Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I’d think the numbers are a tad low! Just based on the detailed info on the demographics you know that all the folks living in CR that are flying under the radar (ie Perpetual tourist, various outlaws, and others) were not included in the count. I’d bet the real number is at least 50% higher.
The nature of the breakdown seem very detailed, hence they’re based on folks that are fully documented in CR. As we know there are many that are not.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”creative”]If my memory is still intact, 40 years ago President John F. Kennedy visited Costa Rica and inaugurated the Hospital de Ninos. The Volcan Irazu erupted with much damage caused by ashes and deaths due to rivers overflowing killing many of those living in Cartago. I have been praying that this will not be the case this week.[/quote]
You aren’t seriously suggesting that visits to Costa Rica by a US president causes earthquakes? I mean that must be a joke, right?
[quote=”creative”]
Maybe he would consider addressing the reason for the poor development of the Atlantic region and take steps to assure that some of IMF, BID and other funds will be alloted to this region.[/quote]“He” meaning President Obama? Why would he insert himself into something which is purely a Costa Rican matter? That would be the height of arrrogance. President Obama has no jurisdiction over what the IMF does.[/quote]
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=”DavidCMurray”]In some cases, medical care providers, firefighters, police, prison guards and others do, in fact, jeopardize their own safety, their lives, to protect and to serve us. And while air traffic controllers may not be at quite the same level of risk, certainly they DO protect and serve. Try flying without their service.
Since legal self-protection (gun possession) in Costa Rica is so nearly impossible, the advice to anyone not here already would be not to come, which would, of course, pull the rug out from under anyone in the real estate business. Is that what you’re really advocating? And those already here should depart posthaste, right? Otherwise, everyone, including our hired and heavily armed personal bodyguards, should hire their own bodyguards.
Your contempt and disdain for all things and all people governmental is readily apparent, Scott, but if you’re going to wear it on your sleeve, you need to formulate less embarassing ad hominem attacks.
Now, shall we open up the discussion to include those whose sole purpose in life is to whore after money?[/quote]
Sure… real tough talk from a guy that is, in every picture we see of him, guarded by a highly trained attack cat sitting on his lap waiting to pounce on anyone that dare come near his master!
Not all of us are as lucky as you Dave as to be protected by a killer cat…. the rest of us are left to defend ourselves via other available means!
[quote=”DavidCMurray”][quote=”imxploring”]
Another thing to remember is that if you’re the only one left breathing after an encounter with someone looking to do you or your loved ones harm….. YOUR version of the event is the ONLY one that gets heard.
Two people can keep a secret. As long as one of them is dead.[/quote]
. . . and no one investigates the physical evidence.[/quote]
Yeah…. another CSI case solved on physical evidence alone.. NOT! The FACT is most if not all self defense deaths (of the bad guy) are judged on the story the survivor tells. And since in most cases the bad guy has a history of poor social interaction no one cares much.
Remember the 70-something retired US Army Ranger that choked the bad guy to death when he attempted to rob a bus of senior tourists visiting Lemon? The police arrived, did an thorough 20 minute investigation and sent the winner on his way with a handshake, a thank you, and a welcome back to Costa Rica anytime card…. I think they even threw in a free ice cream cone!
Just like war…. the winner gets to write the history.
[quote=”Scott”]What’s the American expression?
“I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6..”
… or something like that ….
Scott
[/quote]
Another thing to remember is that if you’re the only one left breathing after an encounter with someone looking to do you or your loved ones harm….. YOUR version of the event is the ONLY one that gets heard.
Two people can keep a secret. As long as one of them is dead.
[quote=”waggoner41″][quote=”davidd”]anyone want to take a gander as to how much this whole trip with the U.S. king will cost the american taxpayer???
i avoid saying names because in case secret service is tailing this forum :shock::shock::shock::shock::shock::shock:
I would wager including airforce one and personnel and $$$$ gifts to CR
$5 million
what say wagonner???
