Author Topic: Overheard at Work  (Read 6385659 times)

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18650 on: September 13, 2017, 04:00:36 PM »
Just discovered it's a "thing" at my office to eat lunch in your car and then take a nap with the car running, a/c blasting, and windows open. People often take more than the hour lunch break to do this in 85-degree weather.

I have no words.
See my journal

fruitfly

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 81
  • Location: Portland, Oregon
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18651 on: September 13, 2017, 04:04:26 PM »
Just discovered it's a "thing" at my office to eat lunch in your car and then take a nap with the car running, a/c blasting, and windows open. People often take more than the hour lunch break to do this in 85-degree weather.

I have no words.

I used to work at a place (a medical manufacturing facility!) where this was a thing. Only you smoked a big joint in your car before lunching and napping. So that made more sense?

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7390
  • Registered member
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18652 on: September 13, 2017, 06:46:40 PM »
Just discovered it's a "thing" at my office to eat lunch in your car and then take a nap with the car running, a/c blasting, and windows open. People often take more than the hour lunch break to do this in 85-degree weather.

I have no words.

I used to do this in my garage after a long day at work

Step37

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 192
  • Age: 43
  • Location: AB, Canada
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18653 on: September 13, 2017, 07:55:04 PM »
Just discovered it's a "thing" at my office to eat lunch in your car and then take a nap with the car running, a/c blasting, and windows open. People often take more than the hour lunch break to do this in 85-degree weather.

I have no words.

I have no nice words. Fuck, I hate people like this. They probably chug a nice, big bottled water afterwards, too...
"Not wanting something is as good as possessing it." ~Donald Horban

Rowellen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • Location: Australia
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18654 on: September 13, 2017, 08:24:03 PM »
Anyway, I find it more strange that people always want tax cuts, but never service cuts. It is like most people are not able to make the connection "if the states builds something it has to pay for it", what everyone knows, and "I pay taxes so that the state has money".
(Raises hand)  I personally would love to see some service cuts.  However, such a position is politically tricky for a politician to make, because there's always someone who will get hurt by that cut, and such sob stories make for good TV segments, even if the cut is actually a good idea.  And it doesn't always have to be a cut in government services, either--there's lots and lots of waste, over-charging, inefficiencies, duplication of functions, etc that could be cut without negatively affecting services.  For example, I'm pretty miffed that our village recently started construction on a massive, $30 million police station (for a population of 30,000) that is ugly as sin.  Or that they're projecting a $50 million cost to widen 4.5 miles of an existing road.  Or that our school district, when facing a shortfall in funds, wants to increase class sizes rather than look at the top-heavy administration (seven assistant superintendents? really?).  Or that the pension system in our state is extraordinarily generous and easy to exploit.

In qld, Australia, the former premier, Cambell Newman, was elected on the back of promises to cut government costs. He won a huge majority.  I just googled to check. His party won 78 of the 89 seats. Unheard of! But people didn't like it when their nice safe cushy government jobs started to get cut. The following election he lost. Went from 78 seats to 42. Newman himself lost his seat.  Committed political suicide. There was probably more to it than just that but that is the big thing I remember from that time.

halftimer

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 80
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18655 on: September 13, 2017, 08:56:31 PM »
And the colleague who bought them just told me she keeps borrowing money from her 10-year-old daughter's piggy bank to pay bills.

That's stealing. I don't care it's a 10-year-old or a family member or that she probably gave her the money anyway. That's stealing. What a wonderful lesson this little girl is going to learn.

The kids don't get pocket money, so this is birthday money from grandparents, and the "loan" now runs to hundreds of dollars.

Apparently the daughter is quite smug about it.

Co-worker's daughter: I'm the only one in the family with money, Mum! You borrowed my money, Dad borrowed my money, [brother] borrowed my money.
Co-worker: Did Daddy borrow money too???

Co-worker said that when she get paid she doesn't have enough left to pay her daughter back.

Co-worker also "jokes" about how she and her husband are both paid fortnightly but on alternate weeks. "We live pay cheque to pay cheque, it's just every week."

That was my family dynamic when I was a kid. At 12 years old my parents had a stack of IOU's to me, for mostly little amounts, but also "$160 for pots and pans". I never had an allowance, I had paper routes or odd jobs or worked for them for a fair hourly wage from about age 10 up. I learned to budget and not borrow. They never did to this day.

With This Herring

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Location: New York STATE, not city
  • TANSTAAFL!
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18656 on: September 13, 2017, 09:40:45 PM »
*snip*
That was my family dynamic when I was a kid. At 12 years old my parents had a stack of IOU's to me, for mostly little amounts, but also "$160 for pots and pans". I never had an allowance, I had paper routes or odd jobs or worked for them for a fair hourly wage from about age 10 up. I learned to budget and not borrow. They never did to this day.

Did you get paid back?  If so, when?
Because your toaster got hacked because you tried to watch porn on your blender.

6-year CPA currently on hiatus.  Botched this.  Working again. 
Go soak your beans.  You know you keep forgetting.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18657 on: September 14, 2017, 12:44:58 AM »
And the colleague who bought them just told me she keeps borrowing money from her 10-year-old daughter's piggy bank to pay bills.

That's stealing. I don't care it's a 10-year-old or a family member or that she probably gave her the money anyway. That's stealing. What a wonderful lesson this little girl is going to learn.

The kids don't get pocket money, so this is birthday money from grandparents, and the "loan" now runs to hundreds of dollars.

Apparently the daughter is quite smug about it.

Co-worker's daughter: I'm the only one in the family with money, Mum! You borrowed my money, Dad borrowed my money, [brother] borrowed my money.
Co-worker: Did Daddy borrow money too???

Co-worker said that when she get paid she doesn't have enough left to pay her daughter back.

Co-worker also "jokes" about how she and her husband are both paid fortnightly but on alternate weeks. "We live pay cheque to pay cheque, it's just every week."

That was my family dynamic when I was a kid. At 12 years old my parents had a stack of IOU's to me, for mostly little amounts, but also "$160 for pots and pans". I never had an allowance, I had paper routes or odd jobs or worked for them for a fair hourly wage from about age 10 up. I learned to budget and not borrow. They never did to this day.

