Export thread

http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/worklife/09/16/mainstreet.stretching.dollars/index.html

Lady loses her job and gets 13 weeks severance pay. Her husband is a stay at home dad. Instead of her husband getting his ass in gear and finding a low end job to make ends meet, and the lady using those 13 weeks to find another, they set out to try and live on 13 weeks of severance pay for a year by cutting costs on things like buying clothes for their 7 year old kid and getting their car repaired.

Chris concedes he has felt internal pressure to get a job, but the couple agrees that for now, they prefer to avoid that to be able to spend as much time together and have Chris available for Max.

Click to expand...

Oh please, the damn kid is going on 8 years old. He's at school for most of the day, and there are magical things called after-school programs and sports. What a bunch of bullshit. Your kid can be at school from 7:40 till 2:40 or 3:20, then stay after school till 4 or 5. Plenty of time for someone to clock in an 8 hour work day. God, I put in 12 hours a day (including my commute) and still have plenty of time to spend with my family after I get home. My parents both worked when I was a kid. Hell, I think after-school programs can be better for kids then just coming home to a stay at home parent, plopping down on the couch, and watching cartoons till dinner. Hell, I remember having my homework all set for the next day by the time my parents came to pick me up from school. This guy isn't staying at home for the kid...

I think being frugal is fine and dandy, but I don't understand why these people are making martyrs of themselves when their situation would be easily fixed if the husband would buck up and just get a job for minimum wage.

The world just doesn't make sense and the people in it are getting stupider by the minute. I only see one way out :6:

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with wanting to be there for your kids, but I actually treasured my time alone in the house when my mom worked. She faux-finished houses Monday-Wednesday from 8am-4, 5pm, so I had to do a lot for myself. I learned how to get dinner started. It's an opportunity for independence. It's nice to have involved parents, but it's also REALLY nice to not be with them every minute you're not in school.

Now this kid's a little younger, so yeah, after school programs seem like the best answer. There are plenty of good ones. If he has past experience with teaching, he should definitely try to find work, even if it was just substitute teaching a few days out of the week or tutoring.

"They are determined to keep paying the mortgage on their home in Crystal Lake, Illinois, a Chicago suburb, and not dig into savings -- all on an expected pre-tax income of $54,000, a little less than half of the family's normal earnings."

OMG, how are 3 people going to live on $54,000 until he or she gets a new job?!?

Oh, and it looks like she used to work for Accenture, to which I say "FUCK YOU ACCENTURE"

[strike]Why complain if you're not going to do something about it? There are plenty of part-time jobs for the dude to do. Lazy ass.[/strike]

EDIT: I actually read the article. Good for them! More folks should take their example.

Adammon said:

"They are determined to keep paying the mortgage on their home in Crystal Lake, Illinois, a Chicago suburb, and not dig into savings -- all on an expected pre-tax income of $54,000, a little less than half of the family's normal earnings."

OMG, how are 3 people going to live on $54,000 until he or she gets a new job?!?

Oh, and it looks like she used to work for Accenture, to which I say "FUCK YOU ACCENTURE"

Click to expand...

I was gonna say something about that too. $54K is a nice chunk of change.

Chazwozel;257287][quote=Adammon said:

"They are determined to keep paying the mortgage on their home in Crystal Lake, Illinois, a Chicago suburb, and not dig into savings -- all on an expected pre-tax income of $54,000, a little less than half of the family's normal earnings."

OMG, how are 3 people going to live on $54,000 until he or she gets a new job?!?

Oh, and it looks like she used to work for Accenture, to which I say "FUCK YOU ACCENTURE"

Click to expand...

I was gonna say something about that too. $54K is a nice chunk of change.[/QUOTE]

On top of that, she got it July 1st. Which means they have half a year left to make use of ...half of the family's normal earnings in a year.

*boggle* It's not like they're living out of a cardboard box for crying out loud. And that doesn't even include unemployment. Sounds like a case of 'frugal chic' to me.

