Millionaire Redux v.2

Archived From: Finance
  • Text Only
Voting History
rated:

July to July Part 1
Disclaimer

July to July Part 2
Disclaimer
I was recently asked if I was going to post an update on my financial status, and I indicated that I had not intended to do so because not a lot has happened between last year, when I wrote about it  here, and the present.  It was  7 years before then, when I had posted my first update here. 
I was prevailed upon to post anyway, and because I have no objection to doing so and like having a "record" so I can see how I am doing over time, I agreed to do so.

I see that when I last wrote in February of 2015, I indicated that my accounts were totaling "just over $2 million", excluding my mortgage and home, that just over 1/2 my asserts were in investment accounts, the vast majority of which are in a 401(k). I excluded then, as I do now, my wife's 403(b) savings plan, which then was "just over 100,000" and is now at $138,000.  Not a bad return, given that no contributions have been made in the intervening 17 months.

Today, the accounts total $2,099,325 of which $1,303,000 is in tax sheltered accounts including my 401(k), my Roth IRA and my wife's Roth IRA.
I also have $138,000 in 529 plans to which I've been contributing $1,800 a month.

My spending still is overly high.  When I wrote last year I indicated that I charged $78,000 in the past year. I don't know exactly what period I was measuring though. Today, from July 7 2015 to July 7, 2016 I charged "only" $70,646.  Travel and Grocery expenses have dropped from $16,000 to $11,000 and $13,405 to $5,858 respectively. However, healthcare expenses seem to have gone up as have our expenses at restaurants. I don't track everything all that well, so the categories are not precise.  Overall, in that period I spent a total of $127,608. I am posting two "graphics" for the top expenses.as categorized by personalcapital.com. 

Conventional wisdom states that to retire, one should save 25 times one's annual expenditures.  If this last year is any indicator of my annual expenditures, I need $3,190,200 in order to retire. I am 48. The accounts that are not earmarked for my kids total $1,960,147, plus 10,000 in the bank.  If I add back in the wife's retirement funds that gives us $2,099,703 in "our money but not our kid's college money, leaving us $1,090,497 short of having enough to retire. 

Of course, there is NFW that I need to spend $127,608 a year.  Still, I do not feel that I buy a lot of stuff, and it is shocking to me  how all of the little things can add up to a whole boatload of money.  This is not something new to me, or something that I only observe on an annual basis.  Every time I look at a credit card statement and see a balance of $5-7,000 I wonder, "how the hell can this bill be for so much? I have so few big charges!"  

I am 48. My kids are now 3 and 5.  My job is even less secure than it was last year, and I am actively looking for work because I expect to be forced out some time next year and want to find work before that happens. I know that we will be able to retire to a less expensive part of the country. I only hope that the next job allows me to keep adding to the bottom line because I am definitely not interested in spending more than I earn and I am not 100% confident that I want to reduce my spending because my earnings have dropped.


 

Member Summary
Most Recent Posts
How much can you really talk about a guy's net worth? The numbers are all laid out there, he reduced a couple of monthly... (more)

jaytrader (Jul. 26, 2016 @ 5:11p) |

Now you've finally said something that I find insulting.

DTASFAB (Jul. 26, 2016 @ 7:02p) |

It was bound to happen sooner or later. I'm from NY, remember.

jaytrader (Jul. 26, 2016 @ 7:30p) |

Staff Summary
Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

I am 48. My kids are now 3 and 5. left off a digit?

rufflesinc said:   
I am 48. My kids are now 3 and 5.
left off a digit?

  Nope. But I definitely wish I were 10 years younger to handle them.

DavidScubadiver said:   Conventional wisdom states that to retire, one should save 25 times one's annual expenditures.  If this last year is any indicator of my annual expenditures, I need $3,190,200 in order to retire.

 

  True, but keep in mind that the mortgage, tax, and savings categories all drop off or decrease by the time you're retired.

