Relatives who just don't get it

[shelivesthedream]

One of the big barriers to getting DH to save was a similar problem. As a young boy his Aunt took him to open a savings account, into which he deposited money from various little jobs. After his parents (primarily his mother) found out about it she had him withdraw everything he had saved to "loan" them money to pay bills, (never repaid of course) and thereafter would regularly request for teenage DH to pay some of the household bills. He also had to pay for his own high school education (he lived in a country where education was free until about grade 6). Took some convincing to help him see that his mother had no business knowing the details of our finances, and to only tell her what he was willing to share (disclosure of income without accompanying disclosure of matching expenses is met with requests for $ for "needs" such as vacations to the beach, nice dinner out, etc). They have no real idea how much we make or save. He has managed to maintain a somewhat healthy relationship by telling them he would send x amount of money a month, and that's it.

@87tweetybirds ,


I disagree.  You've managed to maintain an appeasement relationship by doing this.   It's not healthy, far from it.

Have to agree. He's effectively exchanged monthly payments for peace and harmony. OK, that might be worth it to you guys. Only you can judge that. I'd be well down the path to 'fuck off', myself.

If the only way to have a relationship with my mother is to give her money so she doesn't harass me, that's not a relationship I want to maintain.

I read "healthy" as in "healthy for him". He feels like he's supporting her but it's a fixed amount each month so he can budget for it and not stress about endless random requests for money. He doesn't want to have zero relationship with her, so this is a way he can have boundaries that are manageable and enforceable but not have to stress too much about it.

[a286]

In February my wife and I got denied for our first mortgage. A decade ago, my mother took out three credit cards in my name, to 'pad my credit score'.
I found out in the meeting with the loan agent that my mother took those cards, maxed out their balances, then quit making payments on them.
By May I had payed off the cards, which took quite a bit of life efficiency and putting off other investments.
In the time since February my mother has asked me for a loan four times.

So...your mother committed identity theft...and you paid the bills to cover up for her? Wow...

In the kind of family where a parent feels entitled to steal from a son or daughter, there's generally a whole lot of toxic programming that starts at birth. One person-- let's call him or her the Emperor-- is entitled to do whatever he or she wants to the designated target-- let's call him or her the Peasant. The Peasant's job is to work hard, not complain, serve the Emperor, and make sure to always forgive the Emperor no matter what.

The kind of extreme entitlement that leads to stealing from a relative *always* has a basis in fact. Someone, somewhere, teaches the thief that it's OK to do such things and that not only will there never be any negative consequences, but the theft is right and appropriate. For the victim to object or to seek legal redress is in fact wrong and inappropriate according to family rules. There are often people besides the Emperor or the Peasant who reinforce the family rules to keep the Peasants in line.

Oh yes, I grew up with a parent who did this.  I started working at 15 because I was on my own for school lunch, clothes, etc.  I had to open a joint checking account with my mom because I was a minor.  She regularly dipped into this account without telling me.  When I found out, she told me that this was money I "owed" her (presumably for the food and shelter she was legally obliged to provide).  By the way, she was the one who verbally abused me until I got the job.  It all fell into place why: she saw me as an extra income source to fuel her atrocious financial habits.  I started cashing my checks and hiding the money in increasingly obscure places because she would tear through my room when I wasn't home.

Grims example is spot on for me. And yours. Also verbally abused here. Honestly surprised my dad did not dip into my savings account after I got my first job, but he could have before then or during my freshman year of college and I wouldn't have known. All I knew is I put $2k in graduation gifts in there on top of some money from my high school job and withdrew occasionally from an atm on campus... towards the end of spring semester sophomore year I was a little short on living expenses from my job the previous summer, so I asked my dad to send some money (this is what the extra from the PLUS loans was for, supposedly, see below). When I got home that summer I open the first statement from the savings account and it had..  $81.

The straw that broke the camel's back:

My dad always volun-told me that I would be supporting him in his old age, and giving him a job running the office of my vet clinic (I applied, didn't get in, and now mainly thank my lucky stars for that because that is some crazy debt for an over saturated field...). I was always like, haha, good joke... as this was in high school and college, but he always had a serious note to it...

Then I found out that when my parents took out PLUS loans when I went to college, he took the max amount every year (only needed maybe half) and he told me I owed him the $100k in PLUS loans, though he couldn't show where the other $50k he didn't need to take out went.

I think I dodged a major bullet not getting into vet school...

[LaineyAZ]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

[SwordGuy]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

If he has a mortgage on it, then the insurer is spot on right to require the repairs be made.   They are providing insurance both to the homeowner and to the mortgage owner.    Ditto with a car.


If there is no loan on the property, and the repairs are cosmetic (i.e., not leading to additional damage or liability), I doubt the insurer would require the repairs to be made.   

They certainly didn't when we had both our cars totaled by cosmetic hail damage!   ($10,000 richer!)   But they also wouldn't pay for additional body damage unless we proved the repairs had been done...

