maryellencarter:

so like. there’s this budgeting thing called the 50/30/20 method. apparently it is popularized by elizabeth warren? the idea is you spend only 50% of your budget on needs, 30% on wants, and 20% on savings or debt reduction (after counting all minimum payments on your current debt as part of Needs).

So I know my bills take up more than one of my 2 paychecks a month. (I ignore the occasional third one for budgeting purposes till it rolls around, so I don’t overbudget for months that don’t have one.) So for curiosity’s sake, I broke down my entire budget into Needs, Wants, and Savings, then did percentage math at it.

For this purpose, you count your non-tax payroll deductions, like healthcare and 401(k) contributions, as part of your income and expenses, but you don’t count money that goes away as taxes. So the budget starts off with putting 401(k) contributions in Savings and healthcare deductions in Needs. Then you start listing off shit like rent, utilities, car expenses…

Right now, while I’m still catching up on a bunch of my COVID-deferred bills and loans, my Needs come out to about 74% of my income. However, my Wants are very minimal: I have my massage subscription and tip, I’ve budgeted for fast food or takeout maybe 2-3x a month, and I pledge to one Patreon at the $1 level. All together, my Wants are about 6% of my income, leaving the requisite 20% to go toward reducing COVID debt for now.

However, once my COVID deferrals are all paid off, my Needs go down to about 67% of my income – and this is with generous projections, like at least one specialist copay every single month and gasoline if we ever start driving again. My Wants stay at about 6%. So I could either use the other 27% for savings and debt reduction, or I could stick with the recommended 20% and have 13% of my budget for Wants.

And I’m like… this is so much money. This is $150 just unallocated *after* going out to eat at least once a month and keeping my massage subscription. That’s… I do not know what else I would want. I could buy my entire wardrobe at LL Bean. I could have a massage every single week. I could eat at a sit-down restaurant every week. I could buy the newest and most expensive iPhone every single year. I could buy a brand new American Girl doll every month with money to spare. Like I couldn’t do all of those at *once* obviously, but that’s with just 7% of my income by this method of reckoning.

Like, if I somehow did make twice my Needs expenses after tax. That’s not impossible; I’d have to make a little under $33k a year, or a little over $2700 a month, which would be about $17 an hour excluding taxes. I don’t expect to get there at my current job in the near future, but it’s not astronomical.

But like, at that point I’d be saving about $545 a month, covering all my Needs expenses, and I would have *over eight hundred dollars a fucking month* to spend on Wants! Like… jesus fuckwaffles. How would I… I could buy a new one of my current phone every single month and have money left over. I could go to one of those black-tie restaurants that are like $100 a plate *twice a week*. I could not only move into a bigger apartment but hire a maid service to clean it. I could buy every single book I’ve ever read in short order and pay to store them all. I could live on like… caviar and avocado toast.

Hell, even if my living expenses were somehow miraculously reduced and my Needs were only half of my tax-excluded pay *now*, I’d be living on a little over $1000 a month, saving about $400 a month, and trying to figure out how to spend $600 a month on Wants. How… I don’t fucking know what else I could want. I’m not used to having money to spare. It’s weirder than winning the lottery, even, because it’s just like… it’s not enough to go “I will pay off all my friends’ student loans and buy a condo!” but it’s enough that I’m like “Do I just… put all 27% of my income in savings? Do I save for a car? Pay off my student loans? Invest for retirement? Am I fundamentally missing something I should be wanting?”

That sounds like a sign that 50/30/20 isn’t for you.

A lot of budgeting methods have this…maybe not “problem” exactly, but this thing where they’re clearly aimed at people who start with an entertainment budget of “everything after necessities” (or in many cases even higher) and negotiate *downwards*, which makes the methods a bad fit for people who start with an entertainment budget of zero and negotiate *upwards*. I guess the people spending money they don’t have on things they could do without are the ones most in need of frameworks, so the frameworks are designed for them. Getting *down* to 30% is a good start for people who were previously spending *more*.

Personally, I do struggle to wrap my head around things that draw a bright line between “wants” and “investments”. Sure, there are *occasional* items–like restaurant food–that are just wants and not also investments, but by far the most common reason for me to want to buy something is because I think it will leave me better off in the long run. I have a long list of things to save up for, and it’s all stuff like “house repairs” and “things that give you a leg up on Vimes Boot Theory” and “retirement funds” and “hedging against the future being wildly different from the present, such that normal retirement funds don’t cut it [link]”.

I think it’s important to bear in mind: given how weird your life is in general, and in particular the fact that your ability to work has a history of fluctuating erratically, saving is even more important for you than for most people.

There’s a concept called “self-insurance”. (…actually it turns out that there are at least *two* similar-but-not-identical concepts called self-insurance, and the Wikipedia article is about the wrong one. Investopedia [link] has the right idea.) You, in particular, *really* should get disability insurance if you can possibly manage it, and while third-party disability-insurance companies *exist*, you’d have to file claims (during the periods of time when you are least capable of filing claims!), and take the risk that whatever shit happens to you next won’t technically be disability by their standards, and operate under rules designed to let the insurance company turn a profit. (The house always wins.) Ideally, then, what you’d want is to instead save up enough in the good times that you can cover the bad times yourself.

