[QUOTE=ivylass]
Not all of them. Generally, the cheaper ones do, but it’s rare to find one that comes with furniture.
[/QUOTE]
In Soylent Green only the most expensive apartments include “furniture” but I don’t think that word means quite what you think it does in that context.
[QUOTE=ivylass]
It may be the company pays the fees. It may be because I work for such a huge conglomerate the fees are waived. Either way, I have never seen a line that says “fees” or something similiar on my statements.
[/QUOTE]
And neither have I on mine. 401(k) companies hide these things. My company’s provider told my company that they do not report the fees unless the company specifically asks them to. Fees are very well hidden, and there has been quite a lot in the press about it recently. Cite.
Here are a few things you can do [ul]
[li]look at the prospectus of each fund offered by your plan and compare it to similar funds available elsewhere. Some times you will be able to find the identical fund elsewhere, such as the Vanguard 2025 I mentiond in my earlier post. In other cases, you can only compare with similar funds available elsewhere, for example, look for an S&P 500 Index Fund: you can get one of these outside a 401(k) for under 0.2% fees.[/li][li]Ask your company 401(k) fiduciaries about fees. If they do not know, then they are failing in their fiduciary responsibility.[/li][li]possibly extreme, but stop contributing to your plan for a quarter (and make up in the rest of the year). Monitor your funds and see if the number of units goes down. If it does, this will represent units that are being sold to pay fees.[/li][/ul]
It is certainly true that the larger the company, the lower the fees are likely to be. On the other hand, several large companies are being sued for allowing fees to be too high. Cite
[QUOTE=ivylass]
Not all of them. Generally, the cheaper ones do, but it’s rare to find one that comes with furniture.
[/QUOTE]
Smooth Jack is referring to the apartments in Soylent Green and that’s “furniture,” not furniture, if you get my drift. In this case, it’s only the expensive apartments that are likely to be “furnished.” I find the idea of “furnished” apartments strangely appealing as well.
Congress is expected to start looking into shady practices at 401(k)s.
A recent study concludes that 401(k)s don’t match up to traditional pensions.
[QUOTE=Nava]
Yes. In the States they’re virtually nonexistant.
Public and semipublic transportation is in quite a sorry state in most of the US, in my experience and no-I-haven’t-visited-the-whole-country. I was able to live without owning a car in Philly, but only because I’d found an apartment 6 blocks from the office. Any time I went anywere, I had to rent a car.
Even in urban areas that have public transportation, the times between buses can easily be - one hour! That’s what they were in Miami when I lived there. I explain this to people from Barcelona who are complaining that the bus hasn’t arrived in five minutes. Apparently I look like I’m not making it up, because they usually ask a few questions and then reach the conclussion that “I’m not complaining again!”
My mother and brother were quite amazed at the state of Philly taxis. We took two; the second one was ok (it was clean, the picture in the ID matched the driver’s face, most seatbelts worked) but the first one had a hole in the floor among other defects.
[/QUOTE]
NYC, Chicago and New Orleans are about the only cities I have been in, in the US where mass transit really allows you to get all over the place. I am not sure about Boston, I have never had to try an use mass transit there.
NYC was the best in my experience, though in the eighties and early nineties the subways and the Port Authority (A giant bus Station) were really scary places with frightening crime rates. Now the Subways are clean and safe. I assume the Port Authority is, but I have not used it in a long time.
Jim
[QUOTE=acsenray]
Congress is expected to start looking into shady practices at 401(k)s.
A recent study concludes that 401(k)s don’t match up to traditional pensions.
[/QUOTE]
I thought I heard whispers of this stuff happening not too long ago. Thanks for the info.
[QUOTE=Noel Prosequi]
No idea about Geritol, but I’m guessing it is some sort of Old Person Remedy for What Ails Yer.
Yer exactly right, my friend. Geritol was/is touted as an iron supplement, marketed primarily to senior citizens. These days, the medical establishment is warning against too MUCH iron… ya can’t win, it seems. :smack:
Wishing you (and everyone!) a Happy New Year,
RivahCat
(I hope this is still on topic.)
Do people outside the US use the word “shotgun” to refer to the front passenger seat of a vehicle? For example, when a driver and two passengers are approaching the car, one passenger declares, “shotgun!” This lets the other passenger know the front passenger seat has been claimed. If you don’t say “shotgun,” how the heck do you determine who gets the front seat?
Oh, is that what “riding shotgun” means? They didn’t use that expression where I come from in Canada, and I’ve never known until now. I’d be interested in knowing how that phrase came about. What (or who) did the passenger have to shoot?
[QUOTE=fishbicycle]
Oh, is that what “riding shotgun” means? They didn’t use that expression where I come from in Canada, and I’ve never known until now. I’d be interested in knowing how that phrase came about. What (or who) did the passenger have to shoot?
[/QUOTE]
Watch Stagecoach. The guy next to the driver on a stagecoach has a shotgun, for shootin injuns with.
No, never heard of it.
[QUOTE=Valteron]
But since the OP asked what parts of contemporary American culture puzzle me, and as long as we are talking about races, why is it that an American who is as much as 7/8 or even 15/16 white is considered “black” if he or she has any noticeable African heritage?
[/quote]
In the United States we’ve typically defined race based on physical characteristics. If you look black then you’re black regardless of whether one of your parents was white or not. It’s silly, I know, but no more silly then various other methods used to classify racial makeup.
[/quote]
She has one black and one white parent. So why is she a “black” actress? Why is she an “African-American”? Obviously, half of her is European-American.
