Author Topic: Relatives who just don't get it  (Read 730073 times)

rawr237

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 75
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2050 on: November 22, 2016, 11:53:46 AM »
RE: the tattoo deal, I think it's a combination of my dad being protective of his baby girls, and my parents not wanting us to make youthful decisions that would be physically painful and expensive to reverse. Sis made the argument that it was an arbitrary rule, my response was that for ~30k/year my parents earned the right to their one arbitrary rule. Dad admitted that if Sis had kept the secret, they couldn't have done anything about it. But she told all our relatives, so at that point she had to tell the parents too. Plus then she couldn't post facebook pictures that show the tattoo, which would be a severe constraint (she has two tattoos now, side ribcage and lower sternum -- and several pictures posted that show them at least partially).

c) I think you can't MAKE someone want early retirement, or even save for retirement at all. We're a specific subset who have both the desire and the focus and understanding to make it happen.

d) THAT said, you can help lead someone to budgeting (assuming they're not focused on making more money, and WANT to live on 600$/month because it's 'easier', they have to know what they can spend on what to actually live on that).

I appreciate the thoughts. As an industrial design major, she does use some logic in her work. It's also the type of career that tends to be salaried, so likely post-college she could end up working for a bigger company (she loved her Nerf co-op). Though the artsy flake bit does come into play at moments...she missed our Mother's day brunch this year, overslept and didn't respond to text messages until after noon.

She's damn smart, I just get the impression that she doesn't like to think about money...thus it flows through her fingers like water. I'm no Spock (ha), and I completely understand the tendency to spend money based on fleeting emotions -- working on curbing it. I have no intention of bringing up early retirement...would love to see her stick to a budget, but she has tried with no apparent result. I just want her to be able to save/spend sustainably.

e) sometimes, you just can't affect things. Make your peace with that.

Oof. I guess I feel like I haven't truly tried to make an impact yet, hinting and suggesting but not getting serious. Still holding out hope, but I guess I have to come to terms with the possibility that she won't wise up anytime soon.

Artsy flakes. We can love 'em, but...

Ain't that the truth.

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2051 on: November 22, 2016, 12:32:33 PM »
She's damn smart, I just get the impression that she doesn't like to think about money...thus it flows through her fingers like water. I'm no Spock (ha), and I completely understand the tendency to spend money based on fleeting emotions -- working on curbing it. I have no intention of bringing up early retirement...would love to see her stick to a budget, but she has tried with no apparent result. I just want her to be able to save/spend sustainably.

e) sometimes, you just can't affect things. Make your peace with that.

Oof. I guess I feel like I haven't truly tried to make an impact yet, hinting and suggesting but not getting serious. Still holding out hope, but I guess I have to come to terms with the possibility that she won't wise up anytime soon.

Artsy flakes. We can love 'em, but...

Ain't that the truth.

Well... some people learn by being told. Some people learn by being shown. And some people learn by butting their heads against the wall and finding where the limit is. It's a more painful way to learn, but you can't force someone to learn earlier and less painfully, you can just give them the opportunities.

And the thing with sticking to a budget is that you have to WANT to. As in, you need a REASON to. Right now, it seems like she has no reason - like, why would you NOT spend 20$ on this thing you want because it's not on a spreadsheet? Who cares? Pay it off next month, wheeee!!! And then the problem starts snowballing... And until she sees that the budget has a reason, and that those limits have a reason, and that she wants the thing behind that reason MORE than she wants whatever she's spending her money on now, she's not gonna change.

Like: ok. 20$ brunch. Why not? Brunch is nice! Mimosas are nice! Friends are nice! Let's do brunch, why not?? (Answer: because I want to buy a house in 5 years, go to Spain next summer, buy this designer handbag in 6 months, put X amount into my retirement funds this month, invest and become financially independant by X age, WHATEVER, and that 20$ will put me this much closer to meeting that objective that I value more than brunch, so I'll suggest doing something else instead - brunch and mimosas at my house with friends for a fraction of the cost, maybe!.) My point is: until she has an ANSWER to the 'why not' question that she genuinely wants and believes in, she's not gonna keep a budget. If you want to help her in that direction, help her identify short-mid-range goals (6 months - 3 years, say) that she genuinely, in her gut, wants, and then you can help her figure out what she needs to achieve those.

As always, it's not about the money. It's about psychology and desire and emotions and feelings of self-worth and value and they're all wrapped up together in how we spend our money, but you can't address the money without addressing the foundation on which you've built your relationship with money.

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2052 on: November 22, 2016, 12:49:24 PM »
Ish? Like, yes, it's a niche, but a) you're dealing with broke musicians who don't want to pay ANY money for services, and b) they're FLAKES, and you basically have to triple your rates to break even on the time it takes to wrangle them. High-effort niche, to say the least.

Sorry for the double post.

I think this would be an excellent niche for tradespeople, rather than artists and musicians. I have a lot of friends who work as plumbers / drywall hangers / carpenters and the like who do excellent work but just cannot stay on top of things like billing and scheduling jobs. They hate doing it and it never gets done.

Hell, my brother-in-law runs a landscaping company and constantly forgets to even bill people. His wife brings in a couple "windfalls" a year when she goes through the books and sends bills to delinquent accounts.

Huh. One copy of some scheduling software for different people, one copy of a basic accounting software package, a phone line, a computer, and you're in like Flynn. That could work. You'd have to have everyone pay you first, though, and remit the balance to the contractor that hired you.

