Author Topic: Overheard at Work  (Read 8756449 times)

Astatine

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3579
  • Location: Australia
  • Pronouns: they/them
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7200 on: March 08, 2015, 03:32:09 AM »
Someone I work with often complains about living paycheck to paycheck but she eats out for lunch every day, buys new clothes, handbags and shoes reasonably often and goes out with friends. All of which is stuff I can generally shrug off and nod sympathetically to. What she chooses to spend her money on is none of my business.

However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend, asked in the same way that people ask for a recommendation for a new dentist or hairdresser. o.O Mind. Boggled. I said something like I'm quite sceptical and probably the worst person to ask for stuff like that. I did manage to stay quiet about the utter waste of money I thought it was. At least the other stuff she spends her money on actually does something useful - keeps her fed and clothed.

LennStar

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1057
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7201 on: March 08, 2015, 05:45:29 AM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,
The problem is that the clairvoyant believers dont want good ones. They want the sort that say what the customers want to hear, not what they need to hear. Like: dont waste so much money ;)
Dont get me wrong, a good clairvoyant is like a pschologist, so they really could help. (e.g. great arcana Tarot cards are representations of parts of your character (or others), and using them you can let different parts of you speak etc. - that kind of thing is really interesting.) But as I said, helpful is not what these people want.

caliq

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 675
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7202 on: March 08, 2015, 08:05:55 AM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,
The problem is that the clairvoyant believers dont want good ones. They want the sort that say what the customers want to hear, not what they need to hear. Like: dont waste so much money ;)
Dont get me wrong, a good clairvoyant is like a pschologist, so they really could help. (e.g. great arcana Tarot cards are representations of parts of your character (or others), and using them you can let different parts of you speak etc. - that kind of thing is really interesting.) But as I said, helpful is not what these people want.

whaaa...your second paragraph says basically the exact opposite of the first.

MrsCoolCat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 420
  • Age: 2014
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7203 on: March 08, 2015, 10:24:41 AM »
x2. I think 95% (or more) of people do not understand this and it's not (for the most part) really their fault until they become enlightened. I'm guessing that many do not ever reach that level.

Everyone's responsible for their choices in this life and that includes materialism. It wasn't until I was 16 that I truly realized that material things don't bring happiness beyond the few moments that you initially feel right after buying it. That was it, so I sought for more. I believe that deep down inside many if not most people know stuff does not bring or buy happiness but they don't know what does, or they are not making an active enough of an effort to find themselves beyond materialism.

So they choose materialism. I want to even say some people hide that "emptiness" with this keeping up with the Joneses "I'm better than someone because of my stuff" mentality, when really it's just stuff and surely none of those toys will be going with you at the end of life. Basically, yes, it's true that most people just don't know, but I think they can if they actively sought it and were honest with themselves. Most people don't or consider that a priority... So the priority on stuff continues. This just goes back to spending and being un-Mustachian. The blind leading the blind and they don't know people who see exist.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 10:33:31 AM by MrsCoolCat »

Taran Wanderer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 504
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7204 on: March 08, 2015, 10:37:46 AM »
It wasn't until I was 16...

Sixteen?  You catch on earlier than most.  Earlier than me!

Roadhog

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 70
  • Location: PNW
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7205 on: March 08, 2015, 12:07:55 PM »
I'm 46 now. And when I turn 50 I won't HAVE to work at a place I hate (I can be choosy) and that miserable woman is partially responsible for that!

I think misery creates drive for something better... I can relate because my boss is an official nut case and I got to thinking, "I cannot work like this forever..." and so I found MMM and started investing what I already do well at saving. Thank you to someone making me miserable, right? No one ever wanted to better themselves when life is perfect.

I can totally relate to this.  For several years I worked for a seriously disturbed woman.  It gave me the motivation to make sure I would never be in a position where I had to work in a situation like that.  It is what drove me to seek a meeting with a fee based financial advisor and led me to find MMM.   I was in a fearful place and now I am so close to FI that if I ever find myself in a similar situation I can say FU.

Frankies Girl

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2779
  • Age: 81
  • Location: The laboratory
  • Typical Ghoul Next Door
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7206 on: March 08, 2015, 12:21:43 PM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,
The problem is that the clairvoyant believers dont want good ones. They want the sort that say what the customers want to hear, not what they need to hear. Like: dont waste so much money ;)
Dont get me wrong, a good clairvoyant is like a pschologist, so they really could help. (e.g. great arcana Tarot cards are representations of parts of your character (or others), and using them you can let different parts of you speak etc. - that kind of thing is really interesting.) But as I said, helpful is not what these people want.

whaaa...your second paragraph says basically the exact opposite of the first.
Eh, kind of, sort of. Basically, sometimes people just want someone to talk to and be a sympathetic ear to unload on. Tarot cards are highly symbolic so someone that is well versed in all of their various means and use those as ways of guiding a conversation to what the person actually wants to talk about. Some psychologists will use tarot cards as triggers to get people talking during sessions as well for pretty much the same reason.

However, it should be noted that if you are just looking for a sympathetic ear to talk to and some basic life advice going to clairvoyant is usually going to be a lot cheaper than going to a life coach or a psychologist.

