[Onlyliveonce]

Originally Posted by ScoopLV

I reject those conclusions wholly. It is not imperative to retire to a low-cost area. It is imperative to get to the point where finances simply do not matter anymore. Then go do what you want. I am very, very bad at settling.

And that's why the schools you list as "great," I consider mediocre at best. I'm a product of a great school system. I recognize that I am very fortunate in that respect. When it came time to go to university, I selected the college and program that suited me. There was never any question that I wouldn't be accepted. And I've used that diploma to carry me through my entire professional life. It's the gift that just keeps on giving. When I decided to change careers for the second time, that sheepskin once again opened all the doors for me. Seeking employment has been effortless because of the foundation I laid in primary and secondary school.

And all I ask is that everyone else have the same kind of opportunity that I was given. There will not be equal outcomes. But equal opportunity should be the goal.

That isn't going to happen in Las Vegas.

1) CCSD is dysfunctional to the point of being evil.
2) Las Vegas cannot attract a critical mass of intelligent residents because of its very nature. This means below-average employees across the entire employment spectrum, including teachers. (There are great teachers in the system. There aren't enough of them to balance out the mediocre and below-average teachers. Las Vegas has a signal to noise problem that cannot be fixed.)
3) Point two leads directly to this conclusion: A student's peer group in Las Vegas is going to be below average because Las Vegas is below average. This city simply does not value education. Our drop-out numbers alone prove that. We can say whatever we want about education. Only our actions make a difference. We won't even fund libraries. And peer group is just as important as engaged parents and motivated teachers.

Education in Clark County is a problem with no solutions.

I expected yoo reject what I posted. BUT

Where is this utopia that you are drawn too ? ( trick question ) as utopia doesn't exist. With that said where are the places to live ?

I retired on my terms. The cemeteries are occupied with working stiffs ( literally )

I too have a Masters degree from a NY University. I understand the value of education. I chose the field of Police work so I could pull the plug at 40 and not be another "working stiff" dead or alive.

I commend you on your degree, but how is it working for you ? Are you happy with your current career ? I assume you are not happy about your location of residence. I do identify with you in that regard as I was miserable in NY, which I assume is high culture in your opinion.

I am not going to comment on the great schools that my kids are zoned for as we will agree to disagree.

Lastly, I have settled for nothing. I enjoy living here in the Valley and the low cost of living was only one consideration. Also I am home with my young kids enjoying the most precious gift I have been given.

I am truly sorry you are not where u want to be, but I am sure you will get there.

[FrostyToasty]

Originally Posted by Onlyliveonce

Answer me this: How does a booming economy help a retired 40 year old ? Please be honest and not just try to argue your point.

If you retired correctly, you should have a significant amount of liquid assets. And at age 40 these liquid assets should be highly invested in stocks. A booming economy would give these liquid assets return rates well above the rate of inflation.

[Onlyliveonce]

Originally Posted by FrostyToasty

If you retired correctly, you should have a significant amount of liquid assets. And at age 40 these liquid assets should be highly invested in stocks. A booming economy would give these liquid assets return rates well above the rate of inflation.

Before the big stock crash I took my money out of equities and placed into bonds/fixed income=good
never bought back into market as I thought is was/is over valued, so money still on the sidelines=bad

Your point is valid if I can ever get back in the equities at a decent price. Then the economy would equal out for me. Again I made the mistake of playing it safe too long.

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Wolfpacker

Is this correct, or is a tax on all revenue above $1 million (meaning you're first $1 million in revenue is tax-free)?

You owe the tax on the $1 million at anything over the threshold. No tax free if over the threshold.

[ScoopLV]

Originally Posted by NLVgal

Logical fallacy, Scoop. While I agree on most of your points, saying that the problem has no solution is incorrect.

Short of rounding up all the idiots and sending them to Somalia, what can possibly be done? Our population would be cut by more than half, after all.

