What is your pet peeve of the day?

[travelover]

.......it really stands out when a household or two has a mean dog they can't control and feel it is okay to take it out in public.

I walk my dog at a local park nearly every day (on a leash). We have been charged numerous times by loose dogs, but the only two times they made tooth contact was when the offending dog was on a leash. I've learned to get out the Halt early to catch them in mid lunge.

 

[Sarah in SC]

As a longtime rescue person (border collies), I generally advise against going to the official "dog parks" unless you can go at a time when there are few dogs. It is just so hard for the dogs to learn pack order each and every time, and there are bound to be problem dogs (and more likely, problem people) there.

Interestingly, many many dogs are more aggressive "on leash" than off. Weird but true. It takes a lot of work to retrain dogs that do this, unfortunately.

We live in the country, on a little chunk of fenced land, and our dogs only see leashes when they have to go to the vet's office. And we actively discourage friends from bringing their dogs to our house, so our dogs are not especially well-socialized except for the occasional foster dog.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Daylate, is your dog on a leash or fenced, or is he or she roaming your front yard/neighborhood freely?

Our dog has been leashed and walking with us on a public side walk the first time this happened and the second time our dog was on a short tether in our front yard that kept him well within his own yard.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

and there are bound to be problem dogs (and more likely, problem people) there.

I think the two go hand in hand. Most of the problem dogs at the park seem to have dip-sh*t owners who let them go from one snarling dog squirmish to another while they are chat and ignore the behavior. We stopped going to the dog park partly for that reason.

Our dog seems just as happy going for walks and passing by other dogs for sniff and greets. It is cute as there are 20 or so dogs in the neighborhood who get walked regularly and the dogs all know each other and get excited when they see each other coming.

I bought a spray and a walking stick. We were out hiking in the open space in actually a very ritzy area a few months ago and two off leash pit bulls ran up to us very fast with no owner in sight. They turned out to be friendly but we had to think about well what if next time they are not.

 

[DUFUS]

Pet peeve? People. They're the worst.

 

[aaronc879]

Maybe someday, I'll do what my brother does...live in The Villages, Florida in the winter and Madison, Wisconsin in the summer.

That's almost what I plan to do someday. The only difference is that i'm a small town guy so instead of 100,000+ population cities i'll be going to 25,000 population cities near the ones you listed.

My pet peeve is when people say I can't do that because i'd need a $200K house in both places furnished with $10's of thousands of furnishings and so on. I already have a condo in small town Wisconsin worth $35K that costs maybe $2-3K per decade to furnish and maintain. I can get what I consider to be a very reasonable mobile home in a gated community just outside of the Villages for $50K or less and spend just a couple thousand on furnishings. Not everyone needs millions of dollars(or the pension equivalent) to retire comfortably.

 

[TromboneAl]

Years ago we purchased a VCR (I believe it was a Panasonic, but don't hold me to that) that had an automatic commercial skip function during payback. It did seem to kindof work, and I am not sure how it worked (maybe detecting increased volume, I dunno). Can't recall whatever happened to this unit, but I don't see any of them available now.

Yes, we had one of those. Usually worked. I think it looked at volume changes and blank video.

I just checked with the Tivo, and it takes about 11 seconds to advance four minutes with the 30-second skips. It was instantaneous before.

I'm sure the technology exists to have Tivo seamlessly eliminate the commercials. Is it some kind of industry pressure that prevents that? How would that work?

 

[TromboneAl]

Another solution is the rent, buy, or borrow the "Full Season" set of DVDs for a show you want to watch. We're up to season five of ER* using that.

Of course you have to know how to get around the UOP. I bought a special DVD player that allowed me to hack the OS and get around those. Also, there' s this trick:

That's right. The show about Early Retirement.

 

[travelover]

As a longtime rescue person (border collies), I generally advise against going to the official "dog parks" unless you can go at a time when there are few dogs. It is just so hard for the dogs to learn pack order each and every time, and there are bound to be problem dogs (and more likely, problem people) there.

Agree. I quit taking my dog to our local park after a couple of issues, and it is a well run park - residents need to take a special class to get an electronic pass to get in.

Interestingly, many many dogs are more aggressive "on leash" than off. Weird but true. It takes a lot of work to retrain dogs that do this, unfortunately.