[/quote]http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/the-traveling-president/
It would pay you to read the entire article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_trips_made_by_the_President_of_the_United_States
For comparison Obama has taken 26 trips so far during his presidency with four more planned this year.
George Bush took 140 trips during years in office
Bill Clinton took 133 trips during years in office
George H W Bush took 60 trips during years in office
Ronald Reagan took 49 trips during years in office
Jimmy Carter took 31 trips during years in office
Gerald Ford took 19 trips during his year in office
Richard Nixon took 43 trips during his years in office
Lyndon Johnson took 27 trips during years in office
John Kennedy took 16 trips during years in office
Dwight Eisenhower took 37 trips during years in office
Harry Truman took 6 trips during his years in office
Franklin Roosevelt took 52 trips during his years in officeThose who criticize the cost of Obama’s flights do not want you to know that George W. Bush spent at least $20 million taxpayer dollars just on flights to his ranch in Crawford.
[/quote]Next question….
Under which of these presidents did the (acknowledged) National Debt increase the most?
We’ll ignore the debt to the SSA and Medicare programs just this once… since that opens up a whole other debate.
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]The exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Costa Rican colon (the “buy” rate) has hovered right around $1.00US = c495 for around two and a half or three years. The currency value of my dollars has varied almost not at all. That is not to suggest that some prices (energy, in particular) have not gone up here, but that’s true everywhere. Can you point to reliable numbers (actual data, not just assertions) that the inflation rate in Costa Rica is so dramatically higher than the inflation rate in the U.S?
And, I elect to live in Costa Rica for the experience of daily living here. My decision had nothing to do with the cost of living here. In my estimation, looking for someplace cheap to live is probably the worst reason to move here.
(BTW, I have never suggested that there are not far, far too many unemployed people in the U.S. nor that far, far too many of them cannot earn a living wage. I don’t know where you dredged that up. Please don’t impute to me things I have never said.(Goes for others, too.))
[/quote]Since you asked for the numbers.
US inflation rates as reported (I make no claim these are accurately calculated nor a true number)
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/historical-inflation-rates/
Costa Rica inflation rate.
http://www.indexmundi.com/costa_rica/economy_profile.html
It would seem, according to these sources, that the rate of inflation in Costa Rica is more than double that of the US. But then again…. I’m betting the US numbers leave out some energy costs as well as ever increasing taxes and some other items that might not provide the desired result for those presenting these numbers!
So the real question becomes, who’s BSing who? LOL
We can also debate the ever shrinking purchasing power of the dollar. But that’s a whole other discussion.
[quote=”Scott”]I wholeheartedly agree with statistician John Williams (shadowstats.com) who calls the government’s latest jobs and unemployment reports “nonsense numbers.” ….
[url=http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/12/08/more-phony-employment-numbers/]”A government that wants to cut the social safety net[/url] doesn’t want you to know that the unemployment rate is 22.9%.”
Written by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.[/quote]
And you can rest assured that the inflation numbers being reported by the US government are just as “cooked” as the unemployment figures.
Perhaps Uncle Sam has already applied a little of the “Chained CPI” mathematics to the inflation numbers he’s reporting.
Statistics are a wonderful thing. You can make them say just about anything you want if you have the power to “massage” the method by which they’re calculated. Having the power to include or exclude items from this calculation gives those that prepare them way too much leeway in manipulating the outcome. ANYONE that doubts that should consider how our unemployment rate is arrived at!
[quote=”DavidCMurray”][quote=”imxploring”] Remember 100 years ago communicating by any other means than a letter which was then posted in the mail for delivery was the only form of long distance communication for most people. [/quote]
Uh, your understanding of the historical facts is a little off, imx. The first long distance telegraph line (Baltimore to Washington) was funded by Congress in 1844. It proliferated very quickly such that the telegraph was the central component of the Union’s command system during the Civil War which was waged between 1861 and 1865. Samuel Morse improved on designs which had their origins as far back as 1809.
