This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support!
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Workwear sales of note for 6.02.23:
- Nordstrom – The Half-Yearly Sale has started! See our thoughts here.
- Ann Taylor – $50 off $150; $100 off $250+; extra 30% off all sale styles
- Banana Republic Factory – Up to 50% off everything + extra 25% off purchase
- Boden – Sale, up to 50% off
- Cole Haan – Up to 50% off select styles; extra 20% off sandals & sneakers
- Eloquii – 60% off all tops
- Express – 30% off all dresses, tops, shorts & more; extra 50% off clearance
- H&M – Up to 60% off online and in-store.
- J.Crew – Up to 50% off “dressed up” styles (lots of cute dresses!); extra 50% off select sale
- J.Crew Factory – Up to 60% off everything; 60% off 100s of summer faves; extra 60% off clearance
- J.McLaughlin – The Sale Event: extra 30% off
- Loft – 40% off tops; 30% off full-price styles
- Sephora – Up to 50% off select beauty.
- Shopbop – Up to 60% off sale
- Sue Sartor – Lots of cute dresses on sale!
- Talbots – 25-40% off select styles
Other noteworthy sales:
- CB2.com – Up to 40% off; pop-up sale up to 30% off
- Joss & Main – Up to 60% off, plus an extra 20% off with code
- Tuft & Needle – Save up to $775 on mattresses (Reader-favorite brand; Kat really likes hers!)
- West Elm – Up to 25% off in-stock furniture; up to 60% off clearance
Some of our latest posts here at Corporette…
And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!
- Favorite comfy pants for an overnight plane ride?
- I’ve got a nasty case of tech neck…
- What’s a good place for a relaxing solo escape?
- What’s the best commuter backpack?
- I’m early 40s and worry my career arc is ending…
- I canNOT figure out the proportions in this current season of fashion…
- How is everyone wearing scarves in 2023?
- What shoes are people wearing to work between boot and sandal season?
- What’s a good place for a relaxing solo escape?
- What are some of your go-to outfits that feel current?
- I need more activities that are social, easy to learn and don’t involve extreme running/jumping/etc.
New dating goal: find a younger version of Bill Clinton and put a ring on it.
cheating vegan? no thx
Seriously! I thought it was so strange to go down memory lane like that without acknowledging the cheating and workplace sexual harassment, even if you just said, “We’ve had our troubles,” or something. To paint it so rosy just left me going ????
I see what you mean, but how do you think he should have addressed that? I feel like there isn’t a way to be more candid or honest about “their troubles” that wouldn’t have hurt Hillary.
I think he could have acknowledged it in at least one sentence, like above, or he could have chosen a different type of speech.
Right? HRC has had a tough marriage, she doesn’t need marital problems to be highlighted on a night when she’s making history as the first woman to ever be nominated for President. She is so so much more than what her husband did with an intern 20 years ago.
They have not had “their troubles.”
They have had HIS troubles.
What does his cheating have to do with his wife’s glass ceiling-shattering run for President? Why on earth would he mention that? His speech also didnt’ mention their love or $ex life so it didn’t seem disingenuous to not mention his affairs. He was mainly talking about her accomplishments, what a great working partnership they have, and what a great mom she is. None of that is negated by Monica or anyone else.
He totally talked about their marriage and love life! He talked about how he was speechless when he met her, his proposal, their blissfully happy times in Arkansas and elsewhere. If he had focused on her accomplishments, that would be totally fine not to mention his affairs. No doubt. That’s what I’m saying—he could have chosen a different kind of speech and it would have been fine. But they obviously chose for him to talk about their love story, and I thought that was a strange choice.
So? All of that (being speechless, the proposals, etc.) is probably true. They clearly love and adore each other despite everything that’s gone on, so why can’t he mention that? It’s not like he said “It’s so great that I’m still hot for her after 40 years.”
@9:58: Even though it’s 2016 a man can’t give a speech about his wife and not talk about how in love with her he is and what a great wife she’s been. People are just too sexist. I’m sure Bill would have loved to get up there and just talk about Hillary’s professional accomplishments, but then the narrative would have been “even her husband finds her unlikeable and she’s such an ice queen he can’t say one nice thing about her personally.” Sad, but that’s reality.
Should Ivana have highlighted Trump’s failed marriages when characterizing him, explaining why he’s qualified, etc….??? Surely you could argue that the failed marriages are part of who he is and what his character is – BUT NO ONE DID. I get that Bill’s speech was a ‘trip down memory lane, please come to know my wife,’ but come on now.
He didn’t (and didn’t need to) mention what a jerk he’s been – everyone knows it.
If anything, it is further proof of how impressive she is and what she’s been able to do *in spite of* her deeply flawed spouse.
When I was in high school I didn’t think the whole intern in the oval office thing was that big of a deal. (I was in HS when it happened.) At the time I thought “why do we care about the dude’s sex life?” Now I’m an employment lawyer and aghast.
Seriously. I think it’s crazy that he has such a great reputation. It really was an awful thing to do, and he made a habit of it in Arkansas too. He used his power to take advantage of a powerless woman.
I was in junior high at the time. Now, when I think about how young Monica was (more than 10 years younger than I am now), it makes me shudder.
I understand the reasons for putting Bill on the stage last night because he’s Hillary’s husband. But I can’t help thinking he should be retired from the spotlight, especially for a national convention.
If all he had done was cheat on her with someone not in his employ I wouldn’t think that should be a topic for public discourse. That’s between them and it’s none of my business.
But that’s NOT what he did! He took advantage of a powerless employee who was way, way too young!
I went back and forth on this. At first I thought, is he going to mention it? And then I thought, geez louise 40 minutes of nonstop accomplishments since this woman was in college! It was amazing! I walked away thinking she was SO impressive and by far the most accomplished candidate this year and likely in a long time. I really liked the personal stories, too, and ended up being glad it didn’t come up more than ‘she stuck by me through thick and thin.’ Ultimately, marriages are complicated and they have still stayed together. A lot of politicians have cheated, but I still think we’ve never seen anything like this where the cheated-on political spouse had such a career for herself and then stayed together (at least this high up in office). It struck me as a real-life marriage where despite him creepin on younger women, he actually loved her and greatly admired her and they had their own unique partnership. Imagine being in her shoes on a night where your life’s professional accomplishments are coming to a head and someone talks about your husband cheating on you 20 years ago. Marriages are personal and I ended up admiring what they have, despite its flaws. I also can’t help but contrast it to Trump’s ‘on to the next’ attitude and admired that the Clintons stuck through it together. Also again, that he greatly admired her, which is not the sense I get from Trump about any of his wives.
+1 Trump hated when his wives had a career:
““I have days where I think [Maples’ job is] great. And then I have days where, if I come home — and I don’t want to sound too much like a chauvinist — but when I come home and dinner’s not ready, I go through the roof,” he said.”
EWWW. Possibly one of the worst Trump quotes I’ve heard, and that’s saying something.
I call BS. Surely Trump’s wives do not actually cook dinner.
I mean, I don’t cook dinner all the time. I have people for that (people = Bojangles, the hot-food bar at the grocery store, pizza delivery, etc.). Surely the Mrs. Trumps have figured this out if they don’t have people already dedicated to this.
Anon at 10:28
@ Anon 10:37 – he said ‘dinner ready’ not that she cooked it. Ordering in or telling the staff what to make, whatever! The point is that his view is that a woman’t career doesn’t matter if it interferes with him getting his dinner on time. He’s a chauvinist pig.
TBH, if I had a non-working spouse and plenty of household help, I’d probably p*ssed, too. Dinner’s not going to make itself.
Did you even read the quote? He had a working spouse not a non-working spouse. He specifically said that he went “through the roof” if his working spouse’s job interfered with him having his dinner on time.
He said something along the lines of “we’ve had our share of heartbreak” which I thought alluded to his affairs and how much pain it caused Hillary and Chelsea. What’s crazy is that we all know what he did (and did often with so many women) and yet when he spoke last night I couldn’t help but think he was the greatest.
