When I was in college, I regularly invited friends for dinner, sometimes up to 8 people. I almost always made some spaghetti with tomato sauce, nothing fancy, but lots.
With 3 friends, I started making this a habit: Cooking for more people= less cost for each one. We took turns, each one was hosting once a week. One of my friends had significantly richer parents than the rest of us, so he always made the fanciest stuff. He didnt mind, we enjoyed it. Someone would bring beer or wine, someone sometimes an additional salad or dessert. It was great, only cooking once but having four different meals each week.
Also important was the aspect of saving time. Since I worked after school, usually until 9 pm twice a week, I only showed up for the food at my friends place. The ones that had time would show up earlier, help cooking and already warm up the party.
I know most of you dont think it saves that much in money.. its certainly not free, but the social aspect of it was great, it saved me a lot of time and cooking for friends once a week is definitely more fun than preparing dinner for one each evening.
You guys make me glad things have finally reached the stage in my family where we truly do no shopping and gift exchanging anymore. So much easier. We focus on the 3 kids but even keep that to a minimum, and when we all do get together, it's for a leisurely meal and good conversation. If you ask me, that's how it ought to be.
Great tips, but I also have some techniques where I get "creative" scholarships. See, my school doesn't really give scholarships for academic performance, so what I do is either apply as a Student assistant and get 75% off on all tuition and fees or make a special deal with the school. One semester I paid almost nothing because I made a website redevelopment proposal for the school's website. They loved it and gave me a 100% discount to work on the project. If you have a special skill that you can offer your school in exchange for tuition discounts, do it. Just make sure everything is put down in writing.
The two major radio stations in our area are horrible with their commercials. Both have DJ's doing endorsements and taped ads on top of it. What I find most annoying is the poor production quality very loud commercials both stations do. They are so annoying and so frequent I quit listening to both stations. I got sick of having to turn down the volume on the car radio constantly.
If I am in the car I listen to NPR or patch my MP3 player into the car stereo. As far as satellite radio, we had Sirius for about a year and really liked it. You will get tacky commercials on the talk channels that are mostly for scammy investments or some snake oil health remedy. They are usually fewer and slightly less annoying than what we got on local radio. What we found Sirius better for was trips. We always had something to listen to rather than being stuck with bad country music, farm reports and radio televangelists.
I think that if we really want to save energy, then we should do something that directly saves energy like encouraging programmable thermostats in the home. That saves more energy in my home than having me run around and change all the clocks. If the big push is to have more daylight in the evening just keep daylight savings year round. When my children were infants they didn't read clocks and their parents just got more sleep deprived with this sillyness. You can't explain to a 2 year old that she's supposed to "spring forward." It doesn't work. I think this experiment has gone on long enough. $8.6 million in additional electricity is a lot of money in an age when many States are looking at dire ways to make up budget deficits.
I've had friends come over for dinner because they couldn't afford anything else and end up offering to do things in return. The best was the friend who offered to come walk my dog twice a week when I was out of the house all day and couldn't afford daycare at the time. In exchange for being able to be productive at my job all day, I was happy to buy a little extra food and feed her at dinner!
I DO NOT recommend it, although my father loves it, but that's because he can get hours and hours and hours of Frank Sinatra + Beach Boys + Jan & Dean anywhere in the country. We had it for a while, just to test because my husband got a deal where it was free, and it was ok. Most of the stations were on a loop to rival the top 40 stations on free radio (think 90 - 120 minutes before Justin Timberlake was on again), I would scroll through all the stations and - Hey #22, Sexy Back, #30, Rhianna, #35, Sexy Back, #50, Rhianna, #62, Sexy back. - and on and on. There are only like 10 stations on there that play stuff you couldn't be getting on free radio and they, too, kinda suck. And, we would go to Maine (southern Maine) and it wouldn't work because of trees - isn't that the type of place they tout it for? Spotty and limited regular radio coverage? I think it's exactly like cable TV - but I'm not buying this. I can get my NPR and my Mike FM on free radio and they're really light on commercials.
