Overheard at Work

[willow]

I have never understood those who get upset by the automatic credit limit increases. As others have said, my credit limit has no bearing on how much I spend. I am curious to hear the reasons of those who called to get their limits lowered again. Is it because of the impact to your credit score? Or maybe just the principle of a change being made to your account without you consent?

For my early-twenties self, it was a combo of 1) knowing that the company was hoping I was a consumer sucka and that raising my credit limit was not done out of the goodness of their hearts, but to get me to spend more; and 2) yes, the principle of having this done without my consent.  It was the reflex of someone who has always had a healthy distrust of consumerism and the structures that have been created to take advantage of people's lack of self-control.  At that point in my life, I was still feeling my way, and wanted no extra opportunities to fall into a debt trap.

These days, many years later, I know myself well enough that my credit card limit doesn't affect my behavior, so I don't care if it's raised.  But back then, the horror that anyone could ever possibly put THAT much on a credit card made me have them lower it out of shock and indignation.

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

[Wings5]

I can only remember having my credit line increased once.  Like Kris, I called and had it lowered.  I was in grad school and they raised it to something around the amount of my annual stipend!  I have excellent credit and have not gotten any automatic increases on any of my several cards, so maybe they just aren't doing them without specific requests much anymore?  I also thought it was insane when I was making like $40K and had just bought my first house as a single person, then got pre-approved to buy a $32K vehicle with no down payment (and if I wanted a more expensive car, well just call).  That was circa 2004, but still.

When I was making $3,000 per year in college I was approved for a $29,000 limit on a Chase card.

Also, regarding bringing lunch from home, I have a friend who is 31 who went grocery shopping for the first time this year. 13+ years of eating out every single meal when he wasn't at home with the rents during school breaks.

[johnny847]

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

With regard to #2, that is meaningless. See http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0213-lost-or-stolen-credit-atm-and-debit-cards.
By law, for credit cards:

• Your liability is capped at $50 for fraudulent transactions, but can be further capped by the two following conditions
• If you report a lost credit card before fraudulent use, you're not liable for anything
• If your number is stolen but not your card, you're not liable for anything

[Cinder]

... I am glad I wasn't born in 1986 and graduating into that mess. ...

I was born in 1985, and that seemed like the perfect time.  Graduated college in 2007, found a job, and then everything tanked.  I was contributing to meet the match for my 401k at my job, but I know other people who put more in and we happened to luck out there buying all our stocks on sale!  You are right though, being born in 86 or 87 would have been a LOT rougher out of college. 

[pancakes]

Yeah, the whole 'Anyone want to go to ___?' thing. I'm trying to get enough people to bring their own lunches that it becomes a cascading thing and forces everyone else to do it since the social aspect is moved to sitting at the large conference table and chatting from walking to the restaurant and spending god knows what. So far, 2 people (including me) bring lunch every day with a couple others occasionally brown-bagging.

This DH's workplace. They use every excuse to go out for lunch. Someone is going away on holidays? Office lunch (at employee's expense)! Someone has come back from holidays? Office lunch (at employee's expense)! Someone is engaged/married/divorced/bought a house/got a promotion/cutting back their hours/started working/finished working/having a baby? Office lunch (at employee's expense)!

[firelight]

I politely decline any employee paid office lunches for any occasion unless I know the person really well and am ready to spend $10 on bad food for him/her. That list is very small thankfully.

[zephyr911]

Going carry on free is so wonderful.

Oh, I agree.
I've done it a few times. I felt like I must be hot shit... someone somewhere was carrying all my stuff for me. LOL

[zephyr911]

I stand corrected.  I think that is a major flaw in the turbo tax software then, because it didn't add the credit for me until I put in my IRA contributions.

Might want to double-check that your W-2 entries include your (correction:) 401(k) deductions with the correct coding. I would be surprised if TurboTax missed that, considering the resources at their disposal.
TaxAct pulled both my IRA and TSP (a different type of elective deferral with a different code, but reported in the same box) into the RSCC calculation.
http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Common-Errors-on-Form-W2-Codes-for-Retirement-Plans

[johnny847]

I stand corrected.  I think that is a major flaw in the turbo tax software then, because it didn't add the credit for me until I put in my IRA contributions.

Might want to double-check that your W-2 entries include your IRA deductions with the correct coding. I would be surprised if TurboTax missed that, considering the resources at their disposal.
TaxAct pulled both my IRA and TSP (a different type of elective deferral with a different code, but reported in the same box) into the RSCC calculation.
http://www.irs.gov/Retirement-Plans/Common-Errors-on-Form-W2-Codes-for-Retirement-Plans

Huh? Your W-2 says nothing about your IRA deduction. It does say stuff about workplace retirement plans (401k, 403b, 457b, TSP, etc).

[horsepoor]

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

With regard to #2, that is meaningless. See http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0213-lost-or-stolen-credit-atm-and-debit-cards.
By law, for credit cards:

• Your liability is capped at $50 for fraudulent transactions, but can be further capped by the two following conditions
• If you report a lost credit card before fraudulent use, you're not liable for anything
• If your number is stolen but not your card, you're not liable for anything

Yes, well at the time I was worried about the liability.  And those caps assume that the credit card company won't string you along and try to pin the charges on you.

