|
Oh Reddit... This is a perfect firestorm of BWM and BWL. On the plus side, the guy realizes he's way behind and wants to catch up, but seriously, how did he not notice in, like, high school that his friends were getting jobs and drivers' licenses and whatnot? https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/5armri/had_a_really_sheltered_life_dont_know_what_to_do/?st=iv1fy8zq&sh=a1952cb4 quote:Quick backstory. In Nevada. Grew up less than middle class but not exactly poor enough to ever qualify for welfare but wealthy enough to be even low end middle class. Mother and father always said they would provide, kept me in the home, never allowed to have a job, drive, never said my bad eating habits were bad, etc. Far as I knew my room was my world.
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
He didn't notice because of severe helicopter parenting. Dude was raised to be a shut in - he probably didn't have friends. I have no idea what the parents thought he'd do after they kicked the bucket, but at least he's started to tackle this before that happened.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
April posted:Oh Reddit... This is a perfect firestorm of BWM and BWL. On the plus side, the guy realizes he's way behind and wants to catch up, but seriously, how did he not notice in, like, high school that his friends were getting jobs and drivers' licenses and whatnot? That classic American tale of growing up "less than middle class" with a father whose retirement account balance at one point was in the millions
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
quote:Father is pushing 60 and still working, his retirement went from in the millions to 200k due to some bullshit at work and economy. He will be getting like 50k the end of this year. I'd love to know the story there. Like, what the father says as well as what actually happened. I take that "millions" part with a big grain of salt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:He didn't notice because of severe helicopter parenting. Dude was raised to be a shut in - he probably didn't have friends. I'm wondering if he might be slightly autistic, or mentally disabled in some way. I mean, wouldn't he, at some point, have wanted to get laid or something? I understand overprotective parents, but it seems like most normal kids with that kind of home life either rebel pretty openly, or find ways to sneak around mom & dad's rules. Also curious about the "millions" dad had.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
April posted:Also curious about the "millions" dad had.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
April posted:I'm wondering if he might be slightly autistic, or mentally disabled in some way. I mean, wouldn't he, at some point, have wanted to get laid or something? I understand overprotective parents, but it seems like most normal kids with that kind of home life either rebel pretty openly, or find ways to sneak around mom & dad's rules. It's pretty odd but there are some very sheltered people out there. I couldn't imagine having no interests at all, what would life be like?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Devian666 posted:It's pretty odd but there are some very sheltered people out there. I couldn't imagine having no interests at all, what would life be like? I knew some people who were completely satisfied with videogames and online friends 100% of the time, the internet makes being a shut-in real easy. e: Okay re-reading it I missed the part where he had extreme anxiety going outside, it sounds like he's just super agoraphobic and his parents are really bad enablers cuz he's an only child or something. I had real bad agoraphobia when I was at my worst mentally back in highschool and it's awful. You basically cannot feel at all comfortable unless you are in your house, everywhere else just feels wrong, like you have to constantly be careful and on edge and you can't relax at all, and so you slowly start seeking ways to avoid having to do things in public or go outside at all and just cocoon up 
Shame Boy fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
This is the wrong thread for this, but nonetheless it's bizarre ad campaign and worth sharing. www.ubank.com.au/home-truths posted:Real estate tips from the terminally ill Are Australian banks GWM or is it a ploy because they know people won't heed their message?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Suspicious Lump posted:This is the wrong thread for this, but nonetheless it's bizarre ad campaign and worth sharing. Don't know what their game is, but the banks were throwing around credit cards like confetti a while ago, much like the US banks. Perhaps they accidentally hired a bunch of Goths for a marketing team, rather than the usual yuppies?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
Suspicious Lump posted:This is the wrong thread for this, but nonetheless it's bizarre ad campaign and worth sharing. There are people in the Australian/New Zealand banking sector that advise people not to borrow too much. Although if they qualify and insist on borrowing they will lend. I dug into the site a little bit and their message is buy less house, or only as much house as you need. It's GWM and good with being a bank in terms of financial stability. They are still trying to lend though. However the big four banks in Australia are tightening their lending and boosting capital reserves at the moment. They have finally realised the Australia mortgage bubble and the crazy bubble in New Zealand are huge risks. We're probably 2-4 years from an actual fall in property prices, unless panic sets in earlier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 08:34