Your mortgage and restaurant spending actually looks low for NY, but it might help to track the cash&check categories more closely.  Lunch at work? Bars? H&B?  That's almost $20k of "black box" spending.

That's more than enough for most people to retire on. There's a few people retiring in their thirties on less than a million $. You can get inspiration from Mr money mustache and go curry cracker.

You may not be spending a lot, but your wife might. I suggest you and your wife do a budget at the beginning of each month.

triggerhappy007 said:    go curry cracker.

 

  ummm is that a cheap food or a mixed race person of anglo-indo descent?

EDIT: oh i see it's a blog. lol

Thanks for the post. Its very inspiring.

DavidScubadiver said:   ...I do not feel that I buy a lot of stuff, and it is shocking to me  how all of the little things can add up to a whole boatload of money.  This is not something new to me, or something that I only observe on an annual basis.  Every time I look at a credit card statement and see a balance of $5-7,000 I wonder, "how the hell can this bill be for so much? I have so few big charges!"This is precisely my motivation for tracking every dollar spent. I don't have to wonder at the end of the month or year where my money went. I also don't spend nearly as much as you, so it's easier.

While your mortgage is reasonable for your income, Groceries are a bit high (unless you're eating certified organic prime rib and black Caviar
every day), but without further details your expenses in these categories are completely insane: ATM/Cash, Checks, Utilities, General Merch, Uncategorized, Other Expenses, Online Services, Telephone, and Personal Care.  Does some of that include funding the 529? Hard to tell.

Are the pics from Mint?
-Curious Yodlee User

ThomasPaine said:   Are the pics from Mint?
-Curious Yodlee User

Looks like Personal Capital
- a Mint user

Your insurance spending of ~9k is more than my total spending last year including rent and everything. Being single and frugal has its merits. Though I do consume beans and rice and hardly eat out.

It's nice to have less than 8k tax from 161k income even with four people household. You must have had some crazy some tax deductions.

I suspect that 161K income is already after-tax (and after pre-tax contributions), and the listed 8K tax is just property tax.

last year we spent about $90k (excluding income taxes). We had a mortgage of about $1700 (12 year loan) and I can hardly tell where all the money went. About $10k to health care. We travel a bit, eat out somewhat freely (though usually not at very expensive places), and spend at least $500 per month on kids' activities. We spend quite a bit on life and disability insurance but I think our biggest 'extras' are eating out and travel, which are probably $20,000 or more per year.

Now we're into our new (bigger, and alas, more expensive house) and we'll run expenses of $125,000 or more - so I feel you, David.

I do think once the kids are off to college, we'll be spending less money on kids' activities. We also will no longer have life insurance and eventually, disability insurance. But health care could go up. And travel could go up. And we just took on a 30 year mortgage so we're not close to paying that off.

Bottom line, even though our spending seems outrageous, I see no evidence it's going to come down any time soon.

> Today, the accounts total $2,099,325 of which $1,303,000 is in tax sheltered accounts including my 401(k),
> Conventional wisdom states that to retire, one should save 25 times one's annual expenditures

Is that 25 times in a cash account or a tax deferred account?  I have to keep telling my wife that she cannot sum up my 401/IRA/deferred compensation and treat it the same as "cash account". Obviously we will all try to minimize taxes but at least in my case, I have to deal with both CA and Federal taxes.

Principal -- Great question, one that is often not addressed by the media and pundits.

My own rule of thumb is more like 33 times or a 3% withdrawal rate rather than the 4% rate that was tossed out by a lot of folks a few years ago.

For most people (modest income), the traditional IRA is usually the best way to go -- assuming that income in retirement will be less than income in the working years, so their tax bracket should go down. For folks in the lower brackets, the Roth may be the way to go if they are great savers -- much of their income will never be taxed. I've done a blend so I can manage my taxable income in retirement.