Now I don't worry because I can monitor all my accounts easily through Mint.  15 years ago I'd never know if someone had racked up $10K on an unused card until the statement came in the mail.

[johnny847]

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

With regard to #2, that is meaningless. See http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0213-lost-or-stolen-credit-atm-and-debit-cards.
By law, for credit cards:

• Your liability is capped at $50 for fraudulent transactions, but can be further capped by the two following conditions
• If you report a lost credit card before fraudulent use, you're not liable for anything
• If your number is stolen but not your card, you're not liable for anything

Yes, well at the time I was worried about the liability.  And those caps assume that the credit card company won't string you along and try to pin the charges on you.

Now I don't worry because I can monitor all my accounts easily through Mint.  15 years ago I'd never know if someone had racked up $10K on an unused card until the statement came in the mail.

Um no, by law your liability is capped at $50, period, regardless of when you report the transaction as fraudulent. And the FCBA which established those caps was passed in 1974. So unless you were talking about credit card use before 1974, keeping your credit limit low for the sake of reducing damages from identity theft was pointless unless your credit limit was less than $50, which would make your credit card pretty close to useless.

[zephyr911]

Huh? Your W-2 says nothing about your IRA deduction. It does say stuff about workplace retirement plans (401k, 403b, 457b, TSP, etc).

Oops, I meant the 401(k) deduction.

[willow]

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

With regard to #2, that is meaningless. See http://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0213-lost-or-stolen-credit-atm-and-debit-cards.
By law, for credit cards:

• Your liability is capped at $50 for fraudulent transactions, but can be further capped by the two following conditions
• If you report a lost credit card before fraudulent use, you're not liable for anything
• If your number is stolen but not your card, you're not liable for anything

Thank you for that. I completely understand I'm not liable. I just don't see why I should give them more to steal. I don't actually use or need the credit, so might as well keep it low.

[shelivesthedream]

CW1: So I sold my BMW at last!
CW2: Great! Who did you sell it to?
CW1: Some guy from [city] who's buying it for his 19-year-old son.
CW2: You checked the money went through before you gave him the car, right?
CW1: I didn't need to! He just transferred his bit to the dealership then I sent in enough to pay the rest of the loan off - but the loan's for the car not me, so even if it didn't, now he's got the car, he's got the loan too!

So many WTFs. I work in admin - we are not paid that much. She should not have bought a BMW, let alone PAID SOMEONE to take it away!

[thd7t]

CW1: So I sold my BMW at last!
CW2: Great! Who did you sell it to?
CW1: Some guy from [city] who's buying it for his 19-year-old son.
CW2: You checked the money went through before you gave him the car, right?
CW1: I didn't need to! He just transferred his bit to the dealership then I sent in enough to pay the rest of the loan off - but the loan's for the car not me, so even if it didn't, now he's got the car, he's got the loan too!

So many WTFs. I work in admin - we are not paid that much. She should not have bought a BMW, let alone PAID SOMEONE to take it away!

I guess that paying someone to take it away could be seen as cutting losses and not buying into the sunk cost fallacy...but then again, they bought the BMW that they couldn't afford in the first place!

[Apples]

Apples wins the thread!

I drove by a pet store once with a big sign saying "$0 down puppies!" and it made me want to scream.
[/quote]

Thanks 2ndtimer!  And I can't believe some people buy pets with loans. Argh!!!!  Now a few days later it seems I've talked him out of the expensive dog purchase; instead he is perusing local shelters for a dog he likes.  Though he still won't be able to cover any vet bills. Call me old fashioned, but I really can't fathom getting a loan for a dog.  And I can't believe pet stores have their own financing systems in place, ketchup!  I would scream with you over that.

[shelivesthedream]

CW1: So I sold my BMW at last!
CW2: Great! Who did you sell it to?
CW1: Some guy from [city] who's buying it for his 19-year-old son.
CW2: You checked the money went through before you gave him the car, right?
CW1: I didn't need to! He just transferred his bit to the dealership then I sent in enough to pay the rest of the loan off - but the loan's for the car not me, so even if it didn't, now he's got the car, he's got the loan too!

So many WTFs. I work in admin - we are not paid that much. She should not have bought a BMW, let alone PAID SOMEONE to take it away!

I guess that paying someone to take it away could be seen as cutting losses and not buying into the sunk cost fallacy...but then again, they bought the BMW that they couldn't afford in the first place!

As much as I would love to charitably think that, I'm pretty sure she has just bought another car to replace it because she lives in a village. If £A=total loan, £B = how much the buyer paid, £C = how much she had to pay to make up the difference, and £D = the cost of the new car, then I'm pretty sure C + D = A.

Just maybe-possibly-perhaps she had thought about that but bought a super-efficient car so her capital put into the car stays the same but her petrol costs go down. But this is a woman who went shopping as a birthday present to herself even though she complains about not having enough money to buy (yes, buy) lunch. (Rant: How hard is it to bring lunch?? We only get half an hour and the nearest place is a supermarket ten minutes walk away. So she spends twenty minutes of her lunch break walking to then spend ten eating some shitty sandwich at double speed. It's not even like we're surrounded by delicious, tempting cafes. It's an EFFORT to NOT bring lunch!)

