How to retire early... or simply survive

[SirRumpole]

This topic has certainly moved a bit since I kicked it off.
I opened the discussed on two different stories which explored how a frugal living style enabled some people to retire early and others ... just to survive.
I think there is a good discussio around how much money do we need to live well . The irony of a wealthy lifestyle is that in many cases the extra spending makes people more miserable or unhealthy.

Came across two "similar but different" stories today.

The first was an extract from a book on Living Frugally and how to retire (to an idyllic paradise) at 32.

The second was from a blog site on living frugally - just to stay alive. I wondered what ASF posters would make of the differing slants to the Living Frugally question ?

Some links might help.

Once people become used to the trappings of modern society it's hard to give them up. eg would we all go off grid and live without electricity or spend oodles making ourselves power self sufficient with solar, wind and batteries, and how "frugal" is that really once you add up the capital expenditure ?

 

[PZ99]

This topic has certainly moved a bit since I kicked it off.
I opened the discussed on two different stories which explored how a frugal living style enabled some people to retire early and others ... just to survive.
I think there is a good discussio around how much money do we need to live well . The irony of a wealthy lifestyle is that in many cases the extra spending makes people more miserable or unhealthy.

Came across two "similar but different" stories today.

The first was an extract from a book on Living Frugally and how to retire (to an idyllic paradise) at 32.

The second was from a blog site on living frugally - just to stay alive. I wondered what ASF posters would make of the differing slants to the Living Frugally question ?

On your last sentence.. living frugally is something I've done pretty much all my working life.
I had to. Even though I started with nothing I was determined not to pay rent so I bought this crap box in the Blue Mountains where it was cheap but it meant I had to travel a long way to work. When the interest rates shot up to 17% there were several times when I had to make a choice between filling up the car for the next week and skipping food or sleeping in the car and eating. That's about as crappy as it gets. Getting a second job was the only escape.

The point to the above is retiring early (which is what I'm doing) is possible, even today. There are many things people can go without if they really needed to. As to my first post in the thread I pay all my bills 12 months in advance and keep just $10k for myself which I struggle to spend. Everything else just goes into the retirement fund.

I have two guys at work that are in their 20's and want to retire early. I asked them what sacrifices they were making, then told them to double the list

 

[tech/a]

Sure is.

Meanwhile Sunday workers will get another cut to their penalty rates after next week which is opposed by all sides of parliament except the Govt that lobbied for it. Gotta love that empathy

So if I want to work without penalty why can’t I
If an employer is offered labour without penalty why can’t he accept it?

If you work 40 hrs a week and don’t wish to work more unless your paid a penalty
You should be able to.
If I’m an employer and think that my people are more productive than others 2hy can’t I pay them above award rates and penalty rates.

If I’m wanting to prove myself to an employer and become one of those special employees why can’t I work at a fair wage and choose not to work for penalty why can’t I?

 

[PZ99]

So if I want to work without penalty why can’t I
If an employer is offered labour without penalty why can’t he accept it?

If you work 40 hrs a week and don’t wish to work more unless your paid a penalty
You should be able to.
If I’m an employer and think that my people are more productive than others 2hy can’t I pay them above award rates and penalty rates.

If I’m wanting to prove myself to an employer and become one of those special employees why can’t I work at a fair wage and choose not to work for penalty why can’t I?

Because changing the rate penalises other workers who simply can't afford a further pay cut. They already copped it last year and will cop a more severe one this year.

Your choice to work for a lower rate is fine. But not if affects other people.

 

[SirRumpole]

So if I want to work without penalty why can’t I
If an employer is offered labour without penalty why can’t he accept it?

Because that would be a race to the bottom, and you wouldn't get any labour because they'd rather get the same money on the dole for nothing.

 

[basilio]

Some links might help.

Once people become used to the trappings of modern society it's hard to give them up. eg would we all go off grid and live without electricity or spend oodles making ourselves power self sufficient with solar, wind and batteries, and how "frugal" is that really once you add up the capital expenditure ?