[merula]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

If he has a mortgage on it, then the insurer is spot on right to require the repairs be made.   They are providing insurance both to the homeowner and to the mortgage owner.    Ditto with a car.


If there is no loan on the property, and the repairs are cosmetic (i.e., not leading to additional damage or liability), I doubt the insurer would require the repairs to be made.   

They certainly didn't when we had both our cars totaled by cosmetic hail damage!   ($10,000 richer!)   But they also wouldn't pay for additional body damage unless we proved the repairs had been done...

Assuming that the brother's insurance has Replacement Cost coverage rather than Actual Cash Value, then not only does the mortgage company get to require that the repairs actually be made, the insurance company can too.

Let's say that the damaged roof/siding was approximately halfway through its useful life. The cost of brand-new roofing/siding is $15,000, but the brother didn't lose brand-new roofing/siding, he lost halfway-depreciated stuff, so the actual value of it is $7,500. Typically, you're required to prove that you actually replaced what you lost to get a Replacement Cost payment, otherwise you just get the actual cash value of what you lost.

The advantage from the insurance company's standpoint (and the mortgage company, for that matter) is that repaired roofing/siding is going to better protect against future storms.

[Playing with Fire UK]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

https://notalwaysright.com/recession-part-70/97384/

[merula]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

https://notalwaysright.com/recession-part-70/97384/

That happens so frequently that my company started paying the shop directly. The fact that she didn't actually try to claim injuries is somewhat remarkable; people who will spend an insurance payment on something other than the damages is not usually someone who cares all that much about telling the truth.

[SwordGuy]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

https://notalwaysright.com/recession-part-70/97384/

That happens so frequently that my company started paying the shop directly. The fact that she didn't actually try to claim injuries is somewhat remarkable; people who will spend an insurance payment on something other than the damages is not usually someone who cares all that much about telling the truth.

Well, there's a blanket statement...


We had two cars totaled from hail damage.   Cars worked perfectly fine, just lots and lots of cosmetic damage, i.e., dents.
   Company totaled the cars, we bought them back for pennies on the dollar and netted $10,000 in cash. 

Put that money to work in a rental property that would make us money instead of fixing the dents.  Not clear how that makes me less likely to tell the truth or indicates I'm a liar.

Wife got rear-ended once.  Crushed the back station wagon door and scuffed the plastic coating on the back bumper.   We fixed the funtional damage (the door).   Couldn't just get a plastic cover for the bumper, had to buy an entire bumper assembly.   Wife took some windex and some sand paper, applied it to the plastic, and it looked (mostly) as good as new.  We put the portion of the payment for the bumper unit into a new roof on our house.  Covered half the cost of the roof.   Not sure why that would indicate I'm less than truthful, either.


Some damage needs to be fixed -- other damage doesn't NEED to be fixed.   And it just makes good sense to use the money for things that don't NEED to be fixed on things that provide more value, either because they need to be fixed or they will provide additional income.

[onlykelsey]

Not my relative, but heard this story from a friend this week about her brother:

There was a hail storm that caused damage to her brother's roof and house siding.  Fortunately his insurer agreed to cover it to the tune of $15,000.  But, brother was upset that his mortgage company insisted on his using it to actually repair the house.  He told my friend that he'd wanted to pocket the money and just ignore the damage (!) 

(as much as we like to rag on insurance companies, they must get a little crazy with insureds like this who see any incident as an easy way to riches...)

https://notalwaysright.com/recession-part-70/97384/

That happens so frequently that my company started paying the shop directly. The fact that she didn't actually try to claim injuries is somewhat remarkable; people who will spend an insurance payment on something other than the damages is not usually someone who cares all that much about telling the truth.

Well, there's a blanket statement...


We had two cars totaled from hail damage.   Cars worked perfectly fine, just lots and lots of cosmetic damage, i.e., dents.
   Company totaled the cars, we bought them back for pennies on the dollar and netted $10,000 in cash. 

Put that money to work in a rental property that would make us money instead of fixing the dents.  Not clear how that makes me less likely to tell the truth or indicates I'm a liar.

Wife got rear-ended once.  Crushed the back station wagon door and scuffed the plastic coating on the back bumper.   We fixed the funtional damage (the door).   Couldn't just get a plastic cover for the bumper, had to buy an entire bumper assembly.   Wife took some windex and some sand paper, applied it to the plastic, and it looked (mostly) as good as new.  We put the portion of the payment for the bumper unit into a new roof on our house.  Covered half the cost of the roof.   Not sure why that would indicate I'm less than truthful, either.


Some damage needs to be fixed -- other damage doesn't NEED to be fixed.   And it just makes good sense to use the money for things that don't NEED to be fixed on things that provide more value, either because they need to be fixed or they will provide additional income.

But I assume you don't have a car loan.  It's a different story when the insurance is required not just to protect your means of transportation, but also your lender's collateral. 

[merula]

Well, there's a blanket statement...

Yes, it is.

We started doing it because there are way more people like the lady in the story than like you. Of course, if we owe for damages, we will pay by direct check as well, but it'll come printed with a statement about how this is all you're getting.

