What Irked You Today?

[southpier]

I think there should be a poll. in light of the recent deaths among Hollywood's elite, we could vote which member of the Forum will head explode first.

[crazyjim]

Well Jim, as a military man, you should know better than most that it takes more than wishing.

I guess you're right. So let's kill all the bad people and let somebody upstairs sort them out.

[Rob Hall]

Peace Sells....But Who's Buying?

[Pete J.]

You know, it's funny how, if you say anything these days about almost anything having to do with Hispanics, you're immediately branded a bigot and folks go running to defend the culture.

For the record, I'm NOT a bigot. I'm NOT anti-Hispanic.

Last time I read history, America as we know it started as an ENGLISH colony, and the founders of the nation as we know it were ENGLISH speakers. Kinda makes it an English-speaking nation. And if not, the ones who SHOULD be accommodated are the native-Americans, the indigenous peoples. After all, this is really THEIR land.

Nobody, especially me, called you a bigot. I don't make such assessments of anyone.

As to history, if you are talking about the map of the US and who colonized what you really need to take another look at it. The first colonies were Spanish and Portuguese from Florida north into the into what is now Georgia and as far west as Louisiana. The French colonized the area from Quebec through the Ohio Valley down to Louisiana and northwest into Washington and Oregon. West and south of that was the Spaniards and Mexicans. The Germans and Dutch had large contingents from New England down into Pennsylvania. The Brits really had a very small colony relative to what others had especially the Spaniards. Yes, our founding fathers spoke English and that is what our early laws were adopted in, but as the English speakers moved in, those that spoke other languages didn't just suddenly move out. In point of fact, until the mid and late 1800's the predominant language that was spoken in the majority of the land mass that is now the US was either French or Spanish.

[Harry P.]

I'm happy w the work my yard guys and pool guy do. I pay what I think is a fair and reasonable amount for their services, and it's not the type of work I have interest in doing myself.

Same here. No pool, but the landscaping is done by landscapers. Like Rob, I have no interest in that aspect of home ownership. My guys come in with a crew of usually two, sometimes three, and can do the whole job in 30-45 minutes or so... an hour, tops. What they do in less than an hour would take me an entire Saturday morning, and I still wouldn't have the sharp, clean edges these guys give me.

As far as cost, I think they charge a fair rate ($30 per week). I think thirty bucks is a very fair exchange for the time and effort they save me if I did that work myself. My biggest regret is that I spent way too many years doing that chore myself. I wish I had wised up years earlier!

[Pete J.]

Same here. No pool, but the landscaping is done by landscapers. Like Rob, I have no interest in that aspect of home ownership. My guys come in with a crew of usually two, sometimes three, and can do the whole job in 30-45 minutes or so... an hour, tops. What they do in less than an hour would take me an entire Saturday morning, and I still wouldn't have the sharp, clean edges these guys give me.

As far as cost, I think they charge a fair rate ($30 per week). I think thirty bucks is a very fair exchange for the time and effort they save me if I did that work myself. My biggest regret is that I spent way too many years doing that chore myself. I wish I had wised up years earlier!

Harry, I with you on that one. Living in SoCal, yards are a year round affair. I had abdominal surgery a couple of years ago and couldn't do the weekly maintenance for a while. I hired my neighbors lawn people and at $100 a month I got very use to it. I can't mow the lawn, trim the plants and maintain the trees for that. Talk about great value for the money.

[Harry P.]

Recently I posted a comment about how my homeowner's insurance policy hadn't really gone up much in many years... maybe 20 bucks every couple of years.

I spoke too soon.

Got my latest policy in the mail the other day. The rate has gone up by more than 50%. So I called the agent and asked him why the sudden huge price increase. Turns out that I lost my "multi-policy" discount when I dropped these guys and went with Geico for my car insurance (because Geico charges me literally half what these guys were charging me for car insurance). They also "bumped up" my home replacement coverage (due to inflation and the rising cost of building, they tell me), so the premium rises to cover that. And finally, they just had an across-the-board rate hike for everyone.

So much for my "good deal" on homeowner's insurance!

BTW... I asked him why my homeowner's insurance includes a special coverage for "other structures" when I don't have any "other structures" on the property (like a detached garage, a gazebo, a guest house, etc)... he said its "part of the policy" and can't be removed. So I'm being forced to pay for insurance to cover "other structures" that don't exist. That's insurance company logic right there...

