• doctortran@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I recently re-downloaded the Michaels app while I was in the Michaels checkout line just so I could apply a $5 coupon that the register failed to read from the app anyway.

    There’s your problem right there.

    Does this author not understand how dumb this makes him look? You downloaded an entire app, in the checkout line, for a $5 coupon on something you were likely overcharged for in the first place?

    Even when you’re lacking in a store-specific app, your apps will let you pay by app. You just need to figure out (or remember, if you ever knew) whether your gardener or your hair salon takes Venmo, Cash App, PayPal, or one of the new bank-provided services such as Zelle and Paze.

    If only there was a universal form of payment that you could keep in your pocket and pull out to use anytime with very minimal interaction. Maybe a card or something.

    Apps are all around us now. McDonald’s has an app. Dunkin’ has an app.

    Why are you using them?

    Every chain restaurant has an app. Every food-delivery service too: Grubhub, Uber Eats, DoorDash, Chowbus.

    Why are you using all of them??

    Every supermarket and big-box store. I currently have 139 apps on my phone. These include: Menards, Home Depot, Lowe’s, Joann Fabric, Dierbergs, Target, IKEA, Walmart, Whole Foods

    Why the fucking hell do you need any of these?!

    This is literally the 2024 equivalent of your mother having a dozen toolbars in Internet Explorer because she kept clicking on coupons.

    Just go to the place, pull out your credit card, pay the cashier, and leave. How the hell does any functioning adult blame the technology when they have this little self control?

    • pemptago@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      People who are proud of getting a good deal via an app break my heart. Most folks I know like that are not strapped for cash. They just like the feeling of getting a bargain. They don’t consider that the prices are artificially inflated. They don’t need the sale item. And in the long run they’ll probably end up paying more when the stores know their purchasing habits and have A/B tested them enough to know how to provide as little as possible while charging as much as a customer can stomach.

      If a coupon requires an app, I don’t by that item. Especially when it comes to groceries. When it comes to store cards, most let you use a phone number instead of scanning the card. So plug in a random number at checkout. You can often get a hit on the first try. Then pay in cash. Dirty up someone else’s data and give these stores nothing on you. Seriously, if people keep giving in, it’s guaranteed to get worse. First the store card, then the app, what’s next?

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Most folks I know like that are not strapped for cash.

        Whoa. What group do you run in? Literally everyone I talk to on a daily basis is.

        I actually just thought through an average day, and the people I talk to regularly. I’ve had conversations with each and every one of them over the past few months about how we’ve had to make major changes to our lifestyles in one way or another because the money is going out faster than it’s coming in. We’re all solidly middle-class, for whatever that means anymore.

        So what circles are you in where not everyone is looking for every possible discount they can get? Saving $5 on groceries means I can afford another gallon and a half of gas. I can’t afford to be principled about privacy when those are the stakes. But it doesn’t mean I have to like it.

        • corbs132@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          I think age / location / profession have a lot to do with what socioeconomic circles people run in.

          Not to mention luck of the draw.

          • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            For sure, but like…I’m a middle-aged software engineer in a low cost-of-living area. My parents always had enough on one income, but we’re struggling on two.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I’m similar, but probably a bit younger. I make a good salary now (I’m in a leadership position), but the people on my team are a bit more “average.” Software engineering will have a higher than average salary, but I’m talking $80-120k for the people who work for me in an area where the median income is $70-80k ($80-120k), and most are single or single-income.

              There’s a pretty stark difference between those who are financially stable and those who… aren’t. I don’t have everyone’s salary, but here’s what I see:

              • financially stable - drive older car, own house, wardrobe is simple, hobbies are inexpensive, no extravagent trips
              • financially unstable - drive late model car, rent, nicer clothes, more expensive hobbies, yearly international trips

              Notice I didn’t say anything about income. Some of the financially unstable people have a much higher income (probably double the range above), and some of the financially stable people have a much lower income (e.g. one of my employees is single and just bought a house in a pricier area, while being at the bottom of the income range).

