Advice for the newly laid off?-Page 3: Off-topic discussion forum: Grassroots Motorsports Magazine

Subscribe get a full year for only $23.95 Sample Free Test Drive—no strings attached

1 2 3

March 1, 2011 7:14 a.m. SVreX SuperDork

FGC:

I'm sorry you are struggling. You are not alone. I am also job hunting, and have no severance, nor can I collect unemployment, as my former role was a contract one, not an "employee".

I have 5 kids. 80% unemployment in my field in my geographic area.

But I am not raiding my retirement funds, frankly for exactly the reasons you outline.

I have no expectations that the government, or anyone else will take care of me and my family. If I rob what little I have from my own future, then my future failures are predetermined by my own decisions.

Quit whining. 9 months severance is about as generous as it gets. Get to work.

No, a $10 per hour job will not replace what you had. But it is halfway there, and it positions you for growth.

You have an opportunity. You can put aside the severance for harder times while you collect unemployment and build another career without raiding your future.

Or you can b*tch about it and make yourself a ward of the state in a few years. Frankly, I don't want to pay for your bad decisions through my taxes to have to take care of you.
March 1, 2011 7:23 p.m. friedgreencorrado SuperDork

SVreX wrote:

FGC:

I'm sorry you are struggling. You are not alone. I am also job hunting, and have no severance, nor can I collect unemployment, as my former role was a contract one, not an "employee".

Ouch! I've actually got a couple of Corner Worker buddies (IT professionals) in similar situations. That's one of the reasons I really don't want to freelance, even though I enjoy the nature of the work. And of course, I'm certainly not struggling at the moment. As I've said, the company's being very kind as it downsizes. I'm actually attempting to use this gift in a way that will keep me from having to struggle in the future.

SVreX wrote: I have 5 kids. 80% unemployment in my field in my geographic area.

But I am not raiding my retirement funds, frankly for exactly the reasons you outline. I have no expectations that the government, or anyone else will take care of me and my family. If I rob what little I have from my own future, then my future failures are predetermined by my own decisions.

Quit whining. 9 months severance is about as generous as it gets. Get to work.

Oh, I realize how fortunate I am that the company is being so generous. I didn't think I was whining about my personal situation..I thought I was simply lamenting the end of the middle class way of life, and expressing relief that I may have found a way to escape the collapse. That's why I want to cash out and buy a property outright..without the rent/morgage payment, I honestly believe I can live at the same level of comfort on half my current salary, rendering the reality of modern underemployment irrelevant.

SVreX wrote: No, a $10 per hour job will not replace what you had. But it is halfway there, and it positions you for growth.

I'm honestly no longer concerned with "growth". I think that's not going to be possible for the middle class in the US for very much longer. I'm concerned with preserving what I have, and adjusting for the new socio-economic realities of the country I live in.

SVreX wrote: You have an opportunity. You can put aside the severance for harder times while you collect unemployment and build another career without raiding your future.

I have no plans to file for unemployment. I'm going to do all I can to buy a place to live in as quickly as possible, and shortly after closing on the property, find any POS job that I can to pay the bills. To me, this is another reality..what I used to do for a living just doesn't really exist anymore. Technology has rendered it obsolete. Even if I did relocate, I'd be facing the same situation in another 2-3yrs. Might as well "cut to the chase" and get out of my profession now. If I can do so quickly enough to pocket the rest of the severance, that's another gift. If I can't, then at least I won't be struggling any harder than I've done during hard times in the past. Having a guaranteed roof over the head really does free up many more options. Once you don't have to worry about being homeless, everything else is gold.

SVreX wrote: Or you can b*tch about it and make yourself a ward of the state in a few years. Frankly, I don't want to pay for your bad decisions through my taxes to have to take care of you.

That was kind of harsh, dude. I'll admit I made the mistake of not realizing that my btching about the end of middle class America could be misunderstood as a whine about my own personal situation, but c'mon! Just think for a moment.

How would you feel if I described your own decision to have so many children in similar terms?
March 1, 2011 7:39 p.m. SVreX SuperDork

You're right. It was harsh. I over reacted to the tone of your post, and it was particularly uncomfortable to hear knowing my own situation. I apologize.

