Visit our Popular Forums

Bycrick · 19-09-2021, 10:25

It’s tiresome listening to the "it’s unfair that I can’t get a skip at the price I think I can afford." I once got a great example about how the opinion of "what’s fair" can change at the drop of a hat.

I once met a nurse. She thought she had a great, high paying job. I was a computer tech. She had a nurse friend who had moved to LA who was supporting her boyfriend while he tried to become a success in the movie business. When we talked about living together, her biggest worry was that I was going to be another parasite living on her income. I heard endless discussions about how each of us had to pay their half of common expenses: equality Uber allies. At the end of the month, we would go over the common bills and split them to the last penny. That lasted for several years until she found out that I was making about 3 times what she was making. Then, overnight, the argument changed to "you're making more, you should pay more."

capn_billl · 19-09-2021, 10:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Bill, I don't blame anyone, and I really don't know what you're on about. I don't think what is happening to the OP is any surprise, nor is it breaching his rights. It is capitalism operating as designed: to maximize profit through the control of an (artificially) limited resource.

I really wish people would turn down the rage machine.

Sorry for the rage, you called MY life a "myth", and I took it personally.

Capitalism would create as many marinas as needed to meet the needs of the market.

Unfortunately we are in the middle of the perfect storm of 30 Million baby boomers retiring after the largest expansion of wealth in history right when there is a major "save the planet" movement limiting development of the resources those boomers prefer.

50 years from now when most of us are dead there will likely be a lot of unused boats for sale by the grandkids in marinas scrambling for the few remaining living customers that have the time for expensive leisure.

Until then, I expect things will only get worse until they get better.

Another unfortunate reality is there are about a hundred elderly that want to live in a condo overlooking the ocean for each of US that want to live in a boat, and THEY vote.

Mike OReilly · 19-09-2021, 10:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Sorry for the rage, you called MY life a "myth", and I took it personally.

No, sorry... I meant that your life is an anecdote (and that's not meant as an insult in any way). The myth is that everyone on minimum wage could be a millionaire. It's a shade of the same old myth that all you need is hard work to be financially successful. Reality shows this is simply not true. Just research "social mobility."

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Capitalism would create as many marinas as needed to meet the needs of the market.

God's not creating any more waterfront property. Therefore, it is a limited resource with competing demands. Capitalism is amazing, but it's not magical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Unfortunately we are in the middle of the perfect storm of 30 Million baby boomers retiring after the largest expansion of wealth in history right when there is a major "save the planet" movement limiting development of the resources those boomers prefer.

This is a much broader point than the one raised by the OP. Saving the planet sounds like a pretty good idea for those who want to live here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

50 years from now when most of us are dead there will likely be a lot of unused boats for sale by the grandkids in marinas scrambling for the few remaining living customers that have the time for expensive leisure.

I think we're already into this reality. Babyboomers are already ageing out, and have been for a decade or more. It's why there's such a glut of used boats (or was before the pandemic blip), and why there's a boom in condo development.

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Another unfortunate reality is there are about a hundred elderly that want to live in a condo overlooking the ocean for each of US that want to live in a boat, and THEY vote.

Agreed.

redneckrob · 19-09-2021, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptTom

I thought there was more agreement here than it seemed. Thanks for the thoughtful response!

But that can be said about literally any development. A municipal parking lot is only available to car owners. A campground, only to those who can pay the fee, buy a tent or camper and have enough of that valuable free time you mentioned. Hiking trails are of no value to citizens with limited mobility. I personally don't use the libraries, flower gardens, cemeteries, ball fields, beach houses, historic sites, or many other things my municipality spends my tax money on.

Likewise, some people don't use public beaches, waterfront restaurants, commercial fishing piers, educational facilities or other public-private facilities.

Yet I think we all recognize that these things have value to the community. Certainly the economic argument can be made. There are some immediate tax revenues and fees. But more importantly, the overall quality of life is a huge factor in attracting residents, visitors and businesses.

I'd say marinas are part of that mix. They are important to the community, and the community should exercise some oversight to ensure they remain viable for as large a segment of the population as possible. Leaving it all up to a huge corporation or a very small socio-economic class isn't likely to meet the community's needs.