In 1876, Alexander Graham Bell was granted a U.S. patent for the telephone. It, too, proliferated very quickly.
Now as for the silver coins, all johnnyh and others need to figure out is a medium in which to make change and a way to determine relative values. Just how many nights can you stay at (insert the name of your favorite hotel) for a 1913 Liberty Head V nickel? How about a 1944 steel wheat penny? And what will johnnyh be offered in change, or will he have to make up the difference in corn?
[/quote]
Thanks for the history lesson Dave but I’m well aware of the history of the telephone and telegraph…. as well as the use of smoke signals and drums.
But I’ll stand by my contention that for most people the written word of a letter was the most widely used form of long distance communication 100 years ago. Both from a functional stand point as well an accepted social norm. Folks didn’t chit chat on the phone as they do now on a constant basis over trivial things…. nor did they send telegrams to communicate ideas and exchange information. They wrote letters to each other! Well composed letters with wonderful penmanship and flair. Today folks text each other using broken English and “words” that mean nothing. Like “C U L8tr”!
Much like our financial system communication has lost it’s way and meaning. But what’s to say we can’t return to a system that worked for 1000s of years and had meaning. Be that by choice or by necessity when our current systems fail.
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]So where can you point to for proof that the U.S. inflation rate is so great? Not here . . .
http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/
[/quote]It would seem that Costa Rica’s official inflation rate is much higher than those in the US if you buy into the numbers you’ve pointed to. So as a retiree on a fixed income wouldn’t you be better off moving back to the US to preserve your buying power and lifestyle in retirement longer David? If you do moved back to the US don’t mind all those unemployed people that don’t “officially” exist according to the “official” numbers Uncle Sam puts out…. they’re just an illusion too!
[quote=”johnnyh”][quote=”DavidCMurray”][quote=”johnnyh”]. . . can one go to Costa Rica and pay with 3 Silver American Eagles (current value $25-$30.00) your hotel room? :D[/quote]
We always encourage our visitors to deal only in Costa Rican colones when paying for anything while here. Just be sure to exchange dollars for colones only at a bank or to withdraw colones from one of the many ATMs. That way, you’re assured of getting the right exchange rate. Airport currency exchange booths, both here and in the United States, give notoriously lousy exchange rates. Don’t even consider using them!
Paying for something with coins which have numismatic or metal content value different from their face value would be unwieldy at best. How would a hotel desk clerk determine the value of a silver eagle, a silver dime or a Confederate dollar even if they could determine that they’re genuine? How would they make change?
And why would they bother? None of those circulate in the economy here and there’s probably no market for them. Redeeming them would be a nightmare. The same would apply to your grandfather’s watch, Babe Ruth’s autograph or most anything else of value only to collectors.
[/quote]I see your point. But doesn’t that beat logic in that people have been brainwashed to accept fiat currencies instead of real money.
There’s a you tube video where someone wants to sell a Canadian one ounce gold coin for $50.00, then $25, and so on until he was practically giving it away, and there were no takers.[/quote]Give it some time. Remember 100 years ago communicating by any other means than a letter which was then posted in the mail for delivery was the only form of long distance communication for most people. If our current forms (telephone and email) ceased to exist suddenly most people would be lost but eventually would learn to resort back to the old system.
Money is much that same. Should our current fiat system of exchange fail people will go back to a system of exchange that has existed for thousands of years. But there will be a learning curve just as people would have to relearn how to write and post a letter. Be that “new” form of exchange be silver, gold, corn, beads, or blankets.
It’s always best to prepare for the worse and hope for the best. Hold on to your silver. Remember it has a MUCH longer history (thousands of years) of being a material of exchange and commerce than our current fiat system. Just because our current generation doesn’t understand it doesn’t mean it’s not valid. How many folks today would have a hard time writing and posting a letter?