I borrow small amounts of cash from my nephew, like a buck or two. I do it so we have to have a written agreement and agree on terms and interest. Then I pay him back with interest a few weeks later. Now he knows how to both borrow and lend money. Not bad for a 6 year old.

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18658 on: September 14, 2017, 03:36:05 AM »
I borrow small amounts of cash from my nephew, like a buck or two. I do it so we have to have a written agreement and agree on terms and interest. Then I pay him back with interest a few weeks later. Now he knows how to both borrow and lend money. Not bad for a 6 year old.

I should try that with my nephews.

The five-year-old is completely disinterested in money. When I visit I like to give them a few dollars each for their money box. He will very politely say, "No, thank you." (I put it in his money box anyway, because I like to be fair.)

The two-year-old hoards money. If he finds a stray coin laying around the house it goes straight to his money box. If he doesn't find any coins laying around, he's not above asking my dad for a donation, and he usually gets it, cheeky thing. This one is definitely my nephew, as my mum says. It's his birthday in a bit over a week. I could give him a ziplock bag of 5c coins and he would be delighted.

AnnaGrowsAMustache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18659 on: September 14, 2017, 04:55:38 AM »
I borrow small amounts of cash from my nephew, like a buck or two. I do it so we have to have a written agreement and agree on terms and interest. Then I pay him back with interest a few weeks later. Now he knows how to both borrow and lend money. Not bad for a 6 year old.

I should try that with my nephews.

The five-year-old is completely disinterested in money. When I visit I like to give them a few dollars each for their money box. He will very politely say, "No, thank you." (I put it in his money box anyway, because I like to be fair.)

The two-year-old hoards money. If he finds a stray coin laying around the house it goes straight to his money box. If he doesn't find any coins laying around, he's not above asking my dad for a donation, and he usually gets it, cheeky thing. This one is definitely my nephew, as my mum says. It's his birthday in a bit over a week. I could give him a ziplock bag of 5c coins and he would be delighted.


When my son was growing up, from say about 8 years old, we'd give him $100 in $5 notes for pocket money every week. He then had to hand most back for "rent", "power", "phone", "food" and savings, and would be left with $5 or so for spending. When he wanted something large there would serious attempts at negotiating a later payment of the basics but this was never allowed. He could use a portion of his savings if it was something parentally approved. He's learned that, whatever your income, you pay yourself and your bills first, non negotiable.

rdaneel0

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 168
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18660 on: September 14, 2017, 11:49:17 AM »
Just had a conversation with a co-worker who is really excited about his new leased car :( we live in a city with excellent public transit. I asked if he's going to drive to work, nope, it's just for weekend trips.

Also, talked to a co-worker in the same job position as me who constantly complains about not having enough money. He's single, no kids, and lives with roommates. He was asking me about saving money into a 401(k) and I told him he should put away as much as he can, to which he replied that he can't because he's always broke. Then he told me a story about bar hopping, and then we stopped talking because he had to go out to buy lunch.
I write about my weekly meal preps, saving money in the city while working, and my random thoughts/adventures: https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/journey-to-the-center-of-the-'stache/

AH013

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18661 on: September 14, 2017, 01:55:41 PM »
I seem to remember that I read somewhere (probably here in this forum...) that someone who always pays his credit card bill on time is actually the better customer (on a risk adjusted basis) for the credit card company. Because the company makes steady income from him and there is no risk that he may default on his debt (because, essentially, he has none). Or am I imagining that?

I think it depends on what the definition of a "good" customer is.  ;-) 

In the credit card industry, people who pay their balance in full every month are apparently called deadbeats, because they "use the lender's money but pay no interest on it." 

But I also see that customers who do this could be seen through a different lens as an asset rather than a liability, because they represent a low-risk, steady stream of income at the merchant fee rate on the money the cardholder is using as "float."  Not a bad way to make ~2-3% on your money, guaranteed, plus whatever fees you can manage to wrangle out of the cardholders who goof something up.

Edited to add this link:  http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/aba-study-revolvers-transactors-1701.php.  Apparently as of late 2014, "deadbeats" (also called "transactors") represent 29% of credit card users, while "revolvers" (people who don't pay in full every month) represent 41.2%.  The remaining 29.8% are "dormant" (i.e., inactive accounts).

I'm not sure where any negative frustration from CC merchant banks against cardholders who pay in full every month would come into play.  The "lender" in the case of a CC user who pays in full every month isn't really the CC merchant bank, it's the merchants themselves.  Typically merchants aren't paid for CC sales until 30-45 days after sale, by which time the CC user would have then already paid their CC company off in full.  So the CC merchant bank wouldn't be out anything.

I do remember watching an interview on TV of a CC exec, and the interviewer asked the exec if they hate people who pay off their card in full every month because then "you don't get any high-rate interest".  The exec briefly looked at the woman like she literally said the dumbest thing he ever heard (complete with eye popping), then informed her that the vast majority of revenues come from interchange fees from the merchants.  He followed up to politely inform her that the reason interest rates were so high was to offset losses from people who rack up a bunch of charges and then default, forcing them to spend money on collection efforts, legal fees, and eventual write-offs.  He chuckled, then finished with saying anybody that wants to earn them 3% of their purchases (the merchant interchange fee) and never default on their balance was an amazing customer and he wished all their customers could be like that.

American Express is one of the few CC companies who acts as both card issuer and lender.  Their latest annual report confirms this revenue split.
http://www.snl.com/Cache/c38117384.html#rom321397_28
$26.3 billion in merchant fees and other non-interest related income.  Only $7.2B earned on interest.  And it doesn't distinguish between interest earned from balance-carrying CC users paying interest on their cards to Amex, versus Amex earning interest from receiving payments from non-balance-carrying cardholders at the end of the month and then investing that money for a little longer before eventually paying the merchants back.  Amex also has to pay $600M to borrow the money they've lent to balance-carrying CC users, then take $2B in writeoffs for losses stemming from deadbeats.  Speaking of which, I'm surprised they'd call "transactors" deadbeats, since that would traditionally be the word for a legitimate deadbeat -- someone who refuses to make good on a debt.

