Why do we work so hard? I've been asking myself that question all week. Then I ask the following: what is the earliest age at which I can retire?
I'm ready to retire right now. I was trying to do math in my head, failing miserably, and trying to figure out what is the minimum amount of money I need to make in order to survive while still having a little left over for some travel. If I can figure out at what age I can retire and still make that amount, that will be my retirement age. I may need an accountant for this - or at least someone good with numbers.
See, I think people get greedy, working till they're old and gray so they can get the most during retirement (at least that's how it is in the government). However, I think that if you spend your life working, by the time you retire you are too old to enjoy what you've earned. I have no intention of making that mistake.
I already know that I am minimally eligible for retirement after 25 years of government service - that puts me at a minimum retirement age of 50, but screw that! I need a faster plan...rambling ideas anyone?
1. Lottery
2. Start my own business
3. Make money off this blog. Haha - not likely
4. Buy as many batman comics as I can and hope I can sell them for a lot more $ later.
5. Do the same but with basketball cards, football cards, baseball cards? lol
6. Invest. Now why is this one of the last things that occur to me?
Maybe a combination of 4, 5 and 6. JK, I'm probably doomed to work till I'm 50!
Friday, March 30, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
Wednesday Thoughts
I was sent this via email today and as I read these I realized I agree with everything on that list, except one comment which I deleted. So I thought I'd share, plus they're funny.
Ø I think part of a best friend's job should be to immediately clear your computer history if you die.
Ø Nothing sucks more than that moment during an argument when you realize you're wrong.
Ø I totally take back all those times I didn't want to nap when I was younger.
Ø There is great need for a sarcasm font.
Ø How the hell are you supposed to fold a fitted sheet?
Ø Was learning cursive really necessary?
Ø MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. I'm pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Ø Obituaries would be a lot more interesting if they told you how the person died.
Ø I can't remember the last time I wasn't at least kind of tired.
Ø Bad decisions make good stories.
Ø You never know when it will strike, but there comes a moment at work when you know that you just aren't going to do anything productive for the rest of the day.
Ø Can we all just agree to ignore whatever comes after Blu-Ray? I don't want to have to restart my collection. Again.
Ø I'm always slightly terrified when I exit out of Word and it asks me if I want to save any changes to my ten-page analysis report that I swear I did not make any changes to.
Ø "Do not machine wash or tumble dry" means I will never wash this -ever.
Ø I hate when I just miss a call by the last ring (Hello? Hello? **** it!), but when I immediately call back, it rings nine times and goes to voice mail. What did you do after I didn't answer? Drop the phone and run away?
Ø I hate leaving my house confident and looking good and then not seeing anyone of importance the entire day. What a waste.
Ø I keep some people's phone numbers in my phone just so I know not to answer when they call.
Ø I think the freezer deserves a light as well.
Ø I disagree with Kay Jewelers. I would bet on any given Friday or Saturday night more kisses begin with Miller Lite than Kay.
Ø I wish Google Maps had "Avoid Ghetto" routing option.
Ø Sometimes, I'll watch a movie that I watched when I was younger and suddenly realize I had no idea what the heck was going on when I first saw it.
Ø I would rather try to carry 10 overloaded plastic bags in each hand than take 2 trips to bring my groceries in.
Ø I have a hard time deciphering the fine line between boredom and hunger.
Ø How many times is it appropriate to say "What?" before you just nod and smile because you still didn't hear or understand a word they said?
Ø I love the sense of camaraderie when an entire line of cars team up to prevent a jerk from cutting in at the front. Stay strong, brothers and sisters.
Ø Shirts get dirty. Underwear gets dirty. Pants? Pants never get dirty, and you can wear them forever.
Ø Is it just me or do high school kids get dumber & dumber every year?
Ø There's no worse feeling than that millisecond you're sure you are going to die after leaning your chair back a little too far.
Ø Sometimes I'll look down at my watch 3 consecutive times and still not know what time it is.
Ø Even under ideal conditions people have trouble locating their car keys in a pocket, finding their cell phone, and Pinning the Tail on the Donkey - but I'd bet my *** everyone can find and push the snooze button from 3 feet away, in about 1.7 seconds, eyes closed, first time, every time!
Ø Why does the computer give you the option to check the box that says “Don’t show this message again” if its just gonna keep popping up?
