View Poll Results: Is $250k a year rich?
Voters: 23. You may not vote on this poll
Is $250k a year rich?
#11
10-16-2008, 12:23 PM
Super Moderator
Well, golly JimBob!
Well, golly JimBob!
#12
10-16-2008, 01:26 PM
Super Quad Patrol
Athens Archery Field Staff
Best lunch hour ever!
Athens Archery Field Staff
Best lunch hour ever!
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In Da Skys
Posts: 38,878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is $250k a year rich?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: reconranger
Depends completely where you live!!! That salary would barely pay the rent in New York City or West LA.....
Thing is, once you leave the areas where one can find high paying jobs, the cost of living goes way down, but so do the salaries. So, it is all relative!!! Most places you go, the cost of living is related to the type of salaries that you can make in that area.
So, this just points out how bogus this class warfare thing is! A guy making $250K in NYC, is no better off than a guy making $25K in Redneckville Missouri.....yet Obama wants to tax the guy making 250 and not the guy making 25. It's not fair, plain and simple!!!</end quote></div>
A guy making 250k in NYC is better off than a redneck in Mo making 25k. I've seen it, I live it. I have friends in NYC making slightly less and are better off monetary wise than I...who makes 25k in redneckville. That is a huge difference. If you would have said 50 or 75k, I would agree. Though, I'd much rather live where I do, and live within my means, then have to live in a big city. Obama is not fair, that we can agree on. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
Depends completely where you live!!! That salary would barely pay the rent in New York City or West LA.....
Thing is, once you leave the areas where one can find high paying jobs, the cost of living goes way down, but so do the salaries. So, it is all relative!!! Most places you go, the cost of living is related to the type of salaries that you can make in that area.
So, this just points out how bogus this class warfare thing is! A guy making $250K in NYC, is no better off than a guy making $25K in Redneckville Missouri.....yet Obama wants to tax the guy making 250 and not the guy making 25. It's not fair, plain and simple!!!</end quote></div>
A guy making 250k in NYC is better off than a redneck in Mo making 25k. I've seen it, I live it. I have friends in NYC making slightly less and are better off monetary wise than I...who makes 25k in redneckville. That is a huge difference. If you would have said 50 or 75k, I would agree. Though, I'd much rather live where I do, and live within my means, then have to live in a big city. Obama is not fair, that we can agree on. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img]
#13
10-16-2008, 02:35 PM
Red Rider
Honda, accept nothing less!
Honda, accept nothing less!
Is $250k a year rich?
I know that I could sell my house in So. Calif., and that amount of money would buy a whole neighborhood in many parts of the country! I have to make more here, just because it costs more to live. If I lived somewhere else where the cost of living wasn't so high, I could get along on much less money...just because I wouldn't be pumping so much of it into realestate.
In the end, I wouldn't have any more or less $$$ for toys like quads and dirt bikes, no mater which place I lived in.
In the end, I wouldn't have any more or less $$$ for toys like quads and dirt bikes, no mater which place I lived in.
#14
10-16-2008, 02:55 PM
Is $250k a year rich?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: reconranger
I know that I could sell my house in So. Calif., and that amount of money would buy a whole neighborhood in many parts of the country! I have to make more here, just because it costs more to live. If I lived somewhere else where the cost of living wasn't so high, I could get along on much less money...just because I wouldn't be pumping so much of it into realestate.
In the end, I wouldn't have any more or less $$$ for toys like quads and dirt bikes, no mater which place I lived in.</end quote></div>
I think we all know that living in NYC costs and lot more than in the middle of small town MO, but I'm sure a person making 250k in NYC is doing a lot better than someone in MO making 25k.
Either way, I'm tired of the hand outs for people who won't work for themselves, and I think everyone in here agrees.
I know that I could sell my house in So. Calif., and that amount of money would buy a whole neighborhood in many parts of the country! I have to make more here, just because it costs more to live. If I lived somewhere else where the cost of living wasn't so high, I could get along on much less money...just because I wouldn't be pumping so much of it into realestate.
In the end, I wouldn't have any more or less $$$ for toys like quads and dirt bikes, no mater which place I lived in.</end quote></div>
I think we all know that living in NYC costs and lot more than in the middle of small town MO, but I'm sure a person making 250k in NYC is doing a lot better than someone in MO making 25k.
Either way, I'm tired of the hand outs for people who won't work for themselves, and I think everyone in here agrees.
#15
10-16-2008, 03:50 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is $250k a year rich?
Thanks guys! Lots of good points here!
