Coffee Break: Reversible Faux Leather Tote

174 Comments

1. Has anyone here tried LightBox Jewelry? Any comments of price/quality?

   1. Isn’t that the lab grown brand for DeBeers? Not a company I’d support but some of their designs are pretty.

      If you’re looking for lab diamonds have you considered looking on etsy? Lots of smaller shops on that site use lab diamonds…

2. It’s interesting that we were talking about the marriage penalty yesterday. I follow tax policy and to me, it was always a philosophical irritant — a tax policy that penalizes a second (usually female) earner in a married couple penalized women working, very acutely if that second earner also had kids. So once you pay for child care, which you could avoid by having one parent stay home, and paid for taxes at the higher rate out of the second earner’s wages (since the first worker might be in a lower bracket or not hit a phase-out), there was maybe only 25% of the “earned” second income that was actually spendable in the household budget (so, yes, more $, but often at a cost of schedule complexity, more takeout meals, more reliance on paid child care, arguing over who takes off for a sick kid, and drama; TLDR — often just not worth the hassle unless there are huge bennies (401k match, free health care, etc.). It would make me so angry and cynical at my LGBT neighbors who were previously agitating to get married (“be careful what you wish for, egalitarian earners” (often hit bad by this, especially if no kids)). It was particularly bad in the Clinton years, and oddly, Trump made the marriage penalty much less onerous (I know, of all people).

   I just read that in the Biden tax plan, to be officially unveiled tomorrow, he is aiming to make changes that will significantly broaden the marriage penalty, which will hit so many readers of this blog hard. Women’s careers matter! Especially egalitarian earners or married women with children. He wanted our votes and now he just can’t do this to us.

   1. I’m having trouble following the first paragraph of your post. Do you have an article or something to link to?

      1. My guess would be the tax code, but that’s a bit dense for a casual reader.

      2. She’s saying the juice (second income) isn’t worth the squeeze for many working parents because of the penalty.

         Yes, you get a second income, but:
         -Lose qualification for many tax credit opportunities because they’re evaluated on HHI
         -Pushed into a higher tax bracket so a greater % of that income is taxed than it would be if you were single
         -Out of pocket childcare costs (nanny, daycare, after-school care)
         -Incidental expenses you incur because your dual-working schedule is more hectic (such as more takeout rather than from-scratch cooking).

         In many cases – the marginal benefit of the second earner is pretty small, and in the heavy childcare expense years, in some cases you’re just breaking even in order to preserve your place in the workforce.

         1. “preserve your place in the workforce” being pretty key if you want that job when your kids are in school or you want to career trajectory.

            1. Different anon, but you also don’t want to miss out on those years of retirement savings – compound interest is a real thing!

            2. Anon at 3:04 – I totally agree and on re-reading see my view isn’t clear. Even if you’re just treading water, you’re avoiding having to battle to re-enter the workforce after years away.

            3. I’m with you in theory. Some days, I feel like I’ve just been treading water despite feeling exhausted and at some point, my head is going to sink under the water and not come back up. I’d like to be in for the long term, but working in a 2 career household with kids may do me in first.

      3. The tax rates for married filing jointly essentially treat all household income as that of one earner, so the second salary is taxed at a pretty high marginal rate. You can’t get around it by filing as married filing separately, because those rates are higher than filing singly. It would make more sense to shack up than to get married for dual high earners, tax-wise, if there were no other benefits to marriage.

         I’ve been paying the marriage tax for decades now and it’s annoying AF. It’s based on the idea that the second income is optional *laughs in Bay Arean*

         1. Right? That second income is just for pin money.

            I think this confirms what I’ve suspected — as much as politicians claim to live in the real world and be copacetic with us common folk, they don’t even understand the laws they pass. Or they don’t care — it’s like like Senator A is likely from a state contiguous with DC and has to get the kids to soccer practice or afford the purchase of a new house these days; or Rep B has to miss a vote to stay home with sick kid 2 or 3 states away with little notice.

   2. 1) Let’s wait and see what actually comes out.
      2) Let’s wait and see what actually passes Congress.
      3) Let the 99% of us here who aren’t earning $7.25/hr as childcare workers or $18/hr as construction workers that Biden’s policies are designed to help be thankful that we have the time, education, and internet access to complain knowledgably about tax policy. He needed our votes; he wants theirs. (Aka, I firmly believe that almost none of us here would be hurt by paying more taxes for the overall betterment of society.)

      1. I think that why should married people in a couple pay more than unmarried people in a couple that makes the same amount of $. Considering that the survivorship benefits afforded married people that inure more to women (the lesser-paid longer-living half of the couple), it would benefit women in general not to have deciding to get married come at a cost like this. There is already a slight cost to being married in a two-earner couple, but there should not be a significant cost. The tax law should treat couples equally (so for same-gender couples, the penalty still applies if they are married).

         1. They’re welcome to get divorced

            1. Should you have to though? And won’t the govt then just raise taxes on everyone (probably the right move, but let’s just stick it to working women).

            2. It’s only sticking it to working women using your extremely weird and inaccurate way of describing it.

      2. Why do you believe you will be paying more taxes for the betterment of society? That is quite unlikely. You will be paying more taxes to service the debt, the defense budget, and to maybe fund our underfunded social programs — Medicare and Social Security, and of course a bunch of projects supported by lobbyists. It’s naïve to think taxes will rise and the money will be spent on social programs that you think are worthy.

         More than 50% of US citizens pay no federal income tax at all. A small segment of the population is basically carrying everyone else with their taxes, and that isn’t fair either. Yes, yes, I get it the person making $7.25 an hour shouldn’t be paying federal income tax, but let’s not ignore the fact they are paying absolutely not one single cent.

