: On Vacation...


screature
Feb 16th, 2012, 05:05 PM
Anyone else been/going away?

We were in Puerto Escondido Mexico for 10 days visiting a friend who lives there ... no internet, no e-mails, no TV, no movies, etc... just livin' life and loving it...

Just checking my e-mails and what's been going on here at ehMac and I am already ready to disconnect again... so much snipping and pettiness...

A little time away/disconnected provides a lot of perspective on what is really important... soon enough I am sure this perspective will wear off...

MLeh
Feb 16th, 2012, 05:34 PM
Just got back from a very relaxing 10 day cruise in the Caribbean. Checked my emails once a morning, but otherwise was pretty much disconnected. Really enjoyed it. Ready to go back.

Sonal
Feb 16th, 2012, 05:46 PM
Heading to Barcelona in 10 days. Cell phone and laptop will travel with me, but I generally stay off most forums when I'm travelling.

johnp
Feb 16th, 2012, 05:54 PM
We did 32 nights in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, early-December to early-January. Haven't been back very long according to the calendar, but almost too long in how we feel about it!! ;)

FightingShibas
Feb 16th, 2012, 06:03 PM
Heading to Vegas on Monday for five days, first real holiday in a couple years, pretty stoked to leave!

bryanc
Feb 16th, 2012, 06:07 PM
I could really use a vacation. Wont have time for one until May of 2013. Just tryin' to hold it together until then.

SINC
Feb 16th, 2012, 06:11 PM
I keep trying to take a break from my vacation to get a little work done. Been retired now for 10 years, 6 months, 26 days, four hours and 11 minutes, but who's counting?

Macfury
Feb 16th, 2012, 06:28 PM
I have had exactly one vacation of 7 days since 2003. Other than that just single days off.

John Clay
Feb 16th, 2012, 06:46 PM
I have had exactly one vacation of 7 days since 2003. Other than that just single days off.

Was that your choice, or someone else's?

bryanc
Feb 16th, 2012, 07:46 PM
I have had exactly one vacation of 7 days since 2003. Other than that just single days off.

:eek: That's as bad as me! (Worse... I took 8 days in 2009). Presumably you enjoy what you do, but a little time off probably wouldn't kill you.

mrjimmy
Feb 16th, 2012, 07:48 PM
I take as many as I can get! You won't lie on your death bed regretting taking that trip...

screature
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:05 PM
I have had exactly one vacation of 7 days since 2003. Other than that just single days off.

Hopefully you love what you do for a living... personally I prefer living not to make a living.

Macified
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:27 PM
In the past 10 years I've been to India twice, Mexico three times, Jamaica, Greece, spent several months playing in Utah, several months hanging out at the cottage in Ontario, Aspen Colorado, Oregon, San Francisco, New York, Boston, Vancouver a few weekends in Austin Texas. Just checked in for my flight for a weekend in Fort Worth Texas. I do love my vacation time but then I only work to fill time and keep some sanity.

groovetube
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:29 PM
I didn't regret all the time I took at the start of the year, and intend on taking far more very soon. It's good to get away and see something besides what you see daily.

BigDL
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:39 PM
I take as many as I can get! You won't lie on your death bed regretting taking that trip......but...perhaps...that little something you picked up while away...maybe...if you have the time. :eek:

mrjimmy
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:43 PM
...but...perhaps...that little something you picked up while away...maybe...if you have the time. :eek:

Same thing could happen here. Can't live life in fear BigDL. I see the pressures and stresses of work wearing my friends and colleagues down. A healthy life needs balance.

jamesB
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:46 PM
The more I see of society today and all the s**t that's going on, the better I like my backyard.
I have absolutely no desire to travel anymore.

Macfury
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:47 PM
Was that your choice, or someone else's?

Self-employed. The worst boss imaginable.

Macified
Feb 16th, 2012, 08:53 PM
...but...perhaps...that little something you picked up while away...maybe...if you have the time. :eek:

Little things can be picked-up just about anywhere. Be prepared and travel safely. You'd be amazed where you can safely take yourself.

Sonal
Feb 16th, 2012, 09:16 PM
Self-employed. The worst boss imaginable.

