U to the O-O?

ABColeslaw · April 2014

pandadair said:

kitchencolors said:

pandadair said:

kitchencolors said:

pandadair said:

IBackBevo said:

SNIP

I think both of your situations are completely understandable and plausible. Part of the reason we're planning to space our kids out a bit is because it would essentially negate my husband's current income. @ABColeslaw you definitely have a more unique situation and I think most people aren't aware that it can and does happen. And it's always seemed to me like the required contributions to pensions are quite high, which people also aren't aware of when they like to bitch about teacher benefits.

The contributions are typically "high" in situations where the pensions are valuable. The reality is that retirement benefits are expensive to provide, and someone has to pay for them.

In some states teachers aren't paying into Social Security (and aren't eligible for benefits), so it's important that they have some sort of other safety net type retirement plan (IMO).

I could talk pensions all day every day. Could, and did, when I was still working full time . Heck I work part time now talking about pensions.

ETA: Wording.

For sure. <-- How's that for an intelligent response?

I just mean they seem quite high compared to what a lot of people voluntarily contribute to their employer 401k or whatever retirement savings vehicle of choice.

ETA: And it's mandatory, so, like in @ABColeslaw's situation, there's no ability to adjust savings based on need in other areas. My husband and I currently contribute a pretty large percentage of our income to 401k/Roth IRA, which we will have to scale back a bit to accommodate childcare expenses, but I appreciate that we have that flexibility. Though I really want the best of both worlds and a pension, as well. Should've been a Boomer.

They seem high compared to average elective retirement contributions because they are. They typically aim to provide an adequate retirement benefit. Typical 401(k) contribution patterns absolutely do not provide adequate retirement benefits. Even retirement actuaries tend to not contribute enough to their 401(k) to adequately fund retirement - it's not easy to do. The reality is that saving 4% of pay is not enough to retire. Period. Saving 4% of pay in good years starting at age 30 or later is REALLY not enough to retire. If the employer matches the 4% and the total is 8%, that's still not enough in the overwhelming majority of cases.

It's going to be a huge crisis as we start to have a generation of people whose incomes will be replaced only at a very small percentage by SS and who have little to no retirement savings.

We talk about "millionares" as these elusive people who are crazy wealthy. The reality is that if you want to retire and only have an 401(k)/IRA with no defined benefit pension.. you better be: 1) on your death bed, 2) really really old, or 3) a millionaire.

Watch it, or you're going to stress everyone on this board into early labor . I feel pretty ok with our ability to retire comfortably in our late 60s, though we certainly won't be rich. But, then again, the thought of only putting 4% aside and thinking that will suffice makes my chest tight.

Yeah I mean, I totally understand why they make us contribute so much, but I will say it would be nice to have some control, like right now we'd scale back on contributions if we could and we did with his 401k. I contribute like 18% maybe a little more right now to my pension. It will go up when I go back to work, because I have to make up for my leave time. So consider that, then getting taxed at 30%, having a child like Asher and BAM, poor as shit...at least for now. Because I don't qualify for any sort of help with his needs. I'll appreciate that pension when I am older for sure, but right now...it just sucks. Also don't get me started on being forced to pay into the union even if you don't belong.....another conversation for another time.

KatieP71312 · April 2014

I don't normally participate but ALL of the posts about cervical exams and OBs predicting when you will go into labor is driving me CRAZY. At this point, don't we get that they have zero ability to gauge this...????? The current state of your cervix is not indicative that you'll fly into labor next week. (This coming from the girl who when i was a FTM had the carseat installed 6 weeks before my son came because i was already 1cm dilated and my OB was SURE he'd come on or before his due date... yea he came at 41wks).

pandadair · April 2014

ABColeslaw said:

Yeah I mean, I totally understand why they make us contribute so much, but I will say it would be nice to have some control, like right now we'd scale back on contributions if we could and we did with his 401k. I contribute like 18% maybe a little more right now to my pension. It will go up when I go back to work, because I have to make up for my leave time. So consider that, then getting taxed at 30%, having a child like Asher and BAM, poor as shit...at least for now. Because I don't qualify for any sort of help with his needs. I'll appreciate that pension when I am older for sure, but right now...it just sucks. Also don't get me started on being forced to pay into the union even if you don't belong.....another conversation for another time.

You don't want to start the unions conversation on the UO thread ?!

