What do you consider rich?

[stinkcat_14]

Thank you for making my point for me. Hedonic does not mean “pretaining to utility.” It means “pretaining to pleasure.” But people who have little to say often try to say it with an overabundance of words, using inappropriate translations.

What would be an appropriate term to use instead of hedonic?

 

[vern_humphrey]

What would be an appropriate term to use instead of hedonic?

In that particular passage, there is no appropriate term, since this sentence is so out of whack it can’t be fixed by changing a word:

A hedonic approach that explicitly calculates capitalization rates produces a methodologically consistent measure of the rental cost of owner-occupied housing.

To what does “hedonic” apply? To the approach (whatever it may be)? To the study? To the statistical manipulation of the data? Or to the philosophical orientation of the writers?

What does “methodologically consistent” mean in this context? A normal translation would be, “We used the same methodology here as was used elsewhere.’” But where is “elsewhere?” And why is that important enough to use in this brief description?

What is “the rental cost of owner-occupied housing?” If the owner occupies his own house, there is no rental cost! So the phrase is meaningless.

When you try to parse the sentence, it turns out to be gibberish.

 

[stinkcat_14]

What is “the rental cost of owner-occupied housing?” If the owner occupies his own house, there is no rental cost! So the phrase is meaningless.

You mean I’ve been lied to all of these years My professors told me something that was untrue?

 

[vern_humphrey]

You mean I’ve been lied to all of these years My professors told me something that was untrue?

I hate to shock you, but if they told you home owners have to rent their own homes, they told you wrong.

Of course, it could be all that overblown, fine writing that confused you.

(BTW, “fine writing” is a term of art.)

 

[Proletarian]

Let’s see. Since I am aware of only one social services agency under the auspices of the RCC, that agency gets over $2 billion from the government which is about 2/3 of the budget. So that must mean that this agency is spending the vast majority of its resources on programs that counsel the poor on saving and investing to become financially independent. On a $3 billion dollar budget, that would mean well over half is spent on these programs. Right??? Please, tell us more about these wonderful programs that teach the poor about financial stewardship. $1 1/2 billion is a lot of money for these programs.

Are you telling me that this social services department you speak of spends most of its funds on hand outs? Food stuffs, blankets, clothes etc.? Billions of dollars worth of supplies for the poor!? This organisation must handle millions of tonnes a year; it must have a larger and more efficient logistics network than the US military

The bulk of funds (in any diocese) goes to various programmes that are designed to as you said “how to be good stewards of what they have been given and how to live Godly lives that will keep them from a host of problems”. This may include counselling, drug/alkanol rehabilitation, refugee advocacy, youth programmes etc. The purposes of the social services (as you probably know) is primarily to enable people with skills that allow them to integrate with society. The management of their funds is very rarely the cause of poverty within western culture. If I see a drug adict,with a limited education and poor social skills; I do not recommend financial management education as their first recourse.

 

[Ridgerunner]

J.P. Morgan defined “rich” as “able to live off the income of your income.”

I guess I would have to defer to his definition rather than to my own, since he knew what it was like to be rich, and I don’t.

 

[whatevergirl]

You mean I’ve been lied to all of these years My professors told me something that was untrue?

owner occupied is when the owner is living in his/her separate apartment…like a duplex…and he/she has a renter in another part of the same dwelling.

 

[Pug]

and is anybody else afraid they might have too much?

que Dios te bendiga

Sometimes, but not in the same way as you, I suspect. For example, I have the money to fix my bathroom (it has no door, open slats for a floor, no sink, no electricity, etc.) but I have not accomplished this. So, should I give the money away and keep the insane bathroom? Probably not, since the bathroom is not to code as of this moment. But I am unable to fix it myself (I am in poor health) and I can’t seem to handle getting someone else to do it. I had two people come to make bids and then refuse to make a bid and they just left. So, there it sits. If I had more willpower, perhaps I could get it fixed. But I don’t.

Meanwhile, my house is of less use than it could be. People will not use that bathroom, so I can’t invite people over for dinner or study groups, which is a shame, as our parish could use a host for some of its activities. But perhaps these are meaningless considerations and the poor matter more.

I don’t think I want anyone yelling at me about this. But I do wonder if I should just donate the money. Mostly I don’t think about it because I can’t deal with it. So the money sits.

 

[stinkcat_14]

owner occupied is when the owner is living in his/her separate apartment…like a duplex…and he/she has a renter in another part of the same dwelling.

Owner occupied means when the owner of the property lives in that same property. The government in order to calculate things such as Gross Domestic Product and the Consumer Price Index estimates the rental value of these properties (at least in the aggregate). It is called imputed rent.