I do genuinely believe that he is bursting with pride about his wife and that was nice to see.
It was a fantastic speech and made me feel so much better about supporting her (Bernie fan here).
I don’t see the point of acknowledging one issue from so long ago. How long are we going to beat that horse? The world has moved on and so have the Clintons. At a 50 year anniversary, the parties aren’t going to rehash an affair from decades ago. At a performance review, you’re not going to mention the bad thing from last year that is now totally irrelevant to this year.
He did mention that they had been through heartache. I take that to be the nod that was deemed sufficient BY HILLARY HERSELF. I cannot imagine that speech was drafted without input from her as to what she wanted to be portrayed. And as the one running for the job, I trust that she chose to convey to the world that they’ve moved on in whatever way they saw fit that is none of our business.
Do I like that the cheating occurred? No, I hate it. But I don’t think it’s implausible that that man loves and respects her as much as he says he does. I’ve seen him give a similar speech in person, and I will tell you that from 10 feet away, the way he lights up and the way his voice quavers when he talks about her conveys the same sort of awe I see from my own dad about my mom. And whether that is real or illusory doesn’t really matter to me because she’s not running in a pageant for most loved wives.
Yea, no thanks. I’d prefer not to marry someone with a history of sexually assaulting women at worst and at best using his power to get BJs from an intern in the oval office.
Oh Hahahaha right. Vegan. I’m actually chill with the cheating, whatevs, and loved his speech. But hard pass on vegans.
Not a fan, but I would give props to a politician to copped to cheating when confronted with it.
“Hellz yeah I got serviced by the intern.”
And no “soulmate” BS like the former governor of SC.
Didn’t you hear the line heard round the world?
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
Politician denying improprieties? Next thing you know, he’ll try to sell me a bridge.
Don’t p*ss on me leg and tell me it’s raining.
OTOH the vegan thing has worked out well for him. Spouse is a big WJC fan (and with similar issues to larger WJC) and am trying to sell him on greatly reducing meat as way to eat healthier and make better lifestyle choices.
If only Fritos weren’t vegan . . .
long time lurker
I was a little creeped out by the beginning of his speech. Talking about his chasing after Hillary as a law student just made me think immediately of all the other women he has chased after. It was the introduction part of the speech that bothered me. I thought the part about the house, raising Chelsea, etc. was all fine and good and humanizing for Hillary and thought the end of the speech was terrific, but the beginning… awkward. And while he alluded to heartbreak etc. I don’t think there would be any way to handle his infidelity in such a speech that wouldn’t hurt Hillary.
Now, Hillary herself has a good narrative in my view. She stuck out her marriage, she worked through his infidelity problems, and she did not just ditch her spouse for a newer model (2 times). I’m talking to you Mr. Trump.
Ewww. Cheating aside, I never found him attractive then or now. I know a lot of people do but I don’t get it.
No. Just no.
Great speech though. It was good to be reminded of her impressive path in life. I needed that sort of reminder.
What a contrast to Trump.
I thought the speech was good but this is a very odd comment. Bill had hurt her more than helped. I didn’t realize at the time just how young Monica was- i look at our 24 year old law clerk and realize how disgusting bill was. I would never ever want to be married to him but I appreciated the speech that listed out all her accomplishments
Bill Clinton is a sexual predator with a long history of abusing women from power positions. He’s a POS who doesn’t deserve any praise of any kind.
So better to elect a man with a history of sexual harrassment (Trump)?
Not just sexual harassment, several rape allegations as well.
But the choice isn’t between Bill Clinton and Trump, it’s between Hillary Clinton and Trump. Criticizing Bill Clinton isn’t a statement that Trump is better. Bill isn’t the candidate. You can be pro-Hillary and very uncomfortable with Bill.
And there was a rape allegation against Bill as well.
This (to cbackson)
Her accomplishments — that’s nice. Don’t particularly care what she did for some childrens fund in 1979 or 1982. My takeaway — 1100 sqft house with a $175 mortgage — that was pretty sweet.
I think you’re in the minority. Most people love to see that a presidential candidate has a long history of public service and has genuinely dedicated their life to improving communities. I think that is remarkable and something few can say.
I need a recommendation for very lightweight, cool workout pants that are cheaper than Lulu. I bought a pair of vented Zella ones, but the fabric itself is so dang thick and heavy that they aren’t cool at all despite the vent. Any suggestions? I order everything online, so I’d rather not waste money on another failed pair!
Old Navy has some great cheap workout pants!
Killer Kitten Heels
+1 – they have super-light cropped leggings right now with vents at the back of the knees that are fantastic – I’m wearing them to run in 90 degree heat without issue (well, other than the usual issues of running when it’s that hot, but the pants don’t make it worse).
Are they opaque in crow pose though?
I have no idea what that means, but I’m a karate kid and do a lot of splits and they certainly aren’t see through :)
Ha! Sorry, didn’t mean to be obscure. Here’s google images of a bunch of people doing it
I have found that leggings that are opaque in a forward fold or split sometimes still fail the crow pose test. Might have to give Old Navy a shot though, thanks!
Athleta. You can find them on sale (one is going on right now) and their normal yoga style pants aren’t super thick. (their running styles are more so)
Warning: I have found Athleta leggings to be sheer in the bum. I like them for other items, but no more leggings.
I'm Just Me ....
C9 at Target. Seriously, why pay more than you have to for things.
anon a mouse
I recently went to TJMaxx/Marshall’s and picked up a pair of long bike shorts (no tush padding)/’jammers’ and have been embracing the coolness of just having your legs free.
I tend to not wear running shorts because on long runs chafing is brutal, but these stay down and just make life better. Would recommend the $12 splurge.
I alternate between C9 at Target and Lands’ End on clearance.
My solution is to purchase such loud prints that no one will notice the see-through bum because they’re too busy gaping at the bits festooned with rainbow cupcakes and paisley.
I bought a Le Pliage cross-body bag last year and love how light it is, but the lack of organization is annoying me way more than I thought (as are the tiny, useless pockets inside). Does anyone have any recommendations for a similarly light bag that has more pockets and a better layout? I would love a bag with vertical orientation (so I can slip papers in vertically), a zip top, and cross-body option. I don’t want to spend more than $100, but would consider it for the perfect bag.
Have you looked at MZ Wallace?
Killer Kitten Heels
I have the MZWallace Kate bag and it’s pretty much the perfect mega-tote. Tons of space, tons of pockets (interior and exterior) for organization, and it can fit a legal-size file if I need it to.
You can also get a purse organizer to put inside the le pliage.
Has anyone used Priceline to get a cheap hotel? Can it actually work?
I’ve done it a few times, mostly when I had some flexibility on location / only needed a night or two at the last minute. You can be a bit strategic, restricting your search to a specific area and starting with a low bid to see what you are offered.
for us: sort-of. We probably save 20% against the listing price. You could have grabbed a deal on a normal booking website with less effort, imo.
Also, make your bid, and if you don’t get something you want, check on the express deals. It will give you an area, a star level, amenities, and a price. You can often narrow it down to 2-3 hotels in that area that they list at that star level with those amenities, so it’s more of an educated guess to where you’ll be staying.
I have used it and been happy with the results. The key in my experience is to filter for a higher star rating than you think you want (I never use it for less than 3 1/2 stars) and to be picky on location. I have gotten the best results a day or two before – often paying $60ish for a $150+ hotel room.
Yes. You won’t get a $50 room in NYC or Boston, but you might get $150 in a good location.
Do name your own price. Select locations and star rating combinations where you already know the potential options. IE: “4 stars, Financial District, Boston” as your selection may yield you really only 1 or 2 options… so you’re “blindly” naming your own price, but you already know your options are 4-Star Hotel A or 4-Star Hotel B.
Check out the BetterBidding website. Will give you some good background and has a user generated list of booked deals.
We got a hotel for $90 through Priceline that was otherwise $242 on the hotel’s website. If you’re not too picky, there are good deals to be had. Definitely recommend filtering by neighborhood though.
