted that your ideas are correct? Why do you think that is?

You've created an incredible amount of unity and agreement in opinion. That's rare, the only problem is that what they seem to agree on that you're being overly rigid (and judgmental) in your thinking and your ideas on this stuff are wrong.[/quote]

The reason is because I propose answers. At the very least, it is something different than what their is now where everyone says gee, I don't know how to fix it so lets have it stay the same despite being a bad system.

For what its worth, I think most people on here that know me outside of here (the platteville people) realize that I am actually a fairly liberal person and don't actually posess such radical views. It's a debate exercise for the most part. However, as I grow older and more cynical I think that these radical views are more and more correct.

[MJZiggy]

YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO ME!! I SAID that not everyone is ACADEMICALLY capable of studying and working at the same time. Not everyone assimilates information at the same rate! Some people take an incredible amount of time and energy to learn things you take for granted knowing because it was easy for you to learn them. It's not about time management. It's about expending whatever amount of time and energy necessary to learn the course material. Some....people....learn....more....s-l-o-w-l-y than others. We do not agree at all.

If the answers you proposed made sense, people would wonder why they didn't think of them themselves. No one is thinking that about your propositions.

Why don't you try actually growing older before you start acting cynical? Idealistic youth is something older people often enjoy.

[Partial]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

[Freak Out]

:bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

[GrnBay007]

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

FYI......you are 20 something. I highly doubt you have even had the "life" opportunities to sink OR swim yet. Quit being so judgmental please. I remember last year you seemed like an inquisitive college kid seeking advise....suddenly you learned it ALL in such a short time. Must have been that darn diploma. :D

[Bretsky]

I wish I knew that the h@ll this thread was about but I'm too lazy to go read the whole thing

[MJZiggy]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

No they are not. I have known plenty of people who've struggled. I got in on a program designed for people who struggle. This is why tutors exist, because people struggle. Not everyone is you. What you're saying is not true, given enough time, dedication and study, they can survive in school. I also know a woman who is in the middle of raising two kids who wants her degree so she can go back to work who is going to need aid. I'm sorry but she has a full plate without the school. Not everyone fits into your convenient little scheme.

LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN IN THE WORLD. We're trying very hard to tell you that you simply cannot pidgeonhole people. It doesn't work. One of the greatest skills you can ever learn is to listen. It is mandatory in business. Listen to what those with more experience have to teach you.

[packinpatland]

"LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN IN THE WORLD. We're trying very hard to tell you that you simply cannot pidgeonhole people. It doesn't work. One of the greatest skills you can ever learn is to listen. It is mandatory in business. Listen to what those with more experience have to teach you."


Good Golly...........I'm not even in the business of business and it's still is good sound advise.

[SkinBasket]

FYI......you are 20 something. I highly doubt you have even had the "life" opportunities to sink OR swim yet.

He had the chance to sink or swim at Papa Johns. He sank and now he's blaming black people for it. Not because they're black though, just because they act like black people.


Must have been that darn diploma. :D

In the uncharacteristically sage words of JustinHarrell:


He went from an unsure kid who tried to avoid looking stupid by socially triangulating to a person recognizes social accpeted behavior and now lives and breaths it to the point of looking down his nose at others.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I don't why Mad defiled Partial in G.B. What does he see in him? Just another starfish, I suppose.

[3irty1]

I'll agree that most people could really push hard to squeeze in a part time job MOST of their weeks in college, its stressful and shitty to have to work during the crunch times with school. Jobs that are accommodating of a college workload are rare. College classes aren't even accommodating of college classes. You know how it can get some weeks.

Financially I think it makes the most sense to work through highschool and do most of your saving then while you have minimal expenses assuming you are leeching off your parents.

I have no desire to work while going to school. On the slow weeks its time consuming and on the tough weeks its all you have time for. I find its better to concentrate on school and apply for scholarships. Or do what I'm doing now which is co-op. Learn and earn!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

[Partial]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

OK, well than my girlfriend who put in 25 hours of work plus an additional 10 of research or so while getting great grades at Madison must be a rarity. You're a dumb ass Ty. It's not hard to do, since students like you who attended good schools like Madison are so much smarter and superior in every sense of the word I don't see why they shouldn't work even more!!!

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

OK, well than my girlfriend who put in 25 hours of work plus an additional 10 of research or so while getting great grades at Madison must be a rarity. You're a dumb ass Ty. It's not hard to do, since students like you who attended good schools like Madison are so much smarter and superior in every sense of the word I don't see why they shouldn't work even more!!!

Ah, partial with the straw man.

I asked a question, why don't you answer it?

P.S. Is it your supposition that students should work harder than they will in normal life? If I take 18 credits, i fully expect to study 18 hours per work. That is 36 hours. If i work 25 hours, that puts me at 61 hours a week. That is hardly consistent with the american 40 hour work wee.

[Partial]

Hell yes I expect students to work more than 40 hours. Hell, 60 hours is what most people work between at their jobs.

Why the hell would you bitch about 61 hours? I am sure you work WAY more than that if you're as high in some company as you imply.

However, one can't deny that thats a lot of credits and if they're only going to go to college for 3 years, than they'll be making the big bucks earlier and with less loans will be in much better shape financially.

[MadtownPacker]

I wonder if Partial started chasing the dragon.

[Partial]

I wonder if Partial started chasing the dragon.

I don't know what that means, but if it is implying sucking the dick than its quite possibly if not probable.

[MadtownPacker]

I don't know what that means, but if it is implying sucking the dick than its quite possibly if not probable.It is an old saying for smoking opium but where I live it is use to refer to smoking meth.

In other words, you are acting like a fucking tweaker.

[Partial]

Good, 'cause I'm not down with the blowing dudes thing.

[Zool]

I wonder if Partial started chasing the dragon.

I don't know what that means, but if it is implying sucking the dick than its quite possibly if not probable.

Further proof of my point. You need to move somewhere that you dont know a single person.

[SkinBasket]

Good, 'cause I'm not down with the blowing dudes thing.

You were just "down" with sucking cock not more than 10 minutes ago. You said and I quote:


but if it is implying sucking the dick than its quite possibly if not probable.

You you go from quite possibly or probably sucking cocks to not being interested in 10 minutes? The little gay man inside you just died a little.

[Partial]

Christ its called a joke.

[SkinBasket]

I suppose you didn't mean to tap your foot either.

[3irty1]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

I was assuming we were talking about the majority of students who weren't Engineering students at MIT. Yes in a rigorous program at a big competitive school there are more important things to do than work. I think my program at a small school is too much for 25 hours. A real dynamo might choose to do it though.

[Partial]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

I was assuming we were talking about the majority of students who weren't Engineering students at MIT. Yes in a rigorous program at a big competitive school there are more important things to do than work. I think my program at a small school is too much for 25 hours. A real dynamo might choose to do it though.

Dude no way. 16 hours of that could be done during the weekend. One 4 and one 5 hour day during the week would be a peace of cake.

[BallHawk]

I wish I knew that the h@ll this thread was about but I'm too lazy to go read the whole thing

Partial thinks he has the wisdom of a thousand sages.

People tell Partial he doesn't.

Partial digs deeper hole.

[Partial]

I wish I knew that the h@ll this thread was about but I'm too lazy to go read the whole thing

Partial thinks he has the wisdom of a thousand sages.

People tell Partial he doesn't.

Partial digs deeper hole.

False. I think people should strive for excellence and give life every ounce of effort they have and work hard. It seems everyone else wants to settle for average. All of my ideas have a common theme of hard work and improving your life both financially and educationally. They're progressive and would require the average idiot to CHANGE into something greater.

[BallHawk]

So every person in America should strive to be like Partial?

Christ. :roll:

[3irty1]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

I was assuming we were talking about the majority of students who weren't Engineering students at MIT. Yes in a rigorous program at a big competitive school there are more important things to do than work. I think my program at a small school is too much for 25 hours. A real dynamo might choose to do it though.

Dude no way. 16 hours of that could be done during the weekend. One 4 and one 5 hour day during the week would be a peace of cake.

Oh don't get me wrong I agree with you that college kids too often don't put themselves in good financial situations. But I'm in a tough major, I don't like having to deal with getting off of work when I have a big week at school. I pay for my own tuition, have zero debt, and I don't need to work part time during the semester to do that. My time is better spent elsewhere than at a low paying job in Platteville.

