Those 'Poor' People earning $200k

[Augie]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I learned that from being a parent at my kid's school.  It was a bit intimidating at first with all the people driving fancy cars and living in McMansions while we live in a modest neighborhood and I drive a used Toyota. 

 

Our financial advisor, himself a graduate of the school, put us straight: "For some of those people, your yearly income is peanuts.  For many others, they earn no more than you, but they're spending every penny.  They've got nothing in the bank, they're making payments on everything they've got, their credit cards are maxed out and if they lose their job and don't get another one in a month, they're going to go deep in debt."

 

Or as a friend of mine said when his wife lost her job while he was unemployed: "Weeeellll, I don't imagine they'll be coming to take the house back any time soon" (they owed $0)

 

My parents were in real estate development, the world of the highly leveraged. When it went south, it went down hard. My wife’s family was totally different. An immigrant family who started with nothing. He became a dentist, she was a professor of biochemistry. They knew nothing of leverage. If we ever went out to a restaurant, it was always paid for in cash. Old school. As the patriarch this could be a couple dozen people or more with a big family of cousins. All cash. All the time. 

 

The lesson he would teach is “if you don’t have the money to pay, don’t do it.” We use credit cards for convenience, but we live by that motto. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Greybeard said:

     Ah, the "Affordable Health Care Act."   The politicians who passed it should have been forced to use it.

 

Ain't that the truth

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, KD in CA said:

I disagree that people who actually paid for the the stimulus don't have a reasonable argument for participating in receiving it.   The article isolates income level as the only determinate of being 'rich' or 'wealthy' (terms liberally thrown around in that article), as you seem to be continuing to do while ignoring how misguided that is to use as a single test of financial condition.....as several people have attempted to point out here.

 

Now we're talking about a difference in philosophy.  You view the stimulus like a bank account withdrawal for everyone - "I made my deposit in taxes, I should be able to withdraw".  I look at it as a safety net for people who have limited financial choices and opportunities to save vs. people who do have financial choices and opportunities to save, but are choosing to spend a high percentage of their earnings. 

 

That's legit - we can have philosophical differences.  But let's recognize that's what they are and not disparage them as a matter of "envy" (upthread) or of people thinking $200k means "servants and champaign filled swimming pools", which is what I was responding to. 

 

When one wants to get a payment out quickly and without an application and review process, what test of financial condition other than taxable income exists that is widespread and readily available to government bureaucrats?  I'll hang up and wait.

 

 

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

3 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

Less than $300 for a watch! They’re in the poorhouse!

 

I'm not suggesting that you should feel sorry for them, or that they are entitiled to pandemic-related relief payments from the government.  But be honest - - would you have guessed that 50% of all millionaires never paid more than $300 for a watch?  Or  would you have guessed that the vast majority of them paid thousands of dollars for a fancy Rolex?

[Mike in Horseheads]

28 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Ain't that the truth

The ACA has been undercut in many ways to make it a shell of what was intended. Facts are that about 20m peeps depend on it, age for kids on parents policy was raised to 26 and preexisting conditions can't be held against a person anymore. "Affordable" hell no but better than nothing. And bring up National Health Care like Canada and peoples heads explode so not sure what anybody thinks would be better

[Bferra13]

Make no mistake. This source is from a leftist publication. Theres an agenda here. But a mod posted it, soooo... it is what it is. But this article makes people who actually earn their money look bad. Go China, Go Communists woo. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by Bferra13

[ExiledInIllinois]

3 hours ago, Augie said:

 

My parents were in real estate development, the world of the highly leveraged. When it went south, it went down hard. My wife’s family was totally different. An immigrant family who started with nothing. He became a dentist, she was a professor of biochemistry. They knew nothing of leverage. If we ever went out to a restaurant, it was always paid for in cash. Old school. As the patriarch this could be a couple dozen people or more with a big family of cousins. All cash. All the time. 

 

The lesson he would teach is “if you don’t have the money to pay, don’t do it.” We use credit cards for convenience, but we live by that motto. 

Ralph! Is that  you! 

 

I need a lift from the airport,  I will look for  your ride.  Are you still driving this?

 

 

? ?  Sweet aye!

[Alaska Darin]

8 hours ago, cle23 said:

I agree, to an extent.

 

My wife and I claimed $296,000 last year. My wife makes about $42,000. I own a small metal fabrication company with profits about $200,000 last year, and payroll of about $54,000 for myself. I paid about $55,000 into taxes, so it looks like I can just walk away with $150,000 at the end of the year but it didn't work that way. The company needs operating money. I took out around $10,000 to cover my Roth and throw some in another investment account.

 

We live ok, but nothing lavish. A house worth half our towns average ( ours is around 100k).  Newer car, but a Subaru, not a BMW or some high dollar model. 

 

So $200,000 didn't mean some extravagant lifestyle of the rich.

Thank you for the perfect example.  Small business is truly the backbone of the country but you'd never know it from how the tax code is written.

