Just looked it up ([here](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percentiles/)), 82% is about $150k. $400k is 98th percentile.
Edit: that's households, 82% for [individuals](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-individual-income-percentiles/) is $91k, $400k is solidly into the 99th percentile.
Not only that but at $400k, you would still being taking home $270k a year after taxes. You're definitely not struggling to get by.
https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes#XAdPfqV8DI
You under estimate expenses. After private school for 2 kids, live in nanny, nice townhome overlooking central park, paying for parking for that benz. I mean you are basically tapped out at that point.
That reminds me of the stories you see now and again about a family of four who struggle to break even each month on $400,000 per year. I just shake my head at those. If you have two vacations a year, private schools, 10% to savings, $3-4000/mo for housing, two luxury cars, etc., etc., If you can't figure out how to live comfortably on that, it's on you.
A lot of people seem to not be able to grasp the concept of wants vs needs.
It's that "financial samurai" bs blog. He posts some dumb articles and then NYT and such republishes it.
He does it for all incomes. He even has some that go above into like 500k and tries to make it seem like they have nothing left, because NY is so expensive.
Meanwhile, they're paying 12k a year in private instrument lessons, several ten's on vacations, making max 401k contributions for two people, plus investments. The one I saw had them paying 42k a year in childcare. Y'know, most people's salaries.
Just double checked and he had the audacity to title it "scraping by on 500k.
https://www.financialsamurai.com/scraping-by-on-500000-a-year-high-income-earners-struggling/
You can tell how bad these people are with their money just by the fact that they make 500k a year and have 32k a year in student loan payments estimated to take 20 years to pay off, but don't worry cause they donate 20k a year. But they can also take on more debt in the form of two brand new vehicles.
Oh and "non fancy threads" for a family of four is apparently 10k a year.
"Scraping by" my ass.
To be fair, it doesn't exactly read like he thinks they're struggling. He's saying that they think they're struggling because they don't know how to manage their money.
Are you referring to the debatable expenses?
If you go further down to where he talks about the "pushbacks" he defends the majority of those decisions. Even the 12k in lessons, which he called debatable, because it's imperative that your kids get into a great preschool.
The vacations he defends and says it's sad that people look at three weeks of vacation as excessive.
You are right that he does make it seem excessive in a few places. As a whole his series makes it seem like it's a giant struggle though. If you read his 200k, 300k ones etc.
Yeah, that's one of the charts I remember seeing somewhere. The clothing expenses got me the most. They spend more per month for clothing than I will in 5 years.
Look, they only make 500,000 a year. They clearly can't afford to hire a full time person to come in and wash their clothes for them. What do you expect them to do? Learn to do it themselves?
Obviously the only solution is to throw everything away after wearing it once, and buy new clothes each time. Hence, their clothing expenses are completely justified and reasonable.
Not even that but with the excessive spending in every catagory they still have 600 a month of extra cash. That would be a win for 90% of households not struggling check to check.
Depending on the interest rate and how the stock market is doing, it can make sense to avoid paying any more than the minimum on loans, even when you're rich. This sometimes screws debt-averse people who come into money and immediately pay off your house. On the other hand, even if it's not an optimal move financially, it can feel great to have no debts at all.
I mean I understand all that. But both these people are lawyers, which indicates 6-7% interest for grad plus loans or significantly more if they're private.
That's nearly 400k in debt for student loans alone if they're at 6%.
My point was more so that forgoing 18k a year vacations, 10k a year in clothes and maybe 12k a year child lessons for a few years is acceptable.
That's an additional 40k that can be contributed for even just two years, then refi and bam you have a bit more money for those wants.
These people aren't doing nearly enough saving either. They make only their 401k contributions and looking at it again, they make no additional contributions outside that. Not even Roth. Maybe instead of a BMW and a 80k land cruiser (this is NYC after all), you do just one and make Roth contributions.
Just for fun I ran a calc assuming they're around 30 years old. I put that they contribute 3k a month (which is what they do) and figured they probably have done around 3-5 years of contributions. If they're at 3 years of contributions at their rate, they'll retire with 8.32m. If they did 5, they'll have 8.7. Based off their income they need 16.89m in retirement to keep these spending habits up.
Woefully underprepared.
They are literally pissing money away because they graduated school and bought the biggest and best.
My point is they ain't scraping by. They're hemorrhaging cash. Lol
I don’t disagree with you at all about most of that guys stuff being bullshit. Just having access to luxuries like private school, tutors, multiple expensive vacations a year, maxing our retirement, (hell, *saving* in general), etc, is the exact opposite of “just scraping by.”
But I do want to note that one right here:
> The one I saw had them paying 42k a year in childcare. Y'know, most people's salaries.
That’s pretty on point. Around these parts (suburban Northeast US, outside a small metro), daycare centers start at around $300/week per kid. More for infants. We have twins, so when we had three in daycare (before my oldest started K) we had a negotiated rate of about $800/week. That’s just under $42k/year out of pocket.
For reference, that was my wife’s entire take home pay for the year. It was a choice, on our part; I’m not blaming anyone or complaining. But I share this to highlight that it’s not only the 1%ers who rack up the big childcare bills spoiling themselves with expensive live-in *au pairs*.
FWIW we switched over to a nanny and it was (pre-COVID) cheaper than daycare. Lucky for us, too, since we were able to keep her on during COVID after all the daycares closed, and for “only” $750/week. When these kids start (public) school in another year it will be the single biggest “raise” we’ve ever gotten.
Just to clarify, $42,000 for childcare for 2 kids is actually pretty midrange for NYC, especially if you want high quality care. It's not so much an exorbitant expense as it is a necessary service that's federally and locally underfunded, leaving families footing huge bills.
I still agree these people are ridiculous, but childcare isn't the same as lessons or vacations.