Your standard marketing major at whitewater has a lot more time on their hands than me.

[Partial]

Joel I've seen how much time you have on school. Yeah, it sucks during busy weeks, but most of the time its very doable. I have no idea how you don't have any debt (actually I do), but thats something very, very rare.

You're right about Platte though. That's why I spent a semester driving to Dubuque. That was really shitty for the 10 bucks an hour when paying for all the gas.

[Partial]

So every person in America should strive to be like Partial?

Christ. :roll:

Barack could learn a lesson or two.

[BallHawk]

So every person in America should strive to be like Partial?

Christ. :roll:

Barack could learn a lesson or two.

I'm sure he could. :roll:

[3irty1]

Joel I've seen how much time you have on school. Yeah, it sucks during busy weeks, but most of the time its very doable. I have no idea how you don't have any debt (actually I do), but thats something very, very rare.

You're right about Platte though. That's why I spent a semester driving to Dubuque. That was really shitty for the 10 bucks an hour when paying for all the gas.

I stockpiled in high school and I have a lot of scholarships. I didn't own a car until December and I worked full time at good wages every summer. Plus I went to Platteville where the tuition and cost of living is cheap.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Hell yes I expect students to work more than 40 hours. Hell, 60 hours is what most people work between at their jobs.

Why the hell would you bitch about 61 hours? I am sure you work WAY more than that if you're as high in some company as you imply.

However, one can't deny that thats a lot of credits and if they're only going to go to college for 3 years, than they'll be making the big bucks earlier and with less loans will be in much better shape financially.

Most people don't work 60 hours at their job. Get serious.

You show a shocking lack of understanding of the real world. hours have steadily decreased since the 1900s.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=718905

GAME, SET, MATCH...time for you to go home. Perhaps the satellite tour.

BTW, who said anything about my position at my company? Big assumptions from you. I've always been a work smart, not hard guy.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

I was assuming we were talking about the majority of students who weren't Engineering students at MIT. Yes in a rigorous program at a big competitive school there are more important things to do than work. I think my program at a small school is too much for 25 hours. A real dynamo might choose to do it though.

You have hit upon something that Partial just ignores...more important things to do than work.

Must people need a break, to recharge their batteries. Thus they need some free time. That isn't a bad thing.

Also, going to college is more than just academic. It is learning to live on your own (something partial can't handle), meeting new people and learning to get along, attending sporting events, having relationships, etc.

The point is that most people don't work more than 40-50 hours per week. Partial would have students working/class/studying 61.

[Partial]

That's why you're a loser Ty. I work 35 hours a week while going to school full-time M-F and chill and relax all weekend.

As for me not being capable of living on my own, the guy you're quoting was essentially a suitemate of mine for a year with some other guys.

[Partial]

Hell yes I expect students to work more than 40 hours. Hell, 60 hours is what most people work between at their jobs.

Why the hell would you bitch about 61 hours? I am sure you work WAY more than that if you're as high in some company as you imply.

However, one can't deny that thats a lot of credits and if they're only going to go to college for 3 years, than they'll be making the big bucks earlier and with less loans will be in much better shape financially.

Most people don't work 60 hours at their job. Get serious.

You show a shocking lack of understanding of the real world. hours have steadily decreased since the 1900s.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=718905

GAME, SET, MATCH...time for you to go home. Perhaps the satellite tour.

BTW, who said anything about my position at my company? Big assumptions from you. I've always been a work smart, not hard guy.

60 hours is NOTHING in high paying jobs. All the managers and leads at my company easily put that in. The rest are hourly employees so they do not.

Just recently you defined success as a Lawyer, Director of a company, Doctor, etc. You think those people don't put 60 hours in a week. LMAO. You're clearly not very high at a company if you work 40 and call it a week

[Freak Out]

The last job I had before starting my business was in a fairly large company and the VP that I reported to worked 6am to 6pm Monday through Friday and always worked a few hours on Saturday....but he was the only Exec that did that. Most stuck with pretty normal hours. We all traveled a bunch so you could add that to the total and get a higher number but he was just a workaholic. Now I may work 20 days strait to get a contract done or a project tied to a contract done but I will damn sure take 10-15 strait off afterwards.

[Freak Out]

Working a little bit while carrying a full load at school is ok....but you should only work a weekend and never push it. The mind works much better if it gets good rest/sleep. I always helped my kids enough to make it through the school year without having to work so they could focus on study and life.....but then cut them off in the summer. :lol:

[Freak Out]

That's why you're a loser Ty. I work 35 hours a week while going to school full-time M-F and chill and relax all weekend.

As for me not being capable of living on my own, the guy you're quoting was essentially a suitemate of mine for a year with some other guys.

Whats "full time"?

[3irty1]

I like the parental strategy of treating every kid differently,

My parents cut me loose to find a way to pay for school and go to school. Good thing they did that because its probably what I needed.

My sister gets spoon fed and financially helped along every step of the way.

My brother is a genius and should be treated like a prize race horse. I expect my parents will pay for his schooling and living expenses so that he can reach his full potential.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

That's why you're a loser Ty. I work 35 hours a week while going to school full-time M-F and chill and relax all weekend.

As for me not being capable of living on my own, the guy you're quoting was essentially a suitemate of mine for a year with some other guys.

Yep, i'm a loser. As if what a young idiot like you would say would actually matter.

Suitemate: And your point is? You still have yet to ever live on your own. Your own pad. Lemme know when that happens.

Ok, so now you work 7 hours a day...yet, we find you posting all day.

If you take 12 credits, that is 12 hours of class. And 12 hours of studying. So, add 24...that means you are basically working/studying 12 hours a day. I find that hard to believe.

Plus, your constant posting, your gym workouts, your trips, etc.

LOL

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Hell yes I expect students to work more than 40 hours. Hell, 60 hours is what most people work between at their jobs.

Why the hell would you bitch about 61 hours? I am sure you work WAY more than that if you're as high in some company as you imply.

However, one can't deny that thats a lot of credits and if they're only going to go to college for 3 years, than they'll be making the big bucks earlier and with less loans will be in much better shape financially.

Most people don't work 60 hours at their job. Get serious.

You show a shocking lack of understanding of the real world. hours have steadily decreased since the 1900s.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=718905

GAME, SET, MATCH...time for you to go home. Perhaps the satellite tour.

BTW, who said anything about my position at my company? Big assumptions from you. I've always been a work smart, not hard guy.

60 hours is NOTHING in high paying jobs. All the managers and leads at my company easily put that in. The rest are hourly employees so they do not.

Just recently you defined success as a Lawyer, Director of a company, Doctor, etc. You think those people don't put 60 hours in a week. LMAO. You're clearly not very high at a company if you work 40 and call it a week

exuse me, you said MOST PEOPLE. Hence, you are wrong.

Furthermore, most students are going to be highly paid. I guess school teachers, engineers, accoutants, etc are highly paid. LOL

Success: I did no such thing. Find that. Once again you are lying. I said that there are varying degrees of success and that what one person determines isn't the same as another.

BTW, as the son of TWO FUCKING physicians, and the brother of one..i can most assuredly tell you that they don't work more than 45 per week. One doesn't go to school that many years to work long hours..you go to school to get a high hourly wage. Idiot.

Same for lawyers. After the standard 7 year partnership..they work normal hours..unless they have a major case.

Lastly, my buddy...who has graduated from GT, masters in EE from there, MBA from ASU and is a director at his chip company...rarely works more than 45. The longest days he works are when he travels to china.

People that work long hours are business owners or that are self employed.

As for me...i vary. But, i don't consider it work..it is all integrated. And, i can pretty much do as i please. If i choose to come in at 7 or 9 no one cares. And, if i take 3 hours to watch a bball game..no one is looking over my shoulder because...RESULTS ARE WhAT COUNT. And, prolly cause they also see me sending out emails at midnite or see from my swipe card that i was in the office sunday nite.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

The last job I had before starting my business was in a fairly large company and the VP that I reported to worked 6am to 6pm Monday through Friday and always worked a few hours on Saturday....but he was the only Exec that did that. Most stuck with pretty normal hours. We all traveled a bunch so you could add that to the total and get a higher number but he was just a workaholic. Now I may work 20 days strait to get a contract done or a project tied to a contract done but I will damn sure take 10-15 strait off afterwards.

