Author Topic: Overheard at Work  (Read 5109074 times)

vivophoenix

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8250 on: May 08, 2015, 10:50:42 AM »
A guy I work with was talking about how he's ready to win the lottery with our workplace pool ($50 million this week). He estimates that he would probably get $1 mil of the payout once it's been shared and he says he would be back to work in 1 month because the money is already spent and he's only 36 so he couldn't possibly retire on that.

He plans to pay off his $220k house, his $25k maxed credit line, his credit card(s), his ~$40k he owes his mom (on her credit line). He would then pay to build a custom house just outside the city and pay off his bro/sis (in-laws) consumer debts... but not their mortgages and take his siblings on a trip to Disney World.

A little back story on him. He has a wife and 2 daughters and currently lives in a 3 bed, 1 bath house that he borrowed money from his mom's credit for a down payment and to consolidate his consumer debts. They have lived there for about ~2.5 years, and has maxed out that $25k credit line, 2 cars (one purchased new last year) and has a smaller credit card debt of ~$1k. In order to afford his current lifestyle both him and his wife work full time and he works an additional 20-25hrs per week at a second minimum wage style job.
His wife is pushing him to upgrade their house and since "he's the numbers/money guy" he realized it would be a good idea. If they can sell their home for $250k they would profit ~$30k and can use that for a down payment and the rest can pay off the majority of his credit line. Though he says he definitely needs to keep the credit line open for at least $5k in case of emergencies (cause having a maxed out credit line is great help in emergencies???). He says the house MUST have at least 4 beds and 2 baths, cause they need spare rooms just in case.
While in the process of getting a pre-approval for the increase mortgage he was told they can't approve him because of a $27 delinquent debt from another bank. He says that he's never once been told by this bank that he owed that money and thought he paid off that credit card before he bought his house with his current bank. Even though he's paying off that $27 now, his current bank won't approve the mortgage for at least 90 days and he is so upset about it.

i confused where the profit comes from. he gets ~$30k from the house sale( not really). then that is supposed to cover a $25k credit line, his moms $40k credit line and  a down payment. this guy owns nothing. between the cars, the house , and the debt for the down payment how does he get approved for anything?

Oh, I know that he doesn't get a profit and he's just ADDING to his debt but I was explaining the way he has been telling me and everyone else within earshot for the last 2 months. Most of us just smile and nod, because when he's got something in his mind like this there is no chance of changing it. Before he bought his house and his mom helped him out he says they were going to have to declare bankruptcy.

people like this confuse me. how do they keep getting allowed things?

fantabulous

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
    • My Crappy Little Blog
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8251 on: May 08, 2015, 12:27:06 PM »
It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

I imagine what's rubbing some people the wrong way about the application fee is that they live in areas where a landlord is likely to collect 40 application fees up front and not bother running credit/backgroun checks for 39-40 of the applicants.

seanc0x0

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
  • Location: Saskatchewan, Canada
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8252 on: May 08, 2015, 12:50:40 PM »

Oh, I know that he doesn't get a profit and he's just ADDING to his debt but I was explaining the way he has been telling me and everyone else within earshot for the last 2 months. Most of us just smile and nod, because when he's got something in his mind like this there is no chance of changing it. Before he bought his house and his mom helped him out he says they were going to have to declare bankruptcy.

people like this confuse me. how do they keep getting allowed things?

He's presumably making his payments (except the missed one, but it seems he'd be able to pay had he known about it), so he's a cash cow for lenders. He's their ideal client!

jinga nation

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Location: 'Murica's Wang
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8253 on: May 08, 2015, 12:55:51 PM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.

Of course it benefits you, the applicant. You need a place to stay. If you pass the credit check, then you get the place.
Of course he wants a solvent tenant. Why would he rent to someone who's going to stop paying rent in x<12 months and then go through courts for eviction.
Of course he wants the best for him to get the best return on his investments.

I've had applicants who want new flooring, countertops, walls in a certain paint color, etc. What for? The place is clean and with neutral colored walls. If you're so picky, go apply somewhere else. I've got a 5 person queue wanting to rent my condo in a gated community with nice amenities. And I won't waive application fees, security deposits, and won't pay for your utilities. You pay for water, power, cable, internet. You want, you pay. Or hit the highway!

Walk a mile in a landlord's shoes before you complain about his business practices.
 
And yes, there are PITA landlords just as there are a PITA tenants.
If I genuinely enjoy my profession and workplace, is there a reason to FIRE? Keep Calm and Carry On Milking.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3280
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8254 on: May 08, 2015, 01:05:46 PM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.

Of course it benefits you, the applicant. You need a place to stay. If you pass the credit check, then you get the place.
Of course he wants a solvent tenant. Why would he rent to someone who's going to stop paying rent in x<12 months and then go through courts for eviction.
Of course he wants the best for him to get the best return on his investments.

