| By Backhandgrip (Backhandgrip) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 12:35 pm: Edit |
Did anyone catch Homeland Security Chief Ridge's statement that one of the two reasons he was quiting in 05 was to find a job earning more money so he can send his kids to the college where they want to go.He earns $187.000 now.
| By Fredo (Fredo) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 01:30 pm: Edit |
You beat me to it - I was going to post about this also. I thought it was an interesting comment: That on that salary he didn't feel he could "comfortably" send his two kids to college.
| By 1moremom (1moremom) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 01:38 pm: Edit |
I'm sure he was making six figures as governor of PA and the cost of living in Harrisburg is not that high (especially when one's housing is provided). You'd think he could have set a little something aside.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 01:40 pm: Edit |
Sending 2 kids simultaneously to many private colleges would cost $80K or about $160K in after tax dollars. How can anyone afford that on $187K. It's the middle class squeeze even though most would not consider that a middle class salary.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 01:47 pm: Edit |
I wonder what his wife makes? If she makes close to that or even half, they could just bank her salary.
That is what lots of people do anyway, its what permitted both my parents and my grandparents to pay cash for their homes.
I am glad our kids are 8 years apart, not that we planned it like that but it sure makes paying for college easier!
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 01:57 pm: Edit |
I think a lot of people who have chosen to make their primary careers in public service face this same kind of situation. Even as a lawyer he worked as a prosecutor, where he would not have earned the same as in private practice. I think he has a valid concern that he wants to be prepared to, as he said, be comfortably able to pay for his children's education. We shouldn't make assumptions that he and his wife haven't saved for this. I would be very surprised if they haven't. The reality is, that if he had not held political office, this wouldn't be such an issue for him.
| By Mini (Mini) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:04 pm: Edit |
Oh, he'll go make multi-millions as a "security consultant" with kickbacks on government contracts.
(At my alma mater, with two kids at college, he'd qualify for need-based financial aid.) And he probably has a house in PA and one in Washington, DC, and who knows what he drives.
"Comfortably" is relative, since his income (without his wife's ) puts him in the top 3% of the American population (hardly anywhere close to the middle.)
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:13 pm: Edit |
"Sending 2 kids simultaneously to many private colleges would cost $80K or about $160K in after tax dollars. How can anyone afford that on $187K."
On less than that, we saved and/or paid tuition approx. 70,000 a yr the last several years. Anyone *can* do that; the question would be what else they're willing to give up.
(and like the other poster says, this is only one parent's salary. Add another, and it sure looks doable to me.)
| By Dennis (Dennis) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:17 pm: Edit |
Of course, the main reason he'll be gone in '05 is that we'll have a new president in John Kerry. Ridge will eventually end up where the other Bush cronies go - companies like Halliburton and Carlyle.
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:23 pm: Edit |
Everyone makes choices as to how they want to spend/save/invest their money. Obviously, the term 'comfortably' is relative, and will be different for each of us. My point is simply that, after approximately 25 years in public service, I don't see that it's a negative thing that he's looking to earn what he could have been earning for many of those years. I bet if he made the choice to remain in Washington at his current salary and thus, applied for financial aid for his children, people would be complaining about that, too. 
| By Patient (Patient) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:44 pm: Edit |
Well, one big advantage of his having an extremely high profile job is that I imagine his name, which is pretty much a household word, will be a plus on his children's applications. The other reason cited seemed to be that his job was one big morass and headache of trying to coordinate many different agencies. Maybe the college issue was just a smokescreen.
| By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:46 pm: Edit |
Dennis
Where did the Friends Of Bill end up? They are not exactly lining up to serve meals at the local Soup Kitchen. Thanks for that little gem of objectivity and intelligence.
/sigh
| By Backhandgrip (Backhandgrip) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:49 pm: Edit |
He could save by buying staples from the dollar store, participating in drug store rebates, and buying clothing from the clearance rack.(ha, ha)
| By Mini (Mini) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 02:53 pm: Edit |
He's lived on public assistance all these years....in Pennsylvania, they even gave him free housing. But his parents never taught him money management skills.
| By Dmd77 (Dmd77) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 03:16 pm: Edit |
People say all kinds of weird things when they quit their jobs. The bottom line is that Ridge doesn't want the job anymore--and who can blame him? You couldn't pay me enough to have that job.
| By Dennis (Dennis) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 04:01 pm: Edit |
Well, Xiggi, the extensive connections between former and current Bush (both H.W. and W.) administration figures and groups like Halliburton, Carlyle, Bechtel, etc. have been extensively documented. Many have noted the "revolving door" between these companies and government jobs under Bush I and II. This is objectively true and any reasonably intelligent person can find the relevant info for themselves. It is perfectly reasonable to expect that someone like Ridge might follow suit.
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:12 pm: Edit |
If the person involved were not Ridge, we would have a very different discussion, along the lines that Mom101 suggested: the middle-class squeeze.
It is of interest that someone with a before-tax income of $175k will have trouble sending his or her children to college without financial assistance or without substantial prior earnings. It should be immaterial to the discussion whether there is another source of income or whether Ridge will strike it rich thanks to the revolving door. I personally am not interested in Ridge's personal concerns. I am, as a citizen. concerned about how affordable college is for the middle class.
| By Simba (Simba) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:20 pm: Edit |
May be he is tired of streching the truth - playing with the terror level alerts like a piano (I think this was F9/11 line).
| By Momto2 (Momto2) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:30 pm: Edit |
Maybe $80K is a lot with a $175K salary, but does someone who makes that kind of money expect to pay all of it out of salary the year it is due?