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Dating
Ok, so I've been slacking on this blog. I promised you a table for opportunity cost and I didn't deliver...yet. I also have been MIA for a bit, but in my defense I did recently move, and we all know moving sucks. I was going to blog about the move, but I will save that for another day.
I no longer have my girls to chat during my lunch hour, which was how this blog got started in the first place, but I still have a lot of friends who give me plenty to think about. For instance, it seems the world of dating has merged with the electronic world, meaning that we now get to text, IM, Facebook, etc. Oh, and don't forget you now get to meet the love of your life on an online site (OK this last one is less likely to happen). The fact is that noone calls anymore, remember phone calls? Remember dates for that matter? You know, real life, face-to-face action...chuckles..no pun intended.
Don't get me wrong, I love technology and gadgets, but I miss the old days when there was no texting, IM, Facebook, or any variation of online help. Why? Because then if a guy got your name and number, the only thing he could do was call. Therefore, you knew that he either would or wouldn't, 50/50 chance, I like those odds. Then, if he didn't call within a few days you could move on.
In today's age of technology, the fucker can email, text, Facebook, and basically do everything in his power to avoid asking a simple question - can I take you out on date?
I mean there are a million variations of that, it can be:
1. Can I buy you coffee?
2. Will you let me take you to dinner?
3. Will you go out with me Saturday?
4. Can I take you to a movie?
I can go all day with these. My girlfriends tell me all these stories about how they text a guy for weeks before he finds some excuse to see them, and even then he acts like it's a friendly encounter, no date implied at all. That is such a cop out, but the worst thing is that if that's the way its done, I'm doomed. I have no idea how to flirt via text, I mean I have issues knowing how to flirt in real life unless the guy starts it. Then I have this really old fashioned way of thinking where I think girls shouldn't ask guys out, I know I should probably get with the times, but I can't help the way I was raised.
So guys, grow some and ask women out, it is simpler than you think. See, women are simple, we know if we are willing to give you a chance within the first 10 minutes of meeting you. Granted, some guys talk their way out of that chance, or they can talk their way into that chance. Bottom line: if a girl gives you her number, ask her out! You have nothing to lose.
I no longer have my girls to chat during my lunch hour, which was how this blog got started in the first place, but I still have a lot of friends who give me plenty to think about. For instance, it seems the world of dating has merged with the electronic world, meaning that we now get to text, IM, Facebook, etc. Oh, and don't forget you now get to meet the love of your life on an online site (OK this last one is less likely to happen). The fact is that noone calls anymore, remember phone calls? Remember dates for that matter? You know, real life, face-to-face action...chuckles..no pun intended.
Don't get me wrong, I love technology and gadgets, but I miss the old days when there was no texting, IM, Facebook, or any variation of online help. Why? Because then if a guy got your name and number, the only thing he could do was call. Therefore, you knew that he either would or wouldn't, 50/50 chance, I like those odds. Then, if he didn't call within a few days you could move on.
In today's age of technology, the fucker can email, text, Facebook, and basically do everything in his power to avoid asking a simple question - can I take you out on date?
I mean there are a million variations of that, it can be:
1. Can I buy you coffee?
2. Will you let me take you to dinner?
3. Will you go out with me Saturday?
4. Can I take you to a movie?
I can go all day with these. My girlfriends tell me all these stories about how they text a guy for weeks before he finds some excuse to see them, and even then he acts like it's a friendly encounter, no date implied at all. That is such a cop out, but the worst thing is that if that's the way its done, I'm doomed. I have no idea how to flirt via text, I mean I have issues knowing how to flirt in real life unless the guy starts it. Then I have this really old fashioned way of thinking where I think girls shouldn't ask guys out, I know I should probably get with the times, but I can't help the way I was raised.
So guys, grow some and ask women out, it is simpler than you think. See, women are simple, we know if we are willing to give you a chance within the first 10 minutes of meeting you. Granted, some guys talk their way out of that chance, or they can talk their way into that chance. Bottom line: if a girl gives you her number, ask her out! You have nothing to lose.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Opportunity Cost
Opportunity Cost is a term in economics = The cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the next best alternative foregone (that is not chosen).