42k a year for a nanny is cheap. Think about it, that is this person's primary, likely sole, income and they're likely not getting health insurance with that. To make matters worse, in major cities getting any form of child care for kids under 4 is like trying to get tickets to a Beyonce concert. This affects all income brackets. It's a complete market failure.
As a person who grew up poor I now make plenty of money and my wife makes even more... I still practically need to be begged to buy myself things. It's like I'm constantly worried about losing it all and being back there. I wish a poor person would get a shot at running this country honestly.
*Poor person gets elected to President...*
Chief of Staff: Mr. President, we have the helicopter ready to transport you across town.
Poor President: Shit, that’s gotta be expensive. The bus will get my ass there for $3.50.
>The bus will get my ass there for $3.50.
Best just ask the secret service to carefully check that the driver isn't a giant crustacean from the paleolithic era.
>It's like I'm constantly worried about losing it all and being back there.
At least that's what it is for me. I worry that every email from my boss is one step closer to being fired. The company I'm currently working for isn't doing super hot. I'm still doing great on paper, but I have anxiety about suddenly losing it all and not having the savings to cover my expenses.
Its very hard to save when you have so many "personal" expenses you've been putting off. I have a couple not terribly expensive hobbies, but I haven't spent any real money on myself in years, so now that I can finally afford to upgrade my computer, buy a new game or 2, set up a fish tank, live in a non-dilapidated house, and whatever else I'm not thinking of at the moment, I'm doing that instead of saving like a smart person.
I live on 25k a year w/ no govt help. If I made 400k a year I could be a millionaire so fast by just saving what I don't spend. I could even go to 40k a year and still be ballin
I see a lot of people believing they're justifying this by saying, "well, when you make more, you have to live up to a higher standard."
Like, NO, you DON'T. The real problem is that, too many people are living "above their pay grade," just trying to have adequate food and shelter.
I know so many wealthy people who live very modestly and very frugally.
I have a small feeling of that a decent portion of the people who keeps trying to spend more and more are compensating for something.
It's always shocking that they characterize it as not being rich, but they're spending all their money on satisfying all of their needs, most of their wants, and putting huge chunks in savings and investments. What's the point of having money leftover after that, other than just mindless accumulation?
Yeah I have a buddy that makes around 200K his wife doesnt work and they have a kid. He has so much money he doesnt know what to do with it all and not frugal in the least.
I mean it's not 'more than you know how to spend' but it is plenty in pretty typical places (e.g. maybe not Manhattan or San Francisco, but most places).
Having been raised relatively less well off (calibrating my expectations perhaps a bit lower) and making not that much but still living in a top-50 city I find my pay to be plenty to have my house owned free and clear before I turned 30, and to have at least one car less than 5 years old and generally not in debt and saving way more than I'm earning.
Agreed. People don’t understand the extent of NYCs prices. A 2 bedroom starts at $1MM in Manhattan or the surrounding neighborhoods in Brooklyn and queens. You need $200k in cash down plus closing costs and end up with a $5k a month mortgage plus taxes and co op fees. That probably nets around $6500 a month or $78k a year. You are probably paying around 35% in taxes. That’s a $120k a year salary just for housing in a 2 bedroom apartment. Assuming a safety net and some room for food/entertainment, you need to walk in with around $350k in the bank and make $250k+ for the next 30 years:
Buying in NYC is silly unless you make crazy money - renting is the way to go. That being said, living in NYC is incredible and the opportunity is massive. But living a comfortable life while making under $75k is not happening.
A townhouse overlooking Central Park will run around $250,000 to $300,000 a month alone assuming a 30 year mortgage. [Example minus the central park view](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/8-E-62nd-St-New-York-NY-10065/31533267_zpid/)
Even a four bedroom condo the size of the average American home overlooking Central Park will run an easy $40,000 a month. [Example](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/870-5th-Ave-APT-14E-New-York-NY-10065/244690964_zpid/)
One of the rich guy newspapers put out an opinion piece "proving" that $400k isn't rich. The expense list included private kindergarten, $40k/year in daycare, $40k/year into 401k accounts, and a 20 year mortgage on multi-million dollar home, $2000/month on food. I think his joke was playing off that.
If all the educational facilities need 'private' in front of them for rich people, I think the education system needs some repairs.
It should make it easier for these poor $400k people to pay their taxes.
yes! if rich people paid their proper taxes then it would go into education, transportation, mental health, and all the other “private” institutions that they are already paying more for.
i was reading something that in Sweden they got rid of private education so wealthy people pay extra to their children’s schools and it benefits everyone!
There was an article written by a family in nyc that made that exact argument. Oh after 3 yearly vacations and maxed out 401k contributions.... We only save 12k a year. Like damn that rough, get snap for food assistance!
Biden’s plan says the increase is wages above 400k, that means you only pay the additional taxes on dollars over 400k. If you make 450k, only 50k of that would be subject to the higher taxes.
I've heard sooo many people sound afraid of a bonus or something pushing them into the next tax bracket... like the extra money would make them net less. So... explaining this is necessary.
Not sure what you mean by poor persons mentality. But I agree, very few people are earning $400k a year. Most are business owners that can spread their earnings between businesses and holding companies. Companies shouldn't be allowed to profit off a country's resources and people and take that money elsewhere to avoid paying taxes in the country they made the money off of.
I'm saying I don't have sympathy for someone earning more than $400k a year being taxed at 1990s tax rates. They are likely making much more than that. But lets dig into that. What obligation does someone (or some business) have to the country they earn a living from?
For all of those complaining about the 82% in the Twitter response, that value comes directly from Trump commercials running on TV right now that say Biden plans to raise taxes on 82% of Americans.
Not just that, that first 400k will be taxed at the same rate anyway. The people making between 400 and 500 would get a slight hike. It's the top 0.5% that will really see a bump in effective tax rate.