There's no requirement that we must pay the shop, but for people who ARE repairing their damages, paying the shop directly tends to cut down on a lot of issues. Think of it as saving people from themselves so they don't have to find a way to come up with the money.

[Paul der Krake]

I don't understand why the insurer cares whether or not the lender's collateral is getting what they want. Shouldn't that just be a matter between the insured and the lender?

[merula]

I don't understand why the insurer cares whether or not the lender's collateral is getting what they want. Shouldn't that just be a matter between the insured and the lender?

Theoretically, yes. The insurer has a contract with the insured, the insured has a contract with the lender, the insurer and the lender have no contractual relationship.

Traditionally, lenders lent on the basis of collateral; the home or the car. They quickly figured out that, if the collateral was damaged, the insured/borrower could collect the insurance payment but not repair the collateral, and the lender would be SOL.

So lenders created two solutions to this problem: (1) they inserted themselves into the insurer/insured contract by making insurance loss payee status a condition of the loan contract, and (2) changed the terms of the loan contract to allow them to collect from the borrower beyond the collateral stated, if the collateral proves insufficient.

Fun story: about 10 years back, someone I worked with was writing the insurance on a POS mini golf course. The thing burned down (of course it did, it was a POS firetrap), so we wrote out the check to the owner and called it a day. EXCEPT that the underwriter who handled the account had been lazy and instead of putting on a loss payee form saying "POS Bank LLC", they put the form on saying "As per schedule on file with the company". When the Claims department called up saying "Where's this schedule?" the guy couldn't find it, so he told Claims there wasn't any loss payee on file.

A few months later, POS Bank realizes they haven't been getting paid, go to investigate and find their collateral a bombed out ruin. They contact us because the owner had given them a certificate saying "look, you're a loss payee", and they're able to show that the insured HAD submitted a schedule listing them.

So we paid that claim twice. Good times.

The lazy guy is still with the company. Last I heard, he'd gotten promoted. Insurance is a great career path, kids.

[Just Joe]

Some damage needs to be fixed -- other damage doesn't NEED to be fixed.   And it just makes good sense to use the money for things that don't NEED to be fixed on things that provide more value, either because they need to be fixed or they will provide additional income.

The insurance payout can go towards your car (which is paid off) or into your pocket AFAIC. The other driver removed some of the resale value of your car. You can choose to repair the car or pocket that resale value loss.

I've been rear-ended a couple of times (once while the car was parked in a lot). Each time I repaired the car for pennies and pocketed the check. Actually bought tires for said car or grew my savings a little more.

[SwordGuy]

Some damage needs to be fixed -- other damage doesn't NEED to be fixed.   And it just makes good sense to use the money for things that don't NEED to be fixed on things that provide more value, either because they need to be fixed or they will provide additional income.

The insurance payout can go towards your car (which is paid off) or into your pocket AFAIC. The other driver removed some of the resale value of your car. You can choose to repair the car or pocket that resale value loss.

I've been rear-ended a couple of times (once while the car was parking in a lot). Each time I repaired the car for pennies and pocketed the check. Actually bought tires for said car or grew my savings a little more.

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough. 

[Dave1442397]

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough.

A friend of mine had a car that was so bad the dealer said he'd have to charge him $200 to take it on trade. He said it would cost that much for him to deal with scrapping it :)

[Uturn]

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough.

A friend of mine had a car that was so bad the dealer said he'd have to charge him $200 to take it on trade. He said it would cost that much for him to deal with scrapping it :)

Years ago, my then wife and I were trading her 12 year old Accord for a 5 year old Accord.  I was tired of working on the old one, plus it was just getting too unreliable.  The salesman took it to his manager to get a bid.  He comes back with the bid sheet, laughing.  The manager just wrote "ouch, no" in big letters. 

[Slow&Steady]

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough.

A friend of mine had a car that was so bad the dealer said he'd have to charge him $200 to take it on trade. He said it would cost that much for him to deal with scrapping it :)

Years ago, my then wife and I were trading her 12 year old Accord for a 5 year old Accord.  I was tired of working on the old one, plus it was just getting too unreliable.  The salesman took it to his manager to get a bid.  He comes back with the bid sheet, laughing.  The manager just wrote "ouch, no" in big letters.

Over the last year we have welcomed 4(!) new kids into the house (our baby, a 12, 13, & 18 year olds) so we got a new used van.  When we went to test drive it the dealer was asking if we would trade in our car.  It was a 2006 Prius with (almost) 300k miles on it, the look on his face was pretty priceless as he tried to figure out a way to tell us that he couldn't offer us anything for a car with 300k miles on it.  We had no intention of trading it in, it became the full size bumper car for the 18 year old until he broke her for good in the last accident. 

[La Bibliotecaria Feroz]

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough.

A friend of mine had a car that was so bad the dealer said he'd have to charge him $200 to take it on trade. He said it would cost that much for him to deal with scrapping it :)

Years ago, my then wife and I were trading her 12 year old Accord for a 5 year old Accord.  I was tired of working on the old one, plus it was just getting too unreliable.  The salesman took it to his manager to get a bid.  He comes back with the bid sheet, laughing.  The manager just wrote "ouch, no" in big letters.

