|
I have been reviewing that Cornholio thread and now this it just literally makes me want to grab people by the shoulders and shake them while I scream "CARS!" in their face, over and over again.
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:She should start a business called "Snake Box" and sell snake boxes and the only thing in the boxes is snakes. "I DON'T KNOW WHAT I EXPECTED, BUT IT WASSSSSSSSSSN'T THISSSSSSSSSSSSSSS"
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:We had somebody quit today because they were moving in a couple of months with their husband. Holy Christ, it might just be because I'm drinking coffee on an empty stomach but this post made me shudderingly, physically ill.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 13:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Under the old plan, you are vested after 10 years and get full benefits after 15 (if you're older than 60) or 20. They did away with that plan, but she was grandfathered in. The new plan is much less generous, but still pretty good. The present value of a $9,100 perpetuity beginning in 30 years assuming a discount rate of 3% in 2016 dollars is $125,000. 
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
My favorite twitch streamer is hopefully his hiding money away underneath his mattress, because the money can't keep coming, but for the meantime I think he's making healthy 6 figures.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
Fun BWM at work. I have a coworker who seems pretty good at their job, sophisticated, very smart, bit of a mentor to a junior person like me and we were in the process of needing to get an ottoman and entertainment center for our new house so I asked a couple of coworkers, this individual included, for a place to get decent quality, affordable furniture (it turns out the answer is Vietnam by way of Amazon, if you're curious). She told me that when they moved to this job this person made their partner cash out an entire 401k PLUS PENALTIES to buy a whole house of modern, design furniture and a "whole house style consultation." They have teenagers about to go to college, dogs (why nice furniture now?) and student loans. My jaw hit the floor. Not quite like ($125k) of NPV burned because "you need your money now" but maybe? I don't know how much it cost, but I have to assume on the order of 30 or 40 thousand dollars, so potentially a lot more in future value, assuming they were reasonably invested.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:You're in a super-highly compensated part of the universe, why the gently caress would your colleague just not be able to budget for that poo poo in advance. I literally have no idea. It just gives you some insight that being a really high earner doesn't necessarily translate to being any good with money.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
Not to dive into politics but if you didn't read his "sage financial advice" as a literal snake dressed up in a human suit hissing at you to come closer so that it could eat you, you need to have a little more critical of an eye toward statements made by your politicians. I mean Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The snake hissed, "We need to make sssmart invessstmentsss that hold value into the future. I always advissse cussstomerss coming onto my lotssssss to get a car that will hold its value. Don't ssssettle for a base model. Packagesss that include DVD Playerss and rear-view camerasss might seem like luxuriessss, but they will more than pay for themselves during ressssale in a few years when those featuresss become ssstandard and people will expect them. I tell people to think of the whole cost of the car and what it can do to work for you, even after you ssssell it. We need to get the sssstate running with that kind of foressssight and not just looking at the next budget or election cccycle." the snake is campaigning on car equity! gwm: using your political campaign to bolster your private business holdings EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 17:35 on May 5, 2017 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Yet another opportunity for me to remind everyone to read the Strong Towns blog (https://www.strongtowns.org/) which spells out in painstaking detail (math!) why you shouldn't center your urban planning around making things as convenient as possible for motorists.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:He's got a high income and (except for a decent mortgage) not much debt. He could buy it and donate it as a park or wildlife preserve for significant tax benefits. Alternatively, without even buying it, he could lobby the city to buy it for the same purpose, but that takes considerably more effort.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Staryberry posted:Hobby Horses don't seem that bad for money. The vet bills are really low, and it seems like good exercise if you don't mind looking like a total idiot. YO these girls have this poo poo on lockdown! They are in all kinds of crazy publicity and it's like the same 8 Finnish girls and they're all friends with one another and I bet they secretly own stock in a hobbyhorse company or something just wait til it goes viral, poo poo's going to be SUPER good with money!
