ADVERTISEMENT

This is a good idea

I have friends who do that. Then the shitty city immediately starts citing them for shit. Got out of it. Let it rot

Good point, these empty homes often attract construction handyman who very well may have helped rental landlords along with unhouseable tenants ruin the home in the first place.

Also doesn't take long for an empty house to deteriorate beyond repair.

City inspectors and their building codes can be a problem, especially for under funded investors and their handyman who just think they know what they are doing.

Having said all that, In many ways it is easier to build a home than it is to restore one. On the other hand, the high cost of new homes is making restoration of older homes more reasonable than was once the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcmurtry66
Good point, these empty homes often attract construction handyman who very well may have helped rental landlords along with unhouseable tenants ruin the home in the first place.

Also doesn't take long for an empty house to deteriorate beyond repair.

City inspectors and their building codes can be a problem, especially for under funded investors and their handyman who just think they know what they are doing.

Having said all that, In many ways it is easier to build a home than it is to restore one. On the other hand, the high cost of new homes is making restoration of older homes more reasonable than was once the case.
And there’s no margin in 3/2 1500 Sq ft homes
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoot1
Appointed jobs are rewards for being a party hack, not merit. So there is no real difference between hiring someone for being a good (fill in race/gender/religion) than there is hiring someone for being a member of one of the two parties.
Well, no difference other than the 14th Amendment.
 
Disagree that view is the reason we're in this position. It has many, many causes. One of them is our insistence in high school of pushing kids into college who are only going because they think it helps them get a job and believe they'll be "lesser" people if they don't have a college degree.

There are many more causes, too, that are much more influential than a view of education as a value in and of itself.

OK, I’ll go with the primary reason. It’s an unrealistic view. Sounds good on a Hallmark card, but doesn’t sound so good when the bill comes due and the income isn’t sufficient to pay it.

What we have right now is unsustainable. I can’t say exactly how it will manifest. But I do know that we can’t just keep up making bad investments without costly ramifications.

Again, I wouldn’t want to underwrite the loan of somebody who took this view of education. Because the odds seem awfully high I wouldn’t be paid back.
 
She'll also throw in 25K for a down payment on an inflated home that holders of useless degrees and mounds of debt still can't afford.

Just more pandering with no plan publicly put on display.

That said, I'm sure there are jobs in the federal gov that don't require advanced degrees or any degree in some cases.
What is your group offering to help the middle class? deportment, going to jail, sending the National Guard or military. The gop offers nothing.
 
OK, I’ll go with the primary reason. It’s an unrealistic view. Sounds good on a Hallmark card, but doesn’t sound so good when the bill comes due and the income isn’t sufficient to pay it.
Aren't you religious? If so, I find these criticisms a little odd. Many of Jesus's teaching and Christian morality also "sound good on a Hallmark card," and are unrealistic w/r/t human nature. Yet billions think they bring them a better life, even if their belief and the time invested yield zero income (if you really believe, it should probably cost you money, no?).

Many (all?) of the best things in life have no relation to money, and, if we are only measuring that way, are downright irrational.

I'm sure glad Newton, Einstein, et al. didn't think they only reason they should learn was to make money. What a horrible world we'd live in right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoosboot
Aren't you religious? If so, I find these criticisms a little odd. Many of Jesus's teaching and Christian morality also "sound good on a Hallmark card," and are unrealistic w/r/t human nature. Yet billions think they bring them a better life, even if their belief and the time invested yield zero income (if you really believe, it should probably cost you money, no?).

Many (all?) of the best things in life have no relation to money, and, if we are only measuring that way, are downright irrational.

I'm sure glad Newton, Einstein, et al. didn't think they only reason they should learn was to make money. What a horrible world we'd live in right now.

I’m sorry to always have to be the bad guy. I get it. As I said, there was a time when I’d have agreed entirely with you. But the cost has gone up, the value has gone down….and one way or another ends have to be met.

I’m completely open to ideas on how to do that. But if the idea is to shift the burden of bad investments from the individual students and onto taxpayers, it’s a non-starter with me. That doesn’t fix the problem.

If we changed the way we lent money the way I think we should, it would force colleges to either price their individual programs rationally to meet those levels, or else get rid of programs that can’t make ends meet with those funding levels.
 
Aren't you religious? If so, I find these criticisms a little odd. Many of Jesus's teaching and Christian morality also "sound good on a Hallmark card," and are unrealistic w/r/t human nature. Yet billions think they bring them a better life, even if their belief and the time invested yield zero income (if you really believe, it should probably cost you money, no?).