[Craig Irwin]

Wow. So $70 an hour to push a lawnmower. That's what the hot-rod shop gets for designing, engineering, modifying, fabricating, machining, finishing and tuning machines, and wiring and integrating electronics...all highly-skilled tasks, performed by people who've spent a lifetime learning and honing said skills...including me.

Why do we even bother. I'm getting me a ridin' mower.

Thats for 2 men, two industrial mowers, trimmers, leaf blowers, a truck and trailer, fuel, travel time, equipment upkeep, insurance, business licenses, permits, insurance, advertising, ect......

I'm OK with the cost.

[southpier]

and we've come full circle. those guys are walking away with about 12$ an hour - clear.

who (employee) the heck is going to work for that?

[Tom Geiger]

I too have a lawn service. When I bought this acre I thought I was going to mow my own. I had picked out the tractor I was going to buy. Then I got delayed a few weeks and called the lawn service the past owner used... $30 a week. Heck, I did the math and the break even point was two years! And that was with me riding the friggin tractor. Like Harry said, it frees up an entire weekend morning, I certainly would have 4 hours into the entire treatment.

[Pete J.]

Recently I posted a comment about how my homeowner's insurance policy hadn't really gone up much in many years... maybe 20 bucks every couple of years.

I spoke too soon.

Got my latest policy in the mail the other day. The rate has gone up by more than 50%. So I called the agent and asked him why the sudden huge price increase. Turns out that I lost my "multi-policy" discount when I dropped these guys and went with Geico for my car insurance (because Geico charges me literally half what these guys were charging me for car insurance). They also "bumped up" my home replacement coverage (due to inflation and the rising cost of building, they tell me), so the premium rises to cover that. And finally, they just had an across-the-board rate hike for everyone.

So much for my "good deal" on homeowner's insurance!

BTW... I asked him why my homeowner's insurance includes a special coverage for "other structures" when I don't have any "other structures" on the property (like a detached garage, a gazebo, a guest house, etc)... he said its "part of the policy" and can't be removed. So I'm being forced to pay for insurance to cover "other structures" that don't exist. That's insurance company logic right there...

Harry, that is only part of the explanation. I think you need to get a new agent if he left it at that. I spent 7 years as an underwriter and 15 as an agent and there is a better explanation than that.

All companies use a standardized form. If you look at the bottom of your policy on each page it probably has something like "ISO HO-3" printed on it. That means that your basic policy is an "Insurance Services Office" homeowners form 3. That is a quite complex policy that includes a lot of stuff that some people will never use or need. The reason it is used by all the companies is that in addition to providing standardized forms ISO also acts as an independent organization for the companies and tracks legal actions that involve the forms in all fifty states and compiles that information for the companies. This is critical to the companies, because this means that they know exactly what each word in that document means in a court of law. I say this is important because they use this information to determine their estimated costs on losses. So what makes the companies different and how do you make a policy suit you? Well, this is all done with standardized endorsements.

To put is in carguy talk, the basic policy is like walking into your local Toyota dealer and ordering your Camry as a DL, LX, or Touring. Then the endorsements are the dealer add ons. Unlike in the past where you could go to a Chevy dealer and order your Nova with a radio delete option, you can't do that any more, you can't take things out of the basic policy. You can get customized policies through offshore companies like Lloyds of London, but the cost on those is only practical for the very wealthy. Just too much to keep track of for the manufactures. So just like the car companies, in the basic models they include things that the majority of the population may need as a single cost. Then you have options(endorsments) to add things you might need over and above the basics.

I'm surprised that your agent didn't take the time to explain this a little better.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Pete J.

[Ace-Garageguy]

As to history, if you are talking about the map of the US and who colonized what you really need to take another look at it. The first colonies were Spanish and Portuguese from Florida north into the into what is now Georgia and as far west as Louisiana. The French colonized the area from Quebec through the Ohio Valley down to Louisiana and northwest into Washington and Oregon. West and south of that was the Spaniards and Mexicans. The Germans and Dutch had large contingents from New England down into Pennsylvania. The Brits really had a very small colony relative to what others had especially the Spaniards. Yes, our founding fathers spoke English and that is what our early laws were adopted in, but as the English speakers moved in, those that spoke other languages didn't just suddenly move out. In point of fact, until the mid and late 1800's the predominant language that was spoken in the majority of the land mass that is now the US was either French or Spanish.