         1. The middle class taxpayer supports both the poorest and the wealthiest, and always has. But the support for the wealthiest has only increased over the last 20 years.

         2. you seem to imply that Medicare, Social Security, and debt service (i.e. perpetuating global trust in the US Dollar which ultimately everybody’s savings and investments rely on) aren’t worthwhile endeavors.

            1. I’m not implying that at all. I am stating that Anon at 2:28 believes increased taxes will go to the betterment of society and I don’t agree. Medicare & social security are tremendously important, but we already have them. Actually funding them isn’t going to better society, we are already reaping those benefits but on borrowed money.

            2. Medicare and other Social Security programs aren’t funded by federal income tax. They’re funded by separate taxes that are often referred to as payroll taxes. The marriage tax discussion is about federal income taxes.

   3. What on earth is this nonsense? That’s not how it works at all.

      1. Not OP, but yes, that’s exactly how it works. Look at an IRS tax table.

   4. Yep. My husband is a SAHD in large part because of the economics in your first paragraph. He was working long, irregular hours, including evenings and Saturdays, for $42K/year (probably $14-15 an hour) with no benefits and no overtime. Once we subtracted taxes, the net was about $30K. The first year we had a child, we had a nanny because no infant daycare spots opened up. (In my area, you have to get on the waiting list before you get pregnant.) We paid her more than $30K, and I still handled all the evening and Saturday childcare. After about a year, Kiddo went to daycare, and DH’s income brought in about $15K. It was nice to have, but it’s nicer not having to worry about what to do when our son is sick or when daycare (now school) is closed, plus having someone who can take care of the house, run errands, cook dinner, etc. It’s been REALLY nice to have a SAH parent during the pandemic. Our son is neuro-atypical and has OT and play therapy several afternoons a week, and he can’t go to regular summer camps (the one he goes to is either 9-12 or 9-2), so that makes having a SAH parent an even better fit for our family. But the economics of it are pretty brutal even without that factor.

      1. When I was in DC, pre-TCJA, I feel like it was the nail in the coffin for a lot of couples once they had kids. Like it was just a hard life and throw in a long commute or traffic or kid with some needs that involve you driving them places a lot (we had some medical issues early on with one kid) and it was just time to throw in the towel and not a huge marginal hit to household income. And once a lot of women stop working, they never really go back and their careers pretty much often evolve into jobs. I just don’t like the government having such a heavy thumb on the scale. Life is hard and unfair and it’s like the universe is telling you not to bother; your contributions are of marginal importance to your family in a way that you can actually quantify.

   5. I think you’re confusing the marriage tax penalty with the effect marginal tax rates have on discouraging a second income earner. The marriage tax penalty has mostly been eliminated, but occurs when a couple pays more in taxes than they would if both filed as individuals. For most people, the standard deductions and tax brackets for couples are twice the individual rate, so there’s no marriage penalty (exceptions are some of the deductions like medical expenses and some benefits like the stimulus payments and a few other things).

      However, that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t affect the marginal rate on a second income compared to just one person working and making less total. In that case, all of the second income is taxed at the highest marginal rate. I live in CA, so both of us working compared to one means that all of the second income is in the 22% federal and 9.3% state brackets, plus FICA, so you only take home ~60% of the second income. But if we weren’t married, we still pay pretty much the same amount of the taxes- we’d each have half the standard deduction and half as much in each tax bracket. In our case, he makes twice what I make, so his taxes would be a higher fraction of his income and mine would be lower, but they’d add up to the same amount total. If we weren’t married and either of us made more money, that increased salary would still be taxed at a high marginal rate because that’s what a progressive income tax structure does. I don’t know what the Biden plan is, but I assume it does involve higher marginal rates for high income people and that seems totally fair to me.

      1. I think that the marriage penalty is more acute in the higher brackets, but any time you mess with married people, you can inadvertently squeeze the lowest brackets (including people not taxed) because a lot of programs rely on that for eligibility, etc. If you are low income and married, HHI includes spousal income. Not true for an unmarried partner. You phase out of a lot of benefits and services and eligibility. I feel that that sting is totally unfair.

         1. What benefits and services? I’m struggling to think of benefits for low-income folks that aren’t dependent on family size.

            1. Read about the movement for marriage equality for the disabled.

            2. Yes, marriage penalty for people with disabilities is a great example of where this really is a massive penalty. Elizabeth Warren had some very good plans to improve benefits for people with disabilities and I really hope Biden incorporates as much as he can.

            3. But a lot are also dependent on HHI, so your household is your $, if single or HOH filing status, even if you have a BF/roommate who also makes $ and you share expenses. But your HHI may rise beyond the allowable limits if you get married because now both incomes are counted (even if family size goes up).

            4. “a lot are also dependent on HHI”

               I am literally asking you which ones.

         2. Yes, totally agree marriage penalty does still affect eligibility for some benefits and deductions and the phase in/out of things like the extra medicare tax, and that’s bad. It also affects people with kids who could each file as head of household if single. But if we’re just talking about typical people with wage income and no kids/kids belonging to both of them, there’s only a penalty for couples that make above ~$600k, which is a very small percentage of people.

            https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-are-marriage-penalties-and-bonuses

            1. That’s not true — I knew plenty of people hit AMT once they got married (and no single people paying it) and I assure you, they were making a fraction of 600K with two workers’ incomes factored in. I don’t know anyone making over 600K.

            2. I don’t dispute there are places that people run into the marriage penalty, but one good thing the TCJA did was greatly reduce the situations where it occurs, including by making the AMT less likely to apply. Once you have more complicated taxes with lots of deductions (the only way the AMT applies, which is why it doesn’t affect that many single people without kids), it’s totally possible you have issues. My point is just that people with simple taxes (standard deduction, wage income) mostly won’t run into it anymore and that the marriage penalty is not what the OP is actually complaining about. Her issue is with the progressive tax structure more broadly and the incentives it creates.