GnomeErcy

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18662 on: September 14, 2017, 02:40:21 PM »
Watched the Apple conference thing the other day with a coworker. He set his alarm clock right after the iPhone X for $999 starting was announced so that he could be among the first to pre-order it.

I have no idea how people justify spending that much on a phone.

solon

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1105
  • Age: 1817
  • Location: CO
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18663 on: September 14, 2017, 02:48:21 PM »
Watched the Apple conference thing the other day with a coworker. He set his alarm clock right after the iPhone X for $999 starting was announced so that he could be among the first to pre-order it.

I have no idea how people justify spending that much on a phone.

Love the user name!

nouveauRiche

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 308
  • Location: HCOL - USA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18664 on: September 14, 2017, 02:53:02 PM »
We have a retroactive salary check coming up.  People are are cranking up their withholding allowances because they need the money now and don't want to pay "extra" in taxes!  I can understand making some calculations on what the taxes are actually going to be and adjusting accordingly but these people don't even know what a marginal tax bracket is.

:( This topic makes me depressed. I hear so much misinformed spew because people don't know this.

"I don't want to earn more money because my taxes will go up and I'll actually pocket less money!"

I actually had a co-worker say to me that she didn't want to invest in stocks (outside of retirement) because she didn't want to have to pay more taxes.  "By that logic, you should turn down all future pay raises."  (in my head - not out loud)

Another friend had a CPA tell her to buy a more expensive house because then she would have a bigger interest deduction & get a bigger tax break.  "By that logic, you should just donate $10,000 to charity to get the $3,000 reduction in your taxes."  (in my head - not out loud)
« Last Edit: September 14, 2017, 02:57:30 PM by nouveauRiche »

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Location: Canada
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18665 on: September 14, 2017, 02:59:09 PM »
Watched the Apple conference thing the other day with a coworker. He set his alarm clock right after the iPhone X for $999 starting was announced so that he could be among the first to pre-order it.

I have no idea how people justify spending that much on a phone.

I will defend a subset of those people. The physical camera on the iPhone X is better than a 2000$ camera from just a decade ago. The software that is coupled with that camera makes the comparison even more asinine.

Going beyond still images, video quality on that thing is a beast. What used to take a big, bulky camera with a skilled technician now takes a person with an iPhone. Except the quality is better. There are a few major entertainment companies that use iPhones, that's right iPhones, as their main cameras for video production.

For both content creators and hobbyists, I posit that the iPhone X is not an extremely outlandish choice. Another group of people I would put forward as legitimate users of such a device is those whose phones serve as their primary or only computer. Quite seriously, my iPad does more than enough to cover 100% of my personal computer use cases. If someone is similar to me but wants something that can fit in their pocket, I won't begrudge them.

Everyone else is a spendypants. lol

Zaga

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1445
  • Age: 37
  • Location: North of Pittsburgh, PA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18666 on: September 14, 2017, 04:19:41 PM »
*snip*
 The "lender" in the case of a CC user who pays in full every month isn't really the CC merchant bank, it's the merchants themselves.  Typically merchants aren't paid for CC sales until 30-45 days after sale, by which time the CC user would have then already paid their CC company off in full.  So the CC merchant bank wouldn't be out anything.
*snip*
This is simply not true.  Merchants are (or at least the one I work for is) paid by the CC processor daily for sales from the previous day.  I can't imagine the merchant I work for being able to stay afloat with income from sales not coming into the business for 30-45 days!

**I'm an accountant, I've actually seen the daily deposits corresponding to the previous day sales.

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18667 on: September 14, 2017, 05:03:32 PM »
Watched the Apple conference thing the other day with a coworker. He set his alarm clock right after the iPhone X for $999 starting was announced so that he could be among the first to pre-order it.

I have no idea how people justify spending that much on a phone.

I will defend a subset of those people. The physical camera on the iPhone X is better than a 2000$ camera from just a decade ago. The software that is coupled with that camera makes the comparison even more asinine.

Going beyond still images, video quality on that thing is a beast. What used to take a big, bulky camera with a skilled technician now takes a person with an iPhone. Except the quality is better. There are a few major entertainment companies that use iPhones, that's right iPhones, as their main cameras for video production.

For both content creators and hobbyists, I posit that the iPhone X is not an extremely outlandish choice. Another group of people I would put forward as legitimate users of such a device is those whose phones serve as their primary or only computer. Quite seriously, my iPad does more than enough to cover 100% of my personal computer use cases. If someone is similar to me but wants something that can fit in their pocket, I won't begrudge them.

Everyone else is a spendypants. lol

I agree that pre-ordering is over the top and I agree that they are invaluable tools for those who need them.

My husband is overseas for work at the moment. He will meet up with a crew when he needs to, but the rest of the time he's a one-man band, iPhone 7+ and a gorilla pod, iPad Pro and a keyboard case.

RyanAtTanagra

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18668 on: September 15, 2017, 09:06:47 AM »
Another friend had a CPA tell her to buy a more expensive house because then she would have a bigger interest deduction & get a bigger tax break.  "By that logic, you should just donate $10,000 to charity to get the $3,000 reduction in your taxes."  (in my head - not out loud)

I tell those people, 'if you think giving $10k to the bank to get $3k back from the government is a good deal, I think we can work something out.  You can give me as much money as you want, no limit, and I'll give you 30% back.  And you don't even have to wait until the end of the year to get it, I'll give it back to you right away!  And we can do this as many times over the course of the year as you want, not just once!'

dycker1978

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 721
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18669 on: September 15, 2017, 04:10:53 PM »
So I had to come here and post.  Everyone at work is talking about a new investment plan that the company is promoting.  No match, but they will auto deduct off of your check and thus no charge you income tax on it.  (We have the option to stop source deductions for any investment me make, we just have to do some paperwork) 

Any way, I look into this fund, thinking it might be another place for me to invest.  I look up the fund facts on this one... get this

8.69% MER
0.5% deferred sales charge, that never lapses, but is cumulative for every dollar invested in the fund as long as you invest in it.
1.29% is the average annual return, which I guess isn't bad, with the almost 9% MER deducted.

Wow...