I was working at a company that everyone knew was going to be laying people off. Did anyone start looking for jobs? No, they figured they would cruise on the severance pay and get a free vacation.

I got my ass out of there as soon as I could. The company then ended up slashing severance pay and treating everyone like crap. Economy starts crapping out, and everyone started panicking.

People are stupid some times.

First of all, the writer deserves a kick for using the word "frugal" so many times - it's like he discovered a new word and wants to break it in *facepalm*

Second of all, what a big load of shit. Did you take a look at that list of measures they take?

• Biking and walking rather than driving, whenever possible
--> I don't even OWN a car and cycle everywhere, including for groceries. It's not a big deal and it's healthy

• Rarely going out to restaurants
--> what idiot would waste lots of money on restaurants anyway? That's not saving, that's not being a wasteful spender.

• Finding enriching community activities for their child that cost little or nothing
--> erm ... like after-school sports? Which most kids do?

• Taking out books from the library
--> ... again, like most people do?

• Purchasing only absolute necessities and buying what's on sale.
--> most people buy stuff on sale and many people only buy the necessities even when they still got a job.

This is just minor stuff - I got a well paid job and I still try to save as much money as I can. As reward I treat myself to something nice and expensive (and always practical - like my Wacom Intuos4 which I bought a week ago).

Adammon;257289][quote=Chazwozel;257287][quote=Adammon said:

"They are determined to keep paying the mortgage on their home in Crystal Lake, Illinois, a Chicago suburb, and not dig into savings -- all on an expected pre-tax income of $54,000, a little less than half of the family's normal earnings."

OMG, how are 3 people going to live on $54,000 until he or she gets a new job?!?

Oh, and it looks like she used to work for Accenture, to which I say "FUCK YOU ACCENTURE"

Click to expand...

I was gonna say something about that too. $54K is a nice chunk of change.[/QUOTE]

On top of that, she got it July 1st. Which means they have half a year left to make use of ...half of the family's normal earnings in a year.

*boggle* It's not like they're living out of a cardboard box for crying out loud. And that doesn't even include unemployment. Sounds like a case of 'frugal chic' to me.[/QUOTE]

Some people I know live off about 30k a year just fine. Granted, cost of living etc... but these people are far from living on the street and making such a drastic deal about it. If she's been at a firm for 15 years, she should be a hot commodity for hiring somewhere else at a similar position. As for her husband, get a job you lazy bum!

This reminds me of that one lady who was crying that due to cutbacks her family only had $2500 of "free spending money" per month left after paying all the bills.

$2500 is more than my household makes per month. :bush:

Chazwozel said:

Some people I know live off about 30k a year just fine. Granted, cost of living etc... but these people are far from living on the street and making such a drastic deal about it. If she's been at a firm for 15 years, she should be a hot commodity for hiring somewhere else at a similar position. As for her husband, get a job you lazy bum!

Click to expand...

It's just one less Ivory back-scratcher for Mr Burns.

I agree with Chaz. I don't get this. Some editor actually approved this story for publishing?

Shegokigo said:

This reminds me of that one lady who was crying that due to cutbacks her family only had $2500 of "free spending money" per month left after paying all the bills.

$2500 is more than my household makes per month. :bush:

Click to expand...

Oh yeah I remember that one. That's about how much we put into our savings every month or so. With market prices so low on houses, and our current houses equity holding up pretty well despite a bad market, the Mrs. and I are looking to buying a new place soon with like 25% down on the list price. Yeehaw for super-low fixed mortgage rates! So yeah with that lady's 'free spending money', I can pretty much buy a house!

what the shit? I make a little shy of 30k a year and live quite well (granted, no kids or spouse)

But I just don't fucking understand that.

Silvanesti said:

what the shit? I make a little shy of 30k a year and live quite well (granted, no kids or spouse)

Click to expand...

That right there makes a pretty huge difference. Also depends where you are. $54k for a 3-person household in, say, NYC, is practically impossible.

