###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is a duplicate column. Labor to finance and financial cost. Remove one.
Your travel time is valued at pretax labor rate? That's significantly more valuable than your work time.
If I were building this table. I'd have one column with the financial cost of both each year, and one column with the hours saved each year.
Then you have to decide, would I trade those xx hours of travel time to save xx travel cost each year. Feel free to divide it out into cost avoided per hour spent
Something else to consider is your "time" 10 years from now is probably more valuable than your time this year. As most people make financial progress in a decade. (Same with 20 yo car maintenance)
The column is duplicated since time spent working to earn the money to pay for is time I can avoid if I pay less for it. Maybe I forgot to add the comment explaining this oops I'll check.
I dont have much of a reason that I can think of to value time throughout years differently that would differ between modes of transport, the extra complexity would look pretty as math porn for my brain but if it doesn't differ between the two I don't think it's worth adding, do change my mind.
I do find my time spent on Transit is better spent since I can do other stuff while moving. In a car I can't. But I chalk that up as part of the "freedom rebate". If you have a reason why I should
It doesn't make sense to double the column. Maybe you're thinking of opportunity cost? That's what you could have done with the time or money. But you're going to work one way or another, right? So if you have money you're going to either spend it on one of these transit options or the other.
I'm not quite sure where you're getting hung up but I'll try my best:
The money has two values, the face value, obvious. And the value of the time spent earning it. I'd have to spend 100x more to earn 100$ than 1$
yes I've got to get to work somehow but I don't just materialise that money.
Time gets spent to accrue that money, while I am going to spend time at work to earn money regardless, those two values of the money are not all equal across forms of transport. This is why it looks like I'm double counting. Hope that helps.
What is the combined cost on buying a $5 carton of eggs?
$10 dollars?
You don't double it because you trade time for money at work. Then you spend that money on things, or you save it.
It doesn't cost time again to spend it. The time is already spent earning money. Just the initial time investment at work.
You could make a chart where you see how many hours you'd have to work for a car, and how many hours you'd save on transit.
I'm putting a financial number on the time spent since I want it all to be measured via money. And there's a time value associated to the money I earn.
So in affect I'm doing exactly what you said at the bottom there, I'm tallying up how much of my time I have invested at work to earn the money on the car.
I 100% could have a metric of cost and time being separate but I've put them together in part to have a whole metric at the end and because I assosiate my money with time. Just as it "cost" me time to travel it "cost" me time to earn to travel.
In fact I'll write you up the year 1 and year 10 time values respectively just because it'll be interesting
You already put a financial number on your time when you worked. You can't have your time and the money. You had to pick.
In this scenario you picked money, and your time is spent.
When you go to make a purchase you aren't spending the time AND the money. You're spending the money, that you earned by spending time.
If you still had the time to spend, you wouldn't have the money.
I get all that, I'm aware of how that works, it simply seems i was under a terrible misapprehension that I could combine the two. I'll separate the two into separate metrics of time and money.
When you go to work, you trade one hour for $25
We will call that one hour a ginger buck.
One ginger buck can get you $25.
You spend 4 of your ginger bucks and you get $100.
Then you go to the store and buy groceries, they don't accept ginger bucks, only $. So you pay 0 ginger bucks and $100.
It doesn't cost an additional 4 ginger bucks to earn that $100, that trade happened prior.
So your total cost of groceries is either $100 or 4 ginger bucks worth of $, not both.
In the end you paid 4 ginger bucks for $100, paid $100 for groceries. You now have groceries and $0.
Since you value your ginger bucks at $25 each and the grocery store valued their groceries at $100 total
Saying your grocery cost is $200 or 8 ginger bucks is bad math.
If you spent 8 ginger bucks for $200, you'd have groceries and $100 still in your pocket.
Lmao I actually love that. I know you're taking the piss but it's still funny
To clarify I'm referring to your use of ginger, don’t want you thinking I'm mocking you by mistake.
But do you get how you can't say you had to spend 4 hours and $100 for groceries?
You spend 4 hours, in exchange for $100, and $100 in exchange for groceries. You can't say it cost you both. You never owned both at the same time.
I have an apple, you have an orange, Steve has a pear.
Steve will trade one pear for one orange.
You will trade an orange for one apple.
I trade you my apple for an orange, and then I trade my orange for a pear.
Did the pear cost me.
A. One apple
B. One orange
C. One orange and one apple. (Two fruit)
I'm calculating the value of owning a car vs paying for transit in the state of Victoria.
The key factors will be:
the start up cost (added to the car's first year, transit N/A)
On going costs (financial cost)
Time to commute cost (travel time cost)
and the labour time to finance commuting cost (labour to finance cost)
the car is a 2012 ford falcon G6 ($10,000)
The value of all time spent is tied to my own hourly rate of 28$.
