Mixing
Split utilities among roommates give percent of month they occupied house
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let's say each month a utility bill comes and it needs to be split among a variable number of roommates. Let's say each person occupied the house for a certain percentage of the month: person 1 100%, person 2 100%, person 3, 75%, person 4, 50%. How can I calculate how much each person has to pay? (The number of people could be greater than number of rooms because of people moving in and out during the month.) Let's say the utility bill is $150 and length of month is 28 days.
My algebraic and correct solution is to calculate utility per day: $5.357. Then I go through each day of the month and check number of people that lived in the house. I do 5.357/number of people in house at day d. Then I add up for each for person for each day.
<first 7 days>: 2 people occupied
<second 7 days>: 3 people occupied
<last 14 days>: 4 people occupied
This gives me a correct answer of:
-person 1: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 2: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 3: 31.25 = 12.5 + 18.75
-person 4: 18.75 = 18.75
How can I make this calculation without having to divide up the month day by day? My intuition is that there is a calculus solution to this.
calculus algebra-precalculus
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let's say each month a utility bill comes and it needs to be split among a variable number of roommates. Let's say each person occupied the house for a certain percentage of the month: person 1 100%, person 2 100%, person 3, 75%, person 4, 50%. How can I calculate how much each person has to pay? (The number of people could be greater than number of rooms because of people moving in and out during the month.) Let's say the utility bill is $150 and length of month is 28 days.
My algebraic and correct solution is to calculate utility per day: $5.357. Then I go through each day of the month and check number of people that lived in the house. I do 5.357/number of people in house at day d. Then I add up for each for person for each day.
<first 7 days>: 2 people occupied
<second 7 days>: 3 people occupied
<last 14 days>: 4 people occupied
This gives me a correct answer of:
-person 1: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 2: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 3: 31.25 = 12.5 + 18.75
-person 4: 18.75 = 18.75
How can I make this calculation without having to divide up the month day by day? My intuition is that there is a calculus solution to this.
calculus algebra-precalculus
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Let's say each month a utility bill comes and it needs to be split among a variable number of roommates. Let's say each person occupied the house for a certain percentage of the month: person 1 100%, person 2 100%, person 3, 75%, person 4, 50%. How can I calculate how much each person has to pay? (The number of people could be greater than number of rooms because of people moving in and out during the month.) Let's say the utility bill is $150 and length of month is 28 days.
My algebraic and correct solution is to calculate utility per day: $5.357. Then I go through each day of the month and check number of people that lived in the house. I do 5.357/number of people in house at day d. Then I add up for each for person for each day.
<first 7 days>: 2 people occupied
<second 7 days>: 3 people occupied
<last 14 days>: 4 people occupied
This gives me a correct answer of:
-person 1: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 2: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 3: 31.25 = 12.5 + 18.75
-person 4: 18.75 = 18.75
How can I make this calculation without having to divide up the month day by day? My intuition is that there is a calculus solution to this.
calculus algebra-precalculus
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
Let's say each month a utility bill comes and it needs to be split among a variable number of roommates. Let's say each person occupied the house for a certain percentage of the month: person 1 100%, person 2 100%, person 3, 75%, person 4, 50%. How can I calculate how much each person has to pay? (The number of people could be greater than number of rooms because of people moving in and out during the month.) Let's say the utility bill is $150 and length of month is 28 days.
My algebraic and correct solution is to calculate utility per day: $5.357. Then I go through each day of the month and check number of people that lived in the house. I do 5.357/number of people in house at day d. Then I add up for each for person for each day.
<first 7 days>: 2 people occupied
<second 7 days>: 3 people occupied
<last 14 days>: 4 people occupied
This gives me a correct answer of:
-person 1: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 2: 50 = 18.75 + 12.5 + 18.75
-person 3: 31.25 = 12.5 + 18.75
-person 4: 18.75 = 18.75
How can I make this calculation without having to divide up the month day by day? My intuition is that there is a calculus solution to this.
calculus algebra-precalculus
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
asked 3 hours ago
andrewg
1
1
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
If the goal is to get exactly the same result as the solution you've presented, there's pretty much no hope except doing it day-by-day. Just knowing the number of days each roommate occupied isn't enough information, because it's more expensive to live in the house when there are fewer other people living there.