Yeah. I had to go on strike to convince my boss that I need time off. It was pretty ugly.

kps
Feb 16th, 2012, 09:23 PM
Self-employed. The worst boss imaginable.

Your wife or your banker? ;)

I had to defer my January vacation due to health issues, perhaps next year .

groovetube
Feb 16th, 2012, 09:31 PM
self-employed is often an illusion.

Macfury
Feb 16th, 2012, 10:07 PM
self-employed is often an illusion.

How so?

MLeh
Feb 16th, 2012, 10:25 PM
As one who has been self-employed for 25+ years I'm waiting for edification of this post ...

Macfury
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:27 AM
As one who has been self-employed for 25+ years I'm waiting for edification of this post ...

I'm guessing you'll be waiting 25+ years for a satisfactory answer.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 07:30 AM
How so?

well, you're still really, working for someone.

I haven't had a 9-5 job in probably 28 years, save for a couple temp jobs I snagged when times were really rough way back when. So admittedly, I probably have forgotten what the other side is like. But, I have been working til 1 am lately and not many weekends off, so there are times, I see it as an illusion, you often end up working more.

When I have full time guys working, I'm generally the one still here after 5.

Macfury
Feb 17th, 2012, 10:42 AM
Well, I didn't expect I was going to be paying myself. Of course I'm working for other people. But I'd rather be working long hours and knowing the benefits will all accrue to me instead of to a company of which I'm an employee.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:26 PM
well, you're still really, working for someone.

I haven't had a 9-5 job in probably 28 years, save for a couple temp jobs I snagged when times were really rough way back when. So admittedly, I probably have forgotten what the other side is like. But, I have been working til 1 am lately and not many weekends off, so there are times, I see it as an illusion, you often end up working more.

When I have full time guys working, I'm generally the one still here after 5.

No matter what you do, unless you are independently wealthy, or make your income purely form the proceeds of the buying and selling of equities and commodities, can I think of a single situation where you are not "working for someone else" or more correctly, someone else is paying you for what you do or have done.

So based on your limitation of the definition of what it means to be self-employed there would be literally almost no such thing as being self-employed, a limitation of the definition that clearly no revenue agency in the country either provincial or federal agrees with, so your point is rather moot and does not fit the common sense or legal meaning/understanding of the term self-employed.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:29 PM
No matter what you do unless you are independently wealthy, or make your income purely form the proceeds of the buying and selling of equities and commodities, can I think of a single situation where you are not "working for someone else" or more correctly, someone else is paying you for what you do or have done.

Being a landlord over your own properties--working for yourself.

Some of the tenants seem to think I'm working for them. I'm not. Property management isn't really a service-oriented business, but really speaking, the tenants are not so much my customers are they are part of my product (an income producing asset.)

It may sound like splitting hairs, but there's a definite distinction.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:34 PM
Being a landlord over your own properties--working for yourself.

Some of the tenants seem to think I'm working for them. I'm not. Property management isn't really a service-oriented business, but really speaking, the tenants are not so much my customers are they are part of my product (an income producing asset.)

It may sound like splitting hairs, but there's a definite distinction.

Are you a property manager or a property owner who rents out their properties, i.e. a landlord?

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:40 PM
Are you a property manager or a property owner who rents out their properties, i.e. a landlord?

Depends on the property.

But in some cases, yes, I'm both owner and property manager.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:42 PM
As you indicate in some situations of course you can be/are both.

If you are a property manager you work for the property owner if you are a landlord you do work in essence for the tenants as you have certain basic obligations that you must fulfill to the tenants. No tenants no income, so you are in fact being paid by someone else for the commodity you provide so I can't agree with your semantics.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:46 PM
Are you a property manager or a property owner who rents out their properties, i.e. a landlord?

If you are a property manager you work for the property owner if you are a landlord you do work in essence for the tenants (in some situations of course you can be/are both) as you have certain basic obligations that you must fulfill to the tenants. No tenants no income so you are in fact being paid by someone else for the commodity you provide so I can't agree with your semantics.

Well, I don't quite agree with your semantics either.