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
My wife bought some LuLaRoe pants but they cute.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Yeah it was called "Random House" and they would just send - get this - a RANDOM book to your HOUSE
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:Canada wouldn't normally have worldwide economic repercussions, except there's a whole lot of Chinese money that's going to disappear along with locals' equity. It still won't have worldwide economic repercussions. The US spends more on healthcare every year than the entire GDPs of Australia and Canada combined.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
Like there are 25 corporations with revenues higher than the Canadian Real Estate market. Who even cares about 200 billion $CAD anymore? (Only about 150B $USD). Is it gonna gently caress poo poo up in Canada? Oh you better believe it, eh, but it's not the 10x leveraged mortgage backed accelerant that we were all getting high on in 2007.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Fitzy Fitz posted:Yes, this is part of their standard "hit the pavement" strategy that also includes offering to do work for free until they see your value, asking about jobs when they aren't even hiring, and following up in-person after an interview. Baby boomers! Soon they'll all be incapacitated and we'll be paying for their healthcare. It sure would be a shame if we just... didn't...
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
lampey posted:Lululemon is an upscale athletic wear company owned by gap, like the banana republic of running clothes. You're thinking of Athleta. Lululemon is a publicly traded Canadian company.
|
|
#
¿
May 9, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
According to Title 7 of the CRA of 1964, federally protected classes include race, color, religion, sex and national origin. Age and disability were specifically added by later individual statutes. Some states add language specifically relating to sexual orientation/gender status. You're also protected from discrimination on the basis of family responsibilities because of the equal pay amendment. Unless you can make the case that your status is a protected class of the variety discussed above (I'm looking at you, poverty), it's not illegal for employers to discriminate against you. Felons, for instance, aren't a "protected class" from discrimination so long as you're not ALSO specifically discriminating by race (or some wonky state law prevents discrimination by felony status). I can ask you how you got to the interview, and then when you tell me you don't have a car and have to take the bus every day, make the decision not to hire you on that basis. I can ask where you live and make the decision not to hire you on that basis, provided my decision can't be framed as being explicitly racist. This bullshit about "can't ask about whether I live or have a car" has literally no basis in reality, and people are readily discriminated against for socioeconomic status every single day with zero legal ramifications. Sex? National origin? You have a case, and a discrimination attorney will HAPPILY dive in.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 12:44
|
|
|
SpelledBackwards posted:Whew, I was worried I couldn't ask candidates if they were alive or not. For our company, living is a vital quality for being able to perform the job duties as described. All of this employment law also makes exceptions for "business necessity" which is why you can argue not hiring pregnant women into lead paint factories, for instance.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Really because I'm pretty sure that's used to do exactly that all the time with zero repercussions since it's basically impossible to prove discrimination even when it happens directly let alone via sly loopholes. Employment discrimination law is actually really enthusiastic about siding with the individual filing a complaint, provided you can show discrimination on the basis of your protected class (there are rules that dictate that the burden of proof falls on employers to prove their practices aren't discriminatory, for instance). Which is so wild that stuff like discrimination based on gender still happens, because if anyone who didn't get a job were to file a complaint, the assessment (and the clear pattern of not interviewing female applicants and then hiring very few of those) would be incredibly difficult for the business to defend. Again however, unless you're discriminating against a legally protected class, businesses are basically given carte blanche to hire employees however they see fit. If you can prove you don't hire anyone from poor neighborhoods (natives and immigrants alike, all races) you're free to do so. Doubly so if you can provide some hand-waving argument about how your business needs "the right kind of people." I'm not saying this is fair or right, but it's how the law works.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
For posters playing along at home, soup for lunch chat is exactly what got us the last thread shut down! Abort! Abort!
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
Is Aldi too expensive for this discussion? They have good frozen fruit for pretty cheap.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Another amazing opportunity to post this sick reference about the ultimate GWM, a wine Ponzi scheme. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/wine-ponzi-scheme
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
I found this link which is both celebrity gossip and good financial advice so I enjoyed reading it quite a bit. http://www.moneycrashers.com/cheap-frugal-celebrities/ Contrasts delightfully with Master P, who went from being worth an estimated $600M to bankrupt. http://theboombox.com/master-p-forced-into-bankruptcy-court-over-240-000/ Sorry Master P!