Rocknroll64 · April 2014

My opinion on tax:

They should abolish all income tax and only have increased sales tax. That way you only pay tax if you are spending money. (obviously no tax on necessary goods like food)

Yes I realize this would put me out of a job.

awc1986 · April 2014

Rocknroll64 said:

My opinion on tax:

They should abolish all income tax and only have increased sales tax. That way you only pay tax if you are spending money. (obviously no tax on necessary goods like food)

Yes I realize this would put me out of a job.

Do you realise how much they'd have to increase sales tax in order to compensate for the loss of revenue for income tax. It doesn't bear thinking about.

Here the basic rate for income tax is 20% and it's incremental based on up to 50% of your income. There's currently a big hoo-ha because we're trying to get the 50% made higher for top earners. That's a whole other can of worms though.

Rocknroll64 · April 2014

awc1986 said:

Rocknroll64 said:

My opinion on tax:

They should abolish all income tax and only have increased sales tax. That way you only pay tax if you are spending money. (obviously no tax on necessary goods like food)

Yes I realize this would put me out of a job.

Do you realise how much they'd have to increase sales tax in order to compensate for the loss of revenue for income tax. It doesn't bear thinking about.

Here the basic rate for income tax is 20% and it's incremental based on up to 50% of your income. There's currently a big hoo-ha because we're trying to get the 50% made higher for top earners. That's a whole other can of worms though.

Yes I realize. Do you realize how much money you would save if you didn't pay any income tax?

awc1986 · April 2014

Rocknroll64 said:

awc1986 said:

Rocknroll64 said:

My opinion on tax:

They should abolish all income tax and only have increased sales tax. That way you only pay tax if you are spending money. (obviously no tax on necessary goods like food)

Yes I realize this would put me out of a job.

Do you realise how much they'd have to increase sales tax in order to compensate for the loss of revenue for income tax. It doesn't bear thinking about.

Here the basic rate for income tax is 20% and it's incremental based on up to 50% of your income. There's currently a big hoo-ha because we're trying to get the 50% made higher for top earners. That's a whole other can of worms though.

Yes I realize. Do you realize how much money you would save if you didn't pay any income tax?

But i'd lose that money immediately because the sales tax would go up and my grocery shopping would go through the roof. Swings and roundabouts.

I don't know about the US, but here income tax contributes to the operation of the emergency services, healthcare, local councils and myriad other things. If we all stopped paying, it would basically be anarchy. Raise the sales tax as much as you like (our VAT is 20%), but it won't be enough to keep all of those services operational.

Rocknroll64 · April 2014

awc1986 said:

Rocknroll64 said:

awc1986 said:

Rocknroll64 said:

My opinion on tax:

They should abolish all income tax and only have increased sales tax. That way you only pay tax if you are spending money. (obviously no tax on necessary goods like food)

Yes I realize this would put me out of a job.

Do you realise how much they'd have to increase sales tax in order to compensate for the loss of revenue for income tax. It doesn't bear thinking about.

Here the basic rate for income tax is 20% and it's incremental based on up to 50% of your income. There's currently a big hoo-ha because we're trying to get the 50% made higher for top earners. That's a whole other can of worms though.

Yes I realize. Do you realize how much money you would save if you didn't pay any income tax?

But i'd lose that money immediately because the sales tax would go up and my grocery shopping would go through the roof. Swings and roundabouts.

I don't know about the US, but here income tax contributes to the operation of the emergency services, healthcare, local councils and myriad other things. If we all stopped paying, it would basically be anarchy. Raise the sales tax as much as you like (our VAT is 20%), but it won't be enough to keep all of those services operational.

wow completely missed where I said no sales tax on necessary goods. (which is already implemented here) Also I live in Canada....so ya I know how social services work.

Obviously my model of tax is a pipe dream, it'll never happen. I've just given it some thought and they could definitely work out a system where they would recover just as much tax revenues from sales tax as they would from income tax. I just think that if you have money to spend, then you should be taxed on it, if you don't have money to spend then you shouldn't. That way guess what? People with more money pay more tax.

bumpuser9353653 · April 2014

My UO: I hate the smell of vanilla-favored coffee. It makes me gag. Hazelnut is bad too. Coffee should smell like coffee, not artificial syrup and chemicals.

I ordered an iced coffee the other day in a drive through, and the person immediately responded with "vanilla?" ... No b! If I wanted flavor, I would have asked for flavor. I asked for coffee. Sheesh!

ho11yday · April 2014

kitchencolors said:
I disagree about the flat tax thing. Someone whose income is $5 million a year (or $200k) should pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than someone making at or around the poverty line, IMO.

