FUCK MY BOSS

sighhh...

Scene: 6:00, Friday Night

Boss: Trudy, can you stay a little late?

Trudy: Sure

Scene: 8:55, Friday Fucking Night

Boss: So, was this makeup time, or overtime?

Trudy: It was overtime

Boss: Really? How can it be overtime when you're absent so much?

Trudy: I was very sick for two days in the beginning of January. I have not been out since then.

Boss: Really?

Trudy: Really. I can show you the chart.

Boss: Oh. It must just seem like it because you're late all the time.

Trudy: I haven't been late since my review in November.* I can show you that chart too. I can be a real pain about these charts.

Boss: Fine, well, I really need to get going. Bye.

FUCK MY FUCKING BOSS, FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK

Sighhhhh... I will go to HR on Monday. We will talk about this AGAIN. "Either I need hazzard pay to work for a difficult partner or you need to move me to a sane individual". And then I call my recruiter.

No. No. Then I go perform at Caroline's. Hee. See, that's the part that matters, you know?

Friday, btw, was on five hours sleep because I'd been out until midnight (and couldn't sleep until three) recording my voiceover reel for two hours and rehearsing the Caroline's show for three. Oh, and I hit on a hottie -- by flyering him for the Caroline's show. Seriously? Best way to flirt with a guy EVER.

:: oh so casual:: "Oh yeah, I'm performing at one of New York's premier comedy venues Monday. You should come." ::flip card over:: "Oh lookie-here, I put my phone number on the back in case you need to check anything" ::Captain Jack smile::

SLY LITTLE SMILE BACK OH YES OH YES OH YES HE DID

Fuck my boss. Seriously.

* Please note. I hadn't been late particularly often BEFORE my review in November. Or absent. And HR would not back me up on this. In my review I LITERALLY said "oh, well lets get the attendance sheet and check" And incompetent HR bitch LITERALLY said "well, just make it clear to her that you're there"

Let me put it this way:

How hard would it be for you to save $7,500?

How hard would it be for you to get $7,500 in credit?

If I needed to be able to use it tomorrow?

I'm not arguing the overall point, really - in fact, I need to take a look at these things myself, because I could stand to throw some savings at my credit cards right now myself. But I feel like there's a floor here that's not accounted for, where savings do function as a better emergency net for people who aren't in a strong starting position.

(And, actually, I personally don't have near that amount of available credit, assuming all my sources had zero balances.)

having cash on hand wouldn't be better than getting stuck with an interest payment. Because even if my savings is only earning 1% while it's sitting there, isn't that better than paying 5% (on the low end) for credit debt?

I think we're not distinguishing enough here between available credit and than credit card debt. I.e., David's friend's point is that you did exactly the right thing, sacrificing savings to open up credit.

How hard would it be for you to save $7,500?

How hard would it be for you to get $7,500 in credit?

I think it is missing a factor - one more question if you will - how easy will it be to repay the 7, 500? and what is the impact of paying back the 7,500 on your future life?

I have more savings than I probably should, but I would get twitchy without it, because I had it drilled in to my head early and often that that was how things were done.

I have the rough draft on his rather iconoclastic finances book if you want to see him address this issue. The thing is, finance is all just logic and numbers. But how people deal with finance is very emotional. I can't say what will make you comfortable about how you handle your money, but I can lay out his (pretty logical) argument for how things are actually quantified.

FWIW, Gary's was ranked as the top money manager in the country by Fortune magazine about 10 years ago. He's a physics major, and he's brilliant and understands how finance works. He left Wall St. and his net worth is in the millions.

I'm going to take the wild guess that your average financial advisor has sufficient ready cash laying around in his checking account to take care of the odd four figure car accident or vet bill.

And that most non-six-or-seven-figure people would pull this from their savings account if they could rather than pay credit card interest on it for a few months.

I'll just run some of his paragraphs. Be warned his tone is occasionally obnoxious because he thinks conventional financial advice is STOOPID. But I think his argument is sound, or at least worth considering....

First, the conventional advice. Which he terms "antique-onomics."

******

So, I have isolated 7 financial “World is Flatisms” heretofore known as antique-onomics. CHAPTER 1: Emergency fund vs. Fund for emergencies

Well the first item, hopefully soon to be in the annals of Antique-onomic advice, is almost ubiquitous. It is the “Emergency Fund” Recommendation. I am sure you have heard it many times before. In a nutshell, it most commonly goes something like this "You should have 3 to 6 months of expenses set aside for emergencies. You should have this in a money market account or other cash equivalent that wont fluctuate in value and that you can get at quickly” Here are some quotes from some of the heavy hitters in the financial advisory industry (Emphasis is mine).

The Wall St Journals Lifetime Guide to Money: Everything you need to know about managing your finances – for every stage of life.

“ The idea of saving money for a rainy day may seem terribly old-fashioned. It is certainly not exciting. But there is probably nothing more important than having a financial cushion to smooth the way if you lose your job, or the roof has to be replaced or the car suddenly dies” “Financial experts generally recommend that people have an emergency fund equal to between 3 and 6 months’ spending money. A generous emergency fund is critical for families that are relying on a single wage earner to support a couple of kids. Accumulating rainy day money is also particularly important when you are just starting out and do not have many other assets you could tap in a crunch.” p 32

The Wall St Journal Guide to Planning Your Financial Future:

“Cash in the bank – A cash investment is one that you can get your hands on in a hurry – like a money market fund – without risking a big loss in value. For example, while putting your money in a regular savings account has serious limitations as an investment strategy, the logic behind a cash reserve makes a lot of sense. If all your assets are tied up in stocks and long term bonds and you need to liquidate you may take a loss, or you might miss a great opportunity for new investing.”