I've had applicants who want new flooring, countertops, walls in a certain paint color, etc. What for? The place is clean and with neutral colored walls. If you're so picky, go apply somewhere else. I've got a 5 person queue wanting to rent my condo in a gated community with nice amenities. And I won't waive application fees, security deposits, and won't pay for your utilities. You pay for water, power, cable, internet. You want, you pay. Or hit the highway!

Walk a mile in a landlord's shoes before you complain about his business practices.
 
And yes, there are PITA landlords just as there are a PITA tenants.

I don't see any benefit in this conversation continuing, but this may be just me. Dragonstar has made his point and I doubt there is anything he can do to convince us that landlords should eat application fees, nor do I think that we can convince him as to why it is charged to applicants and why it should be continued to do so (with variations based on market conditions). I think it's best to agree to disagree.

Beaker

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 332
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8255 on: May 08, 2015, 03:46:39 PM »
I don't see any benefit in this conversation continuing, but this may be just me. Dragonstar has made his point and I doubt there is anything he can do to convince us that landlords should eat application fees, nor do I think that we can convince him as to why it is charged to applicants and why it should be continued to do so (with variations based on market conditions). I think it's best to agree to disagree.

I agree with you, but can't resist leaving this here...

Quote
...renting [in Trump Tower] requires a $750 move-in fee, another $750 move-in security deposit, a $900 lease processing fee, and mandatory renterís insurance. There is also of course a $750 move-out fee...
Source

So, it could be worse!

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7006
  • Registered member
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8256 on: May 08, 2015, 03:48:38 PM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.

Of course it benefits you, the applicant. You need a place to stay. If you pass the credit check, then you get the place.
Of course he wants a solvent tenant. Why would he rent to someone who's going to stop paying rent in x<12 months and then go through courts for eviction.
Of course he wants the best for him to get the best return on his investments.

I've had applicants who want new flooring, countertops, walls in a certain paint color, etc. What for? The place is clean and with neutral colored walls. If you're so picky, go apply somewhere else. I've got a 5 person queue wanting to rent my condo in a gated community with nice amenities. And I won't waive application fees, security deposits, and won't pay for your utilities. You pay for water, power, cable, internet. You want, you pay. Or hit the highway!

Walk a mile in a landlord's shoes before you complain about his business practices.
 
And yes, there are PITA landlords just as there are a PITA tenants.

I don't see any benefit in this conversation continuing, but this may be just me. Dragonstar has made his point and I doubt there is anything he can do to convince us that landlords should eat application fees, nor do I think that we can convince him as to why it is charged to applicants and why it should be continued to do so (with variations based on market conditions). I think it's best to agree to disagree.

Bottom line is I think business owners should be responsible for the cost of running their business.  Vetting tenants is one of those costs, as well as maintenance and wear and tear when I move out.  If you repaint the walls after I've been there 5 years, you're not getting that from my deposit.  Yes, in a hot market you can get away with that.  In many places it's perfectly legal to draft a lease where the tenant is responsible for maintaining appliances, for example.  But it's not the norm.

And no, giving me a test to pass doesn't benefit me.  It makes it harder for me to get a place to live.  Consider two equal units in an apartment building, same rent, same lease.  Only difference is one charges $50 application fee.  Which one will I rent?  Hmm, tough call there.  Don't pretend the $50 somehow makes your place more desirable.

PS I like "dragonstar" and may use it in the future.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2015, 03:51:38 PM by dragoncar »

jinga nation

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Location: 'Murica's Wang
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8257 on: May 08, 2015, 08:11:32 PM »
50 year old coworker.  New house.  Not smaller, the same size.   New 30 year mortgage, PLUS lots and lots of new plantation shutters added into the mortgage.

Keep us updated. I want to keep tabs on this potential disaster-waiting-to-happen.
If I genuinely enjoy my profession and workplace, is there a reason to FIRE? Keep Calm and Carry On Milking.

greenmimama

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 717
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8258 on: May 09, 2015, 11:48:22 AM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.

Of course it benefits you, the applicant. You need a place to stay. If you pass the credit check, then you get the place.
Of course he wants a solvent tenant. Why would he rent to someone who's going to stop paying rent in x<12 months and then go through courts for eviction.
Of course he wants the best for him to get the best return on his investments.

I've had applicants who want new flooring, countertops, walls in a certain paint color, etc. What for? The place is clean and with neutral colored walls. If you're so picky, go apply somewhere else. I've got a 5 person queue wanting to rent my condo in a gated community with nice amenities. And I won't waive application fees, security deposits, and won't pay for your utilities. You pay for water, power, cable, internet. You want, you pay. Or hit the highway!

Walk a mile in a landlord's shoes before you complain about his business practices.
 
And yes, there are PITA landlords just as there are a PITA tenants.

I don't see any benefit in this conversation continuing, but this may be just me. Dragonstar has made his point and I doubt there is anything he can do to convince us that landlords should eat application fees, nor do I think that we can convince him as to why it is charged to applicants and why it should be continued to do so (with variations based on market conditions). I think it's best to agree to disagree.