I'm fully aware that this is legitimately unpopular.

A progressive tax makes sense, especially people at or below poverty. I mean, consider the fact that they spend a larger percentage of their income on necessities so that to tax them the same as someone earbing $100k, $200k, or $2m is silly. However, removing the progressive tax at some point (don't know, don't have any ideas) in favor of a flat tax with zero deductions and considerably easier tax code and less room for favors/lobbying/and loopholes is what is love to see.

kat8805 · April 2014

@awc1986

Bootsie327 · April 2014

Carpenter627 said:

But saying "fixin' to" is ok, right? As in, "I'm fixin' to go to the store, need anything?" (It's really pronounced more like "fiddentah" in my family) ... Or what about "jeetyet?" (As in, did you eat yet?) and "Yawnto?" (As in, you want to?)

I will give y'all three guesses as to which state I live in.

I love all of this. Jersyans also fancy the "Jeetyet?" and in response the, "No, joo?" Maybe that's just an American thing...we don't enunciate well as a culture. Haha

SMM1986 · April 2014

lrmrtn · April 2014

awc1986 said:

lrmrtn said:

I hate Pearl Jam and Nirvana. At least I see the talent with Pearl Jam, Eddie Vedder just annoys me. But with Nirvana, it's like Kurt Cobain couldn't muster the effort to actually sing the lyrics and when he does they're mostly about heroin anyway. And everything sounds the same. And they were popular when I was in HS so my friends think I have no taste.

I JUST. WAIT. NO. HYPERVENTILATING.

This is what Ed thinks:

and Stone Gossard judges you:

(FYI - Nirvana are overrated - Pearl Jam > Nirvana any day of the week, but your statement about Kurt's lyrics/singing show that you've not listened to enough Nirvana to form an informed opinion)

</blockquot

I never claimed to have an informed opinion.
I just don't like them but that's why there are plenty of bands and radio stations out there.

awc1986 · April 2014

@Irmrtn - I'm glad you're not claiming to have an informed opinion, because most of Nirvana's songs are not about heroin. Anyway, my baby is mad at you now because she seems to love grunge like her mama. She rocks out whenever i play Mudhoney.

@Kat8805 - I feel bad at myself for laughing so hard at those. Especially as i'm saying them in my head in a Speedy Gonzales voice.

sisterjanet · April 2014

JmeJme said:

There's a difference in a regional pronounciation in something (coo-pon vs cyoupon) and saying something incorrectly--intensive purposes instead of intents and purposes. That's not the same thing at all.

DH and I kind of love comparing things like "intensive purposes" that we find. It's fascinating in a cringe-inducing way to see the ways people try to write out words or even expressions they've picked up from listening instead of from reading. (Waa-la when the person meant voila is an old favorite.)

sisterjanet · April 2014

pandadair said:

ABColeslaw said:

Yeah I mean, I totally understand why they make us contribute so much, but I will say it would be nice to have some control, like right now we'd scale back on contributions if we could and we did with his 401k. I contribute like 18% maybe a little more right now to my pension. It will go up when I go back to work, because I have to make up for my leave time. So consider that, then getting taxed at 30%, having a child like Asher and BAM, poor as shit...at least for now. Because I don't qualify for any sort of help with his needs. I'll appreciate that pension when I am older for sure, but right now...it just sucks. Also don't get me started on being forced to pay into the union even if you don't belong.....another conversation for another time.

You don't want to start the unions conversation on the UO thread ?!

I don't like unions! Or unicorns either for that matter!

(ETA I don't actually have enough knowledge to say intelligent things about unions one way or the other, but what I think I know about them bugs me.)

IBackBevo · April 2014

If you want to see how no income tax works, take a look at Texas. It basically benefits the upper middle class and wealthy and sucks for the poor.

I personally benefit from the Texas system of property tax and sales tax. We pay like pretty low property taxes (I think 2.2% or 2.4% of home value) and like 7-8% sales tax. (One reason this is so low is because the public schools suck in my area because most people who vote in the area are either too old to have school aged kids and don't care or they have the means to send their kids to private school.) Frankly, we don't spend that much so sales tax isn't a huge issue other than our weekly Wal-mart or Kroger runs. We don't even really eat out anymore (DS throws food at other patrons) and rarely go to the movies. If we were paying 10-12 percent of our income on state income taxes like most states do, it would be many, many times more than this. The Texas system greatly benefits the upper middle class and wealthy.

