|
SlapActionJackson posted:Then have I got a deal for you! Mail me $833.33 every month, and I'll send you $10k every year. Can we save time and you just mail me a 4 cents per year? Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Aug 6, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:Then have I got a deal for you! Mail me $833.33 every month, and I'll send you $10k every year. Forget this putz, I'll give you $5k for 12 low payments of $499.99!
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:While obviously it gets misinterpreted, overtime does end up getting taxed at the earner's top marginal rate. So as you work more overtime, your hourly compensation goes down due to taxation. Of course, it will never go negative, which is what some people think. "I got kicked into a higher tax bracket! I see what you're saying but this is a really stupid way to look at it. You will never ever take home less money by working more. Period. Putting it in terms of hourly wages just muddies the issue. Talking about 1x pay overtime confuses things even more because that doesn't exist in the US, that's just called regular work hours. People are very very stupid when it comes to money and taxes so its worth it to be very clear and not bring up a technicality like that. The important thing is take home pay, which can only increase when you work more (barring a few edge cases)
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:I see what you're saying but this is a really stupid way to look at it. You will never ever take home less money by working more. Period. Putting it in terms of hourly wages just muddies the issue. Talking about 1x pay overtime confuses things even more because that doesn't exist in the US, that's just called regular work hours. Pretty much this. A bunch of coworkers were calling me an idiot for letting my sick time expire last year instead of using it, because even though I get paid out for it, the sick time is  Taxed at a higher rate .I don't care if it's taxed at a higher rate. At the end of the year, I still walked away with more money than if I burned it. Oh boo hoo I didn't make the most efficient use of my hours, whatever shall I do with this nice fat check that I have and you don't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Even though I'm making an extra 50% over my normal base pay, it's not worth it because I must pay an extra 3% in taxes on those marginal earnings! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:We all got withheld at (Current paycheck) * 24, but only worked, at most, 15 pay periods. While your check wouldn't go up as fast after about 40 hours of OT... Another person who's bad with money. 10k is a lot of money to loan the government interest-free. If you're a seasonal worker, you just up your exemptions so that the actually proper amount gets withheld. ChipNDip fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
There are an extremely few, legitimate reasons to not want to be paid more, particularly for the very poor, who can suddenly find themselves cut off from benefits if they make a dollar more than the cutoff for, e.g. Medicare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
quote:because even though I get paid out for it, the sick time is... Hear that noise? It's the sound of me hating you. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
My brother-in-law recently claimed that you end up making less if you work too much overtime. I asked him why he thought that was, and he of course mentioned the phrase "tax bracket" in his retort, and I knew he was beyond help unless I decided to hold a 10 minute lesson on how taxation works. I wish I had of now, but sometimes you just have to let people be stupid/ignorant. fake edit: Also, yes....where do you live/work where you get paid out for sick time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
It should take like a minute to explain marginal tax rates even if the person can barely fog a mirror. 30 seconds if they have half a brain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:My brother-in-law recently claimed that you end up making less if you work too much overtime. I asked him why he thought that was, and he of course mentioned the phrase "tax bracket" in his retort, and I knew he was beyond help unless I decided to hold a 10 minute lesson on how taxation works. Don't bother trying to educate family. I just had a big fight with my father in law on how he's managing his nest egg. He is 70 and retired with only income coming in from his social security. He decided that he needs 85% of retirement accounts in stocks index funds with only 15% in bonds. I tried to explain to him that at his age, he needs to preserve capital and not try to maximize gains with increasing risk. Nope, won't listen. He believe that there is no market correction coming and that even if it did, the government would step in and stop it.  I then asked him a simple mathematics question if that you had 100k and lost 50%. What would be rate of return to return back to that original 100k. Of course, like most people, he answered 50%. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Renegret posted:Pretty much this. I wish I could do that. I have 160 hours of sick banked up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Time to play some hooky.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Magic Underwear posted:I see what you're saying but this is a really stupid way to look at it. You will never ever take home less money by working more. Period. Putting it in terms of hourly wages just muddies the issue. Talking about 1x pay overtime confuses things even more because that doesn't exist in the US, that's just called regular work hours. It's not so much about getting more overall pay, but balancing your free time versus more overtime. It's a marginal situation, but there are people that are affected by it. The guys I've heard complain about it the most are usually working 60-80 hour weeks doing unpleasant work, and not always by their choice. At some point during the tax year the extra time bumps their gross pay into the next tax bracket, and they're making less per hour. Yeah, money is fungible and beep-boop-maximize-income but after a certain point of working your rear end off and having your expenses covered, you'd rather have the time at home then the extra cash. Having a mild degree of diminishing returns on your OT affects that point. Again, it's not a woe-is-me situation, but just the kernel of truth behind the "OT sweet spot" idea. As for straight-time overtime, it does exist in the US, although it's not explicitly "overtime". I'm classified as hourly exempt, and get straight pay for each billable hour over 40. But I'm also guaranteed 40 hours pay each week, and for that and other reasons am exempted from FLSA overtime standards. It's fairly common in my industry. LogisticEarth fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:fake edit: Also, yes....where do you live/work where you get paid out for sick time? Happens to me in Australia, the company gives you the choice to cash out anything over the legal 10 day minimum usually first week of December just in time for Christmas. I also cash out holidays every now and then too since I'm boring and never take time off. Here it's required by law to provide 4 weeks of paid leave that accumulates indefinitely, and as long as both parties agree, can be cashed out instead. It's also nice when changing jobs since it all has to be cashed out, I got about 350 hours cashed out last time I changed jobs which was handy to pay for the moving expenses while moving 300km away. EDIT: Although, cashing out the holidays is probably bad with money since if I use them I get a 15% (or somewhere around that) "Leave Loading" on top of my regular pay, but they don't pay the extra 15% if you cash it. Rudager fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