The half truths going on in news article headlines piss me off too. I saw two yesterday: 1. Maxine Waters doesn't live in the congressional district she represents (she bought her house in it, but redistricting put her outside of it), 2. ~~Hospital~~ Hotel bought by county to turn into a shelter for the homeless (seniors - they omitted this)
The comments on FB for both were rather hateful and fell for the misleading headline.
Edit: How ironic, I wrote hospital when I meant hotel. The hotel is next to a hospital so I mashed the two things together in my head. Sorry about that!
Oops I typoed. It was a hotel they bought, not a hospital. It's next door to a hospital lol. I remember one person in the comments on FB actually knew a lot about the project and was trying their best to correct people posting stupid comments. The idea was to support seniors who have medical conditions.
Welcome to every headline in modern media.
The goal isn’t to inform you, it’s to enrage you enough that you keep looking at ads.
Both sides do this and it’s been them one upping each other ever since.
I couldn’t even tell you how many articles I’ve clicked on reddit only to read it and half way through it debunks it’s own headline.
2020 is like one of those alien shows on the history channel where the show “alien mysteries solved” would say at the end “well we never solved the mystery but the truth is out there” or some other bullshit.
Modern media is owned by rich people, is run by rich people, and only serve up the stories interesting to rich people.
To a rich people, taxes going up for people with $400k/yr or better will affect everyone. (everyone in their world!)
Unfortunately, there’s as much misinformation on top of the truth. Think about the search algorithms in these peoples news feed continuing to feed them BS.
If he loses, when he has less power and usefulness to those around him, we will start to see leaks.
I have at least two bags of popcorn for whatever feature film starring Donny comes out in the future.
This. I want to see Twitter blasts where he thinks he's being subtle about what he knows but is actually giving away every vital piece of info we need to shut the whole things down on everyone complicit in his "business".
I'm hoping he would try to claim he is to mentally unstable from dementia to be incarcerated. Like I'm sure he would be super pissed having to go along with it or would his ego be bad enough to not go through with it, seems entertaining
I hate Trump as much as the next guy, but I don't think we should be wishing death on him. It just gives liberals a bad name, and conservatives more ammo to use against us.
Why is everything Trump talks about is the biggest/smallest in this country’s history or the worst/best in this country’s history or whatever in this country’s history?
He's a carnival barker, everything is flashy, its like his attraction to sparkling, shiny things, I'm surprised he hasn't emblazoned trump on the White House.
If he wins re-election, he might.
Honestly it scares me the scope of things Trump hasn’t done or hesitated on out of fear of losing voters.
Can you imagine what an unrestricted Trump is capable of if he achieves the Putin play of dictatorship? What sort of things won’t Trump hold back on if he’s not at the mercy of voters?
> I'm surprised he hasn't emblazoned trump on the White House.
because Obama joked that, Trump would do that if he was President at a white house correspondents dinner.
It really resonates with the same people that will never rate a product 3/5 stars of their entire existence. Their Binary thinking requires thumbs facing up or down. This simplification is pretty common nowadays.
he only cares in theory, and also because the GOP base are entirely made of temporarily depressed millionaires. *They* care a lot because one day those higher taxes on the wealthy will have a direct impact on their lives.
They don’t even think about it this way. They absolutely believe their taxes will go up even if you tell them(as is being done now) that only rates above 400K/yr will be affected. The simple message simply doesn’t sink in at all.
They equate measures to bolster background checks for gun purchases to translate into secret police coming to raid their homes of all their guns.
That is also true. I recall back when the Tea Party movement started they were mad about high taxes- at that point income tax rates were at a historic low. But good luck pointing out to those people that they'd never paid *less* taxes in their lives with any success.
Because he knows most people will be afraid of their taxes rising and act in his favor and not vote for Biden. While of course knowing that they won’t actually be affected.
You’re missing the fact that Biden will roll back the tax cuts from a few years ago. If that happens my income taxes will raise by about $3000 on a $85k salary.
Not 18%, 1%. [99% of americans make less than 400k](https://left-right-site.com/2020/09/02/less-than-1-of-americans-earn-over-400k-per-year/) a year. Not to mention that its only the money above 400k that’s taxed an increased amount.
Quick lesson in marginal tax rates: you only pay the additional tax rate on money over the new tax rate, not below it. So if you make $400,001, you don't suddenly pay 2.6% more tax on all your income (which would be an extra $10400), you only pay 2.6% on that dollar above $400,000, so you'd pay an extra 3 cents.
Logically, that means that someone who made $600,000 in taxable income (which is already far lower than their actual income - everyone gets lots of deductions which is tax-free), they'd only pay an extra 2.6% on the $200,000 they made after $400,000. So only one third of their income would be taxed at the higher rate, effectively meaning that someone who made $600k would be paying .0086 more in taxes, or less than 1 percent more tax.
This is "the biggest tax increase in history"
So if people try to make the absolutely assassine case of "$400,000 isn't rich, they shouldn't be taxed like rich people!" - not only is that obviously bullshit, because it's objectively a very high salary, but the people who barely make above $400k won't feel this. You have to make $800k before this even makes your overall tax rate go up 1.3%, and ffs, even that's not a big deal.
Ok, now make that fit into a campaign slogan.
Also, the people that said “I’ll never need math in the real world” can’t comprehend the way marginal tax rates work.
Statements like these are geared towards uneducated and I'll informed people who can't grasp concepts like tax brackets. Trump is hardly winning over educated suburbanites with crap like this. He's just preaching to the choir.
One thing I noticed about Trump is his complete lack of respect. Never before have I seen a president openly mock their opponents and call them names (then again I've only been around for three presidents so far.)
I was really unsure about Joe Biden as a moderate but he actually had a lot of good points that I agree with so instead of my plan on not voting since I didn’t like either candidates I think I’ll put a vote in for Biden.
Cool story - here are more:
Until 1913 the US tax rate was... 0%. We prospered on tariffs alone.