On to the Radio DJ's endorsing products - it's really not all that different from Jessica Simpson on ProActiv Solution, or Chuck Norris and his Bowflex - it is done rather sneakily with the segues, but it's pretty easy to spot. I will not say I'm not totally annoyed by the fact that Peter Mead loves his new home gym and that his daughter fights him to use it...but, I get it. And it's free and NPR doesn't do it, they do fund drives, which are ok, and Mike doesn't have DJs and they do three hours in the am with NO COMMERCIALS (not counting the one that tells you that your commercial free three hours are brought to you by Jordan's furniture.)
I used to sit in the car while scrolling and finding nothing I wanted to listen to, except commercials for upcoming satellite shows on other stations or something else, and ask why we would pay for it...
As a voice actor I would be really happy if all radio stations hired professionals to do the ads, but they often have their DJs do it instead. And considering the number of former DJs I know who left radio because the pay was so miserable, the endorsements are unlikely to be making them rich, if they even see any of that money at all.
Everybody has to make a living. But if you want to make pots of money, you do not go into radio.
What I find more disturbing is the enormous number of ads!
What I find weird is how major sponsors do not mind having their ads negated, e.g., a Ford ad followed by a Chevy ad
I love talk radio, but it has turned into a FOX tv channel with their huge number of ads, but with FOX I record shows to speed through the commercials
It would seem if I was an advertiser I would be willing to pay more if I would be guaranteed more, say my ad not negated, nor at the end of 10 commercial sweep
I would have fewer ads, but I might just be heard (or seen)
"I do have a Jewish friend who is way cheaper than me, and he's richer too." (from comment 25)
Yes, and there's probably a direct correlation at work there!
I'm not saying this is what you meant by this comment, but this comment did get me thinking...
Very often it seems like a person who has less money is critical of someone who has more money but is "cheaper" than them. They seem to think that since this person has more money, they should spend it more freely (and usually on the "poorer" friends & family). But the funny thing is, if they spent their money just as freely, they wouldn't have more money than you!
I just find it rather interesting that these people criticize rather than emulate. These people who feel poor and get resentful of their family/friends who "have more" don't seem to realize that there are still more Chinese or Jewish or whatever people out there who are making even less than they are but still manage to live below their means. For these "oh poor me" people, I think it's an attitude thing...they'll never have enough to be satisfied. I think for people in some of these other cultures, where savings is promoted...we're more likely to be grateful for what we have, better able to live within or below our means, and less prone to confusing needs and wants.
Theres also: Give a friend/trusted associate 50,000, which he 'found' in a gutter. Hand into the police, no one claims it and 1/2/3 months later (depending on the country's laws) its all yours (minus tax of course). Works well in country's where the police force is not corrupt.
Socio-culturally, I've grown up to believe that tasteful and appropriate gifts and its presentation etiquette are the mark of a well-bred and educated person. Well executed, and you are praised for your ingenuity and arbiter abilities. Poorly reciprocated, and you can eat a social suicide and snickered and paying with your "trashy" reputation.
Be careful with this one, because in certain circles of popular society, this could be a land mine. The nervous "guilt" associated with receiving gifts is rightly so because for some, it is a test to evaluate the premium of your social standing, your cultural depth, and who you are in relation to them. In my experience, I've used this strategic tactic to give gifts, and I myself have bombed miserably in gracious receiving. We do get better with practice.
It's rarely just about money; it's really a complex and symbolic art about fitting in. Some of the best gifts are exactly what the other person wants, hard to procure, and sophisticated things that makes the other person look good. I need not explain how to prepare for or play this game adeptly, but essentially if you suffer from guilt and must respond to the gift, you should ask the CLASSIEST friend you know for advice.
When I was young, I'd receive gifts from friends, parents' associates and relatives and my mother would go through lengths to teach me how to make the giver feel good, and tokens of reciprocation depending on our relationship, cleverness, and ensure that we were properly responsive. For a lot of people it was a crucial matter of classiness, wit, and smart reputation. As I got a bit older, I learned first hand that the penalties for not doing so could be: empty-handed embarrassment, appearing ingrateful or crude, vicious snickering about your character flaws or even alienating/insulting a potential ally. I also came to understand that grotesquely horrid gifts could an indicator of the other person's obtuse upbringing, a sign of a deteriorating relationship, or simply someone's financial strain.