I have obligations to the maintaining value of the asset. The tenants are a part of that asset. If the asset becomes more valuable by having no tenants (i.e., the property has value as a land-development package) then to hell with the tenants because their presence devalues my asset.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 12:55 PM
Are you a property manager or a property owner who rents out their properties, i.e. a landlord?

If you are a property manager you work for the property owner if you are a landlord you do work in essence for the tenants (in some situations of course you can be/are both) as you have certain basic obligations that you must fulfill to the tenants. No tenants no income so you are in fact being paid by someone else for the commodity you provide so I can't agree with your semantics.

Not true. Owning property and making money from selling/renting a product you own doesn't mean you "work for them", just because you have an obligation to ensure the product or service being paid for continues to be what is agreed upon.

Even if you were a property manager, as a freelance business who takes care of 1 or many properties, if it's a business and that's the service, you still, don't work for the tenants.

My quip to macfury was just saying it often doesn't feel as though I work for myself, as I often have many of the same obligations, deadlines, being at work, etc etc as someone who works -for- someone.

He's right though, working for yourself has many benefits and advantages you don't have being a 9-5er.

mrjimmy
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:09 PM
macfury....

....He's right though

Is that a rainbow I see...?

:D

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:12 PM
Not true. Owning property and making money from selling/renting a product you own doesn't mean you "work for them", just because you have an obligation to ensure the product or service being paid for continues to be what is agreed upon.

Even if you were a property manager, as a freelance business who takes care of 1 or many properties, if it's a business and that's the service, you still, don't work for the tenants.

Then of course, there are the owners/investors who hire out a property management company--which describes the majority of landlords. They really aren't working for anyone except possibly themselves, and in a lot of cases most of that is delegated to the property manager.... people are working for them, and they collect money.

It's a funny kind of a business.

I've work for employers, and I've worked clients--this is definitely quite different.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:33 PM
Well, I don't quite agree with your semantics either.

I have obligations to the maintaining value of the asset. The tenants are a part of that asset. If the asset becomes more valuable by having no tenants (i.e., the property has value as a land-development package) then to hell with the tenants because their presence devalues my asset.

Not true. Owning property and making money from selling/renting a product you own doesn't mean you "work for them", just because you have an obligation to ensure the product or service being paid for continues to be what is agreed upon.

Even if you were a property manager, as a freelance business who takes care of 1 or many properties, if it's a business and that's the service, you still, don't work for the tenants.

My quip to macfury was just saying it often doesn't feel as though I work for myself, as I often have many of the same obligations, deadlines, being at work, etc etc as someone who works -for- someone.

He's right though, working for yourself has many benefits and advantages you don't have being a 9-5er.

You still have obligations to the tenants:

Residential Tenancies Act
Statutes of Ontario, 2006, chapter 17 (http://www.ontariotenants.ca/law/act.phtml)

PART III - RESPONSIBILITIES OF LANDLORDS
20. Landlord's responsibility to repair 21. Landlord's responsibility re services
22. Landlord not to interfere with reasonable enjoyment 23. Landlord not to harass, etc.
24. Changing locks 25. Privacy
26. Entry without notice 27. Entry with notice
28. Entry by canvassers 29. Tenant applications
30. Order, repair, comply with standards 31. Other orders re s. 29
32. Eviction with termination order


Being that you have such obligations as to the minimum conditions/provisions that you supply your tenants you are at their service, no matter how minimally.

The tenants are not part of the asset as you do not in any way own the tenants. They may affect the value of the asset but they are not part of the asset.

Without tenants and selling the property purely as an asset it would fit into the exceptions I mentioned previously regarding selling equities and commodities, albeit of a different order, as you would be selling it to an individual and not traded on an exchange where there is no single individual buying your asset.

Macfury
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:50 PM
I see the tenants as individual clients who come and go. The landlord/owner of such a building would be self-employed, with a range of clients who pay for the management service provided. The landlord/owner works all costs into this management fee and calls it rent.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 01:51 PM
Then of course, there are the owners/investors who hire out a property management company--which describes the majority of landlords. They really aren't working for anyone except possibly themselves, and in a lot of cases most of that is delegated to the property manager.... people are working for them, and they collect money.

It's a funny kind of a business.