LOL, if only. I have owned two successful construction companies. I have supervised for contractors that were so big that my best year in business would represent a rounding error on their taxes.  It's amazing how insanely complex operating a construction business can get, and how poorly it's done, even by owners that appear legitimate and successful. The best personal example of this I saw was watching the majority of  single family home builders in my region, as they failed during the great recession. The reason for a significant portion of it?   Construction company owners who didn't understand that cash flow is not profit. They rode an incredibly long boom and suddenly saw their business  drop by 80-90%. They went into survival mode, and downsized, but ended up with huge debts, since they were making very little profit during the boom years, but mistook the huge volume of cash flowing across the desk as success. They had legacy debt at lots of suppliers, from the stream of projects that ended, but no cash flow. They lived very well while gently tapping the flow of cash for personal use, and everything worked as long as they were doing a hell of a lot of volume.  Once the tap slowed to a trickle, the shit hit the fan. The complexity can be staggering also. I spent about half a year working on a multi-million dollar mediation where it came down to battles over scheduling on a large public project. Not only were there law firms involved who specialized in this specific part of contract law, but both sides had witnesses who did nothing but assault the other party's ability to properly schedule the job. Pretty amazing to see a sleazy subcontractor walk away with a million bucks, since he scammed a mediator into believing that he could never of hoped to do the job properly, or in a timely manner, since the general contractor's scheduling incompetence made it impossible to perform. One you get bigger than a truck or two, and a handful of employees, it's an ugly game, and the weak get eaten pretty regularly.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2053 on: November 22, 2016, 02:05:17 PM »
Ish? Like, yes, it's a niche, but a) you're dealing with broke musicians who don't want to pay ANY money for services, and b) they're FLAKES, and you basically have to triple your rates to break even on the time it takes to wrangle them. High-effort niche, to say the least.

Sorry for the double post.

I think this would be an excellent niche for tradespeople, rather than artists and musicians. I have a lot of friends who work as plumbers / drywall hangers / carpenters and the like who do excellent work but just cannot stay on top of things like billing and scheduling jobs. They hate doing it and it never gets done.

Hell, my brother-in-law runs a landscaping company and constantly forgets to even bill people. His wife brings in a couple "windfalls" a year when she goes through the books and sends bills to delinquent accounts.

Huh. One copy of some scheduling software for different people, one copy of a basic accounting software package, a phone line, a computer, and you're in like Flynn. That could work. You'd have to have everyone pay you first, though, and remit the balance to the contractor that hired you.

LOL, if only. I have owned two successful construction companies. I have supervised for contractors that were so big that my best year in business would represent a rounding error on their taxes.  It's amazing how insanely complex operating a construction business can get, and how poorly it's done, even by owners that appear legitimate and successful. The best personal example of this I saw was watching the majority of  single family home builders in my region, as they failed during the great recession. The reason for a significant portion of it?   Construction company owners who didn't understand that cash flow is not profit. They rode an incredibly long boom and suddenly saw their business  drop by 80-90%. They went into survival mode, and downsized, but ended up with huge debts, since they were making very little profit during the boom years, but mistook the huge volume of cash flowing across the desk as success. They had legacy debt at lots of suppliers, from the stream of projects that ended, but no cash flow. They lived very well while gently tapping the flow of cash for personal use, and everything worked as long as they were doing a hell of a lot of volume.  Once the tap slowed to a trickle, the shit hit the fan. The complexity can be staggering also. I spent about half a year working on a multi-million dollar mediation where it came down to battles over scheduling on a large public project. Not only were there law firms involved who specialized in this specific part of contract law, but both sides had witnesses who did nothing but assault the other party's ability to properly schedule the job. Pretty amazing to see a sleazy subcontractor walk away with a million bucks, since he scammed a mediator into believing that he could never of hoped to do the job properly, or in a timely manner, since the general contractor's scheduling incompetence made it impossible to perform. One you get bigger than a truck or two, and a handful of employees, it's an ugly game, and the weak get eaten pretty regularly.

True. I think the goal was to market a service to mom-and-pop shops and owner/operator types. Sad about the lack of understanding the difference between cash flow and profit.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

BDWW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 255
  • Location: MT
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2054 on: November 22, 2016, 02:06:01 PM »
Ish? Like, yes, it's a niche, but a) you're dealing with broke musicians who don't want to pay ANY money for services, and b) they're FLAKES, and you basically have to triple your rates to break even on the time it takes to wrangle them. High-effort niche, to say the least.

Sorry for the double post.

I think this would be an excellent niche for tradespeople, rather than artists and musicians. I have a lot of friends who work as plumbers / drywall hangers / carpenters and the like who do excellent work but just cannot stay on top of things like billing and scheduling jobs. They hate doing it and it never gets done.

Hell, my brother-in-law runs a landscaping company and constantly forgets to even bill people. His wife brings in a couple "windfalls" a year when she goes through the books and sends bills to delinquent accounts.

Huh. One copy of some scheduling software for different people, one copy of a basic accounting software package, a phone line, a computer, and you're in like Flynn. That could work. You'd have to have everyone pay you first, though, and remit the balance to the contractor that hired you.

