> What else is tripping people up?

I suppose it could be a variety of things.  I, for instance, want to  
use only one financial application.  While MoneyWell is intended to  
control cash flow, I also want to track non-cash flow accounts, such  
as loans, debts, and investments.  I'll use the term "cash-flow  
account" throughout to refer to an account, that if I were to use  
actual buckets, I would liquidate it to put cash in my buckets.  They  
include accounts like checking, savings, credit cards (which reduces  
the amount of money that I have to put in a bucket), and cash.

Transfers can be a big challenge to figure out how to interact with  
buckets. When transferring money between cash-flow accounts, no bucket  
should be assigned.  When transferring money from a cash-flow account  
to another account, the withdrawal should be assigned to a bucket.   
Conversely, when transferring money from a non-cash flow account to a  
cash-flow account, the deposit should be assigned to a bucket.  This  
is non-intuitive without giving the whole process some thought and is  
easily confused during execution.  Getting it wrong however, can  
easily mislead you into thinking you have more money than you actually  
have for expenses.  That's at least one of several ways to get tripped  
up.

Another way would be if you started using MoneyWell sometime in a  
given month, say,Mar, and started tracking your cash flow on 1 April,  
using the cash you had at the time by adding up all your cash-flow  
accounts, and then realizing later that you forgotten a transaction  
back in Mar.  When you go to add the transaction, you might forget to  
apply the correction to your starting cash flow amount.  This  
transaction, being before the cash flow date, will not affect bucket  
totals, but it will change cash available and account balances,  
effectively reducing the amount you should have put in the buckets.   
You could inadvertently overspend this way without realizing it.

I implemented a tool using Excel several years ago that basically used  
a bucket/envelope method and tracked all my accounts.  I found two  
calculations extraordinarily useful after using the system for nearly  
two years.

The first was the total of all my cash flow accounts minus the total  
of all buckets with positive balances (this could be calculated using  
a smart bucket if the appropriate logic were in place).  This amount  
told me how much money I had overdrawn my buckets/envelopes.  While it  
is ideal to never have to overdraw a bucket, sometimes a person might  
make an intentional choice to spend next month's money now, or it is  
near the end of the month and you buy groceries on the 31st instead of  
the 1st.  Also, folks who travel for business might have a negative  
bucket until they are reimbursed.  As long as a recovery plan is in  
place, it is not critical when a person overdraws a bucket, and a  
money flow may not be desirable.  However, the deficit has to be  
covered by other buckets or by a hidden buffer not accounted for in  
the bucket/envelope system.  If you were to overdraw a bucket, and  
then spend all the money from the other buckets, you won't have enough  
money to cover your expenses (or you'll dip into the hidden buffer).   
This number told me that I needed to reserve a certain amount of money  
to cover the expenses.  If the number was smaller than my Savings  
bucket/envelope (or another one used for reserve), no immediate  
problem.  I just needed a plan to get fixed, whether it was the next  
paycheck or the reimbursement, or whatever.  I occasionally received  
extra money that I would choose not allocate, this sometimes this  
calculation was positive.  Meaning I had more money in accounts than I  
had planned to spend.  Consequently, I called this calculation my  
Buffer.

The second was a balance checker similar to what has been exhaustively  
discussed.  This could also be implemented by users if the appropriate  
logic were added to smart buckets (in particular being able to exclude  
certain transaction types).

I don't remember if smart buckets were being added in 1.5, but in any  
case, it seems that increased smart bucket functionality has great  
potential to allow folks to double check their bucket integrity  
whenever they do arrive.  This could provide a non-intrusive solution  
for everyone.  Lance, Dave, et al, what do you think?



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "No 
Thirst Software User Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/no-thirst-software?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to