Today is more of a rave than a rant. I spent yesterday watching all the webisodes of The Guild. How did I not hear of this earlier? Of course, I always thought a show about gamers would be sort of boring. I mean, how exciting is it to watch people sit at their computers, play games and talk to people. But then, the Big Bang Theory is evidence that shows about nerds (who game) can be successful, so anything is possible.
Now the Guild is a little different from "typical" gamers, imo. It is written by a gamer (a female one to boot!), so it has the lifestyle and terminology pretty much down. But its about a group of local gamers, who can meet and interact in person. That's not too typical. Certainly in my own experience, members of one's guild run across the country and sometimes even across the world (hello to my hubby from France, whom I met playing EQ). Also, most of the time, the gamers rarely, if ever, meet other players. I've met some of the people in my guilds, we actually planned a vacation to New Orleans for Mardi Gras with a bunch of them (and yes, at first we did call each other by our character names, rather than our real names). That was a real blast! But I've never met most of my good guildy friends.
But like The Guild, the majority of my social interactions (at least several years ago) was through my on line guild friends. And they ran the gauntlet of power gamers, flirts, rules lawyers, auction studs, casual players, 'goody goods', role players, etc. My life a few years ago, was pretty much rushing home from work to log on and spending the rest of the evening and most of the weekends playing. We used to eat while gaming, using quick raid breaks to throw clothes in the laundry or nuke food. I know a lot of my guild buddies skipped classes, called in sick to work and spent the vast majority of their time on line. I was never quite that bad, but I will admit that when I had my first child, it was challenging to play and breastfeed at the same time.
Our life revolved around playing the game for several years, doing raids with our guild, completing epic quests, leveling our characters. When my husband was in France for four months waiting for his visa to be approved, during my first winter in Philly, I don't know what I would have done if I hadn't been able to speak with my guild mates. I only knew a couple of people in Philly (also gamers, but neither were playing much at that time), so having the social interactions with my guildmates through that long cold dark time really kept me from being incredibly lonely.
We had the best guild in EQ, Legions of Darkness. It was one of the top guilds on the Innoruuk server and in the game. It was great being a part of great group of players, who knew how to play and were dedicated to the game. Even now, many years later, we're still in touch with people with whom we played. We continue to play other games, WoW, EQ2, Vanguard. Even those that don't play as much are my Facebook friends, so we can still keep in touch.
We haven't played much recently, most of our gamer friends have stopped playing for various reasons, and some like one game better while other friends like different games. Breaks always seem to happen when hubby and I go on an extended family visiting vacation. At the moment, we haven't played our on-line games in nearly four months, which is a pretty long time for us. Maybe after our Christmas vacation, we'll contact some of friends and play again. I hear both EQ2 and WoW have expansions out or coming out that we haven't tried yet.
For anyone that has played MMORPG and been in a guild, The Guild webisodes are a little microcosm of that life. They are pretty spot on with the types of people that play (some exaggerations of course) and how gamers react with each other. The three seasons (plus extras - the Christmas ones are great) take a few hours to watch, even though the episodes are like six minutes apiece (12 episodes per season). Definitely brings back memories.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Baby Boomers are Luddites
I read this comment on a legal blog I visit from time to time, Above the Law. The blog is mostly about "big law" firms in NYC, but it has articles that have relevancy to me as well, and its always a good idea to keep informed about one's profession in the "big markets."
So this comment is about how baby boomers are, for the most part, quite computer illerate. They figured out how to program the VCR, but aren't quite up to speed when using a computer, or maneuvering about most of todays top tech (ipods, texting, twittering, etc.) I have to agree, at least in general, but mostly for older boomers. Granted there are some exceptions, exceptionally bright people who have learned to use computers, or those that were educated in math, science, engineering. But in my line of work, I'd say probably 50% of those over 45 and 75% of those over 50 are barely able to respond to an email, let alone how to use MS Word.
