Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In reply to a kid needing "academic acumen", go tell that to George H.W. Bush.
In reply to "it seem he doesn't really understand the vast majority of households in this city", As I said before the man was not writing for the MAJORITY (99.9%) of households, but for the MINORITY (.1%) of households. From reading his post I saw that it had nothing to do with "regular people." Therefore I didn't expect him to give a "regular person" answer. It seems that you're not getting who it was written for.
Where is chicagotodc? I've defended you twice on this thread homie; I need rep points!!
He also said he inflated his numbers on purpose. So tell me.....who are these people that his inflated numbers represent? You keep claiming that they are the ".1%," but according to the poster, he exaggerated only to make a point. If that's the case, then he wasn't speaking to the spirit of the OP, he was speaking to some pie-in-the-sky constituency that barely exists. You know this, that's why you hang your hat on the ".1%" that you concocted in order to make a non-existent point. Unfortunately for you, the OP was not asking about the ".1%".....he was asking for realistic terms.
The better approach to this discussion would be not to exaggerate, but instead speak in realistic terms of the lifestyle of the average DC citizen. He didn't do that, and neither did you. That's why I called him out, and you as well, because neither of you are talking reality. Which makes it very odd that you'd "defend" him "twice on this thread" for no good reason or point.
He also said he inflated his numbers on purpose. So tell me.....who are these people that his inflated numbers represent? You keep claiming that they are the ".1%," but according to the poster, he exaggerated only to make a point. If that's the case, then he wasn't speaking to the spirit of the OP, he was speaking to some pie-in-the-sky constituency that barely exists. You know this, that's why you hang your hat on the ".1%" that you concocted in order to make a non-existent point. Unfortunately for you, the OP was not asking about the ".1%".....he was asking for realistic terms.
The better approach to this discussion would be not to exaggerate, but instead speak in realistic terms of the lifestyle of the average DC citizen. He didn't do that, and neither did you. That's why I called him out, and you as well, because neither of you are talking reality. Which makes it very odd that you'd "defend" him "twice on this thread" for no good reason or point.
Since I am a fan of Peter Pan, I won't argue with you anymore. I believe everybody should live out their fantasies; therefore, believe what you want to believe.
$10K per year per kid for a 529 college savings program?? I know you said you intentionally inflated your numbers to make a point, but this figure doesn't even pass the laugh test.
$180K for college per kid? Not in your wildest dreams is that necessary for 99.9% of kids/parents in America.
The 10k figure was actually among the rooted; our financial advisor suggested this, but it wasn't intended to be a perpetuity for 20 years.... It's weighted more heavily in the younger years (power of compound interest and all).... That said, current projections place private 4 year universities at approx 100k per year in 20 years. Theres a number of problems with that, not the least of which, as you rightly noted, 99.99% of folk couldn't afford college, which would slump demand and lower prices, etc. Still, private university is already touching 40, 50k a year with housing and food thrown in: 200k per kid isn't entirely absurd. It's questionable whether it's a smart use of money perhaps, but sadly, this is a fair representation of some university costs.
Last edited by chicagotodc; 06-19-2012 at 05:46 PM..
In reply to a kid needing "academic acumen", go tell that to George H.W. Bush.
In reply to "it seem he doesn't really understand the vast majority of households in this city", As I said before the man was not writing for the MAJORITY (99.9%) of households, but for the MINORITY (.1%) of households. From reading his post I saw that it had nothing to do with "regular people." Therefore I didn't expect him to give a "regular person" answer. It seems that you're not getting who it was written for.
Where is chicagotodc? I've defended you twice on this thread homie; I need rep points!!
I GOT DIS! Oh wait, crap no I dont... "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mdiggs1 again" Figures....
Indeed, as you noted, my advice wasn't intended to be for the 99.99%, it was intended to give someone who made $150K and didn't want to give up anything - travel, etc - an idea of what that meant. I intentionally inflated some figures, etc.
You have a really bad habit of construeing numbers to make your point. Why don't you talk reality for once and then perhaps those who come to this forum will come way feeling more informed?
I'm sorry if you think I've misinformed people or otherwise been disingenuous in my commentary. That wasn't my intent - as I explained before I intentionally inflated my figures because of the context of the womans post, and I think I even called my own figures obscene. I thought I was being pretty transparent, at least in this thread.
Out of curiosity, what would you consider reality? I'm not asking to poke a sleeping bear or attempt to engage you in debate, I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious. Moreover, if anyone here has actually taken my $300K comment to heart (despite my comments explaining how I got there, etc) they would probably be served well by your perspective.
Quote:
He also said he inflated his numbers on purpose. So tell me.....who are these people that his inflated numbers represent? You keep claiming that they are the ".1%," but according to the poster, he exaggerated only to make a point. If that's the case, then he wasn't speaking to the spirit of the OP, he was speaking to some pie-in-the-sky constituency that barely exists. You know this, that's why you hang your hat on the ".1%" that you concocted in order to make a non-existent point. Unfortunately for you, the OP was not asking about the ".1%".....he was asking for realistic terms.
The OPs question was in relation to another thread... My $300K comment should be evaluated in the context of that thread... I only posted here to explain how I got there. As for the "pie in the sky", these people really do exist.... My next door neighbors have a full time nanny - even though only one of them works - they send both their kids to GDS ($32K a year I think, per kid), drive a lexus and a bmw x3, the nanny even "vacations" when them in their 2nd home in Maine. I have no idea what they put in 529k plans, but I doubt they are struggling to fund. Pretty much anyone who has a kid at GDS, NCS or St Albans would fall into this category. There aren't hundreds of thousands of them, but there are certainly plenty.
Last edited by chicagotodc; 06-19-2012 at 06:07 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