Let’s say that a company can only produce 2,000 lbs of wheat or 1,000 lbs of tomato paste within an 8 hour period. The opportunity cost of producing 2,000 lbs of wheat = the 1,000 lbs of tomato paste. The opportunity cost of producing 1,000 lbs of tomato paste is 2,000 of wheat. So, is the choice clear? Do you automatically decide to produce 2,000 of wheat? Let’s assign profit. What if:
2,000 lbs of wheat = $500 dollars
1,000 lbs of tomato paste = $1000 dollars
Still think your company should go for the wheat? I didn't think so. Now, how does that relate to my life? I've been using opportunity cost to make decisions in my life ever since I came across this term in college, it just made so much sense. This is how I use it (*warning to economic majors: do not get on my back, I am going off the text book and we are gonna get flexible for a second here).
First, you assign monetary value to the choices you make, for instance if you want to get a dog, but you know you have to move into a different apartment building to have one. How much will you pay extra every month to live in that new apartment building vs. staying where you are. Let’s say it's $400 extra every month. So, you decide that's too much money. What if the difference was $300, still too much money? If no, then you have just placed a price on how much getting a dog is worth to you. Furthermore, we have just established that: The opportunity cost of you having a dog is the $300 you give up every month, and that’s a trade you will happily make, but if the opportunity cost of having the dog went up to $400, then that’s a trade you won’t make. Same as the tomato paste vs. wheat, the opportunity cost of making tomato paste is the $500 made from wheat which you gladly give up to make $1000 on tomatoes, but if the opportunity cost of making $1000 on tomato paste was making $2000 on wheat, you'd probably choose the wheat right?
You can make almost any decision in your life this way, you can decide what the opportunity cost of having one thing over another is, even without assigning monetary value to things. I happen to find that assigning a monetary value makes things quantitative and easier to calculate, since money makes the world go round, but your call. For my purposes of decision making, opportunity cost can be qualitative (i.e. time, labor, even emotions if you wanna use it to make emotional decisions in your life). You can compare apples to oranges if you want and compare a monetary amount to having a boyfriend, or a dog. For instance, if you get offered the same job in two cities but one pays higher than the other, but the one that pays higher means you have to break up with your boyfriend and leave town. How much is he worth? It sounds cold, but it turns out you CAN put a price on relationships and happiness when you are making a decision, just be sure it’s a price you are willing to pay. So will you break up with him over an extra 10K/year? 20K/year? Or is his love priceless? In this instance, the opportunity cost of staying in your relationship is the money you are giving up by not moving. If you aren't sure, it helps to decide the opportunity cost of your relationship prior to you even being offered the job. This is where you ask yourself - how much money am I willing to give up to keep him?
Is is an exact science? No, but the dog example was my own, except I need to elaborate because it didn't end there. I was willing to give up $300/month to have this dog, mostly because the dog itself was free! Then I thought about it, and in one year I would have paid $3600 for this dog. Instead, if I waited a year, after which I would have to move regardless, and pay more money regardless, and then got the dog, the dog would come at no cost to me because it's a move I have to make anyway. Actually not true, the dog would then cost me $500 which is how much that particular dog sells for. So get a dog now = costs $3600 over a year period. Get a dog in a year = costs $500 on the spot. In this instance you don't count the extra money in rent because it is unrelated to the dog itself. In other words, like I said before, even if I didn't get the dog I would have to pay that extra money. You can even break it down into:
Get a dog now and have companion right away = cost $3600 over a year period
Get a dog in a year = cost $500 plus lack of companionship during the next year.
You can always add emotional benefits to your equations. I am currently working on a table that I would like to post so that your life can be made easy when you want to make decisions. Will post when finished.
Let’s say that a company can only produce 2,000 lbs of wheat or 1,000 lbs of tomato paste within an 8 hour period. The opportunity cost of producing 2,000 lbs of wheat = the 1,000 lbs of tomato paste. The opportunity cost of producing 1,000 lbs of tomato paste is 2,000 of wheat. So, is the choice clear? Do you automatically decide to produce 2,000 of wheat? Let’s assign profit. What if:
2,000 lbs of wheat = $500 dollars
1,000 lbs of tomato paste = $1000 dollars
Still think your company should go for the wheat? I didn't think so. Now, how does that relate to my life? I've been using opportunity cost to make decisions in my life ever since I came across this term in college, it just made so much sense. This is how I use it (*warning to economic majors: do not get on my back, I am going off the text book and we are gonna get flexible for a second here).