I do feel a little bit sorry for her, because she has just completed an awkward divorce with 50/50 childcare arrangements, so when her son is not around she self-soothes by spending money (mostly on clothes and beauty products). But only a little bit.

[mm1970]

I'm always surprised how much my coworkers struggle to figure out "lunch". As in, they would like to bring lunch from home, but have no idea what to make, how to grocery shop with meals in mind, or how to plan even a few days ahead. Or they make things they dislike, then complain about it - why would you even cook things you hate? Argh.

I'm even more surprised when the people are in their 40s and 50s. Uh, you've been working for 20-30 years - why have you not figured this shit out by now? It's so simple. Ghaa.

A good number of my coworkers come to work most days having no idea what they will do for lunch. Once it's within about a half hour of noon they start asking each other where they should go out to eat...

Yeah, the whole 'Anyone want to go to ___?' thing. I'm trying to get enough people to bring their own lunches that it becomes a cascading thing and forces everyone else to do it since the social aspect is moved to sitting at the large conference table and chatting from walking to the restaurant and spending god knows what. So far, 2 people (including me) bring lunch every day with a couple others occasionally brown-bagging.

I successfully did this at two companies. It started with just me, for a few weeks, at both places. 

Eventually it was standing room only.  Our lunch room you'd have to take a number (ok,  not really) at the old place.  At the current place, we have a tiny 4 seater table that we squeeze 6 people around, and once you are done you have to give someone else your spot.

[solon]

I'm always surprised how much my coworkers struggle to figure out "lunch". As in, they would like to bring lunch from home, but have no idea what to make, how to grocery shop with meals in mind, or how to plan even a few days ahead. Or they make things they dislike, then complain about it - why would you even cook things you hate? Argh.

I'm even more surprised when the people are in their 40s and 50s. Uh, you've been working for 20-30 years - why have you not figured this shit out by now? It's so simple. Ghaa.

A good number of my coworkers come to work most days having no idea what they will do for lunch. Once it's within about a half hour of noon they start asking each other where they should go out to eat...

Yeah, the whole 'Anyone want to go to ___?' thing. I'm trying to get enough people to bring their own lunches that it becomes a cascading thing and forces everyone else to do it since the social aspect is moved to sitting at the large conference table and chatting from walking to the restaurant and spending god knows what. So far, 2 people (including me) bring lunch every day with a couple others occasionally brown-bagging.

I successfully did this at two companies. It started with just me, for a few weeks, at both places. 

Eventually it was standing room only.  Our lunch room you'd have to take a number (ok,  not really) at the old place.  At the current place, we have a tiny 4 seater table that we squeeze 6 people around, and once you are done you have to give someone else your spot.

I think a lot of people understand that eating out every day is bad. They want to change but don't know how. So when they see someone actually doing, it gives them the impetus to try it themselves.

Good on you!

[Adventine]

Heh. I've had three jobs to date. At the first one, I just didn't eat lunch because I was too lazy to bring anything from home. At the second one, I worked from home. At the third one, the employer provides three meals per day. I don't think I want to go back to the model of having to prepare my own meals for work.

Company-sponsored meals are an incredible perk. My boyfriend's employer provides free catered meals to everyone in the office. Three different dishes and an afternoon snack, available 24/7. The menu changes daily. Free bottled water, juice and soda, too. And still, he tells me some people go out to buy lunch! It isn't even as if they were buying better-tasting food. Some people are just hooked on the ritual of getting out of the office.

[pancakes]

I work in the new home construction industry. One of our staff members who helps people pick out their kitchens made this comment: "I don't know why people make such a big deal about an extra $5k for a stone bench top, they are paying for it with a mortgage anyway so won't even notice it over the 20-30 years".

I tried to explain that the extra $5k would actually work out closer to $10k with interest depending on the rate over the loan if the owner only made the minimum repayments. There was no point.

[boarder42]

Heh. I've had three jobs to date. At the first one, I just didn't eat lunch because I was too lazy to bring anything from home. At the second one, I worked from home. At the third one, the employer provides three meals per day. I don't think I want to go back to the model of having to prepare my own meals for work.

Company-sponsored meals are an incredible perk. My boyfriend's employer provides free catered meals to everyone in the office. Three different dishes and an afternoon snack, available 24/7. The menu changes daily. Free bottled water, juice and soda, too. And still, he tells me some people go out to buy lunch! It isn't even as if they were buying better-tasting food. Some people are just hooked on the ritual of getting out of the office.

i would most likely still bring my lunch and eat it at work if my employer gave food.  more often than not the food floating around my office isnt the best food to be eating.  I'd rather know what i'm putting in my body.  Even stuff prepared so called healthy may be loaded with preservatives and other bad things for you.

[CaliToCayman]

This isnt really a story any one particular person did that was worth a face punch per se, but pretty interesting:

I'm on a conference call discussing a company we've taken into receivership and as they were discussing one of the employees at the company they were very careful not to "overwhelm" him with extra work because they considered him a flight risk. Why? Because they are under the impression he is financially independent (their words).