Really, one does have about 18 years before the child enters high school to plan and save. Granted he probably didn't start off at this salary, if he socked away $5K a year for each he would probably be have it all in savings. It is not like he has been barely getting by all these years and coundn't save.
I thought colleges looked at it as a major life expense, kind of like buying a house. You don't expect to pay that kind of money all in one year. In the same vein one shouldn't expect to pay all of college in four years.
I only make about $50K a year, but I am putting $3K towards college.
PS - I believe it may be just an excuse to get out of the job anyway.
| By Momto2 (Momto2) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:30 pm: Edit |
Whoops - I meant enter college, not high school.
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:53 pm: Edit |
Momto2----I think your point is well-taken. Your post also supports another fact about life that gets lost here--you are living on 50,000 a year, I presume before taxes. If someone making 187,000/yr did pay 80,000 of their income toward school, they'd still have left the same income as you. (Say, conservatively, take-home of 120,000, minus 80, that still leaves 47,000. Shoot, most of the country gets by on less than that.)
I mean, it's his prerogative to go get more money or leave this position for any reason, but I just don't buy that his income level prevents putting two kids through college.
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 06:56 pm: Edit |
Agreed that for most of us, college needs to be paid out of savings, not just current income. However, Ridge's salary may look good, but let's not forget that we pay for college out of after-tax income.
| By Mini (Mini) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:11 pm: Edit |
Poor guy - he won't be able to put away 20k for himself and 20k for his wife (if he works in the public sector into his 403B this year.) AND all his per diem exchanges - travel, meals, and hotels was paid for by the government for the past three years - he didn't pay for a dime of it. No car expenses, no gasoline expenses, no food expenses. Oh, boo-hoo. And prior to that, he had free rent for how long?
He is as further away from the middle of the middle class as the disabled homemaker living on general assistance with 3 kids on 7k a year.
Let him mortgage one of his homes.
| By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:15 pm: Edit |
It seems that accepting a high-level job in Washington, DC can turn out to be quite costly for someone in his late fifties. I do not believe that the government can be as generous as the private sector in subsidizing moving expenses and housing. I assume that the Ridge family must spend a few dollars on the very high mortgage of their new house in Bethesda.
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:22 pm: Edit |
I'm a little surprised at the hostility shown in some of the responses here. In none of the articles that I read about the possibility of Ridge resigning was there any mention of him claiming that his income level prevented him putting his two children through college. Nor do any of us know what, if any, saving he and his wife have done through the years. He didn't claim to be a part of the middle class, and I doubt he's looking for anyone's sympathy. I must say that I've enjoyed participating in some of the discussions on these forums, and I also am thankful for the knowledge I've gained, as well as that I've been able to impart, but this is not the first time I've noticed real anger and bitterness barely below the surface in some discussions, and it seems to always be aimed at those who have worked hard enough, and been fortunate enough to become financially successful. I'm not a Republican and certainly no apologist for Tom Ridge but this discussion has taken a very nasty, and somewhat immature, turn. I'm disappointed.
| By Mini (Mini) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:28 pm: Edit |
I think it's great that he is hoping to send his kids off to college. But since we all know that folks always leave an Administration in droves at the end of a first term (whether there is expectation of re-election or not), my complaint is that he is being disingenuous (not that he makes good money, or will, of course, make better.)
What he has done, in his own way, is add to the fires of class warfare, and unnecessarily. And THAT is offensive. He is a living example of why we shouldn't roll back the Bush taxcuts (LOL!)
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:48 pm: Edit |
It kinda reminds me of Nixon making a big deal about Pat wearing a cloth coat. A little before my time,, but it sure had legs
I would hope that if I was a government employee whose income was in the top3% of wages not counting the benefits I had received over the years, and if I was in the public eye, I would not be making a fuss over how I was going to pay for my kids college.
Most people I daresay don't "comfortably" put their kids through college. Most either have their kids hunt for merit aid, attend instate public universities or hock the farm.
I don't blame him for looking for another job, but have a little class. Think of the millions of people who have been looking for a job to pay their bills for so long they aren't even on unemployment rosters anymore. Think of the people that are working more than one job with no benefits cause they are "part time", including teachers in those universities.
Just try and have a little class.
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:50 pm: Edit |
I'm only going with the facts as presented here. I'm assuming the OP's facts are accurate.
I have nothing against wealthy folks. I think I am one. I get tired of privileged people who whine about not having enough--there's just too much real need in this world--and this country--to take seriously the income complaints of people in the top five percent. It doesn't make me angry so much as I find it unseemly.
And people who make 50,000 work just as hard.
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 07:55 pm: Edit |
I agree with you, Garland, about tiring of hearing privileged individuals complain. However, as I said before, I didn't read anything about him complaining, or whining. Who knows if the reports are even accurate, considering the accuracy of the press, it's very likely it's not entirely accurate. I do, however, think you're putting words in my mouth by your last comment. I didn't say that. In any case, that's another issue entirely.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:09 pm: Edit |
Alwaysamom, I too have wondered when reading many threads why there is clear disdain for the well off. Further, many threads seem to carry the thinking that being poor is virtuous. Is this just an ultra liberal meeting place? Are people interested in higher education left leaning? Anyone have a hypothesis?
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:16 pm: Edit |
I think that there is a virtue in living within your means, by not using more resources than you need, by not consuming just for the sake of showing off.
