Suze Orman

[barcreperie]

Originally Posted by Allisonfaye

But my point was just that these were a promotional rate so they had no right to up it, IMO.

Yes, I agree - if it was a promotional rate that was to be in effect for x number of months, then it should be in effect for x number of months!

An unrelated observation - I really don't like it when Suze tries to do theme shows based on something that's going on that's not finance related. Her last show where she had this Halloween thing going really detracted from the show. There was another awhile back, I think it was for the Superbowl - she had cheerleaders on and it was just so out of place that it looked depressing. I wish she'd stop doing that stuff. For Halloween, her orange jacket would've sufficed.

[esiders]

Originally Posted by shy*violet

Not necessarily... yesterday she approved a guy for a $35,000 engagement ring upgrade for his fiance. I think as long as you make enough monthly, have a 6-9 mo fully funded emergency fund, no debt, and enough in retirement she's say 'ok'

And as long as you are not 50+ years old. Two weeks ago, she denied everyone over 50 who wanted to spend money. Her rationale was they were too close to retirement to make big purchases (anything $5000+).

[barcreperie]

Originally Posted by esiders

And as long as you are not 50+ years old. Two weeks ago, she denied everyone over 50 who wanted to spend money. Her rationale was they were too close to retirement to make big purchases (anything $5000+).

Yeah, but I think that was because they had very little saved toward retirement. I'm amazed at the people who call in to Suze who have good monthly income, say $8-10 take-home pay, and have so little in savings/retirement. I'm guessing that they think as long as they don't go in debt for something, they can afford it, so live right up to their means with little savings.

[Allisonfaye]

Originally Posted by barcreperie

Yes, I agree - if it was a promotional rate that was to be in effect for x number of months, then it should be in effect for x number of months! An unrelated observation - I really don't like it when Suze tries to do theme shows based on something that's going on that's not finance related. Her last show where she had this Halloween thing going really detracted from the show. There was another awhile back, I think it was for the Superbowl - she had cheerleaders on and it was just so out of place that it looked depressing. I wish she'd stop doing that stuff. For Halloween, her orange jacket would've sufficed.

I agree with you 100%. I HATED those cheerleaders and I also found all the scripted references to ghosts and such annoying.

[Allisonfaye]

Originally Posted by barcreperie

Yeah, but I think that was because they had very little saved toward retirement. I'm amazed at the people who call in to Suze who have good monthly income, say $8-10 take-home pay, and have so little in savings/retirement. I'm guessing that they think as long as they don't go in debt for something, they can afford it, so live right up to their means with little savings.

Yeah, I was noticing that, too. I usually agree with her on those.

[Allisonfaye]

I felt kind of bad because the last time my mom came to visit, she was talking about getting a (new to her) used car..just because, she said her car is getting older. She said to me "It will just about wipe out my savings but I can't afford a car payment'. I was like, MOM! You can't afford it then. I think she was surprised. She owns her house but I don't think she has a ton in retirement. She is pretty frugal generally so I don't know why should would think to wipe out her savings buying a car.

[Allisonfaye]

The other thing she does that I find kind of annoying is when she tries to make the caller thing she is going to do one thing and then she does the other. Or on the How Am I Doing segment she tries to be all mysterious and make it a big surprise what grade she is going to give. All the drama just isn't necessary. The show could stand on its own merit.

[LeeMiller]

^^
I agree with that. The drama detracts from the show.

Does Suzie use some sort of formula for the how am I doing part? Like taking into account age, take home pay, etc, to determine retirement savings?

[LeeMiller]

Originally Posted by barcreperie

Yeah, but I think that was because they had very little saved toward retirement. I'm amazed at the people who call in to Suze who have good monthly income, say $8-10 take-home pay, and have so little in savings/retirement. I'm guessing that they think as long as they don't go in debt for something, they can afford it, so live right up to their means with little savings.