$54k in Ithaca, NY, on the other hand, considerably more possible.

Which, of course, just makes the whole thing more absurd. They're living in Chicago, hardly the cheapest of American cities, you'd think they'd have a little more fire under the ass about getting back to work.

Hell, if she's able to go back to work in a month, that's an additional 50k in her kid's college/trust fund.

Yep, looks like another case of frugal chic.

It bothers me to no end when people write this kind of crap. I'd take 54k a year, it would be a great step up for me.

It reminds me of a show they had on the Discover family of channels. It was about your carbon foot print. Ignoring the environmental thing, these people were the biggest crybabies. They would spend thousands on disposable stuff. This one family had over 100 light bulbs in their house. I have 15 including the one in the fridge. Then they go on to explain how tight they've had to be in the current economy.

My boss has a bad case of this too.

Icarus said:

• Finding enriching community activities for their child that cost little or nothing
--> erm ... like after-school sports? Which most kids do?

Click to expand...

Actually, after-school sports are neither free or inexpensive from what I know. Parents have to purchase the uniforms & equipment among other things. It's not cheap.

However, these people can't live on $54k for a year? My husband makes less than that and I stay at home with our two kids. We still live comfortably. Southern CA isn't exactly a place with a low cost of living either.

TeKeo;257333][quote=Silvanesti said:

what the shit? I make a little shy of 30k a year and live quite well (granted, no kids or spouse)

Click to expand...

That right there makes a pretty huge difference. Also depends where you are. $54k for a 3-person household in, say, NYC, is practically impossible.

$54k in Ithaca, NY, on the other hand, considerably more possible.

Which, of course, just makes the whole thing more absurd. They're living in Chicago, hardly the cheapest of American cities, you'd think they'd have a little more fire under the ass about getting back to work.

Hell, if she's able to go back to work in a month, that's an additional 50k in her kid's college/trust fund.[/QUOTE]

yeah, even so, Im saying I live comfortably, with 54k and a wife and kid i think it would be about the same. (though god help me im never having kids)

I just don't get it, why on eart wouldn't you at least be looking for jobs, instead you're acting like a family of bag ladies.

WildSoul;257340][quote=Icarus said:

• Finding enriching community activities for their child that cost little or nothing
--> erm ... like after-school sports? Which most kids do?

Click to expand...

Actually, after-school sports are neither free or inexpensive from what I know. Parents have to purchase the uniforms & equipment among other things. It's not cheap. [/QUOTE]

Wow, it's free here in most schools. Heck, my colleague's son wants to learn to play accordion and renting one for an entire year costs $50. Lessons are free. It's all funded by the government to promote the development of the children even for poor families. Soccer, basketball, swimming, etc. is all free as well except for their sport shoes and sometimes clothes (soccer clothes are free, basketball clothes are free, etc.).

TeKeo;257333][quote=Silvanesti said:

what the shit? I make a little shy of 30k a year and live quite well (granted, no kids or spouse)

Click to expand...

That right there makes a pretty huge difference. Also depends where you are. $54k for a 3-person household in, say, NYC, is practically impossible.

$54k in Ithaca, NY, on the other hand, considerably more possible.

Which, of course, just makes the whole thing more absurd. They're living in Chicago, hardly the cheapest of American cities, you'd think they'd have a little more fire under the ass about getting back to work.

Hell, if she's able to go back to work in a month, that's an additional 50k in her kid's college/trust fund.[/QUOTE]

My mom raised 3 boys by herself on far less and we never really wanted for anything. I'm beginning to think she was a drug dealer or something.

WildSoul;257340][quote=Icarus said:

• Finding enriching community activities for their child that cost little or nothing
--> erm ... like after-school sports? Which most kids do?

Click to expand...

Actually, after-school sports are neither free or inexpensive from what I know. Parents have to purchase the uniforms & equipment among other things. It's not cheap.

