Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
[quote=”Scott”]I am delighted (but not surprised :wink:) to hear you had a very positive experience with the two Realtors we recommend on WeLoveCostaRica.com
Our [url=https://www.welovecostarica.com/public/department51.cfm]Recommended Realtors can be found here[/url].
Scott
PS. How near must you be to Liberia?[/quote]
Distance isn’t an issue for me. I just figure the closer to the airport the more attractive a vacation rental property it will be. Tamarindo seemed a bit further than the 45 minutes many claim. Hermosa and Coco were a short 25 minute ride which was nice.
Having a condo in a town or complex that doesn’t necessitate having a rental car I feel is a nice attractive selling point.
Right now I’m working on location. Next will be the specific complex.
Any advice would be welcome!
[quote=”Scott”]I don’t like the direction that most “developing” countries are moving in but let’s please try to refrain from turning this into a political discussion that’s NOT related to Costa Rica.
I do agree about the diet here. Just in the last decade I have noticed an ENORMOUS change in the size of the Ticos…
When I arrived in 1999, you could see zillions of incredibly slim and attractive Ticas walking around with their tailored jeans and a tanned, bare flat stomach showing…
You rarely see that now but do often see extremely obese families waddling around…
What I can’t honestly understand is how any mother and father – in any country – can feed their kids and watch as they get fatter and fatter and fatter…
What sort of heart and general health problems are they giving their own children from their earliest years?
Are they totally blind? Do they not care about their own children or, do they feel “comfortable” knowing that they are just like Mum and Dad?
[/quote]
Not to worry Scott! The natural balance of nature will cause the pendulum to swing back…. the rising price of food will once again have the Ticas thin and looking good hoping to attract that rich Gringo to kill the hunger pains. It’s all part of the natural order of things. LOL
Just like the Chained CPI calculation in the US will have folks switching to cheap food products until they just can’t afford to eat at all and just quietly drop off the charts!!
Yes….. Education Is a wonderful thing! I think we all really enjoy coming to a forum about Costa Rica and learning how much Americans spend as a function of GDP on tattoos and perfume to improve our deficient overall knowledge in life!
Personal experience and a history involving the topics discussed might go a bit further than Internet sourcing of
statistics and “information”.So getting away from that debate…. what are your motivations for relocating to CR and your leaving the US? What attracted you to CR as opposed to staying in the Land of Lincoln or relocating to another area of the US?
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]Here’s an idea…..We get Scott to create two new forums….
[/quote]Seems to me that Scott is perfectly capable of deciding what forums to run here but if he DID create 2 such forums I wouldn’t join either since I neither love nor hate the US.
[quote=”imxploring”]
This way everyone has somewhere to make their case pro or con against their chosen abode, post endless meaningless internet sources and statistics without having to express there own opinion, experience, and motivation in doing so, and vent their anger without having to distract the rest of us from openly exchanging information and ideas about navigating and living life in Costa Rica!
[/quote]I’ve gone back and re-read some of your comments and you know what? A lot of them have nothing to do with Costa Rica either. Imagine that. In fact so have some of Scott’s. Yes, I am guilty of posting off-topic comments but it seems like I have plenty of company in that. And no one has EVER accused me of failing to express an opinion before, that’s definitely a first.
[/quote]
So very true. Lots of off CR topics do come up here. Scott included. And many replies, including my own, look to give another view or set someone straight on the issue being discussed. The big difference my friend is that only one of us (to my knowledge) has made the investment, financially or personally in Costa Rica. There is the big difference in the prespective and knowledge that defines the value and experience in our personal postings.
Chicago is a wonderful town if that’s what you believe and the place you choose to call home. Infact I have family there. The US is a wonderful country with no problems headed down the right path if the same applies in your mind. While defending these same places in this venue I believe you will find a number of folks that may not share that that same opinion. Folks like myself that have determined there is a problem in the US. People willing and able to venture outside the norm. Individuals willing to take that big step based on their experience and knowledge. Are you that kind of person or someone that will just enter into endless debate with taking that big step? Do you every really intend to call Costa Rica your home even part-time or is this entire conversation just an exercise in “educating” the rest of us?
After all the site is called WeLoveCostarica.com
Here’s an idea…..
We get Scott to create two new forums….
1….. WehatetheUs.com
And
2….. WelovetheUS.comThis way everyone has somewhere to make their case pro or con against their chosen abode, post endless meaningless internet sources and statistics without having to express there own opinion, experience, and motivation in doing so, and vent their anger without having to distract the rest of us from openly exchanging information and ideas about navigating and living life in Costa Rica!
So how about it? I already have two moderators in mind for the task? 😀
[quote=”davidd”]Sweikert
excellent points!!! I guess that means your staying put..:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: since your general comments overall always seem to contradict someones opinion about things in general in the U.S.
according to you
things are pretty darn good back in the States.
crime is lower in chicago :roll::roll::roll:
yep.. things are looking mighty darn good
glad to hear it.