Bottom line is I think business owners should be responsible for the cost of running their business.  Vetting tenants is one of those costs, as well as maintenance and wear and tear when I move out.  If you repaint the walls after I've been there 5 years, you're not getting that from my deposit.  Yes, in a hot market you can get away with that.  In many places it's perfectly legal to draft a lease where the tenant is responsible for maintaining appliances, for example.  But it's not the norm.

And no, giving me a test to pass doesn't benefit me.  It makes it harder for me to get a place to live.  Consider two equal units in an apartment building, same rent, same lease.  Only difference is one charges $50 application fee.  Which one will I rent?  Hmm, tough call there.  Don't pretend the $50 somehow makes your place more desirable.

PS I like "dragonstar" and may use it in the future.

All business owners pass along the costs, why do you think costs are always going up, because their costs are going up, so what you are saying is you would rather the landlord hid the fee in something else. 

Paul der Krake

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3198
  • Age: 9
  • Location: WA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8259 on: May 09, 2015, 12:04:12 PM »
All business owners pass along the costs, why do you think costs are always going up, because their costs are going up, so what you are saying is you would rather the landlord hid the fee in something else.
Yup. The sense of unfairness stems from the fact that you may not even get the place after forking money. Imagine the uproar if employers started charging an application fee to prospective hires.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7006
  • Registered member
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8260 on: May 09, 2015, 12:45:09 PM »
All business owners pass along the costs, why do you think costs are always going up, because their costs are going up, so what you are saying is you would rather the landlord hid the fee in something else.
Yup. The sense of unfairness stems from the fact that you may not even get the place after forking money. Imagine the uproar if employers started charging an application fee to prospective hires.

It's also not universally true that "all business owners pass along the costs..."  Rational landlords will always charge what the market will pay.  This price is set by the supply/demand curve, not expenses.  Thus, expenses can go up or down without changing the market price, in areas where landlording is highly profitable.  Only at the margin, where increased expenses drive the marginal landlord out of business (for example, if increased expenses drive the ROI below alternative investments), will the increased expenses drive up the market price by reducing supply.

Look at the $1 McDouble... McDonalds didn't start charging a "beef volatility fee" at checkout.  They kept the price steady for years, eating increased costs until they just couldn't do it anymore.  They certainly didn't reprice the McDouble everytime their costs changed.

firelight

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 853
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8261 on: May 10, 2015, 03:02:51 AM »
Back on topic.... My coworker was showing off his apple watch with steel band (costs $1000). He was super proud of it and said his wife and son were getting their watches soon too. Total cost would be easily half their monthly income. All this from a guy who was asking for overtime hours just a few days back. Sigh!

Tallgirl1204

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8262 on: May 10, 2015, 11:47:43 AM »
Back on topic.... My coworker was showing off his apple watch with steel band (costs $1000). He was super proud of it and said his wife and son were getting their watches soon too. Total cost would be easily half their monthly income. All this from a guy who was asking for overtime hours just a few days back. Sigh!

My coworker wAs complaining that her fancy watch flakes back and forth between time zones when she is up on the Arizona/Utah border.  I'm pretty sure this will be a problem for the apple watch too.  My $15 watch from Target?  Not so much.

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2353
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8263 on: May 10, 2015, 02:50:10 PM »
Back on topic.... My coworker was showing off his apple watch with steel band (costs $1000). He was super proud of it and said his wife and son were getting their watches soon too. Total cost would be easily half their monthly income. All this from a guy who was asking for overtime hours just a few days back. Sigh!

My coworker wAs complaining that her fancy watch flakes back and forth between time zones when she is up on the Arizona/Utah border.  I'm pretty sure this will be a problem for the apple watch too.  My $15 watch from Target?  Not so much.

"I mean, I obviously have no knowledge of this, but I am going to make the assumption and say it out loud with confidence."

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3280
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8264 on: May 10, 2015, 04:15:09 PM »

PS I like "dragonstar" and may use it in the future.

Feel free too. Sorry for this mistake.

Tallgirl1204

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8265 on: May 10, 2015, 05:44:04 PM »
Back on topic.... My coworker was showing off his apple watch with steel band (costs $1000). He was super proud of it and said his wife and son were getting their watches soon too. Total cost would be easily half their monthly income. All this from a guy who was asking for overtime hours just a few days back. Sigh!

My coworker wAs complaining that her fancy watch flakes back and forth between time zones when she is up on the Arizona/Utah border.  I'm pretty sure this will be a problem for the apple watch too.  My $15 watch from Target?  Not so much.

"I mean, I obviously have no knowledge of this, but I am going to make the assumption and say it out loud with confidence."
1.  My friend's fancy watch flip flops between time zones on the state line (where we spend time, so yes it matters.)
2.  So does my I-phone.  Which is made by Apple, at least I assume so based on its advertising.  I failed to mention this in my previous post.  Please forgive me for not laying out every bread crumb.
3.   My $15 watch does not, as one actively has to reset it.

It's not a huge leap to an assumption about the apple watch.  At least, I would ask that particular question if I was buying it.  It's a very annoying feature of my phone, and it's an annoying feature of my friend's watch. 