Many (all?) of the best things in life have no relation to money, and, if we are only measuring that way, are downright irrational.

I'm sure glad Newton, Einstein, et al. didn't think they only reason they should learn was to make money. What a horrible world we'd live in right now.

Not just scientists, our founders learned philosophy, they studied science, they learned foreign languages, heck, they learned ballroom dance.

Generally speaking today we want trade schools. I think we miss a well rounded education.
 
Not just scientists, our founders learned philosophy, they studied science, they learned foreign languages, heck, they learned ballroom dance.

Generally speaking today we want trade schools. I think we miss a well rounded education.
I picked the area I thought @crazed_hoosier2 would have to agree was useful. I agree with you on those others.

He and I aren’t far apart, though, if at all. I’m just pushing back at some of his broader statements that I think could use a qualifier or two.

The cost has made it very difficult for someone to use college the way it was intended. It’s a super important issue we need to address in this country, but neither party seems interested.
 
I picked the area I thought @crazed_hoosier2 would have to agree was useful. I agree with you on those others.

He and I aren’t far apart, though, if at all. I’m just pushing back at some of his broader statements that I think could use a qualifier or two.

The cost has made it very difficult for someone to use college the way it was intended. It’s a super important issue we need to address in this country, but neither party seems interested.

The first thing you do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging. You aren’t going to find your way out if you don’t do that.

But there’s no urgency, because the money is currently going into the black fiscal hole that all our bad money goes to. The fixes won’t be popular or pleasant - same as with entitlements. So of course politicians don’t want to touch it.
 
It’s a super important issue we need to address in this country, but neither party seems interested.
education costs
healthcare system
health (rfk jr)
insurance

less popular stuff but a drag on people. look at sope fing with that mess. absolutely absurd for him to be dealing with that bullshit
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
I picked the area I thought @crazed_hoosier2 would have to agree was useful. I agree with you on those others.

He and I aren’t far apart, though, if at all. I’m just pushing back at some of his broader statements that I think could use a qualifier or two.

The cost has made it very difficult for someone to use college the way it was intended. It’s a super important issue we need to address in this country, but neither party seems interested.

I agree it is a problem, hence why I liked the report education has been getting cheaper. My complaint is more that I agree with the well rounded education over living in business or engineering and never seeing a language or philosophy.
 
I agree it is a problem, hence why I liked the report education has been getting cheaper. My complaint is more that I agree with the well rounded education over living in business or engineering and never seeing a language or philosophy.
i already know what i'm doing marv. my daughter goes to mizzou she can study anything she wants. god forbid she goes to MO State same holds true. she goes out of state or private i get a say in what she studies. i'm not paying a fortune for soft sciences. sucks but reality with these costs. fortunately i'll only have one going through college at a time
 
I agree it is a problem, hence why I liked the report education has been getting cheaper. My complaint is more that I agree with the well rounded education over living in business or engineering and never seeing a language or philosophy.

Hold on, I never said that. I’m talking about the degrees people walk away with when they’re done — and the income people can expect to earn by having those degrees, relative to the cost to obtain them.

Of course people can (and should!) take worthy electives. But the cost of any particular degree should absolutely bear some rational relationship to the value (and I do mean monetary value) of having it.

This is a problem. And we have to address it…sooner rather than later. I’ve given one idea on how to do this, but I’m always in the market for other ones.
 
I agree it is a problem, hence why I liked the report education has been getting cheaper. My complaint is more that I agree with the well rounded education over living in business or engineering and never seeing a language or philosophy.

One other thing: knowing a foreign language is a terrific life skill that can very much be of real value.

But it’s also a great example of something that no longer requires (if it ever did) a college education to learn.
 
Hold on, I never said that. I’m talking about the degrees people walk away with when they’re done — and the income people can expect to earn by having those degrees, relative to the cost to obtain them.

Of course people can (and should!) take worthy electives. But the cost of any particular degree should absolutely bear some rational relationship to the value (and I do mean monetary value) of having it.

This is a problem. And we have to address it…sooner rather than later. I’ve given one idea on how to do this, but I’m always in the market for other ones.
Washington University for an MSW to make $32k at United Way. And no. Nothing in social work requires a master's
 
i already know what i'm doing marv. my daughter goes to mizzou she can study anything she wants. god forbid she goes to MO State same holds true. she goes out of state or private i get a say in what she studies. i'm not paying a fortune for soft sciences. sucks but reality with these costs. fortunately i'll only have one going through college at a time
But will she be interested in or good at what you find useful? What if the answer is no?
 