It took me back a bit to see just how employers view your financial independence as a bad thing. Then of course I was reminded of the fact that the lady sitting next to me didn't actually NEED her job because her husband makes $500k+ and so when hiring her they gave her the Manager title even though her background didn't warrant it at all, its just that in order to get her on board at the price she wanted, they had to give her the title. I, on the other hand, WAS a manager within the company (but different department) back in the US and they brought me in at a lower level. I partially blame myself for just grabbing the job, but I still believe what they did to me was slimy since if I had transferred departments within the US I would have still been at the manager level (while I agreed to take a step down for a short period of time, a couple weeks after I signed they informed me that it would take a year longer before I could be a manager again).

Moral of the story is that its amazing how when you DON'T need their money, they pay you more and work you less. I'm currently working on my resume for when my contract is up as I don't intend to re-sign haha.   

[Adventine]

Heh. I've had three jobs to date. At the first one, I just didn't eat lunch because I was too lazy to bring anything from home. At the second one, I worked from home. At the third one, the employer provides three meals per day. I don't think I want to go back to the model of having to prepare my own meals for work.

Company-sponsored meals are an incredible perk. My boyfriend's employer provides free catered meals to everyone in the office. Three different dishes and an afternoon snack, available 24/7. The menu changes daily. Free bottled water, juice and soda, too. And still, he tells me some people go out to buy lunch! It isn't even as if they were buying better-tasting food. Some people are just hooked on the ritual of getting out of the office.

i would most likely still bring my lunch and eat it at work if my employer gave food.  more often than not the food floating around my office isnt the best food to be eating.  I'd rather know what i'm putting in my body.  Even stuff prepared so called healthy may be loaded with preservatives and other bad things for you.

Agreed, but as a transition for somebody who buys lunch out every day, company-sponsored food is a better alternative. The ideal situation would be to bring your own meals (and control everything that goes into your food), but, as we've seen in this thread, a lot of people think of it as too much work.

[Nubs]

This isnt really a story any one particular person did that was worth a face punch per se, but pretty interesting:

I'm on a conference call discussing a company we've taken into receivership and as they were discussing one of the employees at the company they were very careful not to "overwhelm" him with extra work because they considered him a flight risk. Why? Because they are under the impression he is financially independent (their words).

It took me back a bit to see just how employers view your financial independence as a bad thing. Then of course I was reminded of the fact that the lady sitting next to me didn't actually NEED her job because her husband makes $500k+ and so when hiring her they gave her the Manager title even though her background didn't warrant it at all, its just that in order to get her on board at the price she wanted, they had to give her the title. I, on the other hand, WAS a manager within the company (but different department) back in the US and they brought me in at a lower level. I partially blame myself for just grabbing the job, but I still believe what they did to me was slimy since if I had transferred departments within the US I would have still been at the manager level (while I agreed to take a step down for a short period of time, a couple weeks after I signed they informed me that it would take a year longer before I could be a manager again).

Moral of the story is that its amazing how when you DON'T need their money, they pay you more and work you less. I'm currently working on my resume for when my contract is up as I don't intend to re-sign haha.

This is pretty awesome. 

[RL12]

Today while talking with two coworkers the topic of cars and car payments came up...

CW1: I absolutely hate car payments, but I've just accepted the fact that I will always have at least one.
CW2: Well yeah, but having only one is way better than having multiples.

CW2 was talking about how her son is about to turn 16 and they were going to buy him a new car but instead she thinks she's going to take the new car and give her son her older one. Then to make it even better, when her youngest son turns 16 she plans to just keep passing the cars down the line and she'll get a newer one then too.

Her youngest is only a few years away from turning 16 now so she'll still be paying for that car when she gives it to her son. And that is assuming she won't still be paying for her current car. She could possibly be paying four car loans in just a few years if you include her husbands car! I removed myself from the conversation at this point.

[CaliToCayman]

This isnt really a story any one particular person did that was worth a face punch per se, but pretty interesting:

I'm on a conference call discussing a company we've taken into receivership and as they were discussing one of the employees at the company they were very careful not to "overwhelm" him with extra work because they considered him a flight risk. Why? Because they are under the impression he is financially independent (their words).

It took me back a bit to see just how employers view your financial independence as a bad thing. Then of course I was reminded of the fact that the lady sitting next to me didn't actually NEED her job because her husband makes $500k+ and so when hiring her they gave her the Manager title even though her background didn't warrant it at all, its just that in order to get her on board at the price she wanted, they had to give her the title. I, on the other hand, WAS a manager within the company (but different department) back in the US and they brought me in at a lower level. I partially blame myself for just grabbing the job, but I still believe what they did to me was slimy since if I had transferred departments within the US I would have still been at the manager level (while I agreed to take a step down for a short period of time, a couple weeks after I signed they informed me that it would take a year longer before I could be a manager again).

Moral of the story is that its amazing how when you DON'T need their money, they pay you more and work you less. I'm currently working on my resume for when my contract is up as I don't intend to re-sign haha.

This is pretty awesome.

As long as you're not me!

[Kris]

Today while talking with two coworkers the topic of cars and car payments came up...