Of course, given I was born in 1964, supposedly I'm "technically" part of the baby boomer generation. I usually take great umbrage to that designation, because I feel I have virtually nothing in common with boomers, especially those 15-20 years older than me. Hello, I didn't get to take advantage of cheap housing, little to no student loans, and career development. Instead, I've been stuck with higher taxes, higher housing and education costs, funding my own retirement from the git go (while trying to afford housing, taxes and student loans), and I'm a bit stymied in career development because most boomers won't let go.
The one thing I always felt I had a bit of an advantage is in my computer literacy. I got a head start because my dad worked for Xerox, so we actually had a computer at home since I was in high school. In college, I was using a Xerox memory writer with discs, a very very early version of a word processing program on a PC. It was huge help in law school, I was nearly the only person that would type up my class notes for studying. I actually spent most of my time on law review helping other students edit and format their articles. I've not gone without my own home computer since probably 1992 (no sharing for me, hubby has his own).
Now I definitely am not as 'up to speed' on some things, I'm a pretty slow texter (damn buttons are too small), I don't really care to read tweets 50 times a day and I haven't yet downloaded music to an mp3 player (I want to, its just a matter of finding the time to download my hundreds of CDs into a player and finding earbuds that don't fall out of my ears). But maneuvering around a computer is something I am pretty good at, and this is actually where I've had some issues at work.
For the first time ever in my career, I have a secretary all to myself. I'm the only attorney she works for (in general at least, she helps out others frequently). Previously, I've always had to share a secretary, and at least partly due to having to wait for my work to get done, and my typing speed, I've found that its probably 3-4 times as fast for me to type something up, letters, briefs, memos, than it is for me to dictate it, wait for my secretary (who types slower than me) to type it up, revise the letter and correct all her errors, have her fix all her errors, proof read the document again and fix other errors, have her fix more errors and then finalize the document. Instead, I can create the document as I think of it, revise it as I go, run a spell check, proof read one time, then give it to her to put in "final form."
Granted, some things are easier to dictate (summarizing depositions, transcripts and documents, for example). But that's probably no more than 1/5 of my job. Maybe its because I'm used to seeing my thoughts instantenously on the computer screen, but when I dictate, especially a long letter or memo, I've sometimes forgotten what I've said before. If I'm typing it, I can instantly curser up screen to see what I wrote, but with a dictaphone, I either have to let it go and revise the letter later or rewind the tape and listen to the whole thing. Either way is more time consuming. And lets not get into the instances where I've dictated almost an entire tape side only to have the tape break and now I have to redo the whole damn thing.
So even with my own secretary, I do a lot of my own work. I give my secretary things to do, but she still has more down time than most of the other secretaries. My boss tells me I have to dictate more. Grrrr, I hate it. I am significantly more productive when I do my own typing. I have limited time in the office due to child care issues, so I try to get as much done at the office as I possibly can. So its annoying to have to redo and redo and recorrect a report or brief or memo three, four and five times. I end up taking a lot of correction work home to review after the kids are in bed, but this annoys me because I like having what little free time I get at home available to me to catch up on tv shows, or watch a movie. Spelling errors I can understand, but it does annoy me to see errors that doing a little checking in the case file or looking something up online would solve (like getting an address, or knowing how to spell 'ischial', or spelling a party's name wrong).
Why does my boss want me to dictate? Because he does and it keeps secretaries busy. He dictates everything, including his time entries. Maybe if my secretary didn't make as many errors as she does, or would take a little initiative to find out information that's in the case file or easily found online without me having to spoon feed it to her, I wouldn't mind as much, but I still find it easier for me to just type things myself. I've tried to compromise, dictate some time, email her things to do, take work home to correct errors or make revisions, but its annoying. Frankly, if I didn't like my secretary as much as I do, I would have pushed to just share one a long time ago, but I like her a lot as a person, I get along with her better than most of the rest, so I want her to stay. I just wish she'd maybe care a bit more about her job and become a real legal assistant so I could give her subtantive work to do that would really help me. Summarize depositions, documents, prepare draft answers to discovery, stuff I could just review and add to, without having to do the whole thing myself. That would be useful.