            3. From your link:

               A couple with two incomes and no children, for example, could pay more taxes as a married couple if tax brackets for joint filers were less than twice as wide as for single filers. Today, that happens only for couples with income above $622,000, but it was more common before the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

               So if the law changes, it will probably hit a TON more people than it does now. With the law set to change, hold on to your wallets.

            4. Two parents cannot both claim Head Of Household. I’m not a tax pro but I remember being told only one parent could post divorce.

            5. I…don’t think that’s true? I didn’t have stellar grades in tax and took it a few years ago now, but I think as long as you have the right combination of qualified dependents and no second income in your household, anyone can file HOH. I’m not sure kids can be claimed as dependents by both parents in the same tax year though; is that what you meant?

            6. If you are married, you file as MFJ or MFS. You cannot be married and HOH. HOH is single + kids. Post divorce, each parent can be HOH if they have >1 kid. It’s rare, but I have relatives where one kid lives with dad b/c Reasons and the rest live with mom (same city). If you are unmarried, you can be HOH if you have kids.

            7. Correct- the head of household thing would apply to two single people with kids and head of household status who are considering getting married, not a couple with joint kids. Just reiterates that there all kinds of situations where this comes up on the margins and I’m sure we can keep listing them, but this isn’t the majority of people that the OP was talking about (but we should still fix them where we can). And I definitely advocate for keeping the TCJA changes that affect this, even if marginal rates overall go back up. If you care about this, tell your congresspeople!

            8. The AMT doesn’t have nearly the same impact post 2018

            9. If Biden undoes the TCJA changes, I’d watch out for the resurgance of the AMT for lower-bracket taxpayers, especially if state/local deductions go back to being uncapped.

               Everything that works better now is the result of changes that can be undone legislatively now that one party controls the WH and the house/senate. And some other TCJA provisions sunset anyway after 2025, so there’s that also.

      2. IIRC, in high-tax states (e.g., Maryland), doesn’t the marriage penalty kick in oddly, like it forces you to pay Alternative Minimum Tax because of something (like you lose your state and local tax decusion)? Again, maybe before TCJA. AMT isn’t really my thing though (and it just seems wrong that it hit people I know, not kajillionaires).

         Also, is Biden going to reinstate full deductability of state and local taxes? [Pennsylvania, I’m looking at you, who basically adds on local income taxes as some sort of govenrment freebie since the old thinking was that you’d just deduct them anyway on your federal taxes.]

   6. Well, if you are thinking about it in a marginal income kind of way, you too are penalizing women’s careers. Instead, the way to think about it is that you collectively have ex income, and collectively have an increased income if the second person is working. Rather than thinking of it in terms of the woman is only taking home 25% and therefore she should quit her job.

      1. That’s the way economists think about it and the way that most families think about it in practice.

      2. This- there’s no reason that you shouldn’t think of the marginal income as the man’s. The fact of the matter is that once you make a lot of money, any additional income will be taxed more heavily, but you shouldn’t think of it as the woman’s income. There are situations where having either person work more to earn more money might not be worth the marginal return and you should decline, but you should also think about how that affects future earning power, since there’s unfortunately a real penalty for most people who take time off. I believe pretty strongly in a progressive income tax structure and also that money isn’t everything and there can be real benefits to one or both people working less in order to do care work, which should also be valued.

         1. A lot of us got SAHDs because of this and I agree that it’s not always the man who makes more (but if we are talking about general trends, the #s speak for themselves). I can count SAHDs in my part of my city on one hand and feel that >75% of the moms that I know in my area stay home and the rest are in “jobs” even if they originally were in a career. My spouse wants to be a SAHD (he was briefly but that was involuntary after a RIF), but his job now has such excellent free health insurance and a 401K match that it doesn’t make sense; and he also gets “sick days,” which I don’t get (and he can use them for himself or to care for family).

      3. Yup exactly this. Fix your thinking.

         1. Except that you quit jobs, not .25 of jobs to relax one person’s burden and allow the other to share it. Often, jobs are binary: you take 100% care of the kids, I 100% work outside of the home. IDK anyone who has dialed a job back more than .25% and kept it (and not taken more than that in a salary hit). So if one FT worker gives you say 50% more household aggravation drama for only 25% of a FTE salary, it’s easy for everyone to say the drama’s not worth it. Unless you get something like free tuition for your kids (many jobs), a 100% match for a 401K, free family insurance, free housing or similar. For just a paycheck with no perks, I get people throwing in the towel. And to judge by my reunion class’s female participation in the workforce starting at 10 years out of school, it is sadly common (and no one came from $ or married particularly well).

            1. Absolutely- this is what I think we should change, not the progressive tax structure. If we care about women and care work in general, we should make it easier for people to take a few years off work and then start working again. We should make it easier for people to work part time without a huge income penalty or work from home to reduce commute time or have more flexible hours. We should normalize good jobs that pay somewhat less but don’t require 80 hour work weeks. Everyone in a position to affect hiring and work standards should advocate for these ideas if they care about this issue. Based on comments here, it seems like a lot of people would appreciate these options, both men and women.

   7. This is way overblown. Based on what we know right now, the proposal is not to “reinstate the marriage penalty” but to reinstate the top marginal rate for incomes over $400K. The only problem is that to appease wealthy single taxpayers the rate change will apply at $400K for singles as well as joint filers, so married filers will be caught up in it at lower individual income levels. It’s not so much a marriage penalty as a single bonus. The solution is simple–just raise rates at $200K for singles. But of course that won’t happen.