That surprises me. I had a 1999 accord that I traded in in 2016--so it was a solid 17 years old but only had 180K. I got the $500 courtesy offer. I was thinking of trying to sell it myself because I think I could have gotten a grand, maybe $1500, but I got them to throw in a set of snow tires and spare TPMS sensors and called that good. So I like to say I traded my car to $500 and snow tires.

I would have kept it longer but I was a newly single mom, it was my only transportation, the transmission was going, and my grandfather was worried about me. He wanted me to have $10K with which to buy a used car and I very sensibly spent it on a five-year-old Fit.

[mm1970]

My cars have no "resale value" when I get rid of them.    If I get more than $500 as a courtesy offer from the dealer, I didn't drive the car long enough.

A friend of mine had a car that was so bad the dealer said he'd have to charge him $200 to take it on trade. He said it would cost that much for him to deal with scrapping it :)

Years ago, my then wife and I were trading her 12 year old Accord for a 5 year old Accord.  I was tired of working on the old one, plus it was just getting too unreliable.  The salesman took it to his manager to get a bid.  He comes back with the bid sheet, laughing.  The manager just wrote "ouch, no" in big letters.

we traded in a 12 or 13 year old POS Saturn.  They gave us $450.  Considering blue book was $800 and it was non-functional and needed AT LEAST $350 of work, we were good with that.

[ysette9]

From a family party today. One family member who has been retired for a number of years (spouse still works) apparently was scared off by the tech bubble and the Great Recession and has been in cash for the last ten years. He is now talking about investing in CDs. He also has deferred maintenance on a weekend property that he will pay for with a HELOC, but the good news is the vacation rental income will pay for that loan.

[Lovelywings]

This is partially about anti-mustachianism and partially about planning ahead for major life events.

A relative of mine moved to Canada from a developing country at the same time as me. We're the same age (mid 30s) only he is married with a baby. We didn't coordinate the move. Its a coincidence. I was initially excited but ever since he arrived it's been some crazy shit. First he requested I cosign a lease for him... I said no and ignored the guilt trip. Note he is not my sibling (we don't do things like this). Just a cousin that's close to the family. I said no because I myself am trying to get on my feet, I didn't trust that he won't have issues paying rent on time every month, and lastly I have a philosophical issue with subsidising someone elses family as a single woman.

That said, it's a big challenge moving to a western country so I wanted to be supportive emotionally. But after talking to my parents about it I find out they had warned and advised him several times about making such a huge decision without enough funds and expecting that things will just work out. They even told him not to expect help from me (my parents  are awesome sometimes) but he doesn't listen. The latest is him telling me he might need to borrow money from me to demonstrate to a potential landlord that he has enough funds to cover future rent. Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year?? There's been other stuff like not doing proper research on the school his wife was supposed to attend...it's a long story. So now they have to change schools and find a different diploma course that leads to a work permit, even though school starts now. I googled and sent him a website managed by the government to check if other schools are eligible to apply for work permits after his wife graduates. When he mentioned they've gone and visited the other schools recently I asked him, did you confirm with admissions that your wife will be eligible for a permit after graduation? And his response was, I checked the website  link you gave me. 😯 I had to tell him to ask the bloody school as well! Mother of God.

There's other stuff, like him signing a lease then likely going to break it because of the school situation.  Obviously if they change schools they may have to change housing. In all its a crappy situation that reflects poor financial foresight and poor planning in general.

[Dee]

Ugh, that sounds stressful, Lovelywings. Good for you for setting appropriate boundaries and sticking to them. Keep at it!

[Paul der Krake]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

[former player]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

Yes.  The chance to legally move your family to a safe, rich country is one that many millions of people would leap at - even now several thousands of people die each year just for the chance of illegal immigration to such a country.  If a chance at legal immigration comes along you leap fast before it goes away.

[Hula Hoop]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

Yes.  The chance to legally move your family to a safe, rich country is one that many millions of people would leap at - even now several thousands of people die each year just for the chance of illegal immigration to such a country.  If a chance at legal immigration comes along you leap fast before it goes away.

I agree - immigrant communities have always supported each other in various ways to obtain the [insert rich country name here] dream.  Usually, people emigrate to the new country because they are poor and want to improve their circumstances.  I doubt that many of them manage to save up much money while still living in the poor country.  If they were able to do that, why would they emigrate?

[Hula Hoop]

The immigrants I know here are mostly from poor countries like Bangladesh, the Philippines or various African countries or war torn countries like Libya or Syria.  When they arrive the other immigrants from these countries, and especially families, support the recent immigrant.  This seems to be expected along with sending remittances to the less fortunate relatives back home.  But maybe the culture lovelywings comes from does not have this kind of support as part of its culture.

[former player]

None of which is to say that I fault lovelywings for her attitude - she is talking to her cousin and offering advice, just not providing economic outpatient care to someone who hasn't yet figured out a financially sustainable life in their new country.