In the meantime, I have to deal with my luddite boss, use the stupid dictaphone and teach my secretary how to google.
So this comment is about how baby boomers are, for the most part, quite computer illerate. They figured out how to program the VCR, but aren't quite up to speed when using a computer, or maneuvering about most of todays top tech (ipods, texting, twittering, etc.) I have to agree, at least in general, but mostly for older boomers. Granted there are some exceptions, exceptionally bright people who have learned to use computers, or those that were educated in math, science, engineering. But in my line of work, I'd say probably 50% of those over 45 and 75% of those over 50 are barely able to respond to an email, let alone how to use MS Word.
Of course, given I was born in 1964, supposedly I'm "technically" part of the baby boomer generation. I usually take great umbrage to that designation, because I feel I have virtually nothing in common with boomers, especially those 15-20 years older than me. Hello, I didn't get to take advantage of cheap housing, little to no student loans, and career development. Instead, I've been stuck with higher taxes, higher housing and education costs, funding my own retirement from the git go (while trying to afford housing, taxes and student loans), and I'm a bit stymied in career development because most boomers won't let go.
The one thing I always felt I had a bit of an advantage is in my computer literacy. I got a head start because my dad worked for Xerox, so we actually had a computer at home since I was in high school. In college, I was using a Xerox memory writer with discs, a very very early version of a word processing program on a PC. It was huge help in law school, I was nearly the only person that would type up my class notes for studying. I actually spent most of my time on law review helping other students edit and format their articles. I've not gone without my own home computer since probably 1992 (no sharing for me, hubby has his own).
Now I definitely am not as 'up to speed' on some things, I'm a pretty slow texter (damn buttons are too small), I don't really care to read tweets 50 times a day and I haven't yet downloaded music to an mp3 player (I want to, its just a matter of finding the time to download my hundreds of CDs into a player and finding earbuds that don't fall out of my ears). But maneuvering around a computer is something I am pretty good at, and this is actually where I've had some issues at work.
For the first time ever in my career, I have a secretary all to myself. I'm the only attorney she works for (in general at least, she helps out others frequently). Previously, I've always had to share a secretary, and at least partly due to having to wait for my work to get done, and my typing speed, I've found that its probably 3-4 times as fast for me to type something up, letters, briefs, memos, than it is for me to dictate it, wait for my secretary (who types slower than me) to type it up, revise the letter and correct all her errors, have her fix all her errors, proof read the document again and fix other errors, have her fix more errors and then finalize the document. Instead, I can create the document as I think of it, revise it as I go, run a spell check, proof read one time, then give it to her to put in "final form."
Granted, some things are easier to dictate (summarizing depositions, transcripts and documents, for example). But that's probably no more than 1/5 of my job. Maybe its because I'm used to seeing my thoughts instantenously on the computer screen, but when I dictate, especially a long letter or memo, I've sometimes forgotten what I've said before. If I'm typing it, I can instantly curser up screen to see what I wrote, but with a dictaphone, I either have to let it go and revise the letter later or rewind the tape and listen to the whole thing. Either way is more time consuming. And lets not get into the instances where I've dictated almost an entire tape side only to have the tape break and now I have to redo the whole damn thing.
So even with my own secretary, I do a lot of my own work. I give my secretary things to do, but she still has more down time than most of the other secretaries. My boss tells me I have to dictate more. Grrrr, I hate it. I am significantly more productive when I do my own typing. I have limited time in the office due to child care issues, so I try to get as much done at the office as I possibly can. So its annoying to have to redo and redo and recorrect a report or brief or memo three, four and five times. I end up taking a lot of correction work home to review after the kids are in bed, but this annoys me because I like having what little free time I get at home available to me to catch up on tv shows, or watch a movie. Spelling errors I can understand, but it does annoy me to see errors that doing a little checking in the case file or looking something up online would solve (like getting an address, or knowing how to spell 'ischial', or spelling a party's name wrong).