Do you think a woman without children could actually win a presidential election in the US in the current environment? Or an unmarried woman? If not, how long do you think that would take?
Also, I realize that single men and men without children would also have a harder time winning than men with families, but I think it’s a fair assumption that people are less kind toward single women/women without kids than they would be if that person were a man.
I think you’re right. It took this long to get a married woman with a child. I expect it will be a while before high ranking female politicians are not expected to stay home with kids while they are small (Obama/Clinton) and then enter the political arena only once the kids have finished high school. We are starting to elect women but often only ones who have lived traditional lives.
Whatever happened to Condi Rice? Has she left the RNC?
She didn’t leave the RNC, she left politics. As a republican, I wish heartily that she would reengage.
As a democrat I also wish she would jump back in. We don’t agree politically but she is an impressive woman and role model, which I think is helpful to women as a whole.
She has a seriously sweet job at Stanford and doesn’t seem to have any interest jumping back into a role that would destroy her privacy.
Probably not. Maybe if it was a Carly Fiorina-type situation and she was open about the fact that she wanted children but it didn’t happen for her.
Tangent: as a lawyer and mom, I find it disheartening that the two most recent female SCOTUS appointees are childless. I don’t mean that as a judgment of Kagan or Sotomayor as individuals or women, but there is a bit of, oh, is that what it takes to make it to the top of this profession as a woman?
I find a BigLaw lifestyle incompatible with dog ownership (or so say the dog adoption people), even with being able to fund dog walkers / doggie daycare that probably could rival daycare for humans in some places. [It is probably cat-compatible though, but I’m allergic.]
Not surprised that SCOTUS ladies are child-less (and probably dog-less), although no ladies have come from BigLaw to the SCT except as clerks. They all seem to come largely from jobs that BigLaw people go to as lifestyle jobs (and yet: no children).
It’s a very unrepresentative sample, but emblematic of what I hate about this profession. It takes a toll. All is subjugated to the almighty resume.
What? That’s cray. Half the associates I know have dogs. Yeah you might have to shell out for dog walkers more than someone with a 9 to 5, but you can totally have a dog in Big Law.
The DC dog adoption people gave me the side eye on this. Strong, strong side-eye.
Dog adoption people are nutso. Find a different shelter or lie. The shelter we adopted from wouldn’t adopt to people without yards, single people, people who hadn’t owned dogs before…never mind that these categories contain many kind, loving people who would give an unwanted dog a great home.
Dog adoption people are cray, and incapable of understanding that if they continue to be so absurd people are just going to buy a dog instead.
Plus, I was single and hadn’t owned a dog before (but had pet sat them and had had pets before, including cats that I was allergic to). I didn’t realize that shopping around would yield a different result. And the lawyer in me wouldn’t lie on a govt form (the shelter seemed to be a govt thing? or maybe not so much?). I forget.
The female associates I know who have dogs also have SOs with flexible jobs. I know one single female biglaw associate with a dog and she’s basically been told she’s not partner material, so she works from home a lot.
Dog adoption people in the upper midwest are also this crazy. We can’t adopt from most area rescues because we are having a baby and don’t have a fenced in yard…nevermind that we have a half-acre yard for the dog to play in and my husband wants to take the dog to work with him every day so it wouldn’t be alone.
For the DC Anon who works in big law and wants a dog, try CityDogsRescue – they will definitely work with you. They likely won’t give you a young puppy because its hard to see how that would work (they need to go out every 2-3 hours and can’t go to daycare yet because of lack of shots), but a dog over the age of 1 shouldn’t be an issue or even a puppy as young as 6 months, if you could do twice daily dog walkers.
Get a dog from your municipal shelter. Private rescue orgs are often batty: http://www.slate.com/articles/life/heavy_petting/2012/01/animal_rescue_want_to_adopt_a_dog_or_cat_prepare_for_an_inquisition_.html
She Sells Seashells
Around here (SF Bay Area) we have the opposite problem – many shelters don’t want to adopt to people who want outdoor dogs. What??!!
I have worked 14-16 hour days for the last week and a half, including the weekend. There is no way I could do this if I had kids. I can barely do it without kids and a supportive husband at home (but there is a limit to what he can do because he has a similar high stress long hours job). My pets miss me a lot. Where is the quit button?
+1. Totally agree. At my former Big Law firm all the women who made it to the management committee were also childless, which was similarly disheartening.
So I don’t have kids and have a career and I think the missing angle in these discussions is that a lot of us childless professional women just don’t want them. It never seemed remotely appealing, and because I don’t have them, my energy isn’t divided and I can focus on my job. I get being disheartened if you have kids by not seeing women who “have us all” in big roles, but for those of us who don’t conform to the social pressure to have kids, I see the lack of kids for successful women as a huge relief. It’s like thank goodness I don’t have to do that too to get a big job. And I hate that no one focuses on this issue for successful men.
It’s an issue internationally as well. One of the candidates for Tory party leader made a huge deal about having children in the course of the Brexit campaign, repeatedly saying ‘As a mother…’ and then said in an interview that she had more of a stake in the future than her childless competitor. Angela Merkel has been critiqued for not having children. The First Minister in Scotland doesn’t have kids (actually, 4/5 party leaders don’t) and that’s come up periodically throughout the campaign. The New Statesman ran a cover story ‘The Motherhood Trap’ which highlighted the childlessness of women leaders – with one of the most sexist covers I’ve seen.
Is it sexist though? Or just reporting on the facts as they are (in a world that finds motherhood to be at odds with basic careers even, let alone these outlier ones)?
World leaders with chilren are largely men or women who are there by birth (QE2, other royalty, not a career option for moi) or marriage (would put HRC here — do not think she’s be where she is now if not for her spouse).
Stating the fact that they don’t have kids isn’t in itself sexist but the depiction of a childless woman as somehow lacking (without a stake in the future, uninterested in issues of education, cruel, frigid or coldhearted) is. The media / political rivals aren’t asking what’s wrong with politics that it excludes mothers, they are asking what is wrong with these women that they didn’t have kids.
Disagree that Hillary would not be where she is now if not for Bill. I think it’s the other way around actually.
There’s a joke that goes: Hillary and Bill are driving near her hometown and stop to get gas and the gas station attendant is her old high school boyfriend. As they’re driving off Bill says, “Aren’t you glad you married me? If you’d married him you would be working at a gas station.” And Hillary says “If I’d married him, he’d be president.” I think there’s a lot of truth to that joke.
It’s either a joke or it’s Lady Macbeth / Sherry Palmer having a moment.
I often wonder this as well. The cynic in me says that it will take awhile to get there.
Similarly, I wonder when we’ll get to a point that an atheist could win the presidency.
Bernie came fairly close.
Did he though?
He’s not an atheist.
Bernie is a self admitted “secular Jew” which may as well be stating he’s an atheist. It’s as close as we’ve ever come.
There’s a super strong prejudice against childfree people. I’m not sure which would be worse – a single person with no children or a person who’s been married for a while and doesn’t have children.
Also, despite the fact that divorce is so common, I’m not sure that a divorced parent of either sex could get elected.
You’re not sure a divorced parent of either sex could get elected? You mean like Ronald Reagan?
(Praying it doesn’t happen!) But I don’t think Trump is on his first wife…..or second….
I meant divorced single parent.
I would guess that sexuality may play a role into one/both of their statuses as unmarried/childfree women.
Being out with a partner and raising children with that partner is definitely a relatively new thing.
Beyond Tammy Baldwin there are really no out, partnered, women with kids high in the ranks of US Gov.
Fully admit, that this speculation could just be wishful thinking on my part.
As a gay lady in the law, I’d love to have some more prominent out role models.
I’d like to replace a ponte knit black and white striped sheath dress that’s become a bit worn. I’d prefer no back zipper (they always bubble on me). Any suggestions?