For instance, in reciprocation for a large sum of travel money, I got wealthy relatives was a set of hand-carve turtles from a remote village in Zambia, which they could never have gotten themselves and symbolized longevity in our culture, and an intriguing legend. After a trip to Idaho, I presented my good-humored neighbors each with a Russet potato. To the boss's birthday, I gave various bottles of Odwalla juice for his health. To some ill-conceived present, I promptly returned it to sender. And to some who re-gifted in absolutely poor taste, we just generously ignored, sent a thank you email, and donated it.
If money is tight, it's best to conceal it with generous home-made cookies, symbolic things of appreciation, or a potted fern from the garden, an abundance of fragrant fruit, or dedicated artwork from your toddler child.
I should have looked at when Daylight Saving Time would be, and started preparing a month ago. Both of my kids are sensitive to changes and transitions, and this is going to be pretty rough on them. The good thing I can see is that it's right at the start of our March Break, so I have a week where we can start shifting our routine, but it's something I should have started weeks ago.
Few people consider how hard something like this can be on kids, particularly when we focus so hard on the wonderful productive members of society who cope with jet lag - aren't they brilliant? :P Some people handle the changes well, and some don't; the best we can do is figure out which we are, and prepare accordingly.
I think we should institute Daylight Savings Time year round. Having the extra hour of daylight in the evening is so conducive to being social and enjoying the outdoors (which is a great way to relax from a hectic workday). I get much more use out of the hour of sunlight at the end of the day than I do at the beginning, where it only serves to wake me up earlier than necessary -- making me cranky for my whole day.
Some of us have lost jobs because people are not spending money.I had worked as a sales associate for a department store.The sales quoto to keep my job was not met by just $30 a week for this last month.Average per job lost was about the same at the store I had worked at, it was higher at other stores.The store I worked for lost just 12 jobs.Averaged over all my sales in a week I would still have a job if each person had spent 23 cents more before taxes.So do I think people spending even just a little of the money will help? Yes but I am not sure people will spend enough since many people owe too much.Hopefully this makes sense I have a cold and took cold meds.
This crass form of advertising is one of the many reasons I enjoy listening to Nation Public Radio and independent radio stations. There is an NPR affiliate broadcasting almost everywhere in the United States and, while there are commercial breaks, the shameless shilling of goods and services is generally absent from the programs themselves.
True, you won't find Opie and Anthony, John Tesh, or Bob and Sheri style talk radio, but the programing is generally pretty interesting and the discussions lively.
That said, XM does tempt me, if only to listen to the "Theme Time Radio Hour."
...you're watching an interesting debate on TV between a prominent politician and, say, Barbara Walters. She's just about to ask a really important question but then stops, turns to the camera, and says "friends, I'd like to talk to you about an amazing cure for athlete's foot."
This is the difference between regular advertising and paid endorsements. They are far more disruptive and cast a huge shadow of doubt over the legitimacy of the presenter. By all means have your ads, pay for your station that way, but not these crass endorsements. And by the way, it sucks that satellite has ads, too. WHy do you pay for it then?
Whenever you hear of a health care product being advertised on the radio, you can almost be certain that it's something you want to avoid. I work in health care and rarely hear an ad for anything I would want for myself.
BTW, the talk shows on satellite have advertising as well. You can't escape advertising, but you can choose not to buy.
When I was in college, I regularly invited friends for dinner, sometimes up to 8 people. I almost always made some spaghetti with tomato sauce, nothing fancy, but lots.
With 3 friends, I started making this a habit: Cooking for more people= less cost for each one. We took turns, each one was hosting once a week. One of my friends had significantly richer parents than the rest of us, so he always made the fanciest stuff. He didnt mind, we enjoyed it. Someone would bring beer or wine, someone sometimes an additional salad or dessert. It was great, only cooking once but having four different meals each week.
