Fiscal Cliff?

[clenz]

In parts of CA, NYC, northern NJ, southern CT, DC, Boston, etc, etc areas, a family making 250 k (200 k is the cutoff for individuals, 250k for families) isn't "rich" as donks call them. One big problem is a family at 250k in one of those expensive areas and a family in BFE where the cost of living is literally 1/2 as much are taxed at the same rate. Actually, the family in the BFE area may be paying much less on top of that if are in a state with lower or no state income tax. You shouldn't have the same tax rate for every zipcode for starters.

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

I honestly couldn't imagine what I'd do with that kind of coin...hell, I'd love to see half of that a year between my wife and i....it would be roughly double what we live on now.

250k is rich



Sent from the nexus of the universe

[Bison Fan in NW MN]

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

I honestly couldn't imagine what I'd do with that kind of coin...hell, I'd love to see half of that a year between my wife and i....it would be roughly double what we live on now.

250k is rich



Sent from the nexus of the universe

250K is not 'rich'. Living comfortably?.....probably.

To me, 'rich' is multiple millions of dollars and living off of interest.

[danefan]

In parts of CA, NYC, northern NJ, southern CT, DC, Boston, etc, etc areas, a family making 250 k (200 k is the cutoff for individuals, 250k for families) isn't "rich" as donks call them. One big problem is a family at 250k in one of those expensive areas and a family in BFE where the cost of living is literally 1/2 as much are taxed at the same rate. Actually, the family in the BFE area may be paying much less on top of that if are in a state with lower or no state income tax. You shouldn't have the same tax rate for every zipcode for starters.

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

Until recently I lived in North a jersey on less than $250k but near that figure and lived very comfortably. In a matter of 3 years I was able to maintain an 18-month emergency fun, accumulate a number of investment properties that return solid positive cash flow return, save for my new house which I was able to put more than 20% down on, put 6 figures into my retirement accounts, purchase two $30k vehicles for cash, and never once had any issue paying my living expenses or my taxes. Some Caveats - I did not have any children during this time period, but my wife did not work either. She was a liability on my balance sheet as I paid for her to get her masters degree. I also lived in a 950 sq ft house so I didn't exactly live extravagantly and some may argue it was even comfortable.

Maybe i have a little more financial experience than most, but living very comfortably in even the most expensive places in the US on $250k is definitely possible.

I don't consider myself wealthy now because I still need to work for a salary, but I certainly live way more comfortably than 95% of Americans.

The definition of the terms "rich" and "wealthy" are relative and manipulated for whatever purpose the people are using them.

I consider someone rich that can buy assets that generate wealth without sacrificing everyday living. If you've got money to play with, you're rich. It might necessarily last, but for right now, you're rich.

Wealthy is a whole different story. I'll consider myself wealthy when I have a balance sheet which is completely self sustaining. Meaning all of my expenses are covered by the cash flow return of my assets. Meaning salary does nothing but add to the asset side of my balance sheet. That is true wealth and financial independence.

[kalm]

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

Until recently I lived in North a jersey on less than $250k but near that figure and lived very comfortably. In a matter of 3 years I was able to maintain an 18-month emergency fun, accumulate a number of investment properties that return solid positive cash flow return, save for my new house which I was able to put more than 20% down on, put 6 figures into my retirement accounts, purchase two $30k vehicles for cash, and never once had any issue paying my living expenses or my taxes. Some Caveats - I did not have any children during this time period, but my wife did not work either. She was a liability on my balance sheet as I paid for her to get her masters degree. I also lived in a 950 sq ft house so I didn't exactly live extravagantly and some may argue it was even comfortable.

Maybe i have a little more financial experience than most, but living very comfortably in even the most expensive places in the US on $250k is definitely possible.

I don't consider myself wealthy now because I still need to work for a salary, but I certainly live way more comfortably than 95% of Americans.

The definition of the terms "rich" and "wealthy" are relative and manipulated for whatever purpose the people are using them.

I consider someone rich that can buy assets that generate wealth without sacrificing everyday living. If you've got money to play with, you're rich. It might necessarily last, but for right now, you're rich.

