|
Krispy Kareem posted:This has been on my bank's website for months: If it floats, flies or fucks, rent it.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 16:04 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 08:06 |
|
So this checks a lot of bad with money boxes. We just got a company-wide email invitation to a "Free Class" in one of our conference rooms from 5:30-6:30 PM next Wednesday. It's a doTerra "Introduction to Essential oils" which teaches you how to "avoid pharmaceuticals" and "explore ways to share with others and earn cash" And this is from ONE OF OUR EXECUTIVES. I'm glad it's Friday afternoon. I need a drink.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 20:38 |
|
GWM on the part of the executive. You want to be at the top of the pyramid.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 20:44 |
|
Hot Dog Day #91 posted:GWM on the part of the executive. You want to be at the top of the pyramid. Also GWM for the company in that all his employees will remain wage slaves to the company.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 21:17 |
|
It's not the CEO, COO or CFO, but someone who's only a few people down from that.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 21:19 |
|
It's GWM due to all the sales they will make from employees looking to suck up.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 21:36 |
|
tumblr hype man posted:If it floats, flies or fucks, rent it. Or be BWM and get a 5-10 year loan at 10%-40% to buy it.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 21:44 |
|
Dammit, I financed my flock of trained seagulls.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 21:55 |
|
crazypeltast52 posted:Dammit, I financed my flock of trained seagulls. Let me know if you need a bird lawyer.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 22:41 |
|
Devian666 posted:Also having a student loan so large that a part time minimum wage job doesn't really cut it with repayments. College students in the US have been enslaved by the baby boomers with no way out. I suppose if there's one thing that actually isn't novel, it's smug shitbags handwaving away legitimate criticisms of society as mindless whining. Haifisch posted:Is this like being that one friend with the pickup truck, because everyone can just borrow it when they need one? The words appear to be suggesting that, but that photo seems to imply something else entirely. ...which, to be fair, can be very GWM if you know how not to get caught.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 22:49 |
|
r0ck0 posted:Let me know if you need a bird lawyer. All I know about bird law is that I get pecked to death in court. I usually settle before all I'm left with is the crumbs.
|
# ? Mar 18, 2016 22:52 |
CortezFantastic posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/4asa10/33000_in_debt_with_nothing_to_show_for_it/ Looks like she updated! quote:Original post here:https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/4asa10/33000_in_debt_with_nothing_to_show_for_it/
|
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 09:26 |
|
froglet posted:Looks like she updated! quote:Original post here:https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfi...to_show_for_it/ You criminally forgot to bold some parts BWM: It's horses all the way down. Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 10:25 on Mar 19, 2016 |
# ? Mar 19, 2016 10:16 |
|
Cheltenham is on. What better way to celebrate than buying a three piece tailored tweed suit. For my horse. https://youtu.be/lZBxRns4mOM
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 13:25 |
|
I mean, it's probably not any better with money to leave it untailored - your horse is unlikely to put it on in the morning if it doesn't fit well.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 14:04 |
|
Plus, unless you want to work in the 'hello thank you for calling IT, you'll need to speak up I'm wearing a gigantic silkscreened Goku shirt and am on anxiety medication' glue factory, a nicely-tailored suit is essential.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 16:10 |
|
froglet posted:Looks like she updated! Why the gently caress do these people always insist on having children. Welp, we're broke with one extra mouth to feed oh look there's another now we're really sunk what are we gonna do oh look there's another. Remember in Roger and Me, the sheriff's deputy who's going around evicting people, and he commented on the one woman who'd just gotten married? He said something along the lines of "why would you get married if you're poor, you can be poor on your own, you don't need help". That's 100x more true for having kids. If you're broke you don't need the help of a kid to be more broke, you're doing just fine at being broke without drastically increasing your responsibility.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 21:17 |
|
For all the people who quote platitudes like "it's not the destination, it's the journey" there are few who believe it. People think if they have 3 kids and a house and a truck NOW, they'll be happy adults. Every aspect of our consumer society discourages waiting for any of those things and getting your poo poo in order.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 23:35 |
|
I've gotten some mass downvotes for suggesting on Reddit that people get their loving lives in order before they have kids. Steady jobs (can you survive on one income?), retirement funded with part of paycheck, 6 month emergency fund, etc. People then argue that they'll have to be 30 before they have kids, if ever! I'm not sure why people have it so ingrained in their heads that they need kids at their own families sake. Hell, with the way the world is turning, I don't even see how 20-30% of low end jobs in the future are even going to exist.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 23:41 |
|
gently caress you, I'm great, my kids are great, you are whats wrong with this country.