      1. I used to get stabby in tax policy, to the point of being so blistering that anonymous grading was anything but. So I don’t do it; I probably won’t be able to stomach the tax bill once proposed (but I will read it). Fairness and taxes have absolutely nothing in common. If you want to know what a society values and what it doesn’t, to me, Exhibit A is always what and whom it choses to tax.

         1. I am on Team Sloth: if I had a choice b/w more free time and more paid work (say .75 FTE and 1.0), not only to I pay a bit less in taxes, but that leisure time is really enjoyable and valuable to me. My choice of leisure pays 100 cents on the dollar (so there is no tax static on the 25% return of free time — I get all of it; if I chose to work more, from .75 to 1.0, I wouldn’t get 1/3 more income, I’d get something less than that, so #TeamSloth).

            I think a lot of people would like to be a .75 or .80 FTE (one day off a week!) with a concurrent salary reduction.

            1. I was able to work on an 80% basis for 80% comp. It was awesome while it lasted. Honestly, it felt like I worked about the right amount for what “full-time” should feel like in my version of the world (maybe 38-40 hours).

      2. Okay, I finally understand what OP was talking about. My understanding is that Biden made a campaign promise to only raise taxes on households making over 400k, but didn’t really clarify whether he was referring to couples (my interpretation when I heard it) or singles. If he sticks to that promise literally, it’s true that would be an issue, but like you say, the obvious solution is to raise the marginal rate on singles above 200k or double both, though presumably that would raise less revenue. I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure he always intended that it should apply to singles making 200k (because politicians are biased toward thinking everyone is a heterosexual couple with kids), but now he’ll get stuck in a gotcha if he goes with that. It’s pretty infuriating when good policy gets defeated by silly political taunting and I hope they can make it work without adding an actual marriage penalty.

      3. I am not going to shed one single tear for a couple making $400k that has to pay more taxes.

         1. Lol same.

      4. I’m not going to borrow trouble on this – we’re way under 400k so I’m optimistic that the new tax plan won’t screw with us. We got pretty impacted by the changes from the last guy since we’re home owners in a blue state with high state taxes.

   8. My problem is the subtraction of the higher taxes and childcare from only the second earner’s income. The marginal tax rate is based on both spouses’ earnings and childcare allows both spouses to work.

      1. As I used to snarl at my mother and MIL, it’s not like childcare becomes free if I drop dead. We paid a bunch of money in childcare, which allowed both of us to work. Sure, I could have left my paying job and become a stay-at-home mom, but if something had happened to me, then my husband would have had to pay for childcare.

         My kids are older now (end of elementary and middle school), and while it’s not like there is nothing to do anymore, it is SO MUCH less intense than when they were tiny.

      2. You can philosophize however you want, but the economic reality is that the secondary earner (economists say it’s the lower-earning spouse, but I would argue that it’s the spouse more likely to leave the work force regardless of income) IS paying the higher marginal tax rate, and is paying for child care if that person would care for the children if s/he left the work force.

3. Talk to me about pillows. Mine are old and gross and need to be replaced, but they’re from a store that no longer exists (Kmart). I don’t know what density they are because tags are either faded or don’t say at all. One is pretty soft and flat, which I use on the bottom, and the other is thicker and firmer, but still pretty soft. I’m a side or back sleeper, but mostly side, and I like firm-but-not-wildly-firm. If you’re a similar sleeper to me, what densities/brands do you like? I’m not stuck on having two pillows – if I can use just one and have the same comfort I do now, that’s fine with me. They must be king size, and I’d like to not spend over $70 per pillow, although I don’t know if that’s reasonable because I haven’t bought pillows in so long. TIA!

   1. I am a single-piece (i.e., not shredded) latex pillow devotee. I find them just supportive enough and just squishy enough and not hot or overly conforming like memory foam. I have gotten them various places, including Overstock.com. Check out this option, which likely did not exist widely the last time you bought pillows if yours are from KMart.

   2. we splurged and got brooklinen pillows and i love. i got the firmest one for side sleeping and think its great

      1. Do you just use one of them?

   3. I bought this one from Amazon, the EnerPlex (2021 Adjustable Series) Luxury Queen Pillow, it is a shredded latex pillow. I am really happy with it. It arrives with an extra bag of shredded latex that you can use if it isn’t firm enough, and you can remove filling as well.
      I ended up taking out a few handfuls of filling, threw it in the dryer to fluff up, and it is awesome.
      Am a side sleeper as well.

4. I have my annual performance evaluation today with a manager who has never reviewed me before. She’s been my boss for slightly over a year. I am nervous. I have no indications that I’m not doing okay, but this is also the first time I’ve had a supervisor whose specialty doesn’t overlap with mine at all. Any ideas for staying focused this afternoon and trying not to dwell on what I don’t know?

   1. Reviews should never be a surprise. You would know if you were getting a poor review.

      1. Lol. You should tell that to my former boss. (I agree with you in theory, but…. not always the case.)

         1. Yeah, “should” is the operative word there. I have been surprised by negative feedback in a review before. It’s easier for a manager to write something critical in a review 6 months later than to provide that feedback verbally in the moment, even though the latter is much more productive (and fair to the employee). When I had that unpleasant surprise in my review, and complained about it being a surprise, the first response was “how can you improve without feedback?” (exactly my point–no one had given me this feedback!) and then
            “I thought one of your peers had talked to you about this.” Uh, no? That’s your job? That manager is no longer here, and has been replaced by someone more effective who does not do this.

            OP, I would just put it out of your mind as much as possible. In the meeting, be very slow to respond if you hear anything negative that you didn’t expect. Don’t get defensive. You can always collect your thoughts later, when you’re not stirred up, and come back with questions.