CW1: I absolutely hate car payments, but I've just accepted the fact that I will always have at least one.
CW2: Well yeah, but having only one is way better than having multiples.

CW2 was talking about how her son is about to turn 16 and they were going to buy him a new car but instead she thinks she's going to take the new car and give her son her older one. Then to make it even better, when her youngest son turns 16 she plans to just keep passing the cars down the line and she'll get a newer one then too.

Her youngest is only a few years away from turning 16 now so she'll still be paying for that car when she gives it to her son. And that is assuming she won't still be paying for her current car. She could possibly be paying four car loans in just a few years if you include her husbands car! I removed myself from the conversation at this point.

Yup.  My husband's ex-wife decided when my stepdaughter graduated college that she would give SD the car that ex-wife was currently driving -- a three-year old car with two years left on her car loan.  So, instead of simply buying a used car for the kid, she gives her a three-year old car with a loan on it, and buys herself a completely new car.  So now, ex-wife, who is single, has two car payments, instead of one or none.

And she wonders why she feels so broke all the time. 

[eyePod]

People seriously need to understand - every time you make a transaction, you are making the credit card company money. They collect a fee from the merchant for the transaction.
Yes, obviously, credit cards make a lot of money from interest payments. But anybody who consistently pays in full is still a profit maker for the company (well okay, maybe there's an exception for credit card churners. But I don't think that's the case, because if credit card churners were seriously costing CC companies money, they would all just allow only one bonus per lifetime to eliminate churning. Which Amex admittedly does. But that's even funnier because Amex charges the highest transaction fees of all payment networks).

They'd much rather have you consistently pay their bill. There's 0 risk and effort from their end. No collections agencies or anything like that.

[eyePod]

I have never understood those who get upset by the automatic credit limit increases. As others have said, my credit limit has no bearing on how much I spend. I am curious to hear the reasons of those who called to get their limits lowered again. Is it because of the impact to your credit score? Or maybe just the principle of a change being made to your account without you consent?

For my early-twenties self, it was a combo of 1) knowing that the company was hoping I was a consumer sucka and that raising my credit limit was not done out of the goodness of their hearts, but to get me to spend more; and 2) yes, the principle of having this done without my consent.  It was the reflex of someone who has always had a healthy distrust of consumerism and the structures that have been created to take advantage of people's lack of self-control.  At that point in my life, I was still feeling my way, and wanted no extra opportunities to fall into a debt trap.

These days, many years later, I know myself well enough that my credit card limit doesn't affect my behavior, so I don't care if it's raised.  But back then, the horror that anyone could ever possibly put THAT much on a credit card made me have them lower it out of shock and indignation.

Yeah a few things
1) They did it without my consent. Just not a fan of that.
2) Lower credit limits, in the extreme case that I become a victim of identify theft(which has happened to me), just gives a thief less to steal. For the record, my bank did make amends for the criminal purchases.
3) Perhaps some of you are more financially disciplined but my best self discipline has always been to keep credit limits low and money out of sight out of mind. In general I think avoidance of temptation is the best way to avoid making a mistake, and that doesn't just apply to my money habits. I'm much more disciplined with my cash than I am with say, cookies :)

They're not stealing your money. They're stealing the CC's. Don't worry, it'll get fixed. Debit is scarier because that is your money but banks will fix those issues too.

I like to increase my limits because who cares? We only spend money we have so it doesn't matter to us.

[Le Barbu]

I cant believe this one that came to me this morning:

CW1: My dad just complete building a 747 cockpit in his basement...
CW2: Wow,  great! Whit everything? Knobs, lights etc?
CW1: Sure, he think the cost of that project is arround 30k$
CW2: Not bad, anyway, what else to do with free time and $$ when you retire in early 50's like your Dad did?!

What a turn off for ER goal!

To each his own, I would prefer to go hicking, free weight training, mountain bike, buy fixer-uppers (for flip or rent), travel, chill-out, read, art-craft etc

[Tallgirl1204]

I cant believe this one that came to me this morning:

CW1: My dad just complete building a 747 cockpit in his basement...
CW2: Wow,  great! Whit everything? Knobs, lights etc?
CW1: Sure, he think the cost of that project is arround 30k$
CW2: Not bad, anyway, what else to do with free time and $$ when you retire in early 50's like your Dad did?!

What a turn off for ER goal!

To each his own, I would prefer to go hicking, free weight training, mountain bike, buy fixer-uppers (for flip or rent), travel, chill-out, read, art-craft etc

My dad would have totally loved having a 747 cockpit in his basement, and could have afforded it, if he had thought of it.  And if CW's "Dad" retired in his early 50's (which is early compared to most of the world) maybe he has plenty of dough for the splurge.  It does seem like an odd hobby, but I'm pretty sure that your hobbies are also not everyone's cup of tea either (even though many of them are mine). 

[mm1970]

This isnt really a story any one particular person did that was worth a face punch per se, but pretty interesting:

I'm on a conference call discussing a company we've taken into receivership and as they were discussing one of the employees at the company they were very careful not to "overwhelm" him with extra work because they considered him a flight risk. Why? Because they are under the impression he is financially independent (their words).