Absolutely. I have read tarot cards since I was a teenager for fun (I don't actually believe in them "predicting the future" or other such nonsense, but it is fun and unusual hobby). I've also made a casual study of psychics/confidence trickster methods and it's quite fascinating. Reading body language and subtle facial cues is how most operate, and noticing clothing, jewelry and other physical signs that most people don't realize gives away personal details. Most people that go to a psychic want to use them for either reassurance or for comfort - and that's what they provide (but yes, it's still a rip off).


EricL

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 844
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7207 on: March 08, 2015, 12:35:03 PM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,
The problem is that the clairvoyant believers dont want good ones. They want the sort that say what the customers want to hear, not what they need to hear. Like: dont waste so much money ;)
Dont get me wrong, a good clairvoyant is like a pschologist, so they really could help. (e.g. great arcana Tarot cards are representations of parts of your character (or others), and using them you can let different parts of you speak etc. - that kind of thing is really interesting.) But as I said, helpful is not what these people want.

whaaa...your second paragraph says basically the exact opposite of the first.
Eh, kind of, sort of. Basically, sometimes people just want someone to talk to and be a sympathetic ear to unload on. Tarot cards are highly symbolic so someone that is well versed in all of their various means and use those as ways of guiding a conversation to what the person actually wants to talk about. Some psychologists will use tarot cards as triggers to get people talking during sessions as well for pretty much the same reason.

However, it should be noted that if you are just looking for a sympathetic ear to talk to and some basic life advice going to clairvoyant is usually going to be a lot cheaper than going to a life coach or a psychologist.

Yeah, except that psychologists have standardized ethical codes and some oversight. So their costs, while high, are up front.  A clairvoyant fraud can lead the gullible down a primrose path to financial disaster with a hefty pay day (for the clairvoyant).  An "honest" fraud, someone who believes they've got powers but doesn't, is delusional. They're not a person you want counsel from.  A genuine clairvoyant is probably making a bundle off the stock market (or ponies) and not listening to some random schlep.  Or if they're genuine and listening to schleps for money they're probably a complete failure. Because they're either charging what their talents are worth (thousands $ per hour) AND telling people the truth - i.e. what they don't want to hear.  "You'll never win the lottery, your only chance to get rich is to stop spending money on crap and put it in a 401K. Oh, you'll also meet a tall dark stranger who'll be put off by your bad breath."  Any clairvoyant charging reasonable rates for that starved to death eons ago.

MrsCoolCat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 420
  • Age: 2014
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7208 on: March 08, 2015, 12:46:43 PM »
Sixteen?  You catch on earlier than most.  Earlier than me!

:-) Thanks, unfortunately I didn't invest and of course I still bought things in my 20s. I think a lot and [over]analyze things. I am very self aware and my surroundings. LOL, now I've been watching too many movies!

I had a job when I was 13 helping out my parents and started working for a family friend in 8th grade, so like 14 or 15.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 12:49:24 PM by MrsCoolCat »

MrsCoolCat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 420
  • Age: 2014
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7209 on: March 08, 2015, 12:54:35 PM »
"I have every possession I want. I have a lot of friends who have a lot more possessions. But in some cases, I feel the possessions possess them, rather than the other way around.

LOVE IT! Thanks! So taking that quote! :-)

TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7210 on: March 08, 2015, 12:56:57 PM »
Clairvoyant shmairvoiyant - just use the online version of the I Ching. Absolutely free and works great, I use it all the time.

greenplace

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7211 on: March 08, 2015, 03:50:05 PM »
I have many spendthrift co-workers, including people who regularly (as in, every other week) buy $200 basketball shoes and buy new cars every other year. It's almost expected if you are an employee here.

But one takes the cake.
She not only buys herself $200 limited release basketball shoes, but if she likes it she buys matching shoes for her 4 person family.
She wants to buy a house. None of the money for the down payment is coming from savings because she doesn't have any. Turns out she already had taken out a 401k loan for consumer purchases that she is still repaying on, so had to take a 401k withdrawal with fees and taxes to cover a down payment. This means she cannot contribute to the 401k for six months. Not to mention she depleted her retirement account. 
The family has three luxury cars with three monthly payments.
She is throwing an elaborate party for her one year old in a month (>$1000.)

She makes much more money than myself but when I told her how much I save every month she says she doesn't know how anyone can save that much. I don't have kids, but I think at $100,000 yearly, plus a partner who earns as well, and free childcare provided, it'd be easy if you don't spend it on dumb shit for one year olds who don't know they are wearing $500 worth of clothing and guest of honor at a birthday party for 100 people.

I am actually worried for her, the mortgage she is getting with PMI would take half the family income and she could lose the house so easily.

MrsCoolCat

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 420
  • Age: 2014
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7212 on: March 08, 2015, 06:03:18 PM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
  • Age: 36
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7213 on: March 09, 2015, 02:12:04 AM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

While the dollar amount per year may not change you are getting more money the more frequent the pay periods due to the time value of money. Ideally you would get paid per second (or whatever the smallest practical interval may be - daily perhaps) because then you can invest the money on your behalf as your are earning it instead of the employer using the money they owe you and investing it on their behalf (which they definitely do).

