- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 100k-200k is not rich
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:16 am to tigerworkpart2
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:16 am to tigerworkpart2
A salary of 100K a year is not rich anywhere. If you live in La. taxes will eat up at least 25% of it. before you spend anything.
200K is a much better situation in La. and you should be able to save some of that.
Now in NYC or San Fran it's not the same thing. 200K won't let you save much.
Now whether these salaries include health insurance and retirement (pension) is also important. A person making 100K living in La. and paying for his own health insurance isn't going to be rich. They'll be doing fine, but definitely not rich.
200K is a much better situation in La. and you should be able to save some of that.
Now in NYC or San Fran it's not the same thing. 200K won't let you save much.
Now whether these salaries include health insurance and retirement (pension) is also important. A person making 100K living in La. and paying for his own health insurance isn't going to be rich. They'll be doing fine, but definitely not rich.
1
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:19 am to Hog on the Hill
A large majority of our population makes plenty of money to accumulate wealth. Yet, here we are.
I agree. It's a shame we don't take the same approach with federal handouts.
quote:
If you can't, you should probably take a close look at your expenses and trim the fat.
I agree. It's a shame we don't take the same approach with federal handouts.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:42 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:Indeed. Most think that unless you have a private jet and a mansion you are not rich.
I think people must have a really poorly calibrated sense of what makes a person rich.
It's a result of us knowing a lot more about "the rich" and the constant comparisons to the truly rich. It get reinforced when democrats talk about "the rich" as being millionaires and billionaires. In reality, it doesn't take that to be in the top 10% of income. It o my takes ~$150k.
I completely understand why a family making $100k doesn't feel rich. They don't feel like they can be wasteful with money and spend it whimsically. But in reality, there are plenty of people with private jets and mansions that have to watch every penny to pay for their stuff. Are they "rich"?
Ultimately the math doesn't match the emotion. Being "rich" is more of an emotional state (and status) than a financial one.
That is why it's so easily used by politicians to motivate people into believing they are victims.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:55 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
With that said, raising children in NYC is insanely expensive, so there's a chance we won't stay here.
Believe me, I know.
I know people paying $30k+/year for daycare after taxes, often more than what their household expenses are.
Trying making that work with less than $120k/year- it doesn't. That's why I think it's foolish to think that anyone making $130k/year is "rich".
Posted on 3/1/17 at 9:59 am to doubleb
quote:I'm living proof that you can make less than $200k in NYC and still have a lot. The caveat is that I'm single and have no kids, but I'm far enough below $200k that I feel confident I could support a family of four on $200k and still save plenty for retirement. I just wouldn't live in Manhattan.
Now in NYC or San Fran it's not the same thing. 200K won't let you save much.
Probably Forest Hills because the public schools there are very good and the home prices are reasonable, by NYC standards.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:06 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:Again, this is my own income, not a combined income. Details like that are important.
Believe me, I know.
I know people paying $30k+/year for daycare after taxes, often more than what their household expenses are.
Trying making that work with less than $120k/year- it doesn't. That's why I think it's foolish to think that anyone making $130k/year is "rich".
I don't consider myself rich, but my experience living here makes me believe that if I had the same income in Arkansas, I'd become rich. I could max my tax-advantaged investments every year and acquire investment properties with the leftover income. That would snowball pretty quickly, I think.
You're absolutely right about childcare expenses here. The cheapest daycare in my neighborhood is $1700/mo, IIRC. I looked it up a few months ago because my girlfriend and I are talking about marriage. That's $20k/yr right there. Add in food, clothes, medical expenses, etc.
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 10:14 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:09 am to Tigerdev
quote:
I think their point is that 95% of the benefits go to folks (like myself) who are very well off. That is a pretty serious point
ones ability to derive benefit from a tax break is entirely dependent upon the ammount of taxes that person is paying in the first place. it is impossible for an across the board tax reduction not to benefit people who pay the most taxes.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:21 am to CptRusty
quote:He knows that. His point, I think, is that a tax reduction only benefits people who have high incomes, but leaves out people who have lower incomes (including families that earn around the median income). That means it benefits fewer families than it helps.
ones ability to derive benefit from a tax break is entirely dependent upon the ammount of taxes that person is paying in the first place. it is impossible for an across the board tax reduction not to benefit people who pay the most taxes.
It's not a horrible plan--I like it in principle--but I think it would be better if it helped more people.
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 10:22 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:24 am to Tigerdev
quote:
Tax credits and tax write offs ultimately both lead to reduced revenue.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:33 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:Is so.. it's a poor point. The purpose of the tax codes isn't to distribute benefits. It's to collect money to operate the government.
