denverpilot
Tied Down
I had a co-worker once who named his cat "mushu". Even funnier was he didn't know why it made people laugh.
I collected blood once at a chicken processing facility to isolate topoisomerase. I never ate chicken again.
I cut the lawn once, never ate another arugula salad.I collected blood once at a chicken processing facility to isolate topoisomerase. I never ate chicken again.
I didn't know your lawn was made out of arugula. I feed dandelions to my pet tortoise Rosie. Never seem to run out of those.I cut the lawn once, never ate another arugula salad.
Do the chickens have large talons?I guess any meat processing plants are pretty gross. I don't need to know about it. However, what James does is totally different. The chickens lay eggs, and when their egg laying lifecycle is up they get sold to the meat processors. It looks like a pretty clean environment to me.
Doesn't matter, if the political sniping continues, the thread will be closed and warnings will be given. The people who continue in that vein are just as guilty as the starter.Who started it?
Funny, the "guilty" ones on your side of the aisle never seem to get publicly admonished.Doesn't matter, if the political sniping continues, the thread will be closed and warnings will be given. The people who continue in that vein are just as guilty as the starter.
Both sides are equally guilty, . You have no idea who gets private warnings.Funny, the "guilty" ones on your side of the aisle never seem to get publicly admonished.
Just an observation.
I believe that is nearly entirely incorrect. The breeds of chicken that you eat are distinct from those that lay eggs, at least according to my understanding. Indeed the ones you eat are grown by a small number of monolithic corporations, those who raise the chickens are in effect small-time employees of said corporation, and are treated about how you expect. John Oliver did a great piece on it.The chickens lay eggs, and when their egg laying lifecycle is up they get sold to the meat processors. It looks like a pretty clean environment to me.
But I know who gets public warnings.Both sides are equally guilty, . You have no idea who gets private warnings.
BTW, although I have certain political opinions, at this point I can't stand either "side".
Both sides are equally guilty, . You have no idea who gets private warnings.
BTW, although I have certain political opinions, at this point I can't stand either "side".
I believe that is nearly entirely incorrect. The breeds of chicken that you eat are distinct from those that lay eggs, at least according to my understanding.
I never said they were sold to be eaten by humans, just sold. I believe they are processed into feed or some such.
The only reason I quoted your post is that it was the most appropriate one for me to answer. You asked who started it, I said it didn't matter. We don't allow political bashing from either side.But I know who gets public warnings.
Double-standard much?
The only reason I quoted your post is that it was the most appropriate one for me to answer. You asked who started it, I said it didn't matter. We don't allow political bashing from either side.
Sometimes it seems my lawn is only made of arugula!I didn't know your lawn was made out of arugula. I feed dandelions to my pet tortoise Rosie. Never seem to run out of those.
Do the chickens have large talons?
Sure. Glad to help.
1. Avoid debt.
2. Pay off credit cards every month. Every month.
3. Live well within your means.
4. Invest surplus (see 3 above) in low to moderate risk mutual funds, well diversified.
5. Continue patiently for 20 to 30 years.
You're welcome.
I did that, opened my first IRA in 1982 at age 24. 35 years later, my wife and I have amassed $800,000, which I suppose sounds like a lot of money, until you try to live on it. Using that rule of thumb that you should spend no more than four percent of your income producing assets in a given year, that would give me $32,000 per year. If that's being rich then it's overrated.
If you're in the upper middle class and your follow HF's advice, and you never have a long spate of unemployment, and you never have a serious illness, you can collect a nice nest egg to make your retirement more comfortable, but you will not be rich or wealthy. I'm hoping to stay in my current profession until I'm 70, but as my mother used to say, "If you want to make God laugh, tell her your plans.".
To expand on this, numerous posts were deleted and warnings were given. Don't think that just because someone makes an inappropriate post that doesn't get deleted right away that you can jump right in with similar posts. It sometimes takes a while for posts to be noticed or reported. Then it takes a while for the MC to act.Doesn't matter, if the political sniping continues, the thread will be closed and warnings will be given. The people who continue in that vein are just as guilty as the starter.
I get what you're saying, it's not "wealthy", but rich? I think so. Sure beats an awful lot of folks who saved $0.
Mathematically it makes sense. If there were no such thing as interest and you know you'll live approximately 20% of your adult life with no income, you'd have to save 20% of everything you make in a lifetime to cover it.
That just matches lifestyle. It doesn't amass wealth. You'd have to invest far heavier than 20% to live a lifestyle above your working years in retirement in a no interest world.
Besides airplanes, which are hideously expensive, and obviously everyone here would like to fly them in retirement, which means a LOT more saved... what would you not be able to do in retirement that you could do when working at that $32,000/year number? Everything paid off, including house, and food and energy bills being the main/largest outflows.
With SSI added to it, how close will you be to $56,516, the median household U.S. income? Will your SSI number be at least $2000/mo? If it's higher, you'll be above the median. Most folks mathematically would call that "rich".
Not "wealthy" though. I get that.
Actually, taxes and health care will be your highest expenses in retirement. Not too different from your working years.I get what you're saying, it's not "wealthy", but rich? I think so. Sure beats an awful lot of folks who saved $0.
Mathematically it makes sense. If there were no such thing as interest and you know you'll live approximately 20% of your adult life with no income, you'd have to save 20% of everything you make in a lifetime to cover it.
That just matches lifestyle. It doesn't amass wealth. You'd have to invest far heavier than 20% to live a lifestyle above your working years in retirement in a no interest world.
Besides airplanes, which are hideously expensive, and obviously everyone here would like to fly them in retirement, which means a LOT more saved... what would you not be able to do in retirement that you could do when working at that $32,000/year number? Everything paid off, including house, and food and energy bills being the main/largest outflows.
With SSI added to it, how close will you be to $56,516, the median household U.S. income? Will your SSI number be at least $2000/mo? If it's higher, you'll be above the median. Most folks mathematically would call that "rich".
Not "wealthy" though. I get that.
Got me thinking of Iowa.Thanks. That was a few years ago in Ohio. I try to take each kid with me on a trip once per year and show them what Dad does when he's not at home.
Well, if we were trying to live on $32,000 per year, I suppose we could sell our house and find a nice trailer to move into. Taxes, insurance, maintenance, and repairs on this house are around $11,000 per year in today's dollars. (BTW, that $11,000 would rent you a 1 bedroom apartment in a not so nice complex here.) We could downsize and pull probably $100K out of the house and get that per year figure down a couple of thousand dollars per year, but that's not going to make that big of a difference.
Actually, taxes and health care will be your highest expenses in retirement. Not too different from your working years.