So, back to your question, for me, I am comfortable with a 3% withdrawal rate on my aggregate accounts, whether taxable (IRA) or non-taxable (Roths and to some degree regular accounts without any tax shelter other than long term capital gains rates / dividend rates). I'm comfortable with this since I think I'll be able to manage my withdrawals pretty well in order to minimize taxes on my trad IRAs / 401k. Someone with a lot of Roths can sit easy. Someone who has a lot of Trad IRAs probably needs to subtract out their estimated taxes in retirement in the process of determining their withdrawal rate. Remember that the 4% rate is nothing sacred. It came out during some pretty good stock return days. Many now think it was too optimistic, which is why I went to the 3% rate for my own rule of thumb.

My plan and goal is to retire to part time work way ahead of traditional retirement age and just live off of part time work and perhaps some dividends / investments -- but not drawing down any principal. In other words, I plan to (EDIT) spend WAY less than even my 3% rule of thumb for my situation.

My plan also includes getting nothing from social security. If I do get something, great. But I'm not planning on it. Health insurance is probably a big unknown for many of us. If something like Obamacare sticks around, then we have some sort of safety net as a backdrop. If Medicare gets phased out for those with lots of assets or lots of income, then health care / health insurance will become a major expense for some of us.

So here's a question, which I admittedly have not Googled, is Mint or PC better? I kind of am not liking Mint. I tried it when it first came out and it was garbage. Just got back into it a few months ago and it's still not great. However, it sure does beat having to track everything myself.

jagec said:   
DavidScubadiver said:   Conventional wisdom states that to retire, one should save 25 times one's annual expenditures.  If this last year is any indicator of my annual expenditures, I need $3,190,200 in order to retire.

 

  True, but keep in mind that the mortgage, tax, and savings categories all drop off or decrease by the time you're retired.

Your mortgage and restaurant spending actually looks low for NY, but it might help to track the cash&check categories more closely.  Lunch at work? Bars? H&B?  That's almost $20k of "black box" spending.

  I don't see tax and savings categories listed here. I believe it is only tracking actual expenditures. So no contributions to 529 plans or other investments.  Also, income taxes arent included because it doesn't track my withholdings which more than cover my taxes.  So mortgage expense will be eliminated which multiplied by 25 means I'd be saving $450,000. Yet I have a mortgage of just over $306,000k so it is practically a wash.

sclantw said:   Your insurance spending of ~9k is more than my total spending last year including rent and everything. Being single and frugal has its merits. Though I do consume beans and rice and hardly eat out.

It's nice to have less than 8k tax from 161k income even with four people household. You must have had some crazy some tax deductions.

  I find my insurance to be ridiculous. I live in a very old house and have trouble finding anybody to insure it for what it is worth rather than its "replacement value" which is considerably more.  I will profit handsomely from a total loss.
  Those taxes are only real estate taxes. My federal, state and payroll taxes are not included here because they come right out of the paycheck and are not tracked by personal capital

jagec said:   True, but keep in mind that the mortgage, tax, and savings categories all drop off or decrease by the time you're retired.
 

Mortgage?  I intend to take the biggest, longest mortgage possible as far as I can into retirement.  Cash is king. 

psychtobe said:   last year we spent about $90k (excluding income taxes). We had a mortgage of about $1700 (12 year loan) and I can hardly tell where all the money went. About $10k to health care. We travel a bit, eat out somewhat freely (though usually not at very expensive places), and spend at least $500 per month on kids' activities. We spend quite a bit on life and disability insurance but I think our biggest 'extras' are eating out and travel, which are probably $20,000 or more per year.

Now we're into our new (bigger, and alas, more expensive house) and we'll run expenses of $125,000 or more - so I feel you, David.

I do think once the kids are off to college, we'll be spending less money on kids' activities. We also will no longer have life insurance and eventually, disability insurance. But health care could go up. And travel could go up. And we just took on a 30 year mortgage so we're not close to paying that off.

Bottom line, even though our spending seems outrageous, I see no evidence it's going to come down any time soon.