LOL, if only. I have owned two successful construction companies. I have supervised for contractors that were so big that my best year in business would represent a rounding error on their taxes.  It's amazing how insanely complex operating a construction business can get, and how poorly it's done, even by owners that appear legitimate and successful. The best personal example of this I saw was watching the majority of  single family home builders in my region, as they failed during the great recession. The reason for a significant portion of it?   Construction company owners who didn't understand that cash flow is not profit. They rode an incredibly long boom and suddenly saw their business  drop by 80-90%. They went into survival mode, and downsized, but ended up with huge debts, since they were making very little profit during the boom years, but mistook the huge volume of cash flowing across the desk as success. They had legacy debt at lots of suppliers, from the stream of projects that ended, but no cash flow. They lived very well while gently tapping the flow of cash for personal use, and everything worked as long as they were doing a hell of a lot of volume.  Once the tap slowed to a trickle, the shit hit the fan. The complexity can be staggering also. I spent about half a year working on a multi-million dollar mediation where it came down to battles over scheduling on a large public project. Not only were there law firms involved who specialized in this specific part of contract law, but both sides had witnesses who did nothing but assault the other party's ability to properly schedule the job. Pretty amazing to see a sleazy subcontractor walk away with a million bucks, since he scammed a mediator into believing that he could never of hoped to do the job properly, or in a timely manner, since the general contractor's scheduling incompetence made it impossible to perform. One you get bigger than a truck or two, and a handful of employees, it's an ugly game, and the weak get eaten pretty regularly.

^Very true. A close friend of mine owned a siding and gutter business prior to the recession. He used to brag about how much he made 130K+.  Turns out, that was his revenue, but nowhere close to his profit. He was also pretty horrible at his taxes. It all come tumbling down at the same time. Business dried up, IRS got on his case for ~$20K of back taxes; ended up losing his house, his truck, sold his business and works for another general contractor.
Laments he "only makes 50K", but that's likely higher than his profit margin was when he actually ran his own business.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2016, 02:07:36 PM by BDWW »

paddedhat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1699
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2055 on: November 22, 2016, 03:48:31 PM »

^Very true. A close friend of mine owned a siding and gutter business prior to the recession. He used to brag about how much he made 130K+.  Turns out, that was his revenue, but nowhere close to his profit. He was also pretty horrible at his taxes. It all come tumbling down at the same time. Business dried up, IRS got on his case for ~$20K of back taxes; ended up losing his house, his truck, sold his business and works for another general contractor.
Laments he "only makes 50K", but that's likely higher than his profit margin was when he actually ran his own business.

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding, but many self-employed contractors fail to keep tabs on how many hours they actually work in a given week, and it's often far more than 8-10hrs/day. I averaged a taxable income of  typically 17% of my gross revenue. In reality, his real compensation per hour, as the owner of a $130K annual volume business, was probably quite a bit less than if he had been employed working the aisles at Home Depot.  In my career I also got to watch a lot of  folks end up in nasty battles with the IRS. My drywall contractor ended up as a test case for  IRS rules on self employment, when he was informed that he owed $180K in back taxes and penalties that his sub-contractors failed to pay. He won.  A decade later, my insulator got involved in the same issue, to the tune of $400K+., when the IRS decided that all of his installers were (quite legitimately) employees and not sub-contractors. He lost.

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3808
  • Location: BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2056 on: November 22, 2016, 06:06:05 PM »

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,

Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.

frugalparagon

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2562
    • The Frugal Paragon
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2057 on: November 22, 2016, 06:08:04 PM »

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,

Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.

Yep. A friend of mine told me she was making $4000 a month doing LuLaRoe. Then she says she is using almost all of it to "grow her business." While buying a van on credit to carry her inventory around. She really doesn't get that that means she is still in the red.
I blog about Mustachianism during the child-raising years at frugalparagon.com.

And I tell the real story in my journal, https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/still-living-well-in-the-living-room-but-what's-my-next-move/

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2058 on: November 22, 2016, 06:47:53 PM »

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,

Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.

Yep. A friend of mine told me she was making $4000 a month doing LuLaRoe. Then she says she is using almost all of it to "grow her business." While buying a van on credit to carry her inventory around. She really doesn't get that that means she is still in the red.

Clearly basic education has passed by so many...

Taran Wanderer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2059 on: November 22, 2016, 09:20:25 PM »
I have to chuckle because in the middle of reading this, I was interrupted to discuss basic fundamentals of accounting with my wife regarding a non profit she works with:

Assets - Liabilities = Owners Equity

Income statement
Cash flow statement
Balance Sheet

With This Herring

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 892
  • Location: New York STATE, not city
  • TANSTAAFL!
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2060 on: November 22, 2016, 09:54:02 PM »
Sorry for the double post.

I think this would be an excellent niche for tradespeople, rather than artists and musicians. I have a lot of friends who work as plumbers / drywall hangers / carpenters and the like who do excellent work but just cannot stay on top of things like billing and scheduling jobs. They hate doing it and it never gets done.

Hell, my brother-in-law runs a landscaping company and constantly forgets to even bill people. His wife brings in a couple "windfalls" a year when she goes through the books and sends bills to delinquent accounts.

Huh. One copy of some scheduling software for different people, one copy of a basic accounting software package, a phone line, a computer, and you're in like Flynn. That could work. You'd have to have everyone pay you first, though, and remit the balance to the contractor that hired you.

