Rod Hagen

Thank you. Good call. I'm pretty sure it isn't that one though, the tile is too different, though it could have been changed, but the second floor is too different remodeled or otherwise. BUT most importantly, I just watched the scene again and the characters say they are at a YMCA. It's quite possible it was the INFAMOUS YMCA at 213 West 23rd Street. I just rewatched the Village People video, and none of it is inside the YMCA. But ChatGPT swears there was a pool there, and is incapable of trying to find a photo. I think some asshole Slash Lucky Dog owns the whole building now, or most of it. Regardless, even if there is a pool there still it wouldn't look this old fashion, and I wouldn't be allowed to swim in it. Gotta love these old pools. Thank you for the Asser L. Rec Center, I'll hit that place someday. Second floor from Movie: London Terrace Pool Here in LA, USC is nice: p.s. I just watched the scene closely again. Despite the tile, and the second floor, and the fact that they say they are at the YMCA, it could be the Asser Levy Rec Center. Hmm...

Haven't been there, just going by the website, ewww. Ritz Carlton's are, I guess, generally bad taste? Just being an asshole, ignore me (but it does look awful).

Two stills from the movie Ballet Down The Highway. At first I thought it might be the London Terrace pool, but I looked at some photos of the LT pool, and it isn't. It almost certainly has to be in Manhattan, not one of the other Burroughs nor Long Island, simply because since they only had the camera for the weekend, they had to keep it nearby (though some of the movie is either Upstate or LI, so maybe 2 weekends. Still, I'm sure this pool is/was in the city.) It's so beautiful, I must swim there if it still exists. Where do you think/know it is? THANKS!

What a horrible Resort. Why can we always count on Ritz Carlton to do things wrong? (Except Afternoon Tea, they often do that quite well).

All of you are wrong about your preferences, phone is better because it's faster and all questions are answered at once AND importantly with CarPlay you can keep driving, and with AirPod Pros your hands are free for putting away groceries, maybe sweeping the kitchen, or petting a dog, or texting other people. All of you are not wrong about the fact that despite me being right, phone calls are dead.

Thank you. I guess my question is does anyone think any part of what Chat said is wrong, or if there are advantages to renting it out that I am not thinking of, or if anyone is convinced the Market is going to tank like never before or that the Real Estate market is going to soar? Or, something else? I find Real Estate so dull, I'm not familiar with any of this. Much of my life I've heard lamenting, for instance Bette Midler (during an Irvine concert) about her Laguna Home, that they never should have sold the place "It'd be worth a fortune right now". Are they wrong to say that about a fully-paid for house because actually the market, if that's what they did with the money, was historically the better choice?

