Dear Derek Jeter.....

No one questions your legacy as one of the game's best. No one questions your talent, your dedication to the game, and your place in baseball folklore for generations to come. As much as I absolutely loathe the Yankees (see my previous post), I've always respected you as a person, as a player. Regardless of what happens with your contract, I will still respect you as a player. But, I'm starting to question whether or not I can still respect you as a human being.

You're about to turn 37 years old. You're coming off your worst season, ever. You were absolutely atrocious in the playoffs this year. But guess what, the Yankees are still willing to pay you light years more than you could ever expect in the free agency market. Why? Because of the all the reasons I've stated above - you have been the face of the Yankees, and there is no question you deserve a little "extra" for past performance.

Word on the street is the Yankees are willing to offer you a 3 year contract worth $21 million per year. If you do not accept this, and argue for a.) more years or b.) more money, you will lose my respect as a person. I know, you're a superstar. But at some point, you've got to put your ego behind you and look at what's best for your team. Even if payroll is not an issue for the Yankees (although, who knows, maybe accepting less money would make Carl Crawford AND Cliff Lee an option), the fact that you will almost be 40 years old after a 3-yr deal seems fair enough. I understand you want to continue playing the game we both love for as long as you can. But I'd like to add a caveat to that. I want any player to play for as long as they stay productive and an asset to the team. Do you really think at 40 or 41 years old, you will be worth $20+ million per year? Do you really think you will still be the Yankees best option at SS? Do you think you will make the Yankees a better, more competitive team at that age? I'm not saying it's impossible. In fact, I would fully support the Yankees giving you another 1-year, $15 million dollar contract after three years if you are producing. But, I'm guessing that the Yankees front office are with me and betting your best playing years are behind you.

So Derek... why not go out with class? Go out with the reputation of being selfless, one of the rare players that puts the team ahead of themselves, and truly one of the best players AND people the game has ever had.

At this point, rumors are rumors. I will continue to hold out any judgment until more details are released. I understand baseball is a business -- not only for the front office but also for the players. I have seen some of my favorites - Tom Glavine, John Smoltz -- leave Atlanta for more money. I realize that players like Chipper Jones are one in a million. Only time will tell whether or not my speculations are correct -- and I can honestly say that I hope I'm wrong. We need more players in the game like Chipper. Players who don't think of it like a business, but instead like the timeless team game that baseball used to be.

On the eve of election day...my thoughts on Proposition 19

Disclaimer: I have not sat down and really thought about this nor have I read the opinions of others on the topic.

Disclaimer #2: I do not smoke or endorse marijuana.

After reading the Wiki page I have decided to ramble my initial thoughts. I may change my mind tomorrow or the next day, but if I were a voter in California tonight.... I would vote YES for Proposition 19. Here is why:

• California is in financial turmoil. Estimates vary but some say marijuana sales could generate $1.4 billion of revenue a year. If California doesn't figure out a way to solve their finances, guess who will end up paying to bail them out? The rest of us.
  
• The number of people who didn't smoked pot because it is illegal that will become pot smokers if the Act passes is very small. There will be the same number of pot heads running around as there are today in California - the difference is that now the state can reap some benefits financially. Everyone can choose who they are friends with and who they associate with. If you don't want to be affected by the Act, it shouldn't be that hard not to not hang around people who smoke marijuana.
  
• I actually think that the number of NEW marijuana smokers (kids that are teenagers and experimenting) may actually decrease. I go back to the basic premise that by making something legal, it no longer is seen as "taboo". Teens get a rush by thinking they are doing something illegal or "bad" - maybe making marijuana legal will make it less enticing.
• The medical marijuana thing is a joke. Anyone in the state of California can get a prescription written from a doctor for "back pain" and go buy "medical" marijuana. The police are spending time and energy trying to enforce the whole medical marijuana thing and they are failing, thereby wasting tax payer money.

That being said, below are my oppositions:

• I don't know the numbers on this, but my bet is a rather large percentage of marijuana smokers (maybe 25-30%?) are also abusing other illegal drugs. These people belong in treatment or jail.
  
• I do not agree that marijuana smoking should be allowed at ANY public place. Smoke it in your home or a private residence. That is the only place I support it being consumed.
  
• It is very difficult to prove people are driving while high. I don't think there are very good tests in place today that officers can use when they pull people over. This would need to be improved/changed.
  
