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.

[Augie]

10 minutes ago, Alaska Darin said:

 

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.

 

How many decades did you spend working in banking?  It costs them nothing to make the plastic. You can pay it off every month, and they still made the Merchants Fee on every single transaction. That’s income. Banks like income - from every source.  Merchant Services is it’s own department in a bank, unless they outsource it. There is probably an annual fee which more than pays for an processing costs. They are happy to have that card out there just in case you might need it one day. It’s not like they set your credit limit aside making it unavailable to lend to others. That’s just not how it works.  It may not be AS profitable as some other frequent users, but it’s still profitable. 

 

If smart people paying their lines off were a liability to the bank, THE BANK WOULD NOT DO IT. It’s quite simple. 

 

We have a large home equity line, just in case it’s handy one day. Haven’t used it in forever, but they LOVE us! 

[Bill from NYC]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

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.

People are running out of NYC. Rents are sinking rapidly for the first time in decades. Maybe I am misinformed. That is always possible, but; I am under the impression that St. Louis ranks in the top 5 in murders in the nation. Couple that with Ferguson and it sounds bleak, wouldn’t you say? Maybe that is why the networks declared the state for President Trump 7 minutes after polls closed.  Lesson learned.....there is good and bad in everything. ???

[Greybeard]

1 hour ago, WhoTom said:

 

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

 

          Thanks for the link.  I did think they were still covered by their old plan.

[Bill from NYC]

19 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I feel confident you will not let it get in the way of your snark, but the point of the article was the accountant's claim that the family hardly had any money left over for savings.

401(k) is a form of tax-advantaged savings, and their budget called for them to save a substantial amount in this manner.

 

It's not reasonable to budget including good chunk of savings (specially tax advantaged savings at that), and then complain that you don't have much money left over to save.  Oh, the humanity! indeed.

 

 

Most pensions are things of the past HBF. You know this. A 401K is now a total necessity. There is plenty of blame to go around for this too I might add.

[Alaska Darin]

24 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

How many decades did you spend working in banking?  It costs them nothing to make the plastic. You can pay it off every month, and they still made the Merchants Fee on every single transaction. That’s income. Banks like income - from every source.  Merchant Services is it’s own department in a bank, unless they outsource it. There is probably an annual fee which more than pays for an processing costs. They are happy to have that card out there just in case you might need it one day. It’s not like they set your credit limit aside making it unavailable to lend to others. That’s just not how it works.  It may not be AS profitable as some other frequent users, but it’s still profitable. 

 

If smart people paying their lines off were a liability to the bank, THE BANK WOULD NOT DO IT. It’s quite simple. 

 

We have a large home equity line, just in case it’s handy one day. Haven’t used it in forever, but they LOVE us! 

I very much appreciate the snark.  I don't work in banking and I never have.  I probably shouldn't have used the term "liability" but there is a reason credit card companies and banks refer to people who pay their CC balances in full every month as "deadbeats."  It takes a number of deadbeats to make the profit of a single "normal" CC user who doesn't pay their balance.

It's literally as simple as investment.  Would you rather invest in something with a 3% guaranteed return or 15% (or more)?  Banks LOVE people who carry credit card balances.  They get the same guaranteed profit that deadbeats earn them, plus HUGE interest each month.  The average American household pays north of $1k in CC interest each year.   You gotta charge and payoff over $30k a year as a deadbeat to match just that.

 

And of course your bank loves your HELOC.  It's SECURE.

[Mike in Horseheads]

4 hours 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.

 

Yes 20m people being on health insurance is terrible.

[Augie]

2 hours ago, Limeaid said:

 

 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.

 

Well, now THAT sounds spot on. Sometimes it’s not what you do as much as how you do it, and good help is hard to find in most industries. I’m NOT saying the guy isn’t a buffoon!  I’d want to see him trained a little better before having him fired, but I get that it can become emotional. 

 

Every consumer credit application that is declined is required to give a written explanation as to WHY it’s declined. That is what you need to look at if you want to know why it was declined, not some clown spouting off about things he knows little of. It’s usually in the form of boxes checked such as bad credit, insufficient credit, high debt/income ratio, length of employment, etc. Consumer credit became very formulaic generally using credit score decades ago. This makes regulators happy and avoids accusations of discrimination and lawsuits. It’s good in some ways, but difficult in other ways if there is no room to actually “think”. 

 

When our son graduated from college we gave him a couple thousand to get a secured credit card. He had to build credit even if he was happy just using a debit card. When it was time for a new car, my wife co-signed so he could avoid the astronomical interest rate a first time car buyer would get. 