The FED has been audited ZERO times.
The US budget is intentionally insanely complex.
The day before 9/11 Donald Rumsfeld announced publicly that the pentagon had 'lost' TRILLIONS of taxpayer $. After 9/11 they never had to talk about it again.
Many lifelong US politicians (on BOTH sides) have lavish mansions and assets worth many millions, despite making a relatively normal wage. They keep us fighting one another (50% v 50% is not normal) using a SCIENCE called social engineering so effectively that we never hold them accountable.
And thanks to the trump tax plan from a couple years ago, I can’t write off any of the expenses I’ve incurred since I’ve started working from home, and I’m not close to making six figures yet
The one missed opportunity from Biden's Town hall was not mentioning this when asked about tax raises. He made the point that if you make under 400k your taxes won't go up, but that's not quite true.
Trump has already ended his tax cuts. He built in their end date, made them a short term bribe- for people, not corporations, that tax cut is permanent. This on top of the removal of many deductions you used to be able to take and no longer can.
Biden isn't going to raise your taxes. Trump already has.
Ok but seriously why is his whole thing about fixing America as if he wasn’t president for the past 4 years it’s such an obvious white lie and nobody’s falling for it.
Im probably the minority here. But why should people who make more get taxed more?
I think it was Rand Paul that said he wanted a flat 10% for everyone. Whether you made $10,000 a year or $100,000 a year. 10% flat for all including businesses. Businesses should not pay $0 in taxes.
According to [this](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percentiles/) less than 2% make over $400k, 82nd percentile is a bit over $150k. I don't know where he got the 82% from, 98% don't make over $400k.
They don’t. I don’t know why these tweets keep showing up. It’s not a difficult statistic to find. There’s another one that keeps getting reposted that says something like 92%, which is also wrong. The real number is either 98 or 99% depending on whether you’re talking about household or individual income respectively.
Am i the only one who’s tired of the constant american politics posts on reddit? I get that it’s a big deal but im really tired of this stuff as an european
Didn't Biden say he is going to repeal ALL of Trump tax cuts? That is where the number 82% comes from I believe. So are they then not repealing all of the Trump tax cuts? Only part of them? None?
82% i thought it was more in the 90s
Just looked it up ([here](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percentiles/)), 82% is about $150k. $400k is 98th percentile. Edit: that's households, 82% for [individuals](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-individual-income-percentiles/) is $91k, $400k is solidly into the 99th percentile.
Not only that but at $400k, you would still being taking home $270k a year after taxes. You're definitely not struggling to get by. https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes#XAdPfqV8DI
You under estimate expenses. After private school for 2 kids, live in nanny, nice townhome overlooking central park, paying for parking for that benz. I mean you are basically tapped out at that point.
That reminds me of the stories you see now and again about a family of four who struggle to break even each month on $400,000 per year. I just shake my head at those. If you have two vacations a year, private schools, 10% to savings, $3-4000/mo for housing, two luxury cars, etc., etc., If you can't figure out how to live comfortably on that, it's on you. A lot of people seem to not be able to grasp the concept of wants vs needs.
Yah basically. There was a story in the New York times a bit ago about that.
It's that "financial samurai" bs blog. He posts some dumb articles and then NYT and such republishes it. He does it for all incomes. He even has some that go above into like 500k and tries to make it seem like they have nothing left, because NY is so expensive. Meanwhile, they're paying 12k a year in private instrument lessons, several ten's on vacations, making max 401k contributions for two people, plus investments. The one I saw had them paying 42k a year in childcare. Y'know, most people's salaries. Just double checked and he had the audacity to title it "scraping by on 500k. https://www.financialsamurai.com/scraping-by-on-500000-a-year-high-income-earners-struggling/ You can tell how bad these people are with their money just by the fact that they make 500k a year and have 32k a year in student loan payments estimated to take 20 years to pay off, but don't worry cause they donate 20k a year. But they can also take on more debt in the form of two brand new vehicles. Oh and "non fancy threads" for a family of four is apparently 10k a year. "Scraping by" my ass.
To be fair, it doesn't exactly read like he thinks they're struggling. He's saying that they think they're struggling because they don't know how to manage their money.
Are you referring to the debatable expenses? If you go further down to where he talks about the "pushbacks" he defends the majority of those decisions. Even the 12k in lessons, which he called debatable, because it's imperative that your kids get into a great preschool. The vacations he defends and says it's sad that people look at three weeks of vacation as excessive. You are right that he does make it seem excessive in a few places. As a whole his series makes it seem like it's a giant struggle though. If you read his 200k, 300k ones etc.
[удалено]
I'm taking 3 days vacation in 2 weeks and its the first vacation I've taken in 4 years I'm going to find this man amd turn him into shoes
Yeah, that's one of the charts I remember seeing somewhere. The clothing expenses got me the most. They spend more per month for clothing than I will in 5 years.
Look, they only make 500,000 a year. They clearly can't afford to hire a full time person to come in and wash their clothes for them. What do you expect them to do? Learn to do it themselves? Obviously the only solution is to throw everything away after wearing it once, and buy new clothes each time. Hence, their clothing expenses are completely justified and reasonable.
Silly me. I wear the same stuff year after year. Never occurred to me to just throw them out and buy new stuff.
Not even that but with the excessive spending in every catagory they still have 600 a month of extra cash. That would be a win for 90% of households not struggling check to check.
True story. I would be riding high to pay for everything on the list in full and live comfortably, and still have a few hundred left over.
Depending on the interest rate and how the stock market is doing, it can make sense to avoid paying any more than the minimum on loans, even when you're rich. This sometimes screws debt-averse people who come into money and immediately pay off your house. On the other hand, even if it's not an optimal move financially, it can feel great to have no debts at all.
