Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements


JohnAskew JohnAskew 9 girl in pink sweater
  • SpamSpamSpam


  • SpamSpamSpam


  • 4th July

    , TexasToast wrote


    That shows poor planning.  The day that baby bro is born is the day you save and plan.   Buy the cheap Red White and Blue beer and not the Special Export.  Get a second job and get off the internet and stop watching TV.   The parents could take second mortgage to pay for baby brother.   If you cannot afford this then don't have kids.  This is called responsibility and is lacking now from past generations.

    By the way,  college costs more only because the government stuck there nose into it and started giving out secured loans.   Then the colleges saw this gravy train and kept jacking up prices since now extra money was available.     Same as Freddie and Fannie and house prices.   Another bad ending coming on this one too.  

    So plan not to go to Harvard after being accepted because it's too expensive?

    That's asinine as well. Why don't you admit the fact that since 1973, as evidenced by Cbae's graph, everyone has been LOOTED and the wealth is trickling upwards to the rich. Why can't you see that? 

  • 4th July

    , Proton2 wrote

    Too high of a minimum wage could cause this :


    Which isn't necessarily bad.

    Personally, I think there shouldn't be a minimum wage. Counter-intuitively many people would end up making more money as they realize the can negotiate their wage depending on how valuable they feel they are to the enterprise that is employing them, instead of just accepting the minimum wage.

    Now everyone has moxie to make demands on their employer, yeah, right.

  • 4th July

    , TexasToast wrote

    In the States,  responsible parents pay for their kids college so they can start life debt. free.  

    Unfortunately,  many selfish parents would rather have a nice BMW or Mercedes and vacations and tell their kids to pay their own way.    Then they hope the government forgives their loans someday.  

    That's asinine. What if big brother went to Harvard and that used up all the $$? Huh? What now?

  • 4th July

    , cbae wrote


    You're missing the point. The affordability of all of the luxuries that people purchase today is just a mirage. Maybe more people lived within their means in the 1960s because credit wasn't so available back then, but middle class families were at least able to afford the basic necessities of life like food, a family vehicle, and a home, and maybe even college education for the kids without getting in debt to their eyeballs. Today, it's simply not possible for a middle income family purchase all of those things without having to pay down the debt over 30 or 40 years even if they lived like Spartans.


  • Giant rollable TV


    That's just cool. Add WiFi and make it powered wireless, please. +1


  • Science will win out

    , TheJoe wrote


    But, the popular ones are held up as facts.

    Then I'm not at all ashamed when it is time for me to ignore the 'facts' and go with my own ideas.


  • 4th July

    , bondsbw wrote

    @JohnAskew:  You seem to be forgetting that people buy a lot more stuff today than in the 1960s.  That same family might have cable service, internet service, more than one car, cars that cost much more, mobile phones, personal computers, tablets, and so on.

    People used to take the bus more or (gasp) walk to their destination.  They made do with fewer sets of clothing.  They bought/built houses that were not nearly as large or ornate.

    That's called inflation in the real world. Not just a monetary construct, but a life style factor. The single family income model of the 1960's enjoyed relative middle class wealth that is not attainable today for the same model. The incomes should have stayed level with the cost of living in the real world -- but only the wealthiest is gaining and the rest are going without. Do you not see this?

  • New Sherlock!

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote


    That's great and all but what I really want to know is "Will you clean my house?"

    "Clean" meaning taking all things of value and stepping over the mess to leave?