 

I get that it can be frustrating at times, and I may be touchy about all the “Big Bad Bank” attitudes, but public perception is often waaay off. It’s like the folks who resent high incomes and net worths, it helps to thoroughly understand it before making judgment. My sister gets furious over how much some top executives earn. I get that the gap is enormous, sometimes ridiculously so, but she chose to be a teacher. A very noble job (and far more appreciated than ever now!), but she could have tried to get into an Ivy League law school and devote her entire life to her work, networking, sacrificing family time, etc. Instead, she got her summers off. 

 

If you make $200k+, good for you. If you throw it away on fancy cars and $20k in vacation expense annually, don’t expect any sympathy from me. 

 

 

.

 

 

1 hour ago, Alaska Darin said:

I very much appreciate the snark.  I don't work in banking and I never have.  I probably shouldn't have used the term "liability" but there is a reason credit card companies and banks refer to people who pay their CC balances in full every month as "deadbeats."  It takes a number of deadbeats to make the profit of a single "normal" CC user who doesn't pay their balance.

It's literally as simple as investment.  Would you rather invest in something with a 3% guaranteed return or 15% (or more)?  Banks LOVE people who carry credit card balances.  They get the same guaranteed profit that deadbeats earn them, plus HUGE interest each month.  The average American household pays north of $1k in CC interest each year.   You gotta charge and payoff over $30k a year as a deadbeat to match just that.

 

And of course your bank loves your HELOC.  It's SECURE.

 

Not every customer can be your most profitable customer. Yes, they prefer the more profitable customers. I never argued against that. 

 

Chase still loved us, and we hadn’t used that card (other than Visa is required at Costco) for a couple years. The Delta AmEx is no longer the best deal (who flies anymore?), so we are back to our unsecured Chase card. Nobody had mentioned security prior to that. You went from profitability to risk. 

Edited July 26, 2020 by Augie

[Alaska Darin]

37 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:

Yes 20m people being on health insurance is terrible.

It never gets tiring listening to people parrot politicians.  That "small picture" thinking is exactly what politicians count on to keep power.

 

Health care costs are rising just as fast as they did before.   The "Affordable Care Act" is anything but. 

[Alaska Darin]

16 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Well, now THAT sounds spot on. Sometimes it’s not what you do as much as how you do it, and good help is hard to find in most industries. I’m NOT saying the guy isn’t a buffoon!  I’d want to see him trained a little better before having him fired, but I get that it can become emotional. 

 

Every consumer credit application that is declined is required to give a written explanation as to WHY it’s declined. That is what you need to look at if you want to know why it was declined, not some clown spouting off about things he knows little of. It’s usually in the form of boxes checked such as bad credit, insufficient credit, high debt/income ratio, length of employment, etc. Consumer credit became very formulaic generally using credit score decades ago. This makes regulators happy and avoids accusations of discrimination and lawsuits. It’s good in some ways, but difficult in other ways if there is no room to actually “think”. 

 

When our son graduated from college we gave him a couple thousand to get a secured credit card. He had to build credit even if he was happy just using a debit card. When it was time for a new car, my wife co-signed so he could avoid the astronomical interest rate a first time car buyer would get. 

 

I get that it can be frustrating at times, and I may be touchy about all the “Big Bad Bank” attitudes, but public perception is often waaay off. It’s like the folks who resent high incomes and net worths, it helps to thoroughly understand it before making judgment. My sister gets furious over how much some top executives earn. I get that the gap is enormous, sometimes ridiculously so, but she chose to be a teacher. A very noble job (and far more appreciated than ever now!), but she could have tried to get into an Ivy League law school and devote her entire life to her work, networking, sacrificing family time, etc. Instead, she got her summers off. 

 

If you make $200k+, good for you. If you throw it away on fancy cars and $20k in vacation expense annually, don’t expect any sympathy from me. 

 

 

.

 

 

 

Not every customer can be your most profitable customer. Yes, they prefer the more profitable customers. I never argued against that. 

 

Chase still loved us, and we hadn’t used that card (other than Visa is required at Costco) for a couple years. The Delta AmEx is no longer the best deal (who flies anymore?), so we are back to our unsecured Chase card. Nobody had mentioned security prior to that. You went from profitability to risk. 

I like the "pick and choose." I led with "banks call full balance payers deadbeats" for a reason.  My entire initial point that you didn't agree with is proven by that simple statement. 

 

The rest of it is informational and not necessary but some people may benefit from it, so I put it in.

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Alaska Darin said:

I like the "pick and choose." I led with "banks call full balance payers deadbeats" for a reason.  My entire initial point that you didn't agree with is proven by that simple statement. 

 

The rest of it is informational and not necessary but some people may benefit from it, so I put it in.

 

I don’t understand what you mean by “pick and choose”. I have never heard the term “deadbeat” in any manner other than to describe people who do NOT pay their bills. Banks certainly profit from people who pay in full very month. Would they rather you carry a balance? Sure, we can agree on that. 

[Mike in Horseheads]

1 hour ago, Alaska Darin said:

It never gets tiring listening to people parrot politicians.  That "small picture" thinking is exactly what politicians count on to keep power.