Rich is a relative term... They did a show on CNBC a while ago about people "struggling" to survive in places like Manhattan apartments while making $1m a year. Listening to the way they tell it, you'd swear they made minimum wage with 5 kids to raise. ....as the song goes: http://www.cowboylyrics.com/ly...em-like-that-3983.html
"that man is the richest whose pleasures are the cheapest" - Henri David Thoreau
Rich is a relative term... They did a show on CNBC a while ago about people "struggling" to survive in places like Manhattan apartments while making $1m a year. Listening to the way they tell it, you'd swear they made minimum wage with 5 kids to raise. ....as the song goes: http://www.cowboylyrics.com/ly...em-like-that-3983.html
"that man is the richest whose pleasures are the cheapest" - Henri David Thoreau
#16
10-17-2008, 12:57 AM
#17
10-17-2008, 01:58 AM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#18
10-17-2008, 02:22 AM
Is $250k a year rich?
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote>Originally posted by: JustRandy
Someone that makes that much money pays almost half of it in taxes though.
I think it works out like this:
250K = 130k you keep
100K = 70k you keep
20k = 20k you keep
or close anyway.</end quote></div>
Make 20,000 = you keep 14,000. <u>Maybe</u>. I'm not digging out my tax returns but I I think I made 22,000 and paid 7,000 in federal, state, and city taxes. I didn't get to keep all of it or anywhere near that. I got to keep about 2/3 of it. I had to use a lot of the 2/3 that was left to pay city and county property taxes, and home insurance, car insurance, ATV insurance, gun insurance, health insurance, etc.
The only way you're keeping all your money is if you make <u>a lot</u> less than that. If you're above the poverty level you're probably going to pay 28 - 35 % tax depending on where you live. People who make piles of money can hire accountants to find loopholes and exemption and keep more of their money. Po' folks like me can't. Everyone gets screwed except the ones on welfare. If you're rich and don't like paying for a bunch of bums to ride the gravy train, then think about how bad it sucks to just be getting buy and still having to pay for their welfare.
Someone that makes that much money pays almost half of it in taxes though.
I think it works out like this:
250K = 130k you keep
100K = 70k you keep
20k = 20k you keep
or close anyway.</end quote></div>
Make 20,000 = you keep 14,000. <u>Maybe</u>. I'm not digging out my tax returns but I I think I made 22,000 and paid 7,000 in federal, state, and city taxes. I didn't get to keep all of it or anywhere near that. I got to keep about 2/3 of it. I had to use a lot of the 2/3 that was left to pay city and county property taxes, and home insurance, car insurance, ATV insurance, gun insurance, health insurance, etc.
The only way you're keeping all your money is if you make <u>a lot</u> less than that. If you're above the poverty level you're probably going to pay 28 - 35 % tax depending on where you live. People who make piles of money can hire accountants to find loopholes and exemption and keep more of their money. Po' folks like me can't. Everyone gets screwed except the ones on welfare. If you're rich and don't like paying for a bunch of bums to ride the gravy train, then think about how bad it sucks to just be getting buy and still having to pay for their welfare.
#19
10-17-2008, 02:35 AM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#20
10-17-2008, 03:03 AM
Is $250k a year rich?
this is corrected tax calculator based on 2007 rules.
http://creditfederal.com/2007-irs-tax-calculator.html
you'd pay almost 69,000 in total federal taxes if your taxable income was 250,000.
so youd keep about 180K.
its totally where you live. a 70k salary near where i live would have to be 160k in orange county, ca to equal the same buying power. in NYC 100k a year wont be worth moving there for me.
ok this isnt going to be very popular on here but- i dont like either candidate. mccain is too littel too late and which is why he'll prob lose. obama is talking a good talk and actually proposing some interesting ideas. im not for him, but i dont see or hear anything substatial from the other camp. lets hope we can make millions of new jobs in the 'green sector' (green usually means we as riders lose out though so we'll have to be vigilent in our efforts to keep our riding spots open) and our energy policy b/c the tech sector is saturated and has plateued here, there will always be IT jobs, but nothing like it was before. let's all hope he walks the walk after election day. say hello to your new president b/c hes got this one in the bag. the financial industry is in the toilet, our federal debt (not deficit) is onver 10 TRILLION dollars now. In ONE day we added nearly a trillion with the 750BILLION dollar bail out; that was a stupid @ss idea (reward those that screwed it over in the first place, buy bad debt that banks dont want - hey can i throw my debt in there too and wipe my slate clean?). they would have done more for the economy by giving it to the people. just think one plane had every TAX PAYING american getting 400,000; roughly $282,000 after taxes. most people could have payed off their mortgage, cars, etc. and saved some. big chunk of debt gone there for everyone involved; individuals, banks. but no. its going to disappear in oblivion and most people will never see the effects of it at all. they should have brought a vote to the people on that one. we will be paying for that one for decades, if not a full century, if the country lasts that long.
weve had debt since the 1940's. so 68 yrs later and its grown to 10trillion. the larger it gets, the faster it piles up. the National Debt took over six years to rise from $5 trillion to $6 trillion.