Why does my boss want me to dictate? Because he does and it keeps secretaries busy. He dictates everything, including his time entries. Maybe if my secretary didn't make as many errors as she does, or would take a little initiative to find out information that's in the case file or easily found online without me having to spoon feed it to her, I wouldn't mind as much, but I still find it easier for me to just type things myself. I've tried to compromise, dictate some time, email her things to do, take work home to correct errors or make revisions, but its annoying. Frankly, if I didn't like my secretary as much as I do, I would have pushed to just share one a long time ago, but I like her a lot as a person, I get along with her better than most of the rest, so I want her to stay. I just wish she'd maybe care a bit more about her job and become a real legal assistant so I could give her subtantive work to do that would really help me. Summarize depositions, documents, prepare draft answers to discovery, stuff I could just review and add to, without having to do the whole thing myself. That would be useful.
In the meantime, I have to deal with my luddite boss, use the stupid dictaphone and teach my secretary how to google.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Why Men Shouldn't Shop
Now I know why men don't shop and why it should stay that way. Besides the fact that they usually don't like it, too many people, having to wait around for sales people or in line at the register, trying to make sense of the sales and/or prices, they just don't pay attention and they suck at comparison shopping. Even when its on-line, at home, with all the time in the world and no pushing and shoving, apparently they can't be bothered to google something and see if someone else is selling the same thing for less.
We're home this weekend buying a Christmas gift for our daughter, on behalf of my french in-laws (the item wasn't available in France). We're buying a Leapster 2 and a bunch of games/accessories. My husband goes to the Leap Frog website to buy the item. He tells me that the console is $50.00, but more in pink and the games are $25 each, plus shipping of like $20. I say wait, lets check Amazon.com. Sure enough, I find the same item and the games for less money and the shipping is $8 for everything.
Not more than an hour or two later, he comes to me again about a Christmas gift for his brother. I say sure, get the items. He then tells me after placing the order that the cost is more more because the shipping is $14. Excuse me? $14? For what we're getting? Well, that's what the manfacturer's website charges. Did you check Amazon.com? Uh, no. Sigh. Sure enough, Amazon has the same items, a few dollars less, for FREE SHIPPING. You think he paid attention with Leap Frog, yes? Nope.
That's why men shouldn't shop. They just don't pay attention. We won't get into the fact that I can't send him to the grocery store for milk unless I give him a photograph of exactly what to buy.
We're home this weekend buying a Christmas gift for our daughter, on behalf of my french in-laws (the item wasn't available in France). We're buying a Leapster 2 and a bunch of games/accessories. My husband goes to the Leap Frog website to buy the item. He tells me that the console is $50.00, but more in pink and the games are $25 each, plus shipping of like $20. I say wait, lets check Amazon.com. Sure enough, I find the same item and the games for less money and the shipping is $8 for everything.
Not more than an hour or two later, he comes to me again about a Christmas gift for his brother. I say sure, get the items. He then tells me after placing the order that the cost is more more because the shipping is $14. Excuse me? $14? For what we're getting? Well, that's what the manfacturer's website charges. Did you check Amazon.com? Uh, no. Sigh. Sure enough, Amazon has the same items, a few dollars less, for FREE SHIPPING. You think he paid attention with Leap Frog, yes? Nope.
That's why men shouldn't shop. They just don't pay attention. We won't get into the fact that I can't send him to the grocery store for milk unless I give him a photograph of exactly what to buy.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
More Stupid Credit
I have to wonder sometimes how some credit companies stay in business. It has to be stupid people. Case in point.
I got a call from Wells Fargo, with whom we have our mortgage and a couple of credit cards. One we got when we got the mortgage (which pays us back 1% automatically to the principal of our mortgage every time we use it), and another we got when we bought some furniture from Raymore and Flanagan when we bought the house and took advantage of one of those 0% interest for 3 years pay-off plans. The furniture will be payed off next month, so I guess WF is looking to keep our business (even though we didn't pay any interest).
