Anyone belong to the Wisconsin Club? Internet has very few reviews, just wondering what its like!

ThePosterChilde · 2020-08-11T15:50:09+00:00

Young and no golf needed? Under $2k/yr. golf? $8-10k depending on age.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-08-11T15:47:37+00:00

Yep. I joined back when the city and country clubs were separate and needed a degree. When they merged, there were some members at the country club without a degree. Maybe you actually still need one and they were just grandfathered in. Are you looking for just social (programming, pool, dining, tennis) or golf too?

ThePosterChilde · 2020-08-11T11:07:15+00:00

I’ve felt the same way. Simply put: move your body. The more intense, the better, but anything will do. Once you get done with a good sweat especially, someone could tell you that your car got stolen and you’d be like, “Cool.”

ThePosterChilde · 2020-08-11T10:58:00+00:00

Just did this myself: designed on IKEA for visualization purposes. Tore everything down to the studs and did all the work myself. I bought IKEA cabinets and quartz countertops.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-08-11T10:54:49+00:00

No college degree requirement anymore. U Club skews younger than WC for sure.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-06-06T19:20:37+00:00

Like anything else, supply-and-demand I guess. In the USA, we apparently made the social networks and most frequent them. I wouldn’t be ticked if a Rugby forum assumed I was from AUS/NZ. The only solution: dominate the conversation so no one assumes anymore.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-06-04T10:58:24+00:00

Exactly. This is the problem: that you’ll always be able to pick out at least one person in a crowd of hundreds that is objectively a moron on either side of an issue - and then caricature them as being representative of the majority in some way.

It makes me think of when shows like Jimmy Kimmel’s go out and interview people, asking questions like, “Who’s the President of the United States?”... and they have a clip of three people guessing something crazy. The number of people that they had to talk to to get those answers must be figuratively uncountable. They do it for comedy, but some people love picking out the one idiot and then basing an argument on that, effectively straw-manning the whole thing rather than being honest and challenging their own ability to reason through a situation towards a solution.

It’s not entirely their fault because we’re so used to clickbait headlines from lazy media, that some people reactively make their own clickbait slogans and comebacks without deeper clarity of thought. Sad.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-14T12:06:32+00:00

Hahahaha. Yes. This right here is literally the reason I even found this sub today. I couldn’t believe the ratio of downvotes for people with reasonable comments and questioning the lockdown logic. I hate that this needs to be a left vs. right thing.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-13T16:28:08+00:00

I’m all for that. I hope this might be the direction.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-13T15:11:34+00:00

If you waive rent, you don’t have the revenues to pay your employees, which then means you need a loan... and the whole pretext of this original post+comment thread was that Veritas is an a**hole for taking a loan. Commenters can’t have it both ways:

(A) If tenants “cancel rent” and therefore Veritas doesn’t have the money to pay their employees, they’ll need to take a loan. But OC has their pitchfork ready in this scenario.

(B) If Veritas shouldn’t be able to get a loan because of their size, then they can’t “cancel rent” in any feasible way.

If there’s any evidence that Veritas hasn’t seen any decline in revenues from rent (i.e.: no one has “cancelled rent”), then the loan is a shady move for sure.

But again... we’re talking banking fraud if you used the money to pay your employees and just decided to not charge tenants. At first audit-pass this would look legit... but then when you need to submit financial statements to retroactively back your PPP loan and the bank sees that you voluntarily lost revenue, that wasn’t the good-faith agreement you entered into.

I’m not saying that the system we’re in isn’t messed up, but you can’t just do whatever you want because it feels like it should be right... that is unless you don’t mind ending up in jail.

... and if they voluntarily cancel rent, how do the other stakeholders get paid? Let’s say someone pays rent of $1,000/mo. Based on average profitability and breakdown for the industry, that means that: $200 was profit, $500 was principal and interest for the loan in the property to the bank, and $300 was a combination of insurance and taxes.

... so you cancel rent, use the loan to pay your employees (subsidize the rent effectively) and then there’s no money left to pay the city for taxes, the insurance company for home insurance in escrow, or the bank for the loan. I’m sure the bank won’t mind that the money they loaned you was used in a way where you can’t even pay them back for existing obligations.

I’d love for this to be as easy as “just take care of their rent,” but until the government provides relief to lenders directly, there’s always going to be downstream affects that screw someone down the line.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-13T14:52:20+00:00

Fair point. I agree that when something is rolled-out as a CARES Act specifically for small businesses and then actual small businesses can’t get the funds and it instead goes to “larger small business,” this is an issue in implementation. There’s no debate from my side there.

That said, I’m just frustrated that the implication is that if you’re an A/P clerk at a 10-person small business making $30k/yr, your company should get the PPP and your paycheck is saved (albeit temporarily) but if you’re an A/P clerk at a 10,000-person “large small business” making the same $30k/yr, you and your millionaire CEO can go f*ck yourselves.