All well and good.

What language was the Declaration of Independence written in? What language was the Constitution of the United States written in? What country was the colonialist power that America broke free from in the American Revolutionary War? What language do the laws of 27 states recognize as "official"?

[Ace-Garageguy]

Thats for 2 men, two industrial mowers, trimmers, leaf blowers, a truck and trailer, fuel, travel time, equipment upkeep, insurance, business licenses, permits, insurance, advertising, ect......

I'm OK with the cost.

OK. My bad. I stupidly assumed one guy. Two guys cut the man-hour rate for semi-skilled labor in half, obviously. Reasonable cost per man with equipment and overhead.

[Harry P.]

All well and good.

What language was the Declaration of Independence written in? What language was the Constitution of the United States written in? What country was the colonialist power that America broke free from in the American Revolutionary War? What language do the laws of 27 states recognize as "official"?

Ok, I have to weigh in on this, even though we're not supposed to be "political." But this is a real pet peeve of mine.

I came to this country as an immigrant. A legal immigrant. I was born in Europe, as were my parents. They (with me in tow) came to America for the same reason almost every immigrant comes to America... the promise of a better life. In my case I was a month old... so I didn't have a whole lot of input into the decision to emigrate to America. But my parents did it the right way, jumping through all the hoops and playing it strictly by the rules. The same immigration policy that they obeyed is the immigration policy that is somehow "broken" today... ... but that's another issue.

But as far as language goes... my first language is not English. I learned English by playing with my friends. Seriously! That's how I learned to speak English. It's amazing how easily a young kid can pick up a language just by being exposed to it. By the time I was old enough to be enrolled in school, I was perfectly fluent in English.

However... I don't remember ever seeing any product labels that included my native language. I don't remember any school classes being taught in my native language. I had to learn English... or be left behind.

And I don't remember any school bilingual programs being offered in Italian, or Greek, or French, or Dutch, or Chinese, or Portugese, or Danish, or Greek, or Russian, or... well, you get the point.

Singling out one particular group for "special treatment" makes no sense to me. Either we all get the same special treatment... or none of us do.

Sorry if this came across as a rant, but this issue really bugs me, for reasons I just explained.

[Danny Lectro]

Flip phone. Closed when not in conversation. No cheek-access. Ever.

Assuming your flip phone doesn't have any side-mounted buttons, some combination of which might just possibly unlock the phone while it is still closed, and assuming the phone company didn't change the defaults or have some kind of glitch, then hacking might still be the culprit. Do you have a passcode set to access your voicemail? If you do, you may want to change it. If you don't have a passcode set, I suggest setting one.

When we talk about hacking voicemail, we're not necessarily talking about people sitting at banks of computers cracking code, we're also talking about people who find phone numbers, or randomly dial phone numbers, press * to access the menu, and then punch in "0000" to see if it gives access.

[Pete J.]

Ok, I have to weigh in on this, even though we're not supposed to be "political." But this is a real pet peeve of mine.

I came to this country as an immigrant. A legal immigrant. I was born in Europe, as were my parents. They (with me in tow) came to America for the same reason almost every immigrant comes to America... the promise of a better life. In my case I was a month old... so I didn't have a whole lot of input into the decision to emigrate to America. But my parents did it the right way, jumping through all the hoops and playing it strictly by the rules. The same immigration policy that they obeyed is the immigration policy that is somehow "broken" today... ... but that's another issue.

But as far as language goes... my first language is not English. I learned English by playing with my friends. Seriously! That's how I learned to speak English. It's amazing how easily a young kid can pick up a language just by being exposed to it. By the time I was old enough to be enrolled in school, I was perfectly fluent in English.

However... I don't remember ever seeing any product labels that included my native language. I don't remember any school classes being taught in my native language. I had to learn English... or be left behind.

And I don't remember any school bilingual programs being offered in Italian, or Greek, or French, or Dutch, or Chinese, or Portugese, or Danish, or Greek, or Russian, or... well, you get the point.

Singling out one particular group for "special treatment" makes no sense to me. Either we all get the same special treatment... or none of us do.

Sorry if this came across as a rant, but this issue really bugs me, for reasons I just explained.

Harry, I hear what you are saying, but I live in an area with a lot(I would guestimate near or more than 50%) of people who are not fluent in English. I get very annoyed with the people around who think that Spanish speaking = illegal immigrant. This is just as much of a fallacy as believing that someone who speaks English well is a citizen. Both are just BS.