WF contacts us to ask if we have some high interest credit cards we'd like to consolidate and pay on a "fixed rate" plan, using either equity in the house or on our cars. We say sure, we'll check it out. They already have the mortgage info, so I send them info on our 2005 Ford minivan (which we are paying on at 7%) and three credit cards with balances and interest rates of about 15%. I have a few other cards with balances, but all those are 3-5% interest, and I didn't think I'd see better than that. I wasn't expecting miracles, but if I could pay down the 15% balance at 9% I figure I could save a few bucks and every little bit counts these days.
Naturally, WF can't do this over the phone with us, we have to visit them at our office, which requires taking time off work. We go and turns out the only thing they can offer (because the real estate market is still too 'dicey') is to buy out our current car loan, plus give us a whopping $1,300 extra (and we wouldn't have to pay the Nov. car payment), but the loan would now be at 16%.
Excuse me, 16%? Do you think I'm stupid? They want me to exchange my 7% car loan with about 3 1/2 years to pay for a 16% loan just to get $1,300? Why possible good could that do me, since even the credit card I could pay off with that amount is at 15%? I was so pissed it took all my willpower not to totally go off this loan agent.
Talk about a complete waste of time. I mean they knew the interest rate of the credit card I wanted to pay off, I faxed it to them. If there was no way they could even beat that rate, why on earth would they think I'd even be remotely interested? Just to get a "fix payment plan"? Yeah, no thanks, I can put myself on a "fixed payment plan" and pay off both the car and the credit card quicker and at less cost.
I suppose for some people, this might work for them, if they had credit cards with 19% interest or higher. But still, for only $1,300 I wasn't about to exchange a 7% loan for a 16% loan. Maybe some people fall for this when they've taken the time to come into the office, but I'm not that easy. So I was nice and told them no thanks, it really didn't make good economic sense, and we left. Of course, they said maybe we can do business again, but I'm not so sure I want to do so with a company that must think I'm stupid.
Which reminds me, I need to go close a credit card account that I rarely use because now they want to charge me a yearly $50 fee for the privilege of loaning me money for 20 days (because with their new interest rate of 29% I'd never carry a balance on that card). Yeah, I may take a temporary hit to my credit score, but the available credit was low and not worth much anyway. I doubt it will hurt us too much and we're not looking to get more credit right now anyway.
I got a call from Wells Fargo, with whom we have our mortgage and a couple of credit cards. One we got when we got the mortgage (which pays us back 1% automatically to the principal of our mortgage every time we use it), and another we got when we bought some furniture from Raymore and Flanagan when we bought the house and took advantage of one of those 0% interest for 3 years pay-off plans. The furniture will be payed off next month, so I guess WF is looking to keep our business (even though we didn't pay any interest).
WF contacts us to ask if we have some high interest credit cards we'd like to consolidate and pay on a "fixed rate" plan, using either equity in the house or on our cars. We say sure, we'll check it out. They already have the mortgage info, so I send them info on our 2005 Ford minivan (which we are paying on at 7%) and three credit cards with balances and interest rates of about 15%. I have a few other cards with balances, but all those are 3-5% interest, and I didn't think I'd see better than that. I wasn't expecting miracles, but if I could pay down the 15% balance at 9% I figure I could save a few bucks and every little bit counts these days.
Naturally, WF can't do this over the phone with us, we have to visit them at our office, which requires taking time off work. We go and turns out the only thing they can offer (because the real estate market is still too 'dicey') is to buy out our current car loan, plus give us a whopping $1,300 extra (and we wouldn't have to pay the Nov. car payment), but the loan would now be at 16%.
Excuse me, 16%? Do you think I'm stupid? They want me to exchange my 7% car loan with about 3 1/2 years to pay for a 16% loan just to get $1,300? Why possible good could that do me, since even the credit card I could pay off with that amount is at 15%? I was so pissed it took all my willpower not to totally go off this loan agent.
Talk about a complete waste of time. I mean they knew the interest rate of the credit card I wanted to pay off, I faxed it to them. If there was no way they could even beat that rate, why on earth would they think I'd even be remotely interested? Just to get a "fix payment plan"? Yeah, no thanks, I can put myself on a "fixed payment plan" and pay off both the car and the credit card quicker and at less cost.