[Alaska Darin]

5 hours ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

The ACA has been undercut in many ways to make it a shell of what was intended. Facts are that about 20m peeps depend on it, age for kids on parents policy was raised to 26 and preexisting conditions can't be held against a person anymore. "Affordable" hell no but better than nothing. And bring up National Health Care like Canada and peoples heads explode so not sure what anybody thinks would be better

Feel free to give some examples of how it's been "undercut."

 

The law was ALWAYS an abortion and the few decent things you cited could have been passed in a bill that was a single page, not nearly 3000 pages of failure just waiting to happen.  Health care is the one place politicians absolutely REFUSE to let the market work.  Imagine your local muffler shop being able to hand you a bill for whatever they hell they want to charge and you being on the hook to either pay it or negotiate with them until it's at a point you're comfy paying. 

 

 

[Bill from NYC]

13 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Can't find that info.  Being honest, didn't dig very hard. 

You may be correct that many families live in high-tax states, but for many there's an element of personal choice there, too.  A number of companies struggle to recruit to St Louis (this is for very well paying, professional jobs - jobs where a two-income family earns >$200k).  

People want to stay on the coasts and avoid living in "Flyover Country".

How far from St. Louisvis Ferguson? I am thinking thatvriots fail to attract successful people. 

[SoTier]

15 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Maybe we should all make the same salary whether or not we even work. Then, we won’t have to resent, or even loathe successful people.

 

So, high income/wealth should put a person/family above criticism for how he/she/they manage their finances -- unless, of course, they're pro athletes, especially NFL players?  

 

If you had actually read the op-ed piece -- or understood what you read if you did read it -- you would realize that it was about the small segment of relatively wealthy people who cry poverty.

 

15 hours ago, LB3 said:

I feel the same way about poor people (which I was growing up).

 

How, exactly, do children get to choose about who their parents are?    Family situations are the primary determinant of whether people make "good decisions" as adults, especially family economic status and family structure.  Children born into families in good economic situations simply have significant advantages over children born into poor families that enable them to find success.  Individuals born into dysfunctional families, wealthy or poor, frequently make poor decisions, but wealth frequently buffers those individuals from the worst consequences of those poor decisions while poverty tends to amplify them.   

 

34 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

How far from St. Louisvis Ferguson? I am thinking thatvriots fail to attract successful people. 

 

You've got the proverbial horse before the proverbial cart.   "Successful people" weren't living in Ferguson BEFORE the riots. 

[Mike in Horseheads]

2 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

Feel free to give some examples of how it's been "undercut."

 

 

 

 

Start with the President currently trying to get the Supreme Court to over turn it and work backwards

[Alaska Darin]

38 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Start with the President currently trying to get the Supreme Court to over turn it and work backwards

Can't come up with any real examples of your own take?   Every President and politician with a brain should be trying to overturn it.  It's a terrible law.

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

You've got the proverbial horse before the proverbial cart.   "Successful people" weren't living in Ferguson BEFORE the riots. 

I would bet a decent amount of money that you've never been to Ferguson because if you had, you wouldn't make that statement.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

How far from St. Louisvis Ferguson? I am thinking thatvriots fail to attract successful people. 

 

Nice try.  The problems recruiting high-level and especially tech-savvy people to the midwest goes beyond St Louis and predates 2014 by decades.

And somehow riots in LA and NYC (not to mention lack of affordability) don't seem to dampen their desirability as career destinations.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

You've got the proverbial horse before the proverbial cart.   "Successful people" weren't living in Ferguson BEFORE the riots. 

 

Ferguson has a historic district with beautiful old homes, and several neighborhoods with very nice more modern homes.  Many truly wealthy people live there, no, but successful people by most anyone's standards, absolutely.

 

A quick check of demographics (available to those who don't live in this community) shows that the median income in Ferguson is $45k and 79% of the residents live above the poverty level.  The median income in Buffalo NY is $34.8k and the taxes are higher. 

 

Would it be true that "Successful people" aren't living in Buffalo? 

 

There are communities surrounding St Louis MO which have very high poverty levels and you could probably say that, but Ferguson isn't one of them.

 

1 hour ago, Alaska Darin said:

Can't come up with any real examples of your own take?   Every President and politician with a brain should be trying to overturn it.  It's a terrible law.

 

I'd have more respect for that POV if the people trying to overturn it, actually had a concrete proposal on the table for something that would be better.

 

But in the 10 years since it was passed, somehow all these "politicians with brains" can not seem to put a concrete and substantive better proposal on the table.  All we hear is "pillow talk" along the lines of the woman who gets married for the 4th time and on her wedding night, tells her husband she's a virgin.

 

 

[WhoTom]

13 hours ago, Greybeard said:

     Ah, the "Affordable Health Care Act."   The politicians who passed it should have been forced to use it.

 

I pay market rate - the same rate as before the ACA. What's supposed to make it affordable is the subsidy for those who otherwise couldn't afford it. My income is just over the threshold, so I don't qualify. Technically, it is affordable, as I'm able to pay the bills without going homeless or hungry. Rather than complaining about not getting a subsidy that others are getting, I'm grateful that I don't need the subsidy.