lostleaf posted:Don't bother trying to educate family. I just had a big fight with my father in law on how he's managing his nest egg. He is 70 and retired with only income coming in from his social security. He decided that he needs 85% of retirement accounts in stocks index funds with only 15% in bonds. I tried to explain to him that at his age, he needs to preserve capital and not try to maximize gains with increasing risk. Nope, won't listen. A lot of baby boomers are like this, including my parents. They all refuse to face the reality of their financial situation-- they didn't actually save enough money to have the life/retirement they wanted. So they engage in generational warfare by raising the public pension eligibility age and externalize the environmental consequences of resource extraction to the future generations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
ChipNDip posted:Another person who's bad with money. 10k is a lot of money to loan the government interest-free. If you're a seasonal worker, you just up your exemptions so that the actually proper amount gets withheld. Yes and no. Since we were essentially on call, and susceptible to get laid off for any silly reason, it was really hard to estimate your income. It'd swing from 65k one year to 90k the next. And since I got laid off three four times a year, I'd have to refill those withholding forms every years... Sometimes for multiple employers in different provinces. Oh and if we got assigned to a specific job, 75% of our income on those days was tax exempt in Quebec (we got paid in another province). So while it wasn't the best possible use of my money, it was safe. Plus the return usually came in a period where I wouldn't have worked in a few months.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
CitizenKain posted:I wish I could do that. I have 160 hours of sick banked up. Nooooo if your pancreas fails you (note: one of several hundred fun surprises your body may spring on you at any moment!) and you need to spend a month in a medically induced coma and then three more months out of the office recuperating you will be super happy you can just bleed off your accumulated sick days instead of having to take unpaid FMLA, or worse, quit your job. If your workplace allows it, banking sick time is a very pro choice. You can always get the cash when you leave the job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:It's not so much about getting more overall pay, but balancing your free time versus more overtime. It's a marginal situation, but there are people that are affected by it. The guys I've heard complain about it the most are usually working 60-80 hour weeks doing unpleasant work, and not always by their choice. At some point during the tax year the extra time bumps their gross pay into the next tax bracket, and they're making less per hour. Yeah, money is fungible and beep-boop-maximize-income but after a certain point of working your rear end off and having your expenses covered, you'd rather have the time at home then the extra cash. Having a mild degree of diminishing returns on your OT affects that point. Again, it's not a woe-is-me situation, but just the kernel of truth behind the "OT sweet spot" idea. That's not just for overtime neither. At my job I find that the people that are the happiest and most chilled (i.e not hating poo poo) are the people working 75-85%. I wouldn't want to work 100% in that job. It's just not worth it. For that job, 75-85% seems to be the sweet spot to not get burnt out, while still taking home enough to live on. MrOnBicycle fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 06:52
|
|
|
Rudager posted:EDIT: Although, cashing out the holidays is probably bad with money since if I use them I get a 15% (or somewhere around that) "Leave Loading" on top of my regular pay, but they don't pay the extra 15% if you cash it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 08:07
|
|
|
Suspicious Lump posted:That's really interesting because I thought leave loading was paid on acquired leave not taken leave. Check your EBA wording. Pretty sure that was the case last time I did it, it makes sense though since the 15% is supposed to cover the lost chance at overtime while you're away, so if you're cashing it out you're not going to lose that chance at overtime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:That's not just for overtime neither. At my job I find that the people that are the happiest and most chilled (i.e not hating poo poo) are the people working 75-85%. I wouldn't want to work 100% in that job. It's just not worth it. For that job, 75-85% seems to be the sweet spot to not get burnt out, while still taking home enough to live on. When you say %, are you using an estimate of effort or some percentage of available hours worked or what?
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:It's not so much about getting more overall pay, but balancing your free time versus more overtime. It's a marginal situation, but there are people that are affected by it. The guys I've heard complain about it the most are usually working 60-80 hour weeks doing unpleasant work, and not always by their choice. At some point during the tax year the extra time bumps their gross pay into the next tax bracket, and they're making less per hour. Yeah, money is fungible and beep-boop-maximize-income but after a certain point of working your rear end off and having your expenses covered, you'd rather have the time at home then the extra cash. Having a mild degree of diminishing returns on your OT affects that point. Again, it's not a woe-is-me situation, but just the kernel of truth behind the "OT sweet spot" idea. This is one of the reasons I didn't bother trying to educate my brother-in-law on the OT situation. I didn't want to come off as the "beep-boop-maximize-income" type - at least not more so than I already do anyway. If he wants to work OT for time-in-lieu, then fine. But then again, they also live in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories...a place people go so that they can make good money compared to other places in Canada. So if they're not there to maximize their income why the gently caress are they there?! Oh, the horrors...