I've work for employers, and I've worked clients--this is definitely quite different.

And therein lies the difference between being employed and being self-employed... either way someone else is paying you and why gt's point is moot and irrelevant to the definition of what constitutes being self-employed.

You are definitely self-employed (as far as tax law is concerned), but as a landlord and/or property manager and landlord you definitely do not fit into the categories I previously mentioned (selling equities and commodities without other form of income or independently wealthy) as long as you have tenants in your properties to whom you are beholden for your income...

At any rate this is all for another thread as this is a full on derailment of this one.

Who else has been/is going on vacation...? :)

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:12 PM
Hmmm. Seems I've lost track of what is being, argued about.

I guess I'm not self employed since I'm providing ongoing products and services and have an obligation to work on these.

Or, I am. Hmmm.

Is that a rainbow I see...?

:D
I think i-rui in another thread mentioned that a stopped clock tends to be right at least once a day :)

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:17 PM
You still have obligations to the tenants:

Residential Tenancies Act
Statutes of Ontario, 2006, chapter 17 (http://www.ontariotenants.ca/law/act.phtml)

Being that you have such obligations as to the minimum conditions/provisions that you supply your tenants you are at their service, no matter how minimally.

The tenants are not part of the asset as you do not in any way own the tenants. They may affect the value of the asset but they are not part of the asset.

Without tenants and selling the property purely as an asset it would fit into the exceptions I mentioned previously regarding selling equities and commodities, albeit of a different order, as you would be selling it to an individual and not traded on an exchange where there is no single individual buying your asset.

I have legal obligations to the tenants in much the same way that I have legal obligations to the elevator--by law I have to have the elevator inspected monthly, and licensed annually. I also have legal obligations to the fire alarm system (annual inspections, keeping things up to code) and obligations to the condition of the building in general which, while less formalized, can result in legal issues with the City. Failure to do these things devalues my asset and lowers its market value.

When I sell the asset, the tenants go to the new owner with the building. I don't own the tenants, per se, but I 'own' their leases, and when the building is sold their leases are assigned to the new owner. They are part and parcel of the asset, in that I can't sell the building without assigning the leases and rents along with it. Part of the due diligence of any rental building sales typically involves an inspection of the leases, the tenants' apartments, and at least an informal assessment of the tenants themselves.

In any case, you are talking solely about residential tenants. While that's my particular niche, the same things I've said applies to commercial tenants, where I have even less obligation to the tenants.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:18 PM
I see the tenants as individual clients who come and go. The landlord/owner of such a building would be self-employed, with a range of clients who pay for the management service provided. The landlord/owner works all costs into this management fee and calls it rent.

This is a very common misconception of how it all works. :)

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:27 PM
Hmmm. Seems I've lost track of what is being, argued about.

I guess I'm not self employed since I'm providing ongoing products and services and have an obligation to work on these.

Or, I am. Hmmm.


I think i-rui in another thread mentioned that a stopped clock tends to be right at least once a day :)

Maybe this will help to sort it out for you. ;)

Income Tax Act (http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-3.3/)

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:32 PM
I'm sorry, but I have been self employed entirely for over 25 years, and I do NOT work for someone.

I currently have over 80 clients, and rising. By your definition, Apple works for me.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:35 PM
I have legal obligations to the tenants in much the same way that I have legal obligations to the elevator--by law I have to have the elevator inspected monthly, and licensed annually. I also have legal obligations to the fire alarm system (annual inspections, keeping things up to code) and obligations to the condition of the building in general which, while less formalized, can result in legal issues with the City. Failure to do these things devalues my asset and lowers its market value.

When I sell the asset, the tenants go to the new owner with the building. I don't own the tenants, per se, but I 'own' their leases, and when the building is sold their leases are assigned to the new owner. They are part and parcel of the asset, in that I can't sell the building without assigning the leases and rents along with it. Part of the due diligence of any rental building sales typically involves an inspection of the leases, the tenants' apartments, and at least an informal assessment of the tenants themselves.

In any case, you are talking solely about residential tenants. While that's my particular niche, the same things I've said applies to commercial tenants, where I have even less obligation to the tenants.

They do not, their leases do... tenants are people leases are not.