 

The ACA leaves a lot to be desired, but as someone else pointed out, it's helped more than 20 million people obtain coverage. I'd like to see it improved, not repealed or gutted. And for the record, the politicians who passed it ARE forced to use it.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/25/heres-how-much-members-of-congress-pay-for-their-health-insurance.html

 

[Punching Bag]

12 hours ago, Augie said:

 

My parents were in real estate development, the world of the highly leveraged. When it went south, it went down hard. My wife’s family was totally different. An immigrant family who started with nothing. He became a dentist, she was a professor of biochemistry. They knew nothing of leverage. If we ever went out to a restaurant, it was always paid for in cash. Old school. As the patriarch this could be a couple dozen people or more with a big family of cousins. All cash. All the time. 

 

The lesson he would teach is “if you don’t have the money to pay, don’t do it.” We use credit cards for convenience, but we live by that motto. 

 

Only thing we have bought on credit was our houses (both paid off) and one lease of car.  

 

My wife applied for a credit card from bank who we had several large accounts.  She has absolute no issues with credit rating.  She was rejected because she has not paid any interest in her credit history.  I talked to manager and he stated they are looking for customers who will be paying interest in credit cards hence rejection.  I had over $50K in that bank and I told him I was closing all accounts due to this since my wife's business was not a priority.  Evidently he got in trouble for disclosing this for an officer from the company called and said manager was wrong on reason for rejection, my wife's business was welcome and they would restore accounts with no penalty if I reopened accounts.  I told him I would only do it if manager was fired and not transferred and he said that would not happen and I said having our business now and in future will not happen.

[Augie]

5 hours ago, Limeaid said:

 

Only thing we have bought on credit was our houses (both paid off) and one lease of car.  

 

My wife applied for a credit card from bank who we had several large accounts.  She has absolute no issues with credit rating.  She was rejected because she has not paid any interest in her credit history.  I talked to manager and he stated they are looking for customers who will be paying interest in credit cards hence rejection.  I had over $50K in that bank and I told him I was closing all accounts due to this since my wife's business was not a priority.  Evidently he got in trouble for disclosing this for an officer from the company called and said manager was wrong on reason for rejection, my wife's business was welcome and they would restore accounts with no penalty if I reopened accounts.  I told him I would only do it if manager was fired and not transferred and he said that would not happen and I said having our business now and in future will not happen.

 

Hey, you feel free to be you, but that sure seems harsh to me. I mean, the guy probably has a family and bills to pay, like the rest of us. I used to have those angry conversations with people while running bank branches and the emotions often ran a bit too high. People can take it personally when in fact, this guy probably didn’t even make the call.  Maybe he misspoke or misunderstood, but he did not make the policy. I’m not taking away his livelihood over something like that. Sorry, I’m glad the bank took a stand and let you walk. But that’s just me.....  ?‍♂️

Edited July 26, 2020 by Augie

[Alaska Darin]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

But in the 10 years since it was passed, somehow all these "politicians with brains" can not seem to put a concrete and substantive better proposal on the table.  All we hear is "pillow talk" along the lines of the woman who gets married for the 4th time and on her wedding night, tells her husband she's a virgin.

Don't get me started on either party.  They both suck out loud and care more about taking care of their donors than doing the business of the America people.  Doesn't change the fact that the ACA is an absolute abortion.

7 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Hey, you feel free to be you, but that sure seems harsh to me. I mean, the guy probably has a family and bills to pay. I used to have those angry conversations with people and the emotions often ran a bit too high. People can take it personally when in fact, this guy probably didn’t even make the call.  Maybe he misspoke or misunderstood, but he did not make the policy. I’m not taking away his livelihood over something like that. Sorry, I’m glad the bank took a stand and let you walk. But that’s just me.....  ?‍♂️

He didn't "misspeak" - he let an unwritten corporate policy out into the customer ether.  Banks like people who pay big interest, that's why they are able to put up big buildings in every city on the world.  Smart people who pay their balances every month and use the rewards programs are a liability to the bottom line.

[Punching Bag]

8 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Hey, you feel free to be you, but that sure seems harsh to me. I mean, the guy probably has a family and bills to pay. I used to have those angry conversations with people and the emotions often ran a bit too high. People can take it personally when in fact, this guy probably didn’t even make the call.  Maybe he misspoke or misunderstood, but he did not make the policy. I’m not taking away his livelihood over something like that. Sorry, I’m glad the bank took a stand and let you walk. But that’s just me.....  ?‍♂️

 

Well the way he put it, it was insulting to my wife rather than understanding that we just do not borrow money unnecessarily.  I did not put all of the conversation in post.  He suggested that my wife open another type of card backed by line of credit (basically a debt card) and that the money be borrowed from the bank to support it.  We could not use the CDs we had (which I later closed) to secure it. She was to borrow money so she could have their card but she already had credit cards.

 

Frankly I am glad bank took stand as well.  I did not want to go back.