Exactly. Partial has no experience in the real world.

[MJZiggy]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

OK, well than my girlfriend who put in 25 hours of work plus an additional 10 of research or so while getting great grades at Madison must be a rarity. You're a dumb ass Ty. It's not hard to do, since students like you who attended good schools like Madison are so much smarter and superior in every sense of the word I don't see why they shouldn't work even more!!!

I will repeat this one more time. You (and your girlfriend) are NOT representative of everyone. You did it, she did it, who cares? Math is easy for some, others not so much. I had to get tutored and take the proficiency exam 3 times to get out of school. I was happier taking language which was the other choice. Not everyone learns at the same rate and you cannot pigeonhole them. Maybe you need to look that word up? You need to learn to see people as individuals, with skillsets separate from your own. How can my little kid understand that all people are individuals with individual abilities and you cannot? Consider the notion that you and your g/f chose each other because you are on similar social levels and have similar abilities and interests...but is there nothing she can do that you find challenging?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

OK, well than my girlfriend who put in 25 hours of work plus an additional 10 of research or so while getting great grades at Madison must be a rarity. You're a dumb ass Ty. It's not hard to do, since students like you who attended good schools like Madison are so much smarter and superior in every sense of the word I don't see why they shouldn't work even more!!!

I will repeat this one more time. You (and your girlfriend) are NOT representative of everyone. You did it, she did it, who cares? Math is easy for some, others not so much. I had to get tutored and take the proficiency exam 3 times to get out of school. I was happier taking language which was the other choice. Not everyone learns at the same rate and you cannot pigeonhole them. Maybe you need to look that word up? You need to learn to see people as individuals, with skillsets separate from your own. How can my little kid understand that all people are individuals with individual abilities and you cannot? Consider the notion that you and your g/f chose each other because you are on similar social levels and have similar abilities and interests...but is there nothing she can do that you find challenging?

Don't be stupid Ziggy. There is nothing a woman can do that Partial can't do.

He already told us he is smarter than her...despite that she studied/applied herself more in high school, graduated from a better university, and is now attending grad school.

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.

[MJZiggy]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

[Scott Campbell]

How many hours a week should one work? There are a lot of ways to answer the question, but I personally prefer - "whatever it takes". I like to compete.

Other people may choose to work less, and I would never hold that against them. Unless they tried to tax the crap out of me to even the playing field.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

It is pretty common for women in their 20s.

I met a GORGEOUS women in the gym. She started talking to me, cause Tyrone is there to workout, and doesn't approach women at the gym.

She was friendly and such...then later found out she had a boyfriend. My buddy's women, when I related the story and why she kept talking to me..way more than would be expected (finding me in the gym, telling me when she was going to be there, etc)..said low self esteem.

Last time at the gym...started asking me about guys and why her 41 year old boyfriend (she is 27) didn't want to go to her best friend's parents house for easter, why when a couple friend came into town..he didn't bring her out, about him not having health insurance, him not meeting any of her friends in TEN MONTHS...him shooting up insulin..for his bodybuilding, etc.

This is a gorgeous, college grad, professional..from a succesful family in the midwest. I just looked at her..and, well, just silently acknowledged my buddy's women and how smart she was.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

How many hours a week should one work? There are a lot of ways to answer the question, but I personally prefer - "whatever it takes". I like to compete.

Other people may choose to work less, and I would never hold that against them. Unless they tried to tax the crap out of me to even the playing field.

I'm with you. If it takes 70..i'll do 70. If it takes me 30..that is even better.

I like being judged on performance..not how long my ass is in the seat.

[Scott Campbell]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

[MJZiggy]

How many hours a week should one work? There are a lot of ways to answer the question, but I personally prefer - "whatever it takes". I like to compete.

Other people may choose to work less, and I would never hold that against them. Unless they tried to tax the crap out of me to even the playing field.

I'm with you. If it takes 70..i'll do 70. If it takes me 30..that is even better.

I like being judged on performance..not how long my ass is in the seat.

I'd love to do 70, but have a long-ass commute and a kid in child care that closes at 6:30. Happily, my boss knows that and knows that he has intelligent humans working with him not robots. Therefore he makes concessions and has an incredibly productive staff that doesn't screw off at work because there's not time for them to be human.

[Scott Campbell]

I'd love to do 70...........



Ok, nobody I know loves to do 70, or 80 or 90. The people I know that do it, do it because they hate to lose.

[MJZiggy]

I think you know what I meant...

[Scott Campbell]

I think you know what I meant...



I don't presume to know too much. It's safer that way. :lol:

[Partial]

Zig thats a load of BS and you know it. There is ample time for anyone to learn with a 25 hour work schedule. If they can't learn it in 5 hours a day, they're not going to learn it period unfortunately.

My propositions wouldn't fly because people are afraid to sink or swim on their own.

Perhaps those who attend a more rigorous univerity than Platteville or UWM might find school and their coursework a bit more challenging.

Or would your supposition be that all comp sci is the same, regardless of university. If so, you are even more stupid than i thought.

OK, well than my girlfriend who put in 25 hours of work plus an additional 10 of research or so while getting great grades at Madison must be a rarity. You're a dumb ass Ty. It's not hard to do, since students like you who attended good schools like Madison are so much smarter and superior in every sense of the word I don't see why they shouldn't work even more!!!

I will repeat this one more time. You (and your girlfriend) are NOT representative of everyone. You did it, she did it, who cares? Math is easy for some, others not so much. I had to get tutored and take the proficiency exam 3 times to get out of school. I was happier taking language which was the other choice. Not everyone learns at the same rate and you cannot pigeonhole them. Maybe you need to look that word up? You need to learn to see people as individuals, with skillsets separate from your own. How can my little kid understand that all people are individuals with individual abilities and you cannot? Consider the notion that you and your g/f chose each other because you are on similar social levels and have similar abilities and interests...but is there nothing she can do that you find challenging?

College is meant to weed the good from the bad out. If everyone can get a degree with ease than what exactly does it stand for?!?

That's BS. Anyone, and I mean anyone, can succeed with a 25 hour work week if they put their mind to it. It's mind over matter.

[Partial]

That's why you're a loser Ty. I work 35 hours a week while going to school full-time M-F and chill and relax all weekend.

As for me not being capable of living on my own, the guy you're quoting was essentially a suitemate of mine for a year with some other guys.

Yep, i'm a loser. As if what a young idiot like you would say would actually matter.

Suitemate: And your point is? You still have yet to ever live on your own. Your own pad. Lemme know when that happens.

Ok, so now you work 7 hours a day...yet, we find you posting all day.

If you take 12 credits, that is 12 hours of class. And 12 hours of studying. So, add 24...that means you are basically working/studying 12 hours a day. I find that hard to believe.

Plus, your constant posting, your gym workouts, your trips, etc.

LOL

Ty, I'm on spring break. You're the one posting during work all day.

15 credits = 30 hours of school
35 work + school = 65

Still 103 hours left over each week. Factor in sleep 7 hours a night and you still have 54 hours to chill, or about 8 hours a day.

Hmmm... 8 hours a day to relax AFTER factoring in studying time..

I'll take that.

[Partial]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

Excuse me????

[MJZiggy]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

Excuse me????

You're telling me she's not way hotter than you? Maybe you need to trade in those cheap sunglasses (Insert ZZ riff).

[Partial]

Hell yes I expect students to work more than 40 hours. Hell, 60 hours is what most people work between at their jobs.

Why the hell would you bitch about 61 hours? I am sure you work WAY more than that if you're as high in some company as you imply.

However, one can't deny that thats a lot of credits and if they're only going to go to college for 3 years, than they'll be making the big bucks earlier and with less loans will be in much better shape financially.

Most people don't work 60 hours at their job. Get serious.

You show a shocking lack of understanding of the real world. hours have steadily decreased since the 1900s.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=718905

GAME, SET, MATCH...time for you to go home. Perhaps the satellite tour.

BTW, who said anything about my position at my company? Big assumptions from you. I've always been a work smart, not hard guy.

60 hours is NOTHING in high paying jobs. All the managers and leads at my company easily put that in. The rest are hourly employees so they do not.