[quote=”rstelluto”]We own some land in CR, and just got this email from our attorney. I would like some feedback if possible.
“On past August 8th, 2012 the Costa Rican Legislature (Asamblea legislative) approved a modification to the Law Nº 4755 -Code of Taxing Procedures- which added a Penalty to the Corporations that does not keep the Corporation Books current up to date.
On the article 155 of the Costa Rican Commerce Code, is established that once a year there must be an Ordinary Shareholders Meeting with the purpose of informing the partners of the income and loses of the Company, the distribution between the partners and a report of the works of the Board of Directors and Legal Representatives,
Even if you have an Inactive company (a Company that does not hold a business), you are required to hold this shareholders Meeting.
The shareholders Registry book must be kept up to date as well,In order to comply with this regulation, we are requiring you to please sign the power of attorney that you would find on the link below, and send it back to us scanned to this same e-mail address,
Afterwards, we would need you to wire the total amount of $200 to comply with all the items, using the account and information included on the Wire Transfer Instructions that you can find on the link below “[/quote]
And just who is it in the CR government that is coming to check your books for this annual entry???? They can’t even keep up with the annual car registrations!
Sounds like a SCAM to me! Don’t send ANYONE a power of attorney or wire money! Should there be a requirement and needed entries you can make them AFTER you confirm the legal issues. And just as an side, even if this is required doesn’t $200 to make an entry in your books seem a bit much for CR? And it doesn’t seem your “attorney” is concerned if you held the meeting or not, just send money! I wouldn’t doubt if someone in his office is working a little side business churning his clients and ripping them off.
Confirm this info before doing anything.
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”]
Brought to you by the same folks BEGGING you not to take you SS at 62! Seems every week there’s an article on line telling you to wait. [/quote]If that’s meant to suggest the the SS Administration is urging folks [b]NOT[/b] to retire at 62, that’s not true. The SSA takes no position on when anyone should retire. But those who do retire early actually lose out on average.
Let me illustrate with my own situation. I plan on applying for benefits at 62. According to the most recent benefit estimate statement, I will get $1595 per month then. If I wait to age 66.5, I will get $2260. There is a website that crunches the numbers for you to determine what age threshhold you have to reach before you lose out by taking SS early.
https://www.newretirement.com/services/Social_Security_Start_Age_Calculator.aspx
In my case, that comes out to age 79. Now based on my own medical history and my family medical history it seems likely that I won’t live that long, so I have decided to retire at 62. Of course, if I DO live past that age I can kick myself but of course there’s a pretty good consolation prize – I will still be alive.
Note that 79 is older than the current life expectancy for an American male and believe me, that is no accident. The SSA has actuaries who calculate these things with great care. It would therefore be in their interest to urge folks to do the very opposite of what you imply they are doing. In fact it is financial planners who urge folks to delay taking SS benefits as long as possible because they are well aware of the relative costs of taking benefits early.
[quote=”imxploring”]
Why is that if a good portion (the number escapes me but I believe more than half) of folks are taking SS “early” and taking a 30% on their payout that the retirement age needs to be adjusted at all? [/quote]Because even with the facts detailed above there still isn’t enough money to fund all of the projected benefits past 2033. It’s simple arithmetic.
[quote=”imxploring”]You’ve pointed out that he has 3 trillion dollars coming in annually….. that sounds get if it weren’t for the fact that he has 100’s of BILLIONS more than what’s coming in going out! [/quote]
As I mentioned, the budget deficit disappeared in 1999 and if the people who were in charge of things then had stuck to fiscal discipline we wouldn’t be in this mess we are in now. If the budget had grown as I listed above, the national debt would be lower by $4.4 TRILLION!!! Actually, probably even more than that because while I projected revenue higher according to historical trends, I didn’t make any assumptions on spending. But if there had been no great recession there would have been no $800 billion TARP, no $800 billion stimlus, and 8 million more people might be employed and paying taxes rather than collecting unemployment, SS disability, food stamps and other forms of assistance. So figure another $2 trillion less of debt right there.
