>>1233
You're right. Either everyone pays 25% and you forget about the details or you pay too much and get fucked.

hi applesauce

stop living with cunts

you should pay by fraction of your income. calculate what percentage of your income each of you should pay, keeping the percentage equal, to match the bill.

like a flat tax. that way those who make more money pay more rent, but they really can't object because each dollar has less utility for them anyway. i would suggest a progressive scheme but there's way more room for debate there, and you're likely to encounter more resistance (supply side economics lol)

>>1235
<3

>>1236
We're all a bunch of young bucks that don't even THINK about things like income right now, we live paycheck by paycheck. I'm just trying to get them to see that splitting it four ways is equal, regardless of whether or not they share a room.

Just tell them you will pay more if they let you have the master bedroom/bathroom/walk in closet

You're right. The current arrangement seems fair enough, and unless one of them is Darth Vader they can't simply alter the deal anytime they feel like it. Talk with your other roomate and make sure he won't take any shit either.

>Then they proposed that we pay by the amount of square footage, which is taking it too far in my opinion.

Why? Seems the most fair way to me. The way I split the rent with my flat mates works like this: Each party takes the sum of their living space (i.e. their room) and the communal areas (kitchen, corridors, shared bathrooms, etc.). You then compute the ratios of those sums and split the rent in the same way. People with bigger rooms have to pay more, which is fair, but as everyone pays for the communal areas, the difference in the rents doesn't get too big.
Now in your situation there's also two people living together, which makes things a bit more complicated. In my opinion, the rent for the communal areas should be split in four, while the couple gets to split the rent for their room, closet and private bathroom.

I don't get how that is taking it "too far". You obviously care enough about this to ask us for validation, so doing a bit of math to ensure a fair division should not be that much effort.

>>1241
Not op but that shit sounds way too fucking complicated and just splitting it four goddamn ways is simpler and nobody can argue about it.

>>1243
That. That. That. That. That. Yes. Exactly. OP, fucking do that.

>>1241
Wouldn't it be easy to cheat that system and just sleep on a couch or in a closet to save money?

SAGE has been used.

>>1243
Well, as I said, since OP even puts in the effort to make a post like that, it can't be that much more of a hassle to do some simple math to solve his problem. I really don't see how this is "way too fucking complicated". You'd need about 10 minutes for the calculations.

> just splitting it four goddamn ways is simpler and nobody can argue about it.

Apparently, someone argues about it, and rightly so. E.g. if I was the fourth person in this arrangement, I'd be pissed. I have to live in the smallest room, I get a walk-in closet (big fucking whoop), and I still have to pay the same as everyone else. It seems OP's fourth guy is pretty chill about that stuff or doesn't assert himself very well, but this is by no means not arguable, as you put it.

I also think you must have a severe lack of empathy if you don't get why someone would not take that shit. We're talking about big sums of money that are paid monthly. Amongst me and my friends at least, it's understood that big amounts of money require fair distribution rules to be set in place, whether there's friendship involved or not - anything else would lead to bad blood.

Ugh. Just read the thread in /b/ and realized I wasted my time. This is all pretty childish. Well, it's not like I didn't expect that.

CUNT

>>1247
splitting it 4 ways makes more sense than splitting it 3 ways and having 2 people way 1 third together but your way makes the most sense i will agree