Okay, so. We’re being totally irresponsible, but in a responsible way.
Right now, we’re doing pretty okay money-wise. We’re fine on bills, I’m racking up overtime, Meghan’s employed now, etc. Additionally, we’re still able to pay bills just on my paycheck, so Meghan’s money has been extra. What we’ve been trying to do is be responsible with it. We saved the necessary money for her upcoming eye exam (we don’t have insurance, so an eye exam plus contact exam at the IU optometry center is nearly $300), and we were going to start saving up for a new apartment.
But you know what? My hella awesome pay raise should be on us by the end of the year, and Meghan will still be getting paid like $1.50 an hour more than I’m currently making and will probably be officially at full time. So, we’re gonna be okay on the apartment, on the car savings, and on the Disney cruise savings, and on the student loan payments. We’re gonna be fine if we don’t save every penny right now.
So, we’re gonna buy new iPad Minis in about three weeks. :)
That’s how much we’ve saved for this wedding, including what we paid for her dress (for which her parents are going to pay us back).
We’ve done this as poor college students with crappy jobs that give us less than 10 hours per week.
EDIT: Just as a note, this is just how much we’ve saved for the wedding itself. It doesn’t include the $500 we also saved for our starter emergency fund.
My issues with this debt deal
(taken from a long comment I put on a friend’s Facebook post)
Ooh! Ooh! Do I get to say my problems with it? I mean, it hasn’t actually passed through either house yet and as such isn’t a done deal, but I’ve still got complaints.
A.) We’ve still got MASSIVE deficit spending even with this deal. You can’t keep spending more than you make and expect to come out on top. Basic budget rule right there — don’t spend more than you make.
B.) Related to the first one, but still separate. While this deal *does* require a congressional vote on a balanced budget amendment,
nothing very little hinges on it (unlike in Boehner’s plan). In Boehner’s plan, the second debt limit increase hinged on the passage of that amendment. This deal has nothing something like that, and one can simply take it or leave it. With how terrified most democrats (and many republicans) are of actually having a balanced budget (“not our entitlement programs or defense!”), there’s no way little chance it’ll pass. EDIT: Lol, j/k. Apparently, something *does* hinge on the balanced budget amendment. The debt ceiling can be increased by $1.2 trillion regardless of passage of that amendment, but if the amendment *does* pass, it can go up to $1.5 trillion. The relevant parts were correct all snarky-style.
C.) It’s too small. This “cut x-amount *over ten years*” crap is just pointless. Firstly, the current congress has no control over the future congress without the passage of an amendment; laws are too easily changed and recommendations are too easily ignored. Secondly, our current debt is $14.3 trillion, and we think cutting less than $3 trillion in *projected* spending (not even real spending, but what we think we might spend) over a decade is going to work? No. It’s just way too small. It will never get the job done.
I don’t want a default, so part of me is happy that a deal has been struck (although there is now worry it won’t pass both houses as both parties have complaints about it), but another part of me thinks that a default is almost necessary, that we won’t come out of this idiotic mindset until we hit rock bottom. You hear that about drug addicts a lot. Well, I think we’re addicted to spending. Massive cuts are going to be necessary in order to get us out of debt, and that starts with NOT having any deficit spending. You can’t spend 175% of your annual income and get out of debt. That’s equivalent to a family making $60,000 a year and spending $105,000 a year. It just doesn’t make sense, and it just doesn’t work. The size of the cuts necessary will *suck* for everyone in the short term, but they’re necessary for the long term.