I have this one and it’s surprisingly fantastic: http://amzn.to/2abssyh
Fav moment at DNC – Eva Longoria “We didn’t move, the border did.”
I love how the DNC speakers are using facts to highlight difference between themselves and the ‘truthiness’ problem at the RNC.
I fell asleep before the big speeches but I liked Lena Dunham and America Ferrerra’s. Lena Dunham normally bugs me but I thought the two of them together were great.
There was a lot of talk on CNN about the lack of balance after the Mothers of the Movement came out, but I disagreed. I thought having Eric Holder and the Pittsburg police chief speak before them was pretty good. Maybe not perfectly balanced, but both issues were acknowledged, even by the mother who said the majority of police are good people doing a good job.
I was feeling serious girl power last night, starting with Michelle’s speech the day before. Madeleine Albright! The mothers with the courage to fight for peace after burying a child! Meryl! Bill’s speech as a man (with flaws) who greatly admired his wife and had 40 years of her life to show why! But really the glass ceiling theme really resonated with me (starting with Michelle’s allusion to it before). Even as a millennial, I have seen s3xism firsthand and can’t help but think, I can’t believe this is finally happening. Cecile Richards, whose mother became Texas’s first female governor, the 102-year-old delegate from Arizona who has been alive longer than women have had the right to vote. These things mean something. That kind of progress in just one or two generations of women is incredible.
That Cecil Richards line was amazing. I didn’t know that about her mother.
+1 Eva Longoria was awesome. Michelle Obama’s speech was so inspiring. I love Cecile Richards. I’m not American but there is such a stark difference between the two conventions – hope and equality and progress vs. fear and hate. Maybe I’m a sucker but I’m finding this all very inspiring and hopeful.
That line cracked me up. Way to go, Eva.
Everyone should have to wear a name tag with their credentials. I’m so tired of people dismissing what I say as “opinion”. No its my analysis based on research and expertise. *End Rant*
Yup. Analysis is opinion though
In what world does the scientific method count as opinion? Theories are rigorously tested with the most up to date data, methods, and tools
In what world does “analysis” only mean “rigorous application of the scientific method”? I’m a lawyer. I analyze all day long. It’s still my opinion.
I guess I forgot research is synonymous for reading in some fields. But in most fields (mine included) research means labs and ethics boards and publishing and peer reviews. In which case research and the scientific method go hand in hand.
In a post-positivist world.
+10 points for knowing epistemology :). Personally I’m in the middle leaning closer towards sociocritic.
Can I have a badge? Someone tried to explain a political phenomenon that I study and teach to me on the basic of anecdata and ‘my neighbour says this…’ Yep, thanks…
Right about now, I’m always looking forward to the return of my beloved fall TV shows. I think I’m finally accepting that The Good Wife is no longer, and suddenly I’m in mourning. Anyone have any recs for a similar show? I’m looking for something with an interesting plot that requires some thinking (but not House of Cards-level thinking), strong female characters, and of course great clothes. Other current faves:
-Suits (okay, this one doesn’t require a lot of thinking, but it certainly is fun)
Damn. That’s all I’ve got. :| I don’t watch a ton of TV, but apparently a lot of my go-tos are no longer!
+1. It’s not as serious as The Good Wife or Madam Secretary, but it’s not trashy and it’s riotously funny. And definitely fits the “strong women” and “great clothes” categories.
This only fits your interesting plot requirement, but I highly recommend Mr Robot. Season 2 has already started so I guess it’s technically a summer show.
I see the ads when I watch Suits, and it looks terrifying. What’s it about, exactly?
Computer hackers. It’s really intense.
Mr. Robot definitely does not pass the Bechdel test.
Other than the the muslim woman programmer, all of the other female characters basically just act in response to the male character.
And there are way too many manic pixie dream girl characters.
No idea if it will turn out to be good, but I’m going to watch The Good Place which is starting this fall. It has Ted Danson and Kristen Bell and was created by the creator of Parks & Rec. Speaking of Ted Danson, I’ve been watching and enjoying Bored to Death which aired on HBO a few years ago (its on Amazon Prime now and probably other streaming services). It’s a comedy about a struggling writer (Jason Schwartzman) who moonlights as a private detective, but it’s more about his escapades with his friends (Zach Galifianakis and Ted Danson) and his dating life than about the detective work.
+1 on Bored to Death.
I read somewhere once that “Ted Danson makes any TV show better” and both Bored to Death and CSI:Cyber proved this. I will watch at least the first couple episodes of The Good Place for that reason.
Is that the new Kristen Bell series? I love her.
If you are into crime shows – I really loved the Closer with Kyra Sedgwick and also enjoy (to a lesser degree) Major Crimes which is the spin off staring Mary McDonnel.
The first season of Homeland was really good.
Scandal has amazing clothes and female leads.
anon a mouse
Brain Dead (from same people that did Good Wife) is good satire. It’s not a fall show though – it’s on now. Meets your other qualifications though.
Scandal and Call the Midwife are my favorites.
The Americans. Takes place in the 80s, but it is 80s done right.
LOVE The Americans!
You might try TURN – the great clothes are from 240 years ago but the rest fits. It’s about a group of spys (men and women) that served George Washington in the lead-up to the country’s founding. I adore Madam Sec so you may really like this.
Thanks for asking this. I am also in mourning about the end of The Good Wife.
My pregnant sis was just put on bed rest for the time being. She is at home, not the hospital. I live quite a few states away so I would love to send her a few things that can help make this time easier for her, and I’m hoping y’all will have some suggestions. What are some ideas for things to send to her? Thank you times a million!
Adult coloring books, get her a month or two of HBO Now so she can catch up on Game of Thrones, the latest results from Buzzfeed’s ‘What Disney Princess’ Pet’s Outfit Are you’, good blogs to catch up on, funny pinterest posts, etc.
Text her and call her to let her know you’re there but also because bed rest is (hopefully) boring. I mean, really- the goal is to be boring.
Books. Netflix subscription if she doesn’t have one.
Also if she lives in an area with food delivery, order lunch/dinner to her house?
A large, insulated cup/coffee mug with a straw for water. Pregnant women need tons of water, and it helps if you don’t have to get up every 10 minutes to refill. High-protein snacks she can keep by the side of her bed.
Books – I read Americanah while on bed rest, but also mixed it up with lighter stuff like Bossypants and Sippy Cups Are Not For Chardonnay. Magazines – my SIL brought over an issue of Vogue, and that was fun to read through, even though I’m not typically a magazine person. If your sister likes Sudoku or knitting or crosswords or other crafts, definitely send her something related to that. If she’s not, adult coloring books and a big box of crayons.
Call or text often. Like Clementine said, it’s supposed to be boring, but it helps not to feel isolated. I probably spent a good 25% of my days talking and texting with family members and close friends.
A small Keurig with an assortment of non-caffeinated tea pods to give her some variety from water. Craft kits (learn to knit, write in cursive, etc.) to keep her occupied. Coloring books are popular now. I really like the color by number ones and think they draw me in more. https://www.amazon.com/Creative-Haven-Mandalas-Number-Coloring/dp/048679797X#immersive-view_1469637682649
So got into a minor “discussion” with a friend after the Bill speech re Hillary. How is it that people like Bill and Hil come about? By that I mean– from the sounds of his speech and from what I’ve heard before — he came from humble beginnings and she came from a middle class family. Doesn’t sound like anyone had a trust fund. So they make it out of their small towns and grab the brass ring that is Yale and then go back to Arkansas to work for various non profits, take on a governorship that paid 30k/yr at the time (I know times have changed but that’s still less than what was market rate at private law firms)?? How on earth do you get THAT much education and NOT monetize it for yourself and your family first and then serve later if you want?