The Price Waterhouse Book of Personal Financial Planning.

“You should set aside some funds for emergencies in a secure, very liquid investment vehicle that does not fluctuate in market value… How much should you set aside? Many financial advisors suggest 2 to 6 months living expenses.”

The Money Diet by Ginger Applegarth

“Experts usually recommend that you keep an amount equal to 3 to 6 months expenses in bank or money market accounts in case of emergencies.” Pg 131

In addition to this she recommends that everyone who wants a “moderate risk” portfolio regardless of age, net worth, or anything else, should have 10% in cash.

Everyone's Money Book

The 1st goal is to “Build up Emergency Reserve (worth 3 months salary)” pg 23

Personal Finance For Dummies 2nd Edition by Eric Tyson

If your only source of emergency funds right now is a high interest rate credit card, its in your financial interest to save 3 to 6 months of living expenses in an accessible account before funding a retirement acct or saving for other goals…There is simply no reliable way to tell what may happen to your job, health, or family. Because you don’t know what the future holds in store, preparing for the unexpected is financially wise. …

Conventional wisdom says that you should have approximately 6 months of living expenses put away for an emergency… I recommend saving the following amounts under different circumstances.

3 months living expenses if you have other accounts such as a 401k or family members and close friends you could tap for a sort term loan. This minimalist approach makes sense when you are trying to maximize investments elsewhere or have very stable sources of income

6 months living expenses if you don’t have other places to turn for a loan and/or have some instability in your employment situation or (continued...)

( continues...) source of income

Up to 12 months living expenses if you don’t have other places to turn for a loan, and if your income fluctuates wildly form year to year. If your profession involves a high risk of job loss, and if it could take you a long time to find another, you also have a greater need for a significant cash reserve.

Establishing an emergency fund should have priority over saving for other purposes, unless you have access to money through other sources such as a family member, or are willing to borrow from a retirement account. Smart Money: How to be your own financial manager

“No matter what stage of life you are in, you always need liquid investments for emergencies.” They have different recommendations for different age brackets as follows. Before you buy your 1st house, 50% cash. From that age to age 40, 20% in cash. From 40 until retirement 15% cash

“Hmm, what’s the problem?” you may be asking. Sounds like reasonable advice, and it is coming from some of the most prestigious financial institutions and advisors in the world! (the Wall St Journal, Price Waterhouse, etc). Well, lets be clear here. I am not merely saying that the sagaciousness of the advice is debatable. I am saying that it is absolutely unquestionably bad advice. Really bad advice. Well actually, really, really bad advice. Even worse, not only is the advice really really bad, but essentially everything about it is wrong from the definition of the problem to the approach to solving it, to the logic and the assumptions. How’s that for emphatically decrying the established “conservative” and “obvious” (read “World is Flat”) wisdom? Geez, I better be able to back it up J.

.

Generally when posed with a problem I think the first thing to do is try to see if it actually is as advertised (is the apparent problem an actual problem). If I agree that it is a problem, I try to think of all the ways I can overcome that problem. Then I try to look at the cost / benefit of each, and then choose that which offers the optimum cost / benefit. Duh. This is actually a simplification. Sometimes it is not good to figure out the best way to do something (But I wont get into that right now, I may touch on that later as a general approach to problem solving). In this instance, some of the first questions that come to mind are as follows. Do we need to guard against financial emergencies? What are our other options besides a emergency fund? Why 3 to 6 months, why not 1 or 24? Why not 50% of your net worth?

So lets start by analyzing this ‘problem’. First, are financial emergencies something we need to worry about? It seems so - without giving any real thought to it. But how can we really know if we need be concerned? To find the answer, we must ask a few questions, three, to be precise, they are as follows:

“What is a financial emergency?”

“What is the risk of a financial emergency” (Define risk, $ risk, % Risk)

“What is the cost to insure?” (Actually this is, “What are the costs to insure for the various means to insure?”)

Only by answering these questions can you then make the comparisons needed to determine if you should guard against such an event occurring. But in all this prudent, well thought out, conservative advice about preparing for emergencies, I've never heard anyone of these sophisticated mavens answer, or even pose for that matter, each of the three questions that must be answered before any sound advice on the matter can be given (Too dripping with sarcasm? I just cant help myself.).

The 1st of these questions is, “What is a financial emergency?” Well, “financial emergency” is not really well defined by anyone, but I will try to err on the side of being overly inclusive. The list of possible individual items may be infinite, but there are really only 2 types of things that constitute a financial emergency.

One is a big unexpected expenditure that you must make, and don’t have the resources to make. This italicized part is critical because, as you will see, as your wealth increases fewer things become financial emergencies.

The other is a loss of income for a big amount of time, which is really the same thing as the first thing (large net negative cash flow that you don’t have the resources to cover), but we come at it from a different angle in that the net negative is caused by decreased revenue rather than increased expense. You have a bunch of small expenses that you must make that, in the aggregate, is one big expense. The biggest difference is that the first is a “one time” hit, and the other is a hit that occurs over time.

The pundits’ comprehensive aggregated list of things that constitute an financial emergency, as gleaned from the 11 sources sighted above, are, loss of job, major household repair, major auto repair, and finally (and oddly) a great investment opportunity. As an aside giving examples of a financial emergency is a poor (continued...)