You must log in or register to comment.

Expensive-Cow5368 t1_j9zjnbm wrote

Counter argument: I budget for two paychecks a month, so every month is 28 days. Every couple of months I get an extra paycheck that compensates for whatever slip-ups or miscalculation I did during the previous months.


timmyboyoyo t1_j9zlcuo wrote

When do you get extra


blay12 t1_j9znti5 wrote

They get paid bi-weekly (once every 2 weeks) rather than semi-monthly (twice a month, usually the 15th and either the 1st or 31st), so occasionally the offset lines up and gives you three checks in a month (e.g. your payday falls on the 1st, second payday on the 15th, third on the 29th).


FiddleTheFigures t1_ja1hilg wrote

Happens twice a year if you’re paid bi weekly because you’re getting 26 paychecks (52/2) vs the 24 checks for a semi monthly (some would say bi monthly) arrangement.


AlexandrinaIsHere t1_ja03cb9 wrote

The down side to it is that it swaps the date you can expect a check from the first week of the month to the second week. So it's a little bit before I feel like I can relax and spend the "extra"


hearnia_2k t1_ja0u596 wrote

Getting paid every two weeks, or twice a month are both unusual, except in the US. IT's much more common to get paid once a month.


blay12 t1_ja0yqoj wrote

Lol ok, but I wasn’t commenting on what’s normal in different places, I was just explaining how a bi-weekly payment schedule can result in 3 checks a month.


hearnia_2k t1_ja138ru wrote

Edit: I misread, indeed it makes sense now.


blay12 t1_ja146zp wrote

Lmao what? They…literally said they get two paychecks a month, why are you trying to turn this into an argument lol?


paxmlank t1_ja13rni wrote

"I budget for two paychecks a month."


blakeh95 t1_ja1f8m7 wrote

2 checks x 12 months = 24 checks.

But you actually get paid every 2 weeks, so that’s 52 weeks per year / 2 weeks per check = 26 checks.

26 checks received - 24 checks budgeted = 2 extra.

For bonus points, there are occasionally years with 3 extra checks because 52 weeks x 7 = 364 days, not 365.


5l4 t1_ja3rnjr wrote

In very rare years you could also have 27 cheques (if January 1st was a pay day or January 2nd and it’s a leap year).


blakeh95 t1_ja4d734 wrote

…yes, this would be the years with 3 extra checks that I mentioned.


Impossible_Memory_65 t1_ja1t1ba wrote

There are 2 months during the year that have 3 pay perioda if you get paid bi weekly. I think it's October and May . One is on the first, one in the middle, and the third on the last day . I budget for two pay checks per month ( between the first and last day of each month) so the months with three checks between the first and last day seems like a bonus


SophiesUncle t1_ja5njqr wrote

Lol it's not October and May. Everyone gets paid at different times of the week. Some get paid on Thursdays, some Fridays, etc. Also, different weeks, maybe we're both Fridays but your pay is this week and mine is next week, that'll change the months that get the 3rd paycheck. Also, every year it changes too, not always consistent. The only month you know it probably won't be would be February. Unless it perfectly works out that when a pay occurs on Feb 1st, it's also a leap year.


Prometheus188 t1_ja3kdbz wrote

There are 12 months in a year and you get paid every 2 weeks. So you might think “Oh that means I get paid 24 times a year”, since 2 weeks is about 1 month”. But that’s wrong because 2 weeks is not 1 month, it’s only 28 days. And biweekly pay actually results in 26 pays per month, not 24.

So you should be getting paid twice a month for about 10 months, and for 2 months in the year you’ll get 3 payments. For example, if you got paid January first, you’d also get paid on January 15th and January 29th. That’s 3 payments in a single month. That should happen twice a year.


aerodeck t1_ja11o7f wrote

Do you always set your clock 15 minutes back so that when you’re late you’re actually on time? Weird way to live


awsamation t1_ja18oqq wrote

It's not that weird when you consider that they get paid bi-weekly.