I know it worked out for them — they have more than they need now since they left the WH and are giving speeches left and right. But there’s no way that they knew that he’d rise to a national stage and get elected president and then would make his money after presidency; if he had remained in Arkansas state politics, no way would they have the same book deals, commencement speeches etc. Same question I have when people who are not wealthy go down the — I want to be happy route — and leave a 160k (or 200k or whatever) biglaw job bc they aren’t satisfied and would rather work at a non profit for a % of that. Every job has downsides and from what I’ve heard non profits are far from perfect — so why not stay in the private sector and make more? Where does this faith come from that if you do what you want, money will follow? How do you force yourself to take those kinds of chances? Bc there’s no guarantee that it’ll work out and then if it doesn’t, often the more lucrative options are gone bc when you apply for those, you’ll be competing with people coming from traditional paths while you’re justifying why you went a different way — I know that’s ok in lots of fields, but older lawyers are fairly traditional. Thoughts?
For Hillary at least, her drive to serve other first and seek to help people instead of fight to maximize her own financial security came from her deep Christian Faith. A central tenet of Methodism, since its founding, has been service to other. A central tenet of Christianity is service instead of personal riches.
It’s not my path, but I honestly find it a bit sad that you seem so shocked by the idea of something more important than financial gain. The Clintons aren’t really that odd- look at our nations pastors, teachers, social workers, activists, police officers, military- sure, you get paid for this, but it’s a life you chose because serving matters to you.
anon a mouse
Also, there’s a presumption in your question that everyone should want to be rich. Plenty of people don’t want to be RICH. They just want to be comfortable. There’s a big difference there. That difference is why we have people who took the same early path as the Clintons but didn’t end up running for president.
I could leave my public service job today and make 2-3x what I’m making. I’d also be miserable and have almost no time with my friends and family. And now, I wake up in the morning and I am genuinely excited and passionate about the work I do. I feel good at the end of the day about what I’ve done.
I could ask you a different question: Why don’t you want people to do what they believe in and makes them happy?
Wasn’t Hillary a corporate lawyer at the Rose firm while they were in Arkansas? I doubt they were struggling…
she took that job because they were struggling…
Given their record of public service, it seems like making a difference via politics mattered to them more than money.
I work a government job in environmental law and make half of what I would earn in private practice/consulting. I never wanted any other job. I’d much rather live a middle class life and send my kids to public school and shop at Old Navy for the kids and Banana Republic for myself. Not judging those who make other choices, but this is what makes me happy. In the same way that you are surprised people would chose to earn less, I’m often surprised that people chose to work jobs they don’t love just to afford fancier things. Different strokes for different folks.
Different people have different priorities. Everyone views money differently – how much they “need”, how much they “want”, how they relate to it, etc. Your experience and perspective will be different in some way, shape or form from literally everyone you ever meet.
Truth. I did the super high-earning route and was miserable. I found my happiness was well worth a pay cut.
Managers in pharma PR are not “super high-earning”.
Anon in NYC
100% agreed. And those views can change over time based on your circumstances.
No idea what 30k is in today’s dollars, but the Internet says $30k in 1980 is almost $90k in today’s dollars. Getting a prestigious education and then taking a government or public interest job that pays $90k or less is definitely not unheard of today, even for people who don’t come from wealth. There are a lot of studies that show that happiness isn’t correlated with money over a certain amount and that amount is fairly low, I think around 75k. Money just isn’t that big of a motivation for a lot of people. My parents are wealthy but I’m not (no trust fund, no support from them after high school graduation). I funded my education (largely with scholarships) and worked in a Big Law firm to pay off my debt but then was happy to take a much lower-paying job (<50k) that I enjoy a lot more, even though I don't have a huge amount of savings. I think your perspective might be different if you come from a family that was struggling to put food on the table every week, but many people who came from middle-class-but-not-rich homes are happy to have more modest salaries in jobs that give them a better life and don't consider money to be a be all, end all.
My hard to get into financial services agency pays lawyers right out of law school 95k. Federal law clerks — also under 90k in most cities I think.
Though the difference is often people take those jobs to get a credential that may allow them to leap frog a few levels in the private sector so they are compensated for it — just later. Different for non profits — if you’re doing victims rights or childrens rights or something — there aren’t higher paying private sector options out there typically for you to jump into when you decide you need to beef up your retirement savings or buy a house or whatever.
I have been a public defender my entire career. I graduated near the top of my class from a good school, was on law review, etc. and could have worked somewhere else making a lot more money. But that is not what is most important to me (of course, I could always use a raise, but I was raised by a single mother and put myself through school. I know how to get by on very little.) I get great satisfaction from my work and it pays enough (combined with my husband’s federal job salary) to support our three kids. Of course, we don’t drive fancy cars or take fancy vacations, but we drive older, reliable cars and take fun beach vacations. My children see everyday the importance of fighting for what is right, for helping people who need it most, and doing what we believe in. THAT matters to me. And my job is fairly flexible (depending on what is going on in my cases.)
I want to give you about 50 thumbs up. Public defenders are the best.
Being raised by a single mother is also why I’ve dedicated my life to service of others.
A big part of this is the cost of education. Idk offhand if the Clintons got full scholarships, maybe they did, but even those who had to pay their own way back in the day didn’t graduate with nearly $200k debt at 8.5% interest from law school alone. When you have that kind of debt, it’s just not a rational choice to forego a high paying job that will allow you to actually pay off the debt. And yes I know there are programs that help reduce your payments. But that doesn’t help me when I apply for a mortgage or car loan, or when I finally get the debt forgiven after, what, 30 years?, only to have to pay income tax on the amounts forgiven.
A lot of questions here. I think the simple reason is that money/extreme wealth wasn’t their driving motivation. (1) They probably did not have the type of student loans many people do now and (2) People go into government for a lot of non-money reasons like power, effecting change, job security, etc. and money – it can still be more than other jobs. (Also, while government was likely less salary than private sector law firm, the huge bubble of law firm salaries didn’t happen until later.) (3) Some people are content to do a good job at a steady career making a steady pay instead of gunning for the job with the highest salary.
Is this really your first time realizing that lots of people aren’t motivated by money? They don’t have faith that the money will follow. In fact they probably probably thought the money would not follow. They wanted to make a difference in the world and have enough to pay for their little house with the 175 month mortgage. Most people in this country get along on much much much less than people on this board.
Yes — and most people in this country are not Yale Law grads. This isn’t about how do people get by on less — of course I know they do just fine. It’s — why would you choose to do so if you had the degrees to do better??
You define “better” as more money. What numerous posters here are telling you is that is for many people, not the only measure or even the primary measure of success.
You think “better” means “maximal financial gain.” Many find that position immoral and instead think that if they have had such a great education they should do “better” by helping people with less. It’s sad for me that you’ve apparently never encountered this concept.
Why does “better” have to mean “higher-paying?” It’s been discussed a lot here before, but “high-achieving” and “high-earning” are not synonyms. In both my family and my husband’s, the “best,” most prestigious thing you can do is become a tenured professor at a research university and while those jobs eventually usually pay over $90k, they don’t pay anything close to Big Law or medicine or finance (and they require many years of grad school and postdocs where you are probably making $30-50k). Many of my friends are engineers with degrees from top 5 school and while they’re doing just fine compared to many people, with a salary in the low $100s (which is not that far off what $30k was when Clinton was governor of Arkansas), they could be earning way, way more on Wall Street. Would that be better in your opinion? Or are they allowed to help the tech sector innovate while enjoying their lives and earning plenty to fund their modest lifestyles?
I am so confused why this is a question. I graduated summa from an Ivy League school, got a fancy scholarship to Oxford, then got another degree from another Ivy (both were Harvard/Yale level). I make 80k a year. I could make so much more than this if I’d gone into consulting or ibanking 12 years ago, like half of my graduating class. Or if I’d gotten an MBA or a JD from H/Y/S (and based on my resume and test scores, these options would have been available to me). But I didn’t want to do those things, I wanted to go into public policy, and now I earn more than enough to live on and I am thrilled to be doing the work that I do. Some people just care about things other than money – surely that’s obvious?