All you have said simply states what I have already stated... tenants affect the value of your asset but are not part of it, part and parcel as you have subsequently expressed it, which the people are not...

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:38 PM
contracts and business revenue etc in general is definitely part of the value, of any business. I'm not sure why that is being debated or used as a point here.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:41 PM
They do not, their leases do... tenants are people leases are not.

All you have said simply states what I have already stated... tenants affect the value of your asset but are not part of it, part and parcel as you have subsequently expressed it, which the people are not...

Oh, so we sell the asset and all the people magically disappear but the money keeps rolling in? That's a nice trick.

Now whose splitting semantic hairs?

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:42 PM
I'm sorry, but I have been self employed entirely for over 25 years, and I do NOT work for someone.

I currently have over 80 clients, and rising. By your definition, Apple works for me.

Uhhmm....

self-employed is often an illusion.

well, you're still really, working for someone....



So which way is it...

You are indeed lost in your own semantics... read the Act it may help you sort things out. ;) Cause right now you make zero sense...

By your definition, Apple works for me.

:yikes:

I really could say a lot about this part of your post but I am still on vacation so I will bite my tongue...

Anyone else been/going on vacation...

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:51 PM
Yes, I said it often is... an illusion. It can feel that way, when you're stuck in a project that requires you to work long hours to produce, but that's business. But that doesn't mean it's actually the case.

But I don't work for someone's company, and receive a paycheque from their company, and a T4 at the end of the year (their payroll). I define what my business is, what my products and services are, what the prices are, and what my terms of business are. I can also, set what my hours are, and how often I work. It's -my- choice. I may not see it as much of a choice given my obligations to pay my mortgage and keep me in food, and things I want to buy. But it still is, my choice. I can sell my business (actually there is a possibility this may actually occur soon), because, I own my business.

I cannot do any of this, if I "work for someone". A huge massive difference.

I work for myself, and draw a salary from my company (inc) which I own. I'm not sure what the confusion is here.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:52 PM
Oh, so we sell the asset and all the people magically disappear but the money keeps rolling in? That's a nice trick.

Now whose splitting semantic hairs?

Do you really think that because you have a contractual obligation with someone that you own the people associated with that contract...?

No hair splitting just the facts... it is all about your semantics... your tenants are NOT part of your asset, their leases are and yet at the same time at certain times you would wish to see those leases/tenants as a potential liability...

You own property not the tenants it is really that simple.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:54 PM
wow.

*cough*

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:56 PM
Do you really think that because you have a contractual obligation with someone that you own the people associated with that contract...?

No hair splitting just the facts... it is all about your semantics... your tenants are NOT part of your asset, their leases are and yet at the same time at certain times you would wish to see those leases/tenants as a potential liability...

You own property not the tenants it is really that simple.

No. I'm saying that the people associated with that contract are irrelevant.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:58 PM
Yes, I said it often is... an illusion. It can feel that way, when you're stuck in a project that requires you to work long hours to produce, but that's business. But that doesn't mean it's actually the case.

But I don't work for someone's company, and receive a paycheque from their company, and a T4 at the end of the year (their payroll). I define what my business is, what my products and services are, what the prices are, and what my terms of business are. I can also, set what my hours are, and how often I work. It's -my- choice. I may not see it as much of a choice given my obligations to pay my mortgage and keep me in food, and things I want to buy. But it still is, my choice. I can sell my business (actually there is a possibility this may actually occur soon), because, I own my business.

I cannot do any of this, if I "work for someone". A huge massive difference.

I work for myself, and draw a salary from my company (inc) which I own. I'm not sure what the confusion is here.

Agreed it is and one that you previously negated.

well, you're still really, working for someone.

So you want it both ways in your various posts... seems you lose track in your argumentation but your inconsistencies are easily revealed because they are in black and white for all to see.

Carry on, but please in another thread... as this has nothing to do with this thread...

Anyone here been/going on vacation...?

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:58 PM
True. I don't my commercial space landlord cares who actually writes the cheque. As long as the lease is honoured, and I'm legally bound to honour it.

Macfury
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:58 PM
No. I'm saying that the people associated with that contract are irrelevant.

