August 30, 2010
I actually wasn’t interested in participating in Funny About Money‘s Half Off Diet for the purpose of weight loss, but I do want to share how my version of it is a money-saver.
As a kid, the only time we ate out was, ironically enough, at Vietnamese restaurants.
My parents were great cooks but there are a couple things that were always more economical in a time v. money aspect to eat out: beef noodles (pho) and the 7 courses of beef. Go figure, the typically expensive red meat, right?
The interesting thing about Vietnamese food is that it’s really so cheap and easy to prepare most foods that it would seem like you’d always save money by eating in. That hasn’t been the case for many years, though. A bowl of good noodle soup cost less than $5, and it was hard to make the argument that it was worth your time making that broth from scratch and preparing all the side veggies and thinly sliced beef to save, basically, a few cents.
So if you were truly in the mood for pho, it wasn’t that costly a splurge. And honestly, we never ate out so that was definitely a special occasion for us kids.
These days, though, the price of a bowl has me staggering. In the Bay Area, a single regular sized bowl runs you between $6.50 and $7.50. That’s a 50% increase!
I can still afford it as take out, though. Always make sure to ask them not to cook the noodles, and order a single bowl to go: that single bowl can serve both PiC and me two meals – and we are big eaters!
PiC claims it’s because I order in the mother tongue, but I sincerely doubt it. Let me know if you think that’s the case, though, and I’ll be happy to call in your order for you! 😉
December 10, 2009
My friend is an employee of the UC system and, like other California government agency employees, subject to the state-mandated furloughs. She estimates that she’s taking a 15-20% paycut with the 17 furlough days, or nearly a month’s worth of workdays.
Another friend, listening in to the conversation, mentioned that Californians are able to claim partial unemployment, much like Funny About Money’s experience:
….we can claim unemployment for each furloughed day. That will be a HUGE hassle: you apparently have to fill out all the forms and jump through the hoops for every single claim. So it may not be worth the trouble. But it’s there.
My furloughed friend, however, smiled and said that while it bit into her budget enough that she had to decline the trip to Hawaii invitation, she wasn’t in trouble and preferred not to tax the state’s coffers any more than she had to.
Initially, my reaction was: that’s taking the long view. Admirable. If everyone was as careful about accepting “free” money (since she wouldn’t be working for that partial payment, rendering it similar to vacation pay) as she was, perhaps it’d make a difference.
But that’s a slender reed to lean on. So do you think this is actually a shortsighted decision? Should she be taking that money and banking it even if she’s comfortable now in case it just gets rougher or she’s laid off? There’s really no such thing as long-term job security for her, she’s employed by the state of California.
That’s right, the place that’s hiking in-state tuition and setting off protests [where riot cops beat peaceful protestors, and broke a friend’s camera], and closing medical facilities.
There aren’t many indications that California’s on the way out of the frying pan anytime soon. To temporarily stave off disaster, they’re implementing short term fixes like taking an extra ten percent from taxpayers through April 2010, and taxing medical marijuana. [Thanks to Kay Bell]
Times are tough. We get that. And when times are tough, we have to do things we don’t necessarily like to get out of it, we get that too. But without much more serious efforts to mend the budgets, dire predictions prevail:
The deficit is expected to be worse in the years beyond 2011, as temporary taxes expire and raids on local government funds must be repaid by Sacramento. Taylor projected a $21.3-billion deficit in fiscal 2011-12 and a $23-billion shortfall in fiscal 2012-13. [LA Times, November 19, 2009]
What would you do in her shoes?
July 14, 2009
I may still be in NY right now, but I’ve been keeping up with tidbits of news about California, namely, the financial situation.
While discussing this with my friend, she asked who would be affected by the IOU situation and I wasn’t really sure. My assumption was that state contractors and vendors would be, and that state employees would find their work hours affected as well as delayed paychecks. I’d forgotten that income tax returns would be IOUed as well, and Jonathan of My Money Blog, has received one of his very own.
That makes me wonder if unemployment will be protected from this issue, and for how long? If we’re broke, we’re broke. And I’ll have to make some interesting changes to my projected budget for the next few months if nothing turns up on the job front!
January 30, 2009
Never would I have expected to have so much tolerance as my continued tenure at the current job implies.
It’s pretty crazy/toxic now, but the following articles don’t help to relieve that ever-growing knot in my stomach; it twists a little bit more each time I face the uncertainty of the economy, and the current unsettlement of my life:
Boston Gal brings us more of CNN.com’s Horror Stories
Laura Rowley tells us that No Good Deed Goes Unpunished
Actually, you know what? Don’t read them. You don’t need to freak out, too. I just need someone to pet me on the head and tell me, it’ll be ok. It’ll be ok. Except that might generate more annoyance, like static electricity.
So I might take Monday off. If I’m ten hours away from maxing out on vacation hours, taking that time will drop me below the maximum accrual limit. My account must credited every single vacay hour earned! (Huh, is that right? Or am I miscalculating? Might have already rolled over into fifth year of tenure which means higher accrual rate and ceiling. Will check with payroll folks.)
Either way, taking Mondays off feels better than Fridays. Is that weird? How does it even make a difference? A day’s a day.