On January 15th 2004, the Outstanding Public Debt jumped $13 billion to $7,001,852,607,623.35. This was the first time in history the U.S. National Debt surpassed the $7 trillion mark and came less than two years after the Debt first passed $6 trillion. On October 18th 2005, the Outstanding Public Debt rose to $8,003,897,406,911.24 -- the first time it had risen above $8 trillion...
im not for rewarding laziness or those that wont work. but there are allot of peope out there that cant get good jobs b/c of cronies that are in charge who keep hiring their buddies instead of the best qualified people. that is wrong. im not for punishing you if you are successful b/c there is some truth to trickle down economics. but it is wrong to have a CEO making tens of millions of dollars and jumping ship with his golden parachute while the company he promised to increase shareholeder wealth (remember, that's the #1 responsibility of a CEO, you remember this from economics classes) and gets off scott free with another 100million in stock options while the company goes under, the people lose their jobs and an industry that once once repected goes down the tubes. is that right? is there a problem wth wanted to reform that? is there a problem with closing the tax loophole to companies that send jobs overseas and put americans out of work while a proposal and suggestions has been made to give them a credit if they for every job they keep here?
in germany and european countries the board actaully punishes ceos. over here, they dont. that has got to change and right now i dont care who changes it but it must be done.
http://creditfederal.com/2007-irs-tax-calculator.html
you'd pay almost 69,000 in total federal taxes if your taxable income was 250,000.
so youd keep about 180K.
its totally where you live. a 70k salary near where i live would have to be 160k in orange county, ca to equal the same buying power. in NYC 100k a year wont be worth moving there for me.
ok this isnt going to be very popular on here but- i dont like either candidate. mccain is too littel too late and which is why he'll prob lose. obama is talking a good talk and actually proposing some interesting ideas. im not for him, but i dont see or hear anything substatial from the other camp. lets hope we can make millions of new jobs in the 'green sector' (green usually means we as riders lose out though so we'll have to be vigilent in our efforts to keep our riding spots open) and our energy policy b/c the tech sector is saturated and has plateued here, there will always be IT jobs, but nothing like it was before. let's all hope he walks the walk after election day. say hello to your new president b/c hes got this one in the bag. the financial industry is in the toilet, our federal debt (not deficit) is onver 10 TRILLION dollars now. In ONE day we added nearly a trillion with the 750BILLION dollar bail out; that was a stupid @ss idea (reward those that screwed it over in the first place, buy bad debt that banks dont want - hey can i throw my debt in there too and wipe my slate clean?). they would have done more for the economy by giving it to the people. just think one plane had every TAX PAYING american getting 400,000; roughly $282,000 after taxes. most people could have payed off their mortgage, cars, etc. and saved some. big chunk of debt gone there for everyone involved; individuals, banks. but no. its going to disappear in oblivion and most people will never see the effects of it at all. they should have brought a vote to the people on that one. we will be paying for that one for decades, if not a full century, if the country lasts that long.
weve had debt since the 1940's. so 68 yrs later and its grown to 10trillion. the larger it gets, the faster it piles up. the National Debt took over six years to rise from $5 trillion to $6 trillion.
On January 15th 2004, the Outstanding Public Debt jumped $13 billion to $7,001,852,607,623.35. This was the first time in history the U.S. National Debt surpassed the $7 trillion mark and came less than two years after the Debt first passed $6 trillion. On October 18th 2005, the Outstanding Public Debt rose to $8,003,897,406,911.24 -- the first time it had risen above $8 trillion...
im not for rewarding laziness or those that wont work. but there are allot of peope out there that cant get good jobs b/c of cronies that are in charge who keep hiring their buddies instead of the best qualified people. that is wrong. im not for punishing you if you are successful b/c there is some truth to trickle down economics. but it is wrong to have a CEO making tens of millions of dollars and jumping ship with his golden parachute while the company he promised to increase shareholeder wealth (remember, that's the #1 responsibility of a CEO, you remember this from economics classes) and gets off scott free with another 100million in stock options while the company goes under, the people lose their jobs and an industry that once once repected goes down the tubes. is that right? is there a problem wth wanted to reform that? is there a problem with closing the tax loophole to companies that send jobs overseas and put americans out of work while a proposal and suggestions has been made to give them a credit if they for every job they keep here?
in germany and european countries the board actaully punishes ceos. over here, they dont. that has got to change and right now i dont care who changes it but it must be done.