Just so long as they're paying you--or the prospective owner--the rent, whether they exist or not.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:58 PM
No. I'm saying that the people associated with that contract are irrelevant.

Glad I don't rent any of your properties.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 02:59 PM
Just so long as they're paying you--or the prospective owner--the rent, whether they exist or not.

Pretty much.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:01 PM
:lmao: Agreed it is and one that you previously negated.



So you want it both ways in your various posts... seems you lose track in your argumentation but your inconsistencies are easily revealed because they are in black and white for all to see.

Carry on, but please in another thread... as this has nothing to do with this thread...

Anyone here been/going on vacation...?

I'm not sure why it isn't clear, as I've pointed out, it was a quip. Something I often feel. You will often hear a self-employed person grumble this. But all it would take is for any of us to taste working for a company or someone for a couple weeks and we'll happily go back to being self employed.

I'm not sure if you're self employed or if you're fulltime/contract work, but if you were self employed you'd probably know what I'm talking about.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:02 PM
Glad I don't rent any of your properties.

whoa. No need to get nasty now.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:03 PM
Good ole ehMac...

Once again threads being derailed into the abyss... wish I had stayed on vacation away from this chite...

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:04 PM
Glad I don't rent any of your properties.

Likewise. :)

Every rookie landlord--myself included when I first started--makes the mistake of forgetting that they are in the business of managing an asset. This almost always leads to trouble and costs them a lot of money in the end.

It's hard to get over wanting to be nice and sympathetic, but that's not the business. I can personally feel as bad as I want to, but my obligation is to asset. This is property management, not tenant management.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:04 PM
whoa. No need to get nasty now.

gt... the defender of Forum Decorum... :rolleyes:

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:05 PM
Likewise. :)

Every rookie landlord--myself included when I first started--makes the mistake of forgetting that they are in the business of managing an asset. This almost always leads to trouble and costs them a lot of money in the end.

It's hard to get over wanting to be nice and sympathetic, but that's not the business. I can personally feel as bad as I want to, but my obligation is to asset. This is property management, not tenant management.

Slum lords anyone... really I'm quite shocked...

Please take this crap elsewhere for god's sake...

Anyone else been/going on vacation...?

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:06 PM
well for someone who always points out that the forums are too full of sniping, I'm just saying.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:09 PM
Slum lords anyone...

Hmm, accusing Sonal of slum lording...

I read what she said, and I think if a property owner took very good care of the asset than, that is far from "slum lording"

My commercial building is very well taken care os, but, I don't think the owner, cares a great deal about each individual tenant, and may even dislike some of them. Though he's a good guy in general.

Same thing for my clients. I don't particularly like -all- of them, and have on occasion complained about a few. But, this is, business. I'm sure a few have had a few choice words for me as well!

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:10 PM
Slum lords anyone...

I've been called worse.

But you probably should actually see my buildings before you accuse me of that. People pay a lot of money to rent from me. They get a heck of a nice place to live, because I spend a lot of money on keeping bring the buildings up to fantastic shape--because I actually do my job and maintain the asset.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:11 PM
well for someone who always points out that the forums are too full of sniping, I'm just saying.

How about just not saying and you and Sonal start another thread and move along...

Any one else been/going on vacation...?

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:12 PM
Any one else been/going on vacation...?

I answered that question well below. I am going to Barcelona soon.

kps
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:13 PM
Slum lords anyone... really I'm quite shocked...

Please take this crap elsewhere for god's sake...

Anyone else been/going on vacation...?

Oh come on screature, you're the one who started drilling her on "property management". Don't complain now that you don't like what you're reading when you're the one who derailed your own thread.

groovetube
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:14 PM
on all that slum lording cash? For shame ;)

We're actually tlaking about heading to Europe this spring, though we may need to put that off to fall. My hope is to hit Paris/Berlin/Rome, but I suspect we'll need at least 3 weeks for that.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:14 PM
I've been called worse.

But you probably should actually see my buildings before you accuse me of that. People pay a lot of money to rent from me. They get a heck of a nice place to live, because I spend a lot of money on keeping bring the buildings up to fantastic shape--because I actually do my job and maintain the asset.