[quote=”imxploring”]
All during one pretend economy after another! One bubble after another. The commodity bubble, the internet bubble, the DOT.Com bubble, and of course the real estate bubble.[/quote]There was no “internet bubble”. There was a HUGE gain in productivity due to the widespread use of personal computers after 1990, but that was real – not a bubble. The dot.com bubble was purely an artifical increase in technology stocks due to a gold rush mentality of greedy investors for a few years. Once that bubble burst the market settled into a slow but steady increase which reflected real wealth, not the fake kind.
See here, increase timeline to go back to about 1995: http://www.google.com/finance?q=INDEXNASDAQ:.IXIC
The real estate bubble WAS a bubble in the classic sense but that bubble burst and now real estate values have reached more realistic levels.
[quote=”imxploring”]
what I believe you left out are the numbers (DEBT/MONEY) Uncle Sam owes to both Social Security and Medicare. Correct me if I’m mistaken of course. [/quote]Medicare is in big, big trouble – but not due to any flaw in the way it has been administered, unless you count GW Bush’s reckless act of expanding it to include prescription drugs without raising taxes one penny to pay for it. It is due to healthcare cost inflation which affects all healthcare finances, not just Medicare.
SS is [b]NOT[/b] in serious trouble. It can be fixed pretty easily as a link I provided earlier in this thread details.[/quote]
I guess your last sentence is where we have a major disagreement. The “trust” fund does not exist. Uncle Sam and Social Security are one in the same. It’s all coming out of the same budget at this time. Only time will tell how this works out. For now let’s hope people stay informed and make the right moves to secure their financial future should my concerns prove to be the path the future follows.
[quote=”DavidCMurray”]And if you go to
and search on “krugman stockman”
you’ll find a series of columns and blogs by the Nobelist which pretty thoroughly discredits Stockman’s work.
[/quote]While you’re at it check on this fellow Nobelist that was proven quite wrong by the furture. Not all winners have been prove right by there theories and predictions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant%C3%B3nio_Egas_Moniz
Krugman sees no problem with debt. But the real problem starts when credit becomes an issue. Something he seems to ignore.
The future is the only judge of those who try to foresee it~!
[quote=”sweikert925″][quote=”imxploring”] And the PROMISE that was made to all of us forced into Social Security is once again being broken isn’t it with the newest “change” (reduction in promised benefits) with the introduction of chained CPI. As if the current method of calculating CPI isn’t a joke![/quote]
>Social Security makes NO promise other than to pay you an amount based on certain projections of your contributions. You don’t seem to be aware that until 1972 there WAS NO COLA for Social Security benefits. Since 1972 the law says that adjustments would be based on a specific calculation of inflation – but if that method is changed (as is the current proposal) SS has not reneged on that promise. The estimate of inflation is just that, an estimate. There is a plausible case that the estimates up to now are not correct. That is debatable, but there are valid arguments on both sides of that debate.<
[b]Changes are fine. But the changes being made have more to do with the inability of SS to make promised payments because of the way the program has been run, not with changing demographics.[/b]
[quote=”imxploring”]
Up to 85% of your social security can be taxed (hence a reduction of your net social security earnings in retirement) [/quote]>All retirement income is subject to tax. SS benefits are in fact taxed at a lower rate than other retirement income. Why do you think it should be tax exempt?<