[Freedomin5]

I don’t fault loveywings either. There are a lot of other red signs in the post. The cousin:

- Asked her to lend him money to trick the potential landlord into thinong he has more savings than he actually has in order to secure an apartment —> So he’s dishonest?
- Didn’t do proper research on work visas before moving here and selecting housing —> Impulsive? Lacks certain executive functioning skills? Lacks foresight?
- Asked lovelywings to co-sign the lease
- Likely intends to break the lease —> So he’s untrustworthy and doesn’t intend to keep promises?

The point is not that he immigrated to Canada with little money. The point is that he didn’t even seem to do any planning around how he and his family are going to survive, but instead seems to be holding out his hand and asking lovelywings, who is also a recent immigrant, to support him and his family. Seems kind of mooch-y to me.

[Hula Hoop]

Yes - same here.  It sounds like this cousin did not do his homework and also plans to lie to his landlord amongst other things.  I can see why LW would be uncomfortable.

[Imma]

I called a few family members to tell them I've got a new job. In this job I will report to a CFO, but it's a massive company with lot of seperate entities, so it's just "a" CFO of this location, not "the" CFO.

My relatives all said congrats. And then all of them suggested I go shopping for clothes right away, because I can't work for a CFO wearing the type of clothes I wear now. What's wrong with what I wear now? There are no brand names on it. It's not expensive.

Seriously, I wear perfectly appropriate clothes to work but I try to find them secondhand or from shops like H&M and Zara. A black knee-length skirt is a black knee-length skirt. No one cares about the brand name.

Apparantly I also need a new coat. Why? Because I've had this one for years. Does it look worn out or old-fashioned? No, but you've had it for years. You shouldn't wear your clothes for such a long time. And it's boring because it's black.

[Linea_Norway]

I called a few family members to tell them I've got a new job. In this job I will report to a CFO, but it's a massive company with lot of seperate entities, so it's just "a" CFO of this location, not "the" CFO.

My relatives all said congrats. And then all of them suggested I go shopping for clothes right away, because I can't work for a CFO wearing the type of clothes I wear now. What's wrong with what I wear now? There are no brand names on it. It's not expensive.

Seriously, I wear perfectly appropriate clothes to work but I try to find them secondhand or from shops like H&M and Zara. A black knee-length skirt is a black knee-length skirt. No one cares about the brand name.

Apparantly I also need a new coat. Why? Because I've had this one for years. Does it look worn out or old-fashioned? No, but you've had it for years. You shouldn't wear your clothes for such a long time. And it's boring because it's black.

Ridiculous that you should exchange your perfectly appropriate clothes with others because of another function. I do understand that some functions would require a formal clothing style, but that should have more to do with the type of clothes than the brands. But many people are obviously poshy.

[cloudsail]

Zara is considered low end?? I think I've seen Kate Middleton wear stuff from Zara before she married Prince William.

[coldestcat]

I would avoid those shops because they promote a cycle of fashion that in not sustainable. way to go for second-hand clothes!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/environment-costs-fast-fashion-pollution-waste-sustainability-a8139386.html

[ixtap]

Zara is considered low end?? I think I've seen Kate Middleton wear stuff from Zara before she married Prince William.

Wasn't that where Melania got that one jacket...

Zara is one of those middle ground places that people who buy clothes consider pretty pricey, but people who buy fashion consider low end.

[NoraLenderbee]

My relatives all said congrats. And then all of them suggested I go shopping for clothes right away, because I can't work for a CFO wearing the type of clothes I wear now. What's wrong with what I wear now? There are no brand names on it. It's not expensive.

In your situation, your relatives would be thinking, "Yay! New job means I get to buy new clothes!" so they assume you think the same way.

[AMandM]

Apparantly I also need a new coat. Why? Because I've had this one for years. Does it look worn out or old-fashioned? No, but you've had it for years. You shouldn't wear your clothes for such a long time. And it's boring because it's black.

Uh... "I'm sorry that my coat bores you"? Not an apology I'm ever planning to offer. 

[SwordGuy]

Here is the crazy part. My brother lived for about 2 school years in an apartment with a bunch of other guys about 10 mins on the other side of the university. Paying for everything - house, food etc. This means that pretty much his entire income from his job was spent on his bills. 

He has finally "run out of money" and moved back in with my parents. I can only imagine how rich he would be if he had just stayed home, did school and worked. Honestly he could have a down payment for a house by now.

Yeah, but his roommates would cheer him on, whereas his parents might interfere with having people sleep over...


I moved into an apartment when I went into grad school for precisely that reason.  Worth every penny. :)

Would have done so during my undergrad work if I could have afforded it then, too.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

I called a few family members to tell them I've got a new job. In this job I will report to a CFO, but it's a massive company with lot of seperate entities, so it's just "a" CFO of this location, not "the" CFO.

My relatives all said congrats. And then all of them suggested I go shopping for clothes right away, because I can't work for a CFO wearing the type of clothes I wear now. What's wrong with what I wear now? There are no brand names on it. It's not expensive.