  I am sorry to say that it is good to read this.  I forget where you reside. I'm in the northeast.  Sure, once the kids are off to college you will spend less on their activities, but you have to get them there and if you are paying that tuition, all the savings on kids activities (times 25)  may balance out what it cost to get them to or through college.

dcwilbur said:   
jagec said:   True, but keep in mind that the mortgage, tax, and savings categories all drop off or decrease by the time you're retired.
Mortgage?  I intend to take the biggest, longest mortgage possible as far as I can into retirement.  Cash is king. 

  yep, hard to get a new mortgage when you are retired

PrincipalMember said:   > Today, the accounts total $2,099,325 of which $1,303,000 is in tax sheltered accounts including my 401(k),
> Conventional wisdom states that to retire, one should save 25 times one's annual expenditures

Is that 25 times in a cash account or a tax deferred account?  I have to keep telling my wife that she cannot sum up my 401/IRA/deferred compensation and treat it the same as "cash account". Obviously we will all try to minimize taxes but at least in my case, I have to deal with both CA and Federal taxes.

  I don't know. I just multiplied 25 times what I have in both kinds of accounts.  I don't know what the rule of thumb is supposed to capture. If it is based on non-tax deferred accounts then I'd have to multiply by more than 25.  As I understand it, the rule is to account for a "4% withdrawal rate" and I expect it doesn't matter all that much whether you are withdrawing from a tax deferred account or not when you are withdrawing so little.

jaytrader said:   So here's a question, which I admittedly have not Googled, is Mint or PC better? I kind of am not liking Mint. I tried it when it first came out and it was garbage. Just got back into it a few months ago and it's still not great. However, it sure does beat having to track everything myself.
  Mint is more useful if you are tracking spending and want to make your own categories for expenses.  Personal capital is, in my opinion a lot better at tracking investments and does a fair job of tracking expenses. There is no charge for either service and I'd say it is worth looking at both to see which one you like better.

jaytrader said:   So here's a question, which I admittedly have not Googled, is Mint or PC better? I kind of am not liking Mint. I tried it when it first came out and it was garbage. Just got back into it a few months ago and it's still not great. However, it sure does beat having to track everything myself.
  
At least one trade-off is that Mint doesn't call you repeatedly to try and offer investment advisory services.

That said, the investment tracking in PC is evidently wildly superior.

I've never made the full transition over the PC, but have become less-and-less enamored with Mint, for sure.
 

DavidScubadiver said:   I don't know. I just multiplied 25 times what I have in both kinds of accounts.  I don't know what the rule of thumb is supposed to capture. If it is based on non-tax deferred accounts then I'd have to multiply by more than 25.  As I understand it, the rule is to account for a "4% withdrawal rate" and I expect it doesn't matter all that much whether you are withdrawing from a tax deferred account or not when you are withdrawing so little.
 

A rule of thumb is at best a starting point.  Don't get too caught up in the details.

The 4% withdrawal rate, or 25 times expenses, will be not enough, just right, or even way too much, depending on one's individual circumstances.  It just ignores so many things.

Pre-tax accounts grow faster because there's more principal. By deferring tax payments, you're essentially investing with the government's money and keeping the profits. Post-tax accounts start with smaller principal and are subject to capital gains when you sell your positions. Overall, it's probably better to delay paying taxes as long as possible, because even if you end up paying a higher rate when you take distributions, the faster growth over the span of multiple years (decades, in some cases) will likely more than make up for the higher tax rates.

More than 50% of my net worth is in pre-tax accounts. I need six more years of working to get vested, then I'll reassess at the age of 43. I may very well call it quits the very moment I get confirmation from the personnel office that I have the necessary service time to be properly vested.

DTASFAB said:   Pre-tax accounts grow faster because there's more principal. By deferring tax payments, you're essentially investing with the government's money and keeping the profits. Post-tax accounts start with smaller principal and are subject to capital gains when you sell your positions. O
  I thought the math was the same ...

tax rate * (investment rate * principal) = investment rate * ( tax rate * principal) ???