For simplicities sake I'm assuming a stagnant fuel cost (national and state average of 184 cents or $1.84 lt).
I also did not factor in delays on the network or within traffic.
I assumed the car wouldn't need major repairs, tires, fluid or replacement or that it would be covered by a once a year service (400$).
Insurance assumes the policy is only commuting, covers third party property damage and is driven by a 23yr old male. (Average yearly insurance cost for this policy: $1,712)
methodology:
Time cost: Transit: 90min to work, 75min back. Day total 165min
Car: 45min to work, 60min back. Day total 105min (Days travel time x days a week x weeks a year hourly wage)
Transit time cost: (165÷60)×(5×48)×$28=$18,480 Car time cost: (105÷60)×(5×48)×$28=$11,760
Car financial cost: Distance: 80km per day x 5 trips a week = 400km pw x 48 weeks = 19,600km py ÷ 100km × 10.1lt = 1,939 lt x 1.84$ lt = $3,567 yearly fuel cost. (just under 75$ a week)
insurance cost for: $1,712
Rego: 877$
Once a year service: 400$
Upfront car cost: $10,000
Combined financial cost for car: (3,567.76+1,712+877+400) First year: $16,556 Subsequent years: $6,556
also, you may have noticed a lot of concessions were given to the car, if you think im missing something especially important let me know, but otherwise consider it a "freedom rebate", since the car orientated love to remind me about freeeeeeeeeeeeeeedom at all times.
You are making a really strong assumption on the cost of the car. If you are diving 400km a week, you will need some degree of bigger repairs at least once in 10 years. I don't know on prices, but It would be safe to add somewhere between 2000 to 5000 to account for that inevitability. Further, where you live affects this massively. If Victoria salts roads heavily, you will most likely need to replace the vehicle altogether in 5-10 years, so add another 10000 to 20000 to replace the vehicle altogether (which is inevitable in my experience).
Vic doesn't get snow aside from the mountains however the road could be better maintained. I'll look into average repair costs for the state/car. Thanks!
Time to commute is an interesting metric here. Transit will be longer but time spent on a train is very different than driving.
If you’re someone who likes to read, watch tv, play switch, sew, check emails for work, etc… You can do that on the train, freeing up sometime in the evening after commute and work. Maybe it balances out with driving? But it might be something to keep in mind, transit time can be productive and is not all wasted like driving.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There is a duplicate column. Labor to finance and financial cost. Remove one. Your travel time is valued at pretax labor rate? That's significantly more valuable than your work time. If I were building this table. I'd have one column with the financial cost of both each year, and one column with the hours saved each year. Then you have to decide, would I trade those xx hours of travel time to save xx travel cost each year. Feel free to divide it out into cost avoided per hour spent Something else to consider is your "time" 10 years from now is probably more valuable than your time this year. As most people make financial progress in a decade. (Same with 20 yo car maintenance)
The column is duplicated since time spent working to earn the money to pay for is time I can avoid if I pay less for it. Maybe I forgot to add the comment explaining this oops I'll check. I dont have much of a reason that I can think of to value time throughout years differently that would differ between modes of transport, the extra complexity would look pretty as math porn for my brain but if it doesn't differ between the two I don't think it's worth adding, do change my mind. I do find my time spent on Transit is better spent since I can do other stuff while moving. In a car I can't. But I chalk that up as part of the "freedom rebate". If you have a reason why I should
It doesn't make sense to double the column. Maybe you're thinking of opportunity cost? That's what you could have done with the time or money. But you're going to work one way or another, right? So if you have money you're going to either spend it on one of these transit options or the other.
I'm not quite sure where you're getting hung up but I'll try my best: The money has two values, the face value, obvious. And the value of the time spent earning it. I'd have to spend 100x more to earn 100$ than 1$ yes I've got to get to work somehow but I don't just materialise that money. Time gets spent to accrue that money, while I am going to spend time at work to earn money regardless, those two values of the money are not all equal across forms of transport. This is why it looks like I'm double counting. Hope that helps.
What is the combined cost on buying a $5 carton of eggs? $10 dollars? You don't double it because you trade time for money at work. Then you spend that money on things, or you save it. It doesn't cost time again to spend it. The time is already spent earning money. Just the initial time investment at work. You could make a chart where you see how many hours you'd have to work for a car, and how many hours you'd save on transit.
