I just saw an TurboTax Ad where a guy was like "I Like free stuff" and then it said he was "happy to read the disclaimer" on TurboTax and see that "Roughly 37% of taxpayers qualify" which he looks thoughtfully in the distance and says "Thats me!"
I thought it was a funny commercial because 37% doesn't seem like a lot and Turbotax is portraying it as the average person will identify themselves as part of that 37% even though that is not too far off form just 1/3 people so a minority of people.
It was one of the few times I saw a company blatantly lean into the negatives in their fine print and just outright tell you its good.
I agree on every level, but I'm compelled to remind you this is the America where wendy's (?) had to revert to a 1/4 pounder from a 1/3 pounder bc people thought they were getting less meat. And let's not forget the ever-present anti-education cohort that can't be convinced math is good even when you tell them it's how you calculate discounts or tips.
I had to look this up as I didn’t grow up in the States. It was A&W.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/06/17/third-pound-burger-fr...
Crazy.
This story has to be apocryphal, as fractions aren't _that_ rare, especially in the U.S. with its imperial system and third of a cup measurements or quarter inches or half miles and so on.
Anecdotally, it seems like working with fractions is where a lot of people fall off the math-train and never get back on.
… yes, that early.
Fractions and negative numbers.
And, to be fair, they're the first math concepts that aren't intuitive.
Which IMHO leads to some people not studying, then feeling lost, then rationalizing their lack of effort as "I'm bad at math" or "Math is hard."
Fractions are pretty intuitive. Is the pizza or cake analogy really that advanced?
One third times one fifth loses a lot of folks. As does addition and subtraction of fractions that don’t start with the same denominator, for that matter. They might figure out what to do to pass the test, but they may not get it.
Fractions are just division. When kids learn division, it's about splitting into equal groups.
Fractions are a bit different though - you're splitting a single thing into equal chunks. Hence, slices of pie.
Multiplying by 1/5 is really dividing by 5. Introduce that first. We already know how to do this. You split your 1/3 slice into 5 equal slices.
Do the same to the other 2/3 slices, count all the slices, and you have 15. Hence, 1/15.
As an aside, common core math is amazing. They gave my daughter a model for the distributive property that can be used to show how to do long multiplication.
IDK, I did fine with them and find thinking in them natural (I think of fractional division as division, in fact, though I certainly understand the multiplication analogy); I’ve just known enough people who lost track of math at fractions that I doubt it’s coincidence.
I’m not saying I don’t get it, I’m saying others have told me that they found the explanations and instructions they were given nonsensical.
Have you tried dumping all the sockets out of a socket set and putting them back in order? Do you find it's easier to order the metric ones than the imperial ones which have a lot of different denominators on adjacent sizes? I certainly do but I'm not American so maybe it's my background limiting me.
Just to save you some time: the numbers written on the sockets indicate the size of the socket. So you don't even need to read them, just put them in order of size and you'll have them in order of number automatically.
I was thinking of mine which has the same OD for many adjacent sockets. Guess it doesn't work if they're all different.
There's a difference in type of thinking in moving from operations on numbers (basic whole number math) to operations-on-operations-on-numbers (anything with fractions).
Suddenly, you need to begin to understand the rules around operators, sequencing, and what operations are legal and illegal.
Absent that understanding, even...
... gets very complicated trying to reason with physical analogs.So it's the point at which math becomes "pure" rather than strictly physically-mapped.
And if multiplying fractions is simple. Before that addition is done. Which is more complicated.
Actually I think we do very little addition of fractions later in math. But it is a concept that confuses the multiplication or division.
Can confirm - While I was decent at math up to a point, fractions and long division in 4th Grade sent me down a hole that took me years to get out of...until Algebra II as a junior in HS crushed me.
I blame this on my Chemistry teacher - a class which I was also taking at the time - who spoke little English and had never taught in the United States until the year I landed in her class. I actually did reasonably well in Algebra for the first quarter or so until it all fell apart.
I re-invented what turned out to be short division (no joke! I wouldn’t learn it had a name until I was in my late 20s) because I hated long division so much, same year we started doing long division in school (4th grade? 3rd? IDK).