• I'm not sure I buy into any real health benefits of marijuana unless you have an underlying condition. It's not like red wine or other alcohol that has proven medical benefits such as lowering cholesterol, etc. I have read studies that smoking marijuana is just as harmful to your body as cigarettes (if not more) so in that sense, I just don't see the purpose/need for it. (In my opinion, cigarettes should be illegal but that's for another blog post.)
  
• It will just be weird. Imagine marijuana commercials. Marijuana companies like cigarette companies. I have grown up my entire 22 years being raised that marijuana is an illegal drug just like any of the other "harder" drugs. Now it will be legal in California? Go to your grocery store and buy an ounce of weed? Go home and smoke it in front of your parents? I can't wrap my head around it.

To wrap things up, I think my biggest argument is that people will always smoke pot. The same demographic of people that smoke pot today will be smoking pot tomorrow. If we as a culture or society deem that marijuana should not be smoked, then we as adults or parents need to teach our children the dangers of smoking. I think of it like cigarettes or even alcohol. I do not endorse cigarette smoking. Most of my friends don't smoke. I don't judge my friends who do smoke. But it is their choice, their life, and their body. If the government is able to make some money off of legalizing marijuana as they already do by taxing cigarettes, then why not? We as individuals can choose what environments we put ourselves in and who we associate with.

Would my opinion change if this were Iowa and not California? Possibly. In my opinion, California is slightly crazy and a world of its own, so what they do will likely not affect my life in small town Iowa.

I hate the Yankees and their "fans" even more

I thought about coming up with a witty title for this blog post, but then I realized a more "to the point title" would be more effective. I have been meaning to release my bottled-up aggression towards the Yankees for awhile now, and with the latest news of Cliff Lee likely headed to the Bronx, I deemed it necessary to finally let it all out.

NOTE: Lee traded to the Texas Rangers! Hallelujah! But since I already had this mostly written, I'm not going to change it.

So here it goes. I hate the Yankees. I hate all Yankees fans. Extreme apologies to my boyfriend, but in this instance, I cannot make any exceptions. Look, I've been a baseball fan for as long as I can remember. I've experienced good times - 1995 World Series win, 14 consecutive division titles (longest streak in professional sports history, I might add), and have had the luxury of watching the majority of two future HOF's careers in Chipper Jones and John Smoltz. But with the good, there has been the bad. Let's start with the fact that the year I move to Atlanta is the first year since 1990 the Braves did NOT win one of those division titles. The following year I had the genius idea to buy season tickets. To make a long story short, that ended up being one of the Braves worst seasons in decades. I've also had to suffer through the Jeff Francouer saga, Tom Glavine putting on a Mets uniform (still one of the worst images that I can't seem to get out of my mind), Bob Wickman ('nuff said), the endless money pit named Mike Hampton, and then there was the 18-inning post season loss to the Houston Astros in 2005 - which I might mention was the last post-season game for the Braves.

OK enough about the Braves. The point is that I've been through up's and down's, good and bad, great and not-so-great. All of the memories have shaped me to be the fan that I am today. I've cried, cussed, cried of joy, thrown remotes (broken a few too), and drank away both my euphoria and sorrows.

So can you even call Yankees fans actual FANS?! What hardship have they been through? What tears of complete and utter misery have they shed? I mean geez, it must be heartbreaking to not win the World Series every single season. How upsetting those Yankees fans will be if Carl Crawford isn't signed in the offseason. Those poor Yankees fans.

Seriously, the list of free-agents the Yankees have signed - even in just the past few years - is redonkulous. CC, Burnett, Vasquez, Granderson, Damon, Teixiera... the list goes on and on, and I haven't even mentioned Alex Rodriguez. This all might be well and good for Yankees fans, but it's absolutely horrible for the sport of baseball. Whenever free-agency season starts, I always knock off the top 2-3 players because I know they're going to the Yankees, and then see who else is left for the Braves as a possibility. Yankees fans always like to claim it's not their fault their owners have so much money to spend. OK, maybe not your fault, but still completely unfair for the rest of us low lifes who don't have a payroll of $207,000,000. It's kind of sad that the Boston Red Sox, 2nd on the list comes in $46,000,000 lower at $161,000,000. UGH, those damn Yankees!!!!!

But I think there are a few silver linings to this post --

1.) Every single non-Yankees fan gets to laugh extremely loudly every time the Yankees don't win the World Series. I mean, if you're spending THAT much, you better win a ring every single season. It's pretty pathetic if a team that's not filled with an All-Star at every position beats the Yankees in a best-of-seven.

2.) All other baseball fans are brought together with the shared hatred for the Yankees. I think every fan has felt the pain of the Yankees stealing away one of their franchise players. I'm so glad there are still a few guys left, like Chipper Jones, that feel it is more important to stay with one franchise then go take the big money.