Links were in the original post

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/mar/08/how-to-retire-early-frugal-spending
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/mar/08/how-to-retire-early-frugal-spending

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/aug/08/frugal-bloggers-budget-personal-finance-poverty

 

[tech/a]

Because changing the rate penalises other workers who simply can't afford a further pay cut. They already copped it last year and will cop a more severe one this year.

Your choice to work for a lower rate is fine. But not if affects other people.

So affecting others is the premise
So I can’t discount goods as that could be putting competitors out of Business
Or I couldn’t work as a volunteer because I’m taking a job that should be paid.
Or I’m more desperate to get THAT job than anyone else

I was a pump jockey Ist week no pay
Ist month made more in commission from selling product,tyres,services etc than my wage.
Did A years apprenticeship as a mechanic. Made my own wage through worth to employer.

Because that would be a race to the bottom, and you wouldn't get any labour because they'd rather get the same money on the dole for nothing.

Ha ha
You presume everyone would accept a dole payment if it was at the average wage.
People want a sense of worth and most get that from their work
Most hate boredom most release that from work
Most want social integration and they get that from work.
Most want to better their lives and those of their family that too from work.

I’ve had guys off work due to long term illness
The one thing they beg me is to get them back to work
Even when 5hey are being paid a full wage !

 

[Humid]

So if I want to work without penalty why can’t I
If an employer is offered labour without penalty why can’t he accept it?

If you work 40 hrs a week and don’t wish to work more unless your paid a penalty
You should be able to.
If I’m an employer and think that my people are more productive than others 2hy can’t I pay them above award rates and penalty rates.

If I’m wanting to prove myself to an employer and become one of those special employees why can’t I work at a fair wage and choose not to work for penalty why can’t I?

I think most would be happy if they could get 40 hours a week.
It’s the lack of hours penalties make up for.

 

[PZ99]

So affecting others is the premise
So I can’t discount goods as that could be putting competitors out of business
Or I couldn’t work as a volunteer because I’m taking a job that should be paid.
Or I’m more desperate to get THAT job than anyone else

I was a pump jockey Ist week no pay
Ist month made more in commission from selling product,tyres,services etc than my wage.
Did A years apprenticeship as a mechanic. Made my own wage through worth to employer.

What's your point? I was a flaggie at Amaroo Park for no pay when Allan Moffatt won a touring car race in a Holden Torana of all things.

Penalties are a compensation for people who work on what is communally accepted as a day off.

Most large discount retailers are open on Sundays + pay penalties and still putting competitors out of business. Are you saying discount retailers should now have an even bigger advantage from paying lower penalties?

If you want to work as a volunteer that's fine. What's so special about doing it on Sunday?

You appear to be saying if you work as a volunteer then everyone else should do it too.

How do they pay their rent?

 

[PZ99]

Ha ha
You presume everyone would accept a dole payment if it was at the average wage.
People want a sense of worth and most get that from their work
Most hate boredom most release that from work
Most want social integration and they get that from work.
Most want to better their lives and those of their family that too from work.

I’ve had guys off work due to long term illness
The one thing they beg me is to get them back to work
Even when 5hey are being paid a full wage !

Most people don't want to work weekends.
Most people believe they should get a higher pay rate for working on weekends.
Most people believe penalties add to their sense of worth.
Most people don't agree with cutting penalties.

 

[SirRumpole]

Most people don't want to work weekends.
Most people believe they should get a higher pay rate for working on weekends.
Most people believe penalties add to their sense of worth.
Most people don't agree with cutting penalties.

I would image that most of the recipients of penalty rates are casuals or part timers for whom the extra rates make up for less security and less hours of work.

 

[PZ99]

I would image that most of the recipients of penalty rates are casuals or part timers for whom the extra rates make up for less security and less hours of work.

That's more the job of casual loading - a higher dollar rate, no benefits, no regular work.

In the case of a large business weekend workers are usually on a permanent roster such as a Tuesday to Saturday or a Sunday to Thursday. You see a lot of that in the retail industry because shops are open 7 days a week. That also then extends to workers in the supply chain as well.