Fits in about the same space as the original problem unless it’s printed so small that you have to rewrite it, and way less room for transcription errors. I also find it clearer but that may just be me (fwiw I’m “bad at math”—I find it incredibly boring and basically can’t follow proof- and equation/identity-based stuff, I have to turn it all into algorithmic thinking to have a prayer of understanding it; i.e. my opinion on the superiority of short division is that of a mathematical imbecile, so, grain of salt)
It doesn’t help that in chemistry, 1 + 1 may be 1. Or 3. :-)
[edit] short division:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_division
Under the “example” section, the little superscripts are what you write in by hand on the problem as you work it, at least as I did it. 9/4 in the hundreds place is 2 with 1 remainder, so write 2 up above as part of the solution and a 1 superscript next to the 5 in the problem itself (tens place), now that’s 15, divide that, 3 goes in the tens place of the solution, write the remainder (3) next to the digit in the ones place as a superscript and do it again, if you need to keep going just add a decimal point and zeroes as required.
Way faster than working long division, takes up less space, and less error prone (imo). What’s actually going on is clearer (again, imo)
I’ve seen a later fall-off point at factoring. Feels pointless (the motivations are… distant at best), tedious as hell, lots of guessing involved. “So much for math making sense, fuck this, guess I’m out.”
I'm ok with fractions, but fractional and/or negative exponents always give me problems. I suspect it might be something to do with being taught that "multiplication is repeated addition, exponentiation is repeated multiplication". The model doesn't extend properly.
Forty years ago we learned fractions with chocolate bars. A trustworthy child would be chosen to walk from the primary school to the local store (about 5 minutes walk for an adult, probably about two minutes for a child who was just given money by a responsible adult to buy chocolate) and bring back some chocolate, and then kids who raise their hand and give the correct answer to fraction questions get the fraction in its physical form as chocolate. What's half of this third of the bar? A sixth, and now because I knew that I get to eat 1/6 of a bar of chocolate, whereas the kid who enthusiastically answered that it's a quarter does not because that's wrong.
It actually doesn't shock me that many people would be confused, especially if they didn't work with fractional quantities--e.g. for cooking--on a regular basis. Maybe it's a myth but it wouldn't surprise me if it weren't. And even if they've sort of internalized 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 without necessarily fully getting fractions--1/3 is something people encounter a lot less day to day.
It's not that they're rare, it's that it legitimately is an easy error to make even if you understand it to be an error. Even people who work with equations every day will occasionally make careless mistakes like this. That's why mathematicians joke about how it's important to make an even number of sign errors.
To not make this mistake, you have to be able to call to mind that the map x -> 1/x reverses the inequality sign. That's a fairly abstract thing to remember especially if you haven't taken math for years. Yes you could draw it or write down the equation, or convert to decimal... But it's enough of a cognitive barrier that it doesn't surprise me that it would impact the behavior even of people who would answer correctly on a test.
Where it does get easy is if you work with the same set of fractions every day. For example, if you work in construction in the US you can probably quickly order the fractions commonly used for measurement, e.g. 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 3/4 etc. But 1/3 isn't one of these. Now that I think about it, they probably should have just chosen a fraction that you can find on a tape measure, like 3/8.
For fractions like 1/3rd and 1/4th all it takes is common sense.
I speak, and thus think, in both English and Japanese.
English says "1/4", or "1 over 4", or "1 quarter".
Japanese says "4 bun no 1", or the practical equivalent of saying "4 under 1" in English.
I consequently routinely say the numbers in reverse, confounding both myself and anyone around me before I realize my brain engaged in furious tentacle sex with the numbers.
It seems like the obvious solution is to offer Americans what they want in terms of a burger named after a bigger denominator.
1/5th pound burger is going to sell better than the quarter pounder while using less beef.
The vast majority of processing is happening outside language-related areas of the brain. There's certainly leaky interfaces between areas of the brain, but if you literally thought in a language, and that distinction persisted throughout the brain, that would seem to imply that speaking 3 languages would require 3x the number of connections in the brain.
The strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis would presumably be true if we literally thought in a language, but the strong form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been thoroughly discredited.
In other words, "thinking in a language" is an illusion.
I do not really like the term "common sense" as it is more like common experience. It is not hard to learn what fractions are but I do not think it is something that any one is born with and there is other notation to deal with fractions that work differently.
3/8ths is 0.375 while 1/3rd is 0.333~ so it's even bigger while still larger than 1/4th (0.250), without being that much bigger.