Don't connect the dots, if you don't want to, but give me credit for thinking before posting.  Thanks so much.




Cathy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1043
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8266 on: May 10, 2015, 06:10:15 PM »
It's trivial to turn off automatic time changes in iOS. Go to Settings -> General -> Date & Time and then adjust the "Set Automatically" option.
This post contains only general information on the issues raised by this topic. This post does not provide help tailored to your specific situation. There are many facts that could be relevant to your specific situation and I am not in possession of those facts. If you need help tailored to your specific situation, you should retain an appropriate professional and not rely on this post.

Tallgirl1204

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8267 on: May 10, 2015, 08:03:23 PM »
It's trivial to turn off automatic time changes in iOS. Go to Settings -> General -> Date & Time and then adjust the "Set Automatically" option.

Thanks-- that's actually quite useful.  I'll do it.  Don't know if my friend's watch has that option-- will check.  I still like my no-brainer cheap watch though!

theadvicist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1126
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8268 on: May 11, 2015, 02:54:50 AM »
No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.

Still I'd rather live in a neighborhood where all the landlords do checks than one where none of the landlords do.
So if I read that right on the last pages, then landlords only rent to people with no criminal record?
So you get only neighborhoods without people who were in jail? Capital!
Now, I know that it is not the hobby of landlords to do the most important part of the criminal system - to reintegrate criminals - but I think that leaves a bit of a problem.
I mean, if nobody gices ex-criminals a job and noone gives them somewhere to live, it wont help them to reintegrate. Quite contrary it will increase the criminality rate, and I wont even mention that the US already has by far the highest inmate rate in the world. And an increased criminality rate will increase taxes, robberies, murders (of or from police it seems in the US) and not the last lower rental income as a product of this.

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

zephyr911

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3497
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Northern Alabama
  • I'm just happy to be here. \m/ ^_^ \m/
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8269 on: May 11, 2015, 08:32:49 AM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.
Landlords who don't properly vet tenants end up having much higher expenses, which puts upward pressure on rents.
I am not a cog. I am an organizational lubricant.

zephyr911

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3497
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Northern Alabama
  • I'm just happy to be here. \m/ ^_^ \m/
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8270 on: May 11, 2015, 08:42:51 AM »
CW refi'd his house last year, max cashout, and reduced CC debt to only 15k.

Trying to refi again because rates are down, can't qualify for the best rate because FICO score too low. Deduces with my help and CreditKarma that his primary card utilization is too high (present balance and limit not divulged, but over 80%). The brand-new $39K SUV from "Santa" (payment higher than my mortgage) can't have helped either.

Friday AM, in a casual workgroup meeting our supervisor and I happen to mention our upright electric grills (he paid $120, mine was a rental salvage) and how convenient they are for bad weather.

EDIT (apparently, he reversed course to blow the $$ on something else).

CW proudly announced he was getting one too.
Rationale: he had the money and if he didn't use it for that, it would just get frittered away on small things. Yesterday it turned out that he didn't get the grill, but spent even more on other things at the same store, some of which they've already figured out they don't need.

I think he's basically cool with the idea of working here for 30+ years, but I don't think he realizes how many of his choices guarantee that he will have to.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2015, 06:48:00 AM by zephyr911 »
I am not a cog. I am an organizational lubricant.

mlejw6

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Alexandria, VA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8271 on: May 11, 2015, 09:22:13 AM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!
Refinance your student loans with my SoFi referral and get $100: https://www.sofi.com/refer/5/18373

Tallgirl1204

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 104
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8272 on: May 11, 2015, 11:03:23 AM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!

I don't know what the tenant law is here.  However, there is in the U.S. federal protection from "job discrimination" against felons who have served their time, IF the job duties are not related to the reason for the conviction.  So, if someone is applying for (say) a dishwashing job, you can't refuse to hire him based on a felony conviction for embezzlement.  However, you could refuse to hire him to run your cash register.  (I'm not a lawyer, this is just how I've worked out the meaning of the law in my mind.)  Hey-- this is something I learned at work-- I'm not totally foamy!   

Here's one reference if anyone is REALLY interested: 
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/arrest_conviction.cfm


AvisJinx

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 52
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8273 on: May 11, 2015, 11:36:21 AM »
50 year old coworker.  New house.  Not smaller, the same size.   New 30 year mortgage, PLUS lots and lots of new plantation shutters added into the mortgage.

Keep us updated. I want to keep tabs on this potential disaster-waiting-to-happen.

I'd like to hear more, too. What do you think the cost of the house is and did they mention a down payment?

mm1970

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4248
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8274 on: May 11, 2015, 12:56:42 PM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.
If you need a place to live and you want the place badly enough, you pay it.
If your alternative is getting kicked out and living in your car, you pay it.
If your alternative is an hour long commute, you pay it.
If your alternative is couch surfing, you pay it.
If you want the house, it is to your benefit.

mm1970

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4248
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8275 on: May 11, 2015, 01:01:59 PM »
It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

I imagine what's rubbing some people the wrong way about the application fee is that they live in areas where a landlord is likely to collect 40 application fees up front and not bother running credit/backgroun checks for 39-40 of the applicants.
Oh, around here I don't know anyone who has done that.  That's too much work.   You start with just a few.  Like reviewing resumes, some go directly into the trash bin, some go into the "phone interview pile" and some go into the "well if the phone interviews don't work out" pile.

