I empathize with J.D.’s unexpected cash layout in his Get Rich Slowly’s January 9, 2008 post on the benefits of an emergency fund.  Like J.D., we have dipped into our emergency fund for various one-time expenses over the past three months, like fixing a broken sprinkler in our home, an unexpected increase in property taxes, and an unplanned trip to visit a sick relative.  Having a stash of cash available for nonroutine household expenses is a no-brainer, which is why I was surprised with Suze Orman’s response to a question about emergency funds in a recent episode of her television show on CNBC (aired on January 12, 2008).  A woman had called into the show explaining that she was a federal government employee, with about 6 weeks of vacation leave every year, and over 4 months of sick leave.  The caller asked Suze whether she could treat her vacation and sick leave as her emergency fund because the amount of leave was so substantial.  Suze said “yes,” that in lieu of a cash emergency fund, she could rely on her accumulated leave as her emergency fund in the event she was laid off or fired.  Huh?  Let’s be realistic here.  If the caller had to take off 6 months because of a dire medical emergency, she would still receive the same pay as if she were working.  The sick/vacation leave would not cover any additional expenses that the caller might face in such a situation.  There are numerous other scenarios where the caller, still employed, might need extra cash.  Having extra cash is the entire point of an emergency fund.  Frankly, a federal government employee would rarely be fired or laid off.  So, instead of advising the caller on a situation that is very unlikely to happen, Suze should have told the caller to immediately set up a cash fund.  I think Suze is one of the best personal finance experts out there, but this is definitely one of her rare misses.