3/8ths is a pretty good marketing point since all the numbers are bigger and it should be intuitive, plus you can more easily see that it's also 50% bigger than 1/4th => 2/8ths. The harder sell is the 'double whatever' being equal to 3 patties of the competitor.
You absolutely don't have to remember that x |-> 1/x is order reversing, and, for most people, shouldn't—you immediately give two or three other methods (I don't understand what "write down the equation" means) that are a much better way for the average person to check this.
Reportedly that’s the answer they got in focus groups when they tried to figure out why it failed.
4 > 3.
So why didn't they start selling 1/5 pounders?
Quarter and pounder rhymes so rolls off people's tongues.
Fifta-Pounder?
Fifth-Pounder?
Five-Pounder?
For all we know, marketing vetoed it cause they were lazy.
How 'bout a five-ouncer ?
Or would that suffer by seeming microscopic when listed close to "32 ounce" drinks ?
I literally had an argument with a room full of US university professors about whether or not 30% and 1/3 were the same thing.
... and what was your answer?
The correct one, that 30% is less than 1/3.
I did teacher's college in Canada and the teacher who taught math said his biggest surprise when he moved from Europe to Canada is how terrible people were with fraction. I think he asked a barista to fill his cup to 2/3 and they couldn't do it because they didn't know what 2/3 was.
I had the same shock but with reading. They're very much ahead in Europe in terms of reading levels.
Average Americans that frequent QSR’s don’t math so good.
Or perhaps all those people on here who defend US Standard measurements over metric and quote the fractions they know over decimals as an advantage are a minority?
Perhaps the average Joe would be better off with mm rather than 1/16" increments.
I thought so as well but A&W backs that version:
https://awrestaurants.com/blog/aw-third-pound-burger-fractio...
Wait, did Snopes say this was real because of a news article that contain hearsay?
Do people think the NY Times reports hearsay as fact?
Here, straight from the horse's mouth:
https://awrestaurants.com/blog/aw-third-pound-burger-fractio...
Based on a "focus group" discussion which are well known for selecting the brightest bunch of people who have nothing better to do than answer questions for 2 hours and get a coupon for free fries.
Personally I prefer Big Kahuna Burger
It's also important to take any corporation's explanation for increasing their own margins with an extremely large grain of salt. I'm not doubting in the slightest that consumers had some confusion around the fractions, but all it would take for the company to revert their campaign is for the increase in sales to insufficiently offset the increase in their own costs. Blaming it on consumer stupidity afterwards washes their hands of any responsibility for backpedaling, and makes for a memorable and repeatable story that increases brand recognition while simultaneously painting them as heroically trying to offer more value for the same cost.
You say “this is America”, but my mother (who grew up in USSR/Russia and was in her mid 30s at the time) was seriously asking middle-schooled me on multiple occasions whether 0.7 liters of milk was less than 0.55 liters. I don’t remember the exact numbers, i just remember that the smaller volume one had 2 digits past the decimal, and the larger one just had 1 digit.
And no, she wasn’t testing my knowledge, she was seriously confused, as she would ask me that even later in life. Mind you, she has a masters degree. She is in her early 50s right now, and she is fully of sound mind to this day, not senile or anything like that.
Imo, this type of silliness is rather common across many different places, but Americans just tend to own it and not be afraid of coming off silly (if that’s how they genuinely end up behaving in a given situation).
TurboTax is marketing to the kind of people who think getting big refunds is a good thing. That's generally people with lower incomes, so this fits that target.
It is generally a good thing for folks who live paycheck to paycheck. Higher withholding forces more budgeting, and then they get a big paycheck once a year to pay off whatever
People who live paycheck to paycheck are very good at budgeting because they have to do it to survive, they don't need any more pressure. If anything it's richer people that could use a little prodding, but either way we don't need the government to be withholding extra money from people it thinks might have bad habits.
If you have something big to pay off, you usually need to do it right away. You probably can't afford to wait however many months until you get your refund.
This is the kind of feel-good nonsense that people tell themselves. But anyone who has actually dealt with poor people who live paycheck to paycheck knows they are not good at budgeting and planning. Many of them literally have the mentality of spending their entire paycheck. Whatever is left over after expenses is fun to be had as soon as possible.