That said... yes your coworker is a dumbass if they are spending more money or think that they get a "bonus month" for the two months where they get 3 pay periods.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12073
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7214 on: March 09, 2015, 06:17:51 AM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,

The key to picking a good clairvoyant is to meet up with them, shake his or her hand, and then give 'em the old Glasgow kiss.  If you connect, they're obviously not very good at their job.  I'm 0/4 at finding a decent one.

jordanread

  • Guest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7215 on: March 09, 2015, 06:32:58 AM »
However, it was REALLY hard to bite my tongue when she asked me if I had a clairvoyant I could recommend,

The key to picking a good clairvoyant is to meet up with them, shake his or her hand, and then give 'em the old Glasgow kiss.  If you connect, they're obviously not very good at their job.  I'm 0/4 at finding a decent one.

Damn you!! It's too early to be spitting coffee all over my newly cleaned desk.

KodeBlue

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7216 on: March 09, 2015, 06:39:06 AM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

While the dollar amount per year may not change you are getting more money the more frequent the pay periods due to the time value of money. Ideally you would get paid per second (or whatever the smallest practical interval may be - daily perhaps) because then you can invest the money on your behalf as your are earning it instead of the employer using the money they owe you and investing it on their behalf (which they definitely do).

That said... yes your coworker is a dumbass if they are spending more money or think that they get a "bonus month" for the two months where they get 3 pay periods.

Yep, we have a "three payday month" coming up in May and some of my coworkers are already planning their spending sprees. Like an idiot I pointed out to them that our first payday of June isn't until June 13th so they have to make that "extra" May payday last to cover those two weeks. Boy, that was time well spent.

Moonwaves

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 947
  • Location: Germany
    • My blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7217 on: March 09, 2015, 06:57:36 AM »
CW was telling me about the new online services she has been using lately since she feels she has no time.  The first one is for meals.  So you get a recipe and everything you need to make the meal shipped to you for $12 a person.  She is getting three meals a week for 4 people.   
I have a friend who does this and loves it. Admittedly, she is not struggling financially so that's something. Mainly, she said she was just sick and tired of always having to be the one to come up with meals for the family every day with little to no input from her OH and sons (except when they didn't like something) and the mealboxes she gets delivered means she doesn't have to think about it on the few days a week she gets it for and it allows them all to try new things. She's been doing it for about two years now and the benefits in terms of stress reduction in her situation far outweigh the financial outlay. Although from what I've understood the cost is not actually all that much higher than it would be if she were buying everything herself. For people who don't have a lot of time and might be lacking inclination or enthusiasm, it could be a useful service.

pancakes

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7218 on: March 09, 2015, 07:35:29 AM »
I was looking at places for rent on my lunch break because DH and I are looking to move soon. I had one open which would offer us a lot more in terms of convenience and appliances (it is sad but I am completely fixated on having a dishwasher and decent oven at the moment) but is significantly more expensive.

A colleague asked if I could afford it and if I so why wouldn't I just go for it. I explained that it would cost an extra $6.5k+ each year and I wasn't sure if the convenience and mod cons would be worth the extra expense. They countered with "what does that matter? what else are you going to spend that money on?...

Apples

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 790
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7219 on: March 09, 2015, 08:48:15 AM »
x2. I think 95% (or more) of people do not understand this and it's not (for the most part) really their fault until they become enlightened. I'm guessing that many do not ever reach that level.

Everyone's responsible for their choices in this life and that includes materialism. It wasn't until I was 16 that I truly realized that material things don't bring happiness beyond the few moments that you initially feel right after buying it. That was it, so I sought for more. I believe that deep down inside many if not most people know stuff does not bring or buy happiness but they don't know what does, or they are not making an active enough of an effort to find themselves beyond materialism.

So they choose materialism. I want to even say some people hide that "emptiness" with this keeping up with the Joneses "I'm better than someone because of my stuff" mentality, when really it's just stuff and surely none of those toys will be going with you at the end of life. Basically, yes, it's true that most people just don't know, but I think they can if they actively sought it and were honest with themselves. Most people don't or consider that a priority... So the priority on stuff continues. This just goes back to spending and being un-Mustachian. The blind leading the blind and they don't know people who see exist.

I have some extended family in my in-laws that I think definitely do this.  And they make middle class salaries, so it's not like they're parading around with Teslas or going on European vacations.  But combine this "stuff" mentality with facebook, and it's a whole world of crazy.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7220 on: March 09, 2015, 09:45:58 AM »
keeping up with the Joneses "I'm better than someone because of my stuff" mentality, when really it's just stuff

I've become a lot more forgiving of this attitude lately.  I used to judge people pretty harshly for failing to see that their stuff was just a distraction from the important things in their lives, but I've come to see that some people don't have any important things in their lives.  They have no skills, no interests, no talents, no passions.  For people like that, buying meaningless crap is the only source of happiness they have left.

When looked at this way, an endless obsession with accumulating material goods is just another form of self medication.  And it's probably a slightly BETTER way to deal with your problems than the common alternatives of food or drugs.  At least their emotional problems only ruin their lives financially, rather than physically.

Zikoris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3101
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Vancouver, BC
  • Vancouverstachian
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7221 on: March 09, 2015, 10:17:47 AM »
keeping up with the Joneses "I'm better than someone because of my stuff" mentality, when really it's just stuff

I've become a lot more forgiving of this attitude lately.  I used to judge people pretty harshly for failing to see that their stuff was just a distraction from the important things in their lives, but I've come to see that some people don't have any important things in their lives.  They have no skills, no interests, no talents, no passions.  For people like that, buying meaningless crap is the only source of happiness they have left.