Personal experience. My son-in-law is was an illegal immigrant. He was brought here by his parents when he was 14. Due to some complexities I can't explain or understand, his parent's are legalized citizens. They both struggle with English. My son-in-law is perfectly fluent with only a very slight accent. He has been in the naturalization system to get his citizenship for over 20 years. He has been a very productive member of society, starting several of his own businesses, the latest being a very profitable medical transport business. As an immigrant, he has paid his income and social security taxes with a tax ID number instead of a social security number so he has not been mooching on the system. He is well respected in the community. He is not unlike thousands of other illegals who are being productive members of our society. Most people are not aware of these people because they appear to be good citizens, so they are just off the radar.

The point is that for the average immigrant the legalization system is so screwed up that no matter how productive and upstanding they may be, they may wait for 30 years to get legalized. That whole time they have to look over their shoulder. Because of his marriage he is now legal and will be a legal citizen soon. He is not the exception.

[Harry P.]

The point is that for the average immigrant the legalization system is so screwed up that no matter how productive and upstanding they may be, they may wait for 30 years to get legalized.

My parents came to America legally. They were legal the day they set foot in New York City. Yes, they had to wait to become citizens... they (and I) became citizens when I was 13. That was the way the system worked. It wasn't "broken" then and it's not "broken" now.

The difference now is that certain people demand special treatment. My parents never demanded (or expected) special treatment. They did what the law said they had to do, and they were fine with that. They didn't protest or march or carry signs or make demands or carry on about "immigrant's rights." They came to America looking for a better life, and they knew that if they came here, they had to play by the rules in force here, like them or not. And that's how millions of immigrants did it...if you came to America, you had to play by the rules. You didn't demand special treatment or demand that America change it laws to conform to what you want. You conformed to the laws in effect in America.

[Ace-Garageguy]

As an immigrant, he has paid his income and social security taxes with a tax ID number instead of a social security number so he has not been mooching on the system.

According to my understanding of published Social Security regulations, a non-citizen authorized to work in this country by the Department of Homeland Security still needs a social security number to legally do so. Being a business owner myself, I'm well aware of paying income taxes on the BUSINESS income with an employer identification number (Federal Tax ID number), and of substituting a valid ITIN (individual taxpayer identification number) for a SS # when paying other taxes, but I'm not aware of the ability to make social security contributions with it.

I'm sure your son in law is a fine fellow, but if he ever needs his SS benefits, he'll most likely have a hard time getting them with no SSN.

I just double-checked my sources, and found this:

The issuance of an ITIN does not:

· Entitle a recipient to Social Security benefits or the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).

· Create an inference regarding the individual's immigration status.

· GIVE THE INDIVIDUAL THE RIGHT TO WORK IN THE U.S.

Caution: An individual with an ITIN who later becomes eligible to work in the United States must obtain an SSN. The ITIN is not valid for employment purposes.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Ace-Garageguy

[Pete J.]

I also did a bit of research on the subject and you are right.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Pete J.

[Danno]

My parents came to America legally. They were legal the day they set foot in New York City. Yes, they had to wait to become citizens... they (and I) became citizens when I was 13. That was the way the system worked. It wasn't "broken" then and it's not "broken" now.

The difference now is that certain people demand special treatment. My parents never demanded (or expected) special treatment. They did what the law said they had to do, and they were fine with that. They didn't protest or march or carry signs or make demands or carry on about "immigrant's rights." They came to America looking for a better life, and they knew that if they came here, they had to play by the rules in force here, like them or not. And that's how millions of immigrants did it...if you came to America, you had to play by the rules. You didn't demand special treatment or demand that America change it laws to conform to what you want. You conformed to the laws in effect in America.

Amen, Harry.

You and your family are examples of legal immigration. True immigrants who worked in the existing system, not played it.

You're right . . . the system is not "broken" per se, but there are a lot of people who are not willing to invest the time and effort to follow the rules. They would rather break the system to get what they want on their terms.

And there is nothing about the 'amnesty' they dream of and demand that is fair to the millions who have followed the rules, let alone the hundreds of millions of citizens who have to pay the freight.