David
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”sprite”]
“Useless eaters” is not my assessment. It is the assessment of the power structure, the money.
[/quote]
Aside from Mitt Romney I can’t think of too many who hold that opinion. If you look at how the US government treats older citizens, you can hardly accuse them of that type of contempt. The over 65 age group is catered to more than any other group of society. And its not just the government – how many businesses offer senior discounts? I happen to think they deserve a little extra consideration and its not just because I am within a few years of benefiting from some of those benefits. Most of us will have contributed plenty over our working lives and most people recognize and honor that.[quote=”sprite”]
My point is that social security spending is such a small amount that it hardly seems worth worrying about and anyway, since the stated goal is a world economy, does it matter where it is spent?
[/quote]
Um, I believe that was actually MY point, not yours.[quote=”sprite”]
…unless you agree with the banksters who really do consider retirees as “useless eaters”.[/quote]
Who are these banksters who consider retirees as “useless eaters”? The people who run banks will cater to any group of people who have money and the age group that collectively has the most money saved up are the elderly. Seems to me that bankers look at the elderly as favored customers.[/quote][/quote]One less Gringo living on the cheap in Costa Rica smoking cheap cigarettes and drinking $2 dollar beers at the Gringo watering hole….. constantly complaining about the Ticos and telling us all how much better things were back “home” in the states! LOL
I haven’t even touched on the issue of global warming or climate change. We all have our opinion. Science like statistics can be interpreted or out and out manipulated to serve any argument. Are humans having an impact on the plant? No doubt! The real question is to what degree and what will the end result be. That is as far as I think one can go without working a crystal ball!
The issue I have with this entire conversation is the use of so called “experts” and Internet sources to make an argument or challenge the position of others. TIME is the only true arbiter of what is reality. Unfortunate but true. And even then we see history and reality manipulated by those with agendas looking to control information and the effect it has on the masses.
The interpretation of facts and rules that exist in the world, be they physical science or social law, is really the issue. Then there are the political challenges to the truth which additionally cloud the issues and the transfer of truth as I brought up with the entire 9/11 situation and the EPA.
It’s not really apples and oranges. Science and the law are both sets of rules that are subject to change at their very base as well as being subjected to the interpretation of individuals, even so called experts that can’t agree! It’s HUMAN NATURE. I stand by my challenge to the use of “experts” as used as validation in any issue, be it the law or physical science. The internet gives EVERYONE the ability to distribute information today to those seeking to make or challenge a position. That isn’t entirely a good thing.
Check this link and see what I mean.
The internet allows a vast variety of opinions and positions to be put out there! Are they right or wrong?
Pull out some text books written 100 years ago by the “experts” of that era and compare it to the accepted science of today and see just how wrong the “experts” can be when their facts are tested by time.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]
Often the “experts” are wrong. [/quote]That’s a bit too sweeping a statement in my opinion. SOMETIMES SOME experts are wrong, but there are almost always others who disagree with them who turn out to be right. I can think of no cases though where all the experts were wrong about something, can you?[/quote]
I don’t mean to imply that there have been situations where EVERY available so called “expert” has been wrong. There’s ALWAYS (strong word with extra intentional use) going to be dissenters with a different opinion. But does one loose their “expert” status when they postulate incorrectly on an issue or do they continue get to be an “expert” impressing us with their theories and opinions until one pans out correctly and they redeem themselves?
Seems the “expert” (via the EPA and Christie Todd Whitman) told us the dust cloud blanketing lower Manhattan after 9/11 didn’t pose a health and safety hazard. Were they simply wrong or was their “expert” opinion based on something other than science? Or were they right and the health issues faced by rescuers, those who believed the “experts”, just an aberration?
I have a real problem with “experts”…. even those with rather impressive education credentials and accolades from those in their chosen fields. Many times their opinions are based on science or theory of other “experts”. As well as being based on a self theorized hypothesis they went out to prove or disprove. (You wouldn’t be much of a scientist or expert if every hypothesis you proposed came in being disproved through scientific testing now would you!)
Consider the US Supreme court for a moment. The supposed brightest legal minds the US has to offer. Not scientists…. but “experts” in their chosen field. How is it on most issues they review that there is often a dissenting opinion from one or more of the members?
Because the facts and information presented as well as the rules (science) are subject to the interpretation of individuals with different views and agendas wishing to shape the result into something they feel is correct.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]
But you have to remember that not EVERY source on the internet is true. [/quote]Of course – I don’t think anything in my posts would suggest otherwise. But the same is true for those quaint old-fashioned things called books that are stacked in all those libraries.
However when the overwhelming majority of sources from experts on a particular subject come to the same conclusion it’s usually a pretty safe bet to assume they’re right. Usually.[/quote]
I guess that depends on how you define and qualify the term “expert”! LOL
Often the “experts” are wrong. Time is the only true test of what becomes fact…. but that means it’s after the fact.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”costaricabill”]
Either Sweikert925 really has a lot of books (see his photo) or his picture was taken at the library!