If you can't send your kids to college when your income is in the top % nationally, doesn't that just indicate that you are a spendthrift? Hardly a virtue I would want to cultivate
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:20 pm: Edit |
Alwaysamom:
I was replying to this:
"I've noticed real anger and bitterness barely below the surface in some discussions, and it seems to always be aimed at those who have worked hard enough, and been fortunate enough to become financially successful."
I misconstrued it to mean that they've worked harder than others.
| By Texas137 (Texas137) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:32 pm: Edit |
this sounds like one of those vague things people say when they are leaving a job but don't want to discuss the real reason or say anything negative about the job/employer. It's along the lines of "I'm leaving to spend more time with my family". Or "I'm leaving to explore other opportunities". I don't think it has anything to do with paying for college on x number of dollars a year.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:34 pm: Edit |
I don't believe a public servant making $175K has squandered his money if he can't comfortably afford to send his kids to a private college. The guy's wife probably stays home because they've uprooted the kids and they need some nurturing. They probably have a home back in their home State leaving not much for a home in the expensive DC area. Family and friends are probably back in the home State and require 4 plane tickets to visit. Maybe they chose private schools for their kids. This man clearly had the skills and connections to be making millions of dollars a year and chose to take a thankless, highly demanding job. Why is the tone so scathing if he chooses to have fine homes, good cars, travel and give his kids great educations? Most religions even say that those who live with good values shall reap abundance. Why is it less than virtuous to desire material things?
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:40 pm: Edit |
>>Most religions even say that those who live with good values shall reap abundance. Why is it less than virtuous to desire material things?>>
Not to object to your take on Ridge, but I want to point out that Buddhism considers desire"(for life, for love, for things) to be at the root of human suffering, and that the original meaning of nirvana is the void. It is even more drastic than the sentiment expressed by "dust unto dust".
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 08:52 pm: Edit |
"Most religions even say that those who live with good values shall reap abundance. "
Very Calvinist!
It's not the having, it's the coveting and whining I object to.
Personally, for me, the whole camel/needle's eye thing keeps me up at night. I'm pretty sure that the fact that I have more than most of the world isn't a comment from God on my better values.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:10 pm: Edit |
I said most, not all religions! The Christian concept of grace--do good, be good and enjoy all that will come to you. I like the concept and it has worked for me! Maybe I feel no guilt over what I have because I came from nothing and made it honestly. I will be equally proud of my kids if they follow our ambitious pathes (and yes, wealth, beautiful homes and nice cars were aambitions) or choose to be teachers, and we've discussed it at length. I will only be dissapointed if in either case they do not use their gifts to contribute to society.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:14 pm: Edit |
even though some religions now use wealth as a sign of virtue I see that more a comment on adapting the religion to what the followers want to hear as opposed to their spirituality.
If they are so religious, what do they need so much with material things?
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:20 pm: Edit |
This is a genuine question Emeraldkity,Garland and others: What is it offensive to you that people enjoying material things if they have done honest work to get them? Heck, even if they inherited the money? Why do you get sneers while driving a Mercedes, frowns when your address is an expensive town in America today? I let a friend borrow my car, yes an expensive sports car, and she came back shaken from the experience. I honestly don't understand and it was a real eye opener for her, too.
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:29 pm: Edit |
>I said most, not all religions!>
Islam? Hinduism? Shinto? Roman Catholicism?
I think Garland had it right: your take on "most" religions is rather Calvinist.
Being agnostic, I'd rather not bring God into a discussion of the pursuit of wealth.
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:43 pm: Edit |
Where did I say I'm offended by people enjoying things? I think the context of this discussion, and the point I keep trying to come back to, was the unseemliness of wealthy people saying they don't have enough--that's hardly the same thing.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 09:52 pm: Edit |
the more materials some one uses the more resources they are draining.
WHen someone has a huge house, a car that sucks gas, drives just for the pleasure of it often, buys things without notice of cost or where they came from, that affect all of us.
I don't believe that our species needs to act like we are the only species on the planet.
We have already seen the result in global warming, in extinctions in our lifetime, in mutations that affect our health and the health of the planet.
I believe what goes around comes around, and I try and live my life like everything is recorded and will follow me throughout time. I don't want the weight of any extra baggage.
( just for the record I don't understand that if you live in an expensive address why would anyone give your sports car a second look? perhaps it wasn't the car but the way she was driving?
I know that when I visit my mom who lives within walking distance of Bill gates, that drivers often assume that you will slam on your brakes and let them in, that they have the right of way at all times, and that if they can't pay attention cause they are talking on their cell phone then you just need to cultivate patience)
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:11 pm: Edit |
Emerald, explaining to people that there are clear ways in which the wealthy are discriminated against is always an interesting experience. I for one having grown up not facing these issues was shocked to discover the reality. When we moved to the first obviously tony town I had ever lived in, my husband who grew up in such towns demonstrated some things for me. He called a plumbing service and told them of the same situation twice, once saying he lived in the middle class town next door and the second time telling the real, upper class town. He described the same problem and gave the same dimensions for the house. The estimate was twice as much for the same situation in the tony town. My friend borrowing my car learned what I have accepted for years, in bad economies you will get the finger, people who want to drag race you, men who try to pick you up, and dirty looks. I also have an expensive SUV, actually worth more than the 10 year old sports car, but a Mercedes sports car elicits emotional reactions of all sorts whereas I can freely travel in the more expensive car. Growing up without money I honestly believed America admired money. Living as an adult with the trappings of wealth I've learned that any show of wealth makes you a target.
| By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:13 pm: Edit |
Mom101~
I do not think that, on CC, there is disdain for the people who are well-off. I think that the outbursts usually are reactions to perceived gloating about relative wealth, or at the other extreme, hearing complaints about the difficulties of the higher middle class. Anyhow, I forgot the details, but didn't someone write a book styled: "I've been poor. I've been rich. Rich is better."