              I obviously don’t know your income or situation, but I think most people can do much better than they are without changing their income. And the more financially stable you can be, the more “quiet” confidence you get (i.e. you’re not distracted by when payday is), and the more likely you are to get that promotion or better paying job. Success tends to breed success.

              Check out The Millionaire Next Door, which gives lots of examples about how wealthy people tend to be frugal and careful with money. There’s not really any secret sauce here, just delayed gratification and discipline. Obviously a $100k salary will go a bit further than a $50k salary, but even a median income can rocket you to an upper-middle class/lower-upper class retirement if you manage it carefully. I’m happy to walk through a scenario if you like, but that’s a bit off-topic for this community and is probably better for one of the PF communities.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                I have a rule of thumb for financial stability.

                Level 1 - just buy groceries and pay for them without stressing

                Level 2 - don’t worry about when payday hits

                Level 3 - don’t worry about getting laid off

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That makes a ton of sense. To add some numbers to it:

                  1. $1k in the bank - should be enough for any one emergency
                  2. 1 month e-fund - no longer impacted by payday being late
                  3. 3 month e-fund

                  Getting to step 1 can be very difficult, especially for the lower class, but $10 or $20 at a time can get there. But it needs to be intentional, and that’s really hard when working two (or three) jobs, so many just don’t put in the consistent effort needed to get there. But once that first buffer is there, the rest becomes a lot easier since you’re no longer getting pushed backwards.

                  • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I disagree strongly that $1k is enough for any one emergency. My healthcare deductible is higher than that. The last two times I’ve needed car repairs, the bill was $2-3k to get the thing back on the road. If one of our appliances breaks down, we might be able to replace it for $1,000 if it’s the dryer or the dishwasher, but if it’s the fridge, that’s not close to enough.

                    $1,000 was plenty when I was in college back in the mid-00s, but I was single with no kids. That’s just not a realistic emergency fund in 2024, and even less so if you have a family.

                  • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    And it fucking SUCKS in the beginning, because for a very long time it keeps getting wiped out by emergencies. But the more emergencies you weather, eventually the fewer you’ll have, and your buffer will grow.

                    Emergency funds are the most important tool for financial stability (after securing a living wage).

              • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Honestly, what you see isn’t familiar to me at all. The people I know are very good at being frugal and wringing the last out of every dime, not being extravagant or frivolous, etc. We have no car payment on our ten-year-old minivan, own our home, and haven’t been clothes shopping in years except to replace things that wear out, that sort of thing.

                The problem isn’t budgeting; we have a budget, and we stick to it pretty well. There are very few things we could cut, and doing so might save us a hundred or so dollars per month. The problem is that inflation has eaten up every dollar from my paycheck we used to have in surplus. The problem is that my salary hasn’t kept up with inflation and nobody else around here is hiring.

                Yes, you can budget yourself from the top of one financial class into the bottom of another one; and you can manage money poorly enough to drop from anywhere to the bottom of the heap. But that doesn’t change the fact that there is a significant financial crunch happening for most people in the world right now.

                Seems like everyone has their own preferred explanation as to why that’s happening (corporate greed vs. government overreach), but the fact that it’s happening seems pretty clear.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  my salary hasn’t kept up with inflation

                  Yes, that certainly is a problem. Salary increases tend to lag inflation a bit, so you’d either need to switch jobs or wait to get caught up.

                  That said, wage growth has exceeded inflation for the last year and a half or so, so hopefully you’ll get a yearly salary bump to help out. Our salary bump was higher than usual last year (about 5%), but still below inflation (8-9%), and I hope our salary bump this year will fix that (4% would be enough to catch back up).