But it's the retail workers that are being targeted here. And it's under the false logic that lowering the Sunday rate will somehow create extra employment. It won't.

What will happen is a weekend retail worker will simply earn less money every week for doing the same work and the business will enjoy extra profits which are then dispersed as director profits or dividends for shareholders.

That's the real game that's being played here and it's the business community that have been lobbying (and donating to) the Liberal Party to get it done. They've been doing it since 1991. It was part of the fightback package and it remains on their platform today. That's why they hit us with workchoices in the first place.

Taking money off workers has always been part of the Liberal DNA.

 

[tech/a]

What's your point? I was a flaggie at Amaroo Park for no pay when Allan Moffatt won a touring car race in a Holden Torana of all things.

Penalties are a compensation for people who work on what is communally accepted as a day off.

Ok if they work the other 40 hrs.
The penalty is an enticement. But if it was a flat rate across the board then people could
(1) Say no
OR
(2) Be enticed by employers who could
(a) Afford it
(b) Pass it on to their clients so they could afford it.
EG add a gratuity to weekend work on the food industry.
or add a weekend surcharge of X% capped at $x if in other industries.

Most large discount retailers are open on Sundays + pay penalties and still putting competitors out of business. Are you saying discount retailers should now have an even bigger advantage from paying lower penalties?

Yes. They may fit in (a) or (b). But there may also be many smaller Cafe's, Fashion stores, Shoe shops
the list is endless who would love to take the opportunity to open on peak shopping times but cant afford to due to having to pay staff higher rates while their clients aren't willing to pay higher prices to cover them. See some alternate suggestions above

If you want to work as a volunteer that's fine. What's so special about doing it on Sunday?

Nothing.

You appear to be saying if you work as a volunteer then everyone else should do it too.

How do they pay their rent?

No but just as you have an argument there are other counter arguments on the opposite side to the 'Accepted view"
Everyone on each side has an agenda.
That's why penalty rates are looking at being repealed.--- for the other side of the argument.

Most people don't want to work weekends.
Most people believe they should get a higher pay rate for working on weekends.
Most people believe penalties add to their sense of worth.
Most people don't agree with cutting penalties.

(1) Those that want more than a 40 hrs of pay will and do as that's all they can offer is their time.
(2) If they are sacrificing time and don't want the money
(3) As does higher pay --period and a secure job.
(4) Most people don't want any reduction in anything they already have---even if there is valid argument as to how it will help others if they do.--US GUN LAWS.

I would image that most of the recipients of penalty rates are casuals or part timers for whom the extra rates make up for less security and less hours of work.

Could be true for unskilled.

 

[PZ99]

Ok if they work the other 40 hrs.
The penalty is an enticement. But if it was a flat rate across the board then people could
(1) Say no

No they can't. An employer has every right to re-roster a full time employee onto weekend work as part of their normal roster. If they force you to do it, and you say no, you have no job.

OR
(2) Be enticed by employers who could
(a) Afford it
(b) Pass it on to their clients so they could afford it.
EG add a gratuity to weekend work on the food industry.
or add a weekend surcharge of X% capped at $x if in other industries.

They could do all of the above and some do. Which is why there's no need to change the system.

There's one other thing they could do - they could simply put their employees on a salary that has no penalty rates at all. So again, there's no need to change the laws

Yes. They may fit in (a) or (b). But there may also be many smaller Cafe's, Fashion stores, Shoe shops
the list is endless who would love to take the opportunity to open on peak shopping times but cant afford to due to having to pay staff higher rates while their clients aren't willing to pay higher prices to cover them. See some alternate suggestions above

See my response above. They have that very opportunity now. Put their salaried workers on a weekend roster. That's what they do at the Woolies petrol shops.

No but just as you have an argument there are other counter arguments on the opposite side to the 'Accepted view"
Everyone on each side has an agenda.
That's why penalty rates are looking at being repealed.--- for the other side of the argument.