(For example: you mention you’re digging your way out of COVID-related debt. My brother was temporarily laid off in the spring, and because of [glitches in the hastily-expanded Canadian welfare system] was unable to receive any kind of unemployment payments in time to actually help him with it. But he had lots of money in his savings account, and he used some of *that* to cover his bills until the restaurant re-opened. Now that he’s working again, he’s replenishing it; in the long run, he plans to save up enough for a condo.

(We not-quite-joked that if the glitch had to happen to *someone* at his workplace, it’s good that it happened to him: his co-workers spend all their money on booze and weed and wouldn’t have been able to handle it. His co-workers, meanwhile, not-quite-joke that they should get him hooked on something so they can drag him back into the crab bucket.))


Tags:

#reply via reblog #adventures in human capitalism #covid19 #illness mention #drugs cw #101 Uses for Infrastructureless Computers #is the blue I see the same as the blue you see


{{next post in sequence}}

prokopetz:

“I resent that – I happen to think I’m very emotionally well-adjusted.”

“You’re on three different mind-altering chemicals right now.”

“Well, yes. They adjust my emotions, and they do it well.”


Tags:

#god this reads *exactly* like a rationalists-out-of-context post #drugs cw #storytime

bellas-orange-jansport:

1953swan:

esmeanne:

vampires really should be able to get drunk they literally have to be alive forever let them have this

hc: vampires have no blood so they get drunk faster than people

charlie pulling over a shirtless carlisle at 4 am: dr cullen your blood alcohol content is literally 100% how are you not dead

carlisle: au contraire im absolutely dead


Tags:

#I didn’t actually laugh aloud but it still amused me enough to reblog #drugs cw #vampires #Twilight

evolution-is-just-a-theorem:

fermatas-theorem:

gasmaskaesthetic:

evolution-is-just-a-theorem:

gasmaskaesthetic:

There’s a party tonight, help me summon a happy mood.

I will teach you the spell of phenibut in return for your first born

I have learned the spell of phenibut and intend to cast it later.

*chooses to interpret this chain as ‘Mack has given Evo her firstborn’*

I am not ready for this. I should have thought this through.

Anyone want a baby? Undamaged! Original packaging!


Tags:

#anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog #drugs cw

For some reason this morning I was thinking about l’esprit d’escalier (or, no, we’ve started calquing that into “staircase wit”, haven’t we?), and this one post I read maybe a year or three ago.

I think the blogger (I don’t recall who it was) was talking about being “good, giving, and game”: that when negotiating a sexual relationship, it’s good to be open to doing things that, while you really don’t *mind* doing them†, you don’t find erotic yourself (but your partner does).

And the example they used was how they once encountered a man whose primary fetish was painting women’s fingernails while they were under sedation. And this, they said, is someone who is probably only going to be satisfied in a relationship with someone good, giving, and game: after all, women in the audience, would *you* get off on having a man paint your fingernails while you were under sedation?

And I don’t think I ever commented with “Well, actually…”, and I kind of regret that.

(To be fair, there’s still a GGG aspect there, since I don’t care about fingernail painting. And while in *theory* being sedated is hot, in practice sedatives tend to come with side effects (unconsciousness, amnesia, non-lucidity, sometimes all of the above) severe enough that it’s not worth taking them recreationally. (though in fairness to *that*, I *am* pretty sure the question was phrased as “would you get off on it” without reference to “and would you be willing to do it IRL”, and the 5 – 10 minutes or so on dimenhydrinate where you’re high but haven’t lost consciousness yet *are* definitely erotic) And it would make a good segue into a related negotiation point of “sometimes kinks are compatible even when they’re not pointing at the same thing”. And–I think this was the thing that actually stopped me, since at the time I probably still *could* have responded–it felt like something of an asshole move to fight the hypothetical when they could just as easily have picked some other obscure fetish such that nobody in the audience *did* find it appealing.

But it was still kind of a prime comedic moment that they picked *that* example when talking to a group including *me*.)

†Not to be confused with sexual acts you’re *grudgingly* willing to do, which are generally a bad idea.


Tags:

#oh look an original post #people who can distinguish between their drive for sleep and drive for sex fascinate me #sexuality and lack thereof #drugs cw #nsfw text #(and I think it’s close enough to put it in here too:) #high context jokes

jumpingjacktrash:

roachpatrol:

do the hogwarts cafeteria tables have a restriction on who’s allowed to get coffee? i want to believe there’s safety measures in place to make sure ravenclaws don’t get a six cups a day habit before they hit puberty but this is a school that encourages its students to play high-speed flying murderball so 

yeah no this is hogwarts aka murder high

pretty sure the slytherins could be doing cocaine off the desks in potions class without getting in trouble, and hufflepuffs definitely sell weed out of the greenhouses

gryffindors, of course, only get high on righteousness and violence


Tags:

#Harry Potter #anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog #drugs cw #death mention

mathprofessorquotes:

Now, are you ready for me to blow your mind? Imagine a circle with a radius r = infinity. How big is that circle? See, you all are lucky that you are alive in Oregon in 2016 where the stuff you need to help you contemplate these things is completely legal and widely available.

Calculus Professor explaining why saying the radius of convergence is R=infinity makes no sense

Tags:

#anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog #drugs cw