In a different thread I had asked about making a fully-paid-for house in the Hollywood Hills an Air BnB. Then there were fires, and I've had a rethink. A little more information, I have no intention of ever living in this house. 1. Rent it? To what end, since I never intend to live in it? 2. Another option is I know someone else who wants to rent it and then he will use it as an AirBnB. 3. Sell and invest? Before the fires, at lunch outside I was discussing this with a friend in Aspen (Gay Ski Week) and a woman turned to us and said, "sell and invest. The market may fluctuate, but ultimately it always performs better." I said, but it's the Hollywood Hills (this was before the fires) and she said, doesn't matter, Market is always the better choice. So, I asked Chat GPT, and I can see now as I paste it that further down I FORGOT to factor in Liability and Fire Insurance expenses over the next 10 years. Nevertheless: "Me: Taking property tax and income tax into consideration as well as average cost of property maintenance, over the last 20 years which has performed better: renting a fully paid for 3 bedroom House in the Hollywood Hills, currently valued hypothetically at 1.4 million, or the equivalent value of what it would have been worth 20 years ago invested in the market with annual distributions paid out rather than reinvested? " And this is what Chat GPT said (I apologize for the length). Do you agree, do you have any thing else to say that might be helpful? "ChatGPT said: ChatGPT To accurately evaluate this scenario, let’s break it down step by step for both cases. Case 1: Renting the Fully Paid-Off 3-Bedroom House Initial Value 20 Years Ago: Home values in Los Angeles have appreciated at an annual rate of approximately 3.7%. If the house is currently worth $1.4 million, its estimated value 20 years ago would have been:Value in 2004=1.4 million(1+0.037)20≈700,000Value in 2004=(1+0.037)201.4 million≈700,000 Rental Income: Assume average monthly rent started at $2,500 in 2004 and gradually increased by 3% annually (to reflect inflation and market trends). Over 20 years, the cumulative rental income would total approximately $900,000 - $1,000,000. Property Expenses: Property Tax: Roughly 1.25% of the property’s assessed value, averaging $10,000 annually at the start and increasing with appreciation. Maintenance Costs: Estimated at 1% of the property value annually, averaging $7,000–$10,000 at the start and increasing over time. Total expenses over 20 years: Approximately $500,000 - $600,000. Net Rental Income: After expenses, the total rental income would be approximately $300,000 - $400,000. Final Value of the Property: With appreciation at 3.7% annually, the property’s value has increased to $1.4 million. Total Wealth from Real Estate: Net Rental Income+Final Property Value=300,000+1,400,000=1,700,000Net Rental Income+Final Property Value=300,000+1,400,000=1,700,000 Case 2: Stock Market Investment Initial Investment: The equivalent $700,000 (value of the home in 2004) invested in the stock market. Stock Market Returns: The S&P 500 has averaged an 8.5% annual return (adjusted for annual distributions instead of reinvestment). Annual Distributions: Assume a 2% dividend yield paid out annually. Over 20 years, this results in total distributions of approximately:2%×700,000×20≈280,0002%×700,000×20≈280,000 Final Investment Value: With the remaining 6.5% return reinvested annually:Final Value=700,000×(1+0.065)20≈2,440,000Final Value=700,000×(1+0.065)20≈2,440,000 Total Wealth from Stock Investment: Final Investment Value+Distributions=2,440,000+280,000=2,720,000Final Investment Value+Distributions=2,440,000+280,000=2,720,000 Comparison Metric Real Estate Stock Market Initial Value (2004) $700,000 $700,000 Final Value (2024) $1,400,000 $2,440,000 Net Income/Distributions $300,000 - $400,000 $280,000 Total Wealth (2024) $1,700,000 $2,720,000 Conclusion Over the last 20 years, the stock market investment significantly outperformed the real estate investment, providing a total wealth of approximately $2.72 million compared to $1.7 million from renting out a fully paid-off house in the Hollywood Hills However, the real estate investment offered steady rental income and property appreciation, making it a solid, lower-risk option for wealth generation. The stock market, while riskier, provided substantially higher returns. You said: What would you have to say about the same scenario going forward 10 years? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT To evaluate the performance of renting a fully paid-off 3-bedroom house in the Hollywood Hills versus investing its current value ($1.4 million) in the stock market over the next 10 years, we need to make some assumptions about future trends. Key Assumptions for the Next 10 Years Real Estate: Annual property appreciation: 3.5% (slightly conservative compared to historical Los Angeles rates). Annual rental growth: 3%. Annual property taxes: 1.25% of the property's growing value. Annual maintenance costs: 1% of the property’s growing value. Stock Market: Annual stock market return: 8% (reflecting historical trends). Dividend yield: 2%, distributed annually. The remaining 6% return is reinvested. Scenario 1: Real Estate Investment Property Value Growth: Future Value=1,400,000×(1+0.035)10≈1,985,000Future Value=1,400,000×(1+0.035)10≈1,985,000 Rental Income: Current monthly rent: $5,000. Rent grows by 3% annually. Total rent collected over 10 years (accounting for growth):Total Rent≈5,000×12×(1.030+1.031+…+1.039)≈720,000Total Rent≈5,000×12×(1.030+1.031+…+1.039)≈720,000 Expenses: Property Taxes: Approximately 1.25% of the property value annually (growing as the property appreciates). Over 10 years:Taxes≈1.25%×average value over 10 years≈155,000Taxes≈1.25%×average value over 10 years≈155,000 Maintenance: 1% of the property value annually. Over 10 years:Maintenance≈1%×average value over 10 years≈124,000Maintenance≈1%×average value over 10 years≈124,000 Net Rental Income: Net Rental Income=720,000−(155,000+124,000)≈441,000Net Rental Income=720,000−(155,000+124,000)≈441,000 Total Real Estate Wealth: Future Value of Property+Net Rental Income=1,985,000+441,000=2,426,000Future Value of Property+Net Rental Income=1,985,000+441,000=2,426,000 Scenario 2: Stock Market Investment Initial Investment: $1.4 million. Annual Returns: Total return: 8% annually. Dividend yield: 2% distributed annually. Remaining 6% reinvested for growth. Future Value of Investment: Future Value=1,400,000×(1+0.06)10≈2,515,000Future Value=1,400,000×(1+0.06)10≈2,515,000 Dividends Paid: 2% of $1.4 million distributed annually, adjusted for reinvestment:Total Dividends≈1,400,000×0.02×10≈280,000Total Dividends≈1,400,000×0.02×10≈280,000 Total Stock Market Wealth: Future Value of Investment+Dividends Paid=2,515,000+280,000=2,795,000Future Value of Investment+Dividends Paid=2,515,000+280,000=2,795,000 Comparison Metric Real Estate Stock Market Initial Value $1,400,000 $1,400,000 Final Value (10 years) $1,985,000 $2,515,000 Net Income/Distributions $441,000 (net rent) $280,000 (dividends) Total Wealth (10 years) $2,426,000 $2,795,000 Conclusion Going forward 10 years, the stock market investment is likely to outperform real estate in terms of total wealth. The stock market investment could grow to $2.8 million, while real estate wealth (property value plus net rental income) would reach $2.4 million. That said: Real estate provides tangible, relatively stable returns, offering cash flow from rent and a hard asset in an appreciating area. The stock market carries higher risk but delivers potentially higher returns, especially with compounding from reinvested returns. Your choice depends on your risk tolerance, need for liquidity, and desire for active (property management) versus passive (investment) income." One last thing, I asked someone very smart and very close to me and he did the math, incorporating fire and liability insurance as well, much more efficiently, but basically the same result: As long as I never intend to live there, invest, don't rent. Thoughts?