|
# ? Mar 19, 2016 23:54 |
|
Kids are great if you can afford them. I intend to have one in a few years. But if you can't, you're setting them up for a life of trying to beat a game rigged against them.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 00:14 |
|
Nail Rat posted:For all the people who quote platitudes like "it's not the destination, it's the journey" there are few who believe it. People think if they have 3 kids and a house and a truck NOW, they'll be happy adults. Every aspect of our consumer society discourages waiting for any of those things and getting your poo poo in order. That's it 100%. My ex wanted kids more than anything in the world. I was working in construction, she was a PSW making like 13 bucks an hour (and that was pretty much top end for the job). Last thing we needed was something that cost as much money and time as a kid. We broke up and she got with a new guy and had a kid within a year. A few months after the kid came the guy decided he wasn't down for the lifestyle and bailed. She's still working as a PSW, she lives with her parents in the middle of nowhere, with the kid. She's 33, no prospects, no education, no chance of bettering herself, and the dad's hosed right off. Conversely, a friend of mine just had her third. She's a teacher with 10 years' experience, her husband is some high up labour relations guy with a law degree to boot. That's the situation I reckon you've got to be in to be thinking of children, or at least multiple children.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 00:30 |
|
olylifter posted:Conversely, a friend of mine just had her third. She's a teacher with 10 years' experience, her husband is some high up labour relations guy with a law degree to boot. That's the situation I reckon you've got to be in to be thinking of children, or at least multiple children. Not to rock the boat here, but your reasoning is crap. While raising kids is a commitment, it doesn't really have to be all that expensive. You're never going to look in your budget and say "oh hey, I have a $10000 surplus. Time to have a kid!" To put this in perspective, what would be going through your head if you heard one of your coworkers say "I just can't afford to save for retirement right now." It's probably the same thing that goes through my head when I hear someone say "we just can't afford a kid right now." There are certainly people who shouldn't have kids, but it has little to do with how much money they make. It's not about finances, it's about maturity.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 01:05 |
|
You'll never see you have a 10000 surplus, but you can plan for where you want to be when you have a kid. That can be a personal preference, your own line to get to, but a lot of people think no thought should be given to it at all. The people in the linked story were in a bad situation after two kids. They should have waited before number three. They'll never be able to help their kids with college, they'll never retire, and unless one of their kids is quite rebellious, the cycle will continue with them. Also while raising kids doesn't have to be expensive, it can be, especially if they're very ill or special needs. That's financial risk that is worth at least having a good solid situation for. Nail Rat fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Mar 20, 2016 |
# ? Mar 20, 2016 01:16 |
|
TLG James posted:I've gotten some mass downvotes for suggesting on Reddit that people get their loving lives in order before they have kids. Steady jobs (can you survive on one income?), retirement funded with part of paycheck, 6 month emergency fund, etc. That would sort of imply that they were capable of thinking more than five minutes ahead of time. Exposure to the white trash in my town has convinced me that they are literally incapable of doing so. CONTENT: My former co-worker, (not the debt defaulting one I mentioned previously), has decided to buy a new car. To be fair, his current car is on it's last legs. So, he decided that he'll buy a 70's Ford with a busted engine, and swap in a working engine from another chassis one into it. There are certain things that are questionable about this: * He's got nowhere in his unit complex to store even one more car, let alone two. * Said engine is supercharged, which will require premium fuel. Not to mention that it runs on a carburetor, which is less fuel efficient than fuel injection. * He doesn't have any tools. (Usually, he borrows mine.) * He has no mechanical experience. (For example, he asked me to replace his spark plugs, which is relatively dead simple.) * His only point of reference is a post off a car related forum. * His expert proposed team consists of him, his drug-hosed, chronically unemployed brother, and yours truly. * He owes money to both his boss, and our local council. He got shaken down by G-Men at work, because he forgot about the latter. * He stated that the only reason he wanted said car in the first place, is "to impress people". Best case scenario that I can see is that it will rust in whatever place it's left in for fifteen years, much like my uncle's Holden Kingswood at my grandparents' house. EDIT: While we are on the subject, he has two children to provide for. Sic Semper Goon fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Mar 20, 2016 |
# ? Mar 20, 2016 01:30 |
|