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Master P was never actually broke and is currently battling with his ex wife over hundreds of millions of dollars in real estate and business assets. Not paying people you owe money and cycling yourself and various business entities though bankruptcy courts is a time honored strategy for extremely wealthy people to avoid honoring debts. This is an incredible revelation. I hope he succeeds. Hundreds of millions of assets is the best kind of bankrupt.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
John Smith posted:Real leaders can accept being led. God I love your posts 
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
John Smith posted:What is wrong with that statement? Real successful people should be able to function effectively as both employees and employers. If you can't even cut it when following orders, how can you cut it when you are running the show yourself? I know it sounded facetious, but I meant it unironically.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
The Millionaire Next Door - one of the best personal finance books in my opinion, especially because it focuses in laser close on spending - makes a really compelling case that paying for the best school your kids can get into is a really great way of keeping your family wealthy over generations. Forcing your kids to "BOOTSTRAPS!" all over again because you're too cheap to save for their education seems to me to be a decidedly counterproductive way to ensure success for your children, your grandchildren and beyond.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Zo posted:lol taking out a loan for university is now "bootstraps"? has the word lost all meaning now? NOT paying for a 529 if you have the money to do so is bad with money and selfish. Here's why - you're taking after tax dollars at 2017 value and compounding them for however many years before bequeathing them to your progeny. If the market returns a fair price for your tolerance of risk, you'll earn the tax you paid on these dollars off and many more. Your child gets this money to attend a prestigious institution of higher learning - among the highest ROI activities a young person can undertake - without subjecting them to crippling amounts of debt which will compound at very similar rates of interest to the investment you made when they were tiny tots! The money they'll have to use to pay off this debt is after tax dollars in 2037-2052 or whatever, and won't have been compounded by a 20 year bath in the market before being used (tax free!) to pay for education! Like what part of this sounds like a good idea to you? I understand if you're too poor to fund a 529 - it's not the top of anyone's list of "needs" for example. Food, water, shelter, I get it. But to treat it as optional if you're going to have children and want them to do well is insanely backwards to me. Real meaningful wealth probably includes the ability to pay for your kids to have a better chance at success than you did, and that includes the halls of the Ivy League. EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Jun 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
edit: you know what this is a derail I don't think we need to be having. I think not funding a 529 if you can afford it is bad with money, and we don't really need to bicker about it.
EAT FASTER!!!!!! fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jun 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2017 04:37
|
|
|
Jesus I had no idea NZ was drowning under that much real estate debt. Did they not have a correction 8 years ago along with the rest of the world?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
I'd say the road less traveled isn't the one that leads directly into financial ruin there, Reddit poster!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Cars are deeply bad with money and anything a person can do to avoid the treadmill of replacing a car before it becomes more expensive to repair than replace is good with money. This includes lying, cheating and stealing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
My goodness what an awful lot of posts in the bad with money thread, I wonder if somebody did something especially bad wi- Oh. Oh no. We're gonna need a bigger bird.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Heads up $30,000 in Bitcoin 5 years ago would have seen a 10-25 fold return on your money to between $300,000 and $750,000.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
This it the part where that cretin comes in and creeps through all your recent posts to tell us about the kind of car you bought for your wife, so be careful posting about cars!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
So Father's Day is coming up, and we need to get gifts for several men in our lives. I suggested to my wife that we dispense with the "try to guess what they want" bullshit and give cash, because receiving cash they have license to get a thing they wanted but we couldn't select. Everyone in our family thinks they're really good at selecting and giving gifts, and they're not - they're terrible and we accumulate crap like nobody's business. She says it's insensitive, that people would be offended, etc. etc. etc. Good with money or bad with money?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Bingo Leon that's the cite I was hoping for - I guess it's much harder for older men though, who might attach more sentiment to a gift they receive from us. Maybe a mixture of 2 sentimental things - a photograph in the card, some food - and then cash or a giftcard as the economic substance of the gift.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
BEHOLD: MY CAPE posted:Imagine ~300 people eating a plated meal on tables with linens under a rented tent at a place which is a physically desirable location for some reason or other. There is an open bar serving alcohol for several hours. A band and dance floor are present and the sound/lighting are rented as well as the required bathroom trailers. There are numerous flowers. One individual in particular is wearing a very expensive dress which may cost between $2-10k or so. That's a $100,000 wedding. I see this as more of a $50,000 wedding.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:28 |
|
|
It must be so, so much money for this even to be a question. If it was $100 or even $1000 do you think he'd have any hesitation about it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2017 20:24
|
|