         2. One time my boss called me for a “check in” the day before a new staffer started. She presented it as a casual check in to prep for the new staff starting and I had absolutely no clue she thought I was so awful. Turns out it was a “review” of all the things I was doing wrong, but with no specific examples and presented in the worst possible way. She said things like “be more professional,” “do better at your work.” It was horrible, and made worse by that I was walking to get coffee at the time because it was presented as so casual I thought it could be a walk-and-talk meeting. I was so surprised I started silently crying on the phone, praying I wouldn’t see any of my colleagues.

            We didn’t have a great working relationship after that.

      2. Ooof. I disagree. I mean I agree with the “should” but hard disagree that it’s reality. Some of the worst reviews I’ve witnessed colleagues get were colleagues who were painfully un-self-aware and had no idea (lord knows why or how) they were getting bad reviews.

5. To the commenter who recommended One to Watch recently, thank you! I started reading it Sunday and am just devouring it! (The Vanishing Half is on deck next, also a rec from that thread!)

   1. That was me! Glad you’re enjoying.

      1. Ooh, I just downloaded this! Thanks!!

   2. Me too! Thank you for the rec! I really enjoyed it.

6. I’ve lived in a 4 unit brownstone for the last 6 years – I have the top floor, which is the biggest unit because no stairs going up. We got new landlords, who live next door and are generally great, about two years ago. The prior landlord was a nice guy, but really cheaped out on or avoided any repairs, so nothing had been renovated in probably 15 years? Quirky units, but with cool 1890s features, fantastic location, and a good deal for rent. Since buying the place, new landlords have renovated each unit as people have moved out (one unit was the prior landlord’s, the other two have been couples that bought in the suburbs). Pricing here has been weird and dropped a lot the last year, but I think I may be paying the most in the building right now, though not by much (new tenants have def gotten lower rent because covid has made things harder to fill). They’re currently renovating the unit below mine for an April 1 start (from what I was told by the couple moving out, new kitchen and new bathroom fixtures), and based on internet sleuthing the new tenant is paying $25 less than me.

   I’m planning to ask my landlord for, at the very least, an oven that actually works, and probably try to get a new sink that doesn’t leak and new counters, etc. as well. I don’t actually want to move (though there are some great deals popping up around here), so I’m wondering what bargaining chips would be appropriate to offer (I’m month to month now so a new lease? I can afford more in rent, but don’t want to pay dramatically more than the unit below me), or if anyone has any thoughts on how to make the ask. I’m a good tenant and I suspect they would rather keep me here, but I feel like I’m missing out because I’ve been here so long, haha!

   1. Don’t offer anything – just ask. Seriously, it’s a reasonable upgrade for the landlord to just make as part of good upkeep. If you do offer anything, offer to contribute a modest amount to the cost of the upgrade. Don’t tie yourself to a lease — month-to-month is so much better for when you want to move out.

   2. I’d wait to see what the new neighbor is like before committing to a new lease. Your bargaining chips are that you are a long term tenant who pays reliably and is good to deal with. Lease to lock in reliable tenant may entice them. Reno asks like new stove and counters/sink are pretty reasonable as they don’t require major works – like one day max jobs.

   3. Shouldn’t you ask for a stove that works because your current one doesn’t? Not because of the renovations to other units. Like ask at any time it is a problem.

      1. To be fair, the stovetop works fine (and is gas, which I prefer), it’s just the oven which I rarely use (like it took me months after I moved in to figure out it was an issue). I’m angling for the counters, cabinets, and sink as much as the stove.

         1. Asking for a working oven is not a big ask, it’s something they need to be providing you.

            1. +1

   4. Huh? If your stuff doesn’t work call and ask for it to be fixed or replaced. No leverage needed. Super weird you haven’t done this already.

      1. I’m not living with broken appliances, but thanks for the unnecessary dig there. Everything technically works, it’s just old and the oven itself (which I rarely use anyway) is finicky. I actually asked my prior landlord and he was like, nah, and based on the market in my area (again, rent has been a good deal) and my lifestyle, that was acceptable. The issue isn’t that anything’s actually broken, it’s that I’m trying to get a new kitchen despite that since the other units in my building now have them and aren’t paying more in rent.

         1. Ok well you said it doesn’t work. So maybe use better words.

            1. Thanks for the attitude. I’m not looking for whether to ask for a new oven, but how to ask for a whole new kitchen, so neither of your comments were at all helpful.

            2. Friday, different commenter here, but you’re not helping yourself. You said it didn’t work. You want an oven that “actually works” in your original post. No one is being mean to you. Chill.

            3. Sighhhh. “Super weird you haven’t done this already” was a bit rude and added nothing of value, and the oven itself is not the point of my post, but whatever.

   5. A functioning stove and a non-leaky sink are not renovations. Those are just regular maintenance.

   6. I support your request, and agree with others that you shouldn’t necessarily have to bargain for these things. I also trust that you know your situation better than all of us, esp. the status of your current kitchen. I do wonder if there are ways to frame the request in a way that will entice the new LL to do these things (which I think is your Q). Could it be something like “While you’re in construction/reno mode, maybe now is a good time to upgrade my unit in these [insert easy ways here] ways. I plan to remain in my unit a while, and can understand you not wanting to wait to make these relatively easy improvements just because I still live here.”

      1. Thank you for not assuming I’m clueless and/or living in squalor. Yes, exactly, my question was not whether to ask, but HOW to do so in a way that maximizes what I might get without ruffling any feathers. I thought that was clear from my original post, but I’ve maybe been breathing paint fumes from downstairs all day. :) I appreciate your suggestion for a script, because I am sort of trying to piggyback off of the repairs below me.

         1. Totally get where you’re coming from, but I think you’re making it a bigger deal than it needs to be. Just say, “Hey, while you’re renovating all these other units can you upgrade mine too?”