Glad you maintain your asset, but the tenants are not part of your asset, the leases are...

I implore you to please start another thread on this subject and leave this thread to it's stated intention...

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:17 PM
Oh come on screature, you're the one who started drilling her on "property management". Don't complain now that you don't like what you're reading when you're the one who derailed your own thread.


Drilling her??? I asked a couple of questions and disagreed and then said four freaking pages ago:

And therein lies the difference between being employed and being self-employed... either way someone else is paying you and why gt's point is moot and irrelevant to the definition of what constitutes being self-employed.

You are definitely self-employed (as far as tax law is concerned), but as a landlord and/or property manager and landlord you definitely do not fit into the categories I previously mentioned (selling equities and commodities without other form of income or independently wealthy) as long as you have tenants in your properties to whom you are beholden for your income...

At any rate this is all for another thread as this is a full on derailment of this one.

Who else has been/is going on vacation...? :)

So come one kps... the derailing started along time ago and wasn't even started by Sonal but and was politely asked to stop.

Should have stayed on vacation.....

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:23 PM
Oh come on screature, you're the one who started drilling her on "property management". Don't complain now that you don't like what you're reading when you're the one who derailed your own thread.

Thank you.

Glad you maintain your asset, but the tenants are not part of your asset, the leases are...

I implore you to please start another thread on this subject and leave this thread to it's stated intention...

I didn't start that discussion. I continued it. GT made a quip and got questioned on it by MF, ML, and then you. I made a comment on your point. You then started questioning my comment and I kept responding to it. You were more than welcome to ignore my post and not feed any off-topic discussion.

I have no problem with threads getting derailed, but if you are going to keep questioning me on my business, don't expect me not to defend my own points. If you want to keep this thread on its stated intention, you were more than welcome to ignore what I say.

And in any case, I did, in fact, answer your question about going on vacation. Twice.

If you'd like a third response, I'm thinking about Prague for our honeymoon, but that's not for a number of months.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:27 PM
on all that slum lording cash? For shame ;)

We're actually tlaking about heading to Europe this spring, though we may need to put that off to fall. My hope is to hit Paris/Berlin/Rome, but I suspect we'll need at least 3 weeks for that.

Flying in on a deal and renting a cheap apartment--I've been spending too much money making it a darn pretty slum. ;)

We thought about Rome, but I figured I'd want to see a lot more of Italy than we can squeeze into a week, so that might have to wait. Since I'm starting school soon, it doesn't look like I'll be talking a lot of lengthy trips for a while.

Paris is just a bit chilly this time of year.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:37 PM
Thank you.



I didn't start that discussion. I continued it. GT made a quip and got questioned on it by MF, ML, and then you. I made a comment on your point. You then started questioning my comment and I kept responding to it. You were more than welcome to ignore my post and not feed any off-topic discussion.

I have no problem with threads getting derailed, but if you are going to keep questioning me on my business, don't expect me not to defend my own points. If you want to keep this thread on its stated intention, you were more than welcome to ignore what I say.

And in any case, I did, in fact, answer your question about going on vacation. Twice.

If you'd like a third response, I'm thinking about Prague for our honeymoon, but that's not for a number of months.

Clearly...

In subsequent posts I obviously wasn't asking you about your vacation as you had already answered but was asking someone else to join in to get things back on track, I would think that was rather obvious... perhaps it was too subtle.

kps
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:40 PM
Man....I think you need another vacation.;)

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:43 PM
Flying in on a deal and renting a cheap apartment--I've been spending too much money making it a darn pretty slum. ;)

We thought about Rome, but I figured I'd want to see a lot more of Italy than we can squeeze into a week, so that might have to wait. Since I'm starting school soon, it doesn't look like I'll be talking a lot of lengthy trips for a while.

Paris is just a bit chilly this time of year.

Just to be clear, I wasn't insinuating that you are a slum lord just that any old slumlord has the same stated motivations you expressed... sorry if it came across that way... it was not my intention and I should have been more clear in that post. :o

My wife has been to Prague and says it is beautiful and she loved it there.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:43 PM
Clearly... In subsequent posts I obviously wasn't asking you about your vacation as you had already answered but was asking someone else to join in to get things back on track, I would think that was rather obvious... perhaps it was too subtle.