[b]Not ALL retirement income is taxed, SS are not for those earning below a threshold of other income in retirement. So those that worked, saved, and lived below their means (and in many cases paid more then the average into SS) are now taxed on their benefit thus resulting in a lower net return from social security because they have other self funded retirement income? Does that seem fair? No wonder folks would rather jump on the dole and let Uncle Sam pay their way! When you PUNISH (YES PUNISH) folks for being productive, fruitful, prudent, wise, and diligent in taking personal responsibility for their furture you discourge personal responsibility. Care to discuss the recent explosion in folks jumping on SSDI? You can’t really support that all these folks are truly disabled now can you? [/b][b][/b]
[quote=”imxploring”]An ever increasing full retirement age which further reduces your benefit if you take your social security at the age prior retirees did.[/quote]
>The retirement age has only been increased once, in 1983 (hardly “ever increasing”). It may be changed again but when SS was first designed in the 1930s the retirement age was set at 65 – but life expectancy then was only 58 for men and 62 for women. As of 2010 life expectancy is 76 for men and 81 for women. You don’t think the system needs to be adjusted to take that into account?<
[b]Brought to you by the same folks BEGGING you not to take you SS at 62! Seems every week there’s an article on line telling you to wait. But the majority still take their SS at 62 with the reduced benefit (a 30% reduction if I’m not mistaken) and yet the fund still has to make adjustments to the full retirement age? Why is that if a good portion (the number escapes me but I believe more than half) of folks are taking SS “early” and taking a 30% on their payout that the retirement age needs to be adjusted at all? Or for that matter why is there a need for the new Chained CPI proposal? Lave that proposal by the way… beef gets too expensive you’ll switch to a cheaper product. I guess the end game there is when eating gets to expensive at all people will just stop eating all together and the situation with SS will resolve itself! LOL[/b][b][/b]
[quote=”imxploring”]You’ve pointed out that he has 3 trillion dollars coming in annually….. that sounds get if it weren’t for the fact that he has 100’s of BILLIONS more than what’s coming in going out! [/quote]
>People seem to have completely forgotten that as recently as 2001, there was a balanced federal budget – and we even paid down some of the debt for a couple of years. From 1994 to 2006 federal revenue grew by an average of 6%. If federal revenue had grown after 2007 by that same historical percentage, we would have a nearly balanced federal budget today.<
[b]All during one pretend economy after another! One bubble after another. The commodity bubble, the internet bubble, the DOT.Com bubble, and of course the real estate bubble. All pretend money that was taxed and spent fueling an “economy” that wasn’t real. All smoke and mirrors that resulted in big tax revenues for Uncle Sam that he promptly spent. But the party is over now and we’re stuck with a big clean-up! [/b]
>Actual revenue, spending and deficit (all figures in $millions):
2007 2,567,985 2,728,686 -160,701
2008 2,523,991 2,982,544 -458,553
2009 2,104,989 3,517,677 -1,412,688
2010 2,162,724 3,456,213 -1,293,489
2011 2,303,466 3,603,061 -1,299,595
2012 2,468,599 3,795,547 -1,326,948
2013 2,901,956 3,803,364 -901,408Projected revenue, spending and deficit:
2007 2,551,281 2,728,686 -177,405
2008 2,704,358 2,982,544 -278,186
2009 2,866,619 3,517,677 -651,058
2010 3,038,617 3,456,213 -417,596
2011 3,220,934 3,603,061 -382,127
2012 3,414,190 3,795,547 -381,357
2013 3,619,041 3,803,364 -184,323From 1950-1994 federal revenue grew even faster – by 8.4%, but that included some periods of high inflation in the 70s and 80s so it shouldn’t be used for comparison.
source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals (Table 1.1)[/quote]<
[b]Nice numbers (numbers always seem to blind people) but what I believe you left out are the numbers (DEBT/MONEY) Uncle Sam owes to both Social Security and Medicare. Correct me if I’m mistaken of course. That is unless you don’t believe that money that Uncle Sam took (we’ll call it borrowed) from the American public should be included in his balance sheet! After all with all the fighting over the national debt ceiling being increased from $16 trillion everyone seems to ignore that what Uncle Sam has taken and owes to the citizens of this country (not banks or foreign governments)is MUCH bigger than what is currently acknowledged as the “National Debt”! [/b]