Dollar Slice

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2400
  • Age: 40
  • Location: New York City
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18670 on: September 15, 2017, 09:46:03 PM »
8.69% MER

I want to run away screaming from my computer right now. Holy cow.
Referrals for...
Prolific Academic: http://www.prolific.ac/rp?ref=3PJ4H43L (Earn money by taking academic surveys - way better than mturk, I average ~$9/hr)
Robinhood: http://bit.ly/2uGXBPG (Get a free stock!)

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2649
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18671 on: September 16, 2017, 01:27:55 AM »
That's basically a tax scam.  The management company can get away with the 8.69% because it's most of what the employees would have paid in tax anyway, the employees are happy with the 1.29% because it has the benefit of being on untaxed income, and the big loser is the US Treasury.

I'd be tempted to report it to the IRS.
Be frugal and industrious, and you will be free (Ben Franklin)

LennStar

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 911
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18672 on: September 16, 2017, 06:07:28 AM »
That's basically a tax scam.  The management company can get away with the 8.69% because it's most of what the employees would have paid in tax anyway, the employees are happy with the 1.29% because it has the benefit of being on untaxed income, and the big loser is the US Treasury.

I'd be tempted to report it to the IRS.
I don't know if its a tax scam, but it definitly is a scam, so go forward reporting it.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7390
  • Registered member
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18673 on: September 16, 2017, 03:05:00 PM »
That's basically a tax scam.  The management company can get away with the 8.69% because it's most of what the employees would have paid in tax anyway, the employees are happy with the 1.29% because it has the benefit of being on untaxed income, and the big loser is the US Treasury.

I'd be tempted to report it to the IRS.
I don't know if its a tax scam, but it definitly is a scam, so go forward reporting it.

Not sure how interested the IRS will be in a presumably Canadian company

TomTX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2708
  • Location: Texas
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18674 on: September 16, 2017, 03:05:34 PM »

Um...until we start talking about pensions...the answer is no.  When someone can retire at 50 with anywhere from 50% to 100% of their highest income (depending on the job), the answer is no.  I don't get to retire at 50.  (I mean, I totally could retire off my investments - we are talking about retiring off of taxpayer money here).

That's the elephant in the room.
- No more retiring at 50.  I don't care if you are a cop.
- If you want to retire at 50, you still have to wait until aged 60-67 to draw a full pension.
- If that's a no-go, then fine, retire at 50, with a paycheck of 25% of the average of your last 10 years.

Or something like that.  I seriously have a friend doing a go fund me to pay for her last semester of school as a pastry chef.  She retired at 50.  Now, she's not a cop or anything, so her pension is around the $40k mark. But that was 10-15 years ago.  She's worked since - teaching ESL, working at grocery stores, etc.  You are in your 60s, save up the $6k, geez.

We can talk about pensions. Where I work, if you want to retire at 50 (under the old system) - you would need to work there for 30 years. That's a pretty long damn run at a single employer.

Pension would be 69% of the highest 3 years' service. Less if you want the pension to continue for your spouse if you die first.

Pension would NOT be inflation-adjusted/COLA. Get paid $3k/month at 50? That's what you're still getting at 90.

Employee would contribute 9.5% of their salary every year to the pension. If they don't wait for the pension and take a lump sum, they get all of 2% per year accrued interest on that money.

Employee is typically paid considerably less than an equivalent private sector job

Frankly, the pension isn't the huge benefit many people make it out to be. Is it a benefit? Yes. But I would have been better off with equivalent 401k matching, and it would be a damn sight more portable. If I just walked away, most of the value would be eaten by inflation before I could draw it.

The new pension system is significantly worse for employees, unless they come to work for the State after a career elsewhere.
Credit card signup bonuses:

$150 bonus on $500 spend for Chase Freedom:
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/2/MU4TDQ1N3K

$50 bonus (no min spend, just use it once) plus double all cash back at the end of 1 year for Discover, including the initial $50:
https://refer.discover.com/s/37e3u

$500 bonus on $4,000 spend for Chase Sapphire Preferred:
https://www.referyourchasecard.com/6/Z8JIP66H7G

StacheyStache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 175
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18675 on: September 17, 2017, 06:54:22 AM »

Um...until we start talking about pensions...the answer is no.  When someone can retire at 50 with anywhere from 50% to 100% of their highest income (depending on the job), the answer is no.  I don't get to retire at 50.  (I mean, I totally could retire off my investments - we are talking about retiring off of taxpayer money here).

That's the elephant in the room.
- No more retiring at 50.  I don't care if you are a cop.
- If you want to retire at 50, you still have to wait until aged 60-67 to draw a full pension.
- If that's a no-go, then fine, retire at 50, with a paycheck of 25% of the average of your last 10 years.

Or something like that.  I seriously have a friend doing a go fund me to pay for her last semester of school as a pastry chef.  She retired at 50.  Now, she's not a cop or anything, so her pension is around the $40k mark. But that was 10-15 years ago.  She's worked since - teaching ESL, working at grocery stores, etc.  You are in your 60s, save up the $6k, geez.

We can talk about pensions. Where I work, if you want to retire at 50 (under the old system) - you would need to work there for 30 years. That's a pretty long damn run at a single employer.

Pension would be 69% of the highest 3 years' service. Less if you want the pension to continue for your spouse if you die first.

Pension would NOT be inflation-adjusted/COLA. Get paid $3k/month at 50? That's what you're still getting at 90.

Employee would contribute 9.5% of their salary every year to the pension. If they don't wait for the pension and take a lump sum, they get all of 2% per year accrued interest on that money.

Employee is typically paid considerably less than an equivalent private sector job

Frankly, the pension isn't the huge benefit many people make it out to be. Is it a benefit? Yes. But I would have been better off with equivalent 401k matching, and it would be a damn sight more portable. If I just walked away, most of the value would be eaten by inflation before I could draw it.

The new pension system is significantly worse for employees, unless they come to work for the State after a career elsewhere.

My state has something called "Rule of 90:"  Age plus years of experience must equal 90 or higher before you can retire.  I started a few months after I graduated law school at 25; the earliest I can retire and receive a pension is 58:  33 years of experience plus age 58= 91.  And that's 33 years of making way less than I would in the private sector (50k for a lawyer with three years of experience!!!). 