His point, I think, is that a tax reduction only benefits people who have high incomes, but leaves out people who have lower incomes (including families that earn around the median income). That means it benefits fewer families than it helps.
Reversing his logic would show that few people are contributing to our government's funding. And those (including families that earn around the median income) don't contribute very much. Why should they be getting "benefits" from a system they don't contribute to?
We simply cannot fund our government solely on the backs of "the rich". If we do so..we will be taxing the hell out of people making a "meager" $150k.
Getting a little bit from everyone will be far more effective at raising revenue that soaking "the rich".
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 10:35 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:36 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
Forest Hills
The one thing I have learned living in NYC is that everyone pays a lot to live here- either in a lot of (recently increasing) time commuting or paying a lot for the convenience of not having to commute far.
When I first moved to Astoria, LIC was just starting to become a hot spot... Now there's a new luxury tower going up every few months with a fantastic view of Manhattan. That of course spills over to Astoria and everything gets more expensive.
Short of having at least $150k in combined income, the math doesn't work for someone to raise two kids. For the statisticians at home that's about the 91st percentile in household income nationwide.
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 10:38 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:37 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
His point, I think, is that a tax reduction only benefits people who have high incomes
If it's a refundable tax credit, everyone benefits. Again this point will get ignored by the left.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:38 am to tigerworkpart2
In my little wide place in the road in Cenla, $100K is very upper middle class. $200K would easily make you a one percenter.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:51 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
The one thing I have learned living in NYC is that everyone pays a lot to live here- either in a lot of (recently increasing) time commuting or paying a lot for the convenience of not having to commute far.
When I first moved to Astoria, LIC was just starting to become a hot spot... Now there's a new luxury tower going up with a fantastic view of Manhattan. That of course spills over to Astoria and everything gets more expensive.
Short of having at least $150k in combined income, the math doesn't work for someone to raise two kids. For the statisticians at home that's about the 91st percentile in household income nationwide.
Yeah, the amount of growth in LIC is crazy. In just the last year or so, I've seen 4-5 buildings go up in the Court Square area, and there are at least another 3-4 under construction now. The LIC waterfront is almost completely built up, but there should be another 3-4 buildings going up at the south end of Hunters Point in the next several years. It looks like they're doing the groundwork for one or two buildings down there right now.
Very true that you have to choose between housing expenses or commute times. One of my coworkers commutes all the way from Monmouth County, NJ. I can't imagine doing that.
If I marry and have kids with my girlfriend, we'd be fine to have two kids here. Still might move away, though. CA is tempting.
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 10:55 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 10:53 am to tigerworkpart2
Income and wealth, consider both.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 11:00 am to Jim Rockford
In New Orleans, in 2014, the median household income was $36,964. How the F is that possible?
The average house sold for $339,743 in New Orleans in the first half of last year. That's more than 100x the median household income.
Average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $1271/month. So half of the median income would be spent renting a one bedroom apartment.
I guess most people in NOLA are on government assistance because there's no way these people could afford to live here based on the shitty wages and high cost of housing.
The average house sold for $339,743 in New Orleans in the first half of last year. That's more than 100x the median household income.
Average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment is $1271/month. So half of the median income would be spent renting a one bedroom apartment.
I guess most people in NOLA are on government assistance because there's no way these people could afford to live here based on the shitty wages and high cost of housing.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 11:01 am to 4cubbies
quote:10x, not 100x
That's more than 100x the median household income.
Poverty in NOLA is really high, right? I'm guessing that's the reason.
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 11:04 am
Posted on 3/1/17 at 11:05 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
10x, not 100x
She's a teacher.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 11:06 am to Hog on the Hill
quote:
10x, not 100x
thanks. clearly math is not my niche. quote:
Poverty in NOLA is really high, right? I'm guessing that's the reason.
But where do the poor people live? If renting a one bedroom is more than $1,000 a month, where do the people live?
I guess we just have extreme wealth and extreme poverty in the city, with not much middle ground.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 11:07 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
She's a teacher.
and?
you guys are so interested in my life. it's weird. I don't know or care what your job is, nor am I waiting in the throes to advertise it to others. that's so odd to me.
eta: oh wait, I get it. Teachers are supposed to know everything and never make mistakes. So when someone who is a teacher of whatever subject makes a mistake, it's time to ridicule that person for not being perfect? is that it?
This post was edited on 3/1/17 at 11:11 am
Page 9 of 13
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News