Just recently you defined success as a Lawyer, Director of a company, Doctor, etc. You think those people don't put 60 hours in a week. LMAO. You're clearly not very high at a company if you work 40 and call it a week

exuse me, you said MOST PEOPLE. Hence, you are wrong.

Furthermore, most students are going to be highly paid. I guess school teachers, engineers, accoutants, etc are highly paid. LOL

Success: I did no such thing. Find that. Once again you are lying. I said that there are varying degrees of success and that what one person determines isn't the same as another.

BTW, as the son of TWO FUCKING physicians, and the brother of one..i can most assuredly tell you that they don't work more than 45 per week. One doesn't go to school that many years to work long hours..you go to school to get a high hourly wage. Idiot.

Same for lawyers. After the standard 7 year partnership..they work normal hours..unless they have a major case.

Lastly, my buddy...who has graduated from GT, masters in EE from there, MBA from ASU and is a director at his chip company...rarely works more than 45. The longest days he works are when he travels to china.

People that work long hours are business owners or that are self employed.

As for me...i vary. But, i don't consider it work..it is all integrated. And, i can pretty much do as i please. If i choose to come in at 7 or 9 no one cares. And, if i take 3 hours to watch a bball game..no one is looking over my shoulder because...RESULTS ARE WhAT COUNT. And, prolly cause they also see me sending out emails at midnite or see from my swipe card that i was in the office sunday nite.

You don't think teachers work more than 60 hours? Maybe not anymore with the dumbed down standards. Grading homework takes awhile, ya know.

Hospital docs work a lot. Girlfriend's uncle is a chief of medicine and works about 80 hour weeks. I don't know enough physicians to comment, but I imagine most that aren't in private practice work a lot.

I know plenty of lawyers as my dad's wife works for about 50 of them. They all work very long hours.

Business owners work a lot. My dad seems to be the exception as he works about a 6 hour day. But this is definitely not typical.

So you're telling me you're up at midnight answering email and working Sundays and you're not clearing more than 40 hours? That's a pretty sweet deal that you have them.

At both of the companies I have interned at, the guys making booku bucks are working long, long, long hours. Always there before I get in, and leave later than I do.

My boss, his bosses, and his bosses' boss are always at work by 7, and I have never seen them leave before 6 once. I work early and late daily because I leave for a few hours at least every day for class.

I guess it's different with every company, but I am still skeptical. 45 hours for a director is pretty damn short.

[Partial]

How many hours a week should one work? There are a lot of ways to answer the question, but I personally prefer - "whatever it takes". I like to compete.

Other people may choose to work less, and I would never hold that against them. Unless they tried to tax the crap out of me to even the playing field.

Same here. I don't like school work but I love making money so I will work 100 hour weeks if I would get an hourly rate to do so.

I like being the best. However, when I'm older it will be tough because I certainly want to be able to attend all my kids sporting events and whatnot and coach their little league team.

[Partial]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

Excuse me????

You're telling me she's not way hotter than you? Maybe you need to trade in those cheap sunglasses (Insert ZZ riff).

Looks matter very little. I don't appreciate the judgement and would think better of you than that. The fact of the matter is you don't know anything about me other than what I say on here, which is mostly to stir the pot, and from our brief encounter where I was very quiet and reserved.

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

Both of us are very self confident.

I think its ridiculous for you to make a statement like that. I would think that you would be smart enough to realize that sometimes two people just work.

[BallHawk]

I like being the best. However, when I'm older it will be tough because I certainly want to be able to attend all my kids sporting events and whatnot and coach their little league team.

And for some people, they'd rather work less hours, earn a little less money, just so they can do those little things.

It's different strokes for different folks. Just depends what your priorities are.

[MJZiggy]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

Excuse me????

You're telling me she's not way hotter than you? Maybe you need to trade in those cheap sunglasses (Insert ZZ riff).

Looks matter very little. I don't appreciate the judgement and would think better of you than that. The fact of the matter is you don't know anything about me other than what I say on here, which is mostly to stir the pot, and from our brief encounter where I was very quiet and reserved.

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

Both of us are very self confident.

I think its ridiculous for you to make a statement like that. I would think that you would be smart enough to realize that sometimes two people just work.

Cripes, P. Thicken your skin and learn to take a joke.

[SkinBasket]

Cripes, P. Thicken your skin and learn to take a joke.

Makes you wonder about that whole self confidence thing, doesn't it?

[Partial]

Cripes, P. Thicken your skin and learn to take a joke.

Makes you wonder about that whole self confidence thing, doesn't it?

This coming from the guy who takes digs at anyone whenever he gets an opportunity.

[SkinBasket]

Cripes, P. Thicken your skin and learn to take a joke.

Makes you wonder about that whole self confidence thing, doesn't it?

This coming from the guy who takes digs at anyone whenever he gets an opportunity.

Just the people who are clueless assholes. I have the self confidence to do that.

[SkinBasket]

Take your time coming up with a clever response Partial. I'll be here all week. Maybe you can google some more scouting reports and post their opinions as your own in the meantime.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

No, not ugly. Truthful.

Just like many young men are overly cocky to compensate. Or insecure so they have to control their girlfriend.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I thought implication was that a woman had to have low self-esteem to be with Partial. :lol:

I think it works best as a joke.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

That's why you're a loser Ty. I work 35 hours a week while going to school full-time M-F and chill and relax all weekend.

As for me not being capable of living on my own, the guy you're quoting was essentially a suitemate of mine for a year with some other guys.

Yep, i'm a loser. As if what a young idiot like you would say would actually matter.

Suitemate: And your point is? You still have yet to ever live on your own. Your own pad. Lemme know when that happens.

Ok, so now you work 7 hours a day...yet, we find you posting all day.

If you take 12 credits, that is 12 hours of class. And 12 hours of studying. So, add 24...that means you are basically working/studying 12 hours a day. I find that hard to believe.

Plus, your constant posting, your gym workouts, your trips, etc.

LOL

Ty, I'm on spring break. You're the one posting during work all day.

15 credits = 30 hours of school
35 work + school = 65

Still 103 hours left over each week. Factor in sleep 7 hours a night and you still have 54 hours to chill, or about 8 hours a day.

Hmmm... 8 hours a day to relax AFTER factoring in studying time..

I'll take that.

Yes, that is the benifit of being judged on production not hours. And, having freedom at my job.

Again, you reframe the argument. Your point was that it was normal to work that many hours. I've proven you wrong. Admit defeat.

BTW, your logic leaves a bit to be desire. You've already told us that you can work and study and have the weekends free...so, your 8 hours a day is now, like usual..a change. Sorry.

So, in efffect you have 6 hours during the 5 days to "chill." In that 6 you'll have to shower/clean yourself. Eat some sort of food, do some errands, etc.

And, of course, you've factored in NO TRAVEL time between work and school.

Man, you are an idiot.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Low self esteem...Hmmmm...Interesting. I always wondered, but that could be it. He needs to be better to her. I've seen pictures, he's way out of his league.

Excuse me????

You're telling me she's not way hotter than you? Maybe you need to trade in those cheap sunglasses (Insert ZZ riff).

Looks matter very little. I don't appreciate the judgement and would think better of you than that. The fact of the matter is you don't know anything about me other than what I say on here, which is mostly to stir the pot, and from our brief encounter where I was very quiet and reserved.

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

Both of us are very self confident.

I think its ridiculous for you to make a statement like that. I would think that you would be smart enough to realize that sometimes two people just work.

People that need to tell a message board all their attributes and how confident they are...well, they don't come off very confident.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

[GoPackGo]

Partial, why is it that anyone who pays attention to this forum knows you and your gf's name and knows what you look like? Why do I know where you grew up , where you go to school. I don't want to know these things. Your behavior passed up the "giving to much information to online strangers stage" a long time ago and its weird.

[SkinBasket]

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

She is so going to be humping the mailman while you're at work.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Partial, why is it that anyone who pays attention to this forum knows you and your gf's name and knows what you look like? Why do I know where you grew up , where you go to school. I don't want to know these things. Your behavior passed up the "giving to much information to online strangers stage" a long time ago and its weird.

I'm the opposite, i need to know more. What he eats for breakfast, why type of tootpaste, how many times he uses the bathroom, does he floss, how often does he get a haircut, etc.

Please, more!!!

[Zool]

What he eats for breakfast, why type of tootpaste, how many times he uses the bathroom, does he floss, how often does he get a haircut, etc.

