What % are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh makes what 'these lawyers' that are always on here bragging about make. They think every other profession is a piece of sh*t and must be low-paying. FWIW, it ain't so hard to get a law degree. They are a dime a dozen. I work in a scientific field where our agency pays for law school. Countless engineers, biotech, chemists, etc. who have gone nights to GW, Georgetown, American law, etc. and were top of their class and passed Bar right away. They joke about how much easier it is then their own field. I get sick of the DC-lawyer attitutde that permeates this board.

I think DCUM needs a list of stipulations. On a thread a couple months back it was fairly "established" and "agreed" that engineering and other technical/science degrees were much harder/more work than what it took to obtain a law degree. I remember the thread because I almost failed out of a second tier engineering school (not really but not stellar either) and went on to graduate 3rd in my law school class at a top 20 law school -- and never missed any sleep. Law school was a breeze compared to engineering.

I think I started that one after reading boastful after boatful BigLaw big-mouth going on and on about how wonderful they were. I agree. It's a little known fact for us scientists. Actually, the analytical mind of scientists is one of the reason they excel at law/find it easy. Chemists make great cooks too.

The problem with scientists is a lack of social skills that they can use in business.

This is a poor stereotype. Signed, an IP lawyer (with a phD and JD)

Nope. I work with tons of PH.Ds who can't write a one page explanation of something in layman's terms and don't understand business nuances whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh makes what 'these lawyers' that are always on here bragging about make. They think every other profession is a piece of sh*t and must be low-paying. FWIW, it ain't so hard to get a law degree. They are a dime a dozen. I work in a scientific field where our agency pays for law school. Countless engineers, biotech, chemists, etc. who have gone nights to GW, Georgetown, American law, etc. and were top of their class and passed Bar right away. They joke about how much easier it is then their own field. I get sick of the DC-lawyer attitutde that permeates this board.

I think DCUM needs a list of stipulations. On a thread a couple months back it was fairly "established" and "agreed" that engineering and other technical/science degrees were much harder/more work than what it took to obtain a law degree. I remember the thread because I almost failed out of a second tier engineering school (not really but not stellar either) and went on to graduate 3rd in my law school class at a top 20 law school -- and never missed any sleep. Law school was a breeze compared to engineering.

I think I started that one after reading boastful after boatful BigLaw big-mouth going on and on about how wonderful they were. I agree. It's a little known fact for us scientists. Actually, the analytical mind of scientists is one of the reason they excel at law/find it easy. Chemists make great cooks too.

The problem with scientists is a lack of social skills that they can use in business.

This is a poor stereotype. Signed, an IP lawyer (with a phD and JD)

Nope. I work with tons of PH.Ds who can't write a one page explanation of something in layman's terms and don't understand business nuances whatsoever.

I work with a ton of lawyers that are the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add, so while it may be hard to make that much, it's not hard to "*imagine* making that much.

Is it hard for you to *imagine* living on $43,000/year? Because 50% of the households in the country make LESS than $43k.

No, it's not hard for me to imagine living on $43K. The average person in the US doesn't even go to college.

Plenty of people go to college (and even grad school) and make less than 43K - and yes, even in this area!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have people forgotten that the tax code includes deductions for mortgage interest, dependents, real estate tax, health insurance, dependent care, etc? So yah, your $250K a year doesn't go as far here as it might elsewhere-but you also get potentially larger deductions so you're getting taxed on alert total income. And people with large families likewise have more deductions. Plus the higher rates only affect the top end of the earnings, so it's not likely that people on the edge of 99% with their gross income would be affected.

Deductions phase out in the higher income brackets. We have no mortgage. Who gets a deduction for health insurance (?)

All federal employees for one. Insurance premiums are Pre-tax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add, so while it may be hard to make that much, it's not hard to "*imagine* making that much.

Is it hard for you to *imagine* living on $43,000/year? Because 50% of the households in the country make LESS than $43k.

No, it's not hard for me to imagine living on $43K. The average person in the US doesn't even go to college.

Exactly. And the average price of a NEW single family home in the US in 2010 was $273K. So you show me where I can buy my average, new, single family home for 273K and I'll be happy to imagine living on 43K.


Now in DC the median was 85K. But I'd still take that after you show me the average, new, single family home I can buy for 550K anywhere in the DC area.

[Anonymous]

why is everyone entitled to a new home?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add, so while it may be hard to make that much, it's not hard to "*imagine* making that much.

Is it hard for you to *imagine* living on $43,000/year? Because 50% of the households in the country make LESS than $43k.

No, it's not hard for me to imagine living on $43K. The average person in the US doesn't even go to college.

Exactly. And the average price of a NEW single family home in the US in 2010 was $273K. So you show me where I can buy my average, new, single family home for 273K and I'll be happy to imagine living on 43K.

Now in DC the median was 85K. But I'd still take that after you show me the average, new, single family home I can buy for 550K anywhere in the DC area.

Not the PP. But there are plenty of homes for under 273K and 550K. They may not be mcmansions, but they are there.

I've grown to accept that I will never make above 60-70K as long as I am working in my field. It's likely that I'll be in the 40K-50K for a while. Yet somehow, we'll survive.