When looked at this way, an endless obsession with accumulating material goods is just another form of self medication.  And it's probably a slightly BETTER way to deal with your problems than the common alternatives of food or drugs.  At least their emotional problems only ruin their lives financially, rather than physically.

I've noticed the same lately - just how many people have NOTHING in their lives, no talents, hobbies, interests, just nothing. They work, go home, watch TV. Go decades without learning even one new thing. What a horrible, miserable existence.

Cookie78

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1858
  • Location: Canada
    • Cookie's Goals
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7222 on: March 09, 2015, 10:32:46 AM »
keeping up with the Joneses "I'm better than someone because of my stuff" mentality, when really it's just stuff

I've become a lot more forgiving of this attitude lately.  I used to judge people pretty harshly for failing to see that their stuff was just a distraction from the important things in their lives, but I've come to see that some people don't have any important things in their lives.  They have no skills, no interests, no talents, no passions.  For people like that, buying meaningless crap is the only source of happiness they have left.

When looked at this way, an endless obsession with accumulating material goods is just another form of self medication.  And it's probably a slightly BETTER way to deal with your problems than the common alternatives of food or drugs.  At least their emotional problems only ruin their lives financially, rather than physically.

I've noticed the same lately - just how many people have NOTHING in their lives, no talents, hobbies, interests, just nothing. They work, go home, watch TV. Go decades without learning even one new thing. What a horrible, miserable existence.

I have a coworker like that. I have been spending a lot of time the last two weeks taking care of myself, resting and relaxing. Normally I have a monstrous to do list with goals and hobbies and other things I'd like to get done. I commented last week about how I have been just doing two or three very small things each day on my list to feel productive when I get home from work, then going to bed to read or watch Netflix or sleep. He said that his to do list IS ALL NETFLIX.

Clairvoyant shmairvoiyant - just use the online version of the I Ching. Absolutely free and works great, I use it all the time.

Thanks. I tried it. I got a result that might be applicable to many people on this forum:


Beneath the Soil, the Seedling pushes upward toward the light:
To preserve his integrity, the Superior Person contents himself with small gains that eventually lead to great accomplishment.

Supreme Success.
Have no doubts.
Seek guidance from someone you respect.
A constant move toward greater clarity will bring reward.

SITUATION ANALYSIS:

You are progressing, rising inch-by-inch toward certain success.
What makes this assured is your refusal to tilt headlong toward your goal, slamming into obstacles and going mad with frustration.
You have a clear map before you of the steps necessary to reach your objective.
With faithful patience and a careful conservation of personal energy and resources, you will run this long, slow distance.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7223 on: March 09, 2015, 10:43:46 AM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

While the dollar amount per year may not change you are getting more money the more frequent the pay periods due to the time value of money. Ideally you would get paid per second (or whatever the smallest practical interval may be - daily perhaps) because then you can invest the money on your behalf as your are earning it instead of the employer using the money they owe you and investing it on their behalf (which they definitely do).

That said... yes your coworker is a dumbass if they are spending more money or think that they get a "bonus month" for the two months where they get 3 pay periods.

While technically true, this effect should be negligible. If you can prove me wrong, using a "typical" salary, then I'm all ears.

Also, more importantly, this benefit is only realized if you actually invest the money somehow. Considering how financially dumb these coworkers are, I'd be surprised if they actually invest it. Meaning they aren't realizing the time value of money. I suppose Mrs. Cool Cat is realizing it.

Oh and finally, because you want to bring up the what should be negligible effect of the time value of money for a biweekly vs semimonthly pay period, the 26 biweekly pay schedule works against you for taxes. Suppose you're $5000 above the 15% tax bracket on a 24 paycheck cycle, and you always get inflationary adjustments to your salary. You will always be $5000 above the 15% bracket. But suppose now you switch to a 26 paycheck cycle. Because 365 days is not divisible by 14 days/biweekly period, there will be a year with a 27 paycheck cycle every so often (let's just say it's every 5 years). Also suppose every paycheck is $3000 (whether this actually gets you into the 25% bracket is not the point of the exercise). So over a 5 year period, you will have paid a bit more in tax on the 26 paycheck cycle vs the 24 paycheck cycle because every 5th year you will be taxed at 25% on the last $8000 of your pay instead of the last $5000, even though you are getting paid at the same rate per hour every year.

EDIT: Had a math mistake, thought I originally typed $500 instead of $5000.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2015, 11:10:25 AM by johnny847 »

lizzie

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 174
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7224 on: March 09, 2015, 10:57:52 AM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

While the dollar amount per year may not change you are getting more money the more frequent the pay periods due to the time value of money. Ideally you would get paid per second (or whatever the smallest practical interval may be - daily perhaps) because then you can invest the money on your behalf as your are earning it instead of the employer using the money they owe you and investing it on their behalf (which they definitely do).

That said... yes your coworker is a dumbass if they are spending more money or think that they get a "bonus month" for the two months where they get 3 pay periods.

While technically true, this effect should be negligible. If you can prove me wrong, using a "typical" salary, then I'm all ears.

Also, more importantly, this benefit is only realized if you actually invest the money somehow. Considering how financially dumb these coworkers are, I'd be surprised if they actually invest it. Meaning they aren't realizing the time value of money. I suppose Mrs. Cool Cat is realizing it.