However, these people can't live on $54k for a year? My husband makes less than that and I stay at home with our two kids. We still live comfortably. Southern CA isn't exactly a place with a low cost of living either.[/QUOTE]

Soccer, Football, baseball, and basketball are all pretty cheap if you're playing for the school. About the only thing you have to pay for is cleats, shoes, and shin guards for soccer.

I don't recall buying anything but cleats for football, but it's been a while.

Icarus;257406][quote=WildSoul;257340][quote=Icarus said:

• Finding enriching community activities for their child that cost little or nothing
--> erm ... like after-school sports? Which most kids do?

Click to expand...

Actually, after-school sports are neither free or inexpensive from what I know. Parents have to purchase the uniforms & equipment among other things. It's not cheap. [/QUOTE]

Wow, it's free here in most schools. Heck, my colleague's son wants to learn to play accordion and renting one for an entire year costs $50. Lessons are free. It's all funded by the government to promote the development of the children even for poor families. Soccer, basketball, swimming, etc. is all free as well except for their sport shoes and sometimes clothes (soccer clothes are free, basketball clothes are free, etc.).[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I played football in high school and didn't pay a dime other than for my 30 dollar cleats. Ice Hockey on the other hand... Good God, my parents shelled out at least 2 grand for me to play over 4 years. I still use some of my pads from senior year high school though. If you keep playing, it's an ok investment. My older stuff that didn't fit anymore generally sold back at a fair price since hockey gear doesn't really depreciate too much in value.

I think my last pair of cleats were like $100, but they're pretty nice. I used them through senior year, then college and grad school for pick-up games and still have them in my closet ready for whatever hypothetical football game might suddenly materialize in my yard.

Jake said:

I think my last pair of cleats were like $100, but they're pretty nice. I used them through senior year, then college and grad school for pick-up games and still have them in my closet ready for whatever hypothetical football game might suddenly materialize in my yard.

Click to expand...

Now compare that to non-sanctioned school sports. Senior year, my cheapest set of skates cost 300 bucks, and they were a season old; bought on ebay!

Now you have to have Insurance to play any school sports. I'm not talking about rec ball or anything else, but if you're going to be on the school's track, volleyball, football, cheerleading team, you have to pay for special sport insurance.


Times, they are a'changing. And I would love to make $50+ grand a year....

High Schools in my area required a Physical, and a waiver signed by a parent. that was it, barring shoes (think basketball was the only sport that actually required you to buy new sneakers every season). I'd imagine baseball required you to provide your own glove.

The local youth Football program my Dad helps coach does their best to keep costs down for the parents. They get help from the High School and its booster club, and are always willing to take donations of money or equipment from Parents or Businesses. Last I can recall the end result was only having to ask for about $40 per kid to help pay the referees. Exceptions were made, the focus was always on getting the kids into football and giving them a chance to play.

I can only imagine what a full set of pads/helmet/uniform costs, plus field upkeep, having an ambulance on site (I know my school did, at least), etc.

Jake said:

I can only imagine what a full set of pads/helmet/uniform costs, plus field upkeep, having an ambulance on site (I know my school did, at least), etc.

Click to expand...

If the HS team is good some of that is covered by the 5-8 bucks it cost to get into the game.

In Chicago 50k a year isn't much more than the mortgage.

If we go much below 50k per year we'd have issues, and we're not living in a big city or place with a high cost of living.

Keep in mind that a family pays $800+ a month on health insurance (and if you have kids, you don't skip that if you have any way to afford it), the mortgage starts there and can go to $2k, utilities, food, etc all go up with kids even if you take all the usual measures (removing bulbs, lowering water temperature, not using air conditioning, avoiding opening the fridge, etc).

In the city it's easier to live without a car, but in the suburbs it's very difficult to get the kids everywhere they need to go without a car.

I'm not defending her position so much - we could still live reasonably well off $50k/yr - but I'm thinking that many people here underestimate the cost of living with a family.