                  But the fact that you’ve been able to stay financially stable despite high inflation means you’re probably closer to “The Millionaire Next Door” than the average Joe drowning in credit card debt. If you can stay out of debt and put money away for retirement every month, you’ll be doing fine in your 60s when you’re looking at retirement.

                  you can budget yourself from the top of one financial class into the bottom of another one

                  Sure, if you follow the average advice (save 10%), then yeah, one bump-up is essentially expected. But if you’re more aggressive, jumping up more than one level should be feasible.

                  This video talks about economic classes, and the portion I linked shows how you can go from $65k/year salary (middle middle class) to lower upper class by age 50 by just investing 10% of your income. So this is essentially middle middle-class to lower-upper class. If you do 40 years instead of stopping at 50, you’d have $3M by retirement age. If we account for 2% inflation, you’d have about $1.7M in today’s dollars, which is almost to upper upper class. If you bump to 15% of your income, you end up with $2.6M after taking inflation into account, which is in that upper upper class range. So with just a median household salary, you can have an upper upper class retirement.

        • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          My circle of friends are also not strapped for cash. I’m confused as to how that’s so baffling to you. We’re very much NOT upper class.

          • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            We’re very much NOT upper class.

            I kinda think that not being strapped for cash is being upper-class.

            Upper-class: Always having enough

            Middle-class: Always having almost enough

            Lower-class: Never having enough

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              “Class” is determined by income, “enough” is determined by spending habits. You could make $50k and have positive cash flow, or you could make $400k and always be strapped for cash. The higher your income is, the more options you have, but also the more exposure you have to more ways to waste your money.

              This is a great video about this. Basically:

              • lower class ($34k median income, $3400 net worth) - ~25% of population - these are those who truly struggle with emergencies, and flirt w/ the federal poverty line; net worth is pretty much nothing (often negative!); main goal is get an emergency fund to break the cycle of poverty
              • middle class - three categories (lower, middle, upper)
                • lower ($44k median income, $71k net worth) - ~20% population - identify more with middle-middle class and tend to get into more debt than necessary by keeping up with the Joneses, and could be financially stable w/ some discipline
                • middle ($81k median income, $159k net worth) - ~20% - financially stable, most of assets are in home
                • upper ($117k median income, $307k net worth) - ~20% - passive income and compound interest supplement income; some live paycheck-to-paycheck due to lifestyle inflation, but some can do really well with investments
              • upper class - two categories (lower and upper)
                • lower ($189k median income, $747k net worth) - ~10% - specialized professions; most people can get into the lower upper class with discipline (10% savings rate on $65k salary => $787k investments by age 50); little pressure from everyday expenses
                • upper ($378k median income, $2.5M net worth) - ~5% - some college grads working as employees, but a lot of these are business owners

              At each level, I see two types of people:

              • lower class
                • savers - those who scrimp to be able to cover emergencies that would otherwise screw them over; these can move up to the middle class
                • “normies” - those who get screwed over and over and stay in the lower class
              • middle class
                • savers - less scrimping here, but need to budget and avoid “keeping up with the Joneses”; some discipline can establish a solid retirement
                • “normies” - debt payments prevent any kind of progression, and workers are terrified of job loss because the house of cards could come tumbling down
              • upper class
                • savers - become really wealthy (upper upper class)
                • “normies” - some upper class folks are “strapped for cash” because they can’t keep their spending in check, but most have enough income to recover from even the worst mistakes

              By this metric, not being strapped for cash is possible for pretty much anyone in the lower-middle class and above, and even those in the lower class could get there by stabilizing their finances so they can take some risks to increase their income (i.e. night school, quitting a bad job for a better job, getting CDL and financing a truck, etc). On the flipside, being strapped for cash is also quite possible at pretty much any income level, and I’ve heard plenty of stories about lawyers and doctors having trouble keeping up with debt payments because they got caught trying to keep up with those wealthier than them.

              So I don’t think “strapped for cash” is a good metric for economic class, income is, because you can make choices that can cause you to be paycheck-to-paycheck at almost any income level, as well as choices to maintain stability at almost any income level.

              • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                not being strapped for cash is possible for pretty much anyone in the lower-middle class and above, and even those in the lower class could get there by stabilizing their finances so they can take some risks to increase their income (i.e. night school, quitting a bad job for a better job, getting CDL and financing a truck, etc).

                It’s easy to say “stabilize your finances!” but on a practical level it’s almost impossible to do when there’s no wiggle room. You can’t stabilize any finances if you’re taking out payday loans in order to pay rent every month. It’s not like there’s any money to be put into savings if you’re making $2,000 a month but putting $1,000 toward rent, since most people rather like to eat.

                I’m thankful to not be in that situation, personally, but it’s not something you can just wish your way out of. Even your examples require a certain level of financial breathing room that people don’t tend to have when every dollar is spoken for. You can’t finance a truck if your DTI is already high. You can’t take CDL training or night school if you have to work two jobs just to keep food on the table.

                I’ve heard plenty of stories about lawyers and doctors having trouble keeping up with debt payments because they got caught trying to keep up with those wealthier than them.

                But if you get into that scenario, you can just sell the supercar or downsize your house or whatever. That’s not really an option for people who are living paycheck-to-paycheck.

                So I don’t think “strapped for cash” is a good metric for economic class, income is,

                I think income divided by local cost-of-living could be, maybe.

                At the end of the day, irresponsibility with money is still a problem for sure. And keeping-up-with-the-joneses is probably a problem for some people. I’m not one of them, and none of the people I know are either, but I suppose some people have that issue. In my experience, though, most people who are struggling financially are not in those situations. They’re just trying to keep their heads above water.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You can’t stabilize any finances if you’re taking out payday loans in order to pay rent every month

                  Oh, I 100% agree. But in many cases, taking payday loans is a symptom of other serious problems in someone’s spending patterns and not necessarily an income problem. Maybe the car payment is too high, or perhaps they’re paying too much for food. Whatever it is, that needs to get fixed to end the need for emergency cash.

                  If you’re in the lower middle class or higher, there’s no excuse for it IMO. If you’re in the lower class, you’ll need to get creative (government assistance, co-living, etc).

                  you can just sell the supercar or downsize your house or whatever

                  You say that, but in many cases, they still end up net worth negative. The problem here isn’t with income, but spending, and you’re not going to sell your way out of a spending problem.

                  I think income divided by local cost-of-living could be, maybe.

                  Certainly. Economic classes are very much location-dependent. If you live in NYC or SF, you’d need to adjust the numbers a bit, likewise if you live in rural Mississippi or something. And there are calculators available online to help with that.

                  most people who are struggling financially are not in those situations

                  Pretty much everyone will say that though, because people are pretty bad at noticing the excesses in their own spending. If you’re not standing out as being “weird” for spending so little, then you’re probably “keeping up with the Joneses,” because the average American is pretty irresponsible.

                  This is a pretty broad brush stroke to be sure, and I’m sure there are plenty who are legitimately struggling despite a conscious effort to cut costs. I’m just saying that many, if not most, people who aren’t “financially stable” could make room in their budget to get financially stable, but instead end up throwing a ton of money down the drain due to interest.

                  • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Do you actually know anyone who’s in this situation?

                    In my experience, it’s not a choice they’ve made. Some people are bad with money, to be sure. I’m related to a few. But they don’t typically just decide they’re going to blow August’s grocery budget on a new wardrobe; they have a job opportunity dry up after they already moved for it, or they had a messy divorce because their spouse was abusive, or they poured a ton of money into some career training that turned out not to give them any real, marketable skills. Some bad choices, some unavoidable occurrences, some terrible luck, but nothing that crosses the line to them being frivolous.

                    Thirty years ago, a family could weather one or two of those, no problem. My dad got laid off not too long before I was born, and he was the sole earner for our family. He got hired fairly soon after, but in the meantime we were fine.