For example, consider two possible scenarios:
In scenario $A$, person 1 always lives in the house. Person 2 lives there for the first $2$ weeks, and then is replaced by person 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
In scenario $B$, person 1 lives alone for the first $2$ weeks, then is joined by persons 2 and 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
Note that in both these scenarios, person 1 lives in the house for $4$ weeks and the other two people live there for $2$ weeks each. However:
- In scenario $A$, person 1 is always splitting the utility bill with exactly one other person. So person 1 pays $$75$, while each of the other two pay $$37.50$.
- In scenario $B$, person 1 owes the entire $$75$ utility bill for the first half of the month, and then the bill is split three ways for the last half. So person 1 pays $$100$, while the other two pay $$25$ each.
That is, the amount each person owes is different even though their occupancy times are the same.
That being said, utility bills are likely higher when more people live in the house. So splitting it up by shares as suggested by the other answer might be reasonable.
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Another method (it's certainly simpler) is to just add up the occupancy rates for the people, and then figure out the percentage of the total bill that each person has to pay as their share.
For your example, we add up:
$$100+100+75+50=325$$
And now we can say that persons 1 and 2 are each responsible for $frac100325$ part of the total bill, person 3 for $frac100325$ mpart, and person 4 for $frac50325$
That is, persons 1 and 2 pay: $frac100325cdot 150 approx 46.15$
Person 3 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 34.60$
Person 4 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 23.10$
Now, these are different numbers than you got ... so ... which is the better (more 'fair'?) method? If it was just a matter of how one uses in terms of gas/electricity/water, etc, I think your method is better. However, utility bills typically also have some 'base rate' (typically called 'delivery charge') as well, just to cover the costs of the utility company setting up the infrastructure, maintaining and repairing pipes and wires, etc. Think of this as the cost to you for having the option and luxury to be able to use gas an electricity in the first place, before you actually get to use any of it.
So, look at how in your method persons 3 and 4 end up paying a bit less than in my method. So, are they getting stiffed by my my method? Well, you could argue that persons 3 and 4 enjoy the fact that there was this infrastructure just as much as persons 1 and 2: persons 3 and 4 know that they can come to the house and enjoy the fact that there ids gas, electricity, and running water.So sSure, they used less actual gas/water/electricity, but the pipes and wiring had to be there for them just as much ... and so maybe it's just proper that they pay a bit more ...
Indeed, how do you think about the rent? Say the rent for the whole house is $1000 and suppose the 4 people all have an equally nice and sized room. How would you split the rent? Probably you'd do something much closer to my method than yours ... in fact, you'd probably just split this 4-ways regardless of occupancy: and the reasoning is similar: they all have, at any time, a place to go to ... that is largely what they pay for. Well, something similar is going one with utilities, I would argue: at least partly you pay for the option of being able to use it; simply of it being there.
In fact, you could take my argument and make your life more complicated: split the bill between usage costs and 'delivery' costs, and then use your method to split up the usage costs, and simply evenly split the delivery costs.
In fact, with my method being 'in between' the individual-usage method of yours, and the simple 'even-split' method, my method could be seen as a kind of compromise ... and it's certainly fairly easy to calculate. In fact, as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high, I would say don't sweat the few dollars more or less!
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
If the goal is to get exactly the same result as the solution you've presented, there's pretty much no hope except doing it day-by-day. Just knowing the number of days each roommate occupied isn't enough information, because it's more expensive to live in the house when there are fewer other people living there.
For example, consider two possible scenarios:
In scenario $A$, person 1 always lives in the house. Person 2 lives there for the first $2$ weeks, and then is replaced by person 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
In scenario $B$, person 1 lives alone for the first $2$ weeks, then is joined by persons 2 and 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
Note that in both these scenarios, person 1 lives in the house for $4$ weeks and the other two people live there for $2$ weeks each. However:
- In scenario $A$, person 1 is always splitting the utility bill with exactly one other person. So person 1 pays $$75$, while each of the other two pay $$37.50$.
- In scenario $B$, person 1 owes the entire $$75$ utility bill for the first half of the month, and then the bill is split three ways for the last half. So person 1 pays $$100$, while the other two pay $$25$ each.
That is, the amount each person owes is different even though their occupancy times are the same.
That being said, utility bills are likely higher when more people live in the house. So splitting it up by shares as suggested by the other answer might be reasonable.
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
If the goal is to get exactly the same result as the solution you've presented, there's pretty much no hope except doing it day-by-day. Just knowing the number of days each roommate occupied isn't enough information, because it's more expensive to live in the house when there are fewer other people living there.