            1. Overthink something? Me? Neverrrrr

            2. It’s worth asking! The landlord might be happy to be able to upgrade without losing even month’s rent, which is a bargaining chip unto itself. I’ve written here before that my dad has a number of rental properties. To him, a tenant that pays rent reliably in the first of the month is golden. Seriously, he loves those tenants and works with them.

            3. +1 I’ve never been a landlord but I have been a homeowner, and I would ask ASAP while they have a captive work crew already there for other things.I think you deserve most of these things either way, but 100% that will make things easier on them.

         2. Just ask. The last time rents fell in 2010 or so I flat out asked if I could get a lower rate. I was very nice, explained the comparable options and how much they were going for and added that me moving out meant painting, updating and probably foregoing at least a month in rent in the process. I got a $100/month reduction. I don’t think it hurts.

         3. You said in your original post, “I’m planning to ask my landlord for, at the very least, an oven that actually works”, which I think is why people are assuming that your oven…doesn’t work.

            1. I’m not disputing that I need a new one or that it should be provided! I am looking for other more extensive and less necessary repairs as well, which is why I’m looking for a script for how to ask! I am not sure why everyone is so focused on just the oven.

            2. This is definitely a know-your-landlord situation, but I’d just ask for the upgrades – I don’t think you need bargaining chips. You’ve lived there for a while and you need upgrades – it’s reasonable! I think people are focusing on the oven because you said it didn’t work, and if you’re asking the landlord to repair a broken appliance, you DEFINITELY don’t need bargaining chips.

   7. Landlord here. I would just ask – personally I wouldn’t want a leaky sink because that can cause other issues. I might be annoyed about the stove, but if you’re a good tenant I’d be inclined to try to keep you and I also find it easier to just replace/fix things than dealing with complaints. That all said, the worst time is when I’m renovating another unit because I’m already spending money there. I’m the most receptive when I’m generally making money on my rentals, not investing in them. I’d be inclined to buy you better stuff once I had income coming in again. So, depending on how annoying the issues are, you may be better off waiting for the other unit to be fixed and rented.

7. Hopefully this will bring a chuckle this afternoon. DH and I had a tiff over the meaning of the term birthday cake. To me, a quintessential birthday cake is white/colorful buttercream icing, white/chocolate/funfetti cake, and all the better if “hbd [name]” is written on top. To DH, apparently birthday cake is any dessert of any kind. Including brownies, which he called a “brownie cake” because they had a thin layer of fudge, which he called frosting, on top. (See also: to me, “frosting” always means buttercream and all other pseudo-frostings are wrong and bad. I never knew I had such l strong feelings about dessert). In polling our friends, it seems this kind of miscommunication is very common. One friend’s wife asked him to pick up “chocolates” for their moms for Mother’s Day. He got two bags of Hershey’s kisses. One friend’s wife asked him for A cupcake for her birthday because she didn’t want a whole cake sitting around her house tempting her. He got her a dozen cupcakes. Ladies, what are your best man are from Mars moments?

   1. My dad bought my mom earrings for Christmas and I said “the post ones would work too, why are you ruling those out?” “They don’t clip on.

      1. Whoops. That was me. And I hit post too soon.

         He’s been buying her the earrings that slip through the ears (I don’t know what to call them, but the ones with the hook-looking ear part) for decades because he thought they clipped on somehow. But not posts because they couldn’t clip on. I still have no idea where that idea came from, or why he thought his wife of 30 years was wearing clip on earrings.

   2. My boyfriend in college did not know the difference between a dress and a skirt. I explained and demonstrated the distinction to him, but I’m not sure he ever really got it.

      My Dad, an actual doctor, did not know that anyone gets a breast reduction for medical reasons. He thought it was just as cosmetic as implants until I enlightened him as a teenager. In general, topics of the female body including bras and menstruation can lead to hilarious (or infuriating) revelations about how much they don’t know.

   3. Ha! I would say you’re a little too strict on your birthday cake definition (they can definitely be chocolate!) but I totally agree with you. The Hershey’s kisses example cracks me up.

   4. Hmm. I would say that birthday cake is cake served on a birthday. :D

      Whether that is chocolate, carrot, cheese, fairy, cream cake, profiteroles or an ice cake.

      I had chocolate banana cake with “frosting” often as my childhood birthday cake. I think you would call my frosting chocolate ganache… And the classic birthday cake was a chocolate tray cake with frosting, smarties and jelly sweets. But yeah, I am a woman from Mars, in this little dessert dichotomy, hehe.

      1. I agree that birthday cake is cake served on a birthday. Brownies are not cake. You can have them on your birthday if that’s what you want, but they are not cake and you should not expect anyone else to think they are cake.

         1. Brownies are certainly not cake! Either he means chocolate cake or frosted brownies. Both good, but separate, things.

            Generally agree with your philosophy, @3:39. Have whatever on your birthday, but if it’s not cake, don’t call it cake. (#TeamBirthdayPie, FWIW. My husband is captain of the sparsely populated #TeamBirthdayRicePudding.)

            1. That cracks me up :)

            2. I’ll see your husband’s birthday rice pudding and raise him a #BirthdayCheesePlate

         2. in the Great British Bake Off, brownies are categorized under sheet cakes. Personally, I think that cake is an umbrella term for dough and batter based sweet bakes. Muffins and cupcakes are small cakes too. Pies are cakes. Basically everything is cake. Cookies are a weird edge case.

         3. Why is brownies not cake? Is it one of those those tax division things, like with Jaffa cakes and the hot pasties? Confused foreigner here.

            1. I don’t consider brownies cake because they have a substantially different texture. Cake is meant to be lighter and airier, and uses a raising agent. Brownies do not, and are instead dense and fudgy.

               I think the GBBO brownie episode tried to convey this, but as an American baker I would have judged differently than how Paul and Prue ended up doing.