[Anonymous]

82% but it sure doesn't feel like it....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all due respect, why is family size not taken into consideration in the calculator?

A GS-15 supporting himself vs a GS-15 supporting a family of 10 is a huge difference.

Seriously Dude, do you know any GS-15s with families that large? I am a GS-15 with a father that was a GS-15. Generally, these types are too damn smart to have that many children. Education/intelligence is usually an inverse relationship.

Yikes, that's rude.

Ivy grad attorney.

Actually, he supports 11.

And I still hold the calculator to be almost meaningless when it does not account for how many people that income supports.

What is so difficult for you to understand about this? It simply tells you how your income compares to the rest of the country. Nothing more, nothing less. It's not intended to be a commentary on the lifestyle of someone at a certain percentile.

But the thing is, it is being USED that way...as a way to describe how those making above a certain percentage of the rest of the country should be paying more in taxes b/c they have so much extra that it shouldn't be a burden to them. But what we are saying is that it WILL be a burden to many of us in the top 98 or 99%. So that should be taken in consideration. Think about folks living in NYC..and not necessarily just Manhattan. The argument that all of us who live in Metro areas where the housing is expensive are making a "choice" to live there is ridiculous. There are jobs to be done here. We are stepping up to do them. Someone must, after all. And while lots of them pay more to compensate for the extra cost, many do not and most don't come close to paying enough extra that it closes the gap on cost of living vs say, Hartford or Pittsburgh. So while we do have 'fringe' benefits to living in a nice metro area such as arts, culture, etc. Many, if not most of us can't afford to really take advantage b/c of the cost of living wiping out so much of our disposable income. Although we are lucky that here in DC, museums are free, those in NY, Boston, LA and San Fran aren't so lucky. So while to some degree, yes, it is a "choice" not all of us have the option of just picking up and finding work in a more affordable city. So I believe that if you are going to foist more tax burden on folks based on income, you should factor in what that income means to different folks in different places. And yes, it should consider family size, too. Otherwise, it amounts to penalizing folks for having children.

Precisely. The dedctuons I take for my children automatically push me into the Alternative Minimum Tax, because those deductions are treated the same as if I were makin things up to avoid taxes. This penalizes us about $2K, which really hurts a GS-15 family of 11.

Dependents should be their own category of deductions.

I H8 the AMT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:99%, but I can't believe I have somehow been equated to greed and corruption in the news. I work a million hours a week taking care of patients, and I make a good salary, as does my husband. It actually feels terrible to see that the other 99% somehow all of sudden thinks we are terrible people. I know I shouldn't care, but I watch in amazement when I watch the news and see people protesting - and realize they're protesting against me!

Do you think your taxes should be lowered? Do you think you're insufficiently honored by the rest of society? If not, then you're not a schmuck or "terrible people." Otherwise, you poor, poor put-upon darling! You remind me of the narcissitic drama queens who complain that "the rich white male is the only person you can discriminate against any more!"

It's a very, very common bit of ju-jitsu for the more self-absorbed members of various over-classes through history to cast themselves in the role of the victim. "Black people want to end housing discrimination? Oh, so I suppose *I'm* the bad guy?!?" "Gays are coming out of the closet? Pardon me for having a traditional marriage!"

I'm sure this must be very, very difficult to process, but sometimes it's not about *you*.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why is everyone entitled to a new home?

exactly.

I have 2 college degrees and was making just shy of $50K when I left my full time job. My husband makes just shy of 6 figures right now, but more than $85K. On a combined income in the low 6 figures, we wouldn't even TRY to buy a $550K home. We bought a 40-year old SFH in the 22033 zip (Fairfax/Chantilly) that needed work for $450K. We luckily were still up on the TH we bought when we made $85K combined, and had that money for a down payment and some renovations.

Not everyone is entitled to a brand new gigantic home. You have to make choices and trade offs. If we made the same income and worked downtown, we would have had to make further tradeoffs.

I do have to laugh at the people who complain their house is ONLY 2000 sf. Our 4 BR SFH is 2200 and feels HUGE to us. We almost bought one in the same neighborhood that was one room smaller and just less than 2000 and was plenty of space for a family of 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah huffington post and communist news network 2 realiable new sources

This thread is pretty revealing in more ways than one. There are a lot of people out there with a seriously out-of-whack sense of perspective. Sorry, but anyone who thinks CNN is somehow intrinsically left-of-center is either a child, or a frothing lunatic. The "C" in CNN stands for "children's", not "communist." You need to get out of the bunker a bit more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add, so while it may be hard to make that much, it's not hard to "*imagine* making that much.

Is it hard for you to *imagine* living on $43,000/year? Because 50% of the households in the country make LESS than $43k.

No, it's not hard for me to imagine living on $43K. The average person in the US doesn't even go to college.

Exactly. And the average price of a NEW single family home in the US in 2010 was $273K. So you show me where I can buy my average, new, single family home for 273K and I'll be happy to imagine living on 43K.

Now in DC the median was 85K. But I'd still take that after you show me the average, new