Having said that, I believe the system needs to be improved. Improved . . . streamlined and speeded up . . . but not circumvented. It takes too long for lawful, law abiding and respectful immigrants to negotiate the existing system to earn citizenship. But amnesty in any form is not the right answer. And the system cannot be improved by cheating it. Yet so many equate gaming/playing/cheating and circumventing as their right. Demanding the rules be ignored or thrown out for them is not respectful of the system they so claim to want to participate in, and it is certainly not good citizenship. It just isn't acceptable. But it isn't practiced by the majority. It is practiced by a loud minority.

A few years ago when Arizona passed laws prohibiting or restricting illegal immigrants from entitlements, certain factions demonized the will of the majority of the people as mean-spirited and xenophobic, anti-immigration and anti-Mexican. What those factions did not acknowledge was that the majority of legal immigrants, even those of Mexican origin or Spanish-speaking ethnicity supported the anti-illegal-immigration efforts of the laws. Credible, non-partisan polls showed more than 60% of voters (read that citizens) who identified themselves of Hispanic ethnicity supported the efforts to limit the benefits of citizenship to legal citizens and those working legally toward legal citizenship.

Yet outsiders demonized them along with anyone else who supported the legitimately established laws.

Just like the unfortunate former marine who sits in a Mexican jail with no rights, none of us could go to Mexico and demand special treatment.

And Pete's right on another point. 'Spanish-speaking' does not mean 'illegal immigrant.' I hope he doesn't think I believe that.

My point about the language is that ~ just as Harry highlights ~ legal immigrants who want to work for and earn citizenship should make the effort to assimilate, not insulate, themselves into the society they purport to want to join. But what we see is so very many who immigrate illegally and have absolutely no desire or intention of assimilating or learning the language of the land, who arrogantly defy the majority by refusing (not failing) to learn English. Again, one cannot go to another culture and demand it change to accommodate oneself. Yet so many come here and demand everyone else accommodate them.

We have public hospitals where 2/3rds of the babies delivered are delivered to illegal immigrant parents who speak no English and have no insurance or means of paying for the expense of bringing babies into existence. And have absolutely no desire to pay for the expense. They 'demand' equal rights to benefits, yet have no inclination to earn them. They work, yes, but many do so under the table so they won't be found out, and there's no paying taxes involved in that. There are whole families of siblings brought into the world in that fashion, and yet their parents are not working toward legal status or citizenship, they're just working toward more benefits underwritten by the lawful citizens, people like me, and Harry, and Pete, and Pete's son-in-law.

I seriously laud the type of immigration Harry's family represents. That is what makes us stronger through diversity, not the gamers and players who just want the spoils without the investment.

[southpier]

so rules are manipulated according to emotional involvement?

and there's any wonder why cops feel entitled?

[Guest]

They work, yes, but many do so under the table so they won't be found out, and there's no paying taxes involved in that.

That's the biggest problem with the construction industry here in the Northeast/New England. The skilled labor force has become flooded with illegals that have no regard for their own personal safety, let alone the safety and well being of other tradesmen. They also send money back home via Western Union or Moneygram, money that never gets spent and put back into the local economy.

[Danno]

That's the biggest problem with the construction industry here in the Northeast/New England. The skilled labor force has become flooded with illegals that have no regard for their own personal safety, let alone the safety and well being of other tradesmen. They also send money back home via Western Union or Moneygram, money that never gets spent and put back into the local economy.

True. Both of those factors are huge here, as well.

[Ace-Garageguy]

That's the biggest problem with the construction industry here in the Northeast/New England. The skilled labor force has become flooded with illegals that have no regard for their own personal safety, let alone the safety and well being of other tradesmen. They also send money back home via Western Union or Moneygram, money that never gets spent and put back into the local economy.

And who bears a large part of the responsibility for that?

Business OWNERS looking to save a buck and hire illegals who will work for peanuts rather than legal immigrants or citizens who can demand higher wages.

If there wasn't a HUGE market for low-cost illegal immigrant labor, much of the problem simply wouldn't exist.

Blame for the current state of affairs needs to be laid at the doorstep of ALL the participants involved in gaming the system.

[southpier]

ever try finding someone who wants to WORK for a living?

a substantial amount of the workforce wants top pay to show up when it's not inconvenient and do as little as possible until it's time to sneak out early.

I've worked along side of a number of people that were happy to have a job and compensation so they COULD send money home to their families. there's good and bad just like anything.

let's try and get Skip & Buddy jobs pushing a wheelbarrow of cement for the summer and see how they apply their recently bought Bachelor of Arts degrees.