            2. But brownies do have a raising agent, don’t they? Eggs, I mean, even though the texture is denser. I’ll absolutely accept that Americans have the final say on brownies, though, given that it’s an American cake (oops!) ehhem, I mean, cookie? :D

               What about French macarons? Would you call that cake? I would, but would be more likely to go for biscuit/cookie for macarons than for brownie.

            3. My brownies are definitely not cake. They are fudge-y and gooey and perfect.

            4. Eggs don’t serve as a leavening agent in brownies since they aren’t beaten to add volume– and in fact, brownies shouldn’t be mixed much beyond just enough stirs to incorporate the ingredients.

            5. Brownies are a bar cookie actually. Cookies. Not cake.

      2. I say birthday cake implies some sort of decoration, so I would limit the definition to cakes that can be decorated with frosting in some way – i.e., layer or sheet cakes are yes, but Bundt cakes and pound cakes are not. Any flavor of cake, and any kind of frosting (as long as it’s one that can be decorated in some way) are fine.

         Desserts that are served on birthdays but do not fit the definition of birthday cake can still be called “birthday cake” ironically.

      3. Birthday cake is chocolate with chocolate frosting. In fact, I’d argue that birthday cake can be any flavor EXCEPT vanilla, which is dreadfully boring IMO. But it must have frosting.

   5. I’m long term single so no examples, but on the birthday cake thing… to me it’s any frivolously fun cake. Google “Colin the Caterpillar” to see a very stereotypical British cake that lots of people have on their birthdays here.
      When I was in high school the person whose birthday it was would usually bring cake for all their friends to share. When I was 15 or 16 my mum offered to make me a cake… and gave me a dish of brownies made with black beans! This was long before the ‘clean eating’ thing.

   6. this isn’t really a miscommunication, but more along the lines of something i cannot imagine a female saying. i was going through fertility treatments and DH and I were casually talking about the possibility of multiples. and i made a comment along the lines of “i hope its not triplets” and DH’s response was that if I was pregnant with triplets, we would just give one away, because who wouldn’t want to adopt the child of a couple whose parents each have two ivy league degrees. he was 100% serious in the moment, and while i think it is kind of hilarious now, at the time i was furious and we had a huge fight about it.

      1. OMG that is horrifying and hilarious in equal parts!

      2. I saw a similar letter in an advice column once. I don’t remember if mom or dad was writing in, but the question was “we’re expecting twins and only planned for one child, while X family member is struggling to conceive. Can we give one of our babies to her, so everyone gets what they wanted?”

         1. I don’t actually think that is that terrible. People act as surrogates. People adopt. People place babies for adoption. I get the complexities but I don’t think it rises to the OMG that person is a sociopath level.

            1. Well I’m not saying that. I think the question came from good intentions, and I did need the columnist’s breakdown of why it wasn’t a good idea. For me, the nonstarter was the child growing up to ask “why was I the one you gave away?” This is different from regular surrogacy and adoption.

      3. So your husband is the anti-King Solomon?

         1. Ha!

   7. I’m on Team DH for the birthday cake definition. The question at my house growing up (and DH’s) was ‘what do you want for your birthday cake?’ and the answer could be anything from funfetti to key lime pie!

      1. Also – I don’t actually like your (OP’s) type of “birthday cake” — to each their own! — so having to have that type of cake as my birthday dessert would have been no fun at all to this birthday girl :)

         1. +1! I kind of hate that “birthday cake” has become a flavor for things that basically means “vaguely vanilla flavored with lots of sugar and sprinkles.” I hate sprinkles! My birthday cake would be a death by chocolate with ganache mmm…

      2. I guess I split the difference on this one. I say a birthday cake is any cake had for a birthday; a non-cake dessert is a birthday dessert.

         One year I made myself a very fancy cake, and the kids refused to eat it because it was filled with (among other things) raspberry jam. It was the best.

   8. In my opinion, birthday cake has to be Dairy Queen ice cream cake.

      To my BF, women’s leggings are called tights, and tights/nylons just don’t have a word.

      1. YES. Specifically, oreo blizzard cake. No, Carvel grocery store ice cream cakes are not an acceptable substitute.

   9. This thread is really making me laugh, thanks! I agree with you that brownies aren’t a birthday cake, but they definitely qualify as birthday ‘cake’ which could also be pie, brownies, or some other baked good served in a festive way- I think the festive part is key. Hershey’s kisses are definitely not chocolates, though!

   10. One time I was baking cookies with bf around. I asked him to flip the cookies (meaning rotate the pan) for me because I had to take care of something and he flipped them upside down individually, like pancakes.

       1. Ha! I’m an experienced baker, and I think if you asked me to flip the cookies, that’s what I’d do too! (I’ve never had an oven/made a recipe where the tray needed to be rotated…I don’t think ha.)

          1. Same…I’ve been baking my entire life and would be so confused if you asked me to flip the cookies!

             Anon at 4:06 – the back of my oven is much hotter than the front, so sometimes I ROTATE THE PAN (lol sorry OP) to make sure they bake evenly.

   11. My college boyfriend asked me what “shoes that are filled in at the bottom” were called. I was bewildered. Turns out he meant wedges.

       1. Ha!

       2. That’s hilarious!

   12. My dad called all barrettes, ponytail holders, etc. “hair bars.” As in, “go get a hair bar, I can’t stand to watch you eat with your hair hanging in your face.” Love you, Dad!

       1. Love this!

   13. DH and I had a minor tiff last night because he keeps forgetting to put conditioner in our daughter’s long hair when he helps her wash it, which makes it impossible to comb through without painstaking effort (literally). He cannot wrap his mind around why conditioner is an essential element of the shampooing process. Our daughter is 6; this is not new information! Even DD was all, DAD FORGOT THE CONDITIONER AGAIN AND NOW MY HAIR IS TERRIBLE. Basically anything involving our daughter’s hair is just mindboggling to him. Styling is a whole other matter. And truly, her hair type is not high-maintenance at all. It’s fine, straight, and there’s a lot of it.