LOL, if only. I have owned two successful construction companies. I have supervised for contractors that were so big that my best year in business would represent a rounding error on their taxes.  It's amazing how insanely complex operating a construction business can get, and how poorly it's done, even by owners that appear legitimate and successful. The best personal example of this I saw was watching the majority of  single family home builders in my region, as they failed during the great recession. The reason for a significant portion of it?   Construction company owners who didn't understand that cash flow is not profit. They rode an incredibly long boom and suddenly saw their business  drop by 80-90%. They went into survival mode, and downsized, but ended up with huge debts, since they were making very little profit during the boom years, but mistook the huge volume of cash flowing across the desk as success. They had legacy debt at lots of suppliers, from the stream of projects that ended, but no cash flow. They lived very well while gently tapping the flow of cash for personal use, and everything worked as long as they were doing a hell of a lot of volume.  Once the tap slowed to a trickle, the shit hit the fan. The complexity can be staggering also. I spent about half a year working on a multi-million dollar mediation where it came down to battles over scheduling on a large public project. Not only were there law firms involved who specialized in this specific part of contract law, but both sides had witnesses who did nothing but assault the other party's ability to properly schedule the job. Pretty amazing to see a sleazy subcontractor walk away with a million bucks, since he scammed a mediator into believing that he could never of hoped to do the job properly, or in a timely manner, since the general contractor's scheduling incompetence made it impossible to perform. One you get bigger than a truck or two, and a handful of employees, it's an ugly game, and the weak get eaten pretty regularly.

True. I think the goal was to market a service to mom-and-pop shops and owner/operator types. Sad about the lack of understanding the difference between cash flow and profit.

OldJob worked with a lot of these sorts of companies.  This function was fulfilled for them IF they lucked into an excellent full-charge bookkeeper plus an accountant who would do the income taxes AND point out big-picture items where the company could use improving.  If the bookkeeper was only good, or worse was terrible, and the tax-preparer just popped the year-end balances into a tax program and sent out the bill, then this didn't work out so well.
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.

SwordGuy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2898
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
    • Flipping Fayetteville
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2061 on: November 22, 2016, 11:02:15 PM »
There are a lot of cheap properties in my town because the rental property owner mistook cash flow for profit.

They failed to include set asides for vacancies, repairs, and even property taxes.   

I have a friend who inherited a rental property business and he found out they had not were none of the above monies set aside, they hadn't set aside the security deposits, either.   (That's illegal.)

I mean, who could ever expect that things would break, people would move out and the place would be vacant for awhile, people would want their security deposits back, or that taxes would come due.  Shocking!

And, of course, once they get into that vicious cycle it gets worse, because they don't fix what needs fixing and the quality of tenants drops, which makes everything get worse even faster.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2062 on: November 23, 2016, 06:46:30 AM »
I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,
Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.
Yep. A friend of mine told me she was making $4000 a month doing LuLaRoe. Then she says she is using almost all of it to "grow her business." While buying a van on credit to carry her inventory around. She really doesn't get that that means she is still in the red.

Clearly basic education has passed by so many...

I did maths until 18 and engineering until 23. Never got taught about revenue, net profit, gross profit etc. Had one 'financial management' class (as in a single two hour lesson, not a regular two hours per week) where we looked at a till receipt. That's it. In 18 years.

It's not necessarily students ignoring education.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2063 on: November 23, 2016, 06:54:40 AM »
RE: the tattoo deal, I think it's a combination of my dad being protective of his baby girls, and my parents not wanting us to make youthful decisions that would be physically painful and expensive to reverse. Sis made the argument that it was an arbitrary rule, my response was that for ~30k/year my parents earned the right to their one arbitrary rule. Dad admitted that if Sis had kept the secret, they couldn't have done anything about it. But she told all our relatives, so at that point she had to tell the parents too. Plus then she couldn't post facebook pictures that show the tattoo, which would be a severe constraint (she has two tattoos now, side ribcage and lower sternum -- and several pictures posted that show them at least partially).

I think the tattoo deal is an excellent idea.

Not necessarily tattoos specifically: I think it would be just as good if your parents said they would pay for tuition and accommodation as long as you wrote them a page long letter every year expressing your gratitude. Or if they made it a condition that you spent eight hours each winter volunteering in a soup kitchen.

The idea of having a specific requirement, even something totally arbitrary, is a really positive way to remind the recipients that they are not entitled to this money. Someone worked hard to earn it and now they have decided that you can have it as long as you follow certain conditions.

I'm not anti-tattoos, I got my first one during university, but would have happily waited for $30k per year.

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2064 on: November 23, 2016, 07:36:27 AM »
I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,
Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.
Yep. A friend of mine told me she was making $4000 a month doing LuLaRoe. Then she says she is using almost all of it to "grow her business." While buying a van on credit to carry her inventory around. She really doesn't get that that means she is still in the red.

Clearly basic education has passed by so many...

I did maths until 18 and engineering until 23. Never got taught about revenue, net profit, gross profit etc. Had one 'financial management' class (as in a single two hour lesson, not a regular two hours per week) where we looked at a till receipt. That's it. In 18 years.

It's not necessarily students ignoring education.

That's kind of what I meant. There are so many people who have zero knowledge of basic taxes, profit, running a business, bookeeping, etc. And I'm not talking about in-depth knowledge, I mean 'enough to be able to have a small side-gig and not get utterly screwed by failing to understand basic concepts'.

In a nation that talks a good game about entepreneurship, and originality, and striking out on your own, etc... it seems like failing to address this particular chronic lack is not doing the collective good any favor.

Then again the educational system as a whole is. well.

jinga nation

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 594
  • Location: 'Murica's Wang
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2065 on: November 23, 2016, 12:02:37 PM »
I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,
Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.
Yep. A friend of mine told me she was making $4000 a month doing LuLaRoe. Then she says she is using almost all of it to "grow her business." While buying a van on credit to carry her inventory around. She really doesn't get that that means she is still in the red.

Clearly basic education has passed by so many...