Perhaps it would have been more effective to keep the thread on topic by actually discussing and commenting other people's on-topic contributions to this thread so people have something to come back to and talk about instead of throwing out a short answer and that's it, no more to say, no more reason to keep reading or participating in this thread.

In any case, groove and I have started an on-topic back-and-forth about vacations. Care to join in?

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:45 PM
Man....I think you need another vacation.;)

Yeah after one day back here... :rolleyes:

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:47 PM
Perhaps it would have been more effective to keep the thread on topic by actually discussing and commenting other people's on-topic contributions to this thread so people have something to come back to and talk about instead of throwing out a short answer and that's it, no more to say, no more reason to keep reading or participating in this thread.

In any case, groove and I have started an on-topic back-and-forth about vacations. Care to join in?

Yes, you are right... I just did.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:48 PM
Just to be clear, I wasn't insinuating that you are a slum lord just that any old slumlord has the same stated motivations you expressed... sorry of it came across that way... it was not my intention and should have been more clear in that post. :o

My wife has been to Prague and says it is beautiful and she loved it there.

It did come across that way, and I thank you for the apology.

Incidentally, I've purchased and examined a lot of property from slumlords. They don't consider themselves as having an obligation to the asset--they just take cash from it. (I'll save the horror stories for another thread.(

The photos of Prague certainly look beautiful. Owing to the fact that my school term starts shortly thereafter, we have essentially a week--my thought then is to find a city to explore that we can reasonably cover in that time.

screature
Feb 17th, 2012, 03:54 PM
Man....I think you need another vacation.;)

Yeah after one day back here... :rolleyes:

Just another addon to this...

We were up 30 hours straight with bus rides, flights and layovers and on top of that a two hour drive from Montreal coming home, so I think I am sleep deprived and grumpy...

So sorry guys for my part in the derailment of my own thread... Mea Culpa. :o

kps
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:04 PM
Just another addon to this...

We were up 30 hours straight with bus rides, flights and layovers and on top of that a two hour drive from Montreal coming home, so I think I am sleep deprived and grumpy...

So sorry guys for my part in the derailment of my own thread... Mea Culpa. :o

Meh...fahgettaboudit! Stuff happens...especially here.

kps
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:07 PM
The photos of Prague certainly look beautiful. Owing to the fact that my school term starts shortly thereafter, we have essentially a week--my thought then is to find a city to explore that we can reasonably cover in that time.

Too bad you don't have time to do Prague, Vienna, Budapest. You're gonna love Prague, a city that suffered practically zero damage in WWII from bombing (relatively speaking that is). If you're into architecture, fatty food and the best pilsner beer in the world, you won't be disappointed.

Macfury
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:08 PM
Sonal manages the most beautiful slums in the city--I'd gladly take a vacation there.

Sonal
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:17 PM
Too bad you don't have time to do Prague, Vienna, Budapest. You're gonna love Prague, a city that suffered practically zero damage in WWII from bombing. If you're into architecture, fatty food and the best pilsner beer in the world, you won't be disappointed.

We were in Vienna last year--my fiance was at a conference, I was on vacation. Absolutely loved it. Gorgeous city, great beer, great pastry and coffee, whip cream on everything and the tastiest fried cheese everywhere. (It's the Viennese version of 'vegetarian food'.)

Budapest is another one that I would love to see. That might have to wait some.

kps
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:24 PM
We were in Vienna last year--my fiance was at a conference, I was on vacation. Absolutely loved it. Gorgeous city, great beer, great pastry and coffee, whip cream on everything and the tastiest fried cheese everywhere. (It's the Viennese version of 'vegetarian food'.)

Budapest is another one that I would love to see. That might have to wait some.

Vienna is incredible, I have to go back...Prague too. It's been like 20 Years, but I can still taste those viennese sweet rolls for breakfast. Lot of gems in central Europe.!

MLeh
Feb 17th, 2012, 04:28 PM
My daughter enjoyed Vienna, got lost in Prague, and LOVED the food in Poland. If you like the 'nightlife' Budapest is the place to be. Depends what you're in it for.