Wealthy is a whole different story. I'll consider myself wealthy when I have a balance sheet which is completely self sustaining. Meaning all of my expenses are covered by the cash flow return of my assets. Meaning salary does nothing but add to the asset side of my balance sheet. That is true wealth and financial independence.

Good post.

[DSUrocks07]

In parts of CA, NYC, northern NJ, southern CT, DC, Boston, etc, etc areas, a family making 250 k (200 k is the cutoff for individuals, 250k for families) isn't "rich" as donks call them. One big problem is a family at 250k in one of those expensive areas and a family in BFE where the cost of living is literally 1/2 as much are taxed at the same rate. Actually, the family in the BFE area may be paying much less on top of that if are in a state with lower or no state income tax. You shouldn't have the same tax rate for every zipcode for starters.

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

And what does a family "need"?

[YoUDeeMan]

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

And what does a family "need"?

Don't you worry about that...it is for the government, and other people, to decide what you need.

Cell phones, cable TV, big screen TVs, and new sneakers are a good start. Those are absloute necessities. And jewelry...you have to have some bling because you saw it on TV...that makes it unfair to not have it, so it becomes a necessity.

In the end, as danefan hinted, everyone needs to become financially independent so that investment income can take care of everything and you don't have to work.

Of course, that means we will need to import more people to work (because we don't want our children to have to work....what would the neighbors think ), which means more immigration. And those folks, you know...the "help"...will want better things, including free education in our schools in their native language (which will become a real bitch once we run out of Mexicans and have to start importing people from other countries - and just why can't those other countries beef up their education systems to be able to provide us with enough workers who speak Spanish or Americanese) and they'll probably vote Democrat to get more of the stuff that the rest of us have (which by then will include a yatch in every home as the new "necessity" du jour - all government mandated, of course...gotta' protect those campaign contributors' business interests).

So just shut up and thank your lucky stars that someone else is looking after your interests.

[GannonFan]

Until recently I lived in North a jersey on less than $250k but near that figure and lived very comfortably. In a matter of 3 years I was able to maintain an 18-month emergency fun, accumulate a number of investment properties that return solid positive cash flow return, save for my new house which I was able to put more than 20% down on, put 6 figures into my retirement accounts, purchase two $30k vehicles for cash, and never once had any issue paying my living expenses or my taxes. Some Caveats - I did not have any children during this time period, but my wife did not work either. She was a liability on my balance sheet as I paid for her to get her masters degree. I also lived in a 950 sq ft house so I didn't exactly live extravagantly and some may argue it was even comfortable.

Maybe i have a little more financial experience than most, but living very comfortably in even the most expensive places in the US on $250k is definitely possible.

I don't consider myself wealthy now because I still need to work for a salary, but I certainly live way more comfortably than 95% of Americans.

The definition of the terms "rich" and "wealthy" are relative and manipulated for whatever purpose the people are using them.

I consider someone rich that can buy assets that generate wealth without sacrificing everyday living. If you've got money to play with, you're rich. It might necessarily last, but for right now, you're rich.

Wealthy is a whole different story. I'll consider myself wealthy when I have a balance sheet which is completely self sustaining. Meaning all of my expenses are covered by the cash flow return of my assets. Meaning salary does nothing but add to the asset side of my balance sheet. That is true wealth and financial independence.

Good post.

Well, it's only good until you get to the part where he says he didn't have any kids. Everything after that is just silly - anyone could live a comfortble life on most any salary without kids - it's the kids that end up altering most financial planning and how comfortable you are. I'd be retired on a beach at age 40 if I didn't have kids.

[danefan]

Good post.

Well, it's only good until you get to the part where he says he didn't have any kids. Everything after that is just silly - anyone could live a comfortble life on most any salary without kids - it's the kids that end up altering most financial planning and how comfortable you are. I'd be retired on a beach at age 40 if I didn't have kids.

Kids at an early age are a game changer, no doubt. I didn't have a kid until I turned 30. I was 4 years into my career by that point and had all my law school loans paid off in full. I was also lucky enough to not have any undergrad loans because I could throw a football and I had very limited law school loans because of grades.

The question, however, was whether $200-250k makes you rich. It certainly can make you very very comfortable, even in the most expensive locations in America.

