2017 Spending Summary and Analysis

[youbet]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo I'll follow your question with another - since GAAP doesn't apply, does it really make a difference how one individual on this forum accounts for their spending?

Why yes, yes it does. Traditionally, forum members want their way of doing anything to be the one correct way and all other methodologies to be considered "wrong."

[NW-Bound]

I had a few stocks that went bankrupt. I called it investment loss, but perhaps should have classified it as "educational expenses".

Why, the IRS even allows tax deduction for it, just like it does tuition costs.

[ivinsfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet Why yes, yes it does. Traditionally, forum members want their way of doing anything to the the one correct way and all other methodologies to be considered "wrong."

This could be true however I'm on day 3 of at least 4 days of weather that won't go above zero, so I'll sit at the keyboard and argue about anything.

[bobandsherry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo I'll follow your question with another - since GAAP doesn't apply, does it really make a difference how one individual on this forum accounts for their spending?

Not to me, my original comment was how I'd show the spend.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobandsherry I'd show the spend as an asset and then take depreciation (estimate) each year.

I didn't address how you or anyone else should.

[REWahoo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ivinsfan This could be true however I'm on day 3 of at least 4 days of weather that won't go above zero, so I'll sit at the keyboard and argue about anything.

No you won't.

[ivinsfan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo No you won't.

It's either argue or shop so I better argue...

[NW-Bound]

It is true that there's a lot of residual value in a car, even though one loses a bunch after signing the paperwork, even earlier than after driving off the dealer lot as the proverbial saying goes.

And so, depreciating it over a number of years is the correct accounting principle. However, I would need to keep track of my vehicle values to update my networth, and as I do not even keep track of my homes, I will forget about my vehicles (which are old and not worth much anyway).

[bobandsherry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound It is true that there's a lot of residual value in a car, even though one loses a bunch after signing the paperwork, even earlier than after driving off the dealer lot as the proverbial saying goes. And so, depreciating it over a number of years is the correct accounting principle. However, I would need to keep track of my vehicle values to update my networth, and as I do not even keep track of my homes, I will forget about my vehicles (which are old and not worth much anyway).

I really make it easy, I just lease and know what my expense is each year and don't have any unusual hits to me spend for "one time" purchase or maintenance items.

Based on my lease payments it would take over 9 years for my car to "fully depreciate" (purchase price including taxes / monthly lease payment).

[robnplunder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by youbet Why yes, yes it does. Traditionally, forum members want their way of doing anything to be the one correct way and all other methodologies to be considered "wrong."

You are absolutely wrong on that.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobandsherry I really make it easy, I just lease and know what my expense is each year and don't have any unusual hits to me spend for "one time" purchase or maintenance items. Based on my lease payments it would take over 9 years for my car to "fully depreciate" (purchase price including taxes / monthly lease payment).

When you lease or rent, the money is really gone so it's a lot easier. No argument there.

Come to think of it, many of my big expenses in recent years were for home repairs or improvements. There should be some residual values there, as even a repair is still worth something as it means my roof will not demand more money for a few years, or the exterior stain will not cause me grief for a while, etc... Tracking all that is tough, as who knows if the plumbing will not take its turn to cost me an arm or at least some fingers, or the AC, or the sewer line, etc...

And so, I just watch out for these non-recurrent expenses, and hope that they will not take turn hitting my checkbook every year. None did this year.
Fingers crossed...

[PatrickA5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobandsherry It's all good. But as point of reference, if you had $30K cash and "spent" it by buying a stock or gold, would you consider that a spend of this year? What about if you had $300K and "spent" it on a home? As you started this thread though it's all for fun, so indeed let's just party on.

I put anything that I paid cash for as an expense, unless it's savings. Putting money in savings (or stocks, etc) obviously isn't an expense. Having said that, it does make for some really odd looking years. For example, my normal spending is around $100K - $130K. My spending for 2012 was over $500K since I bought a house and 2 cars using cash.

[rodi]

The title of this thread is SPENDING summary, not expense summary. Spending implies outflow of money.

Perhaps we should start another thread about withdrawal rates... (Which are not as tightly correlated to spending as you might think since folks have pensions, SS, rental income, etc.)

[NW-Bound]

Are we going to have a "thread fork", similar to the bitcoin blockchain fork?

[grasshopper]

Quicken has a lot more detail, I am sharing only my top 10 expenses

1) Medical $19,500.00
2) Travel $14,600.00 2016 $30,000.00
3) Groceries $6,400.00
4) Pets $5,600.00
5) Auto $2,300.00
6) Dining $1,600.00
7) Household $1,500.00
8) Liquor $1.400.00
9)Recreation $1,300.00
10) Electric $1,000.00

all other categories are less than 1% of spending each.

[PatrickA5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodi The title of this thread is SPENDING summary, not expense summary. Spending implies outflow of money.

Not sure I understand the difference. I would assume most people equate "spending" with "expenses" at least as it pertains to their personal finances (i.e. not accounting terminology).

[rodi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickA5 Not sure I understand the difference. I would assume most people equate "spending" with "expenses" at least as it pertains to their personal finances (i.e. not accounting terminology).

My comment was in reaction to the discussion of applying depreciation to assets like new cars... I guess I look at spending as $$$ out of my wallet at the time it's spent.... not offsetting it with the asset, then depreciating the asset.

[DEC-1982]

2017 over 2016 expense +5.4%

Increases in medical premiums drowned out reductions everywhere else.

[audreyh1]

Yes. The only asset we count in assets is our house. All vehicles and other bought items are treated as expenses/spending. We don’t track vehicle or other purchased asset depreciation.

If we sell a vehicle (as opposed to a trade-in) or other item then the cash is booked as a credit in the given category. We do this for sold old camera gear all the time.

[Surewhitey]

2 peeps & a dog
2016 - $56,654 (lots of house remodeling)
2017 - $43,661 (lots of frugal travel)

[LRDave]

I find the range of values under the category "groceries" fascinating. Thanks to all that have shared.