Definitely not a screaming deal.  You're better off working in the private sector and saving in a traditional 401k in almost every circumstance (and then our state pays 300k of taxpayer money for a study to ask "gwarsh, why we can't hang on to any state workers?!?"  SERIOUSLY.)




Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: BC
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18676 on: September 17, 2017, 11:26:34 AM »

Um...until we start talking about pensions...the answer is no.  When someone can retire at 50 with anywhere from 50% to 100% of their highest income (depending on the job), the answer is no.  I don't get to retire at 50.  (I mean, I totally could retire off my investments - we are talking about retiring off of taxpayer money here).

That's the elephant in the room.
- No more retiring at 50.  I don't care if you are a cop.
- If you want to retire at 50, you still have to wait until aged 60-67 to draw a full pension.
- If that's a no-go, then fine, retire at 50, with a paycheck of 25% of the average of your last 10 years.

Or something like that.  I seriously have a friend doing a go fund me to pay for her last semester of school as a pastry chef.  She retired at 50.  Now, she's not a cop or anything, so her pension is around the $40k mark. But that was 10-15 years ago.  She's worked since - teaching ESL, working at grocery stores, etc.  You are in your 60s, save up the $6k, geez.

We can talk about pensions. Where I work, if you want to retire at 50 (under the old system) - you would need to work there for 30 years. That's a pretty long damn run at a single employer.

Pension would be 69% of the highest 3 years' service. Less if you want the pension to continue for your spouse if you die first.

Pension would NOT be inflation-adjusted/COLA. Get paid $3k/month at 50? That's what you're still getting at 90.

Employee would contribute 9.5% of their salary every year to the pension. If they don't wait for the pension and take a lump sum, they get all of 2% per year accrued interest on that money.

Employee is typically paid considerably less than an equivalent private sector job

Frankly, the pension isn't the huge benefit many people make it out to be. Is it a benefit? Yes. But I would have been better off with equivalent 401k matching, and it would be a damn sight more portable. If I just walked away, most of the value would be eaten by inflation before I could draw it.

The new pension system is significantly worse for employees, unless they come to work for the State after a career elsewhere.

My state has something called "Rule of 90:"  Age plus years of experience must equal 90 or higher before you can retire.  I started a few months after I graduated law school at 25; the earliest I can retire and receive a pension is 58:  33 years of experience plus age 58= 91.  And that's 33 years of making way less than I would in the private sector (50k for a lawyer with three years of experience!!!). 

Definitely not a screaming deal.  You're better off working in the private sector and saving in a traditional 401k in almost every circumstance (and then our state pays 300k of taxpayer money for a study to ask "gwarsh, why we can't hang on to any state workers?!?"  SERIOUSLY.)

Stacey -- I am curious,  How much are you required to contribute to it, and what is the formula for the amount that you get?  I want to compare it to the government pension (medical / healthcare standard) here..  I was offered a job with a generous pension, but I found that that it did not work for me, because the mandatory personal contribution was too large for what I needed for retirement (I would have ended up taking home 30% more in retirement, due to funding retirement funds early in life, prior to this job).  I needed the present day cashflow to fund a mortgage and teenagers at home more than money later..

I am assuming that rule of 90 is to retire with a full pension...e.g at age 58, you don't take a reduced pension if the 90 rule is obtained.  Please correct if wrong.


StacheyStache

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 175
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18677 on: September 18, 2017, 05:47:52 AM »

Um...until we start talking about pensions...the answer is no.  When someone can retire at 50 with anywhere from 50% to 100% of their highest income (depending on the job), the answer is no.  I don't get to retire at 50.  (I mean, I totally could retire off my investments - we are talking about retiring off of taxpayer money here).

That's the elephant in the room.
- No more retiring at 50.  I don't care if you are a cop.
- If you want to retire at 50, you still have to wait until aged 60-67 to draw a full pension.
- If that's a no-go, then fine, retire at 50, with a paycheck of 25% of the average of your last 10 years.

Or something like that.  I seriously have a friend doing a go fund me to pay for her last semester of school as a pastry chef.  She retired at 50.  Now, she's not a cop or anything, so her pension is around the $40k mark. But that was 10-15 years ago.  She's worked since - teaching ESL, working at grocery stores, etc.  You are in your 60s, save up the $6k, geez.

We can talk about pensions. Where I work, if you want to retire at 50 (under the old system) - you would need to work there for 30 years. That's a pretty long damn run at a single employer.

Pension would be 69% of the highest 3 years' service. Less if you want the pension to continue for your spouse if you die first.

Pension would NOT be inflation-adjusted/COLA. Get paid $3k/month at 50? That's what you're still getting at 90.

Employee would contribute 9.5% of their salary every year to the pension. If they don't wait for the pension and take a lump sum, they get all of 2% per year accrued interest on that money.

Employee is typically paid considerably less than an equivalent private sector job

Frankly, the pension isn't the huge benefit many people make it out to be. Is it a benefit? Yes. But I would have been better off with equivalent 401k matching, and it would be a damn sight more portable. If I just walked away, most of the value would be eaten by inflation before I could draw it.

The new pension system is significantly worse for employees, unless they come to work for the State after a career elsewhere.

My state has something called "Rule of 90:"  Age plus years of experience must equal 90 or higher before you can retire.  I started a few months after I graduated law school at 25; the earliest I can retire and receive a pension is 58:  33 years of experience plus age 58= 91.  And that's 33 years of making way less than I would in the private sector (50k for a lawyer with three years of experience!!!). 

Definitely not a screaming deal.  You're better off working in the private sector and saving in a traditional 401k in almost every circumstance (and then our state pays 300k of taxpayer money for a study to ask "gwarsh, why we can't hang on to any state workers?!?"  SERIOUSLY.)

Stacey -- I am curious,  How much are you required to contribute to it, and what is the formula for the amount that you get?  I want to compare it to the government pension (medical / healthcare standard) here..  I was offered a job with a generous pension, but I found that that it did not work for me, because the mandatory personal contribution was too large for what I needed for retirement (I would have ended up taking home 30% more in retirement, due to funding retirement funds early in life, prior to this job).  I needed the present day cashflow to fund a mortgage and teenagers at home more than money later..

