Forum Discussion
pnichols wrote:
Well .... I consider myself and the DW quite "responsible": Advanced college training for the DW and an advanced degree for myself, USAF officer military service by myself, after my military service max 401K contributions plus employer matching for over 32 years, built our own house to save $$$ over buying one ready to go, bought only one new vehicle over our entire working lives and then a new inexpensive RV in retirement, no "toys" to speak of except for a used 14 foot aluminum fishing boat, etc., etc..
After 20 "responsible" years of 401k contributions while working in industry we had a grand total of ~$200K in our 401K ... plus our house. I looked at the situation and said "no way is that anywhere near enough to retire on while trying to stay in our home during a bunch of those retirement years and then go into to a rest home". I then made a risky investment not recommened by the experts ... which turned out well merely by us being blessed ... so now we're getting by without having to work in an Amazon warehouse or a Micky D's.
Most of us should never do the risky thing I did with our hard earned savings. I fully understand why so many folks here in the good old U.S. of A. can wind up living the way they have to in their older years. I'm convinced that a lot of it has nothing to do with "living irresponsibly". A lot of it has to do with PURE LUCK while being in just the right country at just the right place during just the time(s). There is no room for smug arrogance from any us.
Extremely well said!
I'm glad that risky investment worked for you and you were able to secure your future (as much as anyone can secure the future).- I consider myself among the lucky as well. No degree, tech school in the Navy, fell into computer programming in the late 70s. I worked for startup companies my whole career and a couple of them made me enough to tuck away and it's getting me by now. That's 2 out of 12 companies, the other 10 got me nothing and one actually cost me to work there (but at least I got a polo shirt with the company logo).
I still work, but it's different when you don't have to.
I'm astounded by the number of people critical of anyone down on their luck, whether it be through their hands or someone else's. Believe me when I say; it's there but for the grace of God go you. And a lot of luck. chuckbear wrote:
My wife and I have been freelance writers for a number of publications for 25 years.
For example?- Lot of smug, condescending comments here.
Thousands of poor souls out there, down on their luck through no fault of their own.
How many have read the book?
Shoot the messenger much? Fizz wrote:
Lot of smug, condescending comments here.
Thousands of poor souls out there, down on their luck through no fault of their own.
How many have read the book?
Shoot the messenger much?
The writer of the article was not the messenger. She didn't tell us anything. Heck, she didn't even provide us with a book review let alone any quality information.
The book may have all the answers, but the article doesn't say "here are some short excerpts but you need to read the book". Instead, she used the book as a divine reading and expects the reader to take what is written in the article as gospel because it was pulled from a book that may or may not be well researched.toedtoes wrote:
The writer of the article was not the messenger. She didn't tell us anything. Heck, she didn't even provide us with a book review let alone any quality information.
The book may have all the answers, but the article doesn't say "here are some short excerpts but you need to read the book". Instead, she used the book as a divine reading and expects the reader to take what is written in the article as gospel because it was pulled from a book that may or may not be well researched.
So you didn't read it either, eh?TechWriter wrote:
toedtoes wrote:
The writer of the article was not the messenger. She didn't tell us anything. Heck, she didn't even provide us with a book review let alone any quality information.
The book may have all the answers, but the article doesn't say "here are some short excerpts but you need to read the book". Instead, she used the book as a divine reading and expects the reader to take what is written in the article as gospel because it was pulled from a book that may or may not be well researched.
So you didn't read it either, eh?
No, I haven't read the book. But if reading the book is a requirement for understanding the article, then the article is poorly written.toedtoes wrote:
No, I haven't read the book. But if reading the book is a requirement for understanding the article, then the article is poorly written.
Yes, reading the book would be a requirement before criticizing it or the author.toedtoes wrote:
I had to go back and re-read the article, thinking I had missed something.
The writer of the article was not the messenger. She didn't tell us anything. Heck, she didn't even provide us with a book review let alone any quality information.
The book may have all the answers, but the article doesn't say "here are some short excerpts but you need to read the book". Instead, she used the book as a divine reading and expects the reader to take what is written in the article as gospel because it was pulled from a book that may or may not be well researched.
The article is basically a Q&A with the author of a book. The author of the article asked author of the book some questions and then printed her responses. The author of the article contributed very little other than posing questions.TechWriter wrote:
toedtoes wrote:
No, I haven't read the book. But if reading the book is a requirement for understanding the article, then the article is poorly written.
Yes, reading the book would be a requirement before criticizing it or the author.
I didn't criticize the book or the book's author. I criticized the article and the article's author. Two different things.