1. There’s a bank errand that’s been put off for too long, and it’s time to visit a new-mommy friend.
2. Her baby is … 8 months old now? 10 months? Whatever, still little enough for me to carry her around like a junior football. Cute!
January 29, 2009
Kelly at Almost Frugal posed the question: How much extra are you willing to spend?
In this case, she’s looking for a new bed for her daughter. Her mother suggested that she just consider how much EXTRA she’s willing to spend over a baseline price for the item. The theory behind this is that she’s going to pay the baseline price anyway, the only consideration is how much a premium she’s willing to pay on top of that.
That’s very interesting: I’ve always taken total price into consideration, and didn’t actively separate the purchase price from the premium.
In coming weeks, this purchasing perspective will be very applicable to my personal shopping needs. If a new apartment is in the works (I hope I hope!), I’m going to need some basic furniture and tools. Mostly kitchen stuff, and a basic tool kit.
Major factors include distance (how far will I lug stuff) and space (do I have room for stuff). The most significant issue, of course, is cost. Since I don’t anticipate any crazy signing bonus, not a normal thing in my industry anyway, what I’ve got in the moving account is what I got. (A whopping $1498, if you’re curious.)
It’s a balancing act: take enough stuff – avoid shelling out cash for new stuff, pay to haul stuff.
Take too much stuff – no room for it, costs money to lug it to destination.
Take too little stuff – minimize moving expenses and buy at the other end.
With that in mind, I’m debating what to keep and what to leave behind.
A few months ago, my assumption was that when I moved, my parents would be moved out into a smaller, cheaper apartment. Reduce cost and required upkeep: less stress all around. Turns out, around here? No such thing as a cheaper apartment.
Get this: we’re paying as much for our rent (3 bdrm, 2 bath house) as some folks pay for a 2 bdrm apartment. Can you believe that!? We have the amenities of a single family home (in home laundry, no share-the-wall neighbors) with the associated utility costs. Most importantly, though, we have the freedom to keep our pets. My sole surviving dog of our former 3-pack is a large breed, and no apartment within 30 miles will allow her breed or size. Not even for a premium. And there is NO WAY I will turn out my dog. None, nada, nope, never.
After parking, laundry, fees, and pets are considered, it doesn’t look like we’d be saving more than a few hundred per month, if that. That means that staying put is an option, and that means that I could keep some of my heavier (really old) stuff in my room. Renting out one room to help with cost is a possibility, but I could also still keep my room and have a home base.
The desk: is a 12 year old heavy particle board executive desk. (Yes, I was a spoiled brat and *needed* the 6 foot wide desk with a hutch. We paid way too much for it. But I’ve used every inch of it and work at it every single night.) Doubtful that I would take it with, it’s survived a couple moves but it’s way too heavy for me to haul up and down stairs. I’d like to be as minimalist as possible in case I have to move all by myself.
The bed: is a 13 year old twin day bed. Same old frame and mattress. I’d like to take it with because it can be set pretty high off the ground to create extra storage space vertically. For once in my life I’d love a double, but it’s not a need.
The bookshelf: it’s comin’ with me! I use a deconstructible (uh, is that a word? I’m not a wordsmith today) steel framed bookshelf. Nothing fancy. Just four shelves in black, and I like being able to hook things into the zigzags of the shelves.
A storage bench: this comes with me too. I got this storage bench from Ikea, unfortunately in white, but it’s great because it’s got foam padding on top and storage inside. A decent bed in a pinch. Maybe I’ll just use that as a bed until I get a good deal on a real one?
Chair: I don’t even know how old this desk chair is, but the hydraulics still work, it’s got enough padding on the back to serve. It’ll go with.
Lamps: My friend gave me his extra floor lamp a couple years ago and it’s still working well, as is the ten dollar Target desk lamp that sits by my bed. Both go with.
Misc (Clothes, shoes, and books): I think the books will be the heaviest since I have so many paperbacks and trade paperbacks (comics). They’re my indulgence! I have pared down the paperbacks, pulled out about 150 of them and a good friend who shares a PaperBackSwap account with me listed them for swap. It’s awesome, I supply the books, he supplies the labor, we share the benefits of getting cheap books.
Some basic clothes will stay here, but all the comfy and professional clothes go with me. I’ve already spent a lot of time paring down here too, but I could use another concentrated go at it.
Same with the shoes: some will stay here, but I’d like to make sure we’re down to the essentials only. The definition of essentials will depend on where I go.
Kitchen: there’s nothing in this kitchen I would take from my parents, other than a few favorite glasses/mugs. Maybe the Brita. My parents don’t like it anyway. For that, I’ve got about $80 left on a Bed, Bath and Beyond gift card and some coupons. A pot, a pan, a few dishes and utensils from Ikea should do the trick.
I wonder if it’s too early to set my baseline prices for a bed and desk substitute?
I’m not sure if I’d be willing to yard sale a bed, but a desk would be fine. Perhaps I can hold out on shopping until yard sale season?
January 9, 2009
Another one acquaintance has succumbed to the I need to own a home NOW syndrome.