Seriously, I wear perfectly appropriate clothes to work but I try to find them secondhand or from shops like H&M and Zara. A black knee-length skirt is a black knee-length skirt. No one cares about the brand name.

Apparantly I also need a new coat. Why? Because I've had this one for years. Does it look worn out or old-fashioned? No, but you've had it for years. You shouldn't wear your clothes for such a long time. And it's boring because it's black.

Tell them it's "vintage" and they'll shut up.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

DH and  I have a birthday lunch each year with his sister and her son b/c all 4 of our birthdays are the same month.  We only see the nephew a couple of times a year, some years only once.

A little background:  In the past nephew has been a jeans, tee shirt and tats kinda guy.  A couple of years ago he bought   leased a car so he could make money doing Uber.  That worked as well as you would expect.  Earlier this year he got a steady job.  Not high paying but 40 hours a week with health insurance at a company you've actually have heard of.  Things are looking up.  Now...

He comes in the restaurant dressed  like a rapper (or at least what my 65 y.o. eyes think a rapper looks like):  oversized football jersey, baggy, long shorts, lots of jewelry (cheap in his case), baseball hat with a flat brim, shaved head etc.  He's all about his music and how his music career is taking off.  Showed us how he can "play" guitar on his iphone X.  How he's playing in the barrio and is "the only white boy who dares go there".  How all the girls on his instagram post bikini pics.  He uses cool filters (available only on iphone X) to take pics of him getting out the shower with a towel wrapped around his waist.  How he's going to start a charity for poor single mothers which sounds like a great way to meet vunerable young women.

Typical not-got-their-act-together 20-something behavior you say?  Maybe he'll outgrow it and get his act together.? Yea, maybe.  Except he's 49.  How long until he gives up the steady job so he can devote more time to his music is anybody's guess.

Sounds like nephew has nailed the aspiring part of the 'aspiring rapper' phrase that seems to pop up so often.

We like big bucks and we cannot lie...

[zolotiyeruki]

Sounds like nephew has nailed the aspiring part of the 'aspiring rapper' phrase that seems to pop up so often.

We like big bucks and we cannot lie...

*snigger* that sounds like a great signature for a bogleheads user...

[Imma]

I would avoid those shops because they promote a cycle of fashion that in not sustainable. way to go for second-hand clothes!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/environment-costs-fast-fashion-pollution-waste-sustainability-a8139386.html

I try to buy second hand as much as I can, but it's not always possible to find everything you need used.

It's a myth though that cheaper brands like H&M and Zara are more harmful to the environment than clothes from more expensive brands. There's very little difference in quality and environmental harm between cheap and expensive brands. Actually, some cheaper stores like H&M and C&A (in Europe) are adding more and more eco-conscious clothing to their collection. C&A has a growing range range of C2C gold level certified clothing, and the jeans cost less than €20.

There are some very eco-conscious brands on the market (although secondhand is always best) but most of those are hippie style clothes and not suitable for a corporate environment.

@ixtap  maybe Zara is considered more high-end where you live? It's not expensive at all in my country. It's more expensive than Primark / H&M, where you'd pay €15-€20 for a pair of jeans, but at €15-€30 for a pair of jeans I wouldn't consider them expensive, just one level above super-cheap.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Kate Middleton wore it, the clothes look pretty chic. Our Queen Maxima dresses her kids in Zara and H&M as well. They have to wear affordable clothes every now and then so the public believes they're one of us.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

I would avoid those shops because they promote a cycle of fashion that in not sustainable. way to go for second-hand clothes!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/environment-costs-fast-fashion-pollution-waste-sustainability-a8139386.html

I try to buy second hand as much as I can, but it's not always possible to find everything you need used.

It's a myth though that cheaper brands like H&M and Zara are more harmful to the environment than clothes from more expensive brands. There's very little difference in quality and environmental harm between cheap and expensive brands. Actually, some cheaper stores like H&M and C&A (in Europe) are adding more and more eco-conscious clothing to their collection. C&A has a growing range range of C2C gold level certified clothing, and the jeans cost less than €20.

There are some very eco-conscious brands on the market (although secondhand is always best) but most of those are hippie style clothes and not suitable for a corporate environment.

@ixtap  maybe Zara is considered more high-end where you live? It's not expensive at all in my country. It's more expensive than Primark / H&M, where you'd pay €15-€20 for a pair of jeans, but at €15-€30 for a pair of jeans I wouldn't consider them expensive, just one level above super-cheap.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Kate Middleton wore it, the clothes look pretty chic. Our Queen Maxima dresses her kids in Zara and H&M as well. They have to wear affordable clothes every now and then so the public believes they're one of us.

If those jeans cost less than 20 euros, how much is the person who made them getting? Environmental harm isn't all about fibers and dyes. It's also about keeping people poor. Poor communities have no other choice than to pollute with sewerage, chop down forests to heat with wood, pollute the air if coal is cheap, trade or consume endangered animals, etc. That's why organisations like Jane Goodall are so concerned with supporting communities near the areas they want to conserve.