I did maths until 18 and engineering until 23. Never got taught about revenue, net profit, gross profit etc. Had one 'financial management' class (as in a single two hour lesson, not a regular two hours per week) where we looked at a till receipt. That's it. In 18 years.

It's not necessarily students ignoring education.
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.
If I genuinely enjoy my profession and workplace, is there a reason to FIRE? Keep Calm and Carry On Milking.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2066 on: November 23, 2016, 12:47:15 PM »
Clearly basic education has passed by so many...
...
It's not necessarily students ignoring education.

That's kind of what I meant. There are so many people who have zero knowledge of basic taxes, profit, running a business, bookeeping, etc. And I'm not talking about in-depth knowledge, I mean 'enough to be able to have a small side-gig and not get utterly screwed by failing to understand basic concepts'.

In a nation that talks a good game about entepreneurship, and originality, and striking out on your own, etc... it seems like failing to address this particular chronic lack is not doing the collective good any favor.

Then again the educational system as a whole is. well.

Cool, couldn't tell if your experience was lack of people paying attention to useful classes or lack of useful classes. It doesn't seem like a vast amount of extra teaching that would be needed (and far more useful than some of the rubbish I learnt).

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2067 on: November 23, 2016, 12:54:32 PM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
    • The Live-In Landlord
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2068 on: November 23, 2016, 03:09:06 PM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.

I had to take (well, actually I think I might have challenged it... can't remember) a basic business management course during my engineering tech undergrad. It was basic review because of my background starting as early as high school when my mom started cutting me in on nonprofit admin stuff.
I squeak softly, but carry a big schtick.

BDWW

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 255
  • Location: MT
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2069 on: November 23, 2016, 03:23:48 PM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.

It wasn't required for my engineering degree (US). We did have a statistics course, but no direct finance courses.  One of the senior level courses was a project design course where we had to estimate man-hours and cost, but wasn't directly finance related.

Sibley

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1812
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Chicago, IL
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2070 on: November 23, 2016, 07:21:42 PM »
The number of accountants who don't understand gross vs. net is frightening as well. And embarrassing since I am one.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5313
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2071 on: November 24, 2016, 04:35:19 AM »
The number of accountants who don't understand gross vs. net is frightening as well. And embarrassing since I am one.

Which one - an accountant, or one who doesn't understand gross vs. net? (Teasing!)

All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.

Right? This would be useful to almost everyone! I had friends at another university that had to take calculus for their business degrees; like, really?
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

BlueHouse

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2421
  • Location: WDC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2072 on: November 24, 2016, 04:38:11 AM »

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,

Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.

Not so different from the number of w-2 employees who think they should be paid the same amount of money that they "bring in" to a company. Lack of understanding that a typical employee (in my profession) costs a company 1.3 to 3 times more than their salary. (Includes fringe, overhead, G&a).
Sometimes nothing can be a real cool hand

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2073 on: November 24, 2016, 05:30:52 AM »

I wouldn't doubt that your friend is making at least doubt what he made when he was self employed, even if he strongly disagrees. Not only do you have the classic gross VS net misunderstanding,

Something about that bolded part strikes me cold -- that a small business operator is conflicted about net versus gross... okay.. but that it is CLASSIC (as in often seen?)  that is tragic.

Not so different from the number of w-2 employees who think they should be paid the same amount of money that they "bring in" to a company. Lack of understanding that a typical employee (in my profession) costs a company 1.3 to 3 times more than their salary. (Includes fringe, overhead, G&a).

But all those people were there before I started, so I should be paid what I bring in because I'm a special snowflake. /s

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3808
  • Location: BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2074 on: November 24, 2016, 10:45:53 AM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.
I think that most British engineering degrees are about 36 classes instead of 48, so maybe they had to cut somewhere?

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2075 on: November 24, 2016, 11:44:41 AM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.
I think that most British engineering degrees are about 36 classes instead of 48, so maybe they had to cut somewhere?

Each university picks their own format and class structure. A class isn't a standard unit of measure. I had four subjects in my first year, that was a full course load. A four year course is fairly standard. We don't base courses on another country's class structure.

Goldielocks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3808
  • Location: BC
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2076 on: November 24, 2016, 01:59:42 PM »
All undergraduate engineering students (from all engineering disciplines, to clarify) had to take Engineering Economics and Engineering Statistics classes. It was your basic econ and stats classes, except that all examples and assignments were engineering based. Time value of Money, Three and Six Sigma, etc. Fail and you can't continue in engineering unless you retake the class and pass.

This would have been so useful for my first corporate job! Is this a standard requirement? It wasn't available on my (British) course.
I think that most British engineering degrees are about 36 classes instead of 48, so maybe they had to cut somewhere?

Each university picks their own format and class structure. A class isn't a standard unit of measure. I had four subjects in my first year, that was a full course load. A four year course is fairly standard. We don't base courses on another country's class structure.
Ok, I was thinking more of the three years (UK) rather than four to five year programs (Canada)  so using a class count likely obscured what I was trying to say.

Playing with Fire UK

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2077 on: November 25, 2016, 12:49:47 AM »
Ok, I was thinking more of the three years (UK) rather than four to five year programs (Canada)  so using a class count likely obscured what I was trying to say.

Gotcha, 3 year courses were the default a generation ago, but 4 years are more typical for engineering now (based on a survey of my colleagues and the courses I was looking at studying 15 years ago).

Friar

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 200
  • Location: England
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2078 on: November 27, 2016, 03:38:10 AM »
Ok, I was thinking more of the three years (UK) rather than four to five year programs (Canada)  so using a class count likely obscured what I was trying to say.

