Buying a House
Most people think that owning a home should be their ultimate financial goal. I disagree, at least to the extent that I don't think that should be your absolute and overriding goal.
I've often had trouble explaining my point of view to people, since I always try to describe it in terms of sunk costs, fixed costs, cash flows, and financial safety nets. Many people don't find such arguments compelling--except for accountants, of course. Everyone else generally thinks that--barring a collapse in housing prices--you're guaranteed to be better off if you buy instead of rent.
Well you're not. Here's why. (There's nothing too exciting behind that link, just some financial math.)
The price of housing where I live has been skyrocketing for several years now, and it is fast approaching the level where a "normal" person will have to seriously struggle for most of their adult lives in order to pay for a home. Before committing to such a decision (which could be disastrous if the price of housing ever collapses, as it has in much of the United States), it's worth considering whether or not you would be better off renting.
(Sorry, I know this was a very boring blog posting. If you want to see something more entertaining than personal finance, check out the Random Kitten Generator.)
Someone Else’s Wisdom
This is a very good article. I'd give it to every person under 20 that I know, if I thought there was any chance they'd read it, and if I actually knew anyone under 20.
My only complaint with the article is that the author doesn't put enough emphasis on physical health. As far as I'm concerned, at no point in your life--no matter what you're doing--will any other project ever be more important than maintaining and protecting your health. If you lose your health, nothing else--absolutely nothing else--will ever make up for it.
Just ask anyone who's seriously, permanently sick what they'd give up to have their health back, and that should tell you the value of what you've already got.
It’s Been A While
Ok, I haven't really posted any blog entries for a while. To be perfectly honest, I've been kinda busy with some other projects. For the next little while, I'll probably stick to shorter postings, of the "look at this creative thing that someone else did" variety.
Like this.
Diamond Scam
I don't want to offend anyone who owns a diamond, especially if it happens to have a lot of sentimental value. I, too, have some items that are of special personal importance even though they aren't very useful.
But I do wonder at the people (OK, the women) who positively drool at the thought of being given an expensive diamond ring. Note that I say given. Women don't generally buy big diamonds for themselves, which leads me to believe that it is not the diamond itself that they really want. Maybe what they're really seeking is a status symbol--something that demonstrates their own value by showing that they've snagged a wealthy husband.
Never mind that it's the least wealthy couples who always seem to have the most expensive rings. I think there may be some kind of relationship between accumulating personal wealth and not buying hugely expensive useless stuff.
Besides, if conspicuous consumption is your thing, there are plenty of other ways to show people how much money you can afford to borrow. A pointlessly huge house, for example. Or a stupidly big TV, or a ridiculously expensive car. And if you buy those things, at least you'll end up with a functional possession. A diamond, on the other hand, is at best purely symbolic--a token in a ceremony, or a demonstration of how much money you can spare.
Of course, despite anything I might say, some women just want a diamond. Perhaps they've been raised to view it as an integral part of marriage, or maybe they think that, because they are female, they deserve some cash-equitable evidence of how much their man loves them. (Why don't men get really expensive evidence from their brides-to-be? Men should get an engagement plasma TV or something.)
If you're one of those people and a diamond makes you happy, then I say go ahead and buy one. But if you suspect that--as a newly married couple--you'd rather spend your money on something else, then instead I say listen to your instincts. Diamonds were not even considered an irreplaceable symbol of love until sometime in the 1930's, when De Beers hired N.W. Ayer advertising to promote them.
I ran across this article today. I read some of the links in the reference section, and then I read this. It was all pretty thought provoking.
Of course, after my thoughts were provoked, they ran amok. Which led me to this old Family Guy clip:
Dawkins and Harris vs. Theism
The Bible says it, I believe it, and that settles it.-Written on a Bumper Sticker
Something very interesting has started to happen. Sometime during the last year or two, it became acceptable to question the validity of other people's religious beliefs.
I'm not talking here about the mutual condescension that occurs between two people when one believes in God and the other doesn't. Nor am I talking about the sniping that occurs when people from one faith deride the obviously crazy beliefs of people from another faith.
What I'm talking about is a systematic shift in the public's attitude toward religion. Not long ago, a person's religious ideas were immune to any sort of public argument or criticism. One was simply supposed to respect other people's beliefs. The specific details of any religion were off limits; they were considered so politically incorrect and emotionally charged that no one ever brought them into serious public debate.
No longer, it seems. There is a growing movement that actively questions the very essence of religious faith, challenging taboos that are deeply ingrained in Western culture. The essence of that movement is the idea that religion is harmful to society and to individuals, and that, for the good of the world, people should let go of their religious beliefs.
There are two men who particularly stand out as champions of this idea: the American author and philosopher, Sam Harris, and the prominent British author and biologist, Richard Dawkins. In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I have been a fan of Dawkins for many years, for reasons unrelated to his religious beliefs (or pointed lack thereof.)
Sam Harris recently published a controversial book, The End of Faith, in which he roundly criticizes all manner of religious belief. He spends a lot of pages going over all the terrible things that people have done (and are still doing) in the name of religion, and on that level I found his argument very convincing.