And if tax withholding laws changed to err on the side of under-withholding for poor people, those people would disproportionately fail to be able to pay their taxes when the time comes.
Some of the "better at planning" poor people have built up crude math to make it all makes sense, but seems overly complicated for someone like me. The one I noticed: "oh, I got $85 for selling that pot I made, I'll use that for the fridge repair." - Which is totally different to "oh I got $85, I'll just put it in the pool of my bank balance because I already budgeted for that fridge repair which costs $60". I tried asking this person, but you also needed an extra $10 for that McDonald's lunch you wanted to buy but they insisted "nope, that's my fridge-repair money, can't spend that"
Not sure I'm explaining that properly, but it was the sort of math I encountered dealing with such individuals.
One I've encountered is putting any surplus money into tattoos because they can't be stolen, repossessed or otherwise lost, thus making them a savvy place to put money.
I believe whoever told you that may have been joking[1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke
They were completely earnest. The joke followed that they can't take money with them when they die, but they can take tattoos. Pharaohs still have their tattoos, they point out.
There is also a general pattern of spending "extra" money on things like parties, experiences, consumables, etc. Better to spend the money on a pizza party and gocart trip for their kids than to stash it away in a savings account. Better to spend the money on beer for a party than even to hide it under their mattress.
you made an account just to talk shit about the poor?
It isn't "talking shit", what he's saying is broadly true and you're not doing poor people any favors by pretending otherwise.
Picked an appropriate username tho
As far as I can be bothered to care, schemes involving having other people store your money such as tax withholdings and insurance policies exist primarily to save people from themselves and their lack of budgeting capabilities.
Most people can't budget, poor people especially so (it's among the biggest and most likely reasons why they are poor). They see money, they spend it all immediately. Saving? Investing? "roflmao" or "I can't.", they will say. The only way to address this so certain, specific, important payments are made absolutely is to literally take and keep the money out of the person's hands until the payment is made.
When income is 80% of the minimal bills, which dollars are the fun ones?
You may not know that assertion is uneducated nonsense. The nonsensical part is the inference that better budgeting is all that stands between 80% of minimal bills and 105%.
Past that, an extended time in hunger-level poverty tends to lead to some hyper-focused money management. As in being intimately aware of each penny that hopefully will add up to this weeks bag of white rice.
If they were budgeting, they wouldn't be living paycheck to paycheck. It makes the budgeting more challenging to give the government and interest free loan.
However, giving the government an automatic loan means that a land lord cannot charge that much more in rent, and the owner does get to spend it eventually, rather than throwing it into a rent pit
If they were budgeting, they wouldn't be living paycheck to paycheck.
This is false. You simply aren't going to be able to budget your way into riches if you don't have enough money to go around. If you don't believe me, limit yourself to a minimum wage budget with no startup savings (and no borrowing off of others) and tell me how you are doing in a year... and then tell me how you'd survive the next few years on this. If minimum wage is too little, try setting the income at just over the mark you'd have for assistance.
Alternatively, if you have enough money to cover reasonable expenses, some fun, and have a little leftover, you don't really have to budget if you don't tend to spend lots. If I have enough money, I don't really have to budget.
It’s almost certainly a bad thing to get a big refund because small budgetary changes can result in being unable to make ends meet which is extremely expensive in terms of fines
In addition, I wouldn't be surprised to find that many of the people who are in the target demographic for this feature don't itemize - and never have a need for such practices.
A 1040 + W2 might the only equation these people need to solve for.
I think there's some segment of folks that get snatched up into the weird false pretense that a modern day turbotax filing is less than (at worst, once one factors personal time cost in) a decent tax person even at one of the, shall we say, 'established turn and burns'[0]
That said, TurboTax did hit a specific level of 'eww' when I started seeing the refund option of a debit card (of course for some stupid fee that, if nothing else, provides some transparency to their kickback from the issuer).
I'm going to be doing what might be my last filing with them this year; it's easier for the purposes of history/other events but after that, it's gonna be my Fiancee's CPA.
Originally, I got 'started' when it was a desktop app only, and the user limit was very graceful, my parents and all of my siblings could benefit from that one yearly purchase...
Come to think of it, we should probably capture that date in the historical timeline of Enshittification.