First, you assign monetary value to the choices you make, for instance if you want to get a dog, but you know you have to move into a different apartment building to have one. How much will you pay extra every month to live in that new apartment building vs. staying where you are. Let’s say it's $400 extra every month. So, you decide that's too much money. What if the difference was $300, still too much money? If no, then you have just placed a price on how much getting a dog is worth to you. Furthermore, we have just established that: The opportunity cost of you having a dog is the $300 you give up every month, and that’s a trade you will happily make, but if the opportunity cost of having the dog went up to $400, then that’s a trade you won’t make. Same as the tomato paste vs. wheat, the opportunity cost of making tomato paste is the $500 made from wheat which you gladly give up to make $1000 on tomatoes, but if the opportunity cost of making $1000 on tomato paste was making $2000 on wheat, you'd probably choose the wheat right?
You can make almost any decision in your life this way, you can decide what the opportunity cost of having one thing over another is, even without assigning monetary value to things. I happen to find that assigning a monetary value makes things quantitative and easier to calculate, since money makes the world go round, but your call. For my purposes of decision making, opportunity cost can be qualitative (i.e. time, labor, even emotions if you wanna use it to make emotional decisions in your life). You can compare apples to oranges if you want and compare a monetary amount to having a boyfriend, or a dog. For instance, if you get offered the same job in two cities but one pays higher than the other, but the one that pays higher means you have to break up with your boyfriend and leave town. How much is he worth? It sounds cold, but it turns out you CAN put a price on relationships and happiness when you are making a decision, just be sure it’s a price you are willing to pay. So will you break up with him over an extra 10K/year? 20K/year? Or is his love priceless? In this instance, the opportunity cost of staying in your relationship is the money you are giving up by not moving. If you aren't sure, it helps to decide the opportunity cost of your relationship prior to you even being offered the job. This is where you ask yourself - how much money am I willing to give up to keep him?
Is is an exact science? No, but the dog example was my own, except I need to elaborate because it didn't end there. I was willing to give up $300/month to have this dog, mostly because the dog itself was free! Then I thought about it, and in one year I would have paid $3600 for this dog. Instead, if I waited a year, after which I would have to move regardless, and pay more money regardless, and then got the dog, the dog would come at no cost to me because it's a move I have to make anyway. Actually not true, the dog would then cost me $500 which is how much that particular dog sells for. So get a dog now = costs $3600 over a year period. Get a dog in a year = costs $500 on the spot. In this instance you don't count the extra money in rent because it is unrelated to the dog itself. In other words, like I said before, even if I didn't get the dog I would have to pay that extra money. You can even break it down into:
Get a dog now and have companion right away = cost $3600 over a year period
Get a dog in a year = cost $500 plus lack of companionship during the next year.
You can always add emotional benefits to your equations. I am currently working on a table that I would like to post so that your life can be made easy when you want to make decisions. Will post when finished.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
College
Top 10 things I miss about college:
1. Flip Cup and Beer Pong
2. Taco Bell after Flip Cup and Beer Pong
3. Mario Kart
4. College bars with .25 cent pitchers
5. Intramurals
6. No class on Fridays
7. All nighters
8. Greek Week
9. Homecoming Week
10. Spring Break
Remember the days when you could drink all night, go to bed at 8am and sleep till 5pm, knowing you didn’t have class till 7pm because you were smart enough to do night classes Monday – Thursday.
Remember what it felt like to stay up working on a float till 10am, to then head straight into a homecoming parade, cheering you butt off, and going home to sleep only after the football game was over.
Remember how great it felt to win intramural flag football, or volleyball, or whatever your team was for.
Remember the road trips to Daytona Beach, or Panama City, or Miami Beach (which for us was more like a 35 minute drive from campus).
Only 4 things I disliked about college:
1. Statistics
2. Unpaid internships
3. Networking
4. Having no money
Some people would add Ramen noodles to this list but I liked them so much I still eat them!
Friday, December 23, 2011
Batman
Preface: I normally post my own thoughts alone, but this time it's different. I had sent Willis an email ranting about Batman, and it turned into a discussion, so I decided to post both sides. Feel free to add under the comment section J
My Rant on “The Dark Knight Rises”:It just dawned on me that Anne Hathaway may have been good for Talia's character, since she has brown hair and eyes, but not as Catwoman. Why couldn't Charleze Theron, Angelina Jolie, Eva Green, or even Olivia Wilde, be Catwoman? I think even Marion Cotillard (who is in the movie playing some made up character who wasn’t in the comics) would have made a better Catwoman, she at least has green eyes. Do you know they considered Keira Knightley for Catwoman? I mean WTF is Christopher Nolan thinking? She is flat chested and a twig. They also considered flippin Jessica Biel who looks like a horse with those big teeth!