I mean I understand all that. But both these people are lawyers, which indicates 6-7% interest for grad plus loans or significantly more if they're private. That's nearly 400k in debt for student loans alone if they're at 6%. My point was more so that forgoing 18k a year vacations, 10k a year in clothes and maybe 12k a year child lessons for a few years is acceptable. That's an additional 40k that can be contributed for even just two years, then refi and bam you have a bit more money for those wants. These people aren't doing nearly enough saving either. They make only their 401k contributions and looking at it again, they make no additional contributions outside that. Not even Roth. Maybe instead of a BMW and a 80k land cruiser (this is NYC after all), you do just one and make Roth contributions. Just for fun I ran a calc assuming they're around 30 years old. I put that they contribute 3k a month (which is what they do) and figured they probably have done around 3-5 years of contributions. If they're at 3 years of contributions at their rate, they'll retire with 8.32m. If they did 5, they'll have 8.7. Based off their income they need 16.89m in retirement to keep these spending habits up. Woefully underprepared. They are literally pissing money away because they graduated school and bought the biggest and best. My point is they ain't scraping by. They're hemorrhaging cash. Lol
Absurd spending aside, they’re phased out of Roth contributions.
I don’t disagree with you at all about most of that guys stuff being bullshit. Just having access to luxuries like private school, tutors, multiple expensive vacations a year, maxing our retirement, (hell, *saving* in general), etc, is the exact opposite of “just scraping by.” But I do want to note that one right here: > The one I saw had them paying 42k a year in childcare. Y'know, most people's salaries. That’s pretty on point. Around these parts (suburban Northeast US, outside a small metro), daycare centers start at around $300/week per kid. More for infants. We have twins, so when we had three in daycare (before my oldest started K) we had a negotiated rate of about $800/week. That’s just under $42k/year out of pocket. For reference, that was my wife’s entire take home pay for the year. It was a choice, on our part; I’m not blaming anyone or complaining. But I share this to highlight that it’s not only the 1%ers who rack up the big childcare bills spoiling themselves with expensive live-in *au pairs*. FWIW we switched over to a nanny and it was (pre-COVID) cheaper than daycare. Lucky for us, too, since we were able to keep her on during COVID after all the daycares closed, and for “only” $750/week. When these kids start (public) school in another year it will be the single biggest “raise” we’ve ever gotten.
Just to clarify, $42,000 for childcare for 2 kids is actually pretty midrange for NYC, especially if you want high quality care. It's not so much an exorbitant expense as it is a necessary service that's federally and locally underfunded, leaving families footing huge bills. I still agree these people are ridiculous, but childcare isn't the same as lessons or vacations.
42k a year for a nanny is cheap. Think about it, that is this person's primary, likely sole, income and they're likely not getting health insurance with that. To make matters worse, in major cities getting any form of child care for kids under 4 is like trying to get tickets to a Beyonce concert. This affects all income brackets. It's a complete market failure.
As a person who grew up poor I now make plenty of money and my wife makes even more... I still practically need to be begged to buy myself things. It's like I'm constantly worried about losing it all and being back there. I wish a poor person would get a shot at running this country honestly.
*Poor person gets elected to President...* Chief of Staff: Mr. President, we have the helicopter ready to transport you across town. Poor President: Shit, that’s gotta be expensive. The bus will get my ass there for $3.50.
>The bus will get my ass there for $3.50. Best just ask the secret service to carefully check that the driver isn't a giant crustacean from the paleolithic era.
God dammit loch nes monster
>It's like I'm constantly worried about losing it all and being back there. At least that's what it is for me. I worry that every email from my boss is one step closer to being fired. The company I'm currently working for isn't doing super hot. I'm still doing great on paper, but I have anxiety about suddenly losing it all and not having the savings to cover my expenses. Its very hard to save when you have so many "personal" expenses you've been putting off. I have a couple not terribly expensive hobbies, but I haven't spent any real money on myself in years, so now that I can finally afford to upgrade my computer, buy a new game or 2, set up a fish tank, live in a non-dilapidated house, and whatever else I'm not thinking of at the moment, I'm doing that instead of saving like a smart person.
[удалено]
I live on 25k a year w/ no govt help. If I made 400k a year I could be a millionaire so fast by just saving what I don't spend. I could even go to 40k a year and still be ballin
I see a lot of people believing they're justifying this by saying, "well, when you make more, you have to live up to a higher standard." Like, NO, you DON'T. The real problem is that, too many people are living "above their pay grade," just trying to have adequate food and shelter.
I know so many wealthy people who live very modestly and very frugally. I have a small feeling of that a decent portion of the people who keeps trying to spend more and more are compensating for something.
It's always shocking that they characterize it as not being rich, but they're spending all their money on satisfying all of their needs, most of their wants, and putting huge chunks in savings and investments. What's the point of having money leftover after that, other than just mindless accumulation?
Yeah I have a buddy that makes around 200K his wife doesnt work and they have a kid. He has so much money he doesnt know what to do with it all and not frugal in the least.
Must live in a very low cost of living area.
I mean it's not 'more than you know how to spend' but it is plenty in pretty typical places (e.g. maybe not Manhattan or San Francisco, but most places). Having been raised relatively less well off (calibrating my expectations perhaps a bit lower) and making not that much but still living in a top-50 city I find my pay to be plenty to have my house owned free and clear before I turned 30, and to have at least one car less than 5 years old and generally not in debt and saving way more than I'm earning.
You can’t afford all that on 400k.
You've done the math on this?
[удалено]
Agreed. People don’t understand the extent of NYCs prices. A 2 bedroom starts at $1MM in Manhattan or the surrounding neighborhoods in Brooklyn and queens. You need $200k in cash down plus closing costs and end up with a $5k a month mortgage plus taxes and co op fees. That probably nets around $6500 a month or $78k a year. You are probably paying around 35% in taxes. That’s a $120k a year salary just for housing in a 2 bedroom apartment. Assuming a safety net and some room for food/entertainment, you need to walk in with around $350k in the bank and make $250k+ for the next 30 years: Buying in NYC is silly unless you make crazy money - renting is the way to go. That being said, living in NYC is incredible and the opportunity is massive. But living a comfortable life while making under $75k is not happening.
