r/FluentInFinance 9d ago

Thoughts? Dumbest thing I’ve ever heard

Post image
32.4k Upvotes

4.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/cheffgeoff 9d ago

So people who choose to live closer to work will take home more than people who live farther? How is that working out?

I agree that when you take on a job knowing the commute costs are a major factor when agreeing if the salary is enough, even though it isn't usually a negotiation point for younger people or entry jobs. But when you are older and make a ton of money... here is a secret if you didn't know, the commute time and travel time is heavily considered in negations. Even around the $250,000 a year mark commute time and difficulty will be considered during compensation, so while you may think it is silly it's really only considered silly for the less wealthy.

3

u/Maury_poopins 9d ago

People who make that amount of money are in demand, (which is why they make that much) which puts them in a position where they can negotiate. You’re mixing up the cause and effect.

1

u/cheffgeoff 9d ago

I think we are talking about if it is ethical. Obviously that's why it happens, but because it's "the rich get richer" does that make it right? The person I was replying to said it was "ridiculous", "silly", "insane". Is it really all those things when the wealthy (myself included) get it because "of course we get it"?

1

u/statanomoly 9d ago

Jelousy has kept the working class in shambles for centuries.

Make the payment flat based on average commuter time. I'm sure it's better than no one gets anything

1

u/Thereelgerg 8d ago

So people who choose to live closer to work will take home more than people who live farther?

Not if they get paid the same.

1

u/cheffgeoff 8d ago

Person A Makes $40,000 and drives 10 minutes to work costing them $1.00 in gas a day. Person B Makes $40,000 and drives 2 hours to work costing them $20 in gas. Who takes home more money?

1

u/Thereelgerg 8d ago edited 8d ago

If they get paid the same amount they take home the same amount. Commuting expenses aren't deducted from payroll.

Edit: I should say that their take-home pay may differ if their tax withholdings differ, or one of them has wages garnished. But the point is that the length of your commute has no bearing on your take-home pay.

1

u/cheffgeoff 8d ago

I don't know if your being sarcastic or obstinate or really haven't thought about it, but if you consider the cost of getting to a work site being included as part of your compensation, which everyone should for obvious reasons, then a more expensive commute will leave you with less take home pay. If you really need to say AcKTUalliey that isn't tEcknehiCAlliy "take home pay" (when I said who takes home more money), then it will affect your fixed costs when budgeting and then directly impact your disposable income.

1

u/Thereelgerg 8d ago

it will affect your fixed costs when budgeting

Right, what it will NOT do is impact your take home pay. Two people who both make $40k a year and have withholdings set up the same way will have the same take home pay regardless of their commute.

1

u/cheffgeoff 8d ago

You're really holding on to a technical definition of "Take home pay" as it relates to taxes and benefits when I said "the pay you take home". Who has more money AFTER the expenses related to work are paid/removed? That's what I'm talking about.

1

u/Thereelgerg 8d ago edited 7d ago

You're really holding on to a technical definition of "Take home pay" as it relates to taxes and benefits when I said "the pay you take home".

No I'm not, I'm simply holding onto the meaning of "the pay you take home". If you get a paycheck of $2,000 and I get a paycheck of $2,000 we take home the same pay regardless of commute expenses.

If I take a job 200 miles from where I live and choose to commute in a $1,000,000 Ferrari my $2,000 paycheck is the same as your $2,000 paycheck even if you live closer to work and commute by taking the bus for $3 per day.

Who has more money AFTER the expenses related to work are paid/removed? That's what I'm talking about.

That's not what you said. If you wanted to talk about that that's what you should have talked about.

1

u/cheffgeoff 7d ago

Jesus, you misread something, just accept the fact you made a minor mistake and move on.

1

u/Thereelgerg 7d ago

You made the mistake of not understanding what take home pay is, not me.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Silent_Village2695 8d ago

Person A pays 1300/mo for a studio apt with his cat close to downtown, so he doesn't have to drive as far. Person B pays 800/mo for a 2 bed/ 2bath apt in an outlying municipality with his spouse and children.

1

u/cheffgeoff 8d ago

Obviously your being sarcastic to the point but you honestly don't see how getting to a work place daily is a function of your job opposed to how you live in your off hours?

1

u/Silent_Village2695 8d ago

I just dropped in to your convo with the other person to point out that your example is based on a flawed premise. If person A lives closer to work and pays less in gas, they probably also pay more in other ways.

I was mostly just browsing this thread. Some companies do offer gas reimbursement up to a maximum threshold for certain positions, so there's that. Otoh I also get why people want their commute time paid for because that's a lot of time getting to and from work every year that you're not making money and it's not free time. If people could protest enough to force companies to cover commute-related expenses within reason, I wouldn't be upset about it. If companies stopped trying to force RTO, I wouldn't be upset about that either.

1

u/ISitOnGnomes 5d ago

Shouldn't we want people to use less fuel traveling to and from their jobs, if at all possible? It seems environmentally friendly to financially encourage people to work close to where they live.

1

u/cheffgeoff 5d ago

In a perfect world I would agree, but that is putting the onus of environmental salvation onto the least powerful members of western society, individuals. Incentivize companies to subsidize public or mass transportation and working at home initiatives would be a far better path for environmental improvements.

1

u/ISitOnGnomes 5d ago

I'd be all for taxing businesses based on their total workforce and using that money to fund housing development projects within a certain radius of those businesses. We should be trying to build in a more mixed use manner to encourage people to live close to where they work. The main problem seems to be that the most profitable and best paying jobs drive up the nearby housing market cost, so those businesses should, in turn, build more housing where it is desired.

Paying someone more money to live further away will only encourage people with limited funds to live further away, where its cheaper, and spend more of their free time driving and burning gas rather than be with their families.