Also important was the aspect of saving time. Since I worked after school, usually until 9 pm twice a week, I only showed up for the food at my friends place. The ones that had time would show up earlier, help cooking and already warm up the party.
I know most of you dont think it saves that much in money.. its certainly not free, but the social aspect of it was great, it saved me a lot of time and cooking for friends once a week is definitely more fun than preparing dinner for one each evening.
You guys make me glad things have finally reached the stage in my family where we truly do no shopping and gift exchanging anymore. So much easier. We focus on the 3 kids but even keep that to a minimum, and when we all do get together, it's for a leisurely meal and good conversation. If you ask me, that's how it ought to be.
Great tips, but I also have some techniques where I get "creative" scholarships. See, my school doesn't really give scholarships for academic performance, so what I do is either apply as a Student assistant and get 75% off on all tuition and fees or make a special deal with the school. One semester I paid almost nothing because I made a website redevelopment proposal for the school's website. They loved it and gave me a 100% discount to work on the project. If you have a special skill that you can offer your school in exchange for tuition discounts, do it. Just make sure everything is put down in writing.
The two major radio stations in our area are horrible with their commercials. Both have DJ's doing endorsements and taped ads on top of it. What I find most annoying is the poor production quality very loud commercials both stations do. They are so annoying and so frequent I quit listening to both stations. I got sick of having to turn down the volume on the car radio constantly.
If I am in the car I listen to NPR or patch my MP3 player into the car stereo. As far as satellite radio, we had Sirius for about a year and really liked it. You will get tacky commercials on the talk channels that are mostly for scammy investments or some snake oil health remedy. They are usually fewer and slightly less annoying than what we got on local radio. What we found Sirius better for was trips. We always had something to listen to rather than being stuck with bad country music, farm reports and radio televangelists.
Alyson,
When I lived in New England I also listened to Mike FM a lot. The randomness of that station is unmatched and really entertaining.
I think that if we really want to save energy, then we should do something that directly saves energy like encouraging programmable thermostats in the home. That saves more energy in my home than having me run around and change all the clocks. If the big push is to have more daylight in the evening just keep daylight savings year round. When my children were infants they didn't read clocks and their parents just got more sleep deprived with this sillyness. You can't explain to a 2 year old that she's supposed to "spring forward." It doesn't work. I think this experiment has gone on long enough. $8.6 million in additional electricity is a lot of money in an age when many States are looking at dire ways to make up budget deficits.
I've had friends come over for dinner because they couldn't afford anything else and end up offering to do things in return. The best was the friend who offered to come walk my dog twice a week when I was out of the house all day and couldn't afford daycare at the time. In exchange for being able to be productive at my job all day, I was happy to buy a little extra food and feed her at dinner!
but Paul, you know that those guys are an entirely different species of "DJ".
I DO NOT recommend it, although my father loves it, but that's because he can get hours and hours and hours of Frank Sinatra + Beach Boys + Jan & Dean anywhere in the country. We had it for a while, just to test because my husband got a deal where it was free, and it was ok. Most of the stations were on a loop to rival the top 40 stations on free radio (think 90 - 120 minutes before Justin Timberlake was on again), I would scroll through all the stations and - Hey #22, Sexy Back, #30, Rhianna, #35, Sexy Back, #50, Rhianna, #62, Sexy back. - and on and on. There are only like 10 stations on there that play stuff you couldn't be getting on free radio and they, too, kinda suck. And, we would go to Maine (southern Maine) and it wouldn't work because of trees - isn't that the type of place they tout it for? Spotty and limited regular radio coverage? I think it's exactly like cable TV - but I'm not buying this. I can get my NPR and my Mike FM on free radio and they're really light on commercials.