But I can see where this would be horrible for people who don't make as much. Our expenses now on groceries, diapers, etc. are pretty much the same as what our expenses would be if we were dirt poor. Diapers would cost the same. Milk would cost the same. The Wal-Mart special crib we bought for DS1 would have cost the same. Only having a sales tax would definitely disproportionately affect poor people. I guess that it is why it sucks to be poor in Texas...but it is also why a lot of businesses are relocating to Texas.

kat8805 · April 2014

What do you mean about regional pronunciations @JmeJme?!

LabbyLove · April 2014

sisterjanet said:

JmeJme said:

There's a difference in a regional pronounciation in something (coo-pon vs cyoupon) and saying something incorrectly--intensive purposes instead of intents and purposes. That's not the same thing at all.

DH and I kind of love comparing things like "intensive purposes" that we find. It's fascinating in a cringe-inducing way to see the ways people try to write out words or even expressions they've picked up from listening instead of from reading. (Waa-la when the person meant voila is an old favorite.)

I got an email that said "Coodose" the other day. It took my a minute to figure out what they were trying to say.

sisterjanet · April 2014

@LabbyLove Coodose looks like what you get when you mix beer and cough syrup. That's pretty epic.

Soupy84 · April 2014

Jennyinheaven said:

But saying "fixin' to" is ok, right? As in, "I'm fixin' to go to the store, need anything?" (It's really pronounced more like "fiddentah" in my family) ... Opronunciationat about "jeetyet?" (As in, did you eat yet?) and "Yawnto?" (As in, you want to?)

I will give y'all three guesses as to which state I live in.

Ha my sister in law who I love dearly is from Texas, we spend a good amount of time comparing bad accents and funny expressions Im from Philadelphia home of the over dare ( over there) and other awesome gems of pronunciation

Glad to know that there are differences in pronunciation based on state. I always hear the "Texan" when I am speaking with my southern friends, even if they live nowhere near Texas. My mind has built this stereotype that all Americans speak this way. I am kind of sad now that you all dont speak this way.

BTW - I dont say "eh" (like they say in the movie Fargo). I say "hey". Always confuses my American friends because they have their own stereotype of Canadians in their minds.

awc1986 · April 2014

LabbyLove said:

JmeJme said:

There's a difference in a regional pronounciation in something (coo-pon vs cyoupon) and saying something incorrectly--intensive purposes instead of intents and purposes. That's not the same thing at all.

DH and I kind of love comparing things like "intensive purposes" that we find. It's fascinating in a cringe-inducing way to see the ways people try to write out words or even expressions they've picked up from listening instead of from reading. (Waa-la when the person meant voila is an old favorite.)
I got an email that said "Coodose" the other day. It took my a minute to figure out what they were trying to say.

When i worked in medical insurance, i had a co-worker who used the following spellings - "kimotherapy" and "cafeta" (that last one was catheter).

You'd be surprised at how many English people can't say "latte". They pronounce it "latty" and i want to punch them in the back of the head. Especially if they order a "latty with an extra shot of expresso". NO COFFEE FOR YOU!

NorthernGal248 · April 2014

My UO - I don't seen aything wrong with driving a reconstructed car. My DH fixes cars as a side hobby/job and I know that he knows enough about cars to make them safe again. My first 3 cars were reconstructed and I drove them until I got bored and switched. The car I currently drive was purchased from a dealer, clean title and everything, but I can't wait until DH gets me the SUV I want (it will be a reconstruct).

There are shitty reconstruct jobs out there, I just don't think it's fair to lump them all into one. DH will only deal with cars that need a door replaced, or something like that. He doesn't deal with flood/fire/engine damage.

pandadair · April 2014

IBackBevo said:

If you want to see how no income tax works, take a look at Texas. It basically benefits the upper middle class and wealthy and sucks for the poor.

I personally benefit from the Texas system of property tax and sales tax. We pay like pretty low property taxes (I think 2.2% or 2.4% of home value) and like 7-8% sales tax. (One reason this is so low is because the public schools suck in my area because most people who vote in the area are either too old to have school aged kids and don't care or they have the means to send their kids to private school.) Frankly, we don't spend that much so sales tax isn't a huge issue other than our weekly Wal-mart or Kroger runs. We don't even really eat out anymore (DS throws food at other patrons) and rarely go to the movies. If we were paying 10-12 percent of our income on state income taxes like most states do, it would be many, many times more than this. The Texas system greatly benefits the upper middle class and wealthy.