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2353
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8276 on: May 11, 2015, 01:24:22 PM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!

A very small amount of our prisons and jails are for-profit. They shouldn't be, but let's not pretend that all of them are; that's not remotely close to true.

If you were renting a property, and you had to choose between two almost-identical applicants, but one is a convicted felon - are you saying you would ignore that? No, you would not. You'd go for lower risk, every time.

arebelspy

  • Administrator
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *****
  • Posts: 24545
  • Age: -999
  • Location: Traveling the World
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8277 on: May 11, 2015, 01:40:46 PM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!

A very small amount of our prisons and jails are for-profit. They shouldn't be, but let's not pretend that all of them are; that's not remotely close to true.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prison
Quote
The US Department of Justice statistics show that, as of 2013, there were 133,000 state and federal prisoners housed in privately owned prisons in the US, constituting 8.4% of the overall U.S. prison population. Broken down to prison type, 19.1% of the federal prison population in the United States is housed in private prisons and 6.8% of the U.S. state prison population is housed in private prisons.

I don't know if I'd call that "very small" or not, but might as well have the actual numbers.
We are two former teachers who accumulated a bunch of real estate, retired at 29, and now travel the world full time with a kid.
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."

jinga nation

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 575
  • Location: 'Murica's Wang
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8278 on: May 11, 2015, 02:56:05 PM »

It doesn't just benefit them alone though.

One house goes up for rent for $2500 a month.
40 families apply for it.
How do you choose the right family?  Through applications.  How do you ensure they are solvent?  You run a credit check.  You going to pay to run 40 credit checks?  Or 20?  No.

Around here, housing is so tight that if you want the house or apartment, you pay.  If you are going to be picky about it, you aren't going to have a place to live.

No, it's only benefiting the landlord.  I don't benefit from my LL running a credit check on me, the LL does.  He wants to "choose the right family."  He wants to make sure his tenant is solvent.  He wants he wants he wants.
If you need a place to live and you want the place badly enough, you pay it.
If your alternative is getting kicked out and living in your car, you pay it.
If your alternative is an hour long commute, you pay it.
If your alternative is couch surfing, you pay it.
If you want the house, it is to your benefit.

dragoncar probably lives in a renter's market. I, and possibly mm1970 and others, live in a landlord's market.

I'm finished arguing with the dragon that landlords should pay for costs of business. It is a cost that will be passed on regardless of how it is hidden.

On the internet I concede to him; can't be bothered to argue with someone who has made up his mind.
In the real world my bank account loves multiple monthly rent deposits.
If I genuinely enjoy my profession and workplace, is there a reason to FIRE? Keep Calm and Carry On Milking.

theadvicist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1126
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8279 on: May 12, 2015, 03:05:37 AM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!

A very small amount of our prisons and jails are for-profit. They shouldn't be, but let's not pretend that all of them are; that's not remotely close to true.

If you were renting a property, and you had to choose between two almost-identical applicants, but one is a convicted felon - are you saying you would ignore that? No, you would not. You'd go for lower risk, every time.

I don't even know how you'd be able to check someone's criminal history in the UK. Maybe a UK Landlord can fill me in on whether this is done. But I've certainly only ever had my -credit- checked when applying to rent a property.

I know that you can check the Sex Offenders Register when, for example, appointing someone to volunteer with children or vulnerable adults. But I don't know whether you would be able to make an application to check someone's criminal history just because you want to, if you know what I mean.

A new law has been introduced meaning that, if I were to get into a new relationship I could go to a police station and ask if the guy had any previous form for violence. But that makes me think it wasn't possible to check someone's criminal history before. In the US, do you guys have an 'experian' equivalent for criminal history? Can anyone check on anyone else for any reason?

Under certain circumstances here it would certainly happen (working for certain government departments, banking etc), but in 'civilian' life I don't even know how you would go about doing it.

I used to work in insurance, and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act was taken very seriously. You cannot treat someone differently because of a spent conviction (for most offences) here by law.

gooki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2034
  • Location: NZ
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8280 on: May 12, 2015, 03:12:23 AM »
You need the persons permission to check their criminal record. Well that's how it is in NZ.
Follow me on my journey to FI.

theadvicist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1126
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8281 on: May 12, 2015, 04:53:11 AM »
You need the persons permission to check their criminal record. Well that's how it is in NZ.
Makes sense.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4217
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8282 on: May 12, 2015, 05:35:09 AM »

Yeah, in the UK, under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, you would not be allowed to take certain things into account, just as you aren't when someone is applying for a job. (Violent and sexual crimes are excluded, amongst others). The idea being that for minor misdemeanours, they have 'paid for' their crime and shouldn't continue to be punished, or denied jobs or housing, because that will leave people trapped in a cycle of petty crime.