When it comes to discussing family finances, I am out of my league. In the case of Tom Ridge, I have no problems in understanding how his finances might cause him to consider accepting a private sector position, and I find discussing undisclosed personal finances an exercise fraught with opiniated speculation.
For what it is worth, the reports that are floating around indicate the following:
Quote:Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has told colleagues that he probably will resign after the election because of his personal finances and the stress of his job, officials told the Associated Press.
Ridge, 58, has told colleagues that he needs to earn money to comfortably put his two children, Tommy Jr. and Lesley, through college, officials said. Both are teenagers. Ridge earns $175,700 a year as a Cabinet secretary.
The former Pennsylvania governor, who agreed to serve as the department's inaugural secretary, also has expressed frustration to colleagues about the continuing problems inherent in reorganizing the 22 disparate agencies that formed the Homeland Security Department, officials said.
People who know Ridge and Bush say the two men became close as Republican governors of large states in the 1990s, as did their wives, both former librarians. The Bushes visited the Ridges in Harrisburg, and the Ridge children have stayed at the Bush family compound in Maine.
Bush nearly chose Ridge as his running mate in 2000; ultimately, GOP conservatives nixed Ridge because of his abortion rights beliefs.
In 2001, nearing the end of his second term as Pennsylvania governor and barred by law from a third, Ridge, who had little savings after a career in government, had promised his wife he would enter private life and begin making money.
Weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bush asked Ridge to come to Washington as the White House's homeland security adviser. Ridge said he would take the job for a few months. But he became wrapped up in the task as he confronted the nation's serious security gaps and various agencies' turf consciousness, White House officials and Ridge's friends said.
During a meeting Friday in Miami, Ridge called the news "an inside-the-Beltway game" and said he wouldn't comment about it.
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:17 pm: Edit |
>>Growing up without money I honestly believed America admired money. Living as an adult with the trappings of wealth I've learned that any show of wealth makes you a target.>>
I, too, live in an area where it costs twice as much to repaint my home, fix my plumbing, etc...
But, hey, I'd rather live there than in one that has been redlined by banks; I'd rather get the occasional finger (not that I stand in any danger of that in our quite modest and rather old car) than having to walk, ride buses, change to subways, transfer a couple of times and walk some more to get to a minimum wage job.
| By Dmd77 (Dmd77) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:29 pm: Edit |
I drive an expensive sports car all the time (as I said in the car thread) and I certainly haven't had unpleasant experiences in it! Can you be more specific about what your friend experienced? Did someone suggest they race? (All you have to do is... not race.) Did someone give her the finger? (Maybe she cut them off?)
If my plumber is ripping me off, I haven't noticed it--but then, I don't have to cut corners and accept second-rate materials, either, which may have been the difference in the estimate. (Or perhaps the building code in one town allowed plastic pipes, while the other one required copper? That was the case in one town we lived in.)
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:38 pm: Edit |
Dmd:
It is actually well known in my area that building contractors quote different prices according to the different zip codes. One of them actually acknowledged it indirectly when he said he did not engage in the practice, LOL! But taxi drivers do not refuse to drive to my area at night because it's not safe; products in local supermarkets are actually more reasonably priced than in poorer areas because the supermarkets know folks in my area have transportation to seek out cheaper stores, unlike folks who live in poorer parts of the city. In fact, I suspect that the customers of Cotsco are either middle class or affluent. Poor people not only are less likely to have easy access, they don't have the space to store stuff bought in bulk, nor perhaps the money to buy in large quantities at one time.
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:44 pm: Edit |
I had no idea about the different price quotes for different zip codes, but, I have to say, and I may regret it, but I think it's kinda adorable...like EFC for home repairs!
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:46 pm: Edit |
Garland:
LOL! Well, I don't think it's adorable, but it's not as bad as being redlined.
| By Garland (Garland) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:52 pm: Edit |
Well, i live on the "wrong" side, so if I ever get past tuition, and actually get around to house repair...it's nice to know I'll be getting the "cheap" estimates (said with tongue firmly in cheek.)
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:12 pm: Edit |
"The Christian concept of grace--do good, be good and enjoy all that will come to you."
Mom101, this is not a Christian concept of grace that I have ever heard. The essential point about grace is that it cannot be and never is earned. It is God's unconditional love, available to anyone who seeks it.
Emeraldkity, that is funny re driving in Gates country. In similar neighborhoods where I live, I think one reason these drivers get away with their shoddy behavior is that their cars are so very expensive none of us want to collide with them for fear of driving up our premiums. ;-)
I consider myself a liberal Democrat. My s tells everyone his mother is a socialist! But I don't blame Ridge for this one. And do I think this board is against wealth? No, I think this board is against boastfulness. I think there's just as strong a bias against showing off your kids' SAT scores as there is against acting la-de-dah about one's assets. And is that such a bad thing? Generally speaking, seems to me discourse is very civil here...
| By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:32 pm: Edit |
Actually, regarding the Christian concept of grace, there are many varieties. The Calvinist one is the narrowest. It does not actually interpret God's love as available to anyone who seeks it. According to Calvinism and to the softer version, Jansenism (banned in France as heretic in the 18th century), all human beings have necessary grace to know right from wrong, but only some have sufficient grace to be saved. The French thinker Pascal, the playwright Racine, were both influenced by Jansenism.