It took me back a bit to see just how employers view your financial independence as a bad thing. Then of course I was reminded of the fact that the lady sitting next to me didn't actually NEED her job because her husband makes $500k+ and so when hiring her they gave her the Manager title even though her background didn't warrant it at all, its just that in order to get her on board at the price she wanted, they had to give her the title. I, on the other hand, WAS a manager within the company (but different department) back in the US and they brought me in at a lower level. I partially blame myself for just grabbing the job, but I still believe what they did to me was slimy since if I had transferred departments within the US I would have still been at the manager level (while I agreed to take a step down for a short period of time, a couple weeks after I signed they informed me that it would take a year longer before I could be a manager again).

Moral of the story is that its amazing how when you DON'T need their money, they pay you more and work you less. I'm currently working on my resume for when my contract is up as I don't intend to re-sign haha.

This is pretty awesome.

As long as you're not me!

No kidding! Totally hasn't worked for me either.

[mm1970]

Today while talking with two coworkers the topic of cars and car payments came up...

CW1: I absolutely hate car payments, but I've just accepted the fact that I will always have at least one.
CW2: Well yeah, but having only one is way better than having multiples.

CW2 was talking about how her son is about to turn 16 and they were going to buy him a new car but instead she thinks she's going to take the new car and give her son her older one. Then to make it even better, when her youngest son turns 16 she plans to just keep passing the cars down the line and she'll get a newer one then too.

Her youngest is only a few years away from turning 16 now so she'll still be paying for that car when she gives it to her son. And that is assuming she won't still be paying for her current car. She could possibly be paying four car loans in just a few years if you include her husbands car! I removed myself from the conversation at this point.

I seriously don't get this. 

I have had a couple of conversations with people.  I don't remember who anymore - people with older kids than me?  Or same age kids?  Talking about cars.

"Well wait until your boys are 16 and you have to get them a car!"
"Um, no"
"Sure, you will, how else will they get around?"
"on foot, by bike, by bus?"
"Oh, you can't do that!"

"Seriously?  I didn't have a car until after college when I bought it myself.  My husband got a car in college when he bought half of it (because his parents did not want to keep driving him to and from school).  If kid #1 goes to school within driving distance AND has a place to park a car (I didn't), THEN maybe he can have our current car, which is a 2006, same age as he is."

You'd have think I killed someone.  It's a Toyota, I'm sure it will be going strong when it's 18 years old.  But if he goes far away for school, then he won't need a car, just plane tickets. 

[zephyr911]

I work in the new home construction industry. One of our staff members who helps people pick out their kitchens made this comment: "I don't know why people make such a big deal about an extra $5k for a stone bench top, they are paying for it with a mortgage anyway so won't even notice it over the 20-30 years".

I tried to explain that the extra $5k would actually work out closer to $10k with interest depending on the rate over the loan if the owner only made the minimum repayments. There was no point.

Strictly speaking, she spoke the truth, if from a limited perspective. And at today's rates, interest is mostly offset by inflation, so you might only pay a small premium in constant dollars. That said, she still sounds like a silly spendthrift, as well as being callous toward buyers' needs and preferences.
In terms of refuting this kind of shitty attitude, I'd focus more on resale value. Loading a new house with upgrades does not always add value equal to the cost.

[zephyr911]

I think a lot of people understand that eating out every day is bad. They want to change but don't know how. So when they see someone actually doing, it gives them the impetus to try it themselves.

Good on you!

I actually started sliding into buying workplace cafeteria lunch a little more often last year, but when the cost of all the good meals went to $9, I rebelled. I started religiously stocking $1 soup cans and keeping frozen leftover dinner portions in the fridge, more consistently than ever.
Guess what? My least Mustachian co-worker came along for the ride. I can't remember the last time *either* of us bought that overpriced lunch. He's microwaving his soup right now... :D :D :D

[RL12]

Today while talking with two coworkers the topic of cars and car payments came up...

CW1: I absolutely hate car payments, but I've just accepted the fact that I will always have at least one.
CW2: Well yeah, but having only one is way better than having multiples.

CW2 was talking about how her son is about to turn 16 and they were going to buy him a new car but instead she thinks she's going to take the new car and give her son her older one. Then to make it even better, when her youngest son turns 16 she plans to just keep passing the cars down the line and she'll get a newer one then too.

Her youngest is only a few years away from turning 16 now so she'll still be paying for that car when she gives it to her son. And that is assuming she won't still be paying for her current car. She could possibly be paying four car loans in just a few years if you include her husbands car! I removed myself from the conversation at this point.

Yup.  My husband's ex-wife decided when my stepdaughter graduated college that she would give SD the car that ex-wife was currently driving -- a three-year old car with two years left on her car loan.  So, instead of simply buying a used car for the kid, she gives her a three-year old car with a loan on it, and buys herself a completely new car.  So now, ex-wife, who is single, has two car payments, instead of one or none.

And she wonders why she feels so broke all the time.