Thank you for this. I remember Gone Baby Gone. I'm not an Affleck fan, but he did a fine job with that movie. First season of True Detective, second episode, I said to my partner if the next scene is the two of them talking in a car that's going nowhere, we're stopping this show. It was, we did. But maybe Michelle is from later seasons of True Detective. Mission Impossible movies are a fun blur. I shouldn't have been so breezy, I do not know him by name, but of course I recognize Walton Goggins, character actor. Nevertheless, I do find casting him to be strange. He's kinda a nothing. Was Jason in The Wire? That I saw. Dude, he was the long-haired evil guy in Harry Potter?! That's crazy. I adore Emily. I have a fascination with broadcast news, and her character in The Newsroom was EVERY female broadcast producer, ever. Don't know why her son is in this; a seems like a move out of HBO's Girls playbook: cast the star's kids, see what happens. If MAX could afford F. Murray Abraham last season, why not just hire Emily for this season instead of her son? (I'm thinking out loud, I know you don't have an answer :-) ) Those ALW movies mean nothing to me, and I see a lot. Good on you for the deep dives. So far she is my favorite character and actor in the season. It was a bit long, not her fault, but I saw and liked Yves Sant Laurent. Again, she's boring, I don't get the casting. Yes, I know Google. My bafflement was/is that others in this thread seem to know so many of the actors by sight rather than site. I recognize and accept that that's part of getting older, not knowing the guests on SNL etc.. What I think is difficult for many Gen Xers and Young Baby Boomers, maybe just me and my circle, to wrap their heads around is the enthusiasm, not just among the young, but also people our age, for actors with such, and I'll repeat what I said about Selena, such flat affects. So..dull. Just watch an episode of Graham Norton, the veterans AND the very few young ones ( Obviously, I dislike her music and will never see Wicked, nevertheless I was quite impressed with Arianna Grande's appearance on the show) the younger ones, particularly the American youngers, just don't pop. Again thank you for this summary, much more personal than Google.

How do you people know all these actors? I vaguely recognize the woman who was in the Leftovers and apparently in a season of Fargo (didn't watch Fargo TV series, which is weird because my family is there). Then Parker Posey. (and bald murderer and Spa woman) from other season That's it. Can someone tell me what all these other actors and actresses have been in please? Or are they from Social Media? It reminds me of watching that terrible Only Murderers in the Building show and Emilia Perez and I constantly wonder, who is Selena Gomez, why is she in this? She can't possibly be an actress, her affect is so flat. Who are these people, why are they in White Lotus?

He's excellent in Beach Rats. In BabyGirl probably he was supposed to let Nicole Kidman be the standout.

As I told a friend, The Brutalist could have used a 3 hour and 45 minute intermission.

Thank you for trying to get me in trouble.

This is Fun. Person: I wouldn't change my looks, my Dad is a good looking guy, and I'm enjoying growing into that man. Where: Working as an escort, throughout the '90s, in the Village while getting a science degree at NYU. Always disappointed in myself for getting a BA in the arts before my Biology and Engineering studies. New York was great in the early '90s because Wealth was up, there were still scraps of bohemia (Alphabet City and the East Village...sorta) and Giuliani and Sarah Jessica Parker and Bloomberg hadn't yet conspired to corrupt it. I don't think being a traveling escort was as easy before the internet, nevertheless in my imagination I'm doing my homework on international flights b/w clients and returning to my perfect walk-up just off Bleeker. Who: So whom am I fucking? Whoever calls! The only thing missing is sports, specifically my sports. In Minnesota, where I spent those years, NOT escorting, I had easy access to (bad) snowboarding, lots of Climbing, (bad) mountain biking and White Water Kayaking. You can leave NY to snowboard and climb, but it is a hard hard city to daytrip out of (on an early Saturday morning waiting in line at a Manhattan Hertz SUCKS!), but a fantastic place to come back to.

This was nice: How My Dad Reconciled His God and His Gay Son https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/05/opinion/coming-out-evangelical-pastor.html And if the fucking photo of the man with his son comes up, I did my fucking best to link the article without the photo so just fucking delete the thread without dinging my fucking account fucking again. Thank you.