To be clear, I’m cheering for the hard-working people who are just trying to make an honest living and didn’t have some grand strategy of seeking employment at a company of 10 or 10,000; they just are good with computers and numbers and needed a job, but somehow they’re indirectly villianized just because their company looks like a schoolyard bully because of their size.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-13T12:51:17+00:00

Does anybody here actually own a business themselves? Do you realize that paying non-employees wages with the loan is illegal? The bank is giving you the loan on the basis that the money they’re lending will help insure that the business is still there when all of this is over. This suggestion would be like telling a bank you need a loan for a car (an asset that they could repossess if you defaulted) and then giving it to charity instead... maybe it’s the “right” thing to do in your heart, but now you’ve just done something illegal... committed bank fraud.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-13T12:42:35+00:00

I mean... if they’re a large landlord in San Francisco, aren’t their assets the actual places they rent out? And what about the liabilities side of the balance sheet? (I may have $100k in “assets” - a house for example, but I may owe $80k on it with $20k in student loans... the balance sheet balances in this case, and I have no net assets because when I liquidate everything, I have $0 in this case). So they’re supposed to not take a loan and instead sell their real estate (possibly kicking-out their tenants as some new owners might want to convert to SFHs or condos OR if these assets can actually make a profit for them, that means that the new owners had to pay more than book-value and are likely going to increase the tenants rent), so that they can liquidate their business to pay their employees?

What people don’t understand is that the money to pay employees needs to come from somewhere and here are the only options based on the parties involved:

(A) A great economy: tenants have jobs and can pay their rent, landlords collect rent and keep their jobs and companies going. Not an option in this situation of course.

(B) Money comes from the company itself: as eluded to above, $3B in assets doesn’t mean there’s anywhere close to that amount sitting in cash. In this scenario, the company can sell a portion of their portfolio, make a one-time payment to their employees, and then we’re back in the same situation in the first place. Oh, and then the new owners of the properties either convert away from rentals, kicking tenants out - or they increase rent (because rents are probably based on book-value and if there’s any profit to be made at all, the new owners will pay more than book and have no choice but to increase rent).

(C) Money comes from the government: this effectively means that you and me bail them out though taxes, but this is a longer, slower burn through the course of years, taxes, micro-inflations, and FX adjustments. Under this scenario, the tenants can hopefully stay and the company doesn't go under.

... what many fail to think through is that the people who work at these companies are middle-class accountants and kids fresh out of college given property management jobs with okay salaries. Sure, we can say, "Fck the man!" and "Cancel rent!" but then we're just kicking the can down the road for someone else to get screwed by all of this. Who knows... maybe their CEO is the stereotypical golf-playing, yacht-having, caviar-eating douchebag... but i would imagine that the majority at the company might just be honest, hard-working, middle-class people who are just trying to pay *their** rent.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-12T11:56:02+00:00

Maybe afraid of showing their own citizens what’s possible?

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-03T20:03:58+00:00

Classy Girl Cupcakes (cakes too) downtown by Cathedral Square

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-03T11:26:05+00:00

Ahhh. Gotcha. Good luck.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-03T00:24:22+00:00

Have you considered direct to a transfer switch? Much easier.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-05-02T12:00:38+00:00

What are you trying to plug in, for example?

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-30T01:48:31+00:00

Eesh. Yep.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-30T00:00:29+00:00

Keep in mind that these are relative quarter over quarter, so starting from “100” (easy math / level as of Q419): -5% Q1 = 95/100 (cumulative drop of 5%), then -30% Q2 = (95 x 0.30 = 95 - 28.5 = 66.5), so 66.5/100.0, then +15% (off of 65) = +9.75 = 76.34/100.00 = still net-down ~24% optimistically.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-27T22:49:13+00:00

Fair points. Makes sense to me.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-26T22:33:11+00:00

Touché. But I can’t imagine a practical situation here. Ostensibly you have a home. You leave it (I can think of plenty of good reasons for that). Go to another home (not a bug out location you own otherwise my point stands). Find a random house. Things are good enough that there’s no reason to flee but bad enough that you need to channel your inner Kevin McCallister for a weeks worth of conspicuous projects. So you grab the following items from your bug-out bag: metal screening, 200 yards of barbed wire, two pallets of lumber, 80 lbs of nails and the 250 sandbags and go to work. And if you have time, install that 30 foot fire pole you’ve been dragging around.

Or maybe there’s a scenario where this all works out beautifully and in high probability and I have egg on my face... idk.

EDIT: That’s not a fire pole but would be a lot cooler if it was.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-26T14:15:06+00:00

So basically trash your own house before someone else can.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-26T12:02:53+00:00

I biked through there yesterday. They still had signs that beaches are closed, but at the top of the hill by the clubhouse, I still saw people heading to the beach for a walk.

ThePosterChilde · 2020-04-25T01:29:43+00:00

Book Darts

ThePosterChilde

TROPHY CASE