The other side of the argument needs to have a case that stacks up to community expectations. The vast majority can see that cutting rates is unfair which is one reason why this Govt will probably lose the next election. Even the vast majority of the senate can see it's unfair. When you have people like Pauline Hanson, Hinch, Katter saying it's unfair to cut rates you know the case for doing it is fundamentally flawed.

(1) Those that want more than a 40 hrs of pay will and do as that's all they can offer is their time.
(2) If they are sacrificing time and don't want the money
(3) As does higher pay --period and a secure job.
(4) Most people don't want any reduction in anything they already have---even if there is valid argument as to how it will help others if they do.--US GUN LAWS.

If someone is doing more than 40 hrs they get paid an overtime rate. That has nothing to do with Sunday penalty rates.

They are already sacrificing time and not getting money. Have you worked in a shop? Most people stay behind after closing time to clean the shop and count the till etc: and they don't usually get paid for that - I never did.

Higher pay will never happen for as long as we have a Govt running the country with a grudge against workers. NSW is running budget surpluses yet they still refuse to pay anything higher than 2.5% P/A for public servants. That's BS in any language.

Most people don't want any reduction in their pay quite simply because they have bills to pay and those bills are going up. It's not as if people can cop it because they have a truckload of money. They don't. Retail workers are among the lowest paid workers in the country already and this cutting rates is just another kick in the guts.

 

[tech/a]

Taking money off workers has always been part of the Liberal DNA.

No they can't. An employer has every right to re-roster a full time employee onto weekend work as part of their normal roster. If they force you to do it, and you say no, you have no job.

This is something that could be at time of employment---an agreement.

They could do all of the above and some do. Which is why there's no need to change the system.

There's one other thing they could do - they could simply put their employees on a salary that has no penalty rates at all. So again, there's no need to change the laws

Salary is one option but only helpful if people are full time.
If Casual or part time there is no option for employers with regard to Penalties.

See my response above. They have that very opportunity now. Put their salaried workers on a weekend roster. That's what they do at the Woolies petrol shops.

In most cases they get time in lieu of penalties so still a cost.
My supervisors on salary wont work weekends with out penalties. I wouldn't either if I was sacrificing my weekend but our employers pay the extra. But if I need a labourer who wants to work un skilled on a weekend I have to pay. The café isn't in the same position as we are.

The other side of the argument needs to have a case that stacks up to community expectations. The vast majority can see that cutting rates is unfair which is one reason why this Govt will probably lose the next election. Even the vast majority of the senate can see it's unfair. When you have people like Pauline Hanson, Hinch, Katter saying it's unfair to cut rates you know the case for doing it is fundamentally flawed.

Clear indictment.

If someone is doing more than 40 hrs they get paid an overtime rate. That has nothing to do with Sunday penalty rates.

They are already sacrificing time and not getting money. Have you worked in a shop? Most people stay behind after closing time to clean the shop and count the till etc: and they don't usually get paid for that - I never did.

It does if your working a Sunday.
Yes I have and I was paid for every hour worked.

Higher pay will never happen for as long as we have a Govt running the country with a grudge against workers. NSW is running budget surpluses yet they still refuse to pay anything higher than 2.5% P/A for public servants. That's BS in any language.

Not up with NSW politics

Most people don't want any reduction in their pay quite simply because they have bills to pay and those bills are going up. It's not as if people can cop it because they have a truckload of money. They don't. Retail workers are among the lowest paid workers in the country already and this cutting rates is just another kick in the guts.

Survival or over indulgence---.
If they can only get weekend work then they should find more hrs outside of weekends.
retail is stuffed and will remain stuffed, has little to do with pay rates.

 

[PZ99]

This is something that could be at time of employment---an agreement.

Salary is one option but only helpful if people are full time.
If Casual or part time there is no option for employers with regard to Penalties.

The option is you just don't put casuals or part timers on weekends. If a small business with just casuals doesn't have the confidence to employ full timers then they need to look at whether it's worth trading on Sunday or not. Banks don't, Schools don't, the ASX doesn't. It's not compulsory.