[Hula Hoop]

If those jeans cost less than 20 euros, how much is the person who made them getting? Environmental harm isn't all about fibers and dyes. It's also about keeping people poor. Poor communities have no other choice than to pollute with sewerage, chop down forests to heat with wood, pollute the air if coal is cheap, trade or consume endangered animals, etc. That's why organisations like Jane Goodall are so concerned with supporting communities near the areas they want to conserve.

I agree - the conditions and wages of the workers who made the clothes, usually in poor countries, is a big concern.  Especially after the Rana Center disaster in Bangladesh a few years ago.  https://nordic.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-hms-clothes-would-cost-if-factory-got-paid-sustainable-salaries-2017-6/

[Imma]

If those jeans cost less than 20 euros, how much is the person who made them getting? Environmental harm isn't all about fibers and dyes. It's also about keeping people poor. Poor communities have no other choice than to pollute with sewerage, chop down forests to heat with wood, pollute the air if coal is cheap, trade or consume endangered animals, etc. That's why organisations like Jane Goodall are so concerned with supporting communities near the areas they want to conserve.

I agree - the conditions and wages of the workers who made the clothes, usually in poor countries, is a big concern.  Especially after the Rana Center disaster in Bangladesh a few years ago.  https://nordic.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-hms-clothes-would-cost-if-factory-got-paid-sustainable-salaries-2017-6/

That's true, but it's not like they get paid more when the clothes are more expensive. The difference goes into the pocket of the merchants, not into the pockets of the ladies who sew the clothes. 

The problem with ethical clothing is that there are several aspects to consider: social aspects (like child labour) environmental aspects (like the use of harmful dyes and treatments) and economic aspects (fair trade). I am not aware of any brand that does well on all of these aspects.

There are also many different accreditations for conscious fashion. A company like H&M is FLA accredited, which means their factories meet the FLA standards - that honestly means they're just slightly better than other factories in the same country, it's not what we would consider normal working circumstances in the western world. That doesn't mean there's fair trade, which is almost impossible to achieve for a large first-world company getting their supplies from third-world countries. There are several certified organic accreditations that a company can achieve, but just because they are using organic fabric, that doesn't mean they treat their workers well or there is fair trade.

It's not like I haven't done my research into this. I think the most important thing is to try and buy secondhand, but I know that's not always possible. The second important thing is to wear all your clothes until they are worn out. You shouldn't buy items that you're only going to wear 5 times. I wear the same times for years and years. The third important thing is to have the smallest amount of clothes possible. Not all clothing is easy to find on the used market. I think about 75% of my clothing is either secondhand or homemade, but about 25% is not. For that 25% I have no problems going to stores like H&M.

I only buy quality pieces that will last for years, I've done the research, I'm trying to limit my ecological footprint as much as I can, but I also need some things to wear. That means I will buy maybe 2 or 3 new pieces of clothing on a yearly base and I'm ok with that.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

If those jeans cost less than 20 euros, how much is the person who made them getting? Environmental harm isn't all about fibers and dyes. It's also about keeping people poor. Poor communities have no other choice than to pollute with sewerage, chop down forests to heat with wood, pollute the air if coal is cheap, trade or consume endangered animals, etc. That's why organisations like Jane Goodall are so concerned with supporting communities near the areas they want to conserve.

I agree - the conditions and wages of the workers who made the clothes, usually in poor countries, is a big concern.  Especially after the Rana Center disaster in Bangladesh a few years ago.  https://nordic.businessinsider.com/heres-how-much-hms-clothes-would-cost-if-factory-got-paid-sustainable-salaries-2017-6/

That's true, but it's not like they get paid more when the clothes are more expensive. The difference goes into the pocket of the merchants, not into the pockets of the ladies who sew the clothes. 

The problem with ethical clothing is that there are several aspects to consider: social aspects (like child labour) environmental aspects (like the use of harmful dyes and treatments) and economic aspects (fair trade). I am not aware of any brand that does well on all of these aspects.

There are also many different accreditations for conscious fashion. A company like H&M is FLA accredited, which means their factories meet the FLA standards - that honestly means they're just slightly better than other factories in the same country, it's not what we would consider normal working circumstances in the western world. That doesn't mean there's fair trade, which is almost impossible to achieve for a large first-world company getting their supplies from third-world countries. There are several certified organic accreditations that a company can achieve, but just because they are using organic fabric, that doesn't mean they treat their workers well or there is fair trade.

It's not like I haven't done my research into this. I think the most important thing is to try and buy secondhand, but I know that's not always possible. The second important thing is to wear all your clothes until they are worn out. You shouldn't buy items that you're only going to wear 5 times. I wear the same times for years and years. The third important thing is to have the smallest amount of clothes possible. Not all clothing is easy to find on the used market. I think about 75% of my clothing is either secondhand or homemade, but about 25% is not. For that 25% I have no problems going to stores like H&M.