I am assuming that rule of 90 is to retire with a full pension...e.g at age 58, you don't take a reduced pension if the 90 rule is obtained.  Please correct if wrong.

That's correct.  There is no early retirement before 55 and that's with a substantially reduced payout and still requiremes many years of earned service credit (not sure of the exact amount but I know it's more than 20).  We contribute 9 percent.  It used to be less but has risen every year for awhile now.  We don't have control over the contribution amount.

The formula comes out to a little more than half your salary at retirement at full payout.  Since most state workers make less than 50k...again, better off in the private sector in almost every circumstance.

Edit:  The pension used to be a lot better and still is for anyone who got in about five years ago who were grandfathered in.  The old system was too good to be sustainable, I agree, but the benefits were slashed so much for the new workers that now the state is having the opposite problem:  they can't hold onto anyone because they still want to pay the same low wages with a much crappier pension.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2017, 05:55:40 AM by StacheyStache »

TOgirl

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 61
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18678 on: September 18, 2017, 07:47:58 AM »
Get into work this morning, brew my coffee and fill up my water bottle...

Spendy pants colleague "ooohhh ok, if you aren't buying coffee, how about we both don't spend anything this week?"

Me "ummmm ok, I never really buy coffee, so that's easy - should we have a no spend week challenge?"

SPC "OK! sounds like fun! Let's ask spendy pants colleague #2 to join us"

SPC2 "yeah I'm in, my husband said I need to cut down the spending, I spent too much in the last couple of months, but it's partly his fault, he TOLD me to buy the Prada sunglasses"

Me "ok, so it's a challenge - no spending for the rest of the week. I"m going to do it here and at home"

SPC "ok, but I didn't bring breakfast or lunch for today, so I just need to buy some food, then I can start the not spending"

SPC2 "I'm going out at lunch to get my nails re-done, my shellac is growing out. But that's not something tangible, so it counts right? I'm not BUYING something"

Me "........."

iowajes

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5298
  • Location: United States
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18679 on: September 18, 2017, 08:30:18 AM »
SPC2 "I'm going out at lunch to get my nails re-done, my shellac is growing out. But that's not something tangible, so it counts right? I'm not BUYING something"


Well, I mean, that's just necessary. Her nails have grown out, they NEED to be filled.

(Also, how is that not tangible? You are buying acrylic.)

RidetheRain

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
  • Age: 25
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18680 on: September 18, 2017, 10:03:32 AM »
SPC2 "I'm going out at lunch to get my nails re-done, my shellac is growing out. But that's not something tangible, so it counts right? I'm not BUYING something"


Well, I mean, that's just necessary. Her nails have grown out, they NEED to be filled.

(Also, how is that not tangible? You are buying acrylic.)

I'll be honest, I never really understood acrylic nails. What's wrong with your own nails?
See my journal

marielle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 816
  • Age: 24
  • Location: South Carolina
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18681 on: September 18, 2017, 10:23:21 AM »
SPC2 "I'm going out at lunch to get my nails re-done, my shellac is growing out. But that's not something tangible, so it counts right? I'm not BUYING something"


Well, I mean, that's just necessary. Her nails have grown out, they NEED to be filled.

(Also, how is that not tangible? You are buying acrylic.)

I'll be honest, I never really understood acrylic nails. What's wrong with your own nails?

I can see the appeal, but not something I'd do regularly considering the cost. I did get fake nails twice for prom in highschool. Considering a lot of pictures were taken and I bite my nails, it wasn't the worst idea ever. I would probably do it again for a special occasion but that might never happen again. Bleeding cuticles and super rough bitten nails probably isn't something I'd want on a framed picture forever. Fake nails are also much much stronger which is nice for scratching yourself and such.

I guess I only have an answer to this question because I'm an idiot and my nails suck. One of these days I'll stop...

iowajes

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5298
  • Location: United States
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18682 on: September 18, 2017, 10:39:36 AM »
SPC2 "I'm going out at lunch to get my nails re-done, my shellac is growing out. But that's not something tangible, so it counts right? I'm not BUYING something"


Well, I mean, that's just necessary. Her nails have grown out, they NEED to be filled.

(Also, how is that not tangible? You are buying acrylic.)

I'll be honest, I never really understood acrylic nails. What's wrong with your own nails?

Polish doesn't chip off acrylics as easily. They are much much harder to break. Being the same length it gives a more uniform look.

I had acrylics a bit in college, but now just have my natural nails. I'm not spending money on that. I had way more disposable income during college since my expenses were paid by scholarship and parents, so the money I worked for was half save half spend.

Really acrylic nails are kind of like any makeup. What's the point of false eyelashes? What's wrong with your own eyelashes? What's the point of foundation? What's wrong with your own skin color?

Needless to say, I don't wear makeup. I do however LOVE nail art and paint my nails multiple times a week. So I'm  totally cool with people who do wear makeup. But it is all "extra".

Imma

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 439
  • Location: Europe
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18683 on: September 18, 2017, 12:35:32 PM »
Fake nails seem to be much more common in the US than they are over here. And just like any type of make-up, once it starts to become the norm, many women feel like they have to join that trend or look frumpy / unfashionable / unkempt. I'm glad fake nails aren't a big thing over here yet, although they're on the rise. I've only worn nailpolish once in my life as a teenager and I hated it (and never have had fake nails). Luckily I have pretty strong, healthy looking nails naturally so I don't look like a slob - they look like an understated elegant French manicure.

Going grey and not wearing make-up are two other things that used to be really normal and are now frowned upon. Very few ladies of my grandmother's generation ever wore anything but a little bit of lipstick when they went to town and they all went grey. I only know one woman who's going grey naturally without ever dyeing her hair. People call her a slob constantly though, not sure if they do it to her face but certainly behind her back. She's in a field where looks shouldn't matter (as a medical doctor and a PhD) and she's very meticulous in her job but her grey hair puts people off.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1689
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18684 on: September 18, 2017, 01:01:22 PM »
Fake nails seem to be much more common in the US than they are over here. And just like any type of make-up, once it starts to become the norm, many women feel like they have to join that trend or look frumpy / unfashionable / unkempt. I'm glad fake nails aren't a big thing over here yet, although they're on the rise. I've only worn nailpolish once in my life as a teenager and I hated it (and never have had fake nails). Luckily I have pretty strong, healthy looking nails naturally so I don't look like a slob - they look like an understated elegant French manicure.