To these people, having a right to something means they can have it with no consequences, and thanks in part to a certain vocal section of our country, their having children is a purely emotional decision. If you can sacrifice, you can raise kids on a shockingly small amount of money. But that requires making adult decisions and most of the time not getting what you want because the kids need something, and people who make emotional decisions tend to go for quicker gratification (for various understandable reasons). You don't even have to be poor for that to be the case; almost all of the BWM people make enough money, they just spend it in stupid ways. I don't truly believe most people are too stupid to learn, but the deck is stacked against many, and most are never going to be taught when the stakes are low. The US does not have a social safety net and our education system is a joke. Idiocracy was right, everyone is hosed.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 02:00 |
|
Nail Rat posted:The people in the linked story were in a bad situation after two kids. They should have waited before number three. They'll never be able to help their kids with college, they'll never retire, and unless one of their kids is quite rebellious, the cycle will continue with them. You're right, but the reason they shouldn't have kids is because they aren't responsible parents, as you can see by their financial situation and poor planning. Their money problems are a symptom of their deficiencies, not the cause of them. I mainly object to the concept that there is some "enough" amount of money you need to be making before you "should" have kids. If that's what you're waiting for, then you will never have kids.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 02:07 |
|
Nail Rat posted:For all the people who quote platitudes like "it's not the destination, it's the journey" there are few who believe it. People think if they have 3 kids and a house and a truck NOW, they'll be happy adults. Every aspect of our consumer society discourages waiting for any of those things and getting your poo poo in order. Speaking of platitudes, I've seen numerous references to people saying "there's never a 'perfect' time to have a kid" as though that means that there's never a bad time to have a kid. I Like Jell-O posted:Not to rock the boat here, but your reasoning is crap. While raising kids is a commitment, it doesn't really have to be all that expensive. You're never going to look in your budget and say "oh hey, I have a $10000 surplus. Time to have a kid!" It's not about "oh hey, I have a $10000 surplus. Time to have a kid!", it's about having some basic level of financial stability such that: a. You won't find yourself struggling to get by the moment something goes wrong. b. You can lead by example so that your kids hopefully won't grow up to be featured in some future version of this thread. I Like Jell-O posted:You're right, but the reason they shouldn't have kids is because they aren't responsible parents, as you can see by their financial situation and poor planning. Their money problems are a symptom of their deficiencies, not the cause of them. Well, technically there is some "enough" amount of money you need to be making, in the sense of being able to cover basic expenses and maintain a reasonable emergency fund. With what's been going on with housing, education, and healthcare, that can be a pretty good chunk of change these days. Plus there's really no shame in wanting to do more with your life than get by. The problem is that so many people's idea of "enough money" involves blatant materialism as much as anything.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 02:42 |
|
If someone wants to have kids but has a lovely income there are ways to do it. Live with in-laws or other arrangements. However no income and trying to maintain the American dream of house and two cars is bonkers.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 03:08 |
|
having baby crazy grandparents: GWM
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 03:33 |
|
I Like Jell-O posted:You're right, but the reason they shouldn't have kids is because they aren't responsible parents, as you can see by their financial situation and poor planning. Their money problems are a symptom of their deficiencies, not the cause of them. http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/18/pf/child-cost/ quote:To raise a child born in 2013 to the age of 18, it will cost a middle-income couple just over $245,000, according to newly released estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That's up $4,260, or almost 2%, from the year before. The average American doesn't even have $1000 in savings No wonder so many American kids live in poverty
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 03:41 |
|
My favorite part of her update:quote:He says it is better to be in debt than to live in the ghetto where our children would be in an area with crime, drugs, and so on. Not long ago in the papers a child was raped over there. I don't even know where they're living, but that is guaranteed to be a hilarious exaggeration. Watch yo children! Everybody is gettin raped in the ghetto! Nicely shoehorned in a reference to how those !!! Syrian refugees !!! are also gobbling up all of the government aide. Also lol at the husband's lack of awareness of his dire straits combined with dismissing his wife's legitimate fear for "hormones." And it's OK because the average household or whatever has $20,000 in credit card debt, too!