This makes so much sense. Why doesn't the U.S. do this? Oh, right. Our prisons are for-profit. Ah, freedom!

A very small amount of our prisons and jails are for-profit. They shouldn't be, but let's not pretend that all of them are; that's not remotely close to true.

If you were renting a property, and you had to choose between two almost-identical applicants, but one is a convicted felon - are you saying you would ignore that? No, you would not. You'd go for lower risk, every time.

I don't even know how you'd be able to check someone's criminal history in the UK. Maybe a UK Landlord can fill me in on whether this is done. But I've certainly only ever had my -credit- checked when applying to rent a property.

I know that you can check the Sex Offenders Register when, for example, appointing someone to volunteer with children or vulnerable adults. But I don't know whether you would be able to make an application to check someone's criminal history just because you want to, if you know what I mean.

A new law has been introduced meaning that, if I were to get into a new relationship I could go to a police station and ask if the guy had any previous form for violence. But that makes me think it wasn't possible to check someone's criminal history before. In the US, do you guys have an 'experian' equivalent for criminal history? Can anyone check on anyone else for any reason?

Under certain circumstances here it would certainly happen (working for certain government departments, banking etc), but in 'civilian' life I don't even know how you would go about doing it.

I used to work in insurance, and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act was taken very seriously. You cannot treat someone differently because of a spent conviction (for most offences) here by law.
My applications say I can do a background/credit check and I pay a company to do it.  It has come back with a felony on a perspective tenant and I refused to rent to them.

iowajes

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4419
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8283 on: May 12, 2015, 06:40:50 AM »


I imagine what's rubbing some people the wrong way about the application fee is that they live in areas where a landlord is likely to collect 40 application fees up front and not bother running credit/backgroun checks for 39-40 of the applicants.

Last time we got a new tenant we returned the checks for anyone we didn't run a background check on.

theadvicist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1126
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8284 on: May 12, 2015, 07:02:44 AM »

My applications say I can do a background/credit check and I pay a company to do it.  It has come back with a felony on a perspective tenant and I refused to rent to them.

Which is totally your prerogative in your jurisdiction. I was simply saying that in the UK, it would not be legal to do that - regardless of what might be written in the application. Even if you told them you were doing it, and they agreed to it, it is not legal here (that's my understanding anyway, if anyone knows differently do jump in).

I was just pointing out, 'Oh, that's not allowed here' as a matter of interest.

trobertson79

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8285 on: May 12, 2015, 10:18:38 AM »
Co-worker and wife pull down probably around 100k combined.  Overheard him saying "When we moved in with my wifes parents to save up for a house, we saved money at a CRAZY rate, we stopped buying virtually everything because we wanted to get out of there and in to our own house so bad.  We saved like 12K in 10 months!".   

myhotrs

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 124
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Los Angeles
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8286 on: May 12, 2015, 10:59:25 AM »
Thats pretty funny troberton79! I wonder what they'd think of the CRAZY folks here who really do minimize expenses.
I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

Davids

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 839
  • Location: Somewhere in the USA.
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8287 on: May 12, 2015, 11:29:38 AM »
Co-worker and wife pull down probably around 100k combined.  Overheard him saying "When we moved in with my wifes parents to save up for a house, we saved money at a CRAZY rate, we stopped buying virtually everything because we wanted to get out of there and in to our own house so bad.  We saved like 12K in 10 months!".
If we assume (I know it is probably not true) that they MAX their 401Ks, Roth IRAs and an HSA then the extra $12k they save on top of that given their salaries would not be that bad...

Hunny156

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
  • Location: Central TX
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8288 on: May 12, 2015, 12:21:00 PM »
Co-worker and wife pull down probably around 100k combined.  Overheard him saying "When we moved in with my wifes parents to save up for a house, we saved money at a CRAZY rate, we stopped buying virtually everything because we wanted to get out of there and in to our own house so bad.  We saved like 12K in 10 months!".
If we assume (I know it is probably not true) that they MAX their 401Ks, Roth IRAs and an HSA then the extra $12k they save on top of that given their salaries would not be that bad...

Not overheard at work, but from a former neighbor, discussing large tax bills and sacrifices:
Neighbor: "It was a really tough year for us, but we really cut our spending, and paid off $10K worth of taxes and furniture loans in that year.  So glad we don't have to live like that anymore!"

They have two mortgages on their home, spent $20K on an extended patio, both buy new SUV's/pickup trucks every other year, still have furniture loans, the works!!!  Annual income is probably about $120K combined.  I get the feeling they think they are good w/their money b/c they put a few hundred/mo in savings.  I know they contribute the 3% required to get the match on the 401K, and no IRA's.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3280
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8289 on: May 12, 2015, 12:34:09 PM »
Co-worker and wife pull down probably around 100k combined.  Overheard him saying "When we moved in with my wifes parents to save up for a house, we saved money at a CRAZY rate, we stopped buying virtually everything because we wanted to get out of there and in to our own house so bad.  We saved like 12K in 10 months!".
If we assume (I know it is probably not true) that they MAX their 401Ks, Roth IRAs and an HSA then the extra $12k they save on top of that given their salaries would not be that bad...