Lastly, when I was faced with the prospect of being laid off, I too was glad to have the opportunity to have a long vacation, and I didn't do anything more than update my resume in case I was laid off. I get 5 vacation/sick days a year, and there are so many activities the kids are involved in that I don't get much evening time with them either.

Further, it gives one the opportunity to try making their own business. Times are tough, but there's lots of opportunity to be one's own boss if one is motivated to do so.

I won't knock someone who find that they can live off savings and takes a break to be with family.

The greatest success or worst failure you will ever know will be within the walls of your own home. You won't remember the meetings you went to at work, but you will remember the games you played with your kids.

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

stienman said:

Keep in mind that a family pays $800+

Click to expand...

I really don't mean to turn this into yet another debate, I just want to say "Holy shit I'm glad I don't have to pay that! They couldn't cut my taxes enough to allow me to comfortably afford that."

Gruebeard;257765][quote=stienman said:

Keep in mind that a family pays $800+

Click to expand...

I really don't mean to turn this into yet another debate, I just want to say "Holy shit I'm glad I don't have to pay that! They couldn't cut my taxes enough to allow me to comfortably afford that."[/QUOTE]

If we wanted to cut out wellness care (like immunizations for the kids, birth control, free yearly physicals and lab work, etc) and having higher office visit costs ($20 now, but without insurance each visit is $90 on the cheap end, and with 5 kids we see the doctors many times a year), and higher deductibles with lower coverage, then we could cut that cost in half.

But insurance is a betting game.

It only takes one trip or fall out of a tree to break an arm and then have a $3,000 emergency room visit plus 5 $100 office visits to follow up to destroy a tenuous grip on finances.

I know the odds for my family, so it's less risky (and cheaper most years, and certainly overall) to pay the higher rates for better insurance. Of course, with a full time job it isn't such a problem - the employer covers 80% of it, but if I lose my job it's an expense we'd be picking up.

-Adam

stienman said:

I know the odds for my family, so it's less risky (and cheaper most years, and certainly overall) to pay the higher rates for better insurance. Of course, with a full time job it isn't such a problem - the employer covers 80% of it, but if I lose my job it's an expense we'd be picking up.

Click to expand...

Okay yeah, they could cut my taxes enough to cover that 20%.

(I'd say more, but as I said earlier I don't wanna derail this into another debate and I'm sure somebody out there would champ at the bit to do so.)

TeKeo;257333][quote=Silvanesti said:

what the shit? I make a little shy of 30k a year and live quite well (granted, no kids or spouse)

Click to expand...

That right there makes a pretty huge difference. Also depends where you are. $54k for a 3-person household in, say, NYC, is practically impossible.

$54k in Ithaca, NY, on the other hand, considerably more possible.

Which, of course, just makes the whole thing more absurd. They're living in Chicago, hardly the cheapest of American cities, you'd think they'd have a little more fire under the ass about getting back to work.

Hell, if she's able to go back to work in a month, that's an additional 50k in her kid's college/trust fund.[/QUOTE]

Ithaca is gorges.

stienman said:

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

Click to expand...

You know I read the article all the way through (the first time I skimmed). I think you're right. These folks aren't complaining or asking for a hand-out (which is refreshing). In fact, they're saying it is possible to live a comfortable life w/o "Keeping up with the Jones.'" I'm with Steiny that life is too short to get caught up in the rat race. I retract my earlier statement of calling them lazy.

drawn_inward;257874][quote=stienman said:

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

Click to expand...

You know I read the article all the way through (the first time I skimmed). I think you're right. These folks aren't complaining or asking for a hand-out (which is refreshing). In fact, they're saying it is possible to live a comfortable life w/o "Keeping up with the Jones.'" I'm with Steiny that life is too short to get caught up in the rat race. I retract my earlier statement of calling them lazy.[/QUOTE]

Too late.

Your face is stuck that way.