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 04:17 |
|
EugeneJ posted:http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/18/pf/child-cost/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McXV7tSA1Fw Stanhope loving nails it here.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 04:27 |
|
EugeneJ posted:To raise a child born in 2013 to the age of 18, it will cost a middle-income couple just over $245,000, according to newly released estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. I know these are official figures, but this doesn't sound plausible. A "middle income couple" earns about $50,000 per year. An average earning household with two kids would be spending 50% of GROSS income, i.e. ten years of gross earnings, to get them to age 18. Did they assume that adding a kid proportionally increases housing and health care costs, etc? My kid hasn't cost me nearly that much. We'd still live in the same two bedroom housr, and we'd be paying the same health care premiums either way. If you go the public school route, that's not a major factor, either. Kids eat, but not large amounts. Day care is the main expense that most kids entail. Gotta buy clothes, diapers, and misc expenses etc, but nothing more than a few grand a year. Thesaurus fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Mar 20, 2016 |
# ? Mar 20, 2016 04:35 |
|
When did the american dream have two cars? I thought it was a house, a truck and a horse?
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 05:28 |
|
Thesaurus posted:I know these are official figures, but this doesn't sound plausible. $250,000 for 18 years is a little under $14,000 per year. It sounds plausible to me, but I don't have a kid. Food, clothes, doctors, prescriptions, dentistry, childcare, extra bedroom in your house, etc. It adds up. Some of those costs are covered by subsidized insurance, but it's still part of the cost, even if you're not the one paying for it. It's still part of your total compensation with your employer. So even if a middle income couple earns $50,000, their total compensation is higher than that. Not to mention tax breaks and credits for having children in your household. Uranium 235 fucked around with this message at 05:38 on Mar 20, 2016 |
# ? Mar 20, 2016 05:33 |
|
Devian666 posted:When did the american dream have two cars? I thought it was a house, a truck and a horse? Nah, it's six SUVs, a snowmobile in tropical Florida / jet ski in a landlocked state, and a McMansion. All "paid" for with no money down on credit.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 05:35 |
|
Uranium 235 posted:Is your health insurance subsidized through your employer? I don't understand why your health insurance premium would be the same as if you didn't have a child. It depends on how the insurance is set up. Some plans only have "employee" and "employee plus family" premiums as opposed to "employee", "employee plus spouse", and "employee plus family" categories.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 06:08 |
|
Uranium 235 posted:Is your health insurance subsidized through your employer? I don't understand why your health insurance premium would be the same as if you didn't have a child. Its crazypants numbers. I will soon have 3 kids. By those numbers, I would be $42000 richer if I didn't have those kids. Would it take me $70000 per year to raise 5 kids? That is so blatantly a headline grabbing, exaggerated number that I can't believe that anyone would take it seriously. I'm not saying you COULDN'T spend $14000 per year on a kid, you just don't HAVE to. Its not what a kid "costs".
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 06:13 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 08:06 |
|
I Like Jell-O posted:Its crazypants numbers. I will soon have 3 kids. By those numbers, I would be $42000 richer if I didn't have those kids. Would it take me $70000 per year to raise 5 kids? That is so blatantly a headline grabbing, exaggerated number that I can't believe that anyone would take it seriously. I'm not saying you COULDN'T spend $14000 per year on a kid, you just don't HAVE to. Its not what a kid "costs". Yep, they are made up for headlines. My parents had 5, and they haven't netted $70k a year in take home pay pre-, during-, or post-children.
|
# ? Mar 20, 2016 06:20 |