I’m entering a job come September, just out of law school, that pays $46,000. It’s at a nonprofit. And it’s my dream job. My goal isn’t to be rich. It’s to do good and I see the job I’ll be doing as how I can do good. People can and do live good, fulfilling, happy lives on less than big law salary. The original comment disgusted me. I don’t think I’m going to be rich. I’m not helping other people stay rich. I’m helping people who, without me, would be totally screwed by this system. I’m part of providing access to justice and that’s way more important to me than a pay check.
My cousin is a lawyer. She did her undergrad at an Ivy league school and went to a T8 law school, both on full scholarships. She graduated near the top of her class and had offers from AM top one hundred firms as well as the government and international firms. She works at a non profit making about $37,000 a year, takes public transit, lives in a small apartment and buys her clothes from thrift stores. She helps crime victims, people who cannot afford lawyers and sometimes is brought in to help as a public defender. She’s won cases against some pretty good lawyers. She cares about helping people. The money (and prestige) doesn’t matter to her. She would be miserable if she was working at a Biglaw firm, even if she got paid six figures. Some people don’t care about the money. No judgement, everyone is different. But there are people like my cousin out there.
Yeah I just don’t get this. After toiling away at an ivy undergrad and T8 law school, I’d prefer NOT to be in a super small apartment and thrift store shopping. There is NO job in the world that could satisfy me enough that I’d live that kind of life by choice when I had the degrees to do better.
Who is going to fund her retirement? Or does she not think about that?
If you live a $37,000 lifestyle and don’t have student loans, you need a lot less money to retire on than someone making six figures with BigLaw golden handcuffs. Your position also implies that the only reason to push yourself academically or professionally is to make money–that’s absolutely not true. I’m nowhere near as fancy as Anonymous at 10:53’s cousin, but I went to a top-shelf public school for undergrad; saw all my classmates aiming for careers in law, business, and medicine, or going straight to NoVa to work for McKinsey or Bain; and decided that those paths were not for me. I wanted to do a job where I made a difference in people’s lives and felt like more than a gear in some billion-dollar corporate machine, but also could have a life outside of work. I make a solid middle-class wage in a LCOL city working for a public university. I love what I do, I push myself professionally because I care about my field and my students, I love my life, and it is (shockingly to some readers here, I’m sure) in fact possible to save money for retirement, major life goals, and vacations while making $41,000 a year.
Different people have different goals. I’m not knocking anyone whose main goals are to make bank, have a big house, and never shop in a thrift store–if that’s what matters to you, go for it. But I’ll still be over here, mindfully pursuing my own path in life, while wearing a dress that I got secondhand for pennies on the dollar.
She probably is. By saving her pennies and planning on living modestly in retirement. Not everyone goes to law school to get rich.
Truth. And having a big salary is no guarantee of a solid retirement. I know way too many high-earners who are swamped in debt.
Yep. I think, at least above a minimum threshold (maybe 50-75k depending on COL), there’s very little correlation between earnings and retirement savings. My ex-BFs parents earned close to a million in a year but had NOTHING in the bank, because their lifestyle was so crazy. My parents earned less than $100k combined for most of their working lives but now have over $1 million in the bank because they were frugal and lived within their means.
+1. Read “The Millionaire Next Door” or listen to the “Millionaire Hour” on the Dave Ramsey show. Plenty of people earning well below 100K a year who end up millionaires through deliberate life choices (saving, budgeting, prioritizing, etc).
I am a private sector lawyer with a big salary. My brother is military (enlisted, not an officer). When he purchased a new car a few years ago, he was so excited to tell me how much he was able to put down in cash (from his savings). It was MORE than I had in savings at the time, because I was living high on the hog with my big salary and not saving enough. Keep in mind that my annual bonus was more than his salary. So it was a HUGE wakeup call to me that I needed to fix my priorities and start seriously saving.
Also I was damn, damn proud of him for being so smart with his money.
The degrees to do better? Do you think history remembers the big law associates who toil away for 200k a year? That’s not better- people go into public service to change history. Maybe it’s them that do it, maybe they teach the person that does it or keeps the community safe for the person to do it. It’s kind of laughable that you are unable to comprehend that better doesn’t have to mean more money. Its fine for financial security to be important to you but you are coming off as very shallow here.
toiling away at school for free… some people enjoy learning. You seem like a terrible person.
I think that the biggest thing is the freedom that comes from not having debt.
Also, if I had the $ to pay for this sort of education lying around, I’d urge my child to go to state U and spend the rest on a paid-off house somewhere. And enjoy the peace that being able to decide your path gives you.
My husband and I took these chances, but not to their extent since obviously we aren’t famous. He grew up so poor he went to college on Pell grants and Perkins loans, I grew up middle class but certainly no trust fund or anything like that. We want to be comfortable, not rich, and we’re both happier doing what we’re doing. That said, we took this leap earning about $70k combined in 2009 and are now earning $150k combined, so obviously for us we busted our rumps and the money did finally start to follow.
I think it is different priorities, different goals and a different view about whether you are monetizing. I grew up in generational, abject poverty. I did well in college and law school and turned down big firm options to go the public interest/public sector path. My interest in fighting for social justice professionally was the driving force–and stemmed from both my faith and my own experiences as a child living in poverty. Because of Pell, I don’t have undergrad debt and because of public interest loan forgiveness, I have known that my law school debt would eventually be forgiven. My first post-clerkship job paid 35K (10 years ago). That was, to me, enough money. Certainly more than my parents had made in some recent years (combined). Now I am still in public service and I make six figures. My husband (from a typical WASP middle class) is also in public service and makes six figures. I feel like we did monetize our educations and are able to simultaneously serve. I have never needed faith that if I do what I want, money will follow—-that wasn’t ever the goal, really. And I took those chances because I had seen my own family live on so much less and felt this insatiable desire to serve.
My friends make lots more money than I do and have made different choices and have different priorities. And I am okay with that–you do you. I am just doing me.
Aside from the fact that, as others have noted, some people aren’t driven by money, I think you misconstrue the lifestyle that government jobs afforded the Clintons. I grew up (in the 90s) middle-middle class; my parents, a government worker and a blue-collar worker, made a total of about 60-70K per year for our family of 4 in a LCOL area. We always had food on the table and the bills and mortgage were paid, but our vacations were places within driving distance, we bought used cars, and I didn’t go to fancy camps or anything. I paid for college through loans and scholarships and paid my living expenses on a 20K/year job.
Coming from that background, having a job that pays 70K/year for a starting salary (which I believe is about the average government salary for an entry-level lawyer) seemed like an enormous sum of money. I knew I could easily live on that and save for retirement because my idea of a comfortable lifestyle did not include international vacations or fancy cars or a luxury apartment. I can imagine it felt the same for Bill and Hillary – it didn’t feel like as much of a “sacrifice” to turn down a lot of money in the private sector because a 200K salary was not their baseline of what a comfortable life felt like. Add that to their drive to make change in the world, and it makes total sense.
Agreed. $30k is certainly a lot more now than it was in the early 1980s, but I live in an area with a cost of living similar to Arkansas, and honestly, plenty of families live pretty comfortably here on $30k a year even in 2016. It’s unfathomable to New Yorkers, I know. But a decent single family home here can be had for less than $100k. If you want to be in the best school district or have a shiny, fancy home you might be looking at $200-250k. That’s less than 1/10th of what housing costs in the Bay Area or NYC, so if you’re comparing the salaries, you should think of $30k in Arkansas as $300k in NYC. Doesn’t sound so bad then, does it?
My husband and I make around $100k combined, and honestly, we feel filthy rich for our area. We own our home outright, have spent a lot of money upgrading it, eat out whenever we want, and take regular luxury vacations, all while saving a ton of money. If there was something we wanted to do that would require a 60% pay cut, we would do it in a heartbeat. I’m not trying to brag – I know in many parts of the country we’d be barely scraping by, but our area (like Arkansas) is just so absurdly cheap. You can’t talk about salaries without putting cost of living into the mix.