Please, more!!!

Egg white omelette's with wheat toast
Crest
2 #2's and 5-6 #1's
sometimes
3-4 weeks

[MadtownPacker]

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.You mean like getting punked by black guys with their hands in their pockets? :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

No, not ugly. Truthful.

Just like many young men are overly cocky to compensate. Or insecure so they have to control their girlfriend.


I'm just pointing out that you and Zig interjected ragging on loved ones and relationships into this conversation. Not sure if you really wanted to go there.

[Partial]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

No, not ugly. Truthful.

Just like many young men are overly cocky to compensate. Or insecure so they have to control their girlfriend.


I'm just pointing out that you and Zig interjected ragging on loved ones and relationships into this conversation. Not sure if you really wanted to go there.

Especially from two divorces...

[Scott Campbell]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

No, not ugly. Truthful.

Just like many young men are overly cocky to compensate. Or insecure so they have to control their girlfriend.


I'm just pointing out that you and Zig interjected ragging on loved ones and relationships into this conversation. Not sure if you really wanted to go there.

Especially from two divorces...


......really don't want to go there......

If you decide to mod your post, I'll mod this one too.

[Partial]

Hey, if I can take a "Joke", they can too. Funny, how those are the first people to dish out relationship advice :lol:

[Bossman641]

Not sure I want to throw myself into this one, but I agree with Partial somewhat, just not to the extent he takes it.

I just graduated college last year from Univ. of Illinois, most people I knew would have had plenty of time to have a part-time job. I'm not gonna sit here and say they should have, but I don't think it is that far of a stretch for a college student to work 15-20 hours a week.

Of course Partial, like others have said you can't pigeonhole it. I had friends and former roommates in EE and Nuclear who no way would have been able to work. They absolutely lived in the labs, some weekends included. Then I had friends in LAS who barely had to show up at class and did nothing but play videogames and drink all day. Whatever, that's their choice.

I'm not sure what I'm getting at here. I agree with both sides. :huh:

[Partial]

It depends on the school and the major and how good of a student the person wants to be. It's possible to have a social life, get a 4.0, and work a lot, but you might have to make some sacrifices during the week.

Consequently, most of the engineers and computer scientists who have challenging majors and are more pressed for time typically can get an internship or a co-op for a semester that can knock off just about all their student loans.

IMO, it certainly works against you if you don't have some sort of job in school and don't bring home almost perfect grades. If you're not going to get a job, at least work at a research lab or do something. Getting the co-op is huge, though, in the engineering fields as more often than not if you work hard you'll land a high paying job after college.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Basically, i think we can determine that she is like a lot of women at that age...low self esteem.


Man.

That's right up there with the ugliest shots I've ever taken at Harlan.

No, not ugly. Truthful.

Just like many young men are overly cocky to compensate. Or insecure so they have to control their girlfriend.

I'm just pointing out that you and Zig interjected ragging on loved ones and relationships into this conversation. Not sure if you really wanted to go there.

I see. mea culpa.

However, partial has gone very personal before and just recently mentioned my divorce. Of course, since i hate that bitch with the intnesity of a 1,000 suns...it just rolls off my back (as I silently weep while listeing to Mandy by Manilow...cause she gave and she gave WITHOUT TAKING).

See, partial..that is the point. What you think might sting doesn't. Because I dont' tell everybody on this board my business...you think i'm telling you something important..but, if it was important to me and would cause me pain..i wouldn't mention it.

Like divorce. Which obviously you think would..since you are the child of divorce. And, no matter what they told you..IT WAS YOUR FAULT!

[Harlan Huckleby]

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

She is so going to be humping the mailman while you're at work.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This is JoeMailman's territory, his bread and butter. You got your overworked careerist who's convinced his wife loves him for his inherent goodness. But his gentle, cheerful side is seen less and less as he's ground-up in the rat race.
At home sits his pretty, pampered, bored wifey who spends her day on phone complaining about her declining, inadequate mate.

Into the unhappy domicile arrives our amiable, physically-fit friend, JoeMailman. Special delivery, signature please? The slipping bathrobe, care for a cup of coffee? Fucking like minks.

Joe's got a million stories just like this one.

[MJZiggy]

I'm just pointing out that you and Zig interjected ragging on loved ones and relationships into this conversation. Not sure if you really wanted to go there.

Especially from two divorces...[/quote]

For the record, what I said could be taken by her as a compliment if she read it...and maybe we learn something from our mistakes? Funny, though, I don't recall giving relationship advice, I just told him to quit judging people as groups because people are individual. (I'm sure now someone will quote every piece of advice I've ever given anyone over the last two years.)

[SkinBasket]

Consequently, most of the engineers and computer scientists who have challenging majors...

Don't even try to put your lame comp sci degree with the engineers. Comp Sci is worth as much as a Poli Sci degree these days. Everyone and their grandma has one, and it don't mean crap. I know you might be proud of your coursework, but it's not a challenging degree. Especially for dorks.

[SkinBasket]

She's better looking than me, sure. She hates that I am fat but she recognizes that I am a great person who is family oriented, career oriented, always willing to do whatever it takes to make her smile, do my best to make her feel comfortable and safe all the time, let her be herself and fit in with me friends, etc. She happens to find me incredibly sweet and refreshingly honest and original.

She is so going to be humping the mailman while you're at work.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This is JoeMailman's territory, his bread and butter. You got your overworked careerist who's convinced his wife loves him for his inherent goodness. But his gentle, cheerful side is seen less and less as he's ground-up in the rat race.
At home sits his pretty, pampered, bored wifey who spends her day on phone complaining about her declining, inadequate mate.

Into the unhappy domicile arrives our amiable, physically-fit friend, JoeMailman. Special delivery, signature please? The slipping bathrobe, care for a cup of coffee? Fucking like minks.

Joe's got a million stories just like this one.

At least they'll always be BFFs. That's what chubby, sweet, honest guys are for right?

http://www.cinecultist.com/archives/PrettyInPinkBigPic.jpg
Exhibit A: Partial = Ducky. Joe = Blane.

[Partial]

Consequently, most of the engineers and computer scientists who have challenging majors...

Don't even try to put your lame comp sci degree with the engineers. Comp Sci is worth as much as a Poli Sci degree these days. Everyone and their grandma has one, and it don't mean crap. I know you might be proud of your coursework, but it's not a challenging degree. Especially for dorks.

OK, than why do CS majors average 50k outta college?? Why are developers some of the highest paid jobs??!?

Do you have a CS degree? Until you do, then don't talk. It's right up there with EE, Physics, etc.

What is your degree in?

[SkinBasket]

I've had the displeasure of knowing half a dozen comp sci majors while in school, and even more of them afterward in my job. They were, without exception, the kids who couldn't cut it in engineering. Actually there was one exception. One kid liked anime a lot so he was more focused on learning Japanese than engineering, so he went for a comp sci major instead. I don't know, maybe things are different at UWM and platteville than they are at a real university.

I don't have a comp sci degree. Of course, I could ask what other degree you have to compare yours against, but maybe you'll see how self-defeating that argument is. Probably not, but I thought you had to take logic to get a comp sci degree.

I majored in English and History. Then I became a computer programmer and network engineer for the university. Funny thing is, I didn't even need the lame comp sci degree to get a job that was better than half the comp sci degree guys got and I ended up being involved in the hiring of guys just like you (minus the ego problems) into internships. Makes me wonder about the importance of said degree.


The median starting salary for 2006 computer science graduates was $42,000, compared with $40,800 across all disciplines.

That's the good news. The bad news is that graduate starting salaries are still trending down. Thirty years ago, median new graduate salaries equalled average male weekly earnings, but by 2006 they had fallen to 79.7 percent of the $51,200 average male earnings...

On the other hand, computer scientists do a lot better than art and design ($33,200), social science ($36,000) and accounting ($37,000) graduates.


Well, at least you're still more important than the social science and art class guys. Of course they tend to smell like dirty laundry and pot, but it's something.

Did you want to make up some more numbers?

[Harlan Huckleby]

I majored in English and History. Then I became a computer programmer and network engineer for the university.

How does one major in English and then become an engineer? Sounds like magic.

Wait, I think I know: is it because computers are just a bunch of gadgetry and manuals that anyone with average intelligence can figure out if they try? No, that's not quite true, it takes a knack, like being a good dancer.