[Ibanez]

Republicans have sent a proposal to Obama. It's essentially Bowles' proposal.

[GannonFan]

Well, it's only good until you get to the part where he says he didn't have any kids. Everything after that is just silly - anyone could live a comfortble life on most any salary without kids - it's the kids that end up altering most financial planning and how comfortable you are. I'd be retired on a beach at age 40 if I didn't have kids.

Kids at an early age are a game changer, no doubt. I didn't have a kid until I turned 30. I was 4 years into my career by that point and had all my law school loans paid off in full. I was also lucky enough to not have any undergrad loans because I could throw a football and I had very limited law school loans because of grades.

The question, however, was whether $200-250k makes you rich. It certainly can make you very very comfortable, even in the most expensive locations in America.

I don't know, I started having my kids at age 30 (three boys in total now) and while I agree that making $200k is comfortable, it's still a lost job away from suddenly being very uncomfortable. And it takes quite a lot of work to earn that $200k as well. Rich, or very, very comfortable, would be a place I would associate with not worrying about losing a paycheck and not having to sweat for every dollar of that $200k.

[danefan]

Kids at an early age are a game changer, no doubt. I didn't have a kid until I turned 30. I was 4 years into my career by that point and had all my law school loans paid off in full. I was also lucky enough to not have any undergrad loans because I could throw a football and I had very limited law school loans because of grades.

The question, however, was whether $200-250k makes you rich. It certainly can make you very very comfortable, even in the most expensive locations in America.

I don't know, I started having my kids at age 30 (three boys in total now) and while I agree that making $200k is comfortable, it's still a lost job away from suddenly being very uncomfortable. And it takes quite a lot of work to earn that $200k as well. Rich, or very, very comfortable, would be a place I would associate with not worrying about losing a paycheck and not having to sweat for every dollar of that $200k.

I hear you, but I guess it depends on the type of work you do. I have no fear of losing a job despite the fact that I still need a salary to cover some of my expenses.

[AZGrizFan]

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

Until recently I lived in North a jersey on less than $250k but near that figure and lived very comfortably. In a matter of 3 years I was able to maintain an 18-month emergency fun, accumulate a number of investment properties that return solid positive cash flow return, save for my new house which I was able to put more than 20% down on, put 6 figures into my retirement accounts, purchase two $30k vehicles for cash, and never once had any issue paying my living expenses or my taxes. Some Caveats - I did not have any children during this time period, but my wife did not work either. She was a liability on my balance sheet as I paid for her to get her masters degree. I also lived in a 950 sq ft house so I didn't exactly live extravagantly and some may argue it was even comfortable.

Maybe i have a little more financial experience than most, but living very comfortably in even the most expensive places in the US on $250k is definitely possible.

I don't consider myself wealthy now because I still need to work for a salary, but I certainly live way more comfortably than 95% of Americans.

The definition of the terms "rich" and "wealthy" are relative and manipulated for whatever purpose the people are using them.

I consider someone rich that can buy assets that generate wealth without sacrificing everyday living. If you've got money to play with, you're rich. It might necessarily last, but for right now, you're rich.

Wealthy is a whole different story. I'll consider myself wealthy when I have a balance sheet which is completely self sustaining. Meaning all of my expenses are covered by the cash flow return of my assets. Meaning salary does nothing but add to the asset side of my balance sheet. That is true wealth and financial independence.

That's more than just a "caveat", DF.

[AZGrizFan]

Well, it's only good until you get to the part where he says he didn't have any kids. Everything after that is just silly - anyone could live a comfortble life on most any salary without kids - it's the kids that end up altering most financial planning and how comfortable you are. I'd be retired on a beach at age 40 if I didn't have kids.

Kids at an early age are a game changer, no doubt. I didn't have a kid until I turned 30. I was 4 years into my career by that point and had all my law school loans paid off in full. I was also lucky enough to not have any undergrad loans because I could throw a football and I had very limited law school loans because of grades.

The question, however, was whether $200-250k makes you rich. It certainly can make you very very comfortable, even in the most expensive locations in America.

It definitely depends on WHEN you have children. My first kid was born 3 months after I got out of active duty military....no job. Let's just say some debt was accumulated. 2nd kid came along 3 years later, while I was making a whopping $39,000 per year.