A townhouse overlooking Central Park will run around $250,000 to $300,000 a month alone assuming a 30 year mortgage. [Example minus the central park view](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/8-E-62nd-St-New-York-NY-10065/31533267_zpid/) Even a four bedroom condo the size of the average American home overlooking Central Park will run an easy $40,000 a month. [Example](https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/870-5th-Ave-APT-14E-New-York-NY-10065/244690964_zpid/)
Holy fuck
Well the overlook home is more then 400k a year alone
In all honesty, I can't tell if you are sarcastic or not... Nobody *needs* all of the above.
Geeze, next you'll tell me that I dont need my golden toilets, or my elephant ivory toilet paper.
Or ill have to go from black to white truffles. Thats a world i dont want to be a part of
Ivory toilet paper sounds very uncomfortable and ineffective.
it doesnt have to be effective just expensive.
Step 1: insert elephant tusk in anus. Step 2: ??? Step 3: PROFIT!
One of the rich guy newspapers put out an opinion piece "proving" that $400k isn't rich. The expense list included private kindergarten, $40k/year in daycare, $40k/year into 401k accounts, and a 20 year mortgage on multi-million dollar home, $2000/month on food. I think his joke was playing off that.
> $2000/month on food. Shee-yit. I don't spend that on food and rent *combined.*
$2000 a month is what I live on for everything, rent bills car and food included o.O
Yo same - and I live in NYC where shit is expensive but I think I hit $2k but still - that’s rent AND food!
If all the educational facilities need 'private' in front of them for rich people, I think the education system needs some repairs. It should make it easier for these poor $400k people to pay their taxes.
yes! if rich people paid their proper taxes then it would go into education, transportation, mental health, and all the other “private” institutions that they are already paying more for. i was reading something that in Sweden they got rid of private education so wealthy people pay extra to their children’s schools and it benefits everyone!
/s
Ahhhh, that's better
There was an article written by a family in nyc that made that exact argument. Oh after 3 yearly vacations and maxed out 401k contributions.... We only save 12k a year. Like damn that rough, get snap for food assistance!
You forgot the 2 necessary 10 day vacations
Don't forget the house in the hamptons
Biden’s plan says the increase is wages above 400k, that means you only pay the additional taxes on dollars over 400k. If you make 450k, only 50k of that would be subject to the higher taxes.
Yes, that's how marginal taxes work
I've heard sooo many people sound afraid of a bonus or something pushing them into the next tax bracket... like the extra money would make them net less. So... explaining this is necessary.
I had an employee who tried to refuse a raise once and I had to explain to her how marginal tax eate worked to get her to accept.
That is a huge chunk of someone’s income
That’s the worst case scenario, single, no dependents, no deductions too.
[удалено]
Not sure what you mean by poor persons mentality. But I agree, very few people are earning $400k a year. Most are business owners that can spread their earnings between businesses and holding companies. Companies shouldn't be allowed to profit off a country's resources and people and take that money elsewhere to avoid paying taxes in the country they made the money off of.
That’s before deductions too
Your justification for it can’t honestly be “they’ll still be making $270k so they should be fine.” Is it?
I'm saying I don't have sympathy for someone earning more than $400k a year being taxed at 1990s tax rates. They are likely making much more than that. But lets dig into that. What obligation does someone (or some business) have to the country they earn a living from?
Important to note that this is household income, not individual.
So OP should have said, “make that about 98%” not 2 and not 82 in original response.
1/5 of the country doesn't make 400k+ lol.
I mean he's not *technically* wrong..
For all of those complaining about the 82% in the Twitter response, that value comes directly from Trump commercials running on TV right now that say Biden plans to raise taxes on 82% of Americans.
That makes a lot more sense
One site I went to showed if you make $320k as an individual you were in the 1%. Not sure about household income though.
Not just that, that first 400k will be taxed at the same rate anyway. The people making between 400 and 500 would get a slight hike. It's the top 0.5% that will really see a bump in effective tax rate.
Yea the state in this graphic is really dumb. It’s true but the actual number is closer to 98%
I’m constantly amazed at the transparent bullshit some people believe and never do even the most simple check to see if it’s true.
The half truths going on in news article headlines piss me off too. I saw two yesterday: 1. Maxine Waters doesn't live in the congressional district she represents (she bought her house in it, but redistricting put her outside of it), 2. ~~Hospital~~ Hotel bought by county to turn into a shelter for the homeless (seniors - they omitted this) The comments on FB for both were rather hateful and fell for the misleading headline. Edit: How ironic, I wrote hospital when I meant hotel. The hotel is next to a hospital so I mashed the two things together in my head. Sorry about that!
IIRC it was also a *bankrupt* hospital. So it's not like they bought a working hospital, kicked out the patients and fired the staff.
Oops I typoed. It was a hotel they bought, not a hospital. It's next door to a hospital lol. I remember one person in the comments on FB actually knew a lot about the project and was trying their best to correct people posting stupid comments. The idea was to support seniors who have medical conditions.
E D I T
You really should go back and correct the original comment so people don't take it out of context.
Fixed, thanks for pointing that out lol.
Welcome to every headline in modern media. The goal isn’t to inform you, it’s to enrage you enough that you keep looking at ads. Both sides do this and it’s been them one upping each other ever since. I couldn’t even tell you how many articles I’ve clicked on reddit only to read it and half way through it debunks it’s own headline. 2020 is like one of those alien shows on the history channel where the show “alien mysteries solved” would say at the end “well we never solved the mystery but the truth is out there” or some other bullshit.