[von949]

Originally Posted by Everdeen

*I'm not going to argue with Scoop about education. I'm not going to argue with Scoop about education. I'm not going to argue with Scoop about education. I'm not going to argue with Scoop about education. I'm not going to argue with Scoop about education.*

[Wolfpacker]

Originally Posted by Onlyliveonce

My pension is 100% guaranteed under the NYS constitution. The first debts paid are pensions. A NYS constitution convention requiring two separate sessions over the course of years to ensure two separate elections ,with a 3/4 majority both conventions. In essence the NYS constitution must be changed to screw me. I'm not worried at all and this would effect hundreds of thousands of retirees.
Yes I have addition monies diversly invested, again no worries.
As far as the smog checks like your friends I'm always happy to clip coupons and price search months in advance. Again not worried.
It's time for ALL business to step up and take the hits the working men/women have been hit with.

This is not exactly correct. I've read through the Constitution and also searched this. Please show me what article that supports the wording you have.

"Q. I’ve been told that public employees’ pensions in New York are “guaranteed” by the New York constitution. Are they? — Smotri, New York

A. I’ve heard the same thing, not just in reference to New York, but some other states as well. When I’ve asked legal specialists, I’ve been told there is no such “guarantee,” in the legal meaning of the term.

What New York State does have is explicit constitutional language stating, in effect, that the pension formula in force on the day an employee joins the public retirement system cannot be reduced for the rest of that employee’s public career. This is better protection than workers in the private sector get from the federal pension law; it’s also fairly unusual among the 50 states."

https://www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm

So you want less job creation and tax revenue? Kind of like New York State. Who's going to fund your pension?

[lvoc]

Originally Posted by Wolfpacker

This is not exactly correct. I've read through the Constitution and also searched this. Please show me what article that supports the wording you have.

"Q. I’ve been told that public employees’ pensions in New York are “guaranteed” by the New York constitution. Are they? — Smotri, New York

A. I’ve heard the same thing, not just in reference to New York, but some other states as well. When I’ve asked legal specialists, I’ve been told there is no such “guarantee,” in the legal meaning of the term.

What New York State does have is explicit constitutional language stating, in effect, that the pension formula in force on the day an employee joins the public retirement system cannot be reduced for the rest of that employee’s public career. This is better protection than workers in the private sector get from the federal pension law; it’s also fairly unusual among the 50 states."

https://www.dos.ny.gov/info/constitution.htm

So you want less job creation and tax revenue? Kind of like New York State. Who's going to fund your pension?

Also Detroit made it clear that the Bankruptcy law can prevail against a state constitution.

there is though the added complexity that the State Courts may have been able to prevent a BK if they had responded in a timely way...

[von949]

Never mind. LVOC a ready posted what I was thinking.

[Wolfpacker]

Originally Posted by lvoc

Also Detroit made it clear that the Bankruptcy law can prevail against a state constitution.

there is though the added complexity that the State Courts may have been able to prevent a BK if they had responded in a timely way...

This is the section from NYS' Constitution: Article V, Section VII:

"[Membership in retirement systems; benefits not to be diminished nor impaired]

§7. After July first, nineteen hundred forty, membership in any pension or retirement system of the state or of a civil division thereof shall be a contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired. (New. Adopted by Constitutional Convention of 1938 and approved by vote of the people November 8, 1938.)


Is it just me or is this a rather loose clause? As you noted, bankruptcy law I think would prevail here. Contracts CAN be broken through the bankruptcy system. Public pensions are also not taxed in the NYS. You can see the unions really bought this state.

Originally Posted by Onlyliveonce

You are correct, and I predict the PROP will be voted down. However, I voted for the tax as it benefits ME/MY Family. That is what voting is about. There is no right or wrong vote.
Retiring at 40 has put me in a unique situation ( not complaining ) that my buying power will get eaten away as I age. I need the economy to flounder in order to keep my buying power strong , remember my pension stays the same until they plant me in the ground. I remember the buying power during the recession and it was great, deals everywhere, workers desperate ( this is what I need )
I will not apologize for what's in my best interest or the way I vote.

Wait...you retired at 40 with a tax-free full pension? Now you live in Nevada?