Are we "comfortable"? Yes. Do we "want" for anything? Not really. But I sure as HELL wouldn't call us "rich". Or wealthy.

Perhaps that's my own fault though.

Then again, in the New America, it's NEVER my fault...gotta be the government's fault, right?

[BDKJMU]

If the Republicans fold now they'll never get any spending cuts or entitlement reform. What happened to 3 dollars in spending cuts to every 1 in tax increases? Heck, not only does Obama want to raise 1.6 trillion in new taxes, including on a million small businesses, he wants to increase spending also. If he wants 1.6 trillion in new taxes he should come up with at least 1.6 trillion in spending cuts.

I agree with Krauthammer- the Republicans should just walk away.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... _away.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For the first time ever (at least that I can remember)
I think I agree with you - Businesses with 50 employees or less should be getting a tax break (period)
Raise Taxes on the elite wealthy
Reduce spending by a few percentage points

Done... is that so hard to do..?

Nope. I've agreed with you on some things before-ex- like the govt has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Maybe I've never directly acknowledged it. I'll make it a point to do that from now on.

[BDKJMU]

Since when is making 200k rich?

It isn't rich, but that's not the point. The point is the Dems have a winning strategy (and by winning I mean a political winning strategy - neither party has a strategy right now that helps the country in any particular way, they both have strategies to stay in power). The Dems want to raise taxes on anyone over $250k. I say let them. Once that's done, and we're no closer to solving our fiscal problems, then we can have a discussion about those issues. Right now, we never get to that discussion because the GOP is letting themselves get run over in this discussion and they look like fools for it. Let the tax rate on those people go up and then we can get to the real issues.

And then the Republicans will have no leverage. The only thing we'll end up having is a "discussion" about the exploding national debt and the even bigger problem of unfunded entitlement liabilities, maybe another blue ribbon panel, nothing will get done this upcoming yr (2013), nothing will get done in 2014 because it will be an election yr, the can will continue to be kicked down the road, and we'll be even more screwed....

[clenz]

Considering I have real world experience with this, $250k is still "rich" in most of those areas. It just doesn't seem like it because they are residing next to millionaires, but a family making $250k is living way above what it needs.

And what does a family "need"?

A home with adequate space for all to live....not every one needs their "own room", food, and some nice things....


Honestly, TBH and I probably live beyond our means because we both have a smart phone, we have 2 computers, a 47in tv, xbox360, tivo premier, cable, internet, etc....


Do we need any of those things? Hell no.


If you can't live off of 250k no matter where you're living that's your fault for not living to within your means, period.

[AZGrizFan]

And what does a family "need"?

A home with adequate space for all to live....not every one needs their "own room", food, and some nice things....


Honestly, TBH and I probably live beyond our means because we both have a smart phone, we have 2 computers, a 47in tv, xbox360, tivo premier, cable, internet, etc....


Do we need any of those things? Hell no.


If you can't live off of 250k no matter where you're living that's your fault for not living to within your means, period.

Yeah, it sounds like a lot of money.

Until you factor in the amount of taxes taken out.

You are then left with

[clenz]

A home with adequate space for all to live....not every one needs their "own room", food, and some nice things....


Honestly, TBH and I probably live beyond our means because we both have a smart phone, we have 2 computers, a 47in tv, xbox360, tivo premier, cable, internet, etc....


Do we need any of those things? Hell no.


If you can't live off of 250k no matter where you're living that's your fault for not living to within your means, period.

Yeah, it sounds like a lot of money.

Until you factor in the amount of taxes taken out.

You are then left with

Still left with more than TBH and I make net per year...by a long shot I'd bet.

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, it sounds like a lot of money.

Until you factor in the amount of taxes taken out.

You are then left with

Still left with more than TBH and I make net per year...by a long shot I'd bet.

clenz: You're 23. You're not SUPPOSED to have/make a bunch as of yet. When you have kids (and the associated college funds), medical bills as you get older, etc., etc., you'll be amazed how fast it goes.

[SDHornet]

My money is on these idiots not getting an agreement made, but instead finding a new creative way to kick the can down the road. The idiots in Washington have no concept of true spending cuts but tout reductions in future spending as cuts. The whole thing is a sham.