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:I wasn't talking about bringing an animal out in public, but simply living with one where the state/county/city normally doesn't allow people to posses that particular species for pet purposes. My understanding is that "therapy/emotional support animals" still must be exempt from apartment/HOA rules which would forbid them, as well as laws prohibiting so-called "dangerous" dog breeds - I was merely wondering if a similar principle might apply with exotic pets (at least the ones that couldn't easily kill someone). Dude, come on. Don't do something like this. Are many rules and regulations around animals misguided or, in the case of dangerous dog laws, even racist/classist? Absolutely. So go out and campaign to change rules you find unfair. Actually talk to your landlord about pet deposits and exceptions. Pay the necessary premium and spend the extra time to find a pet friendly place. Do anything but exploit a loophole you know isn't intended for you. If you claim your flying squirrel or prairie dog or pit bull as an emotional support animal to 'exploit a loophole' people will think you're a dick. Is that necessarily fair? Maybe not! You're still going to look like a dick. Worse, you add to the growing suspicion people have of anyone relying on an animal for any kind of help experience. You don't have a right to own a pet. An emotional support or service animal is not a pet, they're a medical accommodation. Please don't add to the abuse and misuse of these exceptions. Edit: I wrote this last night when I was very tired and came off more of a dick myself in tone than I meant to. I love pets (I have a cat) and I appreciate wanting them. I don't think you're a bad person for having this idea occur to you, I just think you probably didn't think it all the way through. Tiny Deer fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Nov 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 09:31
|
|
|
How about you don't base large financial life decisions on your ability to own a pitbull or whatever and just get a regular dog while living in California then get your mutant lizard-ferret you actually want when you retire with all your gobs of robot green?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 13:27
|
|
|
Housing has different rules than the ADA; it does recognize emotional support animals, and you can require that an emotional support animal be allowed in your residence. In the case of emotional support animals in housing, property managers are legally allowed to require you present them with a letter from your therapist, who is treating you actively, prescribing you an emotional support animal. Good luck getting a therapist to prescribe you an emotional support lion. Also if you abuse that poo poo because you want to have a pet but don't want to pay a lot of extra money because pets often end up destroying domiciles and you want to use the ESA loophole, you're a self centered prick who will ruin the way people who legitimately can benefit from it as a medical treatment get better with your lovely loophole navigating. Maybe instead of abusing the loophole around ESAs you can abuse the loophole around graveyards and shoot yourself in the head, which is very good with money!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
Welp, my long battle tilting at windmills to get my coworkers to not pick a 457b provider with 2% ERs and Fees is over. If anyone wanted to know how it ended here's what happened. I managed to get the State Treasurer to make a couple changes and clarify a few things, but overall it is still pretty bad. - The .08% quarterly management fee is actually a .08% annual fee that is assessed quarterly. So good news. - We still went with the terrible ER and fund choice vendor because of phone apps and an HTML calculator. - We previously had to pay no additional fees for index funds, but now we have a higher ER for Index funds (Vanguard S&P500 normal ER is .07, but we pay .11) to subsidize the actively managed funds. The logic behind this is that previously, the actively managed funds were the most popular choices and people didn't realize that they were paying 2.5% or more in fees and expense ratios on them. So, instead of removing the 2.5% fee active managed funds, they are charging everyone who invests in index funds an addition 50% ER to subsidize the actively managed funds, so dumb people are ripped off less. This was justified on the basis that these funds were the most popular and that many people in our 457b plan have a pension, so subsidizing riskier investments in their 457b at the expense of safer investments made sense, because they already had a fixed income stream. The matter is closed for several years and it sucks. They might consider adding more fund options next year, but our treasurer said that "more than 10 funds and people start to get overwhelmed with choices. People like the idea of others managing money for them and we have an S&P 500 Fund for those that don't." Everything is worse than before, but not as bad as it could have been. AmericanFinancials.txt
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Haha man that is awful. Sorry it wound up that way.Thanks for the updates and the insight into the institutional thought process (really sounds more like herd mentality). Does your plan allow in-service rollovers? You would lose some of the flexibility benefits of the 457 but you could roll into an IRA annually or whenever based on the vesting/match schedule to cut down on the fees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 15:12
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The logic behind this is that previously, the actively managed funds were the most popular choices and people didn't realize that they were paying 2.5% or more in fees and expense ratios on them. So, instead of removing the 2.5% fee active managed funds, they are charging everyone who invests in index funds an addition 50% ER to subsidize the actively managed funds, so dumb people are ripped off less. Call the whistle-blower hotline, what they're doing is actually illegal under ERISA. Send HR links to successful ERISA suits and make some noise.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Seriously, you shouldn't have to absolutely blatantly subsidize other idiots so obviously.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Call the whistle-blower hotline, what they're doing is actually illegal under ERISA. Send HR links to successful ERISA suits and make some noise. If I'm remembering correctly he is like the only person fighting this, so there's no way they'll ever connect him to that anonymous whistle blower. I bet that Hertz apprenticeship has a better retirement plan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:If I'm remembering correctly he is like the only person fighting this, so there's no way they'll ever connect him to that anonymous whistle blower. If he gets fired because of it that lawsuit would be a million times more juicy than any retirement plan changes ever would be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