 

[Minnesota_Mary]

Are you telling me that this social services department you speak of spends most of its funds on hand outs? Food stuffs, blankets, clothes etc.? Billions of dollars worth of supplies for the poor!? This organisation must handle millions of tonnes a year; it must have a larger and more efficient logistics network than the US military :

Nice job of obfuscation here. Answer the question that was put to you after you said your agency puts the vast majority of its funds towards programs that teach the poor about saving and investing.

The bulk of funds (in any diocese) goes to various programmes that are designed to as you said “how to be good stewards of what they have been given and how to live Godly lives that will keep them from a host of problems”. This may include counselling, drug/alkanol rehabilitation, refugee advocacy, youth programmes etc. The purposes of the social services (as you probably know) is primarily to enable people with skills that allow them to integrate with society. The management of their funds is very rarely the cause of poverty within western culture. If I see a drug adict,with a limited education and poor social skills; I do not recommend financial management education as their first recourse.

Please direct us to the your social service agency’s websites for the programs that you say teach the poor about good stewardship, saving, and investing for their futures. You said the vast majority of funds for your agency go towards this goal. Now back up what you said with some concrete proof. :dts:

 

[KathleenElsie]

Blessings come From God. Being rich in faith and love of God is the best blessing. Also being rich is to have the family needs met: good health care, a roof over our heads, food on the table, transportation etc.

We don’t need more but at times extra comes in handy.

 

[Proletarian]

Now back up what you said with some concrete proof. :dts:

How ironic that the one that accused the Church of mass corruption without evidence is now the one asking for “proof”

Please direct us to the your social service agency’s websites for the programs that you say teach the poor about good stewardship, saving, and investing for their futures. You said the vast majority of funds for your agency go towards this goal.

When you say things like this I really have to question your claim that you have been involved in the social services. The ultimate goal of ANY social justice programme is for those involved to obtain financial independence.

• Drug rehabilitation: no drugs means more money
• Education/vocational training: greater earning ability
• Housing assistance: providing a safe and reliable environment as a base for their employment
• Counselling/social training: Better social skills means a greater chance of employment

What you may call “financial planning” is rarely required once a person has been given the skills to operate effectively within society.

Heres the link.

catholicwelfare.com.au/about_us/members

There are (if I recall correctly over 50) agencies under the regulation of Catholic Social Services Australia. Check them all out; not one of them deals with handouts.

 

[stinkcat_14]

What you may call “financial planning” is rarely required once a person has been given the skills to operate effectively within society.

Perhaps people in Australia are better at handling their money, but from my experience in the US, financial illiteracy is a huge problem. For example, how many people put off saving for retirement until they are 50, etc?

 

[Proletarian]

Perhaps people in Australia are better at handling their money, but from my experience in the US, financial illiteracy is a huge problem. For example, how many people put off saving for retirement until they are 50, etc?

I’m afraid I can’t comment on that. Here there is a mandatory requirement for every employer to contribute a minimum of 9% of thier employees income into a savings fund. The average Australian worker plans for their retirement whether they like it or not

 

[Al_Masetti]

Call Bathfitter.

The company can fix you up with a tub and or shower.

Their employees may be able to do some additional work for you on their own time to install a floor, sink, etc.

Try it.

You might be pleasantly surprised.

Sometimes, but not in the same way as you, I suspect. For example, I have the money to fix my bathroom (it has no door, open slats for a floor, no sink, no electricity, etc.) but I have not accomplished this. So, should I give the money away and keep the insane bathroom? Probably not, since the bathroom is not to code as of this moment. But I am unable to fix it myself (I am in poor health) and I can’t seem to handle getting someone else to do it. I had two people come to make bids and then refuse to make a bid and they just left. So, there it sits. If I had more willpower, perhaps I could get it fixed. But I don’t.

Meanwhile, my house is of less use than it could be. People will not use that bathroom, so I can’t invite people over for dinner or study groups, which is a shame, as our parish could use a host for some of its activities. But perhaps these are meaningless considerations and the poor matter more.

I don’t think I want anyone yelling at me about this. But I do wonder if I should just donate the money. Mostly I don’t think about it because I can’t deal with it. So the money sits.

 

[leonie]

You really meant to say good food and nice clothes didn’t you? We couldn’t have our children walking around looking like they were poor could we.

They don’t need good books, they just need books. Who cares if they’re second hand, tattered, with a few scribbles?

I take it you were in part referring to necessities like Scouts, soccer or baseball.

Is this how one should justify living in a wealthy area?

You have a very interesting concept of necessity.

I hope I’m not changing the conversation too much, but I haven’t checked in a few days and I wanted to reply to Proletarian.

Er. I mean healthy food.