                    I don’t live a whole lot different than my parents did then. We have more kids than they did, but I’m in a higher earning potential career than he was. Plus, my wife and I are both employed. Yet if either of us were laid off, we would not last long on savings.

                    One thing I’ve learned as I get older: yeah, people are irresponsible. But the generations are pretty much the same, and trying to pretend otherwise is a good way to get clicks on your article but a bad way to actually get any meaningful insight about people. So if our generation is having more widespread problems than our parents’ generation did at this age, it’s probably not because we aren’t as responsible as they are. Something systemic probably changed.

              • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Add the 1% there. Generational wealth people. Private jets, multiple mansion homes, etc. They’re far above the upper class. Totally different plane of existence from everyone else.

            • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              sugar summed it up nicely.

              We make a decent amount, but we’re priced out of buying a home right now. We have a solid amount of savings and stocks, and our only debt is my partner’s student loans which aren’t a ton. We just don’t think about money day to day.

              If we want something, we just get it. But we don’t really want things, so we mainly just spend money on food and booze. And Steam games, but only if they’re 50% off or more.

              We’re probably lower-middle to middle-class. Lower now, maybe mid-mid when we finally can buy a house.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        People who are proud of getting a good deal via an app break my heart. Most folks I know like that are not strapped for cash. They just like the feeling of getting a bargain. They don’t consider that the prices are artificially inflated.

        Thats why Prime Day is such a big deal.

        People think they are getting awesome deals cause its 50% off, are not going and checking price trackers to see the item had a HUGE price spike a week before Prime Day.

        But they think they got 50% off and that gives them that massive dopamine rush, and that encourages more spending.

      • OR3X@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The Lowe’s app is actually really handy. You can look up any item and it will tell you the exact isle and bay it’s in for your store. No more wandering around or hunting for an employee to ask. It’s the only store app I actually keep on my phone.

          • OR3X@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            It actually is available on the website, but like most stores their mobile web experience isn’t great.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Honestly, if there were a simpler way to sell their personal data to retailers for people who want to do so, that probably would be more appealing for the users.

    • kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      This just in: Author/professor/CEO whose books/classes/company are about manipulative technologies… voluntarily installs manipulative technologies.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why the fucking hell do you need any of these?!

      Yup, I have none of them, and I still get a pretty good deal.

      Most of my spending is at Costco, and they send me a paper ad once/month, which I’ll go through and add relevant stuff to my list (in a separate app). But even if I don’t get a discount, their prices are still better than most (e.g. eggs are normally $2.50 or so per dozen, whereas the grocery sells them for $4+). If I’m going to spend more than normal, I’ll check a few sites before going out (or ordering online), and sometimes I’ll ask the store clerk to price match to avoid multiple stops. The one place I have an app for is on my old phone, and it’s for Target because they actually have decent sales sometimes. I don’t check very often, but I will when I’m going to go buy a bunch of gifts for birthdays or holidays or whatever (and again, I’ll check multiple sites first), and I use the 5% off w/ the Target debit card.

      I literally don’t bother with any loyalty programs. My grocery store’s loyalty program isn’t needed for discounts, it’s only for a discount on gas at some gas station I don’t go to (and isn’t even next to the store). There’s another with a better loyalty program (they have their own gas stations), but they’re further away and it would cost me more in gas to go there than I’d save.

      So if we need something, we’ll look for coupons or whatever before setting out, we don’t use an app or loyalty program. I’m pretty sure we end up wasting a lot less money this way.

    • nepenthes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I stopped reading the article after it just became a list of apps. Felt like a thinly veiled ad, and if not, annoying af.

        • nepenthes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Sorry, I don’t know what that means, I don’t have Tiktok. I’m talking about the whole article being vapid, just multiple paragraphs that are lists of apps:

          It could be Class Dojo, Brightwheel, Bloomz, or TalkingPoints. It could be ClassLink, SchoolStatus, or PowerSchool.

          Is it like brand name dropping to keep people’s attention or something?