But I can see where this would be horrible for people who don't make as much. Our expenses now on groceries, diapers, etc. are pretty much the same as what our expenses would be if we were dirt poor. Diapers would cost the same. Milk would cost the same. The Wal-Mart special crib we bought for DS1 would have cost the same. Only having a sales tax would definitely disproportionately affect poor people. I guess that it is why it sucks to be poor in Texas...but it is also why a lot of businesses are relocating to Texas.

Yeah, I've never understood the whole argument about no state income tax in Texas being a bonus. You can't take deductions on property tax (other than homestead, obv). If most people purchase a house 2x their annual income and the tax rate is roughly 2.5%, then it's really no better than living somewhere like Hawaii (which is God awful expensive in other ways, but is my most recent frame of reference), where the state income tax is 5% and property taxes are like .35%. And you're much more affected in a state with high property tax when property values go up.

Rocknroll64 · April 2014

Okay I just don't really understand how a sales tax only approach would hurt the poor? If we're saying that necessary goods aren't taxed? So basically a person who is poor can still buy all of there basic necessities to live and pay zero tax.

Now a rich person, yes doesn't pay any income tax, but any sort of consumer goods is taxed at a high rate. Corporations pay high tax on all goods purchased and also collect high tax on all goods sold. If you buy investments, it's taxed as if you are buying a commodity. There are no ITC's so there's no way for them to recover the tax they've paid on their goods sold.

So basicially yes, it would totally benefit the wealthy, if they chose to save every dime they earned.

Texas is not a good model of what I'm suggesting. Their sales tax is in no way high enough to recover their lack of income tax. Also Texans still pay federal tax.

It's just a thought, I mean how awesome would it be for the individual to determine how much tax they pay. There would be no income tax breaks, no loopholes, it would be as straight forward as it gets. If you spend money, you pay tax.

bumpuser9353653 · April 2014

On the topic of people mispronouncing stuff, it makes so angry when people can't say Chipotle. It's not "chi-pol-tay" ! ... sound it out kids... the t comes before the l.

awc1986 · April 2014

RugbyMamma said:

On the topic of people mispronouncing stuff, it makes so angry when people can't say Chipotle. It's not "chi-pol-tay" ! ... sound it out kids... the t comes before the l.

Over here people keep saying "Chipottle". Again, punch in the back of the head for them. I just like standing in lines waiting to order food and punching people in the back of the head when they say it wrong.

IBackBevo · April 2014

I can one up all of use guys on the mispronunciations...my Mother just flat uses the wrong word for things. All.the.time. Instead of having a "vaginal birth after c-section," I am having a "natural birth after hysterectomy." Yup, she calls a c-section a hysterectomy no matter how many times I correct her. An ultrasound is an "amniocentesis."

And she does this with a million other words and things, too. This is a typical conversation with her: I tell her about my new nanny who moved here from India. Her response, "Does she wear a head dress?" Internal thoughts to myself: "Does she not know the difference between an Indian and a Native American? Does she think Native Americans still wear head dresses?" Further inquiry reveals that she is not referring to a "head dress," but a Burka because she says something about the entire face being concealed. My internal thought process then goes to why she would think my nanny was Muslim. Further inquiry reveals that she apparently thinks Hindus wear Burkas. Nope, Mom. Wrong religion.

ho11yday · April 2014

Re: mispronounced words and wrong words - I have an employee who can't spell worth beans. We are "bizzy" is one of the worst. Then you have my mother who cannot distinguish between goads and gonads. Is also annoying when people add an "s" to words like anyway, anywhere, everywheres or when publications use the word "snuck." It is not snuck, it is sneaked. Ack.

Rocknroll64 · April 2014

kitchencolors said:

It's regressive because unless necessities are defined VERY broadly you end up taxing a huge percentage of the income of poor people and a very small percentage of the income of very wealthy people. Gas = necessity or not? What about a backpack for a child to take to school? What about an expensive imported leather backpack for a child to take in their limo to their expensive private school? What about shoes? Or do you only tax certain brands of shoes and clothes? I mean a bag to carry things to work might be a necessity, but how do you legislate that the $10,000 exotic skin handbag should be taxed while the cheap bag that is "necessary" shouldn't. The end result is either that both are taxed or that neither is taxed.

ya fair enough I see your point. Figuring out what exactly is a necessary expense would definitely be an issue. But lets keep in mind that the amount of money saved on income tax would be pretty much equal to the increase in the price of goods. So a person who was able to buy children's clothing when they did pay income tax is still able to buy children's clothing at pretty much the exact same cost to them.

But I guess you're right, I mean there would be a small portion of the population who don't pay any income tax who would be affected the most. But I think those people probably didn't spend money on unnecessary goods to begin with. I mean in Canada your income has to be lower than $11,038 to not pay any tax.

keeumm · April 2014

Regarding regional pronunciation/words:

I'm from Wisconsin, where everything has a different name.

Water fountains = bubblers

Sloppy Joes = hot tamales

Casserole = hot dish

ATM machine = TYME machine

(I went to Chicago one time and asked for the TYME machine at a museum. They looked at me like I was Marty McFly.)

I have been living in Maryland for 9 years, and I still say "aboot." No shame.

My UO- Judging bad grammar/spelling is one of my favorite things to do.

Edited because my list was confusing. Sorry about that.

pistolpackinmomma · April 2014

Carpenter627 said:
But saying "fixin' to" is ok, right? As in, "I'm fixin' to go to the store, need anything?" (It's really pronounced more like "fiddentah" in my family) ... Or what about "jeetyet?" (As in, did you eat yet?) and "Yawnto?" (As in, you want to?)

I will give y'all three guesses as to which state I live in.

Psst...we use fixin to in Ohio too.

SMM1986 · April 2014

keeumm said:
Regarding regional pronunciation/words:

I'm from Wisconsin, where everything has a different name.
Bubbler = water fountain
Sloppy Joes = hot tamales
Casserole = hot dish
TYME machine = ATM machine
(I went to Chicago one time and asked for the TYME machine at a museum. They looked at me like I was Marty McFly.)

I have been living in Maryland for 9 years, and I still say "aboot." No shame.

My UO- Judging bad grammar/spelling is one of my favorite things to do.

We call ATM machines MAC machines in Philly.

keeumm · April 2014

@SMM1986- What does that stand for?

TYME stands for "Take your money everywhere."

jenb_99 · April 2014

I dislike forced public apologies and wish they'd go away. They're just power trips for the wronged parties (or their advocates in most cases); they're not in any way an indication of how sorry the offenders are. Usually the offenders aren't really sorry and aren't going to change their behavior in private, no matter how sympathetic they begin to act toward the offendees' causes in public or how many PSAs they narrate on TV.

If someone offends me, I find it much more effective and satisfying just to ignore them. Not condone their behavior, but rather just write them out of my life completely, as though they don't even exist. People who say stupid things usually do so for attention, so denying them what they seek renders them far more powerless than any fake "I'm sorry" could ever do.

Along the same lines, I don't think every rude word out of a person's mouth is a window into that person's soul. I have very little tolerance for slurs used in my presence, but I still understand that a person can make a sexist/racist/other-ist joke or comment and not hate or intend to hurt that entire group. For instance, if someone called me a fat bitch, I'd be offended on my own behalf, not on behalf of all women or all overweight people in the world. And that's only if I bothered to be offended at all.

sisterjanet · April 2014

@keeumm What's a hot tamale? I thought it was a cinnamon candy, and a regular tamale I thought was a tasty food thing wrapped in a corn husk that in no way resembles a sloppy joe.

SMM1986 · April 2014

@keeumm‌ - I have no idea.

Jennyinheaven · April 2014

keeumm said:
Regarding regional pronunciation/words:

I'm from Wisconsin, where everything has a different name.
Bubbler = water fountain
Sloppy Joes = hot tamales
Casserole = hot dish
TYME machine = ATM machine
(I went to Chicago one time and asked for the TYME machine at a museum. They looked at me like I was Marty McFly.)

I have been living in Maryland for 9 years, and I still say "aboot." No shame.

My UO- Judging bad grammar/spelling is one of my favorite things to do.

I thought everyone used casserole?
What about the States or regions that say pop? I get irrationally annoyed it is called a soda! Also a sandwich on a roll with several ingredients is called a hoagie, not a sub or a grinder etc..

keeumm · April 2014

@sisterjanet - Yes, that's what it is and you are completely correct. Wisconsinites are not always intelligent (As a Wisco native, I'm allowed to say that

)

I don't know why they call them hot tamales, but it always drives me crazy when I hear it.

Want a personalized experience?

U to the O-O?

Re: U to the O-O?

That One Gal From Alaska

Choose Another Board

Search Boards