On 6/8/2010 1:45 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
After much discussion by the four of us, we've concluded that we're
pretty much there, as far as being able to afford something in the $300K
range. The basic philosophy we're using (and have used individually and
collectively for most big purchases) has been to save for twice the
expected cost. This has the effect of allowing us some wiggle room with
purchase prices in general, not feeling like we're cash broke after a
major purchase (e.g., with our two mortgages, we can afford twice the
current monthly payment), it gives us the ability to incur after-sale
expenses (oh, yeah, I guess a sailboat does need a mast), and extends
the time before one or more of us needs to seriously get back to work.
(Two of us will be standing down from active work for the better part of
1-2 years, the other two will head back into the grinder in less than a
year.)

I'd be interested to hear what those who've made major purchases, such
as for a boat, have done (or not done) along these lines. Did you pretty
much go all in or did you do something similar?


Pay off your debts before you incur more debt in the form of a boat.

Just curious. How do you figure your mortgages afford you to double up
on boat payments.
If you want my opinion, the four of you sound like a bunch of lazy morons.

On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:08:00 -0400, Jeddadiah Smith
wrote:

On 6/8/2010 1:45 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
After much discussion by the four of us, we've concluded that we're
pretty much there, as far as being able to afford something in the $300K
range. The basic philosophy we're using (and have used individually and
collectively for most big purchases) has been to save for twice the
expected cost. This has the effect of allowing us some wiggle room with
purchase prices in general, not feeling like we're cash broke after a
major purchase (e.g., with our two mortgages, we can afford twice the
current monthly payment), it gives us the ability to incur after-sale
expenses (oh, yeah, I guess a sailboat does need a mast), and extends
the time before one or more of us needs to seriously get back to work.
(Two of us will be standing down from active work for the better part of
1-2 years, the other two will head back into the grinder in less than a
year.)

I'd be interested to hear what those who've made major purchases, such
as for a boat, have done (or not done) along these lines. Did you pretty
much go all in or did you do something similar?


Pay off your debts before you incur more debt in the form of a boat.

Just curious. How do you figure your mortgages afford you to double up
on boat payments.
If you want my opinion, the four of you sound like a bunch of lazy morons.

You sound like an asshole.

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:08:00 -0400, Jeddadiah Smith
wrote:

On 6/8/2010 1:45 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
After much discussion by the four of us, we've concluded that we're
pretty much there, as far as being able to afford something in the $300K
range. The basic philosophy we're using (and have used individually and
collectively for most big purchases) has been to save for twice the
expected cost. This has the effect of allowing us some wiggle room with
purchase prices in general, not feeling like we're cash broke after a
major purchase (e.g., with our two mortgages, we can afford twice the
current monthly payment), it gives us the ability to incur after-sale
expenses (oh, yeah, I guess a sailboat does need a mast), and extends
the time before one or more of us needs to seriously get back to work.
(Two of us will be standing down from active work for the better part of
1-2 years, the other two will head back into the grinder in less than a
year.)

I'd be interested to hear what those who've made major purchases, such
as for a boat, have done (or not done) along these lines. Did you pretty
much go all in or did you do something similar?


Pay off your debts before you incur more debt in the form of a boat.

Just curious. How do you figure your mortgages afford you to double up
on boat payments.
If you want my opinion, the four of you sound like a bunch of lazy morons.

You sound like an asshole.

Sound like?? Sound like??

On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

On Jun 8, 6:05*pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:18 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 8, 6:05*pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

It's so damned funny to watch you "conservatives" squirm when you find
out a liberal can be well founded and still speak on behalf of those
who haven't a voice.

We don't bitch about paying our fair share. There's still plenty left
over to live, sometimes even comfortably.

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:18 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 8, 6:05 pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

It's so damned funny to watch you "conservatives" squirm when you find
out a liberal can be well founded and still speak on behalf of those
who haven't a voice.

We don't bitch about paying our fair share. There's still plenty left
over to live, sometimes even comfortably.

Yeah, I've never heard of any rightwing nuts who are attorneys. I don't
think they actually exist. Froggie is an idiot.

On 08/06/2010 5:05 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:18 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jun 8, 6:05 pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

It's so damned funny to watch you "conservatives" squirm when you find
out a liberal can be well founded and still speak on behalf of those
who haven't a voice.

We don't bitch about paying our fair share. There's still plenty left
over to live, sometimes even comfortably.

Yeah, I've never heard of any rightwing nuts who are attorneys. I don't
think they actually exist. Froggie is an idiot.


And you, are full of it.
--
Liberalism - a disease of envy, greed, entitlement and KAOS.

On Jun 8, 6:48*pm, jps wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:18 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch





wrote:
On Jun 8, 6:05 pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. *Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. *Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. *Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. *You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. *I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets *or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

It's so damned funny to watch you "conservatives" squirm when you find
out a liberal can be well founded and still speak on behalf of those
who haven't a voice.

We don't bitch about paying our fair share. *There's still plenty left
over to live, sometimes even comfortably.

Limousine liberals don't bitch about paying their fair share... they
just don't pay it, period. The rest of the liberal voting base has
their hand out, as they don't pay *any* taxes. They wait on the limo
libs to give them a hand-out paid for by, of course, the working
class.

It's no secret.

"Jack" wrote in message
...
On Jun 8, 6:48 pm, jps wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:18:18 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch





wrote:
On Jun 8, 6:05 pm, Jeddadiah Smith wrote:
On 6/8/2010 3:55 PM, jps wrote:

You sound like an asshole.

I am, brother.

I do see a substantial bit of hypocrisy here from someone who is a
liberal but somehow has enough to spend $100K on a sailboat while
having a luxury car and two mortgages.Seems that somebody is making
too much money according to Obama. Most attorneys are dems because
the dems never favor tort reform. Basically attorneys are taking
money out of the pockets of the poor and giving it to the rich.

Having gotten that rant out of my system I will not discuss it more
but will stick to discussing the sailboat. Big mono-hulls are a poor
investment but a catamaran depreciates slower. You will also have
more places to keep her in shallow water. I believe that integrated
over time that a catamaran is safer than a mono because it allows you
to get into shallow water thru questionable inlets or into shallow
anchorages that are well protected during storms.

It's so damned funny to watch you "conservatives" squirm when you find
out a liberal can be well founded and still speak on behalf of those
who haven't a voice.

We don't bitch about paying our fair share. There's still plenty left
over to live, sometimes even comfortably.

Limousine liberals don't bitch about paying their fair share... they
just don't pay it, period. The rest of the liberal voting base has
their hand out, as they don't pay *any* taxes. They wait on the limo
libs to give them a hand-out paid for by, of course, the working
class.

It's no secret.

Well, which one am I? I think you've got some reality issues. I suppose
you're going to claim that rightwing nuts want to pay for their fair share?