Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your monthly budget shouldn't shift just because you got 10 monthly paychecks vs 12 of a lower amount. If you could get paid your full 12 months salary in the first 10 months of the years that's the choice people should make. The rationale to take a lower monthly check only makes sense if you have trouble managing your cashflow. Just because most people want something doesn't make it the best financial decision
Most posts were never an attempt to suggest what most people prefer as that's not relevant to what the best financial advice is
While I agree with you wrt larger paychecks vs smaller paychecks, important thing here is from the OP it doesn't sound like they were paid in the FIRST 10 months of the year. There were 2 months without pay in the middle of the year - summer. I'd imagine they were paid January - June, then no pay in July-August, and then September - December. But, I guess, if you look from a standpoint of a school year (and I would assume that most teacher contracts were starting in September) then indeed you are being paid up front.
In general, pay schedules are interesting things. My company switched from semi-monthly pay to bi-weekly, which resulted in each paycheck being smaller, and two months of 3 paychecks. It was an issue for some because the bills tend to be on a monthly cycle, and with 26 paychecks instead of 24 it feels like you are getting less money for the most of the year.
Once you budget based on 2 smaller paychecks, though, those 2 extra paychecks start to feel like a bonus.
I've been on every possible pay schedule in my life (monthly, bi-weekly, semi-monthly), while my husband now receives weekly checks. I think I like bi-weekly the best because of effortless "saving". I wouldn't say we lack discipline, but anything that simplifies budgeting and paying bills, makes life (and therefore saving) easier.
While I agree with you wrt larger paychecks vs smaller paychecks, important thing here is from the OP it doesn't sound like they were paid in the FIRST 10 months of the year. There were 2 months without pay in the middle of the year - summer. I'd imagine they were paid January - June, then no pay in July-August, and then September - December. But, I guess, if you look from a standpoint of a school year (and I would assume that most teacher contracts were starting in September) then indeed you are being paid up front.
In general, pay schedules are interesting things. My company switched from semi-monthly pay to bi-weekly, which resulted in each paycheck being smaller, and two months of 3 paychecks. It was an issue for some because the bills tend to be on a monthly cycle, and with 26 paychecks instead of 24 it feels like you are getting less money for the most of the year.
Once you budget based on 2 smaller paychecks, though, those 2 extra paychecks start to feel like a bonus.
I've been on every possible pay schedule in my life (monthly, bi-weekly, semi-monthly), while my husband now receives weekly checks. I think I like bi-weekly the best because of effortless "saving". I wouldn't say we lack discipline, but anything that simplifies budgeting and paying bills, makes life (and therefore saving) easier.
Yeah the school contract usually coincides with the school year instead of calander so it's a matter of getting paid your contract over 10 months or 12 but the total remains the same
Yup since you can't provide any facts I won't bother trying to help you learn.
However I will always reply so you don't mislead and misrepresent to people who may not know better.
You can have the last word since you are of that and I don't have time to go around a circles
You have the time to waste going in circle because that's all you do. If you would like to point out where I mislead and misrepresented anything I'd gladly address it.
I do not worry about it overly much. The fact is you are going to spend all of your money one way or another. You can chose to live well now, or later.
Been thinking a lot about this lately. My dad died a few months ago. He had a great life, was a great dad and husband. He never had a big savings, always lived paycheck to paycheck. He never inherited a thing and we were always told not to expect anything, that they were spending it now.
Been thinking a lot about this lately. My dad died a few months ago. He had a great life, was a great dad and husband. He never had a big savings, always lived paycheck to paycheck. He never inherited a thing and we were always told not to expect anything, that they were spending it now.
So, now he's gone and his way worked.
Hindsight is always the clearest view, how would his plan have worked if he lived to 100 or 110?
While strange no one should take 12 checks over 10 unless you have no discipline. Plenty of people live paycheck to paycheck it's something that pretty common even in higher income levels
Right...if there's a way to make fun of and further screw up people with "no discipline", by all means let's do it! Is it really necessary? Unless you own a business where income is variable, or work sales, most everyone works a job with a fairly constant salary. Why would it be hard to imagine that people are used to being paid on a schedule?
Sure I CAN budget it all out but that is certainly harder and while we may be able to do something intellectually it is quite another thing to carry it out in a practical manner, even with best intentions. Why not set something up to HELP people, that is in the case of teachers, to pay them over 12 months. Does anyone's life need to be harder than it is? There will STILL be people who don't budget but why not get rid of at least one roadblock? I guess then we wouldn't get to look down so much on people...where's the fun in that?
You know, maybe all companies could just pay everyone a year's salary all at once, in arrears. Then people would be forced to have a good bit of an emergency fund for that first year, else they'd starve - good way to build up discipline! Then they get a huge paycheck but they have to make it last for 12 months - a TRUE test of budgeting skill!
Right...if there's a way to make fun of and further screw up people with "no discipline", by all means let's do it! Is it really necessary? Unless you own a business where income is variable, or work sales, most everyone works a job with a fairly constant salary. Why would it be hard to imagine that people are used to being paid on a schedule?
It's not a matter of making fun of screwing up people nor is it hard to understand why people like a regular schedule. That doesn't change the logic that it's a better option to have more money in your hand sooner if you have the option especially if delaying payments won't get you anymore money
Quote:
Sure I CAN budget it all out but that is certainly harder and while we may be able to do something intellectually it is quite another thing to carry it out in a practical manner, even with best intentions. Why not set something up to HELP people, that is in the case of teachers, to pay them over 12 months. Does anyone's life need to be harder than it is? There will STILL be people who don't budget but why not get rid of at least one roadblock? I guess then we wouldn't get to look down so much on people...where's the fun in that?
Budgeting is no harder when you get paid 10 months vs 12. The budgeting process is the exact same thing
Quote:
You know, maybe all companies could just pay everyone a year's salary all at once, in arrears. Then people would be forced to have a good bit of an emergency fund for that first year, else they'd starve - good way to build up discipline! Then they get a huge paycheck but they have to make it last for 12 months - a TRUE test of budgeting skill!
Paying in arrears is really what the teacher getting 12 checks vs 10 is. Getting the 10 is paying line with the services. If you don't see the absurdness in your intentionally connected example I'm sorry
It's amazing that you say your statements are logically when they aren't. The fact is the majority of people will take their pay on a weekly basis if offered. I'm disciplined and would prefer it to keep my budget the same month to month rather than having to shift it.
You have to get off this high horse where everything you say, think or do is the right way.
For some 10 checks works but for the majority 12 is preferred. Your assumption of logic is not it's just your opinion
You can simulate having 12 paychecks if you have 10. All you have to do is have 1/6 of each check go to a separate savings account, then in the first "off" month, transfer half of that amount back to checking on the same day you would "normally" get paid. Then do the same with the other half of the money in the second "off" month. The net effect is that you have the same amount of money coming in to your checking account every month.
Amazing. Many people in this tiny discussion have stated they rather have 12 checks than 10 and here you come telling them it's strange that people would want what they want.
Always have to disagree and be wrong. Truly amazing
It's OK to want something that is sub-optimal.
Lowexpectations is right about this.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess then we wouldn't get to look down so much on people...where's the fun in that?