Recently engaged, she and her man have been seriously condo-hunting for a few months now, rejoicing in the fact that housing market is ripe with plums for the picking. She’s not made any PB & J declarations, but they’ve gotten pre-approval for a loan so they feel confident in their ability to secure a purchase of a short sale in the next few months before their summer wedding.
Again, in a purely hypothetical sense, if I were to be asked for my advice …. well, my mental alarms are working overtime.
I’m familiar with some aspects of their finances from a few get-togethers:
The fiance, X, is self-employed. A year into running his own business, he’s done well enough for himself that he’s able to cultivate long-term clients rather than taking every short or long term project that comes his way. That’s quite a good direction to develop. He’s made a good 5-figure income. Plus!
They both have retirement accounts – maybe not fully funded, but definitely funded. Plus!
They scaled back their entire wedding and turned it into more of a backyard affair because they didn’t have anything saved for the wedding, and didn’t want to take on another $10-15K of debt. Good move. Plus!
But, they didn’t have anything for the wedding because X spent about 20K on her ring. I’m not saying there’s a “right” amount to spend, just that they are out that much money that could have been for the wedding or their e-fund. Either way: Minus!
His ladylove, Y, is about to lose her job. She doesn’t know when, but a layoff is imminent. Minus!
Y also hasn’t had any success in landing another job that I know of, and because she’s entirely caught up in wedding planning and house-hunting, I can’t imagine that she’s devoted any time to a job search. Minus!
In my eyes, that’d be the most basic of needs in a three-priority situation like this: Find a job, then get married, then buy a home.
Then, too, my other concerns remain:
Tracking routine expenses – Y loves her clothes, accessories, and expensive tech equipment. She also has no head for caring about numbers. (Note: she doesn’t have to be an expert, just willing to pay attention.) That has to stop if they’re taking on a mortgage with one income while accustomed to two.
Health – Neither will have employer-sponsored health insurance after the job loss. They’re young and healthy, but can’t afford any emergencies or accidents (how well can any of us?). It’d be important to have a contingency plan, whether it be buying insurance or setting aside emergency health money. If nothing else, catastrophic health insurance would be a really good idea.
Moving costs – This would include closing costs and associated fees. I’d hope that they don’t end up paying for unnecessary points or junk fees, but as novice home-buyers, that’s always something to watch out for.
Also, while they may pass on purchasing new furnishings right into their new gates, some maintenance issues will probably come up. They’re looking at short sales, and the condition of those homes are not going to be the same as that of a new build.
Taxes – self-employment, primarily, for both. X, of course, will have planned better for his upcoming tax bill, and Y might have since she did have some contractor income. Those will have to be addressed some time this year.
And I don’t know when property taxes are assessed, but can they afford property taxes? Are they prepared?
Not to be the ultimate party-pooper, but I would strongly urge them to re-assess the commitment they’re about to make together. To the home purchase, not to each other! I think their relationship is fine, but can see how making a hasty, major purchase could strain even the strongest marriage.
What do y’all think? Have I missed anything else?
And what would you do in this situation? Do you think my caution, concern and conservatism are (perhaps, wildly) misplaced?
November 19, 2008
I just read about an idea proposed by President-Elect Obama called the $1000 Emergency Energy Rebate on Five Cent Nickel, and I hope to goodness that it’s just an idea that dies on the vine:
While a great many Americans have been focusing on the possibility of another stimulus check, the $1000 Emergency Energy Rebate has been flying a bit under the radar. In case you’re not aware, President-Elect Obama has floated the idea of enacting a windfall profits tax on “excessive oil company profits” in order to fund an immediate $1,000 emergency energy rebate for American families.
When will this end?
I am not at all a fan of this idea because as Nickel pointed out, the companies affected would probably pass on the windfall tax’s cost to the consumers. Probably! And in all likelihood, the price hikes would benefit the oil companies in the long run because I don’t see them lowering rates sans legislation which would, of course, be at further cost to taxpayers. The idea of playing Robin Hood works better in fiction than as a form of government. (I’m reminded irresistably of Monty Python at the moment.)
I’m not moneyed, by any means, to fear for my pocketbook at the income levels that are most usually targeted by the take-from-the-rich theory, and I’m not all about pitying the corporation. The effects of failing corporations on the individual is awful and understandably evokes the need to do something. It’s just that the proposed solutions don’t seem to be more fleshed out than throwing money we don’t have at the problems. It’s frustrating that “bailout” is on the tip of so many tongues when addressing complicated problems. I’m a thousand percent more in favor of creating an environment that is more amenable to making my own way than one in which my hardships are alleviated by a savior. And that’s with a sick mother, a non-income producing father, and problem brother. I would still rather earn my way despite my own difficulties, illness, and lack of advantages than rely on someone to provide for me from the pocket of someone who had more than I by hook or by crook, by the sweat of their brow, or by virtue of the right relatives. I don’t claim to be better than anyone because of that, it’s just that ultimately the underlying issues aren’t addressed and creates a long term environment in which there’s not much incentive for anyone to do quite well when every solution starts and ends with: take taxpayer money, give it to the floundering.
Maybe it’s bailout fatigue.