CW1 I wanted to ask, why have you just accepted the fact that you'll always have at least one car payment? Both of his cars are fairly new, one a Prius, so why is he anticipating not having these vehicles for the next ten years or more? I'm blown away by how many people just think it's a given that you have to have a car loan. He also just bought his son a truck, taking out a loan of course. I will give him credit for getting the truck for ~$4,000. But then that means he doesn't have $4,000 saved up and makes my head want to explode.

After hearing that from CW2 it made me so grateful that my wife thinks a lot like me about our finances. She's quickly become pretty mustachian without even knowing what that is.

[johnny847]

People seriously need to understand - every time you make a transaction, you are making the credit card company money. They collect a fee from the merchant for the transaction.
Yes, obviously, credit cards make a lot of money from interest payments. But anybody who consistently pays in full is still a profit maker for the company (well okay, maybe there's an exception for credit card churners. But I don't think that's the case, because if credit card churners were seriously costing CC companies money, they would all just allow only one bonus per lifetime to eliminate churning. Which Amex admittedly does. But that's even funnier because Amex charges the highest transaction fees of all payment networks).

They'd much rather have you consistently pay their bill. There's 0 risk and effort from their end. No collections agencies or anything like that.

Yes there's risk involved obviously. But I'm pretty sure that even if you take into account average expected losses, and you are good enough at screening credit card applicants, you can still come out ahead by having a small portion of your customers paying interest, and the others paying in full.

[Luck12]

This isnt really a story any one particular person did that was worth a face punch per se, but pretty interesting:

I'm on a conference call discussing a company we've taken into receivership and as they were discussing one of the employees at the company they were very careful not to "overwhelm" him with extra work because they considered him a flight risk. Why? Because they are under the impression he is financially independent (their words).

I should tell the higher ups here that I'm FI by the 4% benchmark and I'll have even less work. 

[LibrarIan]

I work in IT for a large insurance company with a wonderful boss. However, my boss said something today that really threw me for a loop:

Boss: There's no way I can retire on just $6 million.

Me: Whoa. That's way more than you need to retire on. Throw that in a Vanguard fund and you'll never work another day in your life.

Boss: Well you don't spend like I do.

Me: Not at all. I'll send you a link to a blog that you might find interesting. (This one if you haven't guessed.)

Boss: What is it about?

Me: It's all about frugality, minimalism and making the most of your money.

Boss: Pass. I want to live in the here and now.

:-\

[frugalnacho]

I work in IT for a large insurance company with a wonderful boss. However, my boss said something today that really threw me for a loop:

Boss: There's no way I can retire on just $6 million.

Me: Whoa. That's way more than you need to retire on. Throw that in a Vanguard fund and you'll never work another day in your life.

Boss: Well you don't spend like I do.

Me: Not at all. I'll send you a link to a blog that you might find interesting. (This one if you haven't guessed.)

Boss: What is it about?

Me: It's all about frugality, minimalism and making the most of your money.

Boss: Pass. I want to live in the here and now work forever.

:-\

fixed.

[klystomane]

...and today's game is called "How many problems can you find?"

A friend of a friend of mine, who is around 63, has a wife, 55, who was laid off a few months ago. For awhile, he was pretty worried, since he had refinanced his house and used the equity to renovate and buy toys. His initial retirement plan was his wife, who he said should work to pay off the mortgage after he retires himself (they both make great money by the way, probably $250k+ combined) but since a new head honcho joined his division around the time his wife got laid off and began restructuring the company, he was seriously worried for awhile that he wouldn't even make it to retirement age and might lose the house.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago and his wife has a new job now. When asked how his weekend went, he talked about the nice getaway he had with her, how he spent lots of money buying expensive wine, and how much fun her new car was to drive.

No, it was not a company perk. Yes, she bought a new car. They decided that the current Mercedes with 100k miles was too old and that it only made sense to get a fully loaded X5, since she needed a more reliable car to make the 70 mile commute every day.

Quote: "Well, she's going to be working for another five years at LEAST, most likely 10. She can't do that with an old car!"

[I'm a red panda]

I work in IT for a large insurance company with a wonderful boss. However, my boss said something today that really threw me for a loop:

Boss: There's no way I can retire on just $6 million.

Me: Whoa. That's way more than you need to retire on. Throw that in a Vanguard fund and you'll never work another day in your life.

Boss: Well you don't spend like I do.

Me: Not at all. I'll send you a link to a blog that you might find interesting. (This one if you haven't guessed.)

Boss: What is it about?

Me: It's all about frugality, minimalism and making the most of your money.

Boss: Pass. I want to live in the here and now.

:-\

Not everyone has to share the same values. 
Sucks that the guy's lifestyle is probably really bad for the Earth and future generations, but if he wants to work so he can spend on things most people here think are ridiculous, that's his prerogative.   Some people really would rather work their butts off so they can eat all their meals out, watch fancy sports packages on cable, and wear clothes that cost more due to their tags.

The problem is when people bitch about having to work, and how much they hate it, and still want to do all those things.

Sounds like the boss knows the trade off for not working is frugal, and he'd rather work.

[zephyr911]

...and today's game is called "How many problems can you find?"