DTASFAB said:   Pre-tax accounts grow faster because there's more principal. By deferring tax payments, you're essentially investing with the government's money and keeping the profits. Post-tax accounts start with smaller principal and are subject to capital gains when you sell your positions. Overall, it's probably better to delay paying taxes as long as possible, because even if you end up paying a higher rate when you take distributions, the faster growth over the span of multiple years (decades, in some cases) will likely more than make up for the higher tax rates.

More than 50% of my net worth is in pre-tax accounts. I need six more years of working to get vested, then I'll reassess at the age of 43. I may very well call it quits the very moment I get confirmation from the personnel office that I have the necessary service time to be properly vested.

Currently, long term capital gains are significantly less than marginal rates for higher brackets. So it's a bit more complicated than what you put here since gains are taxed at your marginal rate when withdrawn from a non-Roth tax advantaged account.

You can take out a mortgage the year before you plan to retire. The banks want proof of employment income

rufflesinc said:   dcwilbur said:   
jagec said:   True, but keep in mind that the mortgage, tax, and savings categories all drop off or decrease by the time you're retired.
Mortgage?  I intend to take the biggest, longest mortgage possible as far as I can into retirement.  Cash is king. 

  yep, hard to get a new mortgage when you are retired

BostonOne said:   
DTASFAB said:   Pre-tax accounts grow faster because there's more principal. By deferring tax payments, you're essentially investing with the government's money and keeping the profits. Post-tax accounts start with smaller principal and are subject to capital gains when you sell your positions. Overall, it's probably better to delay paying taxes as long as possible, because even if you end up paying a higher rate when you take distributions, the faster growth over the span of multiple years (decades, in some cases) will likely more than make up for the higher tax rates.

More than 50% of my net worth is in pre-tax accounts. I need six more years of working to get vested, then I'll reassess at the age of 43. I may very well call it quits the very moment I get confirmation from the personnel office that I have the necessary service time to be properly vested.

Currently, long term capital gains are significantly less than marginal rates for higher brackets. So it's a bit more complicated than what you put here since gains are taxed at your marginal rate when withdrawn from a non-Roth tax advantaged account.

Very true, but there are other variables as well from one individual to the next.  I'm single with no kids and my only close relative is my mother, who has plenty of her own money.  She's the primary beneficiary on my post-tax accounts and Roth IRA, with a non-profit tax exempt 501(c)(3) charity as the contingent beneficiary.  On the tax-deferred accounts, it's reversed.  So if I die, the charity gets all that pre-tax money without anyone ever paying tax on it.  Then she can choose to give the post-tax money to them as well if she wants to, but she won't have to rely on the charity's tax exemption to avoid paying the government.

I'm sure there are situations in which it would be better to take a lump sum distribution, pay taxes on it early, and invest what's left in a standard investment account.  But deferring taxes for as long as possible is also a pretty good option for most people.

scripta said:   
DavidScubadiver said:   ...I do not feel that I buy a lot of stuff, and it is shocking to me  how all of the little things can add up to a whole boatload of money.  This is not something new to me, or something that I only observe on an annual basis.  Every time I look at a credit card statement and see a balance of $5-7,000 I wonder, "how the hell can this bill be for so much? I have so few big charges!"
This is precisely my motivation for tracking every dollar spent. I don't have to wonder at the end of the month or year where my money went. I also don't spend nearly as much as you, so it's easier.

While your mortgage is reasonable for your income, Groceries are a bit high (unless you're eating certified organic prime rib and black Caviar 
every day), but without further details your expenses in these categories are completely insane: ATM/Cash, Checks, Utilities, General Merch, Uncategorized, Other Expenses, Online Services, Telephone, and Personal Care.  Does some of that include funding the 529? Hard to tell.