[/quote]
For the record, that picture was taken in my home office. I honestly can’t remember when I visited a library, it must have been sometime in the last millenium. Another testament to the power of the internet – any and all information can be found there.
[/quote]But you have to remember that not EVERY source on the internet is true. Hence you have to carefully filter, confirm, and vet your sources. For just about EVERY position one can take there are “sources” on the internet that will support or dispute your argument!
[quote=”costaricabill”]Here is my take on the subject:
1. Either Sweikert925 really has a lot of books (see his photo) or his picture was taken at the library! Plus he has links to web sites that he feels support his position.
2. jmcbuilber also has a lot of links to web sites that he feels support his position.
3. I don’t think these two guys like each other and it is obvious that they will never convince the other to change their mind.
4. We had a very nice, refreshing rain last night along the central Nicoya Pacific coast.
5. Today is a bright blue sunny day.
6. Why don’t you two guys take this off of the forum and communicate directly (use PM, exchange emails, Skype each other, etc.)?
[/quote]A lot of homeless folks spend their days at the library using the computer.
And I find that many of them chose “alternate” opinions on most topics just to engage others in heated debate since they usually lack normal social interaction on a daily basis.
There’s one guy at the local library that will debate any topic… but somehow can’t manage to operate a facet or utilize a bar of soap! I guess he’s missed that book on the shelf! LOL
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]
The government in CR released figures and statistics about Americans living in CR. Scott asked if we felt the numbers were accurate. My answer is NO. They are much too low.
[/quote]
No. The government posted figures for [b]legal[/b] immigrants to Costa Rica based on the records they have available via applications for legal residency. Since illegal residents do not make their presence known to the government, the numbers published by the government (and reported by La Nacion) are by definition lower than the [b]total number[/b] of Americans living in CR. You and I seem to agree on that point based on the comment you left on May 3.My Spanish is pretty minimal but I did run the pertinent portions of the source report through Google translate and in no place does the report mention that it also takes illegal aliens into account when calcuating the numbers. Some here seem to think the the CR government is deliberately undercounting but I don’t see why they would and if we all agree that the total number of Americans is higher than the number of Americans legally living here then where’s the argument?
[quote=”imxploring”]
but sweikert925 have you ever been to CR?[/quote]
Yes[/quote]So then the simple question is….and the issue this whole thread is based on….. Are there more than 16,000 US citizens living more than 6 months per year in CR? We’ll ignore legal status. That’s all Scott asked. And based on your comments I believe you would say YES.
Some have been in CR for many years. The reported 16,000 that the government captured for their report represent only a portion of the total. While I believe the number is at least 50% higher it may very well be higher.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”costaricabill”]…nobody knows![/quote]
I would have to agree with that.[/quote]The whole point of this thread was a question posed by Scott. The government in CR released figures and statistics about Americans living in CR. Scott asked if we felt the numbers were accurate. My answer is NO. They are much too low. Can I provide a completely accurate number…. NO. But based on personal experience in CR I CAN say that there are many people that were not included in the count.
An interesting question… but sweikert925 have you ever been to CR?
[quote=”sweikert925″]The statistics published in La Nacion appear to come from the Costa Rican department of immigration and the accompanying graphic has precise figures for each region so presumably these come straight from their own records. Why would they publish incorrect figures? What purpose would that serve?
As for the US embassy, they were in no way involved in gathering them so not sure why their “no comment” is significant. As I understand it the US embassy only knows about Us citizens that have dealings with it, which is not strictly required.
Then full report on which the La Nacion article was based can be found here:
http://www.migracion.go.cr/Informe%202012%20version%20digital.pdf%5B/quote%5D
They published the information they had without acknowledging the fact that the numbers presented were ONLY from folks that are fully documented and have been processed through the CR immigration office and completely ignoring people living full time in CR that have not been. Hence the information presented is not correct or complete.
The numbers are very low and do not include folks that we all know live in CR but who can’t or chose not to process a residency application. I’m sure a quick poll of members here will show you that we each know at least 3 or 4 people each that fall into that category. I know at least 5! More that have come and gone over the years.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]
Yeah…. right! He only appoints the member with the most voting power via the vote quota system…. that’s all. And that’s before we even start to apply political pressure to other member countries.[/quote]The current US member on the IMF board was appointed in 2007, which means she was appointed by President Bush. And while it is true that the US exercises the largest weighted vote on IMF board decisions, that vote percentage is only 17%, which means that the US is hardly in a position to dictate decisions.
http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/memdir/eds.aspx
But you ignore my main point: Why would President Obama get involved in a purely local matter, even if he had an opinion on the issue, which I suspect he doesn’t?[/quote]
The US has major influence besides the largest vote. The US involves itself in lot’s of “local” matters all over the world. Both for good and bad as history has shown us!