A friend of a friend of mine, who is around 63, has a wife, 55, who was laid off a few months ago. For awhile, he was pretty worried, since he had refinanced his house and used the equity to renovate and buy toys. His initial retirement plan was his wife, who he said should work to pay off the mortgage after he retires himself (they both make great money by the way, probably $250k+ combined) but since a new head honcho joined his division around the time his wife got laid off and began restructuring the company, he was seriously worried for awhile that he wouldn't even make it to retirement age and might lose the house.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago and his wife has a new job now. When asked how his weekend went, he talked about the nice getaway he had with her, how he spent lots of money buying expensive wine, and how much fun her new car was to drive.

No, it was not a company perk. Yes, she bought a new car. They decided that the current Mercedes with 100k miles was too old and that it only made sense to get a fully loaded X5, since she needed a more reliable car to make the 70 mile commute every day.

Quote: "Well, she's going to be working for another five years at LEAST, most likely 10. She can't do that with an old car!"

How did I do? :P
People like this are the reason MMM exists. Facepunch is urgent. Commutes 70 miles daily and thinks an SUV is a good idea? Probably carries one small bag on a regular basis and nothing else.

[MgoSam]

I work in IT for a large insurance company with a wonderful boss. However, my boss said something today that really threw me for a loop:

Boss: There's no way I can retire on just $6 million.

There is a way, but he refuses to see it. That's fine, large companies need people like him. I'm sure that he will be shocked when he sees that you retire early (should you decide to do so).

[austin]

I cant believe this one that came to me this morning:

CW1: My dad just complete building a 747 cockpit in his basement...
CW2: Wow,  great! Whit everything? Knobs, lights etc?
CW1: Sure, he think the cost of that project is arround 30k$
CW2: Not bad, anyway, what else to do with free time and $$ when you retire in early 50's like your Dad did?!

What a turn off for ER goal!

To each his own, I would prefer to go hicking, free weight training, mountain bike, buy fixer-uppers (for flip or rent), travel, chill-out, read, art-craft etc

Is this supposed to be a crazy story? That's his hobby.

[MandalayVA]

With Bitch I Got A Man Valentine's Day coming up, one of my male coworkers is planning on proposing to his girlfriend that night.  He's already dropped a huge amount on the ring and is doing what I call a Production Number Proposal (renting out a restaurant so all her family and friends can be there).  Including the cost of the ring this guy is spending close to SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS.  On a PROPOSAL. 

And just last week he was complaining about how tight money was for him. 

It may be mean, but I'll laugh like hell if she says no.

[arebelspy]

I cant believe this one that came to me this morning:

CW1: My dad just complete building a 747 cockpit in his basement...
CW2: Wow,  great! Whit everything? Knobs, lights etc?
CW1: Sure, he think the cost of that project is arround 30k$
CW2: Not bad, anyway, what else to do with free time and $$ when you retire in early 50's like your Dad did?!

What a turn off for ER goal!

To each his own, I would prefer to go hicking, free weight training, mountain bike, buy fixer-uppers (for flip or rent), travel, chill-out, read, art-craft etc

My dad would have totally loved having a 747 cockpit in his basement, and could have afforded it, if he had thought of it.  And if CW's "Dad" retired in his early 50's (which is early compared to most of the world) maybe he has plenty of dough for the splurge.  It does seem like an odd hobby, but I'm pretty sure that your hobbies are also not everyone's cup of tea either (even though many of them are mine).

I think it sounds neat too, especially if you put in giant screens for the cockpit "windows" and hook up a flight simulator. 

[klystomane]

...and today's game is called "How many problems can you find?"

A friend of a friend of mine, who is around 63, has a wife, 55, who was laid off a few months ago. For awhile, he was pretty worried, since he had refinanced his house and used the equity to renovate and buy toys. His initial retirement plan was his wife, who he said should work to pay off the mortgage after he retires himself (they both make great money by the way, probably $250k+ combined) but since a new head honcho joined his division around the time his wife got laid off and began restructuring the company, he was seriously worried for awhile that he wouldn't even make it to retirement age and might lose the house.

Fast forward to a few weeks ago and his wife has a new job now. When asked how his weekend went, he talked about the nice getaway he had with her, how he spent lots of money buying expensive wine, and how much fun her new car was to drive.

No, it was not a company perk. Yes, she bought a new car. They decided that the current Mercedes with 100k miles was too old and that it only made sense to get a fully loaded X5, since she needed a more reliable car to make the 70 mile commute every day.

Quote: "Well, she's going to be working for another five years at LEAST, most likely 10. She can't do that with an old car!"

How did I do? :P
People like this are the reason MMM exists. Facepunch is urgent. Commutes 70 miles daily and thinks an SUV is a good idea? Probably carries one small bag on a regular basis and nothing else.

Agreed. I would've also accepted: "Why the fuck do they even need to work? They should have retired ages ago."

Head. Hurts.

[zephyr911]

Bitch I Got A Man Valentine's Day

Best laugh I've had all day.

It may be mean, but I'll laugh like hell if she says no.

The whole thing is a farce to begin with. Seven grand to prove you really mean it when you ask? For fuck's sake guy, if she doesn't already know you wanna marry her by now, you're not communicating. And if by some grave misfortune she's the kind of awful human being who actually wants this kind of spectacle, the disaster has only begun for both of them.