Well, the pursuit of more money doesn’t necessarily lead to more security or more happiness. Sure, I could chase money my entire career and one day I might make $500,000+ but what for? I don’t need to make $500,000/year to live comfortably, support a family and have a comfortable retirement. My husband and I can live very comfortably on $150k combined/year, save $25k/year, and still fully fund our 401ks, IRAs, etc. Every dollar over $150k is nice, but it comes at a different price. I have to start asking what it costs me to make that $1 and too often it comes at the expense of my personal freedom, time with my husband or my health.
And that’s not even touching on the kind of people who feel so strongly about service and duty that they’d sacrifice their own personal comfort and security to help others. I aspire to that.
That dovetails with this, which is now a little old but immediately came to mind – http://lifehacker.com/5632191/75000-is-the-perfect-salary-for-happiness
Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar. Hillary gave her own commencement address at Wellesley. With those bona fides, I think they each had the confidence to know that it would turn out ok in the long run.
some people aren’t concerned about maximizing their earning potential. i think it’s really as simple as that.
I am struggling with this right now – have some golden handcuffs but wondering if I could afford to go from biglaw to a nonprofit making less than half of what I make now.
I want to say that I don’t have to be “rich” to be happy, but I do have a lot of liabilities including children and aging parents who have a less than reliable retirement plan. I worry that the stress of having a tighter budget would become another beast of its own and supplant the job stress I’ve been feeling until now.
Anyone leave a high paying job for something like a nonprofit and regretted it?
I don’t think the responses here should make you feel guilty about sticking with the higher paying job if that is what works best for you. Responses to OP were based on OP’s suggestion that money is the only way to measure success and people that are earning more are doing ‘better’ than those that earn less.
Take a hard look at your budget and to the extent possible, try living on the lower salary for 6 months and see what that would be like (don’t cut expenses related to the more hours aspect of your current job – e.g. ordering take out – because those expenses will be less a factor if a new job).
It doesn’t even matter if the money “follows.” I’m a civil servant because I believe strongly in serving my country and its people. I love this country. I didn’t come in to it thinking I may miraculously end up rich in 25 years? I make a competitive salary, yes, less than I would make in private sector, but it’s enough to be comfortable (maybe not luxurious, but comfortable – and certainly more than fine as part of a DINK situation) and I have upward earning potential.
I also have amazing work-life balance. I have a friend who is in a higher COLA (Bay area) who makes about 20% more than me, pays 50% more in housing, and works around-the-clock. I come in, do my job well and hard for 80 hours every other week, and then I get to live my life. The extra money wouldn’t be worth the flexibility, anyway.
And yeah, I came from a nonprofit background and they have their issues too. But many people feel very strongly about the causes and their ability to affect change there, too. Money isn’t everything.
It’s all about priorities and knowing what will make you happy. I grew up in a poor, crime-ridden neighborhood and wanted to get the hell out. It wasn’t easy to put myself through college and grad school but I was determined to have a different life than what many of the kids I grew up with. All along though, my goal was to be happy and financially secure, so I stopped pushing up at some point. At least for Bill, I think it’s easier to push yourself up when you’re already at the bottom.
I cannot speak to the Clinton’s motivations, but: there are a lot of lawyers who retire from politics to get jobs at law firms. Their name recognition and connections are an asset to the firm.
Former governors and US Congressmen are fine. They can figure out how to make their lives work.
And it’s a pretty nice retirement package….
How much does everyone put aside for retirement/into their savings account? I’m saving 10 percent ($90 every bi-weekly pay). I put half away for retirement because I don’t have any kind of pension or retirement through my work, and the other half goes into a general savings account for a rainy day. Just curious what percent everyone saves (if you don’t mind sharing).
I max out my 401K and Roth IRA, which comes to about 15-20% of my annual income.
Another 10% goes to savings.
401K and Roth IRA are types of retirement funds or pensions? (sorry if it’s an obvious question, we don’t have those in my country)
401K and Roth IRAs are retirement plans in the US. A 401K is tied to your employer but it’s up to the employee whether and how much they contribute to it. Sometimes employers will also contribute to an employee’s 401K. An IRA is not tied to employment. As long as a person earns income, they can contribute to an IRA, although the limit on contribution is much lower than 401Ks.
6% of my annual pay is going into my retirement account. About 10% of my take home pay is going to build up my emergency fund until I get to 6 months of expenses. Once I reach that point though, I’m going to shift most of that 10% saving to paying extra on my loans.
I hadn’t done the math to figure out my savings percentage and am feeling better about it now!
I put 10% into my 401k, my employer matches 4%, for a total of 14%. Husband does similar.
I don’t have a set % I save in a savings account. We have a year or two (depending on lavishness of lifestyle) worth of expenses saved in our emergency fund and aren’t saving for any particular goal at this point. We pretty much spend the remainder of our paychecks each month, but that includes paying $800 extra on our mortgage each month and paying for daycare, which is crazy expensive.
Currently saving about 8% of gross income. 5.5% goes into IRA (retirement) and 2.5% into emergency savings fund. It works out to about 12% of my monthly take home. I also usually make a lump contribution at tax time that pushes me to 10-12% gross income in savings. I’d like to do more, but 15% currently goes to student loans. When those are paid off (within the next 2 years), most of that will be rolled into retirement savings.
For retirement, I save a little over 8% (not sure of the exact rate since there’s one option that isn’t calculated on a percentage basis; total is around $385/month or $190/pay period) on auto-draft with slightly over 4% in employer match, for a little over 12% total. Since my living expenses have gone way down, I’ll start contributing to my personal Roth IRA again, probably in the vicinity of 4%-5%.
I try to save a lot more for emergencies and planned expenses. My goal is 30% of my take-home pay; I haven’t been hitting that for the last few months due to a cocktail of financial emergencies on top of already-planned vacations/weddings on top of a two-month snarl with reimbursements for a large work expense, but I’m going to get back on track ASAP since I moved in with my boyfriend and my rent basically got cut in half. The good news is that due to a history of solid saving, it wasn’t a crisis and I was able to cash-flow almost everything. And that is the PSA of the day for a health emergency fund. Way to go for getting started, OP!
HealthY emergency fund, although in fact I did have to use a solid chunk of money for a health-related bill as well ;)
15% with 3.5% employer match into 401k, max out Roth IRA, plus a ridiculous percentage (like 50%) into general savings that’s not designated. Childless and rent free.
Go you! That’s awesome! Are you planning to stick with savings or starting to invest some of that 50%?
Between my 457 (maxed out) and my mandatory half of my pension contribution, 25%. I won’t be contributing any more than that until I no longer have student loans (I’m on PSLF right now).
25% is a lot, especially in your first 10 years of working (PSLF – I assume). I’d be shocked if anyone asked you why you weren’t contributing even more.
I have no choice on my pension (it was fully employer funded and then the state changed how they were funded) and at this point, I benefit on my loan payments by saving more for retirement, so it’s a win win! I would like to have a bigger emergency fund, so that’s my next goal.
10% into retirement (5% me, 5% employer match). I don’t save money otherwise, my “savings” budget line goes to debt repayment.
For retirement, I save about 14% plus 4% employer match, 18% total. I was focused on building up an emergency savings. However, now that I’ve got about 4 months saved, I only put 5-10% of each paycheck into that savings until I build up to 6 months. And I have shifted the amount I would normally put towards savings to student loans. Once I’m up to 6 months, I’ll put the entire amount currently going to emergency savings towards student loans.
19% of my salary goes towards maxing out my IRA and 401(k) (I also get a partial match but I don’t count that)
19% of my salary goes into savings
And then anything left over in checking at the end of each pay period gets transferred to savings
I also save part of my bonus depending on that year’s priorities.
20% of my salary goes into my 401(k) — I max it out and my employer has a very generous contribution + matching.
And then I save about 50% of my take-home income.
No kids, no car, student loans are paid off, and my husband and I live in a small, cheap place in a great location.
I make 85k, with sometimes a up to 10% bonus (maybe every 3 years this happens, usually it’s like 3-4%). I max out my 401k, roth IRA and also save ~9k a year for a future downpayment.