For the record, my family has NEVER collected a single penny of taxpayer funded benefit for ANY of my kids (including paying ALL medical and birthing costs out of pocket, without insurance), so I don't think my family planning decisions are quite relevant to the point I was making about cleaning out one's retirement, with the potential bad ramifications.

If you'd like to conclude my family is a greater burden to the system, I would have to respectfully disagree. I conclude that my family is a greater CONTRIBUTOR to the system- more jobs, higher pay, more taxes paid, more value contributed.

There isn't anyone in this thread who has agreed with your idea of cleaning out your 401K. But if you'd like to ignore that advice, it's your choice. Don't try to equate it with my family size.
March 1, 2011 8:10 p.m. friedgreencorrado SuperDork

SVreX wrote:

You're right. It was harsh. I over reacted to the tone of your post, and it was particularly uncomfortable to hear knowing my own situation. I apologize.

Most emphaticallly accepted. When you described your current situation in the other post, I figured that stuff like that was what was really going on.

SVreX wrote: For the record, my family has NEVER collected a single penny of taxpayer funded benefit for ANY of my kids (including paying ALL medical and birthing costs out of pocket, without insurance), so I don't think my family planning decisions are quite relevant to the point I was making about cleaning out one's retirement, with the potential bad ramifications.

If you'd like to conclude my family is a greater burden to the system, I would have to respectfully disagree. I conclude that my family is a greater CONTRIBUTOR to the system- more jobs, higher pay, more taxes paid, more value contributed.

Dude, I didn't mean any insult to your family, to your desicion-making processes, or anything else about "the system". I had intended my comment to be a simple reminder for employing empathy after the "..b*tch about it and make yourself a ward of the state in a few years.." comment you made about my post-employment plans in one of your previous posts. It was in no way intended to be a moral commentary upon you and the way you wish to live.

SVreX wrote: There isn't anyone in this thread who has agreed with your idea of cleaning out your 401K.

Ad Populum argument. The number of people who support an idea has no bearing upon whether that idea is correct or not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

I'll be the first to admit that I have no idea whether or not securing a home for us will do for us what I think it will. Especially if I don't get the taxes for liquidating the 401k right. I'd actually find it funny if I did the deed, and then had the IRS swooping in & taking the place away while they shout the legalese equivalent of "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!"

SVreX wrote: But if you'd like to ignore that advice, it's your choice. Don't try to equate it with my family size.

I hope this issue has already been settled by my previous comment upon it earlier in this post.
March 1, 2011 8:31 p.m. TRoglodyte Reader

As an aside comment, I pay taxes to fund social welfare programs. I have no problem with those funds supporting hard working people that have fallen on hard times. Sign up, kids should have Wheaties not whiskey for breakfast.
March 2, 2011 8:59 a.m. Ian F SuperDork

friedgreencorrado wrote: I'll be the first to admit that I have no idea whether or not securing a home for us will do for us what I think it will. Especially if I don't get the taxes for liquidating the 401k right. I'd actually find it funny if I did the deed, and then had the IRS swooping in & taking the place away while they shout the legalese equivalent of "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US!"

I've had similar thoughts from time to time... and while it's easy to say it would be a stupid thing to do, in truth it may not. In a way, you're simply moving the majority of your investment portfolio from the financial market to real estate. How to make this happen without getting hosed really depends on the tax laws. Dig around on irs.gov and then talk to a financial advisor or tax specialist.
March 2, 2011 9:16 a.m. HiTempguy Dork

Don't know about the states, but we've managed ~15+% returns on average on real estate. Much better than most stocks do. I see exactly where FGC is coming from and wanting to get out of the stock market and I'm only 22.

No offense to SVrex either, but I'd like to point out that the information you are receiving here is free and his recent laid off thread does not appear to point out a financial background.
March 2, 2011 11:11 a.m. SVreX SuperDork

You are correct, sir. No background, free advice.

Except that I was parroting exactly what a 30 year trained investment advisor had told me on the same issue 3 days earlier when I had asked him the same question.

So, I take no offense, but still see nothing wrong with the advice. Do you?