Gotcha, 3 year courses were the default a generation ago, but 4 years are more typical for engineering now (based on a survey of my colleagues and the courses I was looking at studying 15 years ago).

In my opinion this is caused by the fact more people are graduating from university each year. Having a bachelor's degree has become much more common so people are turning to master's degrees to help differentiate themselves from the rest of the populace.

It's quite common in Engineering for universities to offer undergraduate master's which are, like you mentioned, four year courses. In 2007 I was one of those who opted for this and about 25% of my year did the same.

Cookie78

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1553
  • Location: Canada
    • Cookie's Goals
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2079 on: November 28, 2016, 08:57:25 AM »
I opened my first non-tax-advantaged investment account yesterday!

I was excited and told my dad about it. He asked what it was and I started to explain briefly about TFSA and RRSP accounts being maxed, so... but he said he didn't know anything about any of that stuff.

On the positive side, I'm not too worried about his future. He has a lot of land that he used to farm, and now rents out to other farmers which covers his expenses. Different strokes.

mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2080 on: November 28, 2016, 11:56:00 AM »
Not money related (they're all pretty frugal with decent, and often multiple incomes--if not frugal, then high income spending still within their means), but Thanksgiving and the quasi-political conversations.

No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

No, same Aunt, that story you ready in the Boston Globe about someone getting a government pension wasn't true--because you didn't read it in the Boston Globe, you read it in the Boston Tribune, which is a fake news site.

Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2081 on: November 28, 2016, 12:48:49 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.


mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2082 on: November 28, 2016, 12:57:38 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.

Obviously, my post was not a pregnancy advice post--just some general guidelines.

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2083 on: November 28, 2016, 01:22:14 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.

Obviously, my post was not a pregnancy advice post--just some general guidelines.

Yeah, I know, but I'm currently pregnant and my colleagues seem to take it as an invitation to give (shitty) advice on every single aspect of my life and I am a liiiiiiiiittle on edge about it right now.

If by "a little on edge" we mean "one missed breath from slapping someone".

And the next person who asks me about the state of my fucking CERVIX while at work is gonna get it. FYI.

mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2084 on: November 28, 2016, 01:23:41 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.

Obviously, my post was not a pregnancy advice post--just some general guidelines.

Yeah, I know, but I'm currently pregnant and my colleagues seem to take it as an invitation to give (shitty) advice on every single aspect of my life and I am a liiiiiiiiittle on edge about it right now.

If by "a little on edge" we mean "one missed breath from slapping someone".

And the next person who asks me about the state of my fucking CERVIX while at work is gonna get it. FYI.

So, what state is your fucking cervix in?

Kitsune

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2085 on: November 28, 2016, 01:27:44 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.

Obviously, my post was not a pregnancy advice post--just some general guidelines.

Yeah, I know, but I'm currently pregnant and my colleagues seem to take it as an invitation to give (shitty) advice on every single aspect of my life and I am a liiiiiiiiittle on edge about it right now.

If by "a little on edge" we mean "one missed breath from slapping someone".

And the next person who asks me about the state of my fucking CERVIX while at work is gonna get it. FYI.

So, what state is your fucking cervix in?

Fortunately for you, probably a different country than you're located... ;)


infogoon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 769
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2086 on: November 28, 2016, 02:13:19 PM »
Different Aunt: You keep pulling up things about smoking maryjane being bad while pregnant. No one is denying that, but that isn't the conversation. You also shouldn't have caffeine, or alcohol, or raw meat, or fish, or deli meat, or certain cheeses, or (should I go on?). At least make a sound argument; you have a Masters and you should be able to do that. What you're saying is like me saying that Hockey should be outlawed because if you get body checked while pregnant the child could die. No, you just shouldn't play hockey while pregnant. Not that hard.

Because I HAVE to nitpick... ;)

Large amounts of caffeine is not recommended while pregant (typically more than a cup or 2 a day) as there seems to be a corrolation between high caffeine usage and high miscarriage rates (NOT proven causation, corrolation - note the difference... and you know what else is corrolated to both higher miscarriage rates AND higher caffeine consumption? Maternal age. Just sayin'). Alcohol... is something you shouldn't have, but one knows what quantity is actually harmful and no ethics committee EVER would approve that study - typically speaking, a few sips does no harm and a half-bottle does, use sense, etc (or, in other words: 35 years ago, French women were told 'no more than a glass a day' and American women were told 'none at all, ever', and I don't think we can make the argument that the current generation of French people is worst off for it. Apply connon sense as needed.). Certain cheeses and deli meats are forbidden because of fear of listeria (because pregnant women are more vulnerable AND it increases miscarriage rates) but the last few wide-spread listeria outbreaks in America were in packaged salad greens and vegetable, and the absolute risks of getting listeria are still very low. Etc.

Which is to say: there's a difference between 'increased risk' and 'absolute risk', and there's a difference between 'generally recommended because it's easy to make general recommendations into public guidelines' and 'actually evaluated risks for this specific person and recommended in her situation'.

Which is also to say that I've had it up to HERE with people lecturing pregnant women as if they suddenly lose all autonomy by getting knocked up.

Obviously, my post was not a pregnancy advice post--just some general guidelines.

Yeah, I know, but I'm currently pregnant and my colleagues seem to take it as an invitation to give (shitty) advice on every single aspect of my life and I am a liiiiiiiiittle on edge about it right now.