I think Madtown works in computers, so you don't even need average intelligence.

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work. Computer networking and management is just endlessly learning procedures and terms.

[MJZiggy]

My ex majored in history and ended up an IT director. The computers were a hobby.

[Harlan Huckleby]

My ex majored in history and ended up an IT director. The computers were a hobby.

When was the last time you heard of somebody majoring in history and becoming a metalurgist?

I think computers are endless bullshit. The kids working out at Best Buy are often smarter than the Systems Analysts making 100K salaries. All computer work is about the same compexity, from top to bottom of the heirarchy. ITs just gadgetry that goes on and on. The secretary who figures out everybody's word processing problems might be the smartest person in the company. There are some real geniuses in the field, though, don't get me wrong. But things aren't what they appear to be. So many people are hiding behind buzzwords.

[SkinBasket]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

[Partial]

I've had the displeasure of knowing half a dozen comp sci majors while in school, and even more of them afterward in my job. They were, without exception, the kids who couldn't cut it in engineering. Actually there was one exception. One kid liked anime a lot so he was more focused on learning Japanese than engineering, so he went for a comp sci major instead. I don't know, maybe things are different at UWM and platteville than they are at a real university.

First of all that is a load of BULL. Software Engineering is pretty much the highest or 2nd highest paid engineering discipline out there. I was in SE at Platteville, but they don't have it at UWM. Instead, they have several paths of CS you can take, some more based on programming, and some based on designing systems, etc.

I think certain facets of engineering like electrical, software, and engineering physics majors are probably more challenging than CS, but certainly not disciplines like civil, mechanical, etc.

I don't think you could even call one harder than the other, they're just different.


I don't have a comp sci degree. Of course, I could ask what other degree you have to compare yours against, but maybe you'll see how self-defeating that argument is. Probably not, but I thought you had to take logic to get a comp sci degree.

So you're talking out of your ass as you have no idea what it takes to get a CS degree. 6-7 semesters of advanced mathematics aren't a cake walk. They're all the purely math classes that any electrical engineer takes, but then instead of taking physics classes we take discrete math classes. Again, not necessarily easier or harder, just different. Personally, I think both are really damn hard.


I majored in English and History

So in other words you're not at all qualified to talk about any sort of engineering or computer science degree. For what its worth, getting an engineering degree doesn't make you an engineer. Passing the professional engineering exam does. And being a CS major, I have a VERY good chance of becoming a professional SE.


Then I became a computer programmer and network engineer for the university

No no, you became a computer programmer and network tech. NOT an engineer.


Funny thing is, I didn't even need the lame comp sci degree to get a job that was better than half the comp sci degree guys got and I ended up being involved in the hiring of guys just like you (minus the ego problems) into internships. Makes me wonder about the importance of said degree.

It depends on what you want to do. I don't think you need a CS degree to be a programmer. My boss for example went to school for business and has an MBA. He is a very good programmer. His right hand man is a professional civil engineer.


According to money magazine, Entry level compuer analysts make 60k. That sounds about right when factoring in bigger cities. In Milwaukee, the average UWM CS grad gets about 45k. I have pretty good grades and work for a good company. I'm expecting 50k. Also, you're crazy if you don't think that IT and CS fields are on the rise. Salaries may be down because there are more people that can do it now, but if you're good you can make a ton of money.


7. Computer IT analyst
Why it's great Seems like the entire world is at the mercy of information technology folks, thanks to the rapid spread of computers and swell of the Internet. And all of these jobs pay well, from desktop support technician to Webmaster to database wonk.

Entry-level analysts make $60,000 and above. Senior database specialists and IT managers command six-figure salaries and decent bonuses. A bachelor's degree is enough to get started.

What's cool Telecommuting and freelance gigs abound. Plus: e-mail snooping!

You're crazy if you think 40k is the average. If I worked 40 hours a week for a year I'd make over 40k as an intern. I don't even have a high paying internship either. I know plenty of people at KC and Epic systems with offers for 60k to be developers straight outta school.

[Partial]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

I don't think thats true, but I don't think programming is particularly hard either. It's normally very easy to write code to do something once you break everything down and get a good grasp on what the project is supposed to entail. I think project managers in IT have pretty difficult jobs and they is why they are paid very well.

[Partial]

http://www.uwplatt.edu/~rowemi/

Take a look at all the links listed Skin. I think you're in for quite a surprise.

And you're also crazy talking about Platteville as not as a good school. Their engineers are far more likely to get co-ops and thus job offers than Madison and they are the highest paid engineers in the state with MSOE. Once Madison gets an SE department than they can talk.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

I don't think thats true, but I don't think programming is particularly hard either. It's normally very easy to write code to do something once you break everything down and get a good grasp on what the project is supposed to entail.

I don't think either of you know what you are talking about. :lol:

Actually, it is not that hard most of the time. But software tools & systems often don't work as advertised, can be very stressful to meet deadlines.

I went to school in physics & grad school in computer science, worked in companies making software for scientific instruments. That was challenging, real-time programming is nightmare. Later worked with databases, which should be easy. Sort of, but software is always evolving, lots of bugs in client-side. I did internet programming before browsers stabilized - miserably difficult and frustrating.

I think people who say programming is easy just haven't done much of it. Systems are always changing, and things are always fucked up.

I recommend that NOBODY make a career of computer programmng. Worst field on earth. Your skills don't accumulate beyond a 5-year window. You have to spend your free time reading about the exciting new software tools, which start to all seem the same, but still tons of new details to absorb. B-O-R-I-N-G.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Then I became a computer programmer and network engineer for the university

No no, you became a computer programmer and network tech. NOT an engineer.

Way to smoke him out, Partial! :lol:

I never called myself an "engineer", despite my technical education. WI has a law preventing pretenders like Mr. Skin from calling themselves "engineers." I respect the grueling preparation that real engineers put themselves through before and during their careers.

But on the other hand: SkinBasket is probably going to be your boss someday, Partial. I know other English majors who do well in technology, I have an english major friend who developed a software/training company.

But on to the elephant in the room: SkinBasket was an English major!!?? Damn, I have the highest respect for that education. So how did Skinbasket do all that improving reading, Shakespeare and such, and end up being such a dick?

[GrnBay007]

Ok, since this thread has evolved into education...I have a question. All the way through school my daughter has tested far, far ahead of her grade level in Science and Language Arts. ...esp. Science. In 7th grade she was testing in the 12th + grade levels. Unfortunately she's struggled with Math. She's in honors algebra....but really has to work for a good grade where the science stuff has always been super easy for her. What areas would be good to "gently" guide her toward looking ahead to college and a career?

[Harlan Huckleby]

my daughter has tested far, far ahead of her grade level

"far, far"? my kid tested "far, far, far, far" :lol:


Unfortunately she's struggled with Math.

she's probably just dumb. I'd ignored those other tests, Math is the real litmus test. I would think social services could offer some sort of vocational training, allow her to become self-supporting.

hope this has been of some help.

[Harlan Huckleby]

She's in honors algebra....but really has to work for a good grade

:lol:
I don't even have to write the jokes, you do all the work!

Come on, she is fine. Big deal, so she doesn't like the math classes as much as the others.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

My ex majored in history and ended up an IT director. The computers were a hobby.

I majored, undergrad, like Skin in English and History..or as i like to say..Double Unemployement.

Thank you, i'll be here all week. Try the prime rib.

And, like Skin i found myself working in IT/programming. If you were a writer..you had to use the computer as your tool. And, since it was such a shitty tool compared to a typewriter (strictly in terms of working 100% of the time)...I found myself having to fix it or figure out why things weren't working. And, natural curiousity led me futher down the rabbit hole.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

I don't think thats true, but I don't think programming is particularly hard either. It's normally very easy to write code to do something once you break everything down and get a good grasp on what the project is supposed to entail. I think project managers in IT have pretty difficult jobs and they is why they are paid very well.

They have a tough job because they have to manage people. People like you.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Ok, since this thread has evolved into education...I have a question. All the way through school my daughter has tested far, far ahead of her grade level in Science and Language Arts. ...esp. Science. In 7th grade she was testing in the 12th + grade levels. Unfortunately she's struggled with Math. She's in honors algebra....but really has to work for a good grade where the science stuff has always been super easy for her. What areas would be good to "gently" guide her toward looking ahead to college and a career?