3.) If the Yankees do end up trading for Cliff Lee, they will ultimately have to part with one of their top catcher prospects, Jesus Montero. If the Yankees could just hold their greed until the offseason, they wouldn't have to dump a prospect and instead just sign Lee to the huge contact we were all expecting anyway.

4.) Yankees fans have to follow a team full of egotistical, money-driven d-bags. OK, I admit, a lot of other MLB players fall into this category, but not as many as the Yankees have.

5.) Eventually (hopefully) MLB will have a salary cap, and the Yankees will no longer be able to continue on as an evil empire. In fact, because they will have depleted their entire farm system, the Yankees will probably suck and sink down to one of the worst teams in the league. We'll see how many "fans" are left after that.

I love the sport of baseball, but I hate the Yankees who are corrupting the game I love so much. Go Braves!

College worth the debt?

I watched a really interesting Suze Orman show over the weekend. First let me say that I've never been a big Orman fan; in fact, this was only the third time I've watched her show. I don't necessarily think that her opinions or ideas are wrong, but I just can't stand her voice and overly-bubbly personality. Why does she need to call everyone her "boyfriend" or "girlfriend?"

OK, to the point. The topic of her show was student loans. Her first guests were a dad and his daughter (I forget her name, so for this post I am naming her Ashley.) The Dad had been putting money into a state account that would provide Ashley with 4-years of college if she attended a state school. Note: the family was from Virginia. However, Ashley had other plans of going to college at Drexel University, a private college in Philadelphia. The family had estimated they would need to take out $75,000 in loans in order for Ashley to attend Drexel. To make a long story short, Suze completely ripped poor Ashley apart and told her Dad if he really loved his daughter, he would not co-sign a loan and make her attend an in-state school. Ashley did the typical teenage "roll your eyes" and eventually ended up crying about how her life would be incomplete if she couldn't attend Drexel.

Poor Ashley. I mean, I've been there. I remember what the college search was like and I never had any intention of staying in-state. But I also was not naive about my financial situation. I asked my parents how much money I had for school, and ran the numbers to figure out what I could afford. There was a slight possibility I would need to take out a small amount in loans, but I was OK with that. I would have never been OK with a number like $75,000. I would have gladly stayed in-state if it was a matter of not being in debt or being in debt $75k.

So here's the question. How much student debt is worth it, if any? When is it OK to choose to take out loans to attend a school if you could go somewhere else with no debt? In my opinion, it comes down to a couple of factors -

1.) Your school options - Ashley lived in the state of Virginia where both University of Virginia (Top-10 best public schools in the nation) and Virginia Tech are very respectable schools. It wasn't like Ashley wanted to go to Stanford or MIT. Drexel is probably a less recognized and reputable school than her options in the state of Virginia. Bottom line is it's one thing if you're from Idaho or Wyoming where state academia isn't top-notch or if you have the opportunity to attend Harvard, Yale, or the like. Debt might be worth it in those scenarios.

2.) Your major - Ashley wanted to study "Communications" and when Suze asked what she ultimately wanted to do with that degree, Ashley didn't even know. Yet it was so important to her to attend Drexel because she said it had a solid communications program. Note to Ashley - You better have a pretty good idea what you want to do if you're about to shell out $75k. Suze then mentioned that the average starting salary for Communication grads was $25,000/year -- and with a $900 loan repayment per month, Ashley would be left with ~$600-800 for the rest of her expenses. If you are entering a field (engineering, computer science, medical, etc.) in which the average starting salary out of college is high enough that you can afford the loan repayment, then you might be OK.



BUT.......

I still do not recommend taking out student loans if they are going to be higher than $50,000 regardless of your desired major. Consider "Jim" - Jim is a 18 yr old high school senior. His parents are lower-middle class and have only been able to save $10,000 for Jim's college education. He has average grades and does not qualify for any scholarships. Jim has aspirations of being a mechanical engineer, but would need to take out $50,000 in loans to attend a state school.

Route #1:
Jim attends Iowa State University and takes out $50,000 loans at a 4.5% interest rate. Jim graduates in 4-years with a degree in Mechanical Engineering. Jim receives a job offer for $52,000/year at a respectable company. Jim has a monthly loan payment of $316.00/month and will make a total of 241 payments. It will take Jim 20 yrs to pay off his debt, and in the mean time he will have paid $26,000 in interest. After 5 years from graduating high-school Jim has -

401(k) - $4,300.00
Savings - $3,600.00
Debt - ($49,000.00)
Net - ($41,100.00)

This is not a horrible scenario, and Jim is very happy, but maybe he would be happier and better off if he chose....