Not overheard at work, but from a former neighbor, discussing large tax bills and sacrifices:
Neighbor: "It was a really tough year for us, but we really cut our spending, and paid off $10K worth of taxes and furniture loans in that year.  So glad we don't have to live like that anymore!"

They have two mortgages on their home, spent $20K on an extended patio, both buy new SUV's/pickup trucks every other year, still have furniture loans, the works!!!  Annual income is probably about $120K combined.  I get the feeling they think they are good w/their money b/c they put a few hundred/mo in savings.  I know they contribute the 3% required to get the match on the 401K, and no IRA's.

And they are the ones referred to in numerous articles as to why "retiring before your 90 is impossible!" cause if they can't do it then no one can!

zephyr911

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3497
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Northern Alabama
  • I'm just happy to be here. \m/ ^_^ \m/
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8290 on: May 12, 2015, 01:21:28 PM »
Not overheard at work, but from a former neighbor, discussing large tax bills and sacrifices:
Neighbor: "It was a really tough year for us, but we really cut our spending, and paid off $10K worth of taxes and furniture loans in that year.  So glad we don't have to live like that anymore!"

They have two mortgages on their home, spent $20K on an extended patio, both buy new SUV's/pickup trucks every other year, still have furniture loans, the works!!!  Annual income is probably about $120K combined.  I get the feeling they think they are good w/their money b/c they put a few hundred/mo in savings.  I know they contribute the 3% required to get the match on the 401K, and no IRA's.
FURNITURE LOANS! Bahahahaha!!!
Wow. I'd rather use crates and piles of clothing as furniture than go into debt for "things that hold my butt".
I did try to finance a couch when I was an idiot 21-yo second lieutenant, and thankfully was denied for shitty credit. Later, I figured out how easy it is to find good used stuff. My current couch was $1200 new, and I bought it years later for $200 from a guy who had put it in a loft and barely used it.
I did let DW talk me into a new bedroom set after she moved in, but only because I had a friend working the store who got us a deep discount. New furniture depreciation is even worse than cars... you often lose 50% or more just hauling it out the door.
I am not a cog. I am an organizational lubricant.

trobertson79

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8291 on: May 12, 2015, 02:17:07 PM »
Here in Boston the whole city moves on September 1st (tied to school semesters as there's so many colleges) and furniture gets put all over every street.  When we moved into our 6BR house in September we furnished the entire house (we rent rooms to people) with beds chairs desks and couches for free.  (And no bed bugs thank god)

intirb

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 79
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8292 on: May 12, 2015, 03:52:28 PM »
Here in Boston the whole city moves on September 1st (tied to school semesters as there's so many colleges) and furniture gets put all over every street.  When we moved into our 6BR house in September we furnished the entire house (we rent rooms to people) with beds chairs desks and couches for free.  (And no bed bugs thank god)

Allston Christmas!!  It's the best!

Hunny156

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
  • Location: Central TX
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8293 on: May 12, 2015, 03:56:03 PM »
Not overheard at work, but from a former neighbor, discussing large tax bills and sacrifices:
Neighbor: "It was a really tough year for us, but we really cut our spending, and paid off $10K worth of taxes and furniture loans in that year.  So glad we don't have to live like that anymore!"

They have two mortgages on their home, spent $20K on an extended patio, both buy new SUV's/pickup trucks every other year, still have furniture loans, the works!!!  Annual income is probably about $120K combined.  I get the feeling they think they are good w/their money b/c they put a few hundred/mo in savings.  I know they contribute the 3% required to get the match on the 401K, and no IRA's.
FURNITURE LOANS! Bahahahaha!!!
Wow. I'd rather use crates and piles of clothing as furniture than go into debt for "things that hold my butt".
I did try to finance a couch when I was an idiot 21-yo second lieutenant, and thankfully was denied for shitty credit. Later, I figured out how easy it is to find good used stuff. My current couch was $1200 new, and I bought it years later for $200 from a guy who had put it in a loft and barely used it.
I did let DW talk me into a new bedroom set after she moved in, but only because I had a friend working the store who got us a deep discount. New furniture depreciation is even worse than cars... you often lose 50% or more just hauling it out the door.

But, it's interest free for the first five years at Rooms to Go, this weekend only!!  That's their logic.  Ironically, hubby noticed a commercial just the other day, and commented that by the time they pay for that interest free furniture in five years, the furniture will be worthless and long gone.  He's right, I wonder if they just let you roll the balance into your new monthly payment, like they do with cars??