In that interpretation of grace, grace has little to do with doing good and being good. Racine's Phaedra was doomed from the start to have the necessary grace to know that lusting after her stepson was wrong, but not sufficient grace to desist from doing wrong and acting on that lust, thus precipitating tragedy.
As Max Weber showed, another aspect of calvinism is the idea that capital accumulation is good and that being rich is a sign of god's grace. Poor people might be very depressed by this idea, if they were not able to take comfort in the Biblical saying: "The meek shall inherit the earth." And of course, the most virtuous in the Roman Catholic hierarchy are supposed to be priests, who have taken a vow of poverty.
PS: These different interpretations of grace are why I suggest keeping God--and religion more generally--out of this discussion.
| By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:35 pm: Edit |
Amen.
| By Patient (Patient) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:38 pm: Edit |
When I heard the news about Ridge last night, the newsclip the television showed made him look very beleaguered and somehow he really got my sympathy. I still think that he just mentioned the college concept as an example of his dissatisfaction with a civil servant's salary to do the kind of work he is having to do. He probably never sleeps, is my guess.
But, I must confess that I agree with Dennis that he'll probably end up as predicted above. I HOPE that it is because there is a new administration, since I share Aparent4's political leanings.
| By Dmd77 (Dmd77) on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:54 pm: Edit |
Marite--the plastic/copper pipe example was from when we lived in Massachusetts, actually. Acton (I think) allowed plastic pipes; Carlisle didn't; different zip codes, different building codes, different prices.
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:08 am: Edit |
Marite, yes, we can talk not only about the Huguenots but also about the proponents of the "prosperity Gospel" who are the televangelists. In my first version of my post I wrote about the Calvinists' belief that prosperity was a *sign* of being elect; that's very different from "do good, be good and enjoy all that will come to you." I deleted because I thought it was probably more than anybody wanted to know about penguins. ;-) I do certainly agree that there are different definitions of grace, but none of them quite resembles winning the Miss America pageant.
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:13 am: Edit |
Dmd:
I understand what you are saying. But when I try to get a quote over the telephone about getting my windows washed, I'm always asked my zip code before the estimate is issued. I don't live in the most expensive zip code area (also known as "the most opinionated zip code in America"); in fact, my zip code area is mixed, so I probably benefit a bit from that. As a matter of fact, I was told that someone with the same number of windows as I recently paid twice as much to have them washed. But they live in an area of McMansions.
| By Patient (Patient) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:20 am: Edit |
Thanks for the tip on zip codes--I'm so naive, I always thought it was so the repairperson could find the house on the map 
And Marite, I always love it when you teach us stuff (I am NOT being sarcastic, I mean it! I am always in awe of your breadth and depth of knowledge...)
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:20 am: Edit |
Aparent:
LOL! I'm glad that televangelists are not "most religions."
I think I will paraphrase a recent speaker at the DNC, about refraining from claiming that God is on our side, but asking, in the words of Lincoln, if we are on God's side. A very, very loose paraphrase, I know, but even better, let's keep God out of it altogether.
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:26 am: Edit |
Patient:
Thank you for your kind words. It is impressive when someone seems to know stuff you don't, but it just comes from having a different education, with a different set of holes. If you look more closely, there are as many holes, but they are in different places. In other words, there's an awful lot I don't know that CC posters know so much better than I. I just happen to have had a French rather than an American education.
If I confess that I cannot read a prospectus, I'm sure that my stock will plunge immediately (hmm... bad pun).
| By Patient (Patient) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:34 am: Edit |
It's not just the education, though (I am not that familiar with the curriculum in the lycee)--it is the retention that is equally impressive. I think that I used to know some of that stuff too! A friend asked me today how my week was and I said, "My short term memory is so shot I can't even remember anything about it!" and I was serious!
Interesting that the one subject I have retained completely intact is French. It is the only subject where ANY question my kids ask me about rules, etc., I can answer. Maybe a right-brain/left-brain issue?
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:35 am: Edit |
I get so much food for thought here. I've lived in wealthy areas in Fairfield county and Westchester where I didn't feel the tension I feel in Silicon Valley between the haves and the have nots. I think a lot of it here is the perception that the "dot comers" have more money than they know what to do with. I've heard it said time and again by decent people--they honestly believe it. My friend has lived in the area all of her life and lives in a good town on the $200K income that is considered middle class here. And when the average house costs $600K, and a home in a decent school district over a million, it truly is middle class. She did not cut anyone off or look like she wanted to race, she is a 55 year old woman!! She was given the finger twice, shouted at and cut off. All in a days drive since the economy got bad here unfortunately. Gun point robberies have become fairly common in wealthy, quite neighborhoods that had no crime during the bubble. We endured an abduction threat concerning one of our children while having our house renovated last year--one of the workman was responsible. Not at all a joke, but the sad reality of the extreme divide that has become reality here. So I do ask honestly why even the extremely bright people on these boards sometimes seem to harbor ill will where the wealthy are concerned. One bright young poster advised me to remove my real name and email address if I was going to post my thoughts here. Duh, what was I thinking? What is wrong with pursuing our version of the American dream? And if it's true that many of the wealthy give back little, I'm gaining an understanding. The people we know give generously--even if they didn't want to, there's extreme peer pressure to give generously in my circles. Your name and the range in which you gave is published by the schools, churches, etc! There are many, many people who became wealthy by fulfilling their passions just as there are passionate teachers and nurses.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:54 am: Edit |
It is a lot different in Seattle.
We have lots of expensive cars but if you drive a Hummer or an Lincoln Navigator you will be snickered at. Not because they are expensive but because they obviously never go anywhere but to the mall.