And, yaknow, I'll ask my dad this weekend how he's doing his taxes this year. I'm honestly curious if he's finally fed up with their antics too... (It's a high bar; in the past he learned the basics of virtual machines to use some of his old-school software/tools, it's a beautiful level of curmudgeonry. OTOH my siblings have good CPAs.)
[0] - Not to be confused with some of the weird 'chop shop' Tax places I have seen around me in the past, sort of 'pop-ups' with a statue of liberty wearing person or 'wacky inflatable arm-flailing tube-man' to help drive business in.
If you have simple taxes, FreeTaxUsa.com.
Not shady, neither is it free, but about as close as you can get AFAIK for online filing. For what it is (a web forms app, with careful explainers), it's pretty good!
I've used tax pros and honestly, my finances are not complex enough to get a good benefit off the extra cost. I used H&R block one year, and really didn't think they knew any more about tax filing than I did. They got confused at all the same line items I did.
I mean... H&R Block is in some ways the Firestone of accounting. Sometimes there's a diamond in the rough of their 'regular' workers [0] but you never know what you're gonna get unless you happen to wind up in the right circumstances where you can build trust with one of their people that happens to stick [1]
[0] - Had a friend who could get one of H&R Block's folks to do the whole deed for 'non complicated'[2] starting with a pile of receipts/medical bills/etc and 90$ for people they liked, and yes they'd do their proper professional duty in the process. Frankly given the time investment that's a steal.
[1] - In my case, it was a guy at a local shop who had his WRX parked outside every time that was some level of manager. Always happy to give proper treatment, never afraid to say 'take it to the dealer' (i.e. more qualified people) if it was out of their comfort zone. Compare and contrast to a different shop, where after some 'changes' managed to mess up an oil change, and the 'fix' for the bad oil change... [3]
[2] - I want to be clear that non-complicated is not the trivial 'oh sure okay' here, they may or may not have had a hand in pointing out said friend's parent was doing some... 'minor some student loan fraud'. But if you had additional properties or other weird situations... If I remember they had their own sort of menu and everything. Very smartly done.
[3] - I had to re-replace a <6 month old timing belt in the process, but frankly the engine needs a rebuild now, it lost 2-5MPG from that one incident.
unrelated, I bet you really like David Foster Wallace
This is distressingly common in marketing. "0% APR financing for well qualified buyers." Where well qualified means 720 FICO score, lower debt to income, and lower payment to income ratios. These details are not even in the fine print of the ad. Then there's ads that show a picture of the high end version of a product with text "starting from <low price>!" (that corresponds to the base model).
Less than a 720 FICO score is “fair” with 720 being “good”. I’m sorry but “fair” doesn’t make you a well-qualified buyer IMO, so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
It's FICO & DTI & PTI. None of this is defined in the ad not even the fine print. I'm well aware that 700 is around the 50th percentile.
Are they leaning in to it or are they forced to fit in the disclaimer?
Seems like the strategy of the ad is to repeat the word "Free" so much people don't remember the rest and to make it seem like the disclaimer is meaningless. Even with it, it's still free.
Probably a bit of both. What the commenter is describing is a textbook social proof tactic. "Hey, I like free stuff and taxes make me feel like a bit of a doofus, just like that guy. And like that guy, I see myself as the clever sort of person that isn't fooled by fine print. That free Turbo Tax program sounds awfully useful and free for people like me!" And Intuit can also point to that commercial and say "how is this trying to disguise the proof?" and they'd be right. They're just also trying to make it feel free still by making it free for a relatable character.
Sounds hokey but that sort of shit has been the bread and butter of advertising since forever. A vanishingly small percentage of people are anywhere close to as rational as they think they are when buying things. Many of the most self-assuredly "skeptical, rational, well-researched consumer" types get totally snowed by the simplest marketing ideas because they're looking for sales bullshit they can empirically disprove, and most marketing is influencing people in a way that makes them think they came to the conclusion independently.
Yeah this ad has been running a lot.
I was pretty sure when first seeing it that they'd already gotten in trouble for their last ads that used the word "free" a lot, and this was a very direct response to that... I guess that's just the final decision that's being reported on here.
How this ad got green lit, distributed to various mediums (tv ads, yt channel, social media), and nobody saying “wait, this is terrible” is unfathomable to me.
That is… unsettling.
I saw the exact same ad today.