By clothes, I mean modest, clean clothes. We only use second hand clothes with a few exceptions when we can’t find something. By good books, I mean edifying. We obtain our books from the library. By activities, I could mean scouts or sports–I mean formative activities that build leadership skills and virtue.

By a safe neighborhood, I mean one in which you have some measure of safety. For example, in one part of Indpls, in the last few months, two young girls were abducted from their bus stops and raped. Obviously, you don’t have children if you don’t consider safety a necessity. And, I doubt you would consider my neighborhood a wealthy one or my small old house a mansion.

You, my friend, have a serious chip on your shoulder. Healthy and adequate diet, presentable clothes, wholesome activities, and safe environment should be our goal for every single person on this planet.

Errrrrrrrrrr

 

[Pug]

Call Bathfitter.

A worthy consideration. I hadn’t considered one of the all in one day bathroom people. I’ve got a tub, though, but that might not matter.

Thanks. A new place to call.

 

[Minnesota_Mary]

How ironic that the one that accused the Church of mass corruption without evidence is now the one asking for “proof”

I never accused the Church of mass corruption! This is you twisting what was said. Show me the post where I accused the Church of mass corruption.

When you say things like this I really have to question your claim that you have been involved in the social services. The ultimate goal of ANY social justice programme is for those involved to obtain financial independence.

• Drug rehabilitation: no drugs means more money
• Education/vocational training: greater earning ability
• Housing assistance: providing a safe and reliable environment as a base for their employment
• Counselling/social training: Better social skills means a greater chance of employment

None of the above address financial planning, checkbook balancing, saving, and investing. If you work but never save a dime, you will never have any financial security.

What you may call “financial planning” is rarely required once a person has been given the skills to operate effectively within society.

Boy are you ever deluded! Most babyboomers don’t have anywhere near enough saved for retirement. The papers were full of articles about it just the other day. Most people are clueless about the stock market, bonds, and other financial instruments. They live from paycheck to paycheck. Walmart gets much of their wealth.

Heres the link.

catholicwelfare.com.au/about_us/members

There are (if I recall correctly over 50) agencies under the regulation of Catholic Social Services Australia. Check them all out; not one of them deals with handouts.

I thought you were working in America. I don’t know anything about Catholic Social Services in Australia. I worked for CSS in the United States. They changed the name back to Catholic Charities.

When I worked for CSS many years ago, Lutheran Social Services, sent out a flyer promoting a program they offered to poor people to teach them how to save, invest, and plan for their futures. I posted the flyer on the waiting room bulletin board. When the director came for a visit to my office, he noticed the flyer and told me to take it down. I asked why, because CSS didn’t have any kind of a program like it. He demanded that I take it down anyway. I really got his number that day. Keeping poor people needy is big business for many.

 

[maryj]

If I may quote from a country song…
I know I’m a lucky man
God’s given me a pretty fair hand
Gotta house and a piece of land
a few dollars in a coffee can
my old trucks still runnin good
my tickers tickin like they say it should
got supper in the oven
a good womens lovin
and one more day to be my little kids dad
Lord knows I’m a lucky man

Got some friends who would be here fast
I could call them anytime of day
got a brother who’s got my back
got a mama who I swears a saint
got a brand new rod and reel
got a full week off this year
dad had a close call last spring
it’s a miracle he’s still here

yes, I’m a lucky man
God’s given me a pretty fair hand

That’s what I consider rich. Being content with everyday life, and being happy with what you have. Yup I’m a lucky (wo)man

 

[Proletarian]

I never accused the Church of mass corruption! This is you twisting what was said. Show me the post where I accused the Church of mass corruption.

resent having the heavy hand of the government extract from my income to redistribute it to a bunch of bureaucrats who want to keep the poverty problem going so they have job security. **If the bishops really wanted to help **the poor they would have programs teaching them how to be good stewards of what they have been given and how to live Godly lives that will keep them from a host of problems. They would teach them about the benefits of saving and investing and how to invest so they too can have financial security.

There are a lot of poverty pimps in the Church. They talk about the poor, but the ones they are really concerned about are themselves. They aren’t working in the Church for peanuts. (Post #35)

The actions of one man does not justify your saying such things about the church.

Boy are you ever deluded! Most babyboomers don’t have anywhere near enough saved for retirement. The papers were full of articles about it just the other day. Most people are clueless about the stock market, bonds, and other financial instruments. They live from paycheck to paycheck. Walmart gets much of their wealth.

No, Im not deluded, were just dealing with two completely different systems. This is the fundamental difference between Australia and the US. Our compulsory superannuation (see post # 154) means that when an Australian retires we are Financially secure. Because of this mandatory investment in the stock market Australians in general are very aware of financial (stock) management. In this regard I don’t think it is productive to compare the level of financial literacy between our two countries.