I see Bill Gates driving his honda or mazda mini van or whatever it is ( it is pretty nondescript) and even though I have never owned a Windoze computer in my life and think he is a pretty ruthless business man I would never think of cutting him off or being rude. He is actually a pretty nice guy and his family isn't any different than anyone else. Virtually all the people I know that are really wealthy don't live like it. They may have three houses but all the homes are middle class. The cars they drive and the clothes they wear are off the rack. I do know one family that is very down to earth except they live in a gated community. In Seattle? What for?
They are from Chicago so maybe it is more common there but I don't know anyone else who would even think of living there.
When companies want my zipcode unless they are going to mail something that I have requested I ignore them. I don't need to be classified for a certain level of junk mail.
I also would not patronize someone that charged for a service depending on what he thought they could afford. I know people do it, but I would worry that if he thought I couldn't afford it he would cut corners on materials and workmanship
I want a quote based on the service not my zip
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 07:37 am: Edit |
Emeraldkity:
>>I want a quote based on the service not my zip.>>
So do I, so do I. No one goes around saying "You live in zip code area 02138, so I'll charge you more than if you lived in zip code area 02139." But it is an open secret that it happens all the time.
I have met Bill Gates, Sr, and his wife. She looked much less expensively dressed than many (most)women at that event. Her suit did look bought off the rack, perhaps at Nordstrom? :-)
| By Tropicanabanana (Tropicanabanana) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 08:36 am: Edit |
Tom Ridge came to my school and a bunch of us walked out.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 09:07 am: Edit |
How mature. It's always best to hear out anyone you consider an enemy.
| By Vjjones59 (Vjjones59) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 09:13 am: Edit |
Just curious...Could someone with 2 kids and $187,000 income qualify for financial aid? The formula may be far too detailed to speculate, but seems to me that's plenty of income to have done some saving and be in pretty good shape for college expenses. Thanks
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 09:22 am: Edit |
Yes. With more than one student enrolled, you can earn more than that and get financial aid. Scroll down here and look at the yellow chart to see who gets aid from Princeton: http://www.princeton.edu/pr/aid/appl/05.html
Bear in mind that the amounts on that list are aid for *each* child. So each of Tom Ridge's kids could get $11,600 in aid per year.
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 09:59 am: Edit |
Marite, I have always loved that quote from Lincoln: At a White House dinner, a clergyman closed his benediction by saying, "The Lord is on our side." When President Lincoln did not respond to this sentiment, someone asked him, "Don't you believe, Mr. President, that the Lord is always on the side of the right?"
"I am not concerned about that," said Lincoln, "for we know that the Lord is always on the side of the right. My concern is that I and this nation should be on the Lord's side."
I don't bring up religion on these boards. However, living in a country where Christian faith is currently held public hostage by the likes of John Ashcroft, many of us reserve the right and consider it our duty to point out, in response to certain kinds of blanket statements, that it's not so simple (just as Lincoln did). I think you did the same thing above when you referred to Buddhism, and I appreciated your comment.
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 10:11 am: Edit |
Aparent:
Yes, I think that the speaker at the DNC (was it Obama?) referred specifically to that Lincoln anecdote. Thanks for elaborating. My French education was somewhat short on US history. :-)
And I absolutely agree with you about trying to avoid making blanket statements about religion (and much else).
| By Emptynester (Emptynester) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 10:42 am: Edit |
John Adams wrote to his wife Abigail in 1780: “I must study politics and war that my sons may have the liberty to study mathematics and philosophy…in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music…”
yes really OT -- sorry -- but it's a quote I can't get out of my head reading through a few of these threads the last 24 hours
| By Emptynester (Emptynester) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 10:45 am: Edit |
okay. Are we the only family here who does our own plumbing, electrical & other house repairs?? LOL
| By Patient (Patient) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 10:53 am: Edit |
Emptynester, you are so lucky! I always chuckle (silently) when I see my (incredibly intelligent) husband heading somewhere in the house with his tool box, because I know he'll emerge sometime later and announce that the job is impossible....and I am equally helpless. I WISH we weren't dependent on experts for these tasks....
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 11:05 am: Edit |
Emptynester:
Yes, indeed, you are so lucky. But I also think that Americans are the most DIY people in the world. Where else would a place like Home Depot be such a roaring success?
| By Jamimom (Jamimom) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 11:52 am: Edit |
Emptynester, we do most of our own repairs. Had to. We lived in rather shabby, old house where doorknobs were always falling off, a pipe was leaking, always something.
We bought a brand new house 4 years ago which gave us a hiatus from many of these activities. Just had the plumber come in to snake some lines, do some caulking as maintenance. I am in sticker shock over the bill. We are doing the rest of the caulking ourselves even if it will not look as professional. My boys, though lazy slackers that have to be nagged and threatened into doing this work, at least can do it, which has proved beneficial to them when they were at college. S and 5 other guys rented a ramshamble house--nothing new to him, and he was able to do many of the minor repairs that came up. The landlord wanted to hire him as a handy man for some of his other property, as he saved him trouble and money.
| By Optimizerdad (Optimizerdad) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:32 pm: Edit |
Emptynester:
Are you willing to give quotes to other posters under 'Parents' who are all thumbs when it comes to home repairs? You never know - you might wind up making more $ than in your day job :-) .
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 12:43 pm: Edit |
My husband used to do household repairs, and still would if I'd let him. Sadly, although he enjoys such work and is willing to do it, it is not where his talents lie.