 

Health care costs are rising just as fast as they did before.   The "Affordable Care Act" is anything but. 

Whatever, it got 20m people on insurance that weren't and too bad you think thats "small picture'. Move on.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Most pensions are things of the past HBF. You know this. A 401K is now a total necessity. There is plenty of blame to go around for this too I might add.

 

Absolutely, I agree a 401K or an IRA is a total necessity.  The point is, it's a form of savings, right?  Don't you think it's a bit hinkey to list it as an expense, then conclude the client's income vs expenses did not allow them to have significant savings?

[T&C]

23 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Absolutely, I agree a 401K or an IRA is a total necessity.  The point is, it's a form of savings, right?  Don't you think it's a bit hinkey to list it as an expense, then conclude the client's income vs expenses did not allow them to have significant savings?

Agreed here as well about the 401k or IRA. I just hit the age of no penalty so I took 6k out to get the tree's trimmed. Didn't want to but Had to... hurricane season is upon us. What is amazing is that even doing that my balance is basically what it was on Jan.1.

 

I've seen credit cards mentioned. I am the only person I know or anyone I know knows that has never had one. Never had that bill or interest. My credit is excellent regardless. 

We live decently, nothing outrageous going on as far as the usual bills and doing a refi saved $340 a month or so. Dropped directv and got sling... love it, that was $100 a month off for the same damn thing. 

 

There are ways to cut costs as opposed to spending money that isn't actually yours... the credit card hell. A buddy of mine took out a ***** ton of money from his 401k last month, with penalty included, to pay off $20k in credit cards. That is ***** crazy.

[Bill from NYC]

On 7/26/2020 at 6:27 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Absolutely, I agree a 401K or an IRA is a total necessity.  The point is, it's a form of savings, right?  Don't you think it's a bit hinkey to list it as an expense, then conclude the client's income vs expenses did not allow them to have significant savings?

Not really. People used to be given pensions that were mostly paid for by their employers. Now, folks must lay out their own money to plan for old age so why isn't it an expense? Tax deductible yes, but; an expense nonetheless. 

I can't say that I completely understand what it is that troubles you about this issue. is it just the complaints, or do you think that a family that makes 200 K, pays 15,000 in property tax, and has kids in college deserves a rebate/incentive, or whatever one wishes to call it less than an illegal alien?

I for one do not but that is simply jmo.

[Taro T]

4 hours ago, Bill from NYC said:

Not really. People used to be given pensions that were mostly paid for by their employers. Now, folks must lay out their own money to plan for old age so why isn't it an expense? Tax deductible yes, but; an expense nonetheless. 

I can't say that I completely understand what it is that troubles you about this issue. is it just the complaints, or do you think that a family that makes 200 K, pays 15,000 in property tax, and has kids in college deserves a rebate/incentive, or whatever one wishes to call it less than an illegal alien?

I for one do not but that is simply jmo.

 

Pensions used to be a good thing where both the employee and employer had skin in the game.  The employee took a lesser salary to have income post retirement and the company funded the plans adequately.

 

Nowadays, most of the few pension plans that remain are essentially stealing from future owners of the company as the pension funds are oftentimes not fully/ adequately funded to provide for the defined benefits that are promised the employee.

 

Defined contribution plans don't have that issue.  The employee and employer each contribute what they've agreed to do and future owners/shareholders & employees aren't on the hook for covering for what didn't get done. 

 

And, by maxing out contributions to the plan, employees can take control of their own retirement and not be at the mercy of a company declaring bankruptcy.  (Fully realize that people can be in situations where they can't contribute much to the 401k, but they can also often change those circumstances.  Not much they can do if the company pulls the rug out from under them.)

[Augie]

8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Pensions used to be a good thing where both the employee and employer had skin in the game.  The employee took a lesser salary to have income post retirement and the company funded the plans adequately.

 

Nowadays, most of the few pension plans that remain are essentially stealing from future owners of the company as the pension funds are oftentimes not fully/ adequately funded to provide for the defined benefits that are promised the employee.

 

Defined contribution plans don't have that issue.  The employee and employer each contribute what they've agreed to do and future owners/shareholders & employees aren't on the hook for covering for what didn't get done. 

 

And, by maxing out contributions to the plan, employees can take control of their own retirement and not be at the mercy of a company declaring bankruptcy.  (Fully realize that people can be in situations where they can't contribute much to the 401k, but they can also often change those circumstances.  Not much they can do if the company pulls the rug out from under them.)

 

We always maxed out on the 401k and taught our kids to do the same. At the very least, you have to get the max match from the employer possible. It may seem difficult, but as the old saying goes “pay yourself first”. If you have money leftover, you will find a way to spend it, probably not knowing where it went. If you put it away for your retirement, you’ll probably get by just fine and benefit exponentially after a full career.