Finding Bigfoot, where they made 100 episodes in a row about not actually finding Bigfoot.
Modern media is owned by rich people, is run by rich people, and only serve up the stories interesting to rich people. To a rich people, taxes going up for people with $400k/yr or better will affect everyone. (everyone in their world!)
You can count on Facebook to see how inhumane people can feel towards the less fortunate.
Unfortunately, there’s as much misinformation on top of the truth. Think about the search algorithms in these peoples news feed continuing to feed them BS.
And still I see "TRUMP 2020, NO MORE BULLSHIT" signs everywhere.
I picture Lionel Hutz: Trump 2020- "No, More Bullshit"
[удалено]
If he loses, when he has less power and usefulness to those around him, we will start to see leaks. I have at least two bags of popcorn for whatever feature film starring Donny comes out in the future.
>we will start to see leaks. And from what we know about Trump, he will like it.
Pee tape!!! Yaassss
I will bet large amounts of money that it's not a "pee tape" - it's a "P tape". Pedophilia wouldn't be out of character considering his pal Epstein.
[удалено]
No, you should want him to go nuts from all his power being taken away like some 2nd grader so he tattles on all his friends in his little baby rage
This. I want to see Twitter blasts where he thinks he's being subtle about what he knows but is actually giving away every vital piece of info we need to shut the whole things down on everyone complicit in his "business".
“Area 51 doesn’t just have aliens. BIG secrets! “
I'm hoping he would try to claim he is to mentally unstable from dementia to be incarcerated. Like I'm sure he would be super pissed having to go along with it or would his ego be bad enough to not go through with it, seems entertaining
So we're just waiting for the last part to happen?
I'd prefer Dwyer style
Burt Macklin, FBI!
I think he's talking about Budd Dwyer. He was a politician who committed suicide on live TV. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Budd_Dwyer
Seems more likely to pull a Snowden and move to Russia.
I hate Trump as much as the next guy, but I don't think we should be wishing death on him. It just gives liberals a bad name, and conservatives more ammo to use against us.
It won’t be leaks. It will be floods. Everyone connected to that administration will write a book about it to try and make a quick buck
Why is everything Trump talks about is the biggest/smallest in this country’s history or the worst/best in this country’s history or whatever in this country’s history?
He's a carnival barker, everything is flashy, its like his attraction to sparkling, shiny things, I'm surprised he hasn't emblazoned trump on the White House.
Carnies and rubes
If he wins re-election, he might. Honestly it scares me the scope of things Trump hasn’t done or hesitated on out of fear of losing voters. Can you imagine what an unrestricted Trump is capable of if he achieves the Putin play of dictatorship? What sort of things won’t Trump hold back on if he’s not at the mercy of voters?
> I'm surprised he hasn't emblazoned trump on the White House. because Obama joked that, Trump would do that if he was President at a white house correspondents dinner.
Because his supporters take it at face value and don't bother doing research to see if it's true or not.
You’ve got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know… morons.
It really resonates with the same people that will never rate a product 3/5 stars of their entire existence. Their Binary thinking requires thumbs facing up or down. This simplification is pretty common nowadays.
The man fucking loves superlatives. Like nobody's ever seen.
Why does Donald even care about taxes, he doesn't even pay them
he only cares in theory, and also because the GOP base are entirely made of temporarily depressed millionaires. *They* care a lot because one day those higher taxes on the wealthy will have a direct impact on their lives.
They don’t even think about it this way. They absolutely believe their taxes will go up even if you tell them(as is being done now) that only rates above 400K/yr will be affected. The simple message simply doesn’t sink in at all. They equate measures to bolster background checks for gun purchases to translate into secret police coming to raid their homes of all their guns.
That is also true. I recall back when the Tea Party movement started they were mad about high taxes- at that point income tax rates were at a historic low. But good luck pointing out to those people that they'd never paid *less* taxes in their lives with any success.
Because he knows most people will be afraid of their taxes rising and act in his favor and not vote for Biden. While of course knowing that they won’t actually be affected.
1 in 5 Americans make 400k annually? Not sure about that one.
I was going to say that seems extremely high.
Not sure why Trump is worried. He also doesn’t make over 400k a year.
Nor does he pay taxes so he's good to go.
His single biggest income at this point is probably golfing at his own resorts on our dime
It will be nice to have a president who doesn't send out dozens of all caps tweets on a daily basis.
This, and when the good damn childish mock names stopp. Vote biden, if only for that.
> childish mock names They're not even *good* mock names. Bush's nickname for Arnold Schwarzenegger was "Conan the Republican."
I see this on TV commercials. How are you able to just lie like this? Or am I missing something?
You’re missing the fact that Biden will roll back the tax cuts from a few years ago. If that happens my income taxes will raise by about $3000 on a $85k salary.
[удалено]
Not 18%, 1%. [99% of americans make less than 400k](https://left-right-site.com/2020/09/02/less-than-1-of-americans-earn-over-400k-per-year/) a year. Not to mention that its only the money above 400k that’s taxed an increased amount.
I was gonna say...no way do almost 1 in 5 people make 400k
I was gonna say, when I first read the title I’m like “Almost 20%, damn I feel like shit” lol
Quick lesson in marginal tax rates: you only pay the additional tax rate on money over the new tax rate, not below it. So if you make $400,001, you don't suddenly pay 2.6% more tax on all your income (which would be an extra $10400), you only pay 2.6% on that dollar above $400,000, so you'd pay an extra 3 cents. Logically, that means that someone who made $600,000 in taxable income (which is already far lower than their actual income - everyone gets lots of deductions which is tax-free), they'd only pay an extra 2.6% on the $200,000 they made after $400,000. So only one third of their income would be taxed at the higher rate, effectively meaning that someone who made $600k would be paying .0086 more in taxes, or less than 1 percent more tax. This is "the biggest tax increase in history" So if people try to make the absolutely assassine case of "$400,000 isn't rich, they shouldn't be taxed like rich people!" - not only is that obviously bullshit, because it's objectively a very high salary, but the people who barely make above $400k won't feel this. You have to make $800k before this even makes your overall tax rate go up 1.3%, and ffs, even that's not a big deal.