You kind of missed my point. A hiking trail may be of no use to those with limited mobility, but do any of us who do use hiking trails demand exclusive use of a 40x20 chunk of them?Do any of us demand the library give us books for our exclusive long term use? Does anyone get to rent a spot exclusively for a year or 2 or 10 in a public campground? Asking for our own personal exclusive long term use of a piece of public property is completely different from any of the examples raised, except perhaps cemeteries. At the point we demand exclusive long term use of a piece of waterfront, how are we any different from "the rich" who exchanged their money for exclusive use of a piece of waterfront? In either case our use forecloses the use of others to park their boat in the piece of waterfront. It's simply being hypocritical for us to bemoan "the rich" doing something then turn around and demand that we get exactly the same thing based on it being "public good" for us but bad for them.

And yes,to the other commentary, the subject of this thread is boat slips, no one is complaining that they don't have a place to launch their kayak in this thread, they're demanding exclusive long term access to a slip.

Nokay · 19-09-2021, 14:39

Thanks for the responses to my initial post. I have been reflecting on this for a bit and wanted to share some additional thoughts.

I actually think that standard economic principles make sense to some degree. Marinas should be allowed to charge what the market will bear and should be allowed, within limits, to raise prices.

However, there should be limits. Just as a landlord is not able to chase out tenants because they found somebody who is willing to pay much more (and maybe pay extra $$$ for optional services provided by the landlord), marinas shouldn’t be able to push out boaters for those reasons.

Anti-competitive practices should definitely also not be allowed. A marina indirectly forcing boaters to use their yards creates a maintenance monopoly and enables them to charge unfair prices and/or allow sub-quality work without any recourse. It also creates lopsided incentives, e.g. the more issues inexperienced marina staff creates (e.g., collisions) the more profit for the marina yard … clearly not ideal. I’m not a lawyer but forcing to use their yard does not seem like a practice they could legally put into their contracts.

I also wish there would be more transparency for some things. Our marina really wants us to use their dock-hands when departing “for safety reasons”. We were puzzled by this and in all but unusual wind conditions this didn’t make sense for us (we can very safely depart by ourselves). It turns out that this is due to them wanting to learn how long we stayed out so that they could rent the slip out. A much better approach would be to just be honest about this practice and create a system to file trip plans and, ideally, share some fraction of the proceeds from renting the slip out (I personally would care less about this last part -- my main interest is to not have somebody in our slip when we return). But instead they seem to be both embarrassed about the practice and frustrated because it is more difficult to manage transients on their end. Maybe this only applies to our marina.

Some additional notes. Some commented that this isn’t eviction. I agree, which is why I put the word in quotes in the title but in retrospect this was not sufficiently clear. I’m also happy to share more specific details once we’re out of there … but since the marine clearly lacks scruple, I don’t think it is safe to have an antagonistic relationship with the people that need to keep our boat safe and secure for 1-2 more months.

Mike OReilly · 19-09-2021, 15:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nokay

...Some additional notes. Some commented that this isn’t eviction. I agree, which is why I put the word in quotes in the title but in retrospect this was not sufficiently clear. I’m also happy to share more specific details once we’re out of there … but since the marine clearly lacks scruple, I don’t think it is safe to have an antagonistic relationship with the people that need to keep our boat safe and secure for 1-2 more months.

I know it's a major PITA right now, but from all you've written, it sounds like you're far better off being somewhere else. From your descriptions, it's not a place I where I would feel comfortable.

Pelagic · 19-09-2021, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

Sorry for the rage, you called MY life a "myth", and I took it personally.

Capitalism would create as many marinas as needed to meet the needs of the market.

Unfortunately we are in the middle of the perfect storm of 30 Million baby boomers retiring after the largest expansion of wealth in history right when there is a major "save the planet" movement limiting development of the resources those boomers prefer.

50 years from now when most of us are dead there will likely be a lot of unused boats for sale by the grandkids in marinas scrambling for the few remaining living customers that have the time for expensive leisure.

Until then, I expect things will only get worse until they get better.

Another unfortunate reality is there are about a hundred elderly that want to live in a condo overlooking the ocean for each of US that want to live in a boat, and THEY vote.

God, I have to laugh!
First world problems

malbert73 · 19-09-2021, 19:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

For the financially challenged.

$7.53 (current minimum wage in US) X 2080 (40 hours X 52 weeks, minimum hours to be full time) X 45 years (age 20 to 65) = $704,808.00

Investing $200 a month in a retirement fund over the same time period. = $553,954.51.

That gives even a minimum wage worker working the minimum number of hours $1.2 million dollars by retirement age if they live with their parents, or partner, and split expenses.