I only buy quality pieces that will last for years, I've done the research, I'm trying to limit my ecological footprint as much as I can, but I also need some things to wear. That means I will buy maybe 2 or 3 new pieces of clothing on a yearly base and I'm ok with that.

Totally agree with you. I happen to really enjoy thrift store shopping. It's a hobby. But I know some people dislike it or don't have the time. There are other strategies to make the most of clothes, as you have pointed out.

[OtherJen]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

Parents moved to the States in '92 with about $4k in cash and six kids. Not every decision in life is made having the resources to fully complement it. Sometimes you just roll with the punches and hope/work/struggle for the best results

Yeah, my best friend and her parents left Vietnam in a boat with the clothes on their backs. They ended up here via a refugee resettlement program and basically started from scratch. Two of my grandparents and their parents and siblings came here as migrant farmers and settled where they could get factory jobs. They raised my dad and his 6 siblings first in a 2-bedroom apartment and then in a 3-bedroom bungalow. My oldest uncles, all born in the USA, were in their late teens by that point.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

Parents moved to the States in '92 with about $4k in cash and six kids. Not every decision in life is made having the resources to fully complement it. Sometimes you just roll with the punches and hope/work/struggle for the best results

Yeah, my best friend and her parents left Vietnam in a boat with the clothes on their backs. They ended up here via a refugee resettlement program and basically started from scratch. Two of my grandparents and their parents and siblings came here as migrant farmers and settled where they could get factory jobs. They raised my dad and his 6 siblings first in a 2-bedroom apartment and then in a 3-bedroom bungalow. My oldest uncles, all born in the USA, were in their late teens by that point.

Would I be right in thinking that none of these individuals lived so far beyond their means as to ask a younger, single relative to co-sign a loan?

[OtherJen]

Which raises the question for me, how can you move your family to another country without the requisite cash on hand to support them for at least a year??

That's what virtually every immigrant since the dawn of time has done.

Parents moved to the States in '92 with about $4k in cash and six kids. Not every decision in life is made having the resources to fully complement it. Sometimes you just roll with the punches and hope/work/struggle for the best results

Yeah, my best friend and her parents left Vietnam in a boat with the clothes on their backs. They ended up here via a refugee resettlement program and basically started from scratch. Two of my grandparents and their parents and siblings came here as migrant farmers and settled where they could get factory jobs. They raised my dad and his 6 siblings first in a 2-bedroom apartment and then in a 3-bedroom bungalow. My oldest uncles, all born in the USA, were in their late teens by that point.

Would I be right in thinking that none of these individuals lived so far beyond their means as to ask a younger, single relative to co-sign a loan?

How could I possibly answer that, as I don’t have access to that information? I’m directly answering the literal question posed in the quoted box at the top. Lots of immigrants move to their new countries. Many of them move with little more than they can carry, for lots of reasons.

[TomTX]

My husbands aunt became a hoarder late in life. Very weird. When she passed away, her apartment was floor to ceiling with stuff and lots of it was from QVC in original bags and boxes and never used. Her apartment was infested with bed bugs and every single thing had to be thrown out. A clean up company had to come in with special gear so they didn't get eaten by the bugs. This was in an old, old apartment building and most likely no way to get rid of these bugs unless the whole building was fumigated. As far as I know, only her apartment was fumigated. I am sure the bed bugs were not brought in by her but her apartment got infested by others in the building. Probably every single apartment was infested. UGH! I had visited the apartment many years ago when her parents lived there and it was a tidy apartment. Can't imagine how this hoarder thing happened.

When my aunt and uncle bought an apartment complex, they would have a free keg and watermelon party for all the residents.

The kickoff for opening the kegs was a bug bomb set off in each and every apartment.

Just to be on topic:

My other aunt can't seem to even stay in the same house for more than a few years. She will buy an expensive, large house (uncle is deceased - it's just her and one small dog) - perform expensive redecorating and kitchen renovation. Within  a couple of years she's not happy with the house anymore and will repeat the process.

Of course, one of her "best friends" is a Realtor(tm).

[fredbear]

...
Would I be right in thinking that none of these individuals lived so far beyond their means as to ask a younger, single relative to co-sign a loan?

My understanding of the way the Vietnamese functioned in the Denver area when they got out of their shattered country about the time Congress collapsed American support was that very quickly they banded together and formed something like a credit union.  Pooled the little they had, listened to pitches, relied on their knowledge of one another to make the loans.  Everyone knew enough of each other to know that, say, young Ms Grimsqueaker was smart as a whip, had a good idea for a business, worked fiercely, upheld the old ways as regards debt, and was in every way a good candidate for a loan.  But young Mr Fredbear though smooth as a mongoose was lazy as a two-toed sloth, so the little the community had would not be risked with him.  Now it is almost 50 years later they have a part of town largely if informally their own, and it is fabulous.

I never heard of any reverse loans, where elders came a-borrowing from the young ones, though I suppose as the community matured, the credit pool grew more sophisticated, and some of the young ones succeeded, that it would eventually have happened.