https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/a...ing-on-500-000-a-year-in-income-can-seem-hard If you are too lazy to read, the gist of the article is "people with an income of 500k are doing ok" and they should have nothing to complain about (the underlying implication is that we can safely raise taxes on that stratum). Here is a rough breakdown of the budget for one of my coworkers who roughly takes home that much. First, Uncle Sam (Federal, State, City) takes his 35-45 percent, leaving him with roughly 300 grand. Private school for his two kids is probably anywhere from 60 to 100 thousand a year (not sure where they go, but more if it's a "good place" like the Lycée Français de New York). Then you have the mortgage (let's say 60k a year) and the maintenance/taxes on the property (another 25-30) which now he can't even deduct from his taxes (unlike cocaine, a legitimate business expense that he's not even trying to deduct). Before you know it, he's left with 150k to live on and the New York City is pretty FUCKING EXPENSIVE. This is before he set a single penny aside for his retirement. He certainly does not feel rich or even well-off. The other bit that the author is forgetting is how fleeting the success is in almost every business. There was a study that about 10% of people reach the top 1% by income at least once in their lives. If you can't set aside much in those years, it really sucks.
It's not rational, to put, the part of pie for uncle sam, in the same plate, as private schools & mortgage. Where's one, having no kids & free of mortgage, use those $160 000, for , value investing, let's say. Or - having kids, but instead of private school, the father brings the role, of mentor, to(?) his child/children, as, Aristotel did with Alexander, ( returns on furfilment of life - 110% guaranteed ) and instead of huge mortage, living in a cozy, minimalistic place. Or maybe, i got it from completely wrong perspective, while wine from chile, might clouded my mind. ( then my sincere apologies, - if so )
Obviously I don't know what he's paying so this was an approximation. My assumption was a 1.5 million apartment that a 2k-2.5k a month maintenance and taxes; with a 4.5% mortgage, he'd be paying 8.5k a month.
Who is more rich, the man who needs to please his boss (real boss, wife, kids) and makes $500K or the man who pleases himself and makes $100K?
Exactly. Close pal of mine that makes 400k per year with kids also in private school... He recently bought a new car, a 2018 Toyota Corolla and the ex wife drives a new Mercedez Benz GLC. Also, she goes to college to better herself so that she can have a career...he's partially paying for that too via a court order. He lives in a nice apartment and the ex wife have their nice house. Him and I recently had lunch together for some sushi and he wanted to make sure I was picking up the tab. I reminded him to next time marry a rich girl. wrbtrader
I support the idea of fair taxation, regardless of income, but none of what you mention here is what I’d consider a bare minimum necessity. With two kids, he can live in a cheaper 2BR condo far outside the city and commute, and can also send his kids to a safe public school. He can deduct the under 10k mortgage interest on his less expensive property. He’s living beyond his means IMO. Ten years of minimalism and sacrifice will reap great rewards for his family, if his wife doesn’t divorce him before that