Emeraldkity, I greatly admire Bill and Melissa Gates and the good things they've done with their great wealth. I must say, though, that they definitely do not live a middle class lifestyle, by any means. My husband has been fortunate to be invited to a conference that Bill holds annually and has dined at their home. I don't know many middle class homes where the dining room can seat 75 people!
| By 2dsdad (2dsdad) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:20 pm: Edit |
"Yes, I think that the speaker at the DNC (was it Obama?) referred specifically to that Lincoln anecdote."
It was Kerry.
| By Simba (Simba) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:22 pm: Edit |
Marite: This from Hindu mythology to go with your Buddhist thought.
In Hindu mythology the goddess of money-wealth is Lakshmi. She always stands in a pond on a lotus or water lilly. Saraswati - the goddess of knowledge sits on a piece of massive rock.
Significance? If one tries to grab and hang on to money - Lakshmi - they can't. The Lotus does not have a stable root system - it will just slip away On the other hand once you have hung on to Knowledge, you can't move it.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:26 pm: Edit |
Alwaysamom, like many wealthy people, Bill and Melinda Gates show one face out in the general community and a very different one at home among friends.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:39 pm: Edit |
However much Bill and Melinda can personally purchase, they still are not inclined to behave as though their money makes them "special" which is what I see with a certain section of the population.
Money is a tool, but whether you want to use it to make a difference or whether you want to use it to buy things that will set you apart from the bulk of the population depends on your values and priorities.
We know the Gates children, as my daughter is an alum of where they are attending school and she is also working there as a science specialist, and they are excessively careful to give them a "normal" life. I know families who make barely more than we do who are living way beyond their means because "status" is more important to them than anything.
Maybe it is a Seattle thing, we don't worship our billonaires here and we don't recognize them when we see them in line at Cafe Vita. everyone shops the Nordstrom sales and buys fleece at REI. You are not going to get any Brownie points for being ostentaious
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:50 pm: Edit |
Simba:
Thanks. I'm no expert on Buddhism. But I know that the Buddha sits on a lotus, a symbol of purity. Interesting that the same images carry so many different connotations. On a trip to Southeast Asia many years ago, we picked up a little statue of Ganesha. My S was quite taken with the story.
| By Alwaysamom (Alwaysamom) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 01:55 pm: Edit |
Emerald, yes, I know that Bill and Melissa do their best to provide a 'normal' life for their children. My comment was in response to yours that indicated that, "Virtually all the people I know that are really wealthy don't live like it. They may have three houses but all the homes are middle class." As I said previously, I greatly admire what Bill and Melissa do with their great wealth, but a home that is valued at approximately $65 million is certainly rare in any area of the country, not just Seattle.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:02 pm: Edit |
The very wealthy are often much more aware than the simply wealthy of the need to keep their kids grounded. Warren Buffet, who claims his kids will not inherit his fortune, is well known to be Bill's mentor on this subject. But how can you think the kids are living a "normal" life when the details of their home is public knowledge? The kids, like many wealthy children, are dressed normally and taught good manners and to fit in at school, but they hardly live a normal life.
| By Momto2 (Momto2) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:11 pm: Edit |
I want to comment about people saying there is a lot of anger towards people with money on this board.
My grip was not about people with money, or Ridge, but some people, especially some of those with significant incomes, that do not plan for college expenses. (Ridge is free to take whatever job he wants as is anyone. Great for anyone who makes that kind of money!) This is more of a general attitude of some parents, not specifically to anyone on this board.
My gripe is more about what I think of as a ridiculous and foolish senario of expecting to pay $80K/year for two children in college and have $0 savings for this obvious coming expense. (Maybe mulitmillionaires excepted.) And then whining about it. The lack of planning makes me crazy. They needed to think of this sooner.
There are always ways to cut expenses, especially when making $187K. I'm sure they could find a way to save $5-10K a year. One obvious area is cars for the family. There is a good chance their teenage kids have cars! Good chance the parents bought their cars new instead of buying 5 year old cars. Maybe the cleaning person could come every other week instead of every week. The list is endless. It never ceases to amaze me what people think is necessary to spend on while acting like saving for college is not a necessary step.
We all make choices in life. One of them is to save or not save for college expenses for one's children. It is hard to have much less money and still be saving and hearing other people who make so much more say they can't.
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:13 pm: Edit |
And since we're talking about Bill and Melinda...Although a good arguement can be made that Bill was just preoccupied with business, there was heavy critisism that it took him some time to start giving away money. Yes, they've more than made up for that. Melinda, not well liked as a Duke undergrad, was well known for being an ambitious climber. She has used the wealth, which it's her preogative to do, to achieve many of her social goals such as becoming a trustee of Duke. All while allowing her husband, by prenuptial agreement, to spend a week every year with his former girlfriend!
| By Simba (Simba) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:18 pm: Edit |
Marite: Buddha sitting on a lotus conveys that He has enough stability and peace of mind to sit on a extremely unstable structure.
Both in Hinduism and buddhism the lotus is considered a symbol of purity. Why? The lotus is very beautiful, but it grows in 'dirty' waters, and the water does not stick to its leaves. One should train their mind such that the surrounding should not matter and one should be able to 'shed' them like a lotus.
BTW Buddha was a prince, his father tried to raise him in a hermetically sealed environment (He was homeschooled).
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:20 pm: Edit |
Mom101:
I'm disappointed. I did not need to hear about Melinda Gates'lack of popularity or her prenuptial agreement. All I need to hear about is her stewardship of the Gates Foundation. That is what I, as an American and a global citizen, care about. Her relationship with her husband is strictly her business.