[/quote]
Because she looks black. Like most other systems of racial classifications ours is arbitrary.
Marc
[QUOTE=MGibson]
In the United States we’ve typically defined race based on physical characteristics. If you look black then you’re black regardless of whether one of your parents was white or not. It’s silly, I know, but no more silly then various other methods used to classify racial makeup.
[/QUOTE]
It actually has historical ties to the “one drop rule.” Legislation stated that if you had one Black parent, grandparent, or even great-grandparent, you were considered Black and thus subject to Jim Crow law. (There is a vocabulary that goes along with this - words like mulatto, quadroon, octoroon, and so forth describe the amount of Black blood a person has. These words are highly offensive and not in use today.) There are several cases of mixed-race people who appeared to be phenotypically White that were forced to ride in Black railcars, or attend segregated Black schools.
The concept of being biracial or of mixed race is a relatively new phenomena. I’d say biracial identity in this country has been recognized in the past 40 years, and today you have a lot of mixed race kids refusing to call themselves just Black, White, Latino, or whatever. I’d also add the “one drop rule” seems to be the case only with Black and White mixed race folks. Growing up in Texas, half White, half Latino kids identified as such, as did half White, half Asian kids. But kids who were half Black often tended to identify strongly as Black.
There’s also a pretty lengthy history of colorism among Black Americans - light-skinned Blacks were often treated better and treated less harshly by Whites and Blacks alike. A light-skinned Black person who stated that they were biracial or half White might be seen by some other Black people as trying to deny their Black heritage, or being ashamed of it. I think this attitude is less pronounced but it still exists.
[QUOTE=GorillaMan]
And this puzzles me! The idea of a school district spending all that money on a fleet of buses just seems bizarre to me. But then, as already pointed out, there may not be an alternative (are there really that many more bus & coach hire firms in Britain?!) (And for comparison, my high school had a catchment area which was 20 miles across, and that’s far from the least populous part of the country)
[/QUOTE]
The yellow buses aren’t always owned by the school districts. Here in NYC, there are private companies which own the big (and small) yellow buses. They have contracts with the public school system, and also with private schools , after-school care centers and summer camps. High school students generally don’t ride the school buses- they get passes for the public transportation system.
[QUOTE=Smooth Jack]
If you don’t say “shotgun,” how the heck do you determine who gets the front seat?
[/QUOTE]
Oh, you should see the fisticuffs and knock-down drag out fights in the parking lot every time a group of people have to travel together somewhere. The humanity, I tell you, the humanity!
Really, it’s no big deal. We just kind of sort ourselves out as we get to the car.
[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]
It actually has historical ties to the “one drop rule.” Legislation stated that if you had one Black parent, grandparent, or even great-grandparent, you were considered Black and thus subject to Jim Crow law.
[/quote]
Sure, but if you saw someone who appeared white on a 19th century road you’d treat them as if they were white without demanding to see his pedigree. Likewise, if you were to see an octoroon (God help me I love saying that word because it’s so silly) you would treat them accordingly without having to examine their pedigree. Did they even use octoroon outside of New Orleans? I can’t remember.
I think there are some examples of the opposite happening as well. I won’t dispute that there is a historical connection between the one drop rule and how we define race but I still think our definition of race is mainly based on physical appearance.
Marc
The concept of being biracial or of mixed race is a relatively new phenomena. I’d say biracial identity in this country has been recognized in the past 40 years, and today you have a lot of mixed race kids refusing to call themselves just Black, White, Latino, or whatever. I’d also add the “one drop rule” seems to be the case only with Black and White mixed race folks. Growing up in Texas, half White, half Latino kids identified as such, as did half White, half Asian kids. But kids who were half Black often tended to identify strongly as Black.
There’s also a pretty lengthy history of colorism among Black Americans - light-skinned Blacks were often treated better and treated less harshly by Whites and Blacks alike. A light-skinned Black person who stated that they were biracial or half White might be seen by some other Black people as trying to deny their Black heritage, or being ashamed of it. I think this attitude is less pronounced but it still exists.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=ivylass]
Oh, you should see the fisticuffs and knock-down drag out fights in the parking lot every time a group of people have to travel together somewhere. The humanity, I tell you, the humanity!
Really, it’s no big deal. We just kind of sort ourselves out as we get to the car.
[/QUOTE]
Geez! I can only imagine the carnage for slug bug and padiddles.
One thing that used to throw me was references to lap dancing - because it sounds painful.
[QUOTE=ivylass]
Oh, you should see the fisticuffs and knock-down drag out fights in the parking lot every time a group of people have to travel together somewhere. The humanity, I tell you, the humanity!
Really, it’s no big deal. We just kind of sort ourselves out as we get to the car.
[/QUOTE]
It often works out to who has outlandishly long legs; that person gets “shotgun.” The car’s owner usually drives, and the rest get scrunched up in the back seat. In some roomy cars, it doesn’t matter at all. As long as I’m not sitting in pain, I’m cool. 
[QUOTE=GorillaMan]
We can all understand that money drives this kind of thing. What us Brits can’t figure out is why there’s money to be made from such a move in the first place. Plonk a new team into London, or Manchester, or Liverpool, and who the hell is going to support them? (I think MK Dons, the sole attempt at this type of move in Britain, have cropped up already - a town of 200k only supplies attendances of 5000 for their ‘home’ team.)
[/QUOTE]
Well if you plonked Man Utd in London (please!) they’d at least be with most of their fans