Also, why did they not make Talia his love interest in Batman Begins when she is Ras Al Ghul’s daughter and he was already the main bad guy? I mean there was just not need to make up a fake character (Rachel) for Katie Holmes to play.
While I’m venting, I may as well get it over with and let you know that I hate - absolutely hate - Christian Bale as Batman. He has no charisma, he is the most dull/boring/I don’t wanna sleep with you because your personality turns me off Batman, ever! Even George Clooney I would have slept with! He had charisma. I know it’s the "DARK" Knight and all, but does he have to be so unemotional at all times?! And boring! Jesus!
I can’t wait till this Batman is over and a new Batman movie series comes up, one that doesn’t make up fake characters like Katie Holmes’ character and Marion Cotillard's character, one that doesn’t switch actresses to play the same character, like Maggie Gyllenhaal substituting for Katie Holmes. I mean just when you think it can’t get worse than Katie, it does! That Maggie B*$@% looks like a droopy dog (like the one from the hush puppy commercials).
Reply from Willis:
I completely agree with you that Christopher Nolan has weird taste in his actresses and it should have been Charlize Theron (definitely not Keira Knightley; she is just too over used) but we'll see what this girl does. I've never seen Marion Cotillard in other movies but I'm wondering if her French accent may have been difficult to hide and that's why they did not choose her? But that is possibly beside the point.
As for Christian Bale, I think he hit the Batman that Christopher Nolan wished to explore pretty well actually. I remember there are the two Batmans, the charming/all around/easy going bachelor from the animated series and the dark/broody/jaded one from the later comics, and it is the later one he chose to do. Is he a little too dark? Yes, but I think it serves the purpose and mood of the story he's striving to tell. He's hitting all the main points, like the origin of his training, the fear of bats, and the lack of rhyme or reason of the joker's intentions. So far so good....
But this movie has me worried. Bane was never that huge a character but I do remember him being Hispanic and educated (something the animated series never showed), BUT, he does break Batman's back, so how can he “Rise” with a broken back? As a matter of fact, there is a scene in the preview where they show a man walking with a cane and the reflection looks like Bruce Wayne. This worries me....
We'll see how this goes but in all honesty, I am not excited. I'm anxious and fearful that this might just get ruined the same way that Batman was ruined when it was moved out of the hands of Tim Burton. The third Batman with the Riddler killed it, and it was all downhill from there.
As for Christian Bale, I think he hit the Batman that Christopher Nolan wished to explore pretty well actually. I remember there are the two Batmans, the charming/all around/easy going bachelor from the animated series and the dark/broody/jaded one from the later comics, and it is the later one he chose to do. Is he a little too dark? Yes, but I think it serves the purpose and mood of the story he's striving to tell. He's hitting all the main points, like the origin of his training, the fear of bats, and the lack of rhyme or reason of the joker's intentions. So far so good....
But this movie has me worried. Bane was never that huge a character but I do remember him being Hispanic and educated (something the animated series never showed), BUT, he does break Batman's back, so how can he “Rise” with a broken back? As a matter of fact, there is a scene in the preview where they show a man walking with a cane and the reflection looks like Bruce Wayne. This worries me....
We'll see how this goes but in all honesty, I am not excited. I'm anxious and fearful that this might just get ruined the same way that Batman was ruined when it was moved out of the hands of Tim Burton. The third Batman with the Riddler killed it, and it was all downhill from there.
My Last thoughts on this:
Touché on everything you said Willis, except for any references to the animated series. I only go by the comics, any other installation doesn’t count as far as Batman story goes for me J. So, the way I see it, you are right, there are 2 Batmans, the bachelor/fun Batman versus the dark one. The bachelor/fun Batman comes from the early Batman comic books, which eventually got dark anyway (this is the one they likely made the animated series out of). However, there is also the “Dark Knight” Series in which he was dark from the beginning, and that’s the Batman I think Christopher Nolan was aiming for, and that’s the Batman I don’t like.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)