I hate my hair so much that I am having daily fantasies about buzzing it off. I have been either pregnant or nursing for the past 3 years. It is curly and graying, frizzy and thin, dry and awful. And I now live in a humid swamp. I have had cuts from the “best curly hair stylists” to no avail. I would like to continue to color the grays but I am also considering some sort of straightening treatment. Japanese? or Brazilian? Why does one pick one over the other? Can I still color my hair with either? HELP
You can color your hair with Japanese, but not two weeks before or after, so you have a month where you need to deal with gray.
Brazilian allows you to keep your curl, it just eliminates frizz. You need to do it every 3 months or so.
Japanese gives you pin straight hair. You cannot curl it or anything else (which is a bonus for me). My hair air dries pin straight and stays that way, even in crazy Florida swamp humidity. If your hair grows slowly and is just frizzy/wavy like mine, you can get it done once a year. If you have very curly hair and it grows relatively fast, you’ll have to get it done every 6-12 months.
You could get the gray colored and then straightened 2 weeks later.
Anyhow, if your hair is thin, I don’t know if the japanese straightening makes sense.
Talk to a stylist though, as I recall them being able to add a color halo/mask at the same time as my straightening in the past.
How often do you wash your hair? Mine is very curly and I live in a very humid climate. A few years ago I started washing it on a once a week only schedule, and it really improved the dryness. That said though I neither color nor straighten it, so YMMV.
My knees make me really self-conscious when I wear skirts / shorts that show them. I have two a circular patch of thick, dry, dark skin on each one. Exfoliating with scrubs / loofahs hasn’t made a dent. What can I do to get my knees back? [I am worried they are permanently calloused after spending a year on my knees crawling after a baby!]
Maybe experiment with glycolic acids or other AHA products? You can get body lotions with AHAs in them.
Bug bite and scars have always taken longer to heal on my legs, so I’m guessing the skin turnover is just slower.
Use something with strong acids, like Gold Bond Rough and Bumpy or similar (like AmLactin Ultra, etc). It’ll take a couple weeks of consistent application.
You might try the Amope foot file. It’s like a pumice stone on a dremel.
This could be eczema? I’d talk to a dermatologist.
Epsom salt baths (or spray if you don’t have the time for baths) seemed to help my feet when they were like this, but in combination with daily exfoliating with those gloves they sell at the drug store and lots of Shea and coconut oil
Recommendations for a dermatologist in DC or NOVA?
If it’s not an issue you need to see somebody in person for – I use the Spruce app for acne and it’s great.
Recommend AVOIDING Alexandria Associates in Dermatology at all costs. Horrible experience there, appointment was like an hour late, waiting room was PACKED (it was obviously just a mill), doctor took about 90 seconds with me and wanted to prescribe a topical that I knew was not covered by my insurance and more than I wanted to pay…. ugh. And I was only seen because I told them I couldn’t stay and was leaving. Twice. Once in the waiting room and once in the exam room.
I like Integrated Dermatology. They have an office on K Street and another on 19th St NW. I’ve gone for both acne and annual mole/skin cancer checks.
Last night I found that the Babliss Pro Hair dryer that was discussed yesterday is available for delivery from Prime Now. So, I could have ordered it at 7 pm for delivery in an hour. I just couldn’t do it. I would have tipped but I just felt guilty.
Today I’m going to make a grocery list and add that to my delivery too.
Why on earth do you fell guilty using Prime Now? Am I missing something?
It is their job but making them come deliver me a blow dryer in an hour seemed like too much.
But that’s the only way they make money. The prime now and same day deliverers are contractors paid per delivery. No delivery=no cash.
Our delivery drivers are recent immigrants and a mom with a van full of kids. It feels icky for them to come to my fancy neighborhood to bring me a hair dryer. But you’re right, if I don’t order they don’t get paid…
Do you think they’d prefer to not have a job?
Is that a thing? Tipping the Amazon guys too? I totally missed that one.
Not in my world. What’s next, tipping the postman? Tipping the fedex guy? No. That is insane.
I thought federal government employees (which includes USPS) legally can’t accept tips or valuable gifts but I could be wrong.
I learned that rural carriers are not in the postal union, FWIW.
Prime Now Drivers and Same Day Delivery drivers are usually independent contractors
I tip the postman annually as is expected.
That is a violation of their policy and you’re putting your postman into a situation where you are likely causing them to violate their ethics policy. https://about.usps.com/postal-bulletin/2012/pb22349/html/cover_025.htm
On the Prime Now ap they suggest a 10% tip and it’s automatically added. I usually up it
That seems kind of crazy to tip based on cost of the product, vs the size or weight. Is a fancy hairdryer really worth an extra $10 over a similarly sized product that costs $10 instead of over $100?
Just to add- I have this dryer too and you will love it. My hair dried in half the time and is shiny :)
I have been identified as a top performer…with lots of kudos. But my department is structured in such a way that I won’t be promoted for another 10 years. It is such a flat organization. Today, HR did a talent review and asked me my career goals, and I replied, “I would like to be promoted within the next decade.” Yes, I was throwing shade. And it felt sooooo good.
Did they pick up on the shade?
Yes, and I loved it. They said, “Surely you can do better than that!”. And I replied, “Check the department’s history on promotions.” It was a friendly conversation, but they got my point.
Mine is not this bad, but I found out yesterday that my boss has been trying to get me a raise FOR A YEAR. He also said he would have promoted me 6 months ago if he could. He knows I’m underpaid, I know I’m underpaid, everyone knows I am underpaid. I am so frustrated that after glowing reviews, being told I am a consistently high performer, that he wouldn’t change anything about my performance except for me to get more experience and training in some of the areas we are getting pushed on due to heavier government scrutiny, etc., but nothing major at all. I am really good at my job, I have a great work schedule, I like my coworkers, I like my job, and my commute is great, so I am not going any where yet, but it’s so frustrating. He asked me to be patient about the raise – I scheduled a meeting to talk about career direction, etc. – and said they are closer than they ever have been to getting it for me. GAH!
Looking for advice on when to broach the subject of a future full-time salary position with my manager.
I am 12 months into an 18 month contract employment, and this company has a history of offering full-time positions to agency hires at the end of successful contracts. At this point, I am taking on the same level of responsibility as the other salary engineers in my team, and I’m interested in staying on with this group long-term. However, I am all too aware of how drastically our section’s budget fluctuates quarter to quarter and given our current “austerity” period, I have no guarantee of a future here past my contract. At what point is it appropriate to discuss this topic with my manager? All advice is much appreciated!
I just wanted to say THANK YOU to women on this board and to those of you who are willing to be honest with young associates. I am considering a few job offers and reached out blindly to a woman who used to work at both, and she gave me all the dirt, the best and worst parts of each firm. I can weigh my options so much better and feel 100% more confident in my decision. I hope I have the opportunity to do the same for another young associate someday!
I know a lot of the people on this board would do the same thing this woman did–I thanked her profusely but also wanted to tell you all how grateful I am for the excellent, thoughtful advice I’ve seen here. It is SO appreciated by young associates in real life, too!!
Sorry if this was already brought up in a previous thread, but has anyone seen the AAM about the coworker stealing their spicy food? My gawd…
That’s absolutely nuts.
Another retirement question...
I have a 401(a) mandatory plan that I have to contribute to, a 403(b) voluntary plan that I will contribute to, and a 403(b) defined contribution plan that my employer contributes to. Which of these count toward my $18K IRS limit? And am I correct that if my husband and I each have retirement accounts we can each contribute $18K, even if we’re married filing jointly?
I don’t know about the first but the second, each contributing 18K, that’s a yes. My husband and I do that, though he prefers to frontload on his payments and I prefer to have it distributed evenly throughout my paychecks.
401(a) is subject to the IRS annual Code section 415 limit of $53k (which totals up both employee and employer contribs), but is not subject to the $18k max.
403(b) is subject to the $18k max on your own contribs and the $53k limit, too.