Oh and finally, because you want to bring up the what should be negligible effect of the time value of money for a biweekly vs semimonthly pay period, the 26 biweekly pay schedule works against you for taxes. Suppose you're $5000 above the 15% tax bracket on a 24 paycheck cycle, and you always get inflationary adjustments to your salary. You will always be $5000 above the 15% bracket. But suppose now you switch to a 26 paycheck cycle. Because 365 days is not divisible by 14 days/biweekly period, there will be a year with a 27 paycheck cycle every so often (let's just say it's every 5 years). Also suppose every paycheck is $3000 (whether this actually gets you into the 25% bracket is not the point of the exercise). So over a 5 year period, you will have paid a bit more in tax on the 26 paycheck cycle vs the 24 paycheck cycle because every 5th year you will be taxed at 25% on the last $3500 of your pay instead of the last $500, even though you are getting paid at the same rate per hour every year.

Aw man. I'm in a 27-paycheck year and you just bummed me out.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7225 on: March 09, 2015, 11:10:57 AM »
Once we moved from 24 paychecks (semi-monthly) to 26 paychecks (bi-weekly) and a coworker said, "I like it. You get more checks." So? "So it's like you get paid more!" But you don't... bc your annual salary is still the same. "You get more checks and more often, so it just feels like you get paid more!" I swear she probably spent more too because of her perceived "fake raise". What a dumbass.

While the dollar amount per year may not change you are getting more money the more frequent the pay periods due to the time value of money. Ideally you would get paid per second (or whatever the smallest practical interval may be - daily perhaps) because then you can invest the money on your behalf as your are earning it instead of the employer using the money they owe you and investing it on their behalf (which they definitely do).

That said... yes your coworker is a dumbass if they are spending more money or think that they get a "bonus month" for the two months where they get 3 pay periods.

While technically true, this effect should be negligible. If you can prove me wrong, using a "typical" salary, then I'm all ears.

Also, more importantly, this benefit is only realized if you actually invest the money somehow. Considering how financially dumb these coworkers are, I'd be surprised if they actually invest it. Meaning they aren't realizing the time value of money. I suppose Mrs. Cool Cat is realizing it.

Oh and finally, because you want to bring up the what should be negligible effect of the time value of money for a biweekly vs semimonthly pay period, the 26 biweekly pay schedule works against you for taxes. Suppose you're $5000 above the 15% tax bracket on a 24 paycheck cycle, and you always get inflationary adjustments to your salary. You will always be $5000 above the 15% bracket. But suppose now you switch to a 26 paycheck cycle. Because 365 days is not divisible by 14 days/biweekly period, there will be a year with a 27 paycheck cycle every so often (let's just say it's every 5 years). Also suppose every paycheck is $3000 (whether this actually gets you into the 25% bracket is not the point of the exercise). So over a 5 year period, you will have paid a bit more in tax on the 26 paycheck cycle vs the 24 paycheck cycle because every 5th year you will be taxed at 25% on the last $3500 of your pay instead of the last $500, even though you are getting paid at the same rate per hour every year.

Aw man. I'm in a 27-paycheck year and you just bummed me out.

Oops. My bad =P.

It's even worse for me because I'm on the border of the 15% and 25% brackets. I believe I'm on a 27 paycheck year this year (my employer's fiscal year ends 06/30, so they'll release the paycheck calendar once it ends) so that means I will have some of my pay end up in the 25% bracket, whereas if I were on a semimonthly schedule like some of my coworkers, then I wouldn't be in the 25% bracket at all.

Shade00

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 143
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7226 on: March 09, 2015, 11:14:11 AM »
We had a work 'party' (term used loosely) last Friday. While we were sitting around, I let slip that I was happy with our 401(k)'s recent addition of several Vanguard funds because it would help me retire earlier. This prompted a discussion, including some disbelief at my plans, but the forehead-slapping moment came when a coworker told me her financial adviser told her she needed $4 million to retire. I can only imagine that her idea of retirement means having a live-in maid and a chauffeur.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7173
  • Location: United States
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7227 on: March 09, 2015, 11:20:53 AM »
All this paycheck talk made me realize I don't even know how often we get paid. 

I know it isn't monthly anymore. My last job we got paid on the 1st.  But I don't know if it is twice a month or biweekly here.

As long as money shows up on a fairly regular interval, it doesn't matter to me when I get it.

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 624
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7228 on: March 09, 2015, 11:21:13 AM »
Our company just finished our transfer from super expensive Mass Mutual to Vanguard for our 401k.  They made us each log in today and do the "set your goals" part (pretty much just a force to make sure people know what the website was).  When Vanguard asked for retirement age to calculate your chance of success, it didn't accept any number I put in, with a nice message of "please enter any round number between 62 and 100".  I asked our CFO (in charge of the transfer) if it was a glitch or not, and he responds with "No, no one can retire before 62, why would a lower number be available?"  The man makes 180-200k a year...

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7229 on: March 09, 2015, 11:25:21 AM »
Aw man. I'm in a 27-paycheck year and you just bummed me out.

Don't be bummed out.  The extra taxes on the 27 paycheck year are always and exactly canceled out by the reduced taxes in the 26 paycheck years, as compared to the person who is paid bimonthly.