We do buy a lot of organic produce, but no meat or Caviar
as I am a vegetarian and the Mrs. Scubadiver doesn't want to cook separate meals for herself (the kids don't eat meat either).
ATM/Cash is not tracked, but I expect that one of our biggest cash expenses is childcare.  With baby sitters charging $20 an hour, that adds up fast!
Utilities are what they are. I keep the house at 68 or so in the winter and 70 or so in the summer, and it is expensive to do so. I've had an energy audit done and reinsulated the attic and basement but the bill are still very high.
General merchandise is $2,900 from Costco -- mostly groceries though there are other items there as well; $600 for furniture, $600 at Amazon, $366 at Target
Online services are paypal transactions. $2,684 of that was to join a pool club and $500 was for a birthday party.
Other expenses are commuting train tickets and subways.  That's an expense that should go away when I retire!
Telephone drops down to $2793 after knocking out some grocery bills that showed up in that category. $1917 for the cable/internet and $876 for my wife's cell phone service.  That really is too expensive. I think we may have to consider going to T-Mobile with unlimited data.
Personal Care is hair care, massages, manicures and pedicures.  How do I approach the Mrs to say that $2,000 for hair, nails and massage should not be spent when she wants to look good and feel good?

 

Realistically, you could knock down cable/internet/landline/cell phones to $2000 a year, maybe $2200. Haggle with your cable provider and threaten to switch because your budget is $100/month. I'm on an economy tv package that includes local broadcast channels, some (but not all) of the 24-hour news networks, History Channel, Animal Planet, Cartoon Network, and a small handful of others. Including internet and the landline phone I hardly ever use, I'm paying $98/month including taxes, and that includes free Showtime/Starz/StarzEncore, which enables me to let my Netflix subscription lapse for 2-4 weeks at a time.  I watch stuff on cable for as long as I can stomach it, then I re-up Netflix for another month.  Then let it lapse again... the cycle continues.

Switch cell phones to an MVNO like Cricket, Boost, or PagePlus. Depending how much data you need, each line should cost in the $30-50 range, but certainly no more than $50. The hardware, when you have to replace it, can be a significant expense, since these plans never subsidize the cost of the phones.

$166/month for your wife to look good is chump change. I'm presuming she's younger than you based on the kids' ages, and I also presume she's at least somewhat familiar with your overall financial picture. If your marriage is decent, I wouldn't bother bringing this up. Just be glad you didn't marry a highly entitled trophy wife who has to spend at least $400/month on hair alone, and believe me, it's not difficult for a decent looker with long hair to spend that much in a single trip to the hair salon every 3-4 weeks.

Your non-grocery expenses from Costco, AmazonTarget total less than $2K/year. That's 0.1 basis points compared to your entire net worth. You can make or lose that much in a matter of seconds whenever the market is open, and not necessarily on a day with high volatility. Don't sweat the small stuff. You've worked hard so that $2K is not a lot of money to you. It is to a lot of people, and I'm not saying you shouldn't recognize that it's a huge amount of money to a lot of people, but really, don't worry about it. It's not like you're flushing that money down the toilet. You're buying stuff that you either truly need or can at least put to good use. Even if all those items are completely discretionary and they're wants (vs. needs) you can afford $2K in luxury/year. I know this is FW, but you don't want to be a complete cheap bastard all the time.

So you're actually spending $14345 (11445+2900) on groceries for 4 people and that doesn't even include meat or ca\/iar? Plus $4963 at restaurants? That's $1600/mo on food for a family of 4. I think even for NYC it's ridiculous. I could only imagine spending this much on groceries by (1) shopping indiscriminately at Whole Foods (or something similarly expensive) and (2) throwing half of it away due to expiration.

Are you paying $20/hr for childcare in cash under the table or something? Does it cost more to pay by check? Your ATM/Cash+Checks add up to $18622. That's a lot of untracked spending.

I suppose your wife's spending on personal care is not ridiculous, but it is the result of your high income. Too late to curb it though -- you've lost the argument with your pool club membership.

You both have expensive tastes. It's fine since you're still growing your net worth by quite a bit, you'll just have to work longer before retiring to satisfy this lifestyle. Here's some perspective: according to BLS, a married couple with children under 6 spends $70K/yr on average. And since this is FWF, we should beat this average.

DTASFAB said:   Your non-grocery expenses from Costco, AmazonTarget total less than $2K/year. That's 0.1 basis points compared to your entire net worth. You can make or lose that much in a matter of seconds whenever the market is open, and not necessarily on a day with high volatility. Don't sweat the small stuff. You've worked hard so that $2K is not a lot of money to you. It is to a lot of people, and I'm not saying you shouldn't recognize that it's a huge amount of money to a lot of people, but really, don't worry about it. It's not like you're flushing that money down the toilet. You're buying stuff that you either truly need or can at least put to good use. Even if all those items are completely discretionary and they're wants (vs. needs) you can afford $2K in luxury/year. I know this is FW, but you don't want to be a complete cheap bastard all the time.I disagree. This $2K you mention is in addition to $2700 spent on entertainment, $4210+$4057 on other+uncategorized, $1963 on clothing/shoes. And there's about $7K that's not captured in the two images he attached. He is almost certainly flushing a ton of money down the toilet.

$14K in groceries seems high, but $5K at restaurants for this area is cheap. Overall, $20K/year to feed four people averages out to less than $14/day per person. It's not THAT unreasonable until the ages of the kids are considered. For right now, this cost is too high. A few years from now it will be unavoidable.

scripta said:   
DTASFAB said:   Your non-grocery expenses from Costco, AmazonTarget total less than $2K/year. That's 0.1 basis points compared to your entire net worth. You can make or lose that much in a matter of seconds whenever the market is open, and not necessarily on a day with high volatility. Don't sweat the small stuff. You've worked hard so that $2K is not a lot of money to you. It is to a lot of people, and I'm not saying you shouldn't recognize that it's a huge amount of money to a lot of people, but really, don't worry about it. It's not like you're flushing that money down the toilet. You're buying stuff that you either truly need or can at least put to good use. Even if all those items are completely discretionary and they're wants (vs. needs) you can afford $2K in luxury/year. I know this is FW, but you don't want to be a complete cheap bastard all the time.
I disagree. This $2K you mention is in addition to $2700 spent on entertainment, $4210+$4057 on other+uncategorized, $1963 on clothing/shoes. And there's about $7K that's not captured in the two images he attached. He is almost certainly flushing a ton of money down the toilet.

  I admit I didn't analyze the charts all that closely before responding to the written text.  I should track my own spending... I might be worse by myself than a rich guy on FW with three other people to take care of.

I categorized all of my checks. A lot of them were medical co-pays and housekeeping/yard maintenance. In any case the new graphics with better categorization are attached. And, I saw that my fuel charges were so low and realized I don't have my penfed card being tracked on personal capital. That doesn't change much. $1300 of my "travel" expenses are train and subway fares, mostly for my commute. My revised expenditures after recategorizing a bunch of stuff are attached.

scripta said:   So you're actually spending $14345 (11445+2900) on groceries for 4 people and that doesn't even include meat or ca/iar? Plus $4963 at restaurants? That's $1600/mo on food for a family of 4. I think even for NYC it's ridiculous. I could only imagine spending this much on groceries by (1) shopping indiscriminately at Whole Foods (or something similarly expensive) and (2) throwing half of it away due to expiration.

 

  $1600/mo on food is a pretty easy number to get to in NYC, IMO.

He could certainly do a lot better with that number, but it isn't as hard to do spend that much as you seem to imply.

(though that number not involving meat does strike me as a challenge)

We drink a lot of organic milk at 5 bucks a half gallon!

Skipping 260 Messages...
DTASFAB said:   
jaytrader said:   I'm glad the majority of posters in this thread are over the age of twelve (myself not included).
Now you've finally said something that I find insulting.

  It was bound to happen sooner or later. I'm from NY, remember.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2017