This is really true - I'm always surprised too - but looking at my co-workers many end up spending alot on housing and cars. My old boss used to say people live right up to the marginal dollar (the last dollar earned).

[Allisonfaye]

Originally Posted by LeeMiller

This is really true - I'm always surprised too - but looking at my co-workers many end up spending alot on housing and cars. My old boss used to say people live right up to the marginal dollar (the last dollar earned).

My dad used to say the same thing, you spend to the level of your income. This is why it drives me crazy when I hear people talk about wealthy people and say well, I don't feel sorry for them losing their house (or whatever) because they should have bought a cheaper house. No, they got a mortgage that was 30% of their income just like you did. You think you would make $1m a year and buy a $200k house but you wouldn't.

[barcreperie]

Originally Posted by Allisonfaye

My dad used to say the same thing, you spend to the level of your income. This is why it drives me crazy when I hear people talk about wealthy people and say well, I don't feel sorry for them losing their house (or whatever) because they should have bought a cheaper house. No, they got a mortgage that was 30% of their income just like you did. You think you would make $1m a year and buy a $200k house but you wouldn't.

Most of the people I know who'd be generally considered wealthy (worth a few million $) bought their homes early on and stayed there. They stretched it a bit in the beginning, but as their income increased, they didn't trade up to a bigger/better house. So while their house was a stretch in the beginning, it's now way under what their finances might indicate they'd own.

But this was 20-30 years ago, and folks got away with stretching their budget a bit to buy a house they could grow in to back then. If someone did that 3-4 years ago, they very well might be in trouble right now.

[Allisonfaye]

Originally Posted by barcreperie

Most of the people I know who'd be generally considered wealthy (worth a few million $) bought their homes early on and stayed there. They stretched it a bit in the beginning, but as their income increased, they didn't trade up to a bigger/better house. So while their house was a stretch in the beginning, it's now way under what their finances might indicate they'd own. But this was 20-30 years ago, and folks got away with stretching their budget a bit to buy a house they could grow in to back then. If someone did that 3-4 years ago, they very well might be in trouble right now.

Well, in a way, this is us. We bought our home in 2004, but contracted to build in 2003. We did stretch to buy it a bit and we assumed DH's income would go up. While it has gone up, we have had two years without bonuses due to hurricanes and the economy. But knock wood, we are still making it. (Although if DH hadn't had a few years of raises and a promotion under his belt, it would be hard). It is still harder since the bonus is about 40% of our income, but we just cut back. As far as trading up, the ONLY thing I want is a yard. We have a lovely house but we have no yard to speak of and I love being outside and want one for the kids. My husband could take it or leave it. But being stuck inside so much of the year, you want to be outside as much as possible when it is nice and it isn't always easy to drag the kids to a park.

[Allisonfaye]

I can't believe no one has commented about the elf spotting school. That woman was nuts and Suze acted like she was completely normal.

[Vegas Long Legs]

[QUOTE=barcreperie;13024281]Most of the people I know who'd be generally considered wealthy (worth a few million $) bought their homes early on and stayed there. They stretched it a bit in the beginning, but as their income increased, they didn't trade up to a bigger/better house. So while their house was a stretch in the beginning, it's now way under what their finances might indicate they'd own.
[QUOTE]

These people understand their home is not an investment. Home is a place to live, period. Its only been in the last 10 years people have gotten crazy with 'homes as an investment.' It is nice when your home goes up in value but history states homes increase barely 3% per year. Barely keeping up with inflation.

[barcreperie]

Originally Posted by Allisonfaye

I can't believe no one has commented about the elf spotting school. That woman was nuts and Suze acted like she was completely normal.

Yeah, that woman was pretty kooky, but I think Suze was getting across the point that she thought it was kooky. She'll usually do this right at the beginning of a "Can I Afford It" call, then get down to business as to whether the person can afford it.

When I was listening to that woman describe the elf thing, I was thinking "Yep, they're certainly is a sucker out there for everything".

Wasn't it something like $5k to go be taught how to find elves?