It never ceases to amaze me how the personal and the public are so entwined in American public discourse.
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:22 pm: Edit |
Simba:
>>BTW Buddha was a prince, his father tried to raise him in a hermetically sealed environment (He was homeschooled).>>
LOL! Strike a huge one for homeschooling, surely?
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:24 pm: Edit |
Sorry, it just amazes me that people are so fooled by small shows.
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:29 pm: Edit |
Mom101:
Again, Melinda Gates' personality and her relationship with her husband have no bearing on how they choose to educate their kids or their agenda for the Gates Foundation. Sorry; I don't care to poke my nose into other people's private lives, and I don't like having other people's private business rubbed into my face just to make a point.
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 02:58 pm: Edit |
But how can you think the kids are living a "normal" life when the details of their home is public knowledge? The kids, like many wealthy children, are dressed normally and taught good manners and to fit in at school, but they hardly live a normal life.
Thats why I put "normal" in quotes.
However do any of us lead a "normal" life?
When my daughter was first attending school, the local ABC affilate wanted to follow her around the first day, from filming while I was packing her lunch to when she arrived back home. I declined deciding that we all were going to have enough stress without a television camera in her face while she was trying to make new friends.
I suspect that because she was a premie,( and in a high risk study) the university psychologist made the referral since she was so excited she was doing so well.
We chose this particular school because I liked the atmosphere, it was more like a parent co-operative and it was very informal and eglatarian. However over time as it got away from its roots more families who were very concious that their children were "gifted" and who wanted to make sure the children knew it too, became involved at the school with a new director who referred to himself as "headmaster".
Luckily he didn't last long, and my daughter was old enough that we werent affected by the new families that wanted more stringent requirements for new kids. While they initially do require an IQ test, they did have kids with learning differences as my daughter and don't have a cutoff point for admission.
I think people who really strive for everyone else to know how much money they make, what prestigous job titles they have, are pathetic. It isn't envy. But rather it seems sad that these folks are desperately trying to fill up something in their lives that never will stay filled with material things.
The poor are certainly not noble. Often they are uneducated, and are too consumed with the stress of putting a happy meal on the table to think about how wonderful life is, and what a gift we have just being here in what I still think is one of the best countries in the world.
But the clones of the upper middle class with their Mercedes cream convertibles, their black lambskin jackets and their carefully streaked hair seem to have lost any individuality or in some cases humanity while they are focused on fitting into their clique
| By Mom101 (Mom101) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 03:26 pm: Edit |
Emeraldkity, you talk about a Seattle thing and I'm trying to figure out what that is. Is it that there are not that many mega rich in Seattle, so you can avoid being looked down upon if you keep driving a Honda? In Silicon Valley and other wealthy enclaves I have lived in, feeling special through obvious shows of wealth would be fleeting because there are always people more wealthy, more conventionally successful, more anything you want to talk about. Many people have Mercedes, so you are choosing a car you love, not a status symbol or you would need a stretch Bentley. You may have a $5 million dollar house but next week someone will start building a $20 million dollar house down the road and the Google guys are worth billions on paper next week. In a town like Seattle people like Bill go out of their way to drive Hondas so as not to stick out in traffic but then build a $65 million home and people still think they are modest? I'm just trying to figure this out...
| By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 05:04 pm: Edit |
Seattle has the highest numbers of any large city of the populace with a college degree ( 52%- national average is 25%- guess Bill didn't do much to raise those numbers at least personally :-)
Three years ago there were 10,000 millionaires in Seattle, not counting outlying areas like Redmond or Woodinville.
I don't see people buying Hondas so as not to "stick" out but because that suits their need.
If you look in any lowincome area, you will see cars disporportinate to what you would think they could afford, people don't necessarily buy cars to blend in.
I don't think Bill gates is modest far from it, but ostentation of his home/business compound aside I don't see native Seattlities generally living the lifestyles of rich and famous.
More Ross Perot than Donald Trump.
Must be the Scandinavian influence!
| By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 05:17 pm: Edit |
Emeraldkity, are you talking about people David Brooks has named "Bobos" for "bourgeois bohemians")? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684853787/104-0088353-0795165?v=glance
As the Amazon promo copy reads: "They sip double-tall, nonfat lattes, chat on cell phones, and listen to NPR while driving their immaculate SUVs to Pottery Barn to shop for $48 titanium spatulas. They tread down specialty cheese aisles in top-of-the-line hiking boots and think nothing of laying down $5 for an olive-wheatgrass muffin. They're the bourgeois bohemians-- 'Bobos'--an unlikely blend of mainstream culture and 1960s-era counterculture that, according to David Brooks, represents both America's present and future: 'These Bobos define our age. They are the new establishment. Their hybrid culture is the atmosphere we all breathe. Their status codes now govern social life.' Amusing stereotypes aside, they're an 'elite based on brainpower' and merit rather than pedigree or lineage: 'Dumb good-looking people with great parents have been displaced by smart, ambitious, educated, and antiestablishment people with scuffed shoes.'"
| By Marite (Marite) on Sunday, August 01, 2004 - 05:41 pm: Edit |
Aparent:
I think Brooks wrote the book before Paris Hilton showed the world that it was better to !. be born rich and 2. be good looking than to be intelligent; that when one has #1 and #2, then one can even make money out of NOT being intelligent.
As for Seattle, it has been said that the reason why so many people who could afford cars and great looking houses, and dress well but do not is that they dont'have the time to spend their money because they're too busy earning it; and they can afford to go to work (or not at all) looking as if they'd just gotten out of bed.