|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| rocklee wrote: |
Enough.
Just stop it.
I do know what intra/inter mean, m-w.com said nothing about your word.
Sorry everybody for hijacking this thread. |
Hey, you started it again. Also, you are lying, which goes to my theory you are lying about everything. You specifically asked, "what is 'intranational'?" That quite obviously shows you don't know. Also, if you know what it means, why did you look it up on m-w.com? You are trying to save face and a liar.
我觉得你不会说中文??? 如果我错，对不起。 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Cheonmunka
Joined: 04 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As a landlord, if I have a small deposit of say 10 K I can increase this to nearly the full price of a large house which may comprise 6 seperate villas. What landlords do is use all the chonsei money that tenants have paid and chuck this in to the bank as part of purchase price. So the property just has a small loan.
All going well property values will increase and LL can either sell at a profit, or, (the big one) wait until redevelopment and let the big developers build a large apartment complex using your land. LL gets new apartments comprising the housing space that was in the villa plus alpha premium for the land, thus turning a 250-300 million won building into 10억 (1000 million)+.
This is why the chonsei system still works for LL's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thunndarr first wrote:
| Quote: |
| potential interest |
Thunndarr later wrote:
| Quote: |
| On the first point, you are assuming two things. One, that the interest rate is set at a static 2.9%, which it is not. I've seen it as high as 6% in long term bank accounts. The second assumption is that a bank is the only place one could keep that money. I'm virtually certain there are investments that would give closer to 10% annually, if not more. |
I did not make the assumption that a bank is the only place to invest your money. I was only talking about a bank since you first typed that the person who pays key money is losing potential interest. If you invest your money in stocks or mutual funds, you are not being paid interest. I was merely answering the question based on what you wrote.
You can earn 20% a year on your money when the stock market is doing well in some mutual funds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Well, for one thing, $40,000 dollars today is worth more than $40,000 one year from now because of inflation. |
It does not matter how many times I read this, it will never make sense. |
| JZer wrote: |
| Thunndarr, I am glad that you are an English teacher and not an economics teacher. |
What's the word I'm looking for. Iro-something. It'll come to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| Or he may be saving money. I think the current interest rate in Korea is around 2.9%. Please correct me if I am wrong. If a hogwon boss was earning 2.9% and the money was compounded monthly, the boss would have lost out on $1176 in interest. Unless he or she can rent an apartment for less than $98 a month, he or she is saving money by using key money. |
| Thunndarr wrote: |
On the first point, you are assuming two things. One, that the interest rate is set at a static 2.9%, which it is not. I've seen it as high as 6% in long term bank accounts. The second assumption is that a bank is the only place one could keep that money. I'm virtually certain there are investments that would give closer to 10% annually, if not more. |
| JZer wrote: |
| I did not make the assumption that a bank is the only place to invest your money. I was only talking about a bank since you first typed that the person who pays key money is losing potential interest. If you invest your money in stocks or mutual funds, you are not being paid interest. I was merely answering the question based on what you wrote. |
First, I don't think there's an actual question there that needs answering. Second, stop being pedantic. I said interest, but we both know the point was that of losing income.
| JZer wrote: |
| If it was more expensive to use key money, I doubt that the people in charge would be doing it. |
I notice you didn't address this part at all. Oops.
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| On the second point...That's just faulty logic. You assume they pay key money because they are saving money. There are several things wrong with this assumption. First, do most hagwon owners pay key money? According to you they should, because they'd be saving money, yet I would hazard a guess that the majority do not. Second, you are looking at this from a renter-centric viewpoint. Think about the landlord. The landlord is going to try to get the most value per rental unit that he can. Do you think that most landlords just let people pay key money even though, as you claim, monthly rent would actually give them more income? While this may indeed be possible, I'm disinclined to believe they are acting in altruistic reasons. I would guess that they receive the key money and then invest it, perhaps in yet more real estate, which the last few years have shown to provide returns much higher than "2.9%." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronnie
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
Location: Wisteria Lane
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| JZer wrote: |
| Or he may be saving money. I think the current interest rate in Korea is around 2.9%. Please correct me if I am wrong. If a hogwon boss was earning 2.9% and the money was compounded monthly, the boss would have lost out on $1176 in interest. Unless he or she can rent an apartment for less than $98 a month, he or she is saving money by using key money. |
| Thunndarr wrote: |
On the first point, you are assuming two things. One, that the interest rate is set at a static 2.9%, which it is not. I've seen it as high as 6% in long term bank accounts. The second assumption is that a bank is the only place one could keep that money. I'm virtually certain there are investments that would give closer to 10% annually, if not more. |
| JZer wrote: |
| I did not make the assumption that a bank is the only place to invest your money. I was only talking about a bank since you first typed that the person who pays key money is losing potential interest. If you invest your money in stocks or mutual funds, you are not being paid interest. I was merely answering the question based on what you wrote. |
First, I don't think there's an actual question there that needs answering. Second, stop being pedantic. I said interest, but we both know the point was that of losing income.
| JZer wrote: |
| If it was more expensive to use key money, I doubt that the people in charge would be doing it. |
I notice you didn't address this part at all. Oops.
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| On the second point...That's just faulty logic. You assume they pay key money because they are saving money. There are several things wrong with this assumption. First, do most hagwon owners pay key money? According to you they should, because they'd be saving money, yet I would hazard a guess that the majority do not. Second, you are looking at this from a renter-centric viewpoint. Think about the landlord. The landlord is going to try to get the most value per rental unit that he can. Do you think that most landlords just let people pay key money even though, as you claim, monthly rent would actually give them more income? While this may indeed be possible, I'm disinclined to believe they are acting in altruistic reasons. I would guess that they receive the key money and then invest it, perhaps in yet more real estate, which the last few years have shown to provide returns much higher than "2.9%." |
|
Why do you guys waste so much of your life and sanity on arguing like children over the internet?
Do you get prizes? Respect? Satisfaction? no. What's the point?
You're ALL right!!!!
Winnorz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
eamo wrote,
| Quote: |
| If my boss didn't pay that then he would have to pay me a higher rate of pay. |
That depends if your boss is really paying your rent. If you live in a highrise then he probably is. If you live in a house, he probably only paid key money . After paying the deposit there is no rent. This is how the old system in Korea worked. |
Let's put this all back in context. You are basically disagreeing with eamo here, yes? The gist of your post here is that key money=free rent. Or at least, that's the only rational explanation I can see for you to disagree with eamo here.
Now, it has been illustrated, ad freakin' nauseum, that key money basically means lost income of a variable percentage of the principle. 2.9% at a minimum. Once again, the bottom line, rent ain't free, or, if you want to be pedantic (and somehow I guess you do,) it does cost your boss money (in lost income) to provide housing. If he's not providing it, then he would indeed have to raise salaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ronnie wrote: |
Why do you guys waste so much of your life and sanity on arguing like children over the internet?
Do you get prizes? Respect? Satisfaction? no. What's the point?
You're ALL right!!!!
Winnorz. |
Oohh....you really got me. Ouch, that really hurts, man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ronnie
Joined: 04 Jun 2006
Location: Wisteria Lane
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| ronnie wrote: |
Why do you guys waste so much of your life and sanity on arguing like children over the internet?
Do you get prizes? Respect? Satisfaction? no. What's the point?
You're ALL right!!!!
Winnorz. |
Oohh....you really got me. Ouch, that really hurts, man. |
I wasn't trying to "get" you.
I was illustrating something. Oh well, rage on.
Cheers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Do you get prizes? Respect? Satisfaction? no. What's the point?
You're ALL right!!!!
|
Speak for yourself, I get satisfaction out of this arguement. Why else would I be here arguing! Well maybe it shows that I need to get out of the Korean country side. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If he's not providing it, then he would indeed have to raise salaries. |
He would not have to raise salaries. Why would he have to do such a thing? If he could find people who were willing to work for 2.0 and no housing then I am sure that many hogwon owners would do that. Maybe we will even see that someday in the future. For example a few employers even get away with paying 1.6 million a month.
Maybe someone on here actually knows why Korean employers provide housing. There must be some reason for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JZer wrote: |
| Quote: |
| If he's not providing it, then he would indeed have to raise salaries. |
He would not have to raise salaries. Why would he have to do such a thing? If he could find people who were willing to work for 2.0 and no housing then I am sure that many hogwon owners would do that. Maybe we will even see that someday in the future. For example a few employers even get away with paying 1.6 million a month.
Maybe someone on here actually knows why Korean employers provide housing. There must be some reason for it. |
All other things being equal, a job that provides housing is worth more than a job that doesn't provide housing. If you take the housing away, the job is worth less, therefore something must be added that is the equivalent (in the employee's view) of housing, most likely a higher salary. If you can't see that, I really have nothing else to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JongnoGuru
Joined: 25 May 2004
Location: peeing on your doorstep
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's got nothing to do with free rent, but this bit really galls me, particularly the third item.
| rocklee wrote: |
Everything that I was able to get here I could get back in China, except :
- food and foreign food was better there
- could get any computer/electrical stuff without getting ripped off
- audio stuff there like speakers are centuries ahead of here |
Wouldn't you agree, Thunndarr, that life sometimes just ain't fair? grrr!! 
(I assume he's talking about the availability & prices of higher-end foreign brands) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JongnoGuru wrote: |
It's got nothing to do with free rent, but this bit really galls me, particularly the third item.
| rocklee wrote: |
Everything that I was able to get here I could get back in China, except :
- food and foreign food was better there
- could get any computer/electrical stuff without getting ripped off
- audio stuff there like speakers are centuries ahead of here |
Wouldn't you agree, Thunndarr, that life sometimes just ain't fair? grrr!!
(I assume he's talking about the availability & prices of higher-end foreign brands) |
Are you by chance alluding to the time a few months ago when I was pulling my hair out trying to find a decent projector? Then yes, I would have to say, I was severely ah...disappointed by the selection and by the tariffs (well, I assume the tariffs are why everything was 50% more expensive than what it should have been.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 10, 2006 4:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If you take the housing away, the job is worth less(worth less than what?), therefore something must be added that is the equivalent (in the employee's view) of housing, most likely a higher salary. If you can't see that, I really have nothing else to say. |
Why wounld I see this? If employers got together and said they would not provide housing they could offer equal pay at a lower rate. If working conditions were poor enough then foreigners would accept 2.0 a month without housing. It really does not matter if the job is worth less as long as other jobs are similar and it beats staying at home. If only one emploeyer does this it will never work. It really only boils down to supply and demand. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