Another thing people, particularly therapists, say that discourages people from even trying the medications. They become convinced they have to "solve" some psychological component first. Fuck that. The very knowledge that you can get an erection is in itself an arousal. In other words, if boners aren't popping up as often anymore, and Viagra etc. can help you with that, chemically, can compensate to a helpful degree for both physiological and psychological impediments, then the knowledge itself that you have taken said boner medication is in itself arousing. And so, step one is done.

Yes, since my first days working in 1999, and lunch, and hang time, and I'm still friends with them. Hypocritically, as that youth I too bristled in this forum at the suggestion that my time with clients would ever be anything other than On The Clock, while simultaneously becoming friends with clients, OFF the Clock/Cock.

Every porn over the last 20 years isn't driven by pills, but by Trimix and Bimix. It has nothing to do with them being young, well not nothing, but it has MUCH more to do with bimix and Trimix, and if you don't want to believe that or don't know how to work google, watch the young dicks in a 70s or 80s movie (before Viagra, Cialis, etc.), largely flaccid (except Jack Wrangler of course), then watch Rafael Alencar's beautiful dick in early 2000s movies (during the heights of Viagra and Cialis), hard when needed , now watch Rafael Alencar's Dick in today's movies (he's a spokesmen for Rev Trimix and Bimix), hard as steel before during and after. What changed over the decades? Chemistry. Enjoy it, and also indulge in it. And most importantly, understand that when you ask men in a forum about it, they don't know and instead attribute the raging constant hardons to "youth" alone, and understand that the Escorts, the Men using BiMix and TriMix will nearly always be cagey about it, so the person to ask is not the Forum, not the Escort, but a Doctor, Urologist or not, who specializes in sexual dysfunction. It's not a dysfunction, but that's where you should look anyway. Just ask ChatGPT about finding one in your area, or Google for that matter, or just go see a male Urologist. Non-medical people like B will say stupid discouraging things to you like, "I'd never put that in my..." They don't know what they're talking about. It's almost always painless, a nothing. Just because they are weak-willled, doesn't mean you have to bel.

I too am sorry this happened to you. Great news from this elder, 99.999% of clients will only fuck you in the GOOD way. :-) Chin up.

Bought the audiobook intending to listen on the drive to and from Mammoth's storms last week, but....Podcasts.

The only actor I know in this season is Parker Posey, so I hope the story gets legs.

"Who's Dead Now Ford?" Excellent.

I'm gonna call bullshit on this one. I know it's popular in the other Forum for frequent flyer SexTourists to pile shame/shit on Americans "overly" generous in the Brazilian saunas. Thought experiment time! Let's say a Sauna worker, Bruno, sees a mix of 10 total local and foreign clients in a week. As a quick, helpful, aside, I worked as a well-reviewed escort, granted it was in the states, for decades and would have remaining digits counting the number of men who overpaid. Most men, most people, don't overpay for goods or services. But, just for funsies, let's pretend 1 of 10 per week "overpay" Bruno because from the Uber Black between GIG and the Hotel Fasano the Client/Tourist noticed a favela and felt sad. Even a simpleton would not, could not, hold out in his transactions for something near the amount that the generous ONE paid. If he tried, he wouldn't last long. He can try, he will see an American and ask for more, and maybe refuse you if you won't give it. But he won't, he can't, be doing that for long, because the reality nobody can deny is that most men, most escort-clients, and certainly most sex tourists, are not "overly" generous. After all, that's why they are in Brazil, cheap rates for hot guys. And the locals simply won't pay that high amount, so the delusional worker can ask for whatever he likes, he won't get it from them either. And when you push back like this, the cheapies on the MER, or whatever that forum is called these days clutch their pearls and say, "you don't know. you don't go to Brazil/Thailand (whichever low-earning country they frequent) as often as I do, I know these boys..." blah blah. I don't need to. The advantage of models and simulations is that you don't have to get your hands dirty. So, yep, bullshit. Good on you ThroatCummer! You are one in a million. Or, one in 10, hypothetically :-)

It is not Hichcockian. If Hitch saw it he'd throw up (and then quickly make reservations at Chasen's)

Loved The Line of Beauty, especially The Swimming Pool Library. Oddly, I have the Folding Star and have not read it. I skipped a couple other books too. Unsure why. The Swimming Pool Library is excellent.

Is it like this? (And I bet nobody here knows what set this is from without googling it) "And it creates this Bangkok whorehouse scenario in your brain. You feel a little tuggle in your sweatpants. And you’re like,” what if they were behind glass in Phuket?” Which one would I select for my evening’s entertainment from the Cambodian guy that runs the place, And he’s got an eye patch. And I go, “ching dai bo dah!” And he pulls the guy out. Number 28. I haven’t even seen all the guys, And I impulse-buy on 28."