I suppose for some people, this might work for them, if they had credit cards with 19% interest or higher. But still, for only $1,300 I wasn't about to exchange a 7% loan for a 16% loan. Maybe some people fall for this when they've taken the time to come into the office, but I'm not that easy. So I was nice and told them no thanks, it really didn't make good economic sense, and we left. Of course, they said maybe we can do business again, but I'm not so sure I want to do so with a company that must think I'm stupid.
Which reminds me, I need to go close a credit card account that I rarely use because now they want to charge me a yearly $50 fee for the privilege of loaning me money for 20 days (because with their new interest rate of 29% I'd never carry a balance on that card). Yeah, I may take a temporary hit to my credit score, but the available credit was low and not worth much anyway. I doubt it will hurt us too much and we're not looking to get more credit right now anyway.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Lotsa Rants
Today I have many rants.
I'm annoyed with my bank because first they increase the minimum balance to maintain a savings account without a fee. I close the account because I now get better interest (these days its not much, but every penny helps) with ING. I take out all the money and tell the CSR I'm closing the account, but apparently he doesn't do it. So when my bank charged me a maintenance fee, I had to call them up to take it off and really close the account. At least that one didn't cost me any money.
Then there's Citibank. Have a credit card with them. I take a weekend and pay/set up a lot of my credit cards with online banking information. Citi claims I put in the wrong checking account information, but doesn't tell me that until a week after the payment is due. I doubt I did it wrong because when I tried to "fix" it, the online program kept telling me I wasn't changing anything, so I couldn't "edit" the information. But the CSR took off the late fee and 'returned payment' fee because I agreed to make the full payment (which was actually two monthly payments now) right then and signed up for their credit protection service for free for 30 days (which we will now have to write them to cancel because those things are just new ways to suck your money).
So I make the full two month payment (even though the Oct. payment isn't really due yet) and confirm that the checking account info they now have is correct. So what happens? Come the day that the Oct. monthly payment was due, which I actually paid several weeks ago (and confirmed on line that I had O minimum payment due), the program still took out the full payment (which was actually two monthly payments). Normally I wouldn't mind too much if it cut down my interest charge, but this account is currently on a 1.99% promotion rate, so it was very minimal savings, but now I'm out two monthly payments that I didn't owe (with money already short these days and we're living on a tight monthly budget - not a whole lot available for 'extra' payments).
Also, the lovely Citi CSR person didn't tell me that because that first online payment didn't go through, my account got put into "default" mode, which means that I was going to have my interest rate increased to 30% and the balance transfer check I had already written (to transfer a higher interest credit card account to the 1.99% interest rate) would now be declined. I find this out only after the balance transfer check got bounced (which my bank charged me another fee). Fortunately more phone calls and requests for fee waivers got approved and I got the returned check fee waived by my bank and Citi finally agreed to keep my interest rate at the original 1.99% rate. I didn't ask if I could do more balance transfers, I figured that the less of my money Citi has right now, the better. I'll just work to pay off the higher rate card faster.
Granted all these problems got resolved, but they all took time to do so over the telephone and caused me stress in the meantime. Also, they only got resolved in my favor because I didn't have prior problems on my accounts. Now, of course, if I have new problems, I may not get a good resolution because of these now prior problems (which weren't my fault). I guess that overall this is just a lesson in why we need to get these stupid cards paid off as fast as we can. Its just hard to do with the current state of the economy, and little extra money left over each month.
The Septa strike is another rant of mine because that one is costing me money. Because I can't take the subway to work, I have to take the train. That costs me an extra $7.00 per day for fare and parking, plus the extra driving to the farther train station. A few days is not a real problem, but if the Septa strike continues for a few weeks, that $7.00 a day starts to add up real quick. Plus I have to make sure I have lots of change available to pay for parking because the meters don't take dollar bills. I'm sure Stephane wants the strike to end soon too, because since I have to be at the train station before 7 am to get a parking spot, he has to take the kids to daycare in the morning, which is a bit out of his way to work. Not a lot of sympathy for the union workers, who make $52,000 a year with guaranteed raises, cadillac health care plans (for which they pay $400 a month for a family) and well funded pensions (of which they only pay 2% of their salaries).