I spoke to the plan administrator and he says that this is not an ERISA issue because: - Part of the reason they are transitioning to this new provider is for clarity of expenses. Previously, the people who were getting reamed with 2% fees didn't realize what their fees were because you had to read the prospectus. A majority of people in the plan were going to these managed asset funds and not realizing how much they were paying. The increased ER for Index Funds represents the actual cost you will pay for the fund including the overall administrative fee that applies to all funds. - He says that the new managed funds seem higher because they show the true cost of the funds upfront. The example he gave was that Fidelity Target Funds had an actual expense ratio of around .49 , but the face value of the ER was half of that. He says that the actively managed fees in the new plan are actually lower fee overall compared to some of what Fidelity was offering before. - He said that people in the Index funds were being effectively subsidized by the majority of participants who were in the other funds and didn't realize that they had upwards of 120 basis points of extra fees. Now, everyone spreads the admin fees around and pays the face value of ER. - People who are 100% into index funds are objectively worse off, but they were effectively getting a free ride before. By cutting the fund choices down to 8 from 300+ it makes it easier to make decisions for most people and it is harder for people to accidently pay more than they intended. - A 1% ER + maintenance fee is not unreasonable for an actively managed growth fund and since those were the most popular funds before, it makes sense to have several versions of those funds for people to choose from. Everyone is automatically dumped into a Target Retirement fund with a .48 ER initially, so they have to actually choose to go into those funds and the new clarity of fees means they know what they are getting. 1% + Maintenance fees is much preferable to the 2.5% that was not clearly presented before. - An S&P500 index fund, bond fund, and Target Retirement fund option is available if you don't want these funds.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
If you have a cheap S&P 500 and bond fund you should consider yourself lucky. You really only need to use those two anyway. And it's somewhat true that the idiots paying 2% for active management are subsidizing the plan overall - 401k providers have a base level of fee that they need to make, and either the employer can pay that or the fund can charge extra fees to make it up. For example, I think a Fidelity plan had to make like $6,000 base + $100 per participant per year, but they would apply some management fees of the more expensive funds to that amount.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:I spoke to the plan administrator and he says that this is not an ERISA issue because: Oh, the person doing illegal things is telling you they're not doing illegal things? Have you looked at ERISA lawsuits? They're over much smaller expenses than you're dealing with. The biggest issue with ERISA lawsuits is that unless you've got a nice juicy class-action (requiring enough potential participants for a firm to take the case on for potential future gains), you're going to be paying too much for a lawyer to help you compared to your own personal benefit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:How about you don't base large financial life decisions on your ability to own a pitbull or whatever and just get a regular dog while living in California then get your mutant lizard-ferret you actually want when you retire with all your gobs of robot green? Well, as I said in the last sentence of my previous post, there's also the matter of Silicon Valley housing prices. Though it turns out there's a decent amount of robotics going on in the Midwest, so focusing my job search there should be GWM. Krispy Kareem posted:If I'm remembering correctly he is like the only person fighting this, so there's no way they'll ever connect him to that anonymous whistle blower. baquerd posted:The biggest issue with ERISA lawsuits is that unless you've got a nice juicy class-action (requiring enough potential participants for a firm to take the case on for potential future gains), you're going to be paying too much for a lawyer to help you compared to your own personal benefit. These people would probably be selling their overpriced retirement funds to a bunch of other companies, wouldn't they? That should solve both of those problems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
https://np.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/5auvih/connecticut_custody_issue_and_reasonable_support/quote:Hi, I am using a friends account and just looking for advice. I have been going back and forth with my ex over child support for the past few years, we have a court order in place that he has mostly complied with but recently he has started to become unreasonable. He had been refusing to pay for certain things that are critical to our child's well being. The court order requires him to pay for essentials as far as our child's up bringing is concerned, but suddenly he is not being cooperative. It's very important that our child recieve music lessons, horseback lessons, attend summer camp etc., but he is now claiming that he is not willing to pay for these things. He knows very well that these things are essential if our child is to fit in and excel in our community but apparently since he has a new family and lives in a less prestigious area (even though he prob spent 2 million on his new home despite the fact it's practically a dump from what I've heard). He had always paid the "basic" child support so far and then some but now he is starting to get picky over extra stuff. His new wife just had a baby and I think it's very unfair that his first child should have to go without. I'm more than able to cover the costs of her extra curricular activities, but feel he should as well. If he's not willing to can I request a reduction in his visitation? I just don't think it's fair that he has the right to deny her these things because he has a new family now. What can I do legally to get him to step up to the plate?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 05:30
|
|
|
You know what, gently caress all those people. Don't know where to start, don't care to figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
NancyPants posted:You know what, gently caress all those people. Don't know where to start, don't care to figure it out. Hahaha, I got more and more unreasonably angry the more I read.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
Being angry with those people isn't unreasonable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
Hey now how can I truly let my child grow up to do anything they want if i don't properly prepare them for a career in horse dancing just in case!