I would suggest Home economics or cooking...Mrs...baby!!!

[MJZiggy]

Now that I think of it, I also know someone in IT at the Pentagon who was a Marketing major, but I think I may see a pattern...The comp sci guys write the code and the BA grads who happen to know about computers are hired to manage the people. Does that sound right?

[GrnBay007]

I would suggest Home economics or cooking...Mrs...baby!!!

Nice! I appreciate your contribution.

How old did you say you were?

[packinpatland]

Age is irrelevant.............what planet is he from? :shock:

[GrnBay007]

Age is irrelevant.............what planet is he from? :shock:

I guess so. Never saw teens with a plan apparently.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I would suggest Home economics or cooking...Mrs...baby!!!

Nice! I appreciate your contribution.

How old did you say you were?

Old enough to appreciate a mom and her daughter. :lol:

[Partial]

Ok, since this thread has evolved into education...I have a question. All the way through school my daughter has tested far, far ahead of her grade level in Science and Language Arts. ...esp. Science. In 7th grade she was testing in the 12th + grade levels. Unfortunately she's struggled with Math. She's in honors algebra....but really has to work for a good grade where the science stuff has always been super easy for her. What areas would be good to "gently" guide her toward looking ahead to college and a career?

I wouldn't worry about that yet but I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

[Partial]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

I don't think thats true, but I don't think programming is particularly hard either. It's normally very easy to write code to do something once you break everything down and get a good grasp on what the project is supposed to entail. I think project managers in IT have pretty difficult jobs and they is why they are paid very well.

They have a tough job because they have to manage people. People like you.

No no, I have fine communication skills and struggle with the technical stuff. No offense, but if you were my age I have a hunch I'd be managing you :D

[Harlan Huckleby]

Now that I think of it, I also know someone in IT at the Pentagon who was a Marketing major, but I think I may see a pattern...The comp sci guys write the code and the BA grads who happen to know about computers are hired to manage the people. Does that sound right?

I would put it another way. The particular degree you come out of college with has very little to do with your advancement in the world, after a few years past college.

No, no, that's not quite right either. What I REALLY mean to say is it's not who you know, it's who you blow.

[GrnBay007]

I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

Tutor time. I hate math. :D

[Partial]

Now that I think of it, I also know someone in IT at the Pentagon who was a Marketing major, but I think I may see a pattern...The comp sci guys write the code and the BA grads who happen to know about computers are hired to manage the people. Does that sound right?

At a lot of companies its the other way around. A lot of developers go and get their MBA so they can manage people. Really, really, really good programmers make more money though. If only I was that talented...

But at any rate, you see both a lot from my experiences at my two jobs. In one, the higher ups were mostly former developers. In my current place, most of the people are from different background and got started out as contract developers.

[GrnBay007]

I would put it another way. The particular degree you come out of college with has very little to do with your advancement in the world, after a few years past college.

No, no, that's not quite right either. What I REALLY mean to say is it's not who you know, it's who you blow.

There's truth in that......well, not who you blow, but those that climb up the bosses ass. You see it all the time. Talk about selling your soul.

[Partial]

I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

Tutor time. I hate math. :D

That, and make sure they understand that attending class and listening is half the battle. My biggest struggles in college have been laziness. The material is a hell of a lot harder when you don't go to class then have a hard time studying because you feel overwhelmed.

[Partial]

Now that I think of it, I also know someone in IT at the Pentagon who was a Marketing major, but I think I may see a pattern...The comp sci guys write the code and the BA grads who happen to know about computers are hired to manage the people. Does that sound right?

I would put it another way. The particular degree you come out of college with has very little to do with your advancement in the world, after a few years past college.

No, no, that's not quite right either. What I REALLY mean to say is it's not who you know, it's who you blow.

See now that I don't know about. In software, it seems a lot of people work on contract and the more companies they work for and do a great job for, the more people begin to know their name. Then when those people move up and are looking for managers, etc, they go for those people they previously worked with.

I know a couple of people who have done this.

[Harlan Huckleby]

There's truth in that......well, not who you blow, but those that climb up the bosses ass. You see it all the time. Talk about selling your soul.

I was only kidding about that part. But ya, the people who rise in organizations often do some rectal orienteering. But leaving aside that true-enough cynicism, college degrees don't matter that much. You have to keep learning and adapting.

[MJZiggy]

I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

Tutor time. I hate math. :D

That, and make sure they understand that attending class and listening is half the battle. My biggest struggles in college have been laziness. The material is a hell of a lot harder when you don't go to class then have a hard time studying because you feel overwhelmed.

Maybe if you focused on school more instead of working 26 hours a week, you wouldn't feel so overwhelmed and would have an easier time focusing on your studies... :wink:

[Scott Campbell]

There's truth in that......well, not who you blow, but those that climb up the bosses ass. You see it all the time. Talk about selling your soul.


Is your boss that bad a guy/gal?

[GrnBay007]

There's truth in that......well, not who you blow, but those that climb up the bosses ass. You see it all the time. Talk about selling your soul.


Is your boss that bad a guy/gal?
No, not now. There was a time when I had a boss that made being at work 10x more stressful then it needed to be. But what I was referring to are those that find a way to climb the ladder without even being able to do the job they were hired for.

[SkinBasket]

I don't have a comp sci degree. Of course, I could ask what other degree you have to compare yours against, but maybe you'll see how self-defeating that argument is. Probably not, but I thought you had to take logic to get a comp sci degree.


So you're talking out of your ass as you have no idea what it takes to get a CS degree.... blah blahblah blah grrrrr.


So in other words you're not at all qualified to talk about any sort of engineering or computer science degree. For what its worth, getting an engineering degree doesn't make you an engineer. Passing the professional engineering exam does. And being a CS major, I have a VERY good chance of becoming a professional SE.

See above. The bolded part. You know, the thick dark letters...


No no, you became a computer programmer and network tech. NOT an engineer.

Thanks for correcting my job title since you have such a deep and thorough understanding of what my job was.


According to money magazine, Entry level compuer analysts make 60k...

No, no you are a potential comp sci major with a low level internship and a super inflated head, not a "compuer analyst." I looked for data on "compuer analysts," but none was available.


In Milwaukee, the average UWM CS grad gets about 45k. I have pretty good grades and work for a good company. I'm expecting 50k..

You also have poor communication skills, a self admitted problem with laziness, and the demonstrated logic skills of a hamster. I am expecting 35k...


You're crazy if you think 40k is the average.

They aren't my numbers. They're your reality - outside your 65k a year inheritance that is. I think I'll go with the published numbers over the "Partial Thinks" numbers.

For the second or third time in the past couple years, harlan is right. Most of the IT jobs involve being familiar with the equipment and software, which isn't hard to do - CS degree or no. If you've built one machine or network you've built them all. There are a lot of terrible IT guys out there with CS degrees that sit in the basement and google whatever problems come up, and as harlan said, hide behind buzzwords hoping their bosses won't understand them or ask questions about why they suck at their job.

The programming part requires a penchant for logic and a varying amount of math depending on your field. After that, it's getting to know the language and how to work around it's limitations.

Or if you're like Partial, you try to learn what you need to for whatever project you're working on and make the job out to be more difficult than it is.

[SkinBasket]

No no, I have fine communication skills and struggle with the technical stuff.

I would think this was a joke if you were anyone else.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I don't think programming is easy, it's very hard work.

Really, it's only as hard as the language makes it.

I don't think thats true, but I don't think programming is particularly hard either. It's normally very easy to write code to do something once you break everything down and get a good grasp on what the project is supposed to entail. I think project managers in IT have pretty difficult jobs and they is why they are paid very well.

They have a tough job because they have to manage people. People like you.


No no, I have fine communication skills and struggle with the technical stuff. No offense, but if you were my age I have a hunch I'd be managing you :D

Right. Look at well you do on this board.

So, you are essentially telling us that you can't even do the basics in your chosen profession.

Manage me. Not a chance. Unlike you, i understand the free market system. I would NEVER choose to work with or under you. Simple as that.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

Tutor time. I hate math. :D

That, and make sure they understand that attending class and listening is half the battle. My biggest struggles in college have been laziness. The material is a hell of a lot harder when you don't go to class then have a hard time studying because you feel overwhelmed.