Its a tough time. Every penny/dollar counts these days, as expenses seem to continue to go up, yet our income remains flat. Just need to get through to August when daycare expenses will go down some at least. Hopefully Stephane will get even a small raise this year too.
I'm annoyed with my bank because first they increase the minimum balance to maintain a savings account without a fee. I close the account because I now get better interest (these days its not much, but every penny helps) with ING. I take out all the money and tell the CSR I'm closing the account, but apparently he doesn't do it. So when my bank charged me a maintenance fee, I had to call them up to take it off and really close the account. At least that one didn't cost me any money.
Then there's Citibank. Have a credit card with them. I take a weekend and pay/set up a lot of my credit cards with online banking information. Citi claims I put in the wrong checking account information, but doesn't tell me that until a week after the payment is due. I doubt I did it wrong because when I tried to "fix" it, the online program kept telling me I wasn't changing anything, so I couldn't "edit" the information. But the CSR took off the late fee and 'returned payment' fee because I agreed to make the full payment (which was actually two monthly payments now) right then and signed up for their credit protection service for free for 30 days (which we will now have to write them to cancel because those things are just new ways to suck your money).
So I make the full two month payment (even though the Oct. payment isn't really due yet) and confirm that the checking account info they now have is correct. So what happens? Come the day that the Oct. monthly payment was due, which I actually paid several weeks ago (and confirmed on line that I had O minimum payment due), the program still took out the full payment (which was actually two monthly payments). Normally I wouldn't mind too much if it cut down my interest charge, but this account is currently on a 1.99% promotion rate, so it was very minimal savings, but now I'm out two monthly payments that I didn't owe (with money already short these days and we're living on a tight monthly budget - not a whole lot available for 'extra' payments).
Also, the lovely Citi CSR person didn't tell me that because that first online payment didn't go through, my account got put into "default" mode, which means that I was going to have my interest rate increased to 30% and the balance transfer check I had already written (to transfer a higher interest credit card account to the 1.99% interest rate) would now be declined. I find this out only after the balance transfer check got bounced (which my bank charged me another fee). Fortunately more phone calls and requests for fee waivers got approved and I got the returned check fee waived by my bank and Citi finally agreed to keep my interest rate at the original 1.99% rate. I didn't ask if I could do more balance transfers, I figured that the less of my money Citi has right now, the better. I'll just work to pay off the higher rate card faster.
Granted all these problems got resolved, but they all took time to do so over the telephone and caused me stress in the meantime. Also, they only got resolved in my favor because I didn't have prior problems on my accounts. Now, of course, if I have new problems, I may not get a good resolution because of these now prior problems (which weren't my fault). I guess that overall this is just a lesson in why we need to get these stupid cards paid off as fast as we can. Its just hard to do with the current state of the economy, and little extra money left over each month.
The Septa strike is another rant of mine because that one is costing me money. Because I can't take the subway to work, I have to take the train. That costs me an extra $7.00 per day for fare and parking, plus the extra driving to the farther train station. A few days is not a real problem, but if the Septa strike continues for a few weeks, that $7.00 a day starts to add up real quick. Plus I have to make sure I have lots of change available to pay for parking because the meters don't take dollar bills. I'm sure Stephane wants the strike to end soon too, because since I have to be at the train station before 7 am to get a parking spot, he has to take the kids to daycare in the morning, which is a bit out of his way to work. Not a lot of sympathy for the union workers, who make $52,000 a year with guaranteed raises, cadillac health care plans (for which they pay $400 a month for a family) and well funded pensions (of which they only pay 2% of their salaries).
Its a tough time. Every penny/dollar counts these days, as expenses seem to continue to go up, yet our income remains flat. Just need to get through to August when daycare expenses will go down some at least. Hopefully Stephane will get even a small raise this year too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)