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:When you say %, are you using an estimate of effort or some percentage of available hours worked or what? A lot of places talk about percentages in terms of percent of a 40 hour standard work week. What's really hard for me to comprehend (without looking at a desk calendar) is when people tell me that something is happening in calendar week 45 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:When you say %, are you using an estimate of effort or some percentage of available hours worked or what? 75-85% of the amount of hours you'd work if you were working full time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Rick Rickshaw posted:This is one of the reasons I didn't bother trying to educate my brother-in-law on the OT situation. I didn't want to come off as the "beep-boop-maximize-income" type - at least not more so than I already do anyway. If he wants to work OT for time-in-lieu, then fine. I've wanted to move to Whitehorse for a few years now. My kinda weather!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:75-85% of the amount of hours you'd work if you were working full time. That's what I thought you meant. I work 90%.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:06
|
|
|
pig slut lisa posted:Nooooo if your pancreas fails you (note: one of several hundred fun surprises your body may spring on you at any moment!) and you need to spend a month in a medically induced coma and then three more months out of the office recuperating you will be super happy you can just bleed off your accumulated sick days instead of having to take unpaid FMLA, or worse, quit your job. Any long term illness I would go on short term disability if I'm going to be gone for 2 or more weeks. They'd drain the sick time until then however.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
I'm really surprised people in the US get paid out for their sick time anywhere. I work for regional government in WA and we get paid out 25% of our sick time at quitting time so its much more profitable to just use it for mental health days or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
I work for the DC Gov, and because I was hired after 86 (I started in 06)--Sick time cannot be cashed out (they made this change after separating their pay scale/schedule from the federal one). I also can only carry over 240 hours of sick time, then it becomes use or lose. I have about 200 hours of sick time. It is far wiser to use sick time than bank it once you have a decent base amount to cover any accidents or extended sick time. I also rarely take my vacation time, so I have about 200 hours of that too (also can only carry over/accrue 240 hours). Accrued vacation time is cashed out upon separation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
All ya'll with hundreds of hours of banked vacation/sick time need to take some time off. Working that much with no break ain't good for you. Seriously, take 2+ weeks and do something fun and totally disconnect. It's good for your body, mind, and soul. Have some more reddit: Losing my job in a week sole provider no savings posted:The title says it all. I'm losing my job in a week for non-performance reasons and they gave me two weeks notice. Other tidbits from the comments/responses: dude has been working a contract at 160k/yr for 6 month that was like totally for sure going to last years and got into an uber mountain of debt with literally zero savings. No cash, no 401k, no other investments, nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
I feel like people clinging to their car debt is a constantly reoccurring theme in these types of stories. WE HAD TO BUY A $40,000 CAR YOU DON'T GET IT. I DON'T WORK ON CARS. In this case it sounds like 2 $40,000 cars.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Seriously, that is just insane. $1600/month in car payments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
How do you go from making 160k/yr to "Dude, consider bankruptcy" is a month
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
And I thought my $308/month car payment was as bad as it could get 
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
Bugamol posted:I feel like people clinging to their car debt is a constantly reoccurring theme in these types of stories. WE HAD TO BUY A $40,000 CAR YOU DON'T GET IT. I DON'T WORK ON CARS. In this case it sounds like 2 $40,000 cars. One of the follow up comments from the dude: quote:The plan is to refinance one with a lower APR (>9.9%) and monthly payment (from $920 down to $700) and to try to refinance the other from $664@19%APR to something more reasonable. Just  I can't even...HonorableTB posted:And I thought my $308/month car payment was as bad as it could get If it makes you feel any better I think a $300-400/mo car payment is reasonable if you make a good salary and budget accordingly. And also assuming it's at a reasonable interest rate (< 4%) on a good car that you'll keep for a while. And you won't just trade it in on a new $300-400/mo payment once it's paid off (the trap dumb people fall into). Guinness fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Aug 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
It's even better.quote:Upside down on both, but not by much, so unfortunately - no. We may be able to refinance one or both and get it down to something more reasonable. As I said in a previous reply, we had to get something else because we donated a vehicle to family. Had to get a new car because we gave ours away!
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
If he's unemployed, why the gently caress does he need a car
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:How do you go from making 160k/yr to "Dude, consider bankruptcy" is a month Well 160k/year for 6 months, probably better expressed as ~13k/month given that. Still a lot but yeah, presumably his previous contract was not that large. (Not that this guy was going to save anything regardless - I just think the expensive contract should be thought of as more of a windfall than a salary.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:29 |
|
|
When you're working on contract, you can't really afford to see everything as a windfall. You have expenses just like everybody else. Of course, when I worked contract, I'd keep two months of expenses in chequing (To be mostly transferred to long term savings when the next contract came along) and six months in emergency fund type savings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 19:46
|
|