If you're really worried about it, you could always ask for two weeks of leave without pay, would that be better?  What's that, you say you don't want to make less money?  Then you've just convinced yourself that the extra pay period is a good thing, haven't you.

Pooperman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2898
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7230 on: March 09, 2015, 11:28:49 AM »
Our company just finished our transfer from super expensive Mass Mutual to Vanguard for our 401k.  They made us each log in today and do the "set your goals" part (pretty much just a force to make sure people know what the website was).  When Vanguard asked for retirement age to calculate your chance of success, it didn't accept any number I put in, with a nice message of "please enter any round number between 62 and 100".  I asked our CFO (in charge of the transfer) if it was a glitch or not, and he responds with "No, no one can retire before 62, why would a lower number be available?"  The man makes 180-200k a year...

Our plan (through Transamerica) is more expensive than vanguard, but now I know where those funds are going! We've got the option to set any age, set any income, and put either % or $ amounts towards it.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7231 on: March 09, 2015, 11:33:07 AM »
Aw man. I'm in a 27-paycheck year and you just bummed me out.

Don't be bummed out.  The extra taxes on the 27 paycheck year are always and exactly canceled out by the reduced taxes in the 26 paycheck years, as compared to the person who is paid bimonthly.

If you're really worried about it, you could always ask for two weeks of leave without pay, would that be better?  What's that, you say you don't want to make less money?  Then you've just convinced yourself that the extra pay period is a good thing, haven't you.

But it's not cancelled out. If you were on a semimonthly period, you would never have a year where you're subjecting more of your pay to your marginal tax bracket.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7232 on: March 09, 2015, 11:48:45 AM »
If you were on a semimonthly period, you would never have a year where you're subjecting more of your pay to your marginal tax bracket.

Right, if you're paid semimonthly then your taxes are the same every year.  If you're paid biweekly instead, then in most years you pay less tax because you make less money, and then every couple of years you get 27 pay periods and you pay more tax.

You seem to think that people who are paid biweekly have the same size paycheck as people who who are paid semimonthly.  'Tis not the case, sadly.

lisahi

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 225
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7233 on: March 09, 2015, 11:52:46 AM »
Re: 26 pay periods vs. 24 pay periods, bi-weekly payments can be good psychologically if you plan your life around 2 paychecks per month. For example, I plan my life around about $4200 per month (this doesn't include retirement savings with my job which are taken out automatically). All my monthly expenditures are based around this figure, including contributions to my IRA and taxable investments. Two months out of the year I get an extra $2100 take home. Since my entire month was already planned out using the original $4200 figure, the additional $2100 seems like "extra" money, even if it's really not. I don't need it for any particular purpose, so it all gets thrown into investments. That's a nice feeling.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7234 on: March 09, 2015, 11:53:34 AM »
If you were on a semimonthly period, you would never have a year where you're subjecting more of your pay to your marginal tax bracket.

Right, if you're paid semimonthly then your taxes are the same every year.  If you're paid biweekly instead, then in most years you pay less tax because you make less money, and then every couple of years you get 27 pay periods and you pay more tax.

You seem to think that people who are paid biweekly have the same size paycheck as people who who are paid semimonthly.  'Tis not the case, sadly.

Let's take a real example: http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-administration/fact-sheets/computing-hourly-rates-of-pay-using-the-2087-hour-divisor/

Quote
In 2011, the annual rate of basic pay of a GS-13, step 1, employee in the Washington, DC, locality pay area is $89,033. The employee's payroll calendar has 26 pay dates.

The employee's hourly rate of basic pay is $42.66 ($89,033/2,087 hours).

The employee's biweekly rate of basic pay is $3,412.80 ($42.66 x 80 hours).

The pay the employee will actually receive is $88,733 ($3,412.80 x 26 pay dates).

If calendar year 2011 had 27 pay dates (see 26 or 27 Pay Dates below), a GS-13, step 1, employee in the DC locality pay area would actually receive $92,146 ($3,412.80 x 27 pay dates).

If the employee was on a semimonthly schedule, then he/she would earn exactly $89033. So on a 26 paycheck year, the employee gets paid $300 less than if he/she were on a semimonthly period.
On a 27 paycheck year, the employee gets paid $3113 more than if he/she were on a semimonthly pay period.

According to http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/08/us-jobs-payroll-27thpaycheck-idUSKBN0KH1XI20150108, the 27 paycheck year occurs once every 11 years. So there's ten years of getting paid $300 less, and one year of getting paid $3113 more. So that's a difference of an extra $113 that is subjected to your marginal tax rate.

Obviously this effect is minor. But I wrote that up because dividendman wanted to bring up the negligible increase of the time value of money of getting paid biweekly vs semimonthly.


Finally, if the extra pay of a 27 paycheck cycle causes you to jump a tax bracket for that year, paying lower taxes on 26 paycheck years does not cancel out paying higher taxes on a 27 paycheck year.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2015, 11:55:14 AM by johnny847 »

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7235 on: March 09, 2015, 12:24:08 PM »
Obviously this effect is minor.

I'm still not sure why your math works out to getting shorted $133 every 11 years.  If that were the case, they could have just added the $0.46 to all 287 pay periods over an 11 year cycle to get it to work out evenly.  Why would they deliberately underpay 4 million federal employee forty six cents less than their own stated wage scale?  Such an easy problem to fix, on one end or the other, that I'm having a hard time believing you've uncovered a fatal flaw in the system.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7236 on: March 09, 2015, 12:28:29 PM »
Obviously this effect is minor.