Route #2:
Jim graduates from high school and gets a job as a mechanical draftsman for a local engineering firm. His starting rate is $15.50/hour which equates to $32,000/year. He participates in his company's 401(k) plan and saves an additional $250/month. He also invests his parent's $10,000 that they had saved for his college education. Jim receives normal raises every year, and after 5 years he is making $37,000/year. After these 5-years Jim has:

401(k) - $15,000.00
Savings - $17,000.00
Investments (the $10,000 from his parents) - $13,500.00
Net - $45,500.00

Jim now has $30,500 in savings + investments. He decides to start working part-time and go to school full-time now that he has enough money. Jim is able to pay for his education out of pocket and graduates 4-yrs later with no debt. He receives a job promotion to a Mechanical Engineer and is now making $53,000.00.





I realize these scenarios and not real-life. Not everyone can get a job at $15.50/hour and some companies do not offer 401(k)'s, etc. However, some companies do have tuition reimbursement and will fund at least one class per semester. The point of this blog is to show students that debt is not the "only option" - you do not have to attend college right after you graduate high school. Think about other possible alternatives/resources before sinking yourself in $50,000+ in debt.

Tiger Woods

I'm going to try and keep this short and sweet. Along with the rest of the world, I have been eagerly anticipating The Masters and the return of Tiger Woods. I've never been a big fan of Tiger to begin with (if you know me at all, you know I'm a fan of Sergio). So when the news broke of all of Tigers "indiscretions", I admit I smiled on the inside. I know no one is perfect, and to be honest I can completely understand why Tiger did what he did. I mean c'mon, being that rich and famous would make nearly any human being feel invincible and like they could get away with anything. That being said, Tiger is still responsible for his actions. He's a married guy with two young kids and he's out there hooking up with everyone and their Mom. Not good. Not honorable, not respectable, and not anything that should be rewarded.

Now to the real point of this blog post. I am completely and utterly unimpressed and quite frankly shocked at the way the gallery, media, and the rest of the population is treating Tiger Woods at The Masters. He is almost turning into the media's little "darling" -- basically, the media is saying "Oh, how wonderful Tiger Woods is still good at golf. He overcame so much to be here. What a great story." UMMM, NO. There's nothing wrong with being pleased with Tiger's performance, but really, he's still the same guy who cheated on his wife with MULTIPLE (and by multiple I mean 5+) women. I wouldn't even encourage my kid to get Tiger's autograph -- I don't want to be endorsing that kind of behavior.

Golf is a better game with Tiger Woods playing there is no doubt about it. But for some of the general public and media to act like the guy has come back from overcoming a deadly disease or something (and no, I do not believe sex addiction is a disease) is ridiculous and sending the wrong message. If there is any golfer that would truly be a feel good story to win the Masters, it would be Phil Mickelson, not Tiger Woods.

Rent vs Buy

As many of you may (or may not) know, I am considering buying a home in Des Moines. It is a big decision but even a bigger investment. To be honest, I did not know much about how mortgages worked, property taxes, PMI insurance, etc. before a few months ago and I admit that I still have a lot to learn. That being said... I've come to the conclusion that the 30-year mortgage is a bad investment. Too many people are figuring out "what they can afford" by calculating the highest monthly payment on a 30-year mortgage. Looking at the numbers, that should NEVER be the decisive factor when determing what your price range is for a house. Here's why --

Jake & I currently pay $1,150.00/month in rent. We're pretty comfortable with that. So the obvious conclusion would be we can afford a whatever-priced house that would equate to a $1,150.00 mortgage payment on a 30-yr mortgage. OK.... that may be true. But the question is whether or not it's a worthwhile investment, or if we'd be better off renting. More numbers --

Loan amount: $150,000

Interest rate: 6.5%

Property tax: 1.25%

PMI insurance: 0.5%

Scenario #1: We live in the house for 30-years and pay it off

Total interest paid: $202,816.73

Total tax paid: $60,000.00

Total PMI paid: $7,250.00

Total payments: $420,066.73

House value assuming 2% appreciation each year (after 30 years): $266,376.70

House value assuming 3% appreciation each year (after 30 years): $268,988.24

House value assuming 4% appreciation each year (after 30 years): $271,599.78

The numbers don't lie -- we will have paid more $$ in interest, tax and PMI than the house is even worth after 30 years.