Shame Boy fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Nov 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
quote:She desperately wants to take music lessons from a very prestigious school but he thinks it's a waste of money on a four year old (it's less than an thousand a month) quote:music lessons...four year old...less than an thousand of month 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
That's such a troll post, meant to prey on white dudes in tech. 1. Clearly white. 2. Describes living in a high COL area where a terrible house costs 2M. 3. Wants to enroll the kid in activities like horseback riding and music class, not a coding camp.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 12:16
|
|
|
Residency Evil posted:That's such a troll post, meant to prey on white dudes in tech. I'm on board with this interpretation. In NYC/Boston/Chicago, someone like this wouldn't post this online and I don't think there are southern metros this expensive. Her description makes it sound like she also has non-trivial sums of money which would make me assume she would just lawyer up or call in her parents to help sue her ex. Only thing the author could add would be that her ex isn't paying for cable and bon bons anymore really.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
crazypeltast52 posted:I'm on board with this interpretation. In NYC/Boston/Chicago, someone like this wouldn't post this online and I don't think there are southern metros this expensive. It's certainly likely but I did know a rich person who posted incredibly dumb legal questions on the internet like this so who knows 
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
That kid could be the next great horseback fiddler of our time! The likes of which this country hasn't seen since "Galloping" Jeremiah Smithston in the 1870's!
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:It's certainly likely but I did know a rich person who posted incredibly dumb legal questions on the internet like this so who knows Hell, quite a few of the stories in this thread involve well-off people who somehow never learned much better money management skills than the average rent-to-own customer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Reddit parent posted:I'm from Greenwich CT which is a much different social status from the rest of CT so no, I'm not a troll. Sorry if you are from a lesser area of CT and can't understand the social implications this entails. Sounds like a troll, but I still want to believe that someone out there is actually fighting for child support payments in order to put their 4 year old on horseback.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
I guessed Brentwood, TN but I suppose you can be a classless douche anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
MrKatharsis posted:I guessed Brentwood, TN but I suppose you can be a classless douche anywhere. Tell us about the social implications entailed by your daughter not getting her horseback riding lessons, do all the neighbors sneer at how poor you must be
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Teeter posted:Sounds like a troll, but I still want to believe that someone out there is actually fighting for child support payments in order to put their 4 year old on horseback. I mean, it happens. But it's like some rich divorcee trying to negotiate a better deal from her super-rich ex and claiming 80k a month isn't enough to raise children on. It literally never happens anywhere else. But I absolutely love the story for just how many triggers it pulls. Barry posted:If he gets fired because of it that lawsuit would be a million times more juicy than any retirement plan changes ever would be. It's so easy to fire people, even if they are a protected class or have legal protections. Just look at those poor Wells Fargo employees who were canned for reporting illegal activity. It's taken tens of thousands of hours of media coverage and loving Senate testimony for them to even get a shot at legal remedy. And even then, it's only the sheer scope of the crime that makes lawsuits viable. Krispy Wafer fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Nov 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
Teeter posted:Sounds like a troll, but I still want to believe that someone out there is actually fighting for child support payments in order to put their 4 year old on horseback. I've known people from Connecticut. Probably not a troll.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 18:52
|
|