I'm still not sure why your math works out to getting shorted $133 every 11 years.  If that were the case, they could have just added the $0.46 to all 287 pay periods over an 11 year cycle to get it to work out evenly.  Why would they deliberately underpay 4 million federal employee forty six cents less than their own stated wage scale?  Such an easy problem to fix, on one end or the other, that I'm having a hard time believing you've uncovered a fatal flaw in the system.

Well then prove my math wrong. (And it's not being shorted $133, it's being shorted the taxes on $113 (you've got a typo) so the effect is less than that). And really, almost all that math is not done by me, it's done by the government.

But this part isn't really "fixable" so long as the 27 paycheck year is a possibility:
Finally, if the extra pay of a 27 paycheck cycle causes you to jump a tax bracket for that year, paying lower taxes on 26 paycheck years does not cancel out paying higher taxes on a 27 paycheck year.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2015, 12:35:05 PM by johnny847 »

lizzie

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 174
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7237 on: March 09, 2015, 12:29:02 PM »
Quote
According to http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/08/us-jobs-payroll-27thpaycheck-idUSKBN0KH1XI20150108, the 27 paycheck year occurs once every 11 years.

I'll take solace in the fact that I should be retired the next time this happens! ;-)

(BTW I'm really not broken up about it. Actually DH is on a biweekly schedule too and gets paid the opposite Friday from me. So every Friday in my house is a nuclear explosion of cash!)

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7238 on: March 09, 2015, 12:33:05 PM »
Quote
According to http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/08/us-jobs-payroll-27thpaycheck-idUSKBN0KH1XI20150108, the 27 paycheck year occurs once every 11 years.

I'll take solace in the fact that I should be retired the next time this happens! ;-)

(BTW I'm really not broken up about it. Actually DH is on a biweekly schedule too and gets paid the opposite Friday from me. So every Friday in my house is a nuclear explosion of cash!)

Haha I figured you were joking ;)

You'd have a bigger explosion once a month if you were paid monthly =P

TheBuddha

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 237
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7239 on: March 09, 2015, 12:43:47 PM »
Clairvoyant shmairvoiyant - just use the online version of the I Ching. Absolutely free and works great, I use it all the time.

Thanks. I tried it. I got a result that might be applicable to many people on this forum:


Beneath the Soil, the Seedling pushes upward toward the light:
To preserve his integrity, the Superior Person contents himself with small gains that eventually lead to great accomplishment.

Supreme Success.
Have no doubts.
Seek guidance from someone you respect.
A constant move toward greater clarity will bring reward.

SITUATION ANALYSIS:

You are progressing, rising inch-by-inch toward certain success.
What makes this assured is your refusal to tilt headlong toward your goal, slamming into obstacles and going mad with frustration.
You have a clear map before you of the steps necessary to reach your objective.
With faithful patience and a careful conservation of personal energy and resources, you will run this long, slow distance.

Awesome :)

That answer looks familiar, I think I got the exact same answer when asking about my financial planning. The answers I get are always extremely relevant to the question I ask.

dandarc

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3176
  • Age: 36
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7240 on: March 09, 2015, 12:46:32 PM »
I think y'all are quibbling over the rounding - i.e., it is not exactly an 11 year cycle.  Example - this year, January 1st fell on a Thursday.  So if it worked out exactly to 11 years, January 1st would fall on a Thursday every 11th year.  This does not happen - Jan. 1st 2048 is on a Wednesday.  In 1993, Jan. 1st was on a Friday.

May not be of any practical consequence to have a couple of day shift over a 55 year period, but it explains the discrepancy, in addition to the IRS example rounding off several hundredths of a cent in the hourly rate.

johnny847

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3196
    • My Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7241 on: March 09, 2015, 12:59:10 PM »
I think y'all are quibbling over the rounding - i.e., it is not exactly an 11 year cycle.  Example - this year, January 1st fell on a Thursday.  So if it worked out exactly to 11 years, January 1st would fall on a Thursday every 11th year.  This does not happen - Jan. 1st 2048 is on a Wednesday.  In 1993, Jan. 1st was on a Friday.

May not be of any practical consequence to have a couple of day shift over a 55 year period, but it explains the discrepancy, in addition to the IRS example rounding off several hundredths of a cent in the hourly rate.

Maybe we are. But the point is that the cycle exists. Suppose it was a 12 year cycle. Then it would be advantageous from a tax standpoint to have a biweekly instead of a semimonthly pay cycle. Or if it was a 10 year cycle, then it would be advantageous for a semimonthly pay cycle instead of a biweekly cycle. Regardless, these two aren't going to be the same.

And the cycle is never going to be an exact period, because many companies move their paycheck date if the paycheck would fall on a bank holiday such as New Year's. I think if you figured this all out, then you would see after enough years that it would all line up eventually. But, the amount of time that it takes for it to line up would probably exceed the working lifetime of most people on this forum, and maybe even the average person.
And then also have fun with the fact that every 100 years is not a leap year, unless it's also divisible by 400.