On to the Radio DJ's endorsing products - it's really not all that different from Jessica Simpson on ProActiv Solution, or Chuck Norris and his Bowflex - it is done rather sneakily with the segues, but it's pretty easy to spot. I will not say I'm not totally annoyed by the fact that Peter Mead loves his new home gym and that his daughter fights him to use it...but, I get it. And it's free and NPR doesn't do it, they do fund drives, which are ok, and Mike doesn't have DJs and they do three hours in the am with NO COMMERCIALS (not counting the one that tells you that your commercial free three hours are brought to you by Jordan's furniture.)
I used to sit in the car while scrolling and finding nothing I wanted to listen to, except commercials for upcoming satellite shows on other stations or something else, and ask why we would pay for it...
Don't do it.
this new metod with a lighter work perfect for me.:)
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/963248/remove_car_dent_with_a_lighter/
but recently I heard Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck all hawking products during their shows. Tell me these guys aren't worth a few bucks.
As a voice actor I would be really happy if all radio stations hired professionals to do the ads, but they often have their DJs do it instead. And considering the number of former DJs I know who left radio because the pay was so miserable, the endorsements are unlikely to be making them rich, if they even see any of that money at all.
Everybody has to make a living. But if you want to make pots of money, you do not go into radio.
I've never heard these kind of endorsements here in Canada. Am I wrong, or do we have different rules here? (Does anyone know?)
What I find more disturbing is the enormous number of ads!
What I find weird is how major sponsors do not mind having their ads negated, e.g., a Ford ad followed by a Chevy ad
I love talk radio, but it has turned into a FOX tv channel with their huge number of ads, but with FOX I record shows to speed through the commercials
It would seem if I was an advertiser I would be willing to pay more if I would be guaranteed more, say my ad not negated, nor at the end of 10 commercial sweep
I would have fewer ads, but I might just be heard (or seen)
"I do have a Jewish friend who is way cheaper than me, and he's richer too." (from comment 25)
Yes, and there's probably a direct correlation at work there!
I'm not saying this is what you meant by this comment, but this comment did get me thinking...
Very often it seems like a person who has less money is critical of someone who has more money but is "cheaper" than them. They seem to think that since this person has more money, they should spend it more freely (and usually on the "poorer" friends & family). But the funny thing is, if they spent their money just as freely, they wouldn't have more money than you!
I just find it rather interesting that these people criticize rather than emulate. These people who feel poor and get resentful of their family/friends who "have more" don't seem to realize that there are still more Chinese or Jewish or whatever people out there who are making even less than they are but still manage to live below their means. For these "oh poor me" people, I think it's an attitude thing...they'll never have enough to be satisfied. I think for people in some of these other cultures, where savings is promoted...we're more likely to be grateful for what we have, better able to live within or below our means, and less prone to confusing needs and wants.
Theres also: Give a friend/trusted associate 50,000, which he 'found' in a gutter. Hand into the police, no one claims it and 1/2/3 months later (depending on the country's laws) its all yours (minus tax of course). Works well in country's where the police force is not corrupt.
Socio-culturally, I've grown up to believe that tasteful and appropriate gifts and its presentation etiquette are the mark of a well-bred and educated person. Well executed, and you are praised for your ingenuity and arbiter abilities. Poorly reciprocated, and you can eat a social suicide and snickered and paying with your "trashy" reputation.
Be careful with this one, because in certain circles of popular society, this could be a land mine. The nervous "guilt" associated with receiving gifts is rightly so because for some, it is a test to evaluate the premium of your social standing, your cultural depth, and who you are in relation to them. In my experience, I've used this strategic tactic to give gifts, and I myself have bombed miserably in gracious receiving. We do get better with practice.
It's rarely just about money; it's really a complex and symbolic art about fitting in. Some of the best gifts are exactly what the other person wants, hard to procure, and sophisticated things that makes the other person look good. I need not explain how to prepare for or play this game adeptly, but essentially if you suffer from guilt and must respond to the gift, you should ask the CLASSIEST friend you know for advice.