For example, consider two possible scenarios:
In scenario $A$, person 1 always lives in the house. Person 2 lives there for the first $2$ weeks, and then is replaced by person 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
In scenario $B$, person 1 lives alone for the first $2$ weeks, then is joined by persons 2 and 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
Note that in both these scenarios, person 1 lives in the house for $4$ weeks and the other two people live there for $2$ weeks each. However:
- In scenario $A$, person 1 is always splitting the utility bill with exactly one other person. So person 1 pays $$75$, while each of the other two pay $$37.50$.
- In scenario $B$, person 1 owes the entire $$75$ utility bill for the first half of the month, and then the bill is split three ways for the last half. So person 1 pays $$100$, while the other two pay $$25$ each.
That is, the amount each person owes is different even though their occupancy times are the same.
That being said, utility bills are likely higher when more people live in the house. So splitting it up by shares as suggested by the other answer might be reasonable.
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
If the goal is to get exactly the same result as the solution you've presented, there's pretty much no hope except doing it day-by-day. Just knowing the number of days each roommate occupied isn't enough information, because it's more expensive to live in the house when there are fewer other people living there.
For example, consider two possible scenarios:
In scenario $A$, person 1 always lives in the house. Person 2 lives there for the first $2$ weeks, and then is replaced by person 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
In scenario $B$, person 1 lives alone for the first $2$ weeks, then is joined by persons 2 and 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
Note that in both these scenarios, person 1 lives in the house for $4$ weeks and the other two people live there for $2$ weeks each. However:
- In scenario $A$, person 1 is always splitting the utility bill with exactly one other person. So person 1 pays $$75$, while each of the other two pay $$37.50$.
- In scenario $B$, person 1 owes the entire $$75$ utility bill for the first half of the month, and then the bill is split three ways for the last half. So person 1 pays $$100$, while the other two pay $$25$ each.
That is, the amount each person owes is different even though their occupancy times are the same.
That being said, utility bills are likely higher when more people live in the house. So splitting it up by shares as suggested by the other answer might be reasonable.
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
If the goal is to get exactly the same result as the solution you've presented, there's pretty much no hope except doing it day-by-day. Just knowing the number of days each roommate occupied isn't enough information, because it's more expensive to live in the house when there are fewer other people living there.
For example, consider two possible scenarios:
In scenario $A$, person 1 always lives in the house. Person 2 lives there for the first $2$ weeks, and then is replaced by person 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
In scenario $B$, person 1 lives alone for the first $2$ weeks, then is joined by persons 2 and 3 for the last $2$ weeks.
Note that in both these scenarios, person 1 lives in the house for $4$ weeks and the other two people live there for $2$ weeks each. However:
- In scenario $A$, person 1 is always splitting the utility bill with exactly one other person. So person 1 pays $$75$, while each of the other two pay $$37.50$.
- In scenario $B$, person 1 owes the entire $$75$ utility bill for the first half of the month, and then the bill is split three ways for the last half. So person 1 pays $$100$, while the other two pay $$25$ each.
That is, the amount each person owes is different even though their occupancy times are the same.
That being said, utility bills are likely higher when more people live in the house. So splitting it up by shares as suggested by the other answer might be reasonable.
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
answered 3 hours ago
Micah
27.7k135897
27.7k135897
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Another method (it's certainly simpler) is to just add up the occupancy rates for the people, and then figure out the percentage of the total bill that each person has to pay as their share.
For your example, we add up:
$$100+100+75+50=325$$
And now we can say that persons 1 and 2 are each responsible for $frac100325$ part of the total bill, person 3 for $frac100325$ mpart, and person 4 for $frac50325$
That is, persons 1 and 2 pay: $frac100325cdot 150 approx 46.15$
Person 3 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 34.60$
Person 4 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 23.10$
Now, these are different numbers than you got ... so ... which is the better (more 'fair'?) method? If it was just a matter of how one uses in terms of gas/electricity/water, etc, I think your method is better. However, utility bills typically also have some 'base rate' (typically called 'delivery charge') as well, just to cover the costs of the utility company setting up the infrastructure, maintaining and repairing pipes and wires, etc. Think of this as the cost to you for having the option and luxury to be able to use gas an electricity in the first place, before you actually get to use any of it.
So, look at how in your method persons 3 and 4 end up paying a bit less than in my method. So, are they getting stiffed by my my method? Well, you could argue that persons 3 and 4 enjoy the fact that there was this infrastructure just as much as persons 1 and 2: persons 3 and 4 know that they can come to the house and enjoy the fact that there ids gas, electricity, and running water.So sSure, they used less actual gas/water/electricity, but the pipes and wiring had to be there for them just as much ... and so maybe it's just proper that they pay a bit more ...