[clenz]

Still left with more than TBH and I make net per year...by a long shot I'd bet.

clenz: You're 23. You're not SUPPOSED to have/make a bunch as of yet. When you have kids (and the associated college funds), medical bills as you get older, etc., etc., you'll be amazed how fast it goes.

I'm a month from 25...bitch.


I have a kid on the way.

If you're shocked how quick 250k goes, you'd be sitting in a corner balling your eyes out over our budget each month.


We make it work...we don't expect to have high paying jobs. We understand how things work.....


I also realize just how fucking funny...and sad...it really is when people say that can't live off of 250k that easily. You don't need a 2,500 square foot house, with 5 cars, every one with a smart phone, satellite TV, etc...


Like I said, if you anyone with 250k a year, they have some real issues.

[BDKJMU]

Republicans have sent a proposal to Obama. It's essentially Bowles' proposal.

"House GOP makes a $2.2 trillion debt counteroffer to Obama on cliff

House Republican leaders on Monday made a counteroffer to President Obama in the "fiscal cliff" negotiations, proposing to cut $2.2 trillion with a combination of spending cuts, entitlement reforms and $800 billion in new tax revenue.

The leaders delivered the offer to the White House on Monday with a three-page letter signed by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and four other senior House Republicans, including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the party’s just-defeated vice presidential nominee.

The White House rejected the offer as insufficient in a statement released about two hours after Boehner made the offer public. White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer in a statement said the GOP proposal was unbalanced on the key issue of taxes on wealthier households, and that it also lacked detail.

Republican officials said the offer was based on a proposal outlined by Erskine Bowles, who served as chief of staff to former President Clinton, in testimony last year before the congressional “supercommittee” on deficit reduction. That offer is distinct from the widely cited Simpson-Bowles deficit plan released two years ago.
The GOP offer is a response to Obama’s opening bid, which called for $1.6 trillion in tax increases and reducing the power of Congress to block an increase in the debt ceiling.

“What we are putting forward is a credible plan that deserves serious consideration by the White House,” Boehner told reporters in a brief appearance at the Capitol. He said he hoped the administration would respond in a timely manner.

He characterized it as a response to what he called the “la-la land” offer that Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner presented to congressional leaders last week."
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/27064 ... t-talksklj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AZGrizFan]

clenz: You're 23. You're not SUPPOSED to have/make a bunch as of yet. When you have kids (and the associated college funds), medical bills as you get older, etc., etc., you'll be amazed how fast it goes.

I'm a month from 25...bitch.


I have a kid on the way.

If you're shocked how quick 250k goes, you'd be sitting in a corner balling your eyes out over our budget each month.


We make it work...we don't expect to have high paying jobs. We understand how things work.....


I also realize just how fucking funny...and sad...it really is when people say that can't live off of 250k that easily. You don't need a 2,500 square foot house, with 5 cars, every one with a smart phone, satellite TV, etc...


Like I said, if you anyone with 250k a year, they have some real issues.

You're right. I'd be shocked.

Newsflash: I didn't ALWAYS make the $$ I make. 16 years ago I was a temp working at B of A making $8 an hour. With a kid and an unemployed wife. You do the math.

[AZGrizFan]

And Clenzy, isn't your degree in Social Work, or some other low/non-paying field like that?

[clenz]

And Clenzy, isn't your degree in Social Work, or some other low/non-paying field like that?

Can you live comfortably on what you make now?

Would you really argue that making 250k a year isn't "rich". Wealthy? No. Rich? I'd say so.

Also, my degree was not social work...I think the social work system is fucked beyond belief with politics and bureaucratic bull shit. and is wildly inefficiency. I could tell you the differences of what my degree is compared to social work, but you're one of those that would still go "So....you're a social worker".


Also also....I don't work in my degree field. I am a manager for the retail company I work for...entry level manager, but manager none the less. I'm not saying, nor do I think, I should be paid 250k right now...or likely ever.


Wouldn't someone with an income of 250K still take home about 165k of that?


This isn't about taxes, or anything like that. 250k is a lot of live off of...if one decides to spend more than they make per year, that doesn't mean it isn't a lot of money