You are lazy. But, you tell us all the time how easy it is to attend class and work.

[Partial]

I would really start grinding the math and pushing it hard. Knowing math and being great at it will make a lot of college majors easier.

Tutor time. I hate math. :D

That, and make sure they understand that attending class and listening is half the battle. My biggest struggles in college have been laziness. The material is a hell of a lot harder when you don't go to class then have a hard time studying because you feel overwhelmed.

Maybe if you focused on school more instead of working 26 hours a week, you wouldn't feel so overwhelmed and would have an easier time focusing on your studies... :wink:

Ha. Back in my foolish days it was way too much playing video games and sitting around shooting the shit with the roomate and whatnot. That, and sleeping.

[MadtownPacker]

Ha. Back in my foolish days it was way too much playing video games and sitting around shooting the shit with the roomate and whatnot. That, and sleeping.That's how you spent your "foolish days"??

Hahahahaha!! Now I understand why you fear the hood. Try getting arrested sometime. Might scare the lame out of you.

[Partial]

Skin, you're truly an idiot. The number you quoted includes as the jokers like you who pretend to have a CS degree and thus get paid significantly less. It includes all the business chumps in the IT field who do phone support, etc.

According to UWM career center, these are the 2007 averages:

Web Designed - 47k
QA associate - 52,250
Web Developer - 54,750
Developer/Program Analyst - 55,250
E-commerce Analyyst - 61,250
Systems Analyst - 61,500

But again, Skin, you know more than everybody and your made up stats are more accurate than the actual statistics from the UWM career center.

Like I said, I'm shooting for 50k and with my current job I should be making almost 55 according to the average. With my grades and experience I don't think its unreasonable to expect to exceed that total.

So there you go. You're full of shit. You're an idiot who likes to stroke his ego by calling himself an engineer despite going to college to write and read books :lol: . You're off you're rocker if you think how someone writes on here has any impact on the real world or who they are as a person. I'm not going to bother addressing any more of your posts in this thread because what the hell do you know?? You claim you're an engineer when you're a stay at home dad with an english degree. You got lucky and found a wife who is willing to tolerate your attitude. I am sure you're acting like a big phony prick on here, because I all but guarantee you wouldn't have a wife if this is how you acted in the real world. But again, you'll never acknowledge that..

[SkinBasket]

Skin, you're truly an idiot. The number you quoted includes as the jokers like you who pretend to have a CS degree and thus get paid significantly less. It includes all the business chumps in the IT field who do phone support, etc.

I take it you don't actually know how to read the source I quoted. Unfortunate, really. We cured polio, but still can't stave off adult illiteracy. Or was that adult idiocy?


According to UWM career center, these are the 2007 averages:

Web Designed - 47k
QA associate - 52,250
Web Developer - 54,750
Developer/Program Analyst - 55,250
E-commerce Analyyst - 61,250
Systems Analyst - 61,500

But again, Skin, you know more than everybody and your made up stats are more accurate than the actual statistics from the UWM career center.

The average salary for jockeys is 26,000, but guess what? You're not a jockey. You aren't any of those things Partial. You are a Comp Sci major. Pull all the numbers you want for things you aren't and ignore the numbers I posted about what you are, a Comp Sci major. It seems to make your argument a lot easier. The rest of us don't know WTF you're trying to prove, but it is occasionally entertaining.


So there you go. You're full of shit. You're an idiot who likes to stroke his ego by calling himself an engineer despite going to college to write and read books :lol: . You're off you're rocker if you think how someone writes on here has any impact on the real world or who they are as a person. I'm not going to bother addressing any more of your posts in this thread because what the hell do you know?? You claim you're an engineer when you're a stay at home dad with an english degree. You got lucky and found a wife who is willing to tolerate your attitude. I am sure you're acting like a big phony prick on here, because I all but guarantee you wouldn't have a wife if this is how you acted in the real world. But again, you'll never acknowledge that..

So there you go. Another grand victory in your own mind.

I'm perfectly content with what I am, plan to be, and what I have been. I've lived my life for me, my wife, and my kids. Not for what I think my father wants of me so I can replace him in this world without dropping the royal scepter. I can only assume you make yourself feel better by constantly launching what you think are stinging personal attacks on whoever doesn't agree with your delusions of grandeur so you can go tell your girl how you put the smack down on some jerk on a forum and she can nod like she's interesting in what you're saying. At the same time, you're obviously intimidated by my previous job title, while I hold no worth in it whatsoever. You're jealous of my life, but continue to belittle it. You claim what someone posts on here doesn't reflect who they are, yet you base everything you know about me (while at the same time magically psychoanalyzing my real life personality) by what I post . You're a complete mess.

And since you're fixated on my personal life, my wife likes me fine. I'm sure sometimes she even loves me. She doesn't mind how I treat people who act like douchebags. It's the same way I treated douchebags when she met me and she happens to find it refreshing and original, not to mention very sweet. Not every girl is looking for confused, insecure, self important, delusional, misogynistic, racist college boys who live with their parents and throw all their money on the table at the first sign of trouble after all, it would seem.

It took longer that I thought it would though for you to throw all your insults at me and then run away. I remember kids in grade school doing that all the time, too.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Skin, you're truly an idiot. The number you quoted includes as the jokers like you who pretend to have a CS degree and thus get paid significantly less. It includes all the business chumps in the IT field who do phone support, etc.

I take it you don't actually know how to read the source I quoted. Unfortunate, really. We cured polio, but still can't stave off adult illiteracy. Or was that adult idiocy?


According to UWM career center, these are the 2007 averages:

Web Designed - 47k
QA associate - 52,250
Web Developer - 54,750
Developer/Program Analyst - 55,250
E-commerce Analyyst - 61,250
Systems Analyst - 61,500

But again, Skin, you know more than everybody and your made up stats are more accurate than the actual statistics from the UWM career center.

The average salary for jockeys is 26,000, but guess what? You're not a jockey. You aren't any of those things Partial. You are a Comp Sci major. Pull all the numbers you want for things you aren't and ignore the numbers I posted about what you are, a Comp Sci major. It seems to make your argument a lot easier. The rest of us don't know WTF you're trying to prove, but it is occasionally entertaining.


So there you go. You're full of shit. You're an idiot who likes to stroke his ego by calling himself an engineer despite going to college to write and read books :lol: . You're off you're rocker if you think how someone writes on here has any impact on the real world or who they are as a person. I'm not going to bother addressing any more of your posts in this thread because what the hell do you know?? You claim you're an engineer when you're a stay at home dad with an english degree. You got lucky and found a wife who is willing to tolerate your attitude. I am sure you're acting like a big phony prick on here, because I all but guarantee you wouldn't have a wife if this is how you acted in the real world. But again, you'll never acknowledge that..

So there you go. Another grand victory in your own mind.

I'm perfectly content with what I am, plan to be, and what I have been. I've lived my life for me, my wife, and my kids. Not for what I think my father wants of me so I can replace him in this world without dropping the royal scepter. I can only assume you make yourself feel better by constantly launching what you think are stinging personal attacks on whoever doesn't agree with your delusions of grandeur so you can go tell your girl how you put the smack down on some jerk on a forum and she can nod like she's interesting in what you're saying. At the same time, you're obviously intimidated by my previous job title, while I hold no worth in it whatsoever. You're jealous of my life, but continue to belittle it. You claim what someone posts on here doesn't reflect who they are, yet you base everything you know about me (while at the same time magically psychoanalyzing my real life personality) by what I post . You're a complete mess.

And since you're fixated on my personal life, my wife likes me fine. I'm sure sometimes she even loves me. She doesn't mind how I treat people who act like douchebags. It's the same way I treated douchebags when she met me and she happens to find it refreshing and original, not to mention very sweet. Not every girl is looking for confused, insecure, self important, delusional, misogynistic, racist college boys who live with their parents and throw all their money on the table at the first sign of trouble after all, it would seem.

It took longer that I thought it would though for you to throw all your insults at me and then run away. I remember kids in grade school doing that all the time, too.

I think i have a man crush on Skin.

[SkinBasket]

You're only saying that because we're both oppressed by Partial's silent majority that lives in his head. We're more like war buddies fighting an army of doped-up poop-slinging monkeys in party hats.