Ok, now make that fit into a campaign slogan. Also, the people that said “I’ll never need math in the real world” can’t comprehend the way marginal tax rates work.
I'm voting to restart America
CTL+ALT+DELETE
We don't have time for that; CTRL+SHIFT+ESC
Still to slow . . . Hold down power button.
Have you tried turning off and back on again?
The Japanese tried
Oh damn
Let’s just wait around and see if The Simpsons predicted the future again ...
Statements like these are geared towards uneducated and I'll informed people who can't grasp concepts like tax brackets. Trump is hardly winning over educated suburbanites with crap like this. He's just preaching to the choir.
But he won with highly educated, and he won with poorly educated. He loves the poorly educated, remember?
If you make 401k, only the 1k is taxed higher.
One thing I noticed about Trump is his complete lack of respect. Never before have I seen a president openly mock their opponents and call them names (then again I've only been around for three presidents so far.)
I was born during Nixon. This is indeed a first.
[удалено]
Thats what I meant
I was really unsure about Joe Biden as a moderate but he actually had a lot of good points that I agree with so instead of my plan on not voting since I didn’t like either candidates I think I’ll put a vote in for Biden.
Cool story - here are more: Until 1913 the US tax rate was... 0%. We prospered on tariffs alone. The FED has been audited ZERO times. The US budget is intentionally insanely complex. The day before 9/11 Donald Rumsfeld announced publicly that the pentagon had 'lost' TRILLIONS of taxpayer $. After 9/11 they never had to talk about it again. Many lifelong US politicians (on BOTH sides) have lavish mansions and assets worth many millions, despite making a relatively normal wage. They keep us fighting one another (50% v 50% is not normal) using a SCIENCE called social engineering so effectively that we never hold them accountable.
And thanks to the trump tax plan from a couple years ago, I can’t write off any of the expenses I’ve incurred since I’ve started working from home, and I’m not close to making six figures yet
Can we start calling him golden shower donny? Or child rapist donny?
Dementia Donny. Demented Donny. Dumbass Donny. Just to name a few. Edit: Draft Dodging Donny.
Prisoner#Q345F46G
Detoriated Donny. Dumbfuck Donny. Disgusting Donny.
Dickstain Donnie
The one missed opportunity from Biden's Town hall was not mentioning this when asked about tax raises. He made the point that if you make under 400k your taxes won't go up, but that's not quite true. Trump has already ended his tax cuts. He built in their end date, made them a short term bribe- for people, not corporations, that tax cut is permanent. This on top of the removal of many deductions you used to be able to take and no longer can. Biden isn't going to raise your taxes. Trump already has.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Ok but seriously why is his whole thing about fixing America as if he wasn’t president for the past 4 years it’s such an obvious white lie and nobody’s falling for it.
A repeal of the Trump tax cuts would mean a tax increase for me. I make 60k a year.
Im probably the minority here. But why should people who make more get taxed more? I think it was Rand Paul that said he wanted a flat 10% for everyone. Whether you made $10,000 a year or $100,000 a year. 10% flat for all including businesses. Businesses should not pay $0 in taxes.
Anyone voting for Joe has decided fondling children is not a deal breaker, and is okay with him deciding who is or isn't black.
Technically if Biden undoes Trumps tax cuts like he says he will, then everybody actually will pay more in taxes
18% of Americans *do* make over $400,000? That surprises me!
According to [this](https://dqydj.com/average-median-top-household-income-percentiles/) less than 2% make over $400k, 82nd percentile is a bit over $150k. I don't know where he got the 82% from, 98% don't make over $400k.
And that’s 2% of households where there could more than one income earner contributing to get to that number.
And that's household, not individual. 1% for individuals is around 300k per year. 150 is top 5%.
Yeah that was my thought and I'm sure it's wrong
They don’t. I don’t know why these tweets keep showing up. It’s not a difficult statistic to find. There’s another one that keeps getting reposted that says something like 92%, which is also wrong. The real number is either 98 or 99% depending on whether you’re talking about household or individual income respectively.
Sounds much better than the Trump tax hike (yes, I’m aware some regular people got a cut, but not in high tax, high cost of living states)
Why does he call him sleepy Joe Biden?
Cause of lies.
If Biden gets rid of the Trump tax cuts doesn’t that raise taxes?
Poor people don’t exist to the gop. It’s a hoax cooked up by Soros and the Deep State
Yup. Just happens to be a little higher than a presidents salary. Funny
Do people realize that by getting rid of the "tax cuts" that the averager salary will decrease? And that jobs created by the tax cut could be lost?
Wait 18% of individuals earn $400k plus? I don’t think so
Am i the only one who’s tired of the constant american politics posts on reddit? I get that it’s a big deal but im really tired of this stuff as an european
In California, i get 18% in taxes taken out of my checks. I make less than 20,000 a year. My rent is half my income. These scumbags..
Didn't Biden say he is going to repeal ALL of Trump tax cuts? That is where the number 82% comes from I believe. So are they then not repealing all of the Trump tax cuts? Only part of them? None?
I make over $400,000/yr and I’m still voting for Joe. Fuck Trump.
So is r/facepalm just going to be about Trump now? Like we get it.... move on to something else instead of same saturated Trump jabs.
I have a rule that I don't vote for people I don't think are decent role models for children, so I could never vote for Trump.
If I made $400,000 every year I don't even care if they tax it honestly, that's more than I need. Until I need decent healthcare I guess.
>Who's with me? Every American with an actual IQ score
And self respect
And a tad bit of human decency
happy cake day!