If by "a little on edge" we mean "one missed breath from slapping someone".

And the next person who asks me about the state of my fucking CERVIX while at work is gonna get it. FYI.

So, what state is your fucking cervix in?

It's a province, I believe.

LeRainDrop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2087 on: November 28, 2016, 05:34:51 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

mustachepungoeshere

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1419
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2088 on: November 28, 2016, 07:02:58 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

I find the distinction interesting.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/10/05/130353638/the-tuesday-podcast-the-art-of-living-at-the-poverty-line

This woman received subsidised housing, food stamps and other government support, but proudly proclaimed that she "never went on welfare" because she didn't receive cash payments.

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3318
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2089 on: November 28, 2016, 07:22:15 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

I find the distinction interesting.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/10/05/130353638/the-tuesday-podcast-the-art-of-living-at-the-poverty-line

This woman received subsidised housing, food stamps and other government support, but proudly proclaimed that she "never went on welfare" because she didn't receive cash payments.

"I've been on welfare and food stamps, did anyone help me out? No. No"
-Craig T Nelson

AlanStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1475
  • Age: 37
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2090 on: November 28, 2016, 08:30:59 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

I find the distinction interesting.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/10/05/130353638/the-tuesday-podcast-the-art-of-living-at-the-poverty-line

This woman received subsidised housing, food stamps and other government support, but proudly proclaimed that she "never went on welfare" because she didn't receive cash payments.

"I've been on welfare and food stamps, did anyone help me out? No. No"
-Craig T Nelson

With that quote in mind I just read his bio http://www.biography.com/people/craig-t-nelson-587096#synopsis  cant say it makes a good impression of the man.  That welfare/food stamps period was in the late 70's while he was in northern California so apparently he could not figure out how to grow pot. 
Be the person Mr. Rogers knows you can be.

mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2091 on: November 28, 2016, 08:54:35 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)


Not really. SSI doesn't come from the same taxes as standard social security. And we did tell her SSI.

LeRainDrop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2092 on: November 28, 2016, 09:23:05 PM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

Not really. SSI doesn't come from the same taxes as standard social security. And we did tell her SSI.

If you are talking United States, then yes really.  "Social Security" is actually the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program and includes retirement benefits, survivors benefits, and disability benefits.  All of these components are funded through the same payroll taxes, but then go into two separate trust funds -- the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund.  Note that "excess funds" (measured as the amount paid in by current workers being more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries) go into the U.S. Treasury and can be used for non-Social Security purposes, in exchange for special government securities that go into the trust accounts.

Perhaps you are thinking of Medicare as the similar concept but that is funded from a different tax than Social Security?  Because it is true that those are two separate line items.

mtn

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1186
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2093 on: November 29, 2016, 07:56:11 AM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

Not really. SSI doesn't come from the same taxes as standard social security. And we did tell her SSI.

If you are talking United States, then yes really.  "Social Security" is actually the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program and includes retirement benefits, survivors benefits, and disability benefits.  All of these components are funded through the same payroll taxes, but then go into two separate trust funds -- the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund.  Note that "excess funds" (measured as the amount paid in by current workers being more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries) go into the U.S. Treasury and can be used for non-Social Security purposes, in exchange for special government securities that go into the trust accounts.

Perhaps you are thinking of Medicare as the similar concept but that is funded from a different tax than Social Security?  Because it is true that those are two separate line items.

SSI--Supplemental Security Income. It comes from the Treasury's general funds, not the Social Security trust fund, if my minor in economics is still fresh enough in my head (it might not be).

We don't actually know that was what she was on, but we know it wasn't "Social Security" as my Aunt was describing it ("she never paid a dime into it"... well, no, she's got cerebral palsy and couldn't work). Likely you're right and it was Medicare (or more likely, Medicaid). At the end of the day though, I really don't care what the woman is on as long as she is getting reasonable care.

kayvent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
  • Location: Canada
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2094 on: November 29, 2016, 08:36:20 AM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

Not really. SSI doesn't come from the same taxes as standard social security. And we did tell her SSI.

If you are talking United States, then yes really.  "Social Security" is actually the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program and includes retirement benefits, survivors benefits, and disability benefits.  All of these components are funded through the same payroll taxes, but then go into two separate trust funds -- the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund.  Note that "excess funds" (measured as the amount paid in by current workers being more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries) go into the U.S. Treasury and can be used for non-Social Security purposes, in exchange for special government securities that go into the trust accounts.

Perhaps you are thinking of Medicare as the similar concept but that is funded from a different tax than Social Security?  Because it is true that those are two separate line items.

SSI--Supplemental Security Income. It comes from the Treasury's general funds, not the Social Security trust fund, if my minor in economics is still fresh enough in my head (it might not be).

Since Bill Clinton, the incoming money to the trust fund and general funds have been effectively merged (that is one of the ways he was able to claim a surplus). It is because of this merging that people occasionally say that the trust fund has been drained. The surplus from money for the fund was diverted for the past two decades to make up the difference between the budget minus general funds & debt accumulation. Social Security does have an IOU from general funds but people on the right like Paul Ryan think that IOU will not be honored. The view of the IOU is mixed on the left.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2016, 08:40:11 AM by kayvent »

Pooperman

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2512
  • Age: 27
  • Location: North Carolina
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2095 on: November 29, 2016, 09:15:32 AM »
No, Aunt, the woman in your story is not on Social Security, she's on disability. And in any case, someone who has Cerebral Palsy and no family is not the drain on the system I'm worried about.