-Adam

stienman;257881][quote=drawn_inward;257874][quote=stienman said:

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

Click to expand...

You know I read the article all the way through (the first time I skimmed). I think you're right. These folks aren't complaining or asking for a hand-out (which is refreshing). In fact, they're saying it is possible to live a comfortable life w/o "Keeping up with the Jones.'" I'm with Steiny that life is too short to get caught up in the rat race. I retract my earlier statement of calling them lazy.[/QUOTE]

Too late.

Your face is stuck that way.



-Adam[/QUOTE]

:waah:
I'm telling the mods!

drawn_inward;257874][quote=stienman said:

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

Click to expand...

You know I read the article all the way through (the first time I skimmed). I think you're right. These folks aren't complaining or asking for a hand-out (which is refreshing). In fact, they're saying it is possible to live a comfortable life w/o "Keeping up with the Jones.'" I'm with Steiny that life is too short to get caught up in the rat race. I retract my earlier statement of calling them lazy.[/QUOTE]

Hence "frugal chic", as if it's somehow hip and trendy not to spend money you don't have and live well beyond your means.

The rest of us have been doing this for a while now and don't get articles written.

Adammon;257933][quote=drawn_inward;257874][quote=stienman said:

Note that they aren't whining - they're simply making a choice based on their options.

I don't understand the need for people to hate others because they are able to make such decisions. Life may be harder for you, but you're the one wasting time whining about someone else's success.

-Adam

Click to expand...

You know I read the article all the way through (the first time I skimmed). I think you're right. These folks aren't complaining or asking for a hand-out (which is refreshing). In fact, they're saying it is possible to live a comfortable life w/o "Keeping up with the Jones.'" I'm with Steiny that life is too short to get caught up in the rat race. I retract my earlier statement of calling them lazy.[/QUOTE]

Hence "frugal chic", as if it's somehow hip and trendy not to spend money you don't have and live well beyond your means.

The rest of us have been doing this for a while now and don't get articles written.[/QUOTE]

I don't know that many people that live this way. In fact, the majority of folks I know live well-above their means. I agree it's like rewarding inner-city kids for staying in school and getting good grades. I don't think they're being too pompous about it. It surprises me to see that folks put family first.

My good friend from HS worked 3 jobs to allow his wife to stay home with the kids. He worked his way through nursing school, and now when he could be earning a decent paycheck, he works at a place close to home so he can see his kids on his lunch break. I admire the guy.

Adammon's lack of surprise might come from being Canadian. I really don't know anyone who lives significantly beyond their means - some seem to live from cheque to cheque - but conspicuous consumption is more of a vice than a virtue.

Yeah, I'm stereotyping Canadians and Americans here, but I do think that on the whole we're conservative spenders while y'all are quite liberal.

Gruebeard said:

Adammon's lack of surprise might come from being Canadian. I really don't know anyone who lives significantly beyond their means - some seem to live from cheque to cheque - but conspicuous consumption is more of a vice than a virtue.

Yeah, I'm stereotyping Canadians and Americans here, but I do think that on the whole we're conservative spenders while y'all are quite liberal.

Click to expand...

Canadians are generally more conservative with their money. and per capita have a higher savings ratio compared to their US friends.

Thus, you're probably right

Adammon;257967][quote=Gruebeard said:

Adammon's lack of surprise might come from being Canadian. I really don't know anyone who lives significantly beyond their means - some seem to live from cheque to cheque - but conspicuous consumption is more of a vice than a virtue.

Yeah, I'm stereotyping Canadians and Americans here, but I do think that on the whole we're conservative spenders while y'all are quite liberal.

Click to expand...

Canadians are generally more conservative with their money. and per capita have a higher savings ratio compared to their US friends.

Thus, you're probably right [/QUOTE]

I didn't realize this. The whole economic debacle is due in a large part by folks living outside their means. Greed folks. Greed. So, I'd rather see stories about folks living within a budget and not more about jackasses making >50k and not being able to make ends meet.