If I ran student lending in this country, I’d put a value on the degree being pursued. And the total loan amount they qualify for would be a function of that number. And if somebody changes majors to one of the useless degrees, it will change what they’re able to get.

This is how mortgages work: is the property worth the amount requested? Do they have the wherewithal to pay it back?

Student lending should work similarly.
Yeah, I think you've made your opinion on the subject abundantly clear.

I'd quibble about "useless degrees", but I doubt there is much interest in that conversation.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I think you've made your opinion on the subject abundantly clear.

I'd quibble about "useless degrees", but I doubt there is much interest in that conversation.

I just mean ones that don’t carry much value in the job market - yet are still priced the same as valuable degrees that are. It’s just rhetorical shorthand.

Why do you think we have some $2T in distressed student debt sitting on the books, if it’s not what I’m saying?

If people were making incomes that were rational to what they spent on college expenses, we wouldn’t have this. But many aren’t, so we do.
 
Precisely.

I don’t think I would want to underwrite the loan of somebody who approaches higher education in the old view that education itself is its own value and shouldn’t have a pricetag put on it.

That view is the reason we’re in the pickle we’re in. It does sound nicer than my view — I’ll give it that.

Figure out how to reduce or cap administrative costs. That is the primary driver of higher prices along with uncontrolled lending
 
All federal jobs? Where were you in the thread on appointments where I proved we already do not consider the "best" qualified as a criteria.
I think suggesting you “proved” anything is a little disingenuous. I may have missed the post where you refuted that eliminating the largest demographic from consideration for any position was going to increase the likelihood of having the best folks in place.
 
I think suggesting you “proved” anything is a little disingenuous. I may have missed the post where you refuted that eliminating the largest demographic from consideration for any position was going to increase the likelihood of having the best folks in place.

For appointed jobs, we automatically eliminate the other main party, Libertarians, and independents. No matter who wins, we eliminate over 1/2 of the country simply based on a criteria that they don't donate big money to the winning party.
 
Why do you think we have some $2T in distressed student debt sitting on the books, if it’s not what I’m saying?

Figure out how to reduce or cap administrative costs. That is the primary driver of higher prices along with uncontrolled lending

Most student debt isn't the silly huge amounts that are bandied about. It's more in the $20- 50K range, and a good chunk of that is held by people who never graduated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
Yes and no. If you have a system. Good case. Ortho on board for causal ltr. Life care if justified. Do it up right. Present it right. You can get a policy to pop without filing. There’s an art to it
Demand letters to an insured serve two purposes. 1. Scare the crap out of the insured—sleep deprivation scared. 2. Put tension between the insured and the insurance company. Done right P is off to the races.

When I did public entity defense, nobody gave a crap about demand letters. Not the public officials and certainly not me. There was no way a plaintiff could scare anybody in that world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
Demand letters to an insured serve two purposes. 1. Scare the crap out of the insured—sleep deprivation scared. 2. Put tension between the insured and the insurance company. Done right P is off to the races.

When I did public entity defense, nobody gave a crap about demand letters. Not the public officials and certainly not me. There was no way a plaintiff could scare anybody in that world.
For sure. There’s a time and a place. My first boss had and has never spoken to an adjuster. Has never written a demand letter. If he took a case it was filed

Then again the Glazers were his neighbors and for a sport he played polo with Tommy Lee jones.

I would sign him up for westlaw training tho. Everyone thought it was real funny when that would get buzzed into his office

Sir. There’s a Westlaw representative here for your training
Huh. What. How is that possible
 
We need to lower the bar. As an educated man, I can safely say that education is highly overrated.
I cherish the 4.5 years I spent in Bloomington, and I learned a lot in all of my graduate programs I bounced around, especially law school. But in hindsight, I wish I had never done any of it. I wish I had spent two years studying a trade right out of high school, and just stuck with that.
I guess we need to consider what being educated even means.

Interesting that you would toss law school in with bouncing around in different disciplines in Bloomington. After 19 years of k-12 education, 4 years undergrad, and 3 years law, I can easily say that I did not consider myself educated until law school.

Here is a bit of personal history that emphasizes the point.

When I was in Bloomington, candidates for a Bacekor of Arts degree had to pass an English proficiency exam. I flunked it. The paper was grammatically acceptable but I had nothing to say. (We were given some abstract question to comment on). I met with a grad student a few times, wrote another paper and passed. That was in the spring. Months later I was a 1L taking a mandatory class called something like The Legal Method. It was taught by a tough taskmaster. The grade in that class was based on a single paper. I got the highest grade in that class. What was the difference? I can’t put my finger on it other than to say law school was unlike any other learning experience.

Professor Kingsfield:

 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT