Today
Sections
More
Features
Social capital
Different Craigslist strokes for different folks
A friend of mine in Ohio recently said that she was going to meet up with a prospective Craigslist buyer in the parking lot of a local fast-food joint. She prefers to conduct her Craigslist (and Freecycle) transactions in public places. It makes her feel safer.
Her precaution is understandable. Anyone who's read about the Craigslist murder -- Amanda Knight, Clabon Terrel Bernaird, Kiyoshi Alan Higashi and Joshua Nathan Reese have been accused of using the pretext of being interested buyers to rob Craigslist posters, culminating in the murder of James Sanders -- might be leery of letting strangers into their house to pick up stuff.
So you no longer want to let folks come by to pick up a chair or check out the beater you're selling. How can you unload the big stuff safely?
Craigslist's own guidelines suggest:
# Insist on a public meeting place like a cafe
# Do not meet in a secluded place, or invite strangers into your home
# Be especially careful when buying/selling high value items
# Tell a friend or family member where you're going
# Take your cell phone along if you have one
# Consider having a friend accompany you
# Trust your instincts
And while you can (presumably) drive a car you're selling to a public meeting place, what do you do if you're trying to buy or sell a big piece of furniture?
If you're the buyer and someone asks to come over and check out your sectional, bring a friend. Let the seller know you're bringing a pal, and be sure to let someone else know what you're planning on doing. Be sure to bring your mobile phone (if you have one) so you can check in with people where appropriate.
If you're the seller, and you can't schlep your sectional to a public area, here's how you can keep your sale from turning into another true-crime blotter. Understand the buyer will be bringing a friend (see the above paragraph), so be sure you've got your own backup on hand too. Keep your phone on hand, just in case. Clean any valuables out of whatever space your buyer will be trooping through. And don't be afraid to make things a little awkward: if you suspect the buyer isn't serious or is stalling so their back-up posse can come and rob you, ask them to leave and don't hesitate to say you'll call the cops.
| May 25 2010 at 04:22 PM
How much do you talk about your spending?
Two recent articles about spending caught my eye. The first documented the proliferation of "haul videos," where shoppers in their teens and twenties, usually women, post YouTube clips documenting their latest purchases. The second article notes a rising trend of people being willing to share the minutiae of their lives online, including their purchases.
(That second article came out right before news broke that one of the online services which will tell people what you've bought, Blippy, was also revealing a few of its users' credit card numbers on Google. Blippy said it's working with Google to flush out any incriminating information from the search engine's caches.)
The idea that you'd be so public about your shopping -- even willing to share the exact amounts you're spending on your purchases -- is intriguing. There's undeniably the potential for coworkers, friends or family to infer things about the state of your personal finances based on seeing how you choose to spend your money. I know we all have the urge to brag about netting a great deal. But how would we respond when someone says, "I see you just paid this amount for this thing -- what a sucker!"
What do you think? Are you comfortable letting the world know what you're buying and how much you're spending? Or do you prefer to keep your purchasing habits private? Spill your answers at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| April 28 2010 at 02:54 PM
Save the earth and skip buying a water bottle
My inbox was full of Earth Day deals from different vendors. In honor of Earth Day, why not buy bottles for my water, tote bags for my groceries, dryer balls for my clothing, organic spray disinfectant for my countertops?
Here is the message that no vendor will send out for Earth Day: If you really want to ameliorate the damage done to this planet, don't consume "eco-friendly" items. Consume less, period.
It can be tricky to do that sometimes. For example, I don't know how many of you grew up wearing hand-me-downs (I did), but it's harder to do that these days, thanks to the rise of cheap, "fast fashion" clothing that is completely affordable, really stylish -- and poorly made so it can't be passed along after a year or two of typical kid wear. Hand-me-downs are still out there -- but their value is becoming more evident (just check out the going rate for Hanna Anderssons on eBay), so mindful consumers may have to balance their budgetary considerations against their environmental ones.
Rather than beat myself up over every necessary purchase, I usually try to steer my consumer behavior by the four Rs: reduce, reuse, recycle, replenish. Re-using is one of the most satisfying activities -- I love that the surplus of lemons I got this winter went to use scrubbing the grease out of our skillets, I like knowing that I can avoid buying a lot of cleaners at the store because I have plenty of salt and vinegar on hand (and they're cheaper on a per-volume basis ...), and I can't wait to turn the stockpile of old race-day tees we have into aprons. (And, I hope, protect our clothing, thereby extending its useful life.)
I listed a few easy and obvious ways to hit the "reuse" segment on the four Rs. But I'd love to hear from you how you've reduced your consumption and what re-use innovations make your life awesome. Share your wisdom at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| April 22 2010 at 03:04 PM
Turn off the TV and turn down the brand awareness
April may be the cruelest month -- but it's also one of the busiest in terms of being National [Fill in the Blank] Week or Month. You already know this is National Financial Literacy Month, and that this week is Earth Week (leading up to Earth Day tomorrow). Did you know this week is also TV Turnoff Week?
The goal behind the last initiative is to get people to examine their screen-consumption habits. According to the Center for Screentime Awareness:
Screen Time cuts into family time and is a leading cause of obesity in both adults and children. Excessive use of screens for recreational purposes leads to a more sedentary and solitary lifestyle and that is unhealthy for all of us, both mentally and physically.
So what do your TV/computer/iPhone/iPad viewing habits have to do with your buying habits? There was a recent ABC news article on how brand-literate Australian children are becoming, due in part to the ubiquity of branding and advertising, and a Slate article looking at similar studies conducted at the University of Madison-Wisconsin and the University of Michigan pointed out the following:
We love brands, and the many and varied things those brands and their advertising support, from PBS Kids to American Idol.
So, screen time presents an increased number of opportunities for your kids -- and you -- to become more brand-literate. Might that lead to more demands for specific types of yogurt, or cookies, or toys? Or is this an opportunity for kids to learn early on that shopping requires more than picking a brand?
Do you see a relationship between the amount of TV you and your family watch and your purchasing habits? Let us know at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| April 21 2010 at 01:42 PM
Revisiting the relationship between the green in your wallet and the green in your habits
In honor of Earth Day (Thursday, April 22, 2010), here's a round-up of previous posts that underline the relationship between mindful money management and smart resource management:
10 reasons why going green can save you money
Organic produce doesn't have to cost you the farm
The finer points of re-using gifts
| April 19 2010 at 05:02 PM
How wide open is your "compassion window"?
I got a press release from World Vision today reading, in part:
Randy Strash, World Vision's Strategy Director for Emergency Response says, "In a disaster of this magnitude, charities typically have three to six weeks before the media and the public's attention shifts." Strash says, "That's how fast this 'Window of Compassion' closes." He adds, "Already, American media is finding other stories to crowd news of the Haiti quake off the headlines. The Massachusetts U.S. Senate race and storms in Southern California are just two examples."
And it got me wondering: How long does your "compassion window" stay open after there's a call for aid? Do you prefer to give immediately after a crisis, or do you prefer to allocate your charitable donations to a few specific organizations regardless of whether or not a crisis has hit recently? Tell us how you give at: dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| January 22 2010 at 04:16 PM
You determine both the price and the value
In Monday's post, I highlighted an interview with Raj Patel, the author of The Value of Nothing, and his contention that American consumers are largely oblivious to the "real" costs of their consumer goods. This sort of information problem is one the Web seems well-suited to solve; you can use websites to assemble a picture of a consumer good's path from creation to consumption.
Many sites pitch themselves as helping consumers make informed choices about the real cost of consumer goods. These costs are generally framed in terms of human rights issues, environmental impact, or animal rights.
Nearly every "ethical" guide begins with the underlying premise that companies should not have the freedom to pursue profit without restriction; to some people, that very notion is unethical. These ethical guides also seem to center around the following areas: environmental impact, animal rights, human rights records, whether or not the company is a bad corporate citizen, and how sustainable the product and its manufacturing process are. None of these areas are clear-cut: for example, people may argue that testing on animals saves human lives, or that being able to get cheap fresh produce in the middle of winter is better for the population as a whole.
To the last point, for example, in David Kamp's The United States of Argulua, there is this passage:
"I love Alice [Waters] but ..." is a common refrain among the stars of the food world, who admire her ideals but question her pragmatism. As in "Don't get me wrong, I love Alice, but she's fuckin' out there," the words that come from Emeril Lagasse's lips when it's put to him that she might not approve of his line of California-grown but nationally distributed green-salad blends sold in plastic containers bearing his photo. ... A true subscriber to Waters' tenets, Lagasse is told, would recoil from buying non-local produce ... Waters herself, when asked where an American living in a cold-weather climate is supposed to find salad greens during the winter, says, "I always want to buy from the local small-scale producer who is taking care of the land. During the winter, there are lettuces grown in hoop houses in the East Coast and the Midwest."
But Lagasse counters, "I got into this because of my children and the crap that's in the supermarket. Look, most people don't live in New York City, where you can just go down the street and get anything you want. Most people have to settle for brown lettuce that's been up there for a couple of weeks, and it's sad."
The point is: there is no one unilateral definition of what constitutes "ethical" buying Here is a list of online resources to help make more informed shopping decisions. The data available will be useful to many different sets of priorities: Read More 'You determine both the price and the value' »
| January 06 2010 at 01:44 PM
The price of everything and the value of nothing
This morning, on NPR's Morning Edition, UC Berkeley professor Raj Patel was talking about his new book, The Value of Nothing, which argues that much of modern American consumption is set up in a way where we as consumers are separated from or oblivious to the consequences of our actions. He said:
The idea that we value things through markets and that there are no other ways of valuing things, well, that's an international problem and it's one that we're suffering the consequences of right now through the financial crisis and the recession.
I'm concerned that the way that we get reeled in to behaving like consumers involves a sort of a bait-and-switch around the price of goods. I mean, we don't pay the full social costs, for example, for the way we eat today.
Food isn't the only market with "hidden" costs -- there are all sorts of sites devoted to helping make the consumer experience more transparent to us shoppers. I'll look at those over the next few days. But if you have any suggestions for sites that have helped you make fully-informed shopping decisions, shoot me a line at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| January 04 2010 at 12:55 PM
Saying no to fund-raising efforts
Friday's "Think Before You Buy Pink" entry prompted a thought-provoking piece of feedback from a reader. Writes Liz:
I never buy things in support of specific causes, preferring to make donations directly to the organizations I support. I extend this policy to the tedious annual fundraising for our school's parent-teacher organization, where the kids and parents are pressured to sell Innisbrook wrapping paper and junky "gifts" to extended family and neighbors. I'd much rather write a generous check directly to the PTO and be done with it.
In fact, that kind of fundraising in our communities is so much more annoying than the "pink" campaign, which is easy to blow off. I feel like such a grinch saying a polite "no thanks" to a little kid from down the street, with dad standing behind him, who is trying to sell me candied popcorn etc.
Liz brings up a really good point: telling young children "no" can make you feel like a crank. And when it's your neighbor's kids, there's an extra layer of social tension: Do you tell the kid no and possibly risk cooling intra-neighbor relations? Do you tell the kid yes and seethe for a full year every time they ride their bike over the lawn? ("That little brat! I bought $10 worth of wrapping paper from them!") Do you sigh and write off the $10 wrapping paper as a reasonable fee for peace in the neighborhood?
We're about to head into the season of charity solicitations. Surely, nobody will be saying "yes" to everything. There are excellent tips in Slate's "How to turn down requests for charity without feeling like a jerk." I usually manage to fend off phone calls or direct requests with something like, "Our charity dollars are spoken for" or "Let me check on that group through Charity Navigator first."
Doing due diligence isn't just a deflection technique, but a way to make sure your money is going where it will be most effectively deployed. In addition to Charity Navigator, you could also check out GuideStar nonprofit reports or GiveWell if you want to make sure your charitable dollars are going to be put to the best use possible.
How do you handle charity requests from friends, neighbors or the person ringing the bell next to the Salvation Army kettle? Tell me at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| October 19 2009 at 10:53 AM
Think before you shop pink
Be wary of companies that use this symbol as a way to drive sales.
There's nothing wrong with putting your money where your mouth is and trying to support specific causes with your dollars. But how much due diligence should you do before buying a chocolate bar that purports to be rainforest-friendly? Or what about saying "no" to the tide of pink products in the stores every October?
This October is the 25th annual Breast Cancer Awareness month, as symbolized by a pink ribbon. You know, just in case you've missed the tidal waves of pink products in your stores or missed seeing the "Shop for a good cause!" sections in the front of magazines.
I was in the grocery store this afternoon and was gobsmacked by a deluge of pink products: socks, egg timers with pink ribbons that tick down to zero, pink Ghiradelli chocolates, pink-lidded Yoplait yogurt containers. "Show your support for breast cancer awareness and a cure!" the signs exhort. Except ... the packaging is often missing an explanation of how the company that is getting your money will be using it to support breast cancer research or treatment.
Or, according to Daily Finance, the packaging contains fine print that basically admits, "We don't have to use your money to support breast cancer research at all." Many of the companies kicking out pink products cap their donations, so if sales of the pink-ribbon product exceed the donation ... well, guess who gets the money you thought you were donating to a good cause?
Think Before You Pink has an excellent guide to the questions any critical shopper should ask before opening their wallet for a pink-ribbon-labeled product. There's nothing wrong with buying something because you like the color pink and hey -- bonus! -- some of your money might go toward the Susan G. Komen foundation or another organization. But be wary of any product that alleges to be doing all the charity-work lifting for you. The company that's slapped on a pink ribbon (or produced its normal offerings in pink) may simply be trying to capitalize on people's tendency to buy products they perceive as supportive of their pet causes.
If you're really moved to join the battle against breast cancer, you can always make a direct donation to Breast Cancer Action or Team Survivor.
Do you make an effort to buy things in support of specific causes? Or do you think your money is better spent elsewhere? Let me know at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| October 16 2009 at 04:16 PM
Dollars and Sense is about finding new ways to inject dollars, cents and sensibility into your everyday spending.
By Lisa Schmeiser, Read Bio
advertisement
|
your ad here
Print grocery coupons and save at a store
close to you.
$1.00 off Purina Friskies brand Canned Cat Food
Expires on: 05/ 1/2011
Get more coupons on 
more