Every month is guaranteed 2 paychecks for them, so budgeting around 2 paychecks is an easy way to make sure expenses stay lower than income every month. But every once in a while they'll get 3 paychecks in a month because that's just how the bi-weekly schedule lined up.

Since weeks and months have nothing to do with each other, the paychecks (delivered bi-weekly) and expenses (charged monthly) will never have a nice consistent match. So working like you seem to be suggesting would mean budgeting every month based on how many paychecks will arrive that month. While their system allows a consistent budget that can be reused month to month with minimal need for change.

Every month is guaranteed 2 paychecks. So if the budget assumes 2 paychecks worth of income, and one month's worth of expenses, then as long as the budget balances they never have to worry about overspending because they thought they were getting 3 checks when they only got 2. And for bonus points the times when they do get 3 paychecks in a month, that 3rd paycheck is loose money. It isn't assigned to a specific use so it can be given to wherever it'll give the best value. Maybe it all goes to savings, maybe it helps pay of an emergency expense, maybe some of it gets used for a fun treat for themselves.

The important point is that they never need to think about how many paychecks they'll be receiving in a given month. So the budget only needs to be adjusted for large-scale changes like rate of income or cost of living, which are much less predictable at an individual level.


SophiesUncle t1_ja5ojup wrote

Yeah it's not a weird way to live at all, because almost everyone's expenses are monthly (mortgage/rent, utilities, cell phone, etc). Most people that get biweekly, or weekly, pay, budget their 2 cheques (or 4) to cover these expenses and leave extra for savings/whatever. So, when that extra cheque in that month comes in, it does feel good and does feel like extra money.

Maybe you're lucky enough not to live pay cheque to pay cheque, but not everyone is, and to make a comment like this shows what type of person you truly are. Why make a comment basically making fun of someone's financial situation?


pork0rc t1_j9zc62l wrote


Something Id take for granted but I can see people overlooking this!


Alittlemoorecheese t1_ja09dd8 wrote

This is the professional tip. It's agreed upon by every single market. Calculating it any other way does not make your books more accurate.


StelioZz t1_j9zmzfo wrote

365/7/12 if you want to go a step further


r2k-in-the-vortex t1_ja0lcq1 wrote

365.2425/7/12 = 4.348125 would be the correct calculation by that logic, but I think it's a stupid calculation.

You agree on a price or wage or whatnot by day, week, month whatever and you need to calculate it the way you write the agreement, converting it makes no sense.

If you have rent X/month, you can't pay less just because it's February.


pork0rc t1_j9ztjgu wrote

Ah yes.

The micro budget for when you want to live dangerously.


hotplasmatits t1_ja1nu9g wrote

Yeah, so where does 4.345 come from? The answer is 4.333


Kelli217 t1_ja1sp0q wrote

Maybe because there are actually 52.142857 weeks in a year (52.285714 in a leap year).


Eneko_the_Rottweiler t1_j9zdfbq wrote

If it is helpful, there are 26 bi-weekly pay periods in a year.


nafk t1_j9zx9pm wrote

People that found this helpful going to be big mad when they find out that if we really had 13 months in a year many things in life would be 10x easier. 365/13=28.


jansencheng t1_ja13ar4 wrote

Actually, 13*28 is 364, not 365, so there's a leftover day.

Despite that, I'm still in favour of having 13 4 week months. Can use the last day as a special no day. Would be hell for computers, though.


19is_ t1_ja0sua7 wrote

I'm a little mad ... but only because I didn't know you could be big mad, but it makes sense now that I think about it.


rypher t1_ja1v52f wrote

Im happy you havent been very mad.


Potential-Ad5470 t1_ja1jh2w wrote

This is wrong.. there’s a remainder there lol


nafk t1_ja2uqvu wrote

Sure. It doesn’t account for leap year either. Neither does OP’s subject. Does that make the original question wrong?

Most of the comments in this thread are discussing rounding. It’s why I started out with “anyone that finds this thread useful…” are also likely to also find it useful to know that 13 period accounting is a real thing and very related to the original subject.

if we moved to a system of 13 months in a year a lot of things in life would be much simpler to calculate.


wwarnout t1_j9zmlxt wrote

Or, you can use 4-1/3 weeks, which might make the math easier.


jansencheng t1_ja12yhb wrote

I round up to 4.5 just to bake in emergency funds.