At the risk of sounding like a broken record, rounding does not negate the effect of the extra taxes paid if you jump a tax bracket in a 27 paycheck year, like I believe I will this year.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7242 on: March 09, 2015, 01:04:56 PM »
I think y'all are quibbling over the rounding - i.e., it is not exactly an 11 year cycle.

Rounding errors were my first thought, as well.  This sample calculation shows it working out to a perfect 11 year cycle but also assumes exactly two leap years every 11 years, which obviously isn't right either.

Finally, if the extra pay of a 27 paycheck cycle causes you to jump a tax bracket for that year, paying lower taxes on 26 paycheck years does not cancel out paying higher taxes on a 27 paycheck year.

That's fair enough.  Tax brackets are always going to ding people who earn right near the cutoff values.  As I mentioned above, feel free to ask for two weeks of LWOP if you think it's really a problem, and then tell me if you're better off because of it.

Maybe we are. But the point is that the cycle exists. Suppose it was a 12 year cycle... Or if it was a 10 year cycle

Leap years happen every 4 years.  So it will be an 11 year cycle most of the time, and then it will be a 10 year cycle once to make up the difference. 

In either case, I'm hopeful that very few people here will work long enough to see it come around.  My take home lesson: your stated pay scale is very slightly bogus.  Which I already knew, looking at my tax returns vs my listed annual wage.



sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7340
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7243 on: March 09, 2015, 01:53:34 PM »
I think y'all are quibbling over the rounding - i.e., it is not exactly an 11 year cycle.

Rounding errors were my first thought, as well.  This sample calculation shows it working out to a perfect 11 year cycle but also assumes exactly two leap years every 11 years, which obviously isn't right either.

Finally, if the extra pay of a 27 paycheck cycle causes you to jump a tax bracket for that year, paying lower taxes on 26 paycheck years does not cancel out paying higher taxes on a 27 paycheck year.

That's fair enough.  Tax brackets are always going to ding people who earn right near the cutoff values.  As I mentioned above, feel free to ask for two weeks of LWOP if you think it's really a problem, and then tell me if you're better off because of it.

Maybe we are. But the point is that the cycle exists. Suppose it was a 12 year cycle... Or if it was a 10 year cycle

Leap years happen every 4 years.  So it will be an 11 year cycle most of the time, and then it will be a 10 year cycle once to make up the difference. 

In either case, I'm hopeful that very few people here will work long enough to see it come around.  My take home lesson: your stated pay scale is very slightly bogus.  Which I already knew, looking at my tax returns vs my listed annual wage.



Pooperman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2898
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7244 on: March 09, 2015, 01:45:37 PM »
Guys, there are only 28 possible years. Of those, some number will be 26 paycheck years and some will be 27 paycheck years for bi-weekly. Semimonthly is clearly better because stability and predictability are more important.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7173
  • Location: United States
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7245 on: March 09, 2015, 01:58:06 PM »
Semimonthly is clearly better because stability and predictability are more important.

What? Regardless of if it is every 2 weeks or twice a month, the paycheck is stable and predictable, assuming your job is secure.

They are all just arguing about a very minute tax implication.

Pooperman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2898
  • Age: 28
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7246 on: March 09, 2015, 02:21:54 PM »
Semimonthly is clearly better because stability and predictability are more important.

What? Regardless of if it is every 2 weeks or twice a month, the paycheck is stable and predictable, assuming your job is secure.

They are all just arguing about a very minute tax implication.

I was going for yearly stability.

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7173
  • Location: United States
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7247 on: March 09, 2015, 03:26:36 PM »
What? Regardless of if it is every 2 weeks or twice a month, the paycheck is stable and predictable, assuming your job is secure.

If by secure you mean salary.  A huge portion of the population is based on hourly wages, which can and do fluctuate based on how many hours they work, and also any job that pays bonuses or commissions based on sales or other performance factors also pays slightly more or less than the median each pay period.  I don't think it's the big deal people are making it out to be since so much of the current workforce is used to some fluctuation based on OT, bonuses, and sales commissions.  Typically the only people on a truly fixed monthly income are those who live on Social Security and/or pension and have no savings.

But regardless of whether they are paid every 2 weeks or bimonthly- the pay is going to be the same as the hours they worked in the weeks the paycheck is for. 

What might not be stable is those hours worked or the bonus they earn, but the occurrence of the pay date has no effect on that.
The factor that effects pay is amount worked, not frequency of paychecks.

ender

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7248 on: March 09, 2015, 03:36:40 PM »
Semimonthly is clearly better because stability and predictability are more important.

What? Regardless of if it is every 2 weeks or twice a month, the paycheck is stable and predictable, assuming your job is secure.

They are all just arguing about a very minute tax implication.

I was going for yearly stability.


But what if I budget to the day? Then months like February and those blasted 31 day months screw me over ;)

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 27198
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #7249 on: March 09, 2015, 04:01:30 PM »
Semimonthly is clearly better because stability and predictability are more important.

What? Regardless of if it is every 2 weeks or twice a month, the paycheck is stable and predictable, assuming your job is secure.

They are all just arguing about a very minute tax implication.

I was going for yearly stability.

Getting paid once/yr. on December 31 is also stable and predictable...  ;)
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with two kids.
If you want to know more about me, or how we did that, or see lots of pictures, this Business Insider profile tells our story pretty well.
We (occasionally) blog at AdventuringAlong.com.
You can also read my forum "Journal."