Absolutely. Dogs seem to feel more vulnerable on a leash and perhaps more protective of their owners. It makes it awkward when I give them a 10 foot berth, but experience warrants it.

 

[imoldernu]

Don't know if a pet peeve means it has to happen more than once, but...

We don't drive at night, except in emergencies... an age thing.....
The problem is the new cars with the LED lights...blinding, obnoxious and IMHO unnecessary. If there's anything worse, it has to be the blue LEd lights. Sheesh.. for what reason?

Am mightily tempted to install my 20 million candlepower spotlight, a citizen protest against a world gone mad.

 

[Bestwifeever]

Wind chill reports on the tv news. I don't care what the wind chill is, I want absolute temps. It is 7 degrees right now but the local weather talking head won't say that because a wind chill of -13 is soooo much more dramatic. As if 7 degrees isn't cold.

 

[aja8888]

Don't know if a pet peeve means it has to happen more than once, but...

We don't drive at night, except in emergencies... an age thing.....
The problem is the new cars with the LED lights...blinding, obnoxious and IMHO unnecessary. If there's anything worse, it has to be the blue LEd lights. Sheesh.. for what reason?

Am mightily tempted to install my 20 million candlepower spotlight, a citizen protest against a world gone mad.

Those are really HID lights (High Intensity Discharge). BTW, lots of new cars are coming with them installed. The blue ones you see are probably aftermarket installs.

 

[Options]

This has been posted elsewhere, and quite recently, but it's more than a pet peeve of mine, it's yet another reason I believe one should be wary of "new" academic "research" claiming this time it's different.

David Blanchett, Michael Finke, and Wade Pfau published a January 21,2013 report claiming 3% is the new 4% safe withdrawal rate. This piece was picked up by several major news outlets, including CBS news, Forbes, USA Today, the New York Times, among others. The news outlets either completely glossed over or omitted entirely the fact that the authors allowed for a whopping 1% fee deducted from the PF annually--a major error when you consider a PF can be managed at Vanguard for about 10 basis points (or less using Admiral shares, depending on the funds one owns).

In another thread, John P. Greaney's latest blog post was uploaded pointing out the fee assumption used in this research, and here it is in case anyone missed it:

Professor Wade Pfau: 3% is the new 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR)?

Why a pet peeve? IMHO, it's irresponsible for researchers to publish information which will grab headlines but not include the whole picture (i.e., with lower fees assumed, results would be different). As Greaney correctly points out, 3% is not the new 4% when one manages fees responsibly.

 

[samclem]

David Blanchett, Michael Finke, and Wade Pfau published a January 21,2013 report claiming 3% is the new 4% safe withdrawal rate. This piece was picked up by several major news outlets, including CBS news, Forbes, USA Today, the New York Times, among others. The news outlets either completely glossed over or omitted entirely the fact that the authors allowed for a whopping 1% fee deducted from the PF annually--a major error when you consider a PF can be managed at Vanguard for about 10 basis points (or less using Admiral shares, depending on the funds one owns).

In another thread, John P. Greaney's latest blog post was uploaded pointing out the fee assumption used in this research, and here it is in case anyone missed it:

Professor Wade Pfau: 3% is the new 4% Safe Withdrawal Rate (SWR)?

Why a pet peeve? IMHO, it's irresponsible for researchers to publish information which will grab headlines but not include the whole picture (i.e., with lower fees assumed, results would be different). As Greaney correctly points out, 3% is not the new 4% when one manages fees responsibly.

Pfau and the co-authors were in a "tough spot". The readership of journals they write for, and the audiences they give presentations to, are primarily financial planners. If the assessment hadn't had their "cut" included, the choruses of "but, but . ." would have been unanimous. And, to their credit, they did include the 1% vig in their article.

To me, the fault lies with the news media that covered the story and wrote the sensational headline without noticing and calling out the very significant included 1% costs built in. It would have been a good opportunity to do some public education. OTOH, Ameriprise et al buy ads in many of these publications.

 

[Chuckanut]

To me, the fault lies with the news media that covered the story and wrote the sensational headline without noticing and calling out the very significant included 1% costs built in.

What is your guess as to how many people who reported on this story even bothered to read the article just once?

I know what mine is, and it isn't very high.

Thankfully, we have places like this forum to discuss and inform each other.

 

[Options]

What is your guess as to how many people who reported on this story even bothered to read the article just once?

I know what mine is, and it isn't very high.