Sycseven0 t1_j9zb7ct wrote

except leap years, which are 4.357


hearnia_2k t1_ja0tw0h wrote

Why do weeks matter when calculating things like rent etc? it's all monthly anyway.


Scuka1 t1_j9zmfey wrote

How would that help me, though?


Burstar1 t1_ja0cqew wrote

For when combining weekly income and expenses with monthly.

Weekly expenses (fuel, food, etc.) * 4.345 + Monthly Expenses (rent, loans/CC, ISP, etc.) = Total Monthly Expenses

Weekly Income (avg.) * 4.345 = Total Monthly Income.

Compare the 2 to see how F'd you are.


Scuka1 t1_ja1v0b8 wrote


Meh. Only applicable if you have a weekly salary.

All the bills and subscriptions are monthly though, so I don't see much point in a weekly salary either, except 4.345 more paperwork.

For life expenses (fuel, food), the 4.345 thing doesn't make sense either. You get a more accurate result if you actually average out the entire month, instead of averaging out a week and multiplying by 4.345. If you average out, say, 3 months and then divide by 3, you get an even more accurate monthly average.

The longer the time period, the more accurately your average represents the actual situation because outliers get ironed out.

Week is too short for capturing general trends.


Burstar1 t1_ja2a89r wrote

>You get a more accurate result if you actually average out the entire month

Not necessarily. Months very in their length if accuracy is your argument so what you're really saying is convert to annual and compare that way. This... is an option ofc.

In practice many don't have a choice BUT to be paid weekly or bi-weekly and are living paycheck to weekly paycheck (and consequently need to budget the most). Additionally, a lot of expenses are budgeted weekly despite longer terms being better for the math. The individual may know they can eat out once a weekend and also want to know how much they can afford to spend on entertainment that week. Car loan amortized weekly?

;tldr this is how you can do it if you need to but, shocker, there's more than one way to do math if you don't.


Scuka1 t1_ja2bgas wrote

>there's more than one way to do math

There are ways that give you more and less accurate results.

If you take a week worth of data and multiply to get a month, you're also multiplying any mistakes or outliers there might be. If you take 3 months worth of data and dividing to get a picture of your average month, you're dividing, i.e. ironing out any outliers. That gives you better predictive power to predict, say, how much money you're going to need in the next 10 months.

Say you eat at home almost every day of the month, but once per month you eat at a fancy restaurant. If you take data from the week you ate at that fancy restaurant and multiply by 4.345, you're going to make it seem like you eat at a restaurant 4 times per month. If you take data from the non fancy restaurant week, your fancy meal won't be captured in the data at all. Either way, you're getting inaccurate monthly data.

Longer time frame = more accurate result in terms of predictive power (e.g. predicting how much money you're going to need over the, say, next 10 months)


schwifty38 t1_ja09awq wrote

Wondering the same damn thing tbh. It doesn't change when the bills are due...


19is_ t1_ja0sce5 wrote

Also, a US gal of water weighs 8.345 pounds.


rypher t1_ja1vahx wrote

Depends on the lead, I would think


JwSatan t1_j9zdzat wrote

2080 working hours in a year for the US



Fresh_Pomelo8842 t1_j9zlynt wrote

You don't have vacations over there?


FoghornLegday t1_j9zrtey wrote

Vacations are counted as working hours in this context bc you still get paid the same


StormyCrow t1_j9zukxp wrote

But no, a whole lot of people living in the US do not get paid vacations.


Negative_Equity t1_ja063x7 wrote

Lol no Americans don't get time off. See r/antiwork for more details.


Alittlemoorecheese t1_ja09skh wrote

Doesn't work for leap year. That's why (Hours X Pay X 52)/12 is the accounting standard.


Nagisan t1_ja39srs wrote

Unless you're calculating hourly rate of pay as a federal employee - they use 2087 working hours in a year. This is done because it represents the average hours worked per year (with 40hr work weeks) over the 28-year repeating calendar cycle due to leap years.