WaRpBeast

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 17
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Denver, CO
    • Denver RPG Meetup
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8294 on: May 12, 2015, 04:36:39 PM »
Coworker is selling his home 11ish miles away (he currently carpools with another coworker of ours) to build a house 27+ miles away, and in the mean time he'll be living with family 30+ miles away.  Yargh. 

Even if you can take the bus, it is at least an hour each way (on roads currently under heavy construction). 

I have never lived further than 2 miles from my office and have always prioritized being close to transit hubs for the off days I don't ride the bike. Even since before I followed MMM in my college years.  **shutter**

Alabaster

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 85
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8295 on: May 12, 2015, 06:13:13 PM »
Not overheard at work, but from a former neighbor, discussing large tax bills and sacrifices:
Neighbor: "It was a really tough year for us, but we really cut our spending, and paid off $10K worth of taxes and furniture loans in that year.  So glad we don't have to live like that anymore!"

They have two mortgages on their home, spent $20K on an extended patio, both buy new SUV's/pickup trucks every other year, still have furniture loans, the works!!!  Annual income is probably about $120K combined.  I get the feeling they think they are good w/their money b/c they put a few hundred/mo in savings.  I know they contribute the 3% required to get the match on the 401K, and no IRA's.
FURNITURE LOANS! Bahahahaha!!!
Wow. I'd rather use crates and piles of clothing as furniture than go into debt for "things that hold my butt".
I did try to finance a couch when I was an idiot 21-yo second lieutenant, and thankfully was denied for shitty credit. Later, I figured out how easy it is to find good used stuff. My current couch was $1200 new, and I bought it years later for $200 from a guy who had put it in a loft and barely used it.
I did let DW talk me into a new bedroom set after she moved in, but only because I had a friend working the store who got us a deep discount. New furniture depreciation is even worse than cars... you often lose 50% or more just hauling it out the door.

But, it's interest free for the first five years at Rooms to Go, this weekend only!!  That's their logic.  Ironically, hubby noticed a commercial just the other day, and commented that by the time they pay for that interest free furniture in five years, the furniture will be worthless and long gone.  He's right, I wonder if they just let you roll the balance into your new monthly payment, like they do with cars??

On a related note: how crazy is it that you can roll forward debt on cars?

Also: I heard a radio commercial today for a bank that was suggesting you take a loan for a dream car ... or vacation.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2015, 06:15:21 PM by Alabaster »

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7386
  • Senior Mustachian

zephyr911

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3497
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Northern Alabama
  • I'm just happy to be here. \m/ ^_^ \m/
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8297 on: May 13, 2015, 06:32:15 AM »
CW mentioned yesterday having a $273 monthly phone bill.
One guy, his wife, and a teenager.
Even with an iPad... how?
I am not a cog. I am an organizational lubricant.

Hunny156

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 382
  • Location: Central TX
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8298 on: May 13, 2015, 09:50:53 AM »
Co-worker qualified for the early retirement package, which included 1 year of pay and insurance premiums paid for the next 10 years or until you qualify for Medicare, whichever comes first.  He did not take it.  :(

Same co-worker complained about how much he will hate being here for the next five years until he retires.  I asked him why he didn't take the package (he could even go work elsewhere, just not in our industry), and he said that he couldn't afford it, b/c he's paying for his daughter's college.

Nice sentiment, and she is smart, getting a useful degree, and going to a state school, but I often wonder about the finances.

To save money, his wife cuts his hair, and she doesn't do it frequently.  It grows way out of shape, and then she shears him like a dog in summer, lol!

They both have solid careers - she's a nurse, he's an engineer.  House was purchased new close to 20 years ago, so the mortgage, if any, should be pretty small.  But he does go out to eat every day, and every year he trades in his Kia for another one.  I'll bet the wife and kids cars are on the same plan.

Their son is a (self-imposed) drain on them - barely made it through high school, repeatedly dropped out of college, just recently married and got the wife pregnant already, and the parents are still covering car insurance, cell phone, and probably some rent too, at this point.

Sad to see someone make such solid choices in some areas, and poor ones in other areas.  I can't imagine being in my early 60's and hating the next five years of my life.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2015, 12:56:20 PM by Hunny156 »

Gazelle

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #8299 on: May 13, 2015, 01:20:16 PM »
CW mentioned yesterday having a $273 monthly phone bill.
One guy, his wife, and a teenager.
Even with an iPad... how?

There is a recurring conversation in my workplace about cable services.  I'm always the crazy person trying to convince everyone to drop it, but no one ever has the guts.

One coworker is paying Comcast over $230/month for cable, internet, and home phone.  Oh, and for renting the modem/router, a DVR, and SIX cable boxes for all of the rooms that have TVs.  The worst part is that most of that goes unused, because they have a Netflix subscription too, and the kids just watch that on their laptops/tablets/whatever.  There is also an unspecified amount that goes to paying for smartphones for CW/Spouse/3 kids.  I believe this to be $250/month minimum, but probably more.

The first time this came up, I told CW to think of all of the unwatched TV going to waste, and suggested hiring some people at minimum wage to come over and watch TV to make sure she was getting her money's worth.