Indeed, how do you think about the rent? Say the rent for the whole house is $1000 and suppose the 4 people all have an equally nice and sized room. How would you split the rent? Probably you'd do something much closer to my method than yours ... in fact, you'd probably just split this 4-ways regardless of occupancy: and the reasoning is similar: they all have, at any time, a place to go to ... that is largely what they pay for. Well, something similar is going one with utilities, I would argue: at least partly you pay for the option of being able to use it; simply of it being there.
In fact, you could take my argument and make your life more complicated: split the bill between usage costs and 'delivery' costs, and then use your method to split up the usage costs, and simply evenly split the delivery costs.
In fact, with my method being 'in between' the individual-usage method of yours, and the simple 'even-split' method, my method could be seen as a kind of compromise ... and it's certainly fairly easy to calculate. In fact, as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high, I would say don't sweat the few dollars more or less!
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Another method (it's certainly simpler) is to just add up the occupancy rates for the people, and then figure out the percentage of the total bill that each person has to pay as their share.
For your example, we add up:
$$100+100+75+50=325$$
And now we can say that persons 1 and 2 are each responsible for $frac100325$ part of the total bill, person 3 for $frac100325$ mpart, and person 4 for $frac50325$
That is, persons 1 and 2 pay: $frac100325cdot 150 approx 46.15$
Person 3 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 34.60$
Person 4 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 23.10$
Now, these are different numbers than you got ... so ... which is the better (more 'fair'?) method? If it was just a matter of how one uses in terms of gas/electricity/water, etc, I think your method is better. However, utility bills typically also have some 'base rate' (typically called 'delivery charge') as well, just to cover the costs of the utility company setting up the infrastructure, maintaining and repairing pipes and wires, etc. Think of this as the cost to you for having the option and luxury to be able to use gas an electricity in the first place, before you actually get to use any of it.
So, look at how in your method persons 3 and 4 end up paying a bit less than in my method. So, are they getting stiffed by my my method? Well, you could argue that persons 3 and 4 enjoy the fact that there was this infrastructure just as much as persons 1 and 2: persons 3 and 4 know that they can come to the house and enjoy the fact that there ids gas, electricity, and running water.So sSure, they used less actual gas/water/electricity, but the pipes and wiring had to be there for them just as much ... and so maybe it's just proper that they pay a bit more ...
Indeed, how do you think about the rent? Say the rent for the whole house is $1000 and suppose the 4 people all have an equally nice and sized room. How would you split the rent? Probably you'd do something much closer to my method than yours ... in fact, you'd probably just split this 4-ways regardless of occupancy: and the reasoning is similar: they all have, at any time, a place to go to ... that is largely what they pay for. Well, something similar is going one with utilities, I would argue: at least partly you pay for the option of being able to use it; simply of it being there.
In fact, you could take my argument and make your life more complicated: split the bill between usage costs and 'delivery' costs, and then use your method to split up the usage costs, and simply evenly split the delivery costs.
In fact, with my method being 'in between' the individual-usage method of yours, and the simple 'even-split' method, my method could be seen as a kind of compromise ... and it's certainly fairly easy to calculate. In fact, as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high, I would say don't sweat the few dollars more or less!
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Another method (it's certainly simpler) is to just add up the occupancy rates for the people, and then figure out the percentage of the total bill that each person has to pay as their share.
For your example, we add up:
$$100+100+75+50=325$$
And now we can say that persons 1 and 2 are each responsible for $frac100325$ part of the total bill, person 3 for $frac100325$ mpart, and person 4 for $frac50325$
That is, persons 1 and 2 pay: $frac100325cdot 150 approx 46.15$
Person 3 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 34.60$
Person 4 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 23.10$
Now, these are different numbers than you got ... so ... which is the better (more 'fair'?) method? If it was just a matter of how one uses in terms of gas/electricity/water, etc, I think your method is better. However, utility bills typically also have some 'base rate' (typically called 'delivery charge') as well, just to cover the costs of the utility company setting up the infrastructure, maintaining and repairing pipes and wires, etc. Think of this as the cost to you for having the option and luxury to be able to use gas an electricity in the first place, before you actually get to use any of it.