Going grey and not wearing make-up are two other things that used to be really normal and are now frowned upon. Very few ladies of my grandmother's generation ever wore anything but a little bit of lipstick when they went to town and they all went grey. I only know one woman who's going grey naturally without ever dyeing her hair. People call her a slob constantly though, not sure if they do it to her face but certainly behind her back. She's in a field where looks shouldn't matter (as a medical doctor and a PhD) and she's very meticulous in her job but her grey hair puts people off.

Funny: in engineering, grey hair gets you promoted because it suggests credibility. We also tend to avoid makeup especially in the lab or the field. Wearing makeup tends to get you mistaken for a clerical worker.

Several months ago I suspected that fake nails received far more media attention than real ones did, and did not reflect the preferences of real people despite my daughter's protestations that "everybody" wore fake nails. I never seemed to see any on her classmates except for special events such as Prom. So I did a little bit of fieldwork. I went about my business with a little notebook, and my usual errands took me to a mall, various shops and department stores, several drive-through counters, a hospital, and the office where I worked. As I went, I discreetly counted professional or professional-looking manicures that looked as though someone had exchanged money to make them happen. I classified women's manicures as "none", "polish", "fake" as in long and obviously artificial, or "decorative", meaning an elaborate set of nails with multiple colors, jewels, textures, or more than one pattern that is intended to draw attention to the ring finger. It's very possible that I mis-categorized some French manicures as "none", or a few high-quality fakes as "polish". Most polish jobs were probably done Mustachian-style by the owner of the nails.

In my workplace there were no children, so at the other shops, stores, and mall locations I ignored children and adolescents and focused only on adult women.

At my place of work, one female manager and two engineers had nail polish but none had an obviously fake or decorative look. Three secretaries and one of the janitors had decorative fake nails. None of the security guards had polish and neither did any of the student interns.

At the hospital, none of the doctors or nurses had any manicure or polish whatsoever. Counter staff nearly all wore nail polish however I only noticed two with nails that appeared to be fake, and only one of those sets was decorative.

At the drive-through, nearly every female counter worker had a set of elaborate fake decorative nails, generally complete with added jewels and doodads. The second most common way to wear nails was polished. Very few drive-through employees wore bare nails.

At the mall, clerks tended to wear nail polish but not fake nails. Most customers had no nail polish at all. Only about one in ten women who were not obviously employed at the mall wore nail polish or decoration of any sort, and only about half of those (I'd say about five percent) wore decorative nails. Most food service workers who handled food did not wear polish or nail decoration of any kind at work. This could have reflected company policy of some kind.

Overall, I'd say only five to ten percent of the women who can afford it were wearing fake nails. The ones who do, tend to be concentrated either in entertainment-related industries where a high maintenance appearance is considered necessary, or in very low-end service jobs where it's important to hide dirt that may be under the fingernails.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

Rowellen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 367
  • Location: Australia
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18685 on: September 18, 2017, 03:52:16 PM »
TGS, when I worked at McDonald's, we weren't allowed to wear nail polish. I believe it was a health and safety requirement. My mum was a nurse so she was also not allowed to wear nail polish. For the same reason I assume.

My spendypants coworker has fancy fake nails. I think they look a bit ridiculous and impractical. She also always has her hair and makeup done. I've mentioned her before. She likes to purchase  $200 skirts on afterpay. She's the only one in the office that does this so it's not keeping up a certain expected appearance. It's purely her own vanity.

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18686 on: September 18, 2017, 04:47:15 PM »
Going grey and not wearing make-up are two other things that used to be really normal and are now frowned upon.

I've been pondering this lately because of the stark differences in two of my female colleagues.

Colleague A:
- over 60
- tall, handsome woman
- short grey hair, well maintained, styled but nothing fussy
- looks strong and fit
- wardrobe is the embodiment of 'fashion comes and goes but style is forever'

Colleague B:
- over 60
- carrying about 25kg too many (by her own admission) and has been paying to see a dietitian each week
- spent an inheritance on a face-lift
- long hair that requires expensive dye jobs, but it's then left to its own - limp and slightly greasy - devices
- is still squeezing into clothes that fit 25kg ago

No, I shouldn't be judging my colleagues on their appearance.

Yes, they can present themselves as they like.

It's just interesting to me that the one who is more focused on maintaining herself (Colleague A cycles, hikes, eats well) presents better than the one focused on maintaining her appearance (Colleague B, who sees her dietitian then comes to work with lollies to celebrate).

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18687 on: September 18, 2017, 04:49:22 PM »
One of my colleagues lives in a $5.3 million house in a beach suburb.

Her neighbours just bought the $2.9 million house next door with the sole purpose of demolishing it to improve their ocean view.

RyanAtTanagra

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 845
  • Location: San Francisco, CA
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18688 on: September 18, 2017, 04:56:14 PM »
One of my colleagues lives in a $5.3 million house in a beach suburb.

Her neighbours just bought the $2.9 million house next door with the sole purpose of demolishing it to improve their ocean view.

Like, they already own the house behind it and it was blocking their view?  Or they're going to rebuild it more to their liking?

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1876
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18689 on: September 18, 2017, 05:03:23 PM »
One of my colleagues lives in a $5.3 million house in a beach suburb.

Her neighbours just bought the $2.9 million house next door with the sole purpose of demolishing it to improve their ocean view.

Like, they already own the house behind it and it was blocking their view?  Or they're going to rebuild it more to their liking?

They own the house behind it and it was partially blocking their view.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2309
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18690 on: September 18, 2017, 07:27:14 PM »
One of my colleagues lives in a $5.3 million house in a beach suburb.

Her neighbours just bought the $2.9 million house next door with the sole purpose of demolishing it to improve their ocean view.

Like, they already own the house behind it and it was blocking their view?  Or they're going to rebuild it more to their liking?