   14. Bless my DH’s heart, but on the rare occasion he buys me flowers, it’s literally flowers wrapped in plastic wrap from the grocery store. No vase, no arrangement. Just flowers.

       1. I definitely prefer to get flowers this way. I have more than enough vases at home and you get way more flowers for your money buying cut instead of an arrangement.

   15. A birthday cake is a cake on your birthday. There is no requirement for it to be white or colorful.

       I don’t love the men are from Mars thing here because in your post there’s a lot of mindreading the men have to do, or things they were supposed be born knowing, and then you make fun of them.

       The men are from Mars thing for me is mostly how men expect women to be turned on by things like d1ck pics, because the opposite would work for them. It’s a fundamental difference in how we are wired.

       1. But women weren’t born knowing these things either, yet we’ve all picked them up, as society expects us to.

8. I have almost a full bottle of a Cabernet a Sauvignon left over from Passover, and I’m not going to drink it all before it goes bad. Any favorite recipes that use red wine?

   1. Braised short ribs, coq au vin

      1. https://www.bonappetit.com/recipe/red-wine-braised-short-ribs

      2. Drink it. Hurry.

   2. Any beef stew, or the Smitten Kitchen Red Wine Chocolate Cake.

   3. Oxtails.

   4. The Ina Garten bolognese. It freezes really well if you want to make some extra.

   5. Don’t forget – you can freeze wine! If you don’t use it all in your recipe, freeze the rest in an icecube tray.

   6. Red wine risotto or a bolognese sauce?

9. Does anyone have a deck box they love? I’d like to keep my outdoor yoga/Pilates items in a box on my back deck, where it would be exposed to both rain and sunlight.

   1. Ooh following.

   2. We have this one and have been happy with it (we keep it in the shade but have a matching trash can that has held up fine in the sun). https://www.amazon.com/Keter-Gallon-Weather-Outdoor-Storage/dp/B00E0JO5MG?pd_rd_w=jLJCX&pf_rd_p=f3e50726-7ac9-42bc-9c53-4f798540b4be&pf_rd_r=04SBMKTSM2ND3J5NRGTP&pd_rd_r=c909caef-3245-4b97-bbb4-7ecf6c68cb25&pd_rd_wg=WIbEP&pd_rd_i=B00E0JO5MG&psc=1&ref_=pd_bap_d_rp_1_t

   3. We have a Suncast box that is going strong 10+ years later. We’re about to buy a second for our other outdoor area.

10. Suggestions for gifts for a 10 year old boy? Budget upto $100. He already has and loves his skateboard, bike, loves reading a variety of books from the library, plays soccer, and has enough Legos that I don’t want to add to.

    1. Does he draw or paint? Art supplies are usually a hit, and need to be replaced often with enthusiastic kids.

    2. My boys (10 and 12) love getting mail. They have a Tinker Crate subscription and also a few magazine subscriptions. The Week Junior, Muse, Cricket, Ask, National Geographic Kids. (I’ve really been impressed with the Week. My kids learn enough from it to meaningfully contribute to discussions about current events, which is more than I can say for some adults I’ve encountered recently.)

    3. What about something else for the outdoors, like a slackline/ninjaline, or any soccer or skating equipment he needs or wants?

    4. Spikeball !

    5. Gift card at a cool skateboarding shop, so that he can get some tees and hoodies and general “stuff”? 10-year-old is just old enough to be interested in his image and wanting to express himself.

    6. Great ideas! The magazine subscription idea looks good. He doesn’t need any soccer gear really (has his team outfit and soccer ball, that’s pretty much it). Outdoor stuff is currently not an option due to lack of backyard space.
       Art materials are a good idea and so is a gift card + trip to a store. Going to a store is a rare treat in these Covid days…

11. Who else gets into these moods during which they’re all I’M GONNA REVAMP MY STYLE! And by trying to do so, you’re reminded why you chose your current stuff and why you shop certain brands, hence your style never really evolves THAT much? Case point: I just ordered another Athleta swimsuit. If I keep it, it’ll be my sixth or seventh Athleta suit over the past decade. I think I need to make peace with knowing what I like and what actually works for my body type, instead of being all aspirational or trying to switch things up.

    1. That sounds fine to me. It ain’t broke! I have the opposite problem–I keep thinking I HAVE FOUND MY ONE TRUE STYLE AND CAN STOP SHOPPING NOW! But then some new idea comes across my radar and I have to wear it. So I keep making changes and churning through clothes.

    2. You know, this is actually why Kate Middleton is chief among my style inspiration. I think she has more green coatdresses than I could count on hands and feet (just green! like, leaving aside the rainbow of others that she owns!). And while that’s boring from a headline-writing standpoint, she, much like the Queen has done, is finding a formula and making it work. So I don’t beat myself up anymore for drooling over yet another cable sweater or navy sheath dress. I like them. They spark joy. That’s enough.

       1. I actually really like Kate’s style. I realize she doesn’t get a ton of leeway to take risks, but she always looks impeccable and knows what suits her best.

    3. I have slowly eliminated most of the black from my wardrobe over the last few years, which was something that came upon me in an impulse. Navy is now by base neutral, which has been great because I’ve worn a lot of stretchy jeans over WFH and dark wash jeans work well with all of my navies.

       In terms of knowing what works for me, it’s not only about my colors (navy yes, black no) but also the shapes that work. I’ve been in what others would call a style rut and I would call a uniform for years, and I’m happiest here. I find wearing something that isn’t “my style” uncomfortable because I think about it all day.

Comments are closed.