Which they can then add to Social security income.

THAT is reality, at least in the US.

I’m maybe missing something- but the only way said worker actually has 1.2 million dollars is with 0 expenses along the way. And, they invested 100K of the 700K wages in the retirement fund so you can’t count it twice. So with NO expenses they have 1.1 million.

Instead what we have is possibly 500K in retirement expenses and social security, with this very diligent worker saving 20% of pay. The wages got spent along the way living paycheck to paycheck trying to afford food, rent, transportation to the minimum wage job, etc.

Regardless, doubtful this person will be at a marina on their boat, sadly

NPCampbell · 19-09-2021, 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Ah... blame the government. All functioning capitalist state operate under various forms of government control. There is no pure capitalist state out there.

Since god isn't making any more waterfront, it is a limited resource. Capitalism values this limited resource by the amount someone is willing to pay. If someone is willing to pay more for the resource, in this case a spot in the marina, then basic capitalist principles mean the higher-paying person wins.

As I said, it sounds like capitalism operating as designed.

Dead-on.

There's only two ways to utilize a limited resource: price-based systems and non-economic rationing. Capitalism typically uses price. Other systems like socialism tend to use rationing.

Nothwithstanding monopolies, I prefer the capitalistic approach. With price I can either accept it, shop around, save up, budget or sacrifice to accommodate increases.

Rationing is routinely random, arbitrary, corrupt, cronyistic or a combination of all of the above.

NPCampbell · 19-09-2021, 23:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by valhalla360

While certainly, there is an advantage to starting from wealth....Studies show rich only stay rich for a generation or two typically. Even among the extremely wealthy, it's rare to hold that thru 3-4 generations.

The vast majority of millionaires are first generation millionaires.

Correct.

To the chagrin of the "you must have had privilege crowd", a VAST majority of all millionaires in the US are self made that DID NOT inherit their wealth. The single largest group is savers/investors.

"79% of millionaires did not receive any inheritance at all from their parents or other family members."
https://www.ramseysolutions.com/reti...aires-research

"You'd never guess most of these people were rich. They grew up in average families, they didn't have advanced degrees from elite universities, they didn't inherit money, and they didn't own luxurious homes and flashy cars."
https://www.businessinsider.com/pers...er-time-2019-8

"two-thirds of individuals with a net worth of $30 million or more are considered "self-made"."
https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/28...-got-rich.html

The #1 myth, "Most millionaires inherited their money". A 2017 survey from Fidelity investments found that 88 percent of all millionaires are self-made.
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs...t-millionaires

seandepagnier · 20-09-2021, 00:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by NPCampbell

Correct.

"two-thirds of individuals with a net worth of $30 million or more are considered "self-made"."
https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/28...-got-rich.html

Yes, but they generally had special advantages.

In any case, I checked the top 100 richest people. I could not find a single one who got to where they are without causing significant harm well beyond what most humans do to the environment as well as taking advantage and deceiving and harming others.

So these "self made" people are simply criminals who stole from others and were over-compensated for their efforts. Even if they did not cause significant harm (and all of them did) It is physically impossible to work 1000's of times harder than someone who is already working hard.

seandepagnier · 20-09-2021, 00:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by capn_billl

For the financially challenged.
$7.53 (current minimum wage in US) X 2080 (40 hours X 52 weeks, minimum hours to be full time) X 45 years (age 20 to 65) = $704,808.00

Not everyone has the health to work for 45 years of their life, and this leaves very little time for cruising.

Furthermore, you think people work 52 weeks a year, zero vacation? What this does to mental health? I think most people would be suicide before this scenario plays out: unrealistic/impossible

The government taxes even minimum wage as well.

Quote:

Investing $200 a month in a retirement fund over the same time period. = $553,954.51.

45*12*200 = $108,000

Maybe in your life, but today interest rates are going negative. Again, working 45 years without any break or vacation and you expect minimum wage people to save $200 a month? I doubt many can.

Quote:

That gives even a minimum wage worker working the minimum number of hours $1.2 million dollars by retirement age if they live with their parents, or partner, and split expenses.

your math is completely wrong by more than a factor of 10 and you expect people to live with their parents until age 65.

Caleb_Grey · 20-09-2021, 02:24

Why do Canadians keep talking about capitalism?

rslifkin · 20-09-2021, 04:40

Keep this in mind: any economic system taken to its extremes will have problems. You'll always need some control and moderation on the system to keep it working reasonably.