Thankfully, we have places like this forum to discuss and inform each other.

Well, they had an angle, which was to provide a launching pad for financial ads. What incensed me is the familiar financial industry theme to "save more/work longer" that ran throughout the articles in response to the "new normal" of a 3% WR. There's been a lot of recent talk about future valuations being lower, particularly in the next 10 years (VG just stated this), and their implications on expected returns. Pfau's, et al., paper covered the topic of valuations, and consequently confused causality, (i.e., lower future valuations = 3% WR rate), when in fact the 1% assumed PF fee was was the culprit. This is B.S. research, IMO, and only serves to confuse people in one of the most important areas of retirement planning (WR rate/PF amount/when to retire, etc.).

 

[samclem]

What is your guess as to how many people who reported on this story even bothered to read the article just once?

Right, that's my "peeve"--the mass media just turned the story without doing their job: carefully reading it, thinking about it, looking for subtle conflicts of interest (cha-CHING!), and asking some tough questions before reporting it. I don't expect the reporters to be subject mater experts, but I do expect them to know how to find peopel with different viewpoints and then present the whole story. It didn't happen here.

Thankfully, we have places like this forum to discuss and inform each other.

Yep, it is great--and good for us. But Joe Public needs reporters to do a little thinking and ask relevant questions to at least give him a fighting chance.

 

[EastWest Gal]

Two pet peeves, right now.

1. Flying across country, first leg landed 20 minutes early. No gate available. Sitting on the tarmac waiting for a gate.

2. The people across the isle are watching music videos on the cell phone. No earbuds/headphones. I was trying to sleep.

Thank goodness I can pass the time reading posts here.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[aaronc879]

Two pet peeves, right now.

1. Flying across country, first leg landed 20 minutes early. No gate available. Sitting on the tarmac waiting for a gate.

2. The people across the isle are watching music videos on the cell phone. No earbuds/headphones. I was trying to sleep.

Thank goodness I can pass the time reading posts here.


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

I haven't flown in over 20 years so I don't know the rules but I would assume having any sound come from a personal electronic device without the use of earbuds would be against the rules. Why would you not call an attendant?

 

[TromboneAl]

Wind chill reports on the tv news. I don't care what the wind chill is, I want absolute temps. It is 7 degrees right now but the local weather talking head won't say that because a wind chill of -13 is soooo much more dramatic. As if 7 degrees isn't cold.

That has always bugged me. I think the news people wet their pants when they found that they could report temperatures like -54 degrees.

 

[Walt34]

I think the news people wet their pants when they found that they could report temperatures like -54 degrees.

I'm sure they did because then the wind chill effect is increased to a wet bulb temperature.

I didn't have a peeves today, mostly because I haven't had any interactions with other people. DW is off babysitting her grandnephew so I have the place to myself.

 

[Meadbh]

I didn't have a peeves today, mostly because I haven't had any interactions with other people. DW is off babysitting her grandnephew so I have the place to myself.

I find that I have fewer pet peeves since ER.

 

[HFWR]

I find that I have fewer pet peeves since ER.

I have plenty of pet peeves, but what I've learned is that no one gives a $hit what I think...


Sent from my iCouch using Early Retirement Forum

 

[ERD50]

Experienced one today:

Made a hotel reservation. They email a confirmation, and I always figure it would be good to have a hard copy of that, just in case (yes, 'old school', but effective).

Of course their confirmation has a ton of graphics, it covers three pages, and the pertinent info is in a minuscule font.

Give me a one-pager in 14 point font on page 1 to print. Put all the other stuff following that, so I can just tell my 'puter to print page 1.

-ERD50

 

[Meadbh]

Experienced one today:

Made a hotel reservation. They email a confirmation, and I always figure it would be good to have a hard copy of that, just in case (yes, 'old school', but effective).

Of course their confirmation has a ton of graphics, it covers three pages, and the pertinent info is in a minuscule font.

Give me a one-pager in 14 point font on page 1 to print. Put all the other stuff following that, so I can just tell my 'puter to print page 1.

-ERD50

Here are a couple of suggestions.
1. Find the relevant area, enlarge it to fit the screen (works on an iPad and a Mac, YMMV), then take a screenshot. Print that if you need to print, or just send it to the cloud and open it on your tablet or phone as required.
2. Save it as a PDF, then print only what you need. This won't enlarge the tiny font, however.