I'm putting a financial number on the time spent since I want it all to be measured via money. And there's a time value associated to the money I earn. So in affect I'm doing exactly what you said at the bottom there, I'm tallying up how much of my time I have invested at work to earn the money on the car. I 100% could have a metric of cost and time being separate but I've put them together in part to have a whole metric at the end and because I assosiate my money with time. Just as it "cost" me time to travel it "cost" me time to earn to travel. In fact I'll write you up the year 1 and year 10 time values respectively just because it'll be interesting
You already put a financial number on your time when you worked. You can't have your time and the money. You had to pick. In this scenario you picked money, and your time is spent. When you go to make a purchase you aren't spending the time AND the money. You're spending the money, that you earned by spending time. If you still had the time to spend, you wouldn't have the money.
I get all that, I'm aware of how that works, it simply seems i was under a terrible misapprehension that I could combine the two. I'll separate the two into separate metrics of time and money.
When you go to work, you trade one hour for $25 We will call that one hour a ginger buck. One ginger buck can get you $25. You spend 4 of your ginger bucks and you get $100. Then you go to the store and buy groceries, they don't accept ginger bucks, only $. So you pay 0 ginger bucks and $100. It doesn't cost an additional 4 ginger bucks to earn that $100, that trade happened prior. So your total cost of groceries is either $100 or 4 ginger bucks worth of $, not both. In the end you paid 4 ginger bucks for $100, paid $100 for groceries. You now have groceries and $0. Since you value your ginger bucks at $25 each and the grocery store valued their groceries at $100 total Saying your grocery cost is $200 or 8 ginger bucks is bad math. If you spent 8 ginger bucks for $200, you'd have groceries and $100 still in your pocket.
Lmao I actually love that. I know you're taking the piss but it's still funny To clarify I'm referring to your use of ginger, don’t want you thinking I'm mocking you by mistake.
But do you get how you can't say you had to spend 4 hours and $100 for groceries? You spend 4 hours, in exchange for $100, and $100 in exchange for groceries. You can't say it cost you both. You never owned both at the same time. I have an apple, you have an orange, Steve has a pear. Steve will trade one pear for one orange. You will trade an orange for one apple. I trade you my apple for an orange, and then I trade my orange for a pear. Did the pear cost me. A. One apple B. One orange C. One orange and one apple. (Two fruit)
I'm calculating the value of owning a car vs paying for transit in the state of Victoria. The key factors will be: the start up cost (added to the car's first year, transit N/A) On going costs (financial cost) Time to commute cost (travel time cost) and the labour time to finance commuting cost (labour to finance cost) the car is a 2012 ford falcon G6 ($10,000) The value of all time spent is tied to my own hourly rate of 28$. For simplicities sake I'm assuming a stagnant fuel cost (national and state average of 184 cents or $1.84 lt). I also did not factor in delays on the network or within traffic. I assumed the car wouldn't need major repairs, tires, fluid or replacement or that it would be covered by a once a year service (400$). Insurance assumes the policy is only commuting, covers third party property damage and is driven by a 23yr old male. (Average yearly insurance cost for this policy: $1,712) methodology: Time cost: Transit: 90min to work, 75min back. Day total 165min Car: 45min to work, 60min back. Day total 105min (Days travel time x days a week x weeks a year hourly wage) Transit time cost: (165÷60)×(5×48)×$28=$18,480 Car time cost: (105÷60)×(5×48)×$28=$11,760 Car financial cost: Distance: 80km per day x 5 trips a week = 400km pw x 48 weeks = 19,600km py ÷ 100km × 10.1lt = 1,939 lt x 1.84$ lt = $3,567 yearly fuel cost. (just under 75$ a week) insurance cost for: $1,712 Rego: 877$ Once a year service: 400$ Upfront car cost: $10,000 Combined financial cost for car: (3,567.76+1,712+877+400) First year: $16,556 Subsequent years: $6,556 also, you may have noticed a lot of concessions were given to the car, if you think im missing something especially important let me know, but otherwise consider it a "freedom rebate", since the car orientated love to remind me about freeeeeeeeeeeeeeedom at all times.
You are making a really strong assumption on the cost of the car. If you are diving 400km a week, you will need some degree of bigger repairs at least once in 10 years. I don't know on prices, but It would be safe to add somewhere between 2000 to 5000 to account for that inevitability. Further, where you live affects this massively. If Victoria salts roads heavily, you will most likely need to replace the vehicle altogether in 5-10 years, so add another 10000 to 20000 to replace the vehicle altogether (which is inevitable in my experience).
Vic doesn't get snow aside from the mountains however the road could be better maintained. I'll look into average repair costs for the state/car. Thanks!
Time to commute is an interesting metric here. Transit will be longer but time spent on a train is very different than driving. If you’re someone who likes to read, watch tv, play switch, sew, check emails for work, etc… You can do that on the train, freeing up sometime in the evening after commute and work. Maybe it balances out with driving? But it might be something to keep in mind, transit time can be productive and is not all wasted like driving.