When I was young, I'd receive gifts from friends, parents' associates and relatives and my mother would go through lengths to teach me how to make the giver feel good, and tokens of reciprocation depending on our relationship, cleverness, and ensure that we were properly responsive. For a lot of people it was a crucial matter of classiness, wit, and smart reputation. As I got a bit older, I learned first hand that the penalties for not doing so could be: empty-handed embarrassment, appearing ingrateful or crude, vicious snickering about your character flaws or even alienating/insulting a potential ally. I also came to understand that grotesquely horrid gifts could an indicator of the other person's obtuse upbringing, a sign of a deteriorating relationship, or simply someone's financial strain.
For instance, in reciprocation for a large sum of travel money, I got wealthy relatives was a set of hand-carve turtles from a remote village in Zambia, which they could never have gotten themselves and symbolized longevity in our culture, and an intriguing legend. After a trip to Idaho, I presented my good-humored neighbors each with a Russet potato. To the boss's birthday, I gave various bottles of Odwalla juice for his health. To some ill-conceived present, I promptly returned it to sender. And to some who re-gifted in absolutely poor taste, we just generously ignored, sent a thank you email, and donated it.
If money is tight, it's best to conceal it with generous home-made cookies, symbolic things of appreciation, or a potted fern from the garden, an abundance of fragrant fruit, or dedicated artwork from your toddler child.
I should have looked at when Daylight Saving Time would be, and started preparing a month ago. Both of my kids are sensitive to changes and transitions, and this is going to be pretty rough on them. The good thing I can see is that it's right at the start of our March Break, so I have a week where we can start shifting our routine, but it's something I should have started weeks ago.
Few people consider how hard something like this can be on kids, particularly when we focus so hard on the wonderful productive members of society who cope with jet lag - aren't they brilliant? :P Some people handle the changes well, and some don't; the best we can do is figure out which we are, and prepare accordingly.
I think we should institute Daylight Savings Time year round. Having the extra hour of daylight in the evening is so conducive to being social and enjoying the outdoors (which is a great way to relax from a hectic workday). I get much more use out of the hour of sunlight at the end of the day than I do at the beginning, where it only serves to wake me up earlier than necessary -- making me cranky for my whole day.
But then, why pay for cable when you have to watch commercials?
There's pretty much no way to escape it, unfortunately.
Some of us have lost jobs because people are not spending money.I had worked as a sales associate for a department store.The sales quoto to keep my job was not met by just $30 a week for this last month.Average per job lost was about the same at the store I had worked at, it was higher at other stores.The store I worked for lost just 12 jobs.Averaged over all my sales in a week I would still have a job if each person had spent 23 cents more before taxes.So do I think people spending even just a little of the money will help? Yes but I am not sure people will spend enough since many people owe too much.Hopefully this makes sense I have a cold and took cold meds.
This crass form of advertising is one of the many reasons I enjoy listening to Nation Public Radio and independent radio stations. There is an NPR affiliate broadcasting almost everywhere in the United States and, while there are commercial breaks, the shameless shilling of goods and services is generally absent from the programs themselves.
True, you won't find Opie and Anthony, John Tesh, or Bob and Sheri style talk radio, but the programing is generally pretty interesting and the discussions lively.
That said, XM does tempt me, if only to listen to the "Theme Time Radio Hour."
Very funny post Paul.
...you're watching an interesting debate on TV between a prominent politician and, say, Barbara Walters. She's just about to ask a really important question but then stops, turns to the camera, and says "friends, I'd like to talk to you about an amazing cure for athlete's foot."
This is the difference between regular advertising and paid endorsements. They are far more disruptive and cast a huge shadow of doubt over the legitimacy of the presenter. By all means have your ads, pay for your station that way, but not these crass endorsements. And by the way, it sucks that satellite has ads, too. WHy do you pay for it then?
Whenever you hear of a health care product being advertised on the radio, you can almost be certain that it's something you want to avoid. I work in health care and rarely hear an ad for anything I would want for myself.
BTW, the talk shows on satellite have advertising as well. You can't escape advertising, but you can choose not to buy.
I know I don't pay for the radio. Do you people?
How should those radio people go about getting funds?
The writer said it himself. If you don't like commercials get satellite. You should just get Sirius and XM. They both have good and bad things.