They own the house behind it and it was partially blocking their view.
I wonder if each morning, they walk out on their balcony, look out at the ocean, and think "I'm so glad I'm spending >$300 today see a bit more of the ocean.  And I'm glad that tomorrow, I'll spend that same $300 to enjoy a slightly-larger view of the ocean again.  And another $300 the day afterward."  (4% interest on $2.9million is about $320/day)

Gone_Hiking

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 119
  • Location: Arizona
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18691 on: September 18, 2017, 10:06:56 PM »
Anyway, I find it more strange that people always want tax cuts, but never service cuts.

However, there's a ballot measure this fall to add 1% to our already 8.25% sales tax for infrastructure to fix our roads, etc.
 

1.  Seems to me that some of the people who want tax cuts also want to cut services - just not services for them.  To those types, they deserve the benefits they get - and everybody else is a deadbeat.  This sentiment is perhaps heard more when it comes to Social Security in United States.
2. When it comes to fixing roads, sales tax is not perfect.  A better formula might involve vehicle weight and miles driven.   Sales tax, however, seems to be more equitable  than property tax levied on homeowners.  Property tax raise is a new idea from the county where I live and where roads are in bad shape.  Because sales tax requires unanimous vote from the county board of supervisors and property tax raise needs majority only, homeowners are now paying for the road updates because the county board can't muster unanimity on anything, including laws of physics.  Vehicle weight and miles driven proposals don't have a chance to pass through state legislature within the next ten years.

Of course, it's easy for me to pick on the county board of supervisors: property tax statement came in the mail today.  The point of view depends on where one has planted the rear end, no?

shelivesthedream

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2470
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18692 on: September 19, 2017, 02:24:30 AM »
^^Surely vehicle weight and miles driven are correlated with petrol ("gas") used. So tax petrol and use it to maintain roads.

On fake nails: I've known a few people who had manicures frequently in the past, but now I live in a poor mostly-black area I see a lot of fake nails. Some of them are amazing (colours, patterns, rhinestones) and some of them are ridiculous (cannot get card out of purse because of massive claw nails). But I read a thing one time about why poor people value ostentatious clothes, hair and makeup and middle class people are obsessed with their houses. Property value might be a bragging thing for the middle classes but you can't *see* it, whereas anyone you meet can see your awesome nails or the latest pair of trainers.

farfromfire

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 234
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18693 on: September 19, 2017, 02:55:38 AM »
^^Surely vehicle weight and miles driven are correlated with petrol ("gas") used. So tax petrol and use it to maintain roads.

... for now. But with the advent of electric cars, this will no longer be the case:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty
I know that in some countries, governments are considering taxing car use for road improvement by requiring recording devices in every car, that report the distance driven each month.

shelivesthedream

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2470
  • Location: London, UK
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18694 on: September 19, 2017, 03:09:47 AM »
^^Surely vehicle weight and miles driven are correlated with petrol ("gas") used. So tax petrol and use it to maintain roads.

... for now. But with the advent of electric cars, this will no longer be the case:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty
I know that in some countries, governments are considering taxing car use for road improvement by requiring recording devices in every car, that report the distance driven each month.

Fair enough, but it's still the case NOW and American petrol is known for being ridiculously cheap so they could easily jack up the tax on that for the time being.

nobody123

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 504
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18695 on: September 19, 2017, 06:45:56 AM »
^^Surely vehicle weight and miles driven are correlated with petrol ("gas") used. So tax petrol and use it to maintain roads.

... for now. But with the advent of electric cars, this will no longer be the case:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jul/26/treasury-tax-electric-cars-vat-fuel-duty
I know that in some countries, governments are considering taxing car use for road improvement by requiring recording devices in every car, that report the distance driven each month.

Fair enough, but it's still the case NOW and American petrol is known for being ridiculously cheap so they could easily jack up the tax on that for the time being.

It is EXTREMELY unpopular to raise the gas tax, since it affects essentially everyone, rich and poor alike.  Even those without vehicles are affected as service providers like trash collection just pass it along as part of their "fuel cost surcharge".

Raenia

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 372
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18696 on: September 19, 2017, 07:09:23 AM »
There was some talk of adding a mileage tax, assessed at the required annual emissions inspection, in my area.  I don't think it passed, but it would have been a good complement to the gas tax - we already have one of the highest gas taxes in the country, and you wouldn't know it from the roads :/

mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1265
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18697 on: September 19, 2017, 08:24:57 AM »
I read about someone online who was running his diesel off of waste oil (greasecar). He tried the DMV, state police, secretary of state, etc., trying to figure out how he could pay his road tax. Nobody could help him. He has been keeping track of everything, but as he's gone through about 2 gallons of diesel in the past 4 years he's not paid nearly any of his road tax because no one knows how.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2309
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18698 on: September 19, 2017, 08:33:36 AM »
There was some talk of adding a mileage tax, assessed at the required annual emissions inspection, in my area.  I don't think it passed, but it would have been a good complement to the gas tax - we already have one of the highest gas taxes in the country, and you wouldn't know it from the roads :/
This is a great example of why, as nobody123 pointed out, increasing the gas tax is unpopular.  People may not understand the word "fungible," but they *do* understand when they're being taxed more to take care of the roads, and the roads aren't being maintained.

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4949
  • Location: BC
Re: Overheard at Work
« Reply #18699 on: September 19, 2017, 10:09:36 AM »
One of my colleagues lives in a $5.3 million house in a beach suburb.

Her neighbours just bought the $2.9 million house next door with the sole purpose of demolishing it to improve their ocean view.

Like, they already own the house behind it and it was blocking their view?  Or they're going to rebuild it more to their liking?

They own the house behind it and it was partially blocking their view.


Hey, this could be a shrewd investment concept.     Buy adjacent property, remove home, maybe a tree that also blocks your own view.  Maybe put a small (cheap) affordable home for renters where you can't see it, to cover taxes, maybe not.   

Live in own home for 2 more years, then renovate existing home, sell it for $10 million in perfect condition with fabulous view.   Then build a massive house on the second property, again blocking the first home's view, or just sell the land as is to someone else for $3 million (as it has a new small home on it), or for $5 million (to the people that just bought the first home).