A coffee shop owner needs to explain why retail workers who don't work for that business should cop a pay cut so he can sell coffee on Sundays. Good luck with that.

In most cases they get time in lieu of penalties so still a cost.

Not in my circle of friends. They get paid the flat rate and they work every weekend.
No extra benefits.

My supervisors on salary wont work weekends with out penalties. I wouldn't either if I was sacrificing my weekend

Neither would I. You and your supervisors obviously value your weekends. So do the vast majority of workers including me. If I'm sacrificing my weekend to work I expect compensation.

but our employers pay the extra. But if I need a labourer who wants to work un skilled on a weekend I have to pay.

Damn straight. Your labourer probably values their weekend as much as you do.

The café isn't in the same position as we are.

The competent café owner would have started that business knowing full well that Sundays attract penalties. If they can make more money for the business by pulling an employee away from their family on a Sunday then it's fair, in the eyes of most, that they should be adequately compensated.

Clear indictment.

It's all on the record.

It does if your working a Sunday.
Yes I have and I was paid for every hour worked.

I wasn't. We traded from 10am to 4pm. But I was there from 9 to 5pm and didn't get paid. I had to be there to set up the shop and close it down again.

 

[tech/a]

The option is you just don't put casuals or part timers on weekends. If a small business with just casuals doesn't have the confidence to employ full timers then they need to look at whether it's worth trading on Sunday or not. Banks don't, Schools don't, the ASX doesn't. It's not compulsory.

A coffee shop owner needs to explain why retail workers who don't work for that business should cop a pay cut so he can sell coffee on Sundays. Good luck with that.

I don't have a problem with this if he can charge more to cover the expense.

Not in my circle of friends. They get paid the flat rate and they work every weekend.
No extra benefits.

Other than a salary which covers the weekend
There would be an amount included.
If they didn't work a weekend--ever Ill bet the salary would be less.

Neither would I. You and your supervisors obviously value your weekends. So do the vast majority of workers including me. If I'm sacrificing my weekend to work I expect compensation.

But if I don't have any job and want some money and am prepared to work weekends and have every other day off Id be happy to take a job without penalty rates.

Damn straight. Your labourer probably values their weekend as much as you do.

See above.

The competent café owner would have started that business knowing full well that Sundays attract penalties. If they can make more money for the business by pulling an employee away from their family on a Sunday then it's fair, in the eyes of most, that they should be adequately compensated.

In certain circumstances as we have discussed.
But in others an opportunity to survive and even thrive if there are no penalty rates.

It's all on the record.

Nutters.

I wasn't. We traded from 10am to 4pm. But I was there from 9 to 5pm and didn't get paid. I had to be there to set up the shop and close it down again.

Did you leave because of this?
Rare these days perhaps some could learn by this.

My guys wont even stay back to clean their utes/trucks and excavators I supply for their work without being paid---through the week!!!

 

[PZ99]

I don't have a problem with this if he can charge more to cover the expense.

Other than a salary which covers the weekend
There would be an amount included.
If they didn't work a weekend--ever Ill bet the salary would be less.

Of course. They would be selling their weekend for a higher salary. Another reason the system should stay as is.

But if I don't have any job and want some money and am prepared to work weekends and have every other day off Id be happy to take a job without penalty rates.

Which brings me back to my first point. Other workers shouldn't be affected by your desire to work without penalty rates.

In certain circumstances as we have discussed.
But in others an opportunity to survive and even thrive if there are no penalty rates.

Most people starting a small business fail within two years. That will never change.
Starting a small business isn't for people who don't know what they're doing. If they can't survive they should work for someone who can. Meanwhile other workers can continue paying their rent because.. it's not their problem.

Nutters.

They're all nutters

Did you leave because of this?
Rare these days perhaps some could learn by this.

My guys wont even stay back to clean their utes/trucks and excavators I supply for their work without being paid---through the week!!!

Well I did it out of common sense. Having the shop ready for business before it opened was a sure way to make more money on the day. Your situation would be different though. Are they union members?

 

[tech/a]

No they don't want to be!

 

[PZ99]

Fairy nuff