HHegert t1_ja0dpo4 wrote

US with their 7 paydays every month instead of getting paid monthly lol


froggy328 t1_ja0zukr wrote

What? Everyone I know is paid bi-monthly.


Magic_mousie t1_ja5j2zj wrote

Everyone I know is paid monthly. Hence the phrase "too much month left at the end of the money"


hornboggler t1_j9ztvhf wrote

An average month (one 12th of a year) is ~30.5 days long


el-em-en-o t1_j9zyymu wrote

52 weeks in a year. 2080 work hours.


tangcameo t1_ja0ouel wrote

If you get paid biweekly there are two months out of every year where you have a 3 paystub month instead of just a 2 paystub month.


keepthetips t1_j9zaq24 wrote

Hello and welcome to r/LifeProTips!

Please help us decide if this post is a good fit for the subreddit by up or downvoting this comment.

If you think that this is great advice to improve your life, please upvote. If you think this doesn't help you in any way, please downvote. If you don't care, leave it for the others to decide.


frzn_dad t1_ja0g3p0 wrote

An average month. February is 4 weeks 75% of the time.


patricia_iifym t1_ja0lxkp wrote

I budget as if I only got 2 pays / month (24/year) so anything outside that is “extra savings”, but I get your point.


ACuteMonkeysUncle t1_ja0rdm2 wrote

Fun fact: 0.001 weeks is a little more than 10 minutes.


ompster t1_ja1el5l wrote

It's (price X 52) / 12 right?


downinCarolina t1_ja1gvz3 wrote

if you get paid bi-weekly, you'll get two extra paychecks a year. it's nice to just budget for the other 24 and let those two be a rainy day bonus.


pleurtinmetassie t1_ja1ory1 wrote

Don't forget leap years. Every 4 years a month is 4.357 weeks on average.


ThatRedheadMom t1_ja1rdfn wrote

Related to food benefits, if you’re paid weekly, your income is calculated as your check * 4.3. People get PISSED about it. Bi-weekly is multiplied by 2.15


M4NOOB t1_ja2nu76 wrote

Why would you calculate with weeks and not days???


tropicalsugar t1_ja2y5nl wrote

If paying by the week, I always do times 52 weeks divided by 12 months. Gives me same number


Ogediah t1_ja34kuj wrote

That is 52 weeks / 12 months and it’d be most useful for extrapolating weekly pay or expenses. However, it’s not necessarily gonna help you with monthly expenses and months are different lengths and pay days do fall on the same days (not do months have the same amount of them.)


Original-P t1_ja3ce2d wrote

Finally, a life pro tip I can actually use. Thanks!


spiderysnout t1_ja3dgy4 wrote

Going along with this, bi weekly payments aren't the same as 2 per month. I find gyms especially always try to do this. Oh its 40 bucks a month with $20 bi weekly payments. Actually, $40x12mon/yr =$480/yr; $20x(52wks/2=26/yr)=$520/yr.

Pay monthly if they give you this option!! Or if that's not an option tell them they're wrong.


chrissilich t1_ja3f41p wrote

Things would be so much easier with the International fixed calendar aka the 13 month calendar that works so beautifully it makes you wonder why the fuck we haven’t done it yet.


nooBarOne t1_ja3gd7l wrote

None of the 12 months is this long. February is usually 4.000 weeks for example.


StarGazinWade t1_ja3glgq wrote

I'm trying to think of a time when I'd use this. Maybe it's the way I've budgeted the past decade or two, but nothings coming to mind. Can you expound on why or when this would be useful?


fulanomengano t1_ja3l6i1 wrote

I use 4 1/3, close enough and easy to calculate in my head.


Smooth_Peace_6272 t1_ja51mas wrote

That's a good tip to remember. It can be helpful to know the conversion from months to weeks when making calculations.


ImSwiss t1_ja5z68l wrote

correct, and calculate biwk as X 2.17. If months were exactly 4 wks long, we would have 13 months since we have 52 weeks in a year


[deleted] t1_ja0lrcc wrote

So just basic math?