So, look at how in your method persons 3 and 4 end up paying a bit less than in my method. So, are they getting stiffed by my my method? Well, you could argue that persons 3 and 4 enjoy the fact that there was this infrastructure just as much as persons 1 and 2: persons 3 and 4 know that they can come to the house and enjoy the fact that there ids gas, electricity, and running water.So sSure, they used less actual gas/water/electricity, but the pipes and wiring had to be there for them just as much ... and so maybe it's just proper that they pay a bit more ...
Indeed, how do you think about the rent? Say the rent for the whole house is $1000 and suppose the 4 people all have an equally nice and sized room. How would you split the rent? Probably you'd do something much closer to my method than yours ... in fact, you'd probably just split this 4-ways regardless of occupancy: and the reasoning is similar: they all have, at any time, a place to go to ... that is largely what they pay for. Well, something similar is going one with utilities, I would argue: at least partly you pay for the option of being able to use it; simply of it being there.
In fact, you could take my argument and make your life more complicated: split the bill between usage costs and 'delivery' costs, and then use your method to split up the usage costs, and simply evenly split the delivery costs.
In fact, with my method being 'in between' the individual-usage method of yours, and the simple 'even-split' method, my method could be seen as a kind of compromise ... and it's certainly fairly easy to calculate. In fact, as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high, I would say don't sweat the few dollars more or less!
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
Another method (it's certainly simpler) is to just add up the occupancy rates for the people, and then figure out the percentage of the total bill that each person has to pay as their share.
For your example, we add up:
$$100+100+75+50=325$$
And now we can say that persons 1 and 2 are each responsible for $frac100325$ part of the total bill, person 3 for $frac100325$ mpart, and person 4 for $frac50325$
That is, persons 1 and 2 pay: $frac100325cdot 150 approx 46.15$
Person 3 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 34.60$
Person 4 pays $frac75325cdot 150 approx 23.10$
Now, these are different numbers than you got ... so ... which is the better (more 'fair'?) method? If it was just a matter of how one uses in terms of gas/electricity/water, etc, I think your method is better. However, utility bills typically also have some 'base rate' (typically called 'delivery charge') as well, just to cover the costs of the utility company setting up the infrastructure, maintaining and repairing pipes and wires, etc. Think of this as the cost to you for having the option and luxury to be able to use gas an electricity in the first place, before you actually get to use any of it.
So, look at how in your method persons 3 and 4 end up paying a bit less than in my method. So, are they getting stiffed by my my method? Well, you could argue that persons 3 and 4 enjoy the fact that there was this infrastructure just as much as persons 1 and 2: persons 3 and 4 know that they can come to the house and enjoy the fact that there ids gas, electricity, and running water.So sSure, they used less actual gas/water/electricity, but the pipes and wiring had to be there for them just as much ... and so maybe it's just proper that they pay a bit more ...
Indeed, how do you think about the rent? Say the rent for the whole house is $1000 and suppose the 4 people all have an equally nice and sized room. How would you split the rent? Probably you'd do something much closer to my method than yours ... in fact, you'd probably just split this 4-ways regardless of occupancy: and the reasoning is similar: they all have, at any time, a place to go to ... that is largely what they pay for. Well, something similar is going one with utilities, I would argue: at least partly you pay for the option of being able to use it; simply of it being there.
In fact, you could take my argument and make your life more complicated: split the bill between usage costs and 'delivery' costs, and then use your method to split up the usage costs, and simply evenly split the delivery costs.
In fact, with my method being 'in between' the individual-usage method of yours, and the simple 'even-split' method, my method could be seen as a kind of compromise ... and it's certainly fairly easy to calculate. In fact, as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high, I would say don't sweat the few dollars more or less!
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
answered 3 hours ago
Bram28
54.4k33776
54.4k33776
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
@andrew_ghobrial Yes, well aware ... I am in the process of addressing that in my post .. hang on a sec
– Bram28
3 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
Can you elaborate on "as long as the differences in occupancy rates aren't too high"?
– andrewg
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
@andrewg Well, that's indeed a very vague term ... but maybe your concrete example is a good case: since they all stayed there at least half of the time, you don't have anyone stay there for, say, one tenth of the time as someone else. This is why, in the end, the difference between my method and your method isn't all that great ... so if this is a real life situation .. I would say don't sweat the 5 or 10 bucks difference. And hey, next month someone else might stay longer, so lots of this will probably wash out anyway.
– Bram28
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2873309%2fsplit-utilities-among-roommates-give-percent-of-month-they-occupied-house%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password