Since we're already nitpicking, disability benefits actually do fall within Social Security (unless you're talking about payments from a disability insurance policy).  But yeah, I agree with your broader point.  :-)

Not really. SSI doesn't come from the same taxes as standard social security. And we did tell her SSI.

If you are talking United States, then yes really.  "Social Security" is actually the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program and includes retirement benefits, survivors benefits, and disability benefits.  All of these components are funded through the same payroll taxes, but then go into two separate trust funds -- the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund.  Note that "excess funds" (measured as the amount paid in by current workers being more than the amount paid out to current beneficiaries) go into the U.S. Treasury and can be used for non-Social Security purposes, in exchange for special government securities that go into the trust accounts.

Perhaps you are thinking of Medicare as the similar concept but that is funded from a different tax than Social Security?  Because it is true that those are two separate line items.

SSI--Supplemental Security Income. It comes from the Treasury's general funds, not the Social Security trust fund, if my minor in economics is still fresh enough in my head (it might not be).

We don't actually know that was what she was on, but we know it wasn't "Social Security" as my Aunt was describing it ("she never paid a dime into it"... well, no, she's got cerebral palsy and couldn't work). Likely you're right and it was Medicare (or more likely, Medicaid). At the end of the day though, I really don't care what the woman is on as long as she is getting reasonable care.

She could have gotten SSDI through her parents as a child (continuing as an adult) along with SSI if the SSDI wasn't too much. SSI gives Medicaid, SSDI gives Medicare (and SSDI converts to normal SS upon reaching 62).

economista

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Colorado
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2096 on: November 29, 2016, 09:21:41 AM »

I find the distinction interesting.

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2010/10/05/130353638/the-tuesday-podcast-the-art-of-living-at-the-poverty-line

This woman received subsidised housing, food stamps and other government support, but proudly proclaimed that she "never went on welfare" because she didn't receive cash payments.

This!  Nothing irritates me more than people who ignore the welfare benefits they receive and play it off like they earned everything they have.  My brother and his wife and children live in subsidized housing (they pay around $30 per month for a 3 bedroom apartment) and they get food stamps, but my mom makes a big deal out of the fact that "they aren't on welfare."  Are you f*cking kidding me?!  Subsidized housing and food stamps are part of the welfare program, and the single largest component of the welfare program is the earned income tax credit, which they receive every year!  My mom also tries to say that she only got welfare once or twice while we were growing up.  In reality, we always lived in subsidized housing, we always received food stamps, we got food and clothes from the food bank, and after only working a bare minimum throughout the year, she always got more back at tax time than she came close to paying in, because of EITC.  Yet they are all ignorant voters* who exclusively vote Republican because they think they've worked hard for the things they have and they shouldn't have to support drains on the system who don't support themselves.  I've pointed out to them that they benefit from the welfare programs that exist and they are voting for the people who say they are going to get rid of those systems.  They argue with me that they don't receive welfare and "the lazy leeches" shouldn't be able to take their hard earned money.  Yet they are unemployed 75% of the year and don't realize the "lazy leeches" the politicians are talking about are them.

*I'm not intending to say all Republican voters are ignorant, I'm saying my family members are ignorant voters because they don't take the time to understand the issues and they vote for people who want to take away the benefits they live on, without realizing it. 
Follow along on my journey toward becoming (semi) mustacian :) http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/economista's-journal/

MgoSam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3318
  • Location: Minnesota
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2097 on: November 29, 2016, 09:28:10 AM »
Yet they are all ignorant voters* who exclusively vote Republican because they think they've worked hard for the things they have and they shouldn't have to support drains on the system who don't support themselves.  I've pointed out to them that they benefit from the welfare programs that exist and they are voting for the people who say they are going to get rid of those systems.  They argue with me that they don't receive welfare and "the lazy leeches" shouldn't be able to take their hard earned money.  Yet they are unemployed 75% of the year and don't realize the "lazy leeches" the politicians are talking about are them.


I feel like such people think that when they (white people) use welfare benefits it's ok because they somehow all paid into the system but when others (non-white people) use it, "THEY"RE ABUSING THE SYSTEM, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO PAID FOR THEIR LAZINESS!"

economista

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 196
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Colorado
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2098 on: November 29, 2016, 09:34:58 AM »
Yet they are all ignorant voters* who exclusively vote Republican because they think they've worked hard for the things they have and they shouldn't have to support drains on the system who don't support themselves.  I've pointed out to them that they benefit from the welfare programs that exist and they are voting for the people who say they are going to get rid of those systems.  They argue with me that they don't receive welfare and "the lazy leeches" shouldn't be able to take their hard earned money.  Yet they are unemployed 75% of the year and don't realize the "lazy leeches" the politicians are talking about are them.


I feel like such people think that when they (white people) use welfare benefits it's ok because they somehow all paid into the system but when others (non-white people) use it, "THEY"RE ABUSING THE SYSTEM, WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO PAID FOR THEIR LAZINESS!"

Exactly!  And, being an economist who studies this exact system makes trips back home extremely stressful and annoying. 
Follow along on my journey toward becoming (semi) mustacian :) http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/economista's-journal/

Nederstash

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 181
Re: Relatives who just don't get it
« Reply #2099 on: November 29, 2016, 11:31:34 AM »
... we got food and clothes from the food bank ...

just had a very vivid image of you shouting at your mom "I wanted a leather jacket!" and your mom just standing there dumbfounded with a lettuce in her hand "Oh, I thought you said a lettuce jacket"

Nevermind, I've had too much coffee.