Something I found quite interesting when I visit China is that a lot of people think foreigners are automatically rich, and if you’re a Chinese expatriate people would think you’re loaded, too. When I am immersed in that environment sometimes I do feel I am wealthy and I tend to spend more money than I should. The exchange rate makes me feel rich in a mathematical manner, and I don’t calculate the prices to US dollars extremely accurately every time I buy something. As a coworker of mine says it, “it feels like I am spending monopoly money in China and I could buy so much more!”. Here are some of my stories about this phenomenon.

The first time I went back to China was in 1999. This was a full seven years after I left my home country and I was sixteen. I remember that my mom told me to not tell people that I am from America because they will try to rip me off. When we went back home we did some shopping, and we were buying quite a bit of stuff and the vendor was quite puzzled. She said to us, “you’re not Yangzhouese are you?” ( is the city I am from, the birthplace of Yangzhou/Yangchow fried rice). We both knew the merchant was an out of towner because she had an accent of another dialect. So my mom replied in fluent Yangzhouese, “can’t your tell by the way we speak that we’re really Yangzhouese? You’re the out of towner!” I thought it was funny that the way we spent money in our hometown marked us as tourists, and yet we had the essence of the locals because of our language.

The next time we went to China was 2006. China change so much in seven years and everything became much more expensive and the dollar has declined against the yuan, but this time we went with a tour group. We were inexperienced tourists and every time we were brought to a tourist trap shop we bought something. In Beijing my mom gave into sales pressure and bought a little statue for way more than it’s worth. She still blames us for letting her buy it today. I guess the problem is that this time they knew we were from America, and gave us the “special” high prices in the designated stores. The excitement of being back in China and having fun really got to us on that trip, and we went a bit overboard. Then again, I felt like I was supporting the economy of my homeland, and it wasn’t a bad thing.

The last time I went to China was shortly before I got married this year. My mother and I toured some of the most beautiful and remote places in China and I could write a lot more about this later. The people in these distant lands were so simple and beautiful and we bought a lot less things this time, but we were mostly happy with our finds. Then after the tour we went back home to Yangzhou and had dinner with friends and family. Of course my grandparents have told everyone how much money I make because they are proud of it. People were impressed because they always multiply the income by the exchange rate, and they don’t realize that we have fairly heavy income taxes and a high cost of living here. (in China there is still no income tax at this moment) It felt good to invite everyone to a very nice restaurant and pay for it out of my pocket because I am able to do it. Again, that feeling of being rich crept up.

It is dangerous to feel rich when you travel abroad to any country that has a currency that’s cheaper than the dollar because you can end up spending a lot and you will be noticed. It is better to lay low sometimes so you don’t get robbed or scammed. Additionally, I think what is worse is to feel superior to the people who have less than us. The next time I go back to China I will be with my hubby, and I will keep on reminding myself the reality of our life. We are not internet tycoons and we live a comfortable life, but we still need to be responsible with our money no matter which country we are in. It is so easy to get lost in the surreal surroundings of a foreign land and there is nothing wrong with having some fun, but just remember to count your blessings, and your spending.

compare prices cialis 20mg

During a recent lunch with my coworkers we discussed marriage and two guys voiced their opposition to the institution of marriage. They weren’t against the concept of being monogamous at all. One man said that he doesn’t like the fact that he has to register his marriage with the government. He really doesn’t mind having a longterm commitment to one woman and he isn’t against having a ceremony declaring his current live-in girlfriend as his wife, but he feels that it’s ridiculous that the government has to get into a private union such as marriage and charge additional taxes. Another man said that he doesn’t like the fact marriage has historically been a business deal where a woman becomes the property of a man. He says that marriage is still very much about the ownership of property and he just thinks it’s a really archaic custom where two people join to increase their wealth.

I think they both had valid points. Marriage is an economic union no matter how we slice it. In many cultures it is customary to marry someone in the same economic standing as you are. In China the saying for the compatibility of economic stature is “meng dang hu dui”, which literally translates to “the suitable door and the matching household”. In Arab countries it is also common for cousins to marry each other in order to keep wealth within the same family. I think in America it is more of an unspoken rule , but for the most part couples I know do come from fairly similar economic backgrounds. If one partner happens to be a lot poorer than the other they may be labeled as a “golddigger” or “mooch”.

Disregarding arranged marriages, I think one of the main reasons we tend to end up with people in our own economic echelon is that these people usually live in the same neighborhoods, have similar educational backgrounds, and have common social circles. Also, when two people get married it’s easier to adapt to a lifestyle that is familiar to both of them so having similar economic backgrounds is actually a good thing for a marriage. So in most cases where we marry laterally we have an economic union that is a partnership or merger of sorts. In such a marriage the two parties have equal economic clout in the household.

In cases where one person “marries up” to another, the economic dynamics is more like a buyout. Basically the partner with more money could hold more power over the less financially endowed partner. As my coworker said, oftentimes women were treated like property in a marriage and it still happens today in many countries because women in those are forbidden to work and earn income.