BTW- I don't think anyone in the states can claim they've averaged 15% returns on real estate in the last 5 years. Just a guess- again, no formal training. Just 35 years of building (within the real estate market), and 22 years of being a licensed real estate agent.

Most markets have taken a dive in the US in the last few years. That's why we are not building. Sales prices don't cover construction costs.

My house is worth 20- 30% less than it was 3 years ago. My stocks are worth about the same as they were 3 years ago. If I had rebalanced my portfolio when things were low (like I should have), my stock portfolio would have gained about 20% over the last 3 years.
March 2, 2011 12:24 p.m. HiTempguy Dork

SVreX wrote:

So, I take no offense, but still see nothing wrong with the advice. Do you?

BTW- I don't think anyone in the states can claim they've averaged 15% returns on real estate in the last 5 years. Just a guess- again, no formal training. Just 35 years of building (within the real estate market), and 22 years of being a licensed real estate agent.

First line, there is nothing wrong with advice! Hopefully he is taking everything with a grain of salt. It certainly helps that it is coming from a financial person.

2nd paragraph, that seems like formal enough training to me Buy low, sell high where there is demand (obviously that is key)! There is at least one subdivision in Edmonton, Calgary, and Red Deer under development at anytime even when E36 M3 hit the fan, so it might not work out as well for you guys.
March 2, 2011 12:46 p.m. Ian F SuperDork

As pure investment, I would agree - the stock market is likely a better ROI. However, after factoring in the concept of a house being a 'useable' investment - it gives him a place to live that for the foreseeable future that he would otherwise be paying for - then it may work out differently (vs. buying a property purely as an investment). I think this is the point he's been trying to make.

We're making a lot of general comments based on partial information. Only if he sits down with a professional and discuss his finances in detail (more so than he can or should post here) can it be determined if his idea has merit.
March 2, 2011 12:59 p.m. bluej HalfDork

i would think one of the largest detractors to his plan is also that it would anchor him to an area. may be better to effect a career change and KNOW you like the new one before sticking yourself in an area for good.
March 2, 2011 11:34 p.m. friedgreencorrado SuperDork

SVreX wrote:

You are correct, sir. No background, free advice.

Except that I was parroting exactly what a 30 year trained investment advisor had told me on the same issue 3 days earlier when I had asked him the same question.
So, I take no offense, but still see nothing wrong with the advice. Do you?

SVreX, the only thing I see in that advice that I might consider "wrong" is that investment advisors still want people to invest. I have to admit that I no longer listen to their counsel.

SVreX wrote: BTW- I don't think anyone in the states can claim they've averaged 15% returns on real estate in the last 5 years. Just a guess- again, no formal training. Just 35 years of building (within the real estate market), and 22 years of being a licensed real estate agent.

Most markets have taken a dive in the US in the last few years. That's why we are not building. Sales prices don't cover construction costs.

My house is worth 20- 30% less than it was 3 years ago. My stocks are worth about the same as they were 3 years ago. If I had rebalanced my portfolio when things were low (like I should have), my stock portfolio would have gained about 20% over the last 3 years.

I can only remind ya that I'm not buying property as an "investment", we're just looking for a place to to live. We don't care about what the place may or may not be worth in the future..we're searching for a home. Our main concern at the moment is that the place we're looking at is so close to I-75 Northbound leading out of Atlanta. We are afraid that if the road is widened, we'll lose the place to eminent domain.

I guess the best way for me to express my idea is for me to admit that I don't think any of the "good" jobs that ended during the "Great Recession" will come back. Therefore, I don't really mind using what I earned back before these dark days came to pass.

The way I've explained it to people in the real world is like this:

Instead of a short "complete" retirement as an old man, I'd rather have a long "semi-retirement" as a middle-aged man.
March 11, 2011 1:31 a.m. friedgreencorrado SuperDork

In related news, anybody that wants the Alfa can have it for $300. I can't find my original ad in the $20XX classifieds, but here's my Readers' Ride link.

http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/reader-rides/1566/

The thing is more disassembled now than it was then (I didn't update it often), but I'll help anyone interested in buying the thing bolt up enough stuff to reduce the number of boxes you'll have to take home with it..I think I can also get a clean title (I have the old one & a bill of sale, but never did the deed because of Georgia's insurance rules) if you wish.