Scenario #2: We live in the house for 5-years and then move

Total interest paid: $45,778.38

Balance on the loan: $140,788.47

House value assuming 2% appreciation each year (after 5 years): $162,364.82

House value assuming 3% appreciation each year (after 5 years): $163,956.64

House value assuming 4% appreciation each year (after 5 years): $165,548.45

Let's say we sold the house for $165,000 -- our home equity would net $24,759.98. We could use that for another downpayment and continue the cycle over and over and over. Of course, I'm not trying to belittle the $25k in home equity -- that is great, but when you consider that you paid double that in interest and taxes, it doesn't seem like such a brilliant investment.

-----------

In my opinion, both scenarios are not solid investments. Consider if Jake and I were to continue paying $1,150.00 to rent somewhere, but took the extra $$ not used for house maintenance, property taxes, new appliances, etc. etc. and invested it. Let's say that number is $9,000/year homeowners pay for all that above mentioned stuff. We could take that money and invest it -- make an additional 6-9% compound interest every year on that $9k. If a house only appreciates 2-4% and I'm paying more in interest, wouldn't it be a better idea to take the extra money and invest?

Maybe. But... I think I've come up with the best solution.

When considering what house price you can "afford" -- run the numbers on a 10-year or 15-year mortgage. For example... figure out what loan amount you can afford with the same monthly payment but only a 10-year loan term. For me that number is $90,000. With a down payment to add on top of that, I could afford a $120,000 house with these numbers --

Loan amount: $90,000

Interest rate: 6.5%

Property tax: 1.25%

PMI insurance: 0% if you put 20% down

Total interest paid: $28,881.82

Total tax paid: $15,000

Total PMI paid: $0

Total payments: $131,882.82


Assuming the house appreciates 3% every year, after 10 years the house would be completely paid off and valued at: $161,269.96. Adding the $30k down on top of the $132k of total payments, you are almost breaking even.

THIS is the scenario I consider a solid investment. Now that the house is paid off, one could choose to either "live for free" (except for property tax, homeowner's insurance, etc.) or put some of that money back in towards a down payment. Now that you would have more to put down, you could essentially do the natural progression of buying a bigger and better house.

Conclusion: Pay off your house at the 10 or 15-year mortgage rate. Otherwise, in my opinion, you'd be better off renting and investing your extra money not spent on maintenance costs. Save the money invested until you have a large enough down payment to afford (based on definition of "afford" in the above argument) the price of house you want to live in.

WANTED: BASEBALL FAN

Location: Sitting on the couch in front of your TV, on your computer, in the stands
Career Category: Experienced professional
Full/Part Time: Full time, plus weekends, overnight travel and 24-7 on-call
Regular/Temporary: Regular

Responsibilities:
You will be responsible for putting 110% of your emotion into the game. If your team loses, be prepared to get in an argument with your significant other for being in a bad mood. You will be in charge of keeping track of the team all year round which includes the winter meetings, amateur draft, spring training and of course the regular and post season. You may need to sacrifice time during your day job to keep up with the latest rumors, injury reports, and box scores.

Do you enjoy spending thousands of dollars on tickets, hot dogs, alcoholic beverages, t-shirts, MLB.TV, and other souvenirs? If so... this position may be the right job for you! In return, you will receive compensation in the form of walk-off home runs, the smell of freshly cut grass, and the possibility of seeing yourself on ESPN. However, please be aware that you may also feel the following emotions throughout the year - depression, anger, hate, lack of self-worth, doubtfulness, and periods of extreme anxiety. If any of these feelings or emotions start to interfere with your daily life... get over it. It's part of the job.

Other responsibilities include but are not limited to: not being friends with any fans of your team's arch enemy, naming your child or pet after a player, stadium, or other piece of team history, holding out hope until your team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, developing a beer belly, and studying the top prospects within your organization.

Finally, you must be able to realize that although you must be completely invested - mentally, financially, and emotionally - into the team's success, you ultimately have absolutely no control over the team's fate.


Qualifications:
Proven dedication and experience as an obsessive fan (10+ years)
Season ticket holders, fans who have been arrested outside of the stadium, and those with fantasy baseball experience strongly desired
Time management (162 games is a long season), communication (so the ump's hear you), decision-making (Bud Lite or Miller Lite), problem-solving (the game is blacked out), and analytical (ERA, WHIP, OPS, etc.) skills required.

Backround Check Requirements:
Please be prepared for a in-home visit which will include wardrobe check, as well as proof of attendance -- ticket stubs preferred.

Note - New York Mets and Chicago Cubs fans need not apply.