I think in both cases there are problems and compromises have to be made for any marriage to work. In the case where two people are fairly equal in wealth and income there may be too much independence. Since a marriage is about combining two lives together into one the combining of spending and finances may be an issue of contention. I think the hubby and I have it figured out mostly. In the case where one person has no income or very little income the other partner may have too much power, and when that partner abuses that power there would be major problems in the relationship. Millionaire Mommy Next Door had an entire article about and unfortunately a lot of people are in these relationships where the person who brings home the bacon asserts his/her power with money. On the flipside of the coin, sometimes the person who earns money isn’t necessarily an abuser, but is just fed up with being a provider and becomes resentful. That is why there are sites like where men who feel trapped go to rant about their lives. However, I think these financially imbalanced marriages can work well if both partners appreciate each other more for what they do. A lot of stay at home partners do a lot of things around the household to improve the lives of the whole family, and that is work too. As long as both people recognize each other for what they do and care about money a bit less then it should work out.

Since a marriage is a very long relationship sometimes one partner’s financial situation changes so much that they’re no longer equals, or the person who married up suddenly started to earn more money than the other. In these cases there are problems because money can change people. In the case of , the couple started out with nothing, but his wife managed to help him get through Harvard Business School and then quit her job after he became an executive. Their marriage ended in a very public divorce where his exwife Lorna battled for half of his fortune. It is very unfortunate that these types of divorces happen over and over again.

Money issues is the number one reason couples divorce each other, so it’s best to figure out what kind of economic relationship you have with your mate before you get married. If you are already married having open and honest talks about your concerns with each other also helps a lot. I am still a newlywed but I hope that money will not change my hubby and I. So what sort of economic union do you have? A merger in progress or a total buyout? Are you a victim of economic abuse or are you a resentful provider?

compare prices cialis 20mg

Today I received an excellent email from a reader of mine and I have permission from him to post his email here. I thought the information is excellent for first time buyers who are interested in condos. It’s funny but my parents were just telling me this weekend that they met a taxi driver who bought a condo in San Mateo and was assessed one of these secret fees for $20,000 or $40,000. San Mateo’s condo fees seem to be extremely expensive and basically I really wouldn’t want to buy a condo here. The reader also attached a picture of the Colina Condos at 1 Appian Way. That address has been on the list in the past and it seems that more will flood the market.

Hi Baglady,

I just want to stress the importance of looking carefully into the signing documents when purchasing real estate, especially condos. Often, sellers may try to slide in information about “special assessment fees” hoping the buyer won’t notice. “Special Assessment Fees” are levied by the HOA for repairs that affect the whole complex that the standard monthly HOA fee can’t cover, usually as a result of shoddy construction, bad planning, or mismanagement. The HOA or property management company usually informs owners about these assessment fees a year or so in advance and sometimes set up an installment payment plan, as some of these fees are outrageously large. These assessment fees are a bad sign, as they often indicate possible future problems and therefore, more future fees. And unfortunately, you can’t deduct it off your taxes like a mortgage. It is an out-of-pocket expense. And unfortunately for some condo-owners, they are already financially stretched to the point where they can’t afford this surprise fee, thus forcing them to sell early before the fee hits them, hoping some other poor sucker buyer was
equally as negligent as they were and gloss over the signing documents in haste.

Here’s an example I saw earlier this year. The condos at Pointe Pacific at the top of San Bruno Mountain in Daly City had an assessment fee levied because the location of the condos was a poor decision. Pointe Pacific is on the side of the mountain, battered by rain and wind moreso than another condo complex no more than a block away. This
results in the buildings at Pointe Pacific requiring more repairs. The special assessment fee: approximately $15,000 per household. Even worse, this was not the first time its happened. Just about 5-7 years ago, the HOA levied a similar fee. So you can probably bet there will be another fee in another few years, after the current fee.

Its even worse when the HOA neglects the repairs as they snowball into a huge financial disaster in the long run. Probably the worst example of “Special Assessment Fees” gone awry is the one CURRENTLY HAPPENING at Colina Condos on 1 Appian Way (cross street Gellert) in South San Francisco. I know several people who have bought condos there. Apparently, the condos were poorly built as the original builder went bankrupt halfway through the construction process. The whole complex requires approximately $13.5 million to repair the run-down buildings. The HOA meetings are shouting matches and whole HOA board has quit in horrified disgust. The property management company has abandoned the complex. The only hope left is for the city of SSF to take over and help solve the process, something many of the homeowners are hotly debating. The ship is sailing in the dark with nobody at the helm, so to speak.

The average estimated cost per household for Colina Condos: $70,000. Yes, you heard right. compare prices cialis 20mgout-of-pocket repair costs for condos going for about $400k on the market.

Even worse, you may need to temporarily move when they finally do get the repairs going (and possibly spend even more money on renting a temporary place), as the condos have some deep structural integrity problems. (Some people have water-logged walls, others have collapsed bathrooms.) So, as you can imagine, many new condo owners with no equity can’t afford it and may need to sell. This will probably result in a bunch of impatient, panicked sellers putting those condos on the market all at once, driving value down further. They are hoping for a miracle of miracles: that someone else will be dumb enough to buy their lemon condo and lift the load off their shoulders.

Lessons to be learned: 1. Read all the signing documents carefully. 2. Don’t buy crappy condos. It is of such importance, I hope you publish this email on your main webpage.

compare prices cialis 20mg

The winter isn’t very chilly in San Mateo, but the real estate market is almost frozen. Surprisingly these two weeks there were more listings than the last two weeks and I managed to find about 240 new listings, and of these 18.3% qualify as homes in trouble. Lets take a look:

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mgcompare prices cialis 20mgcompare prices cialis 20mg

It seems that a lot of these homes are REOs or short sales and the banks are getting anxious to get rid of them. Anyway, data on these homes are available at the The average price per square foot is still extremely high. Since this new data is not extremely interesting I decided to look back at some of the older reports. I examined the approximately 150 homes from the first two reports listed and and the findings are quite interesting.

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

compare prices cialis 20mg

• Price Increased: 3
• Price Further Reduced: 53
• Price Stayed the Same: 44

compare prices cialis 20mg

• Sold: 9
• No New Sales Information/Withdrawn: 35

It is interesting to see that three homes actually increased their listing prices because these homes have been on the market for months. What makes them think that raising their price would make their home sell? The home at was relisted so it doesn’t seem like it has been on the market for that long and it increased its price by 1000.

The good news is that a majority of sellers are coming to their senses and reducing their prices more. Some of the biggest reductions are $100,000 or more. Some examples are:

• , 480,000 in October to 380,000 today
• , 889900 in October to 789900 today
• , 649,000 in October to 499000 today

It was surprising to me that only 9 of these homes have sold for sure. At this rate it would take another 10 months or so to sell the remaining 100, and more homes are being listed every day. Of these 9, only one went for more than asking price, the other eight homes sold for anywhere from 2% to 10% less than asking! So if you like any of these distressed homes it doesn’t hurt to ask for more of a discount because it seems very tough to sell them. Since October 21st I have recorded almost two hundred of these distressed properties and at the snail pace they are selling I estimate there are 300+ of these home sellers in trouble in San Mateo right now. I think we’re nowhere near the bottom. I find it funny that Redfin has a real estate tip that says “wait for foreclosures in your neighborhood is off the market, and then sell your home”. In our current situation we would have to wait a very long time for all of these properties to get off the market.

Anyway, the raw data and past issues are available at the. The next issue will appear in 2008 since I will be on vacation. Enjoy!

compare prices cialis 20mg

I graduated from Berkeley’s Electrical Engineering and Computer Science program in 2005 and the Valley was in the midst of an economic recovery. It took me about a month to find a full time position paying $60,000 a year. Recently I did a little digging into the starting salaries of my major for the past 7 years just for fun. I am not surprised by my findings but it is pretty interesting.

This is the raw data from Berkeley’s career center which I copied from several different pages and pieced together. 2007 data isn’t yet available but the median salary is probably about 4 to 5% higher:

Since this data is self reported the reported salaries may be skewed a bit towards the higher end. Nevertheless it’s interesting to see that the class of 2005 is extremely small. I started college in 2001 and that was actually the year Berkeley EECS had the most applicants and it was the most difficult year to get accepted. I think the acceptance rate was somewhere around 11%. The reason was that everyone wanted to get into the high paying major and we all applied during the height of the technology bubble. However, I witnessed a lot of people drop out of the major after the economic downturn. Berkeley would then accept quite a few transfer students from community colleges to fill up the upperclassmen spots. I remember that my sophomore class was wittled down to less than 200 people, but junior year was filled up by an influx of new people so the final graduation count is above 200.

2003 was the worst year of all seven years, and the was this class. Companies cut down the starting pay drastically and people had no choice but to take it because having a job is better than nothing. Now four years later, it may still be too optimistic to say that salaries have recovered to the peak levels because the cost of living in the Valley has risen significantly. Gas prices in 2000 were less than $2.00 a gallon, and now it has doubled. The same goes for housing prices. In 2000 a salary of $62,000 is more than enough to purchase a starter home in the Bay Area. I remember back then that my parents were contemplating buying a condo near Berkeley and it cost less than 180,000. Our family friend also purchased a home around then in Albany for 170 to 180k. Now these homes are all valued at around half a million and a salary of even $70,000 a year is nowhere near enough to cover the mortgage. If we take the cost of living into account, I would argue that our real wages have dropped significantly in the Bay Area.

The lesson here is that negotiating for a higher salary when you just start out is really important. Also, it is true that not every Berkeley grad stayed here in the Bay Area so perhaps life isn’t so bad for those that moved on to cheaper areas. Also, if you graduated in a bad year you would need to ask for bigger raises to avoid being paid less than new grads. If you can’t secure a reasonable market rate raise then it’s probably best to change jobs.

I am not sure what will happen in the next seven years. Some say that there is another technology bubble already here, but I don’t think that is true. I am working at another startup but it has a great product that brings in a good chunk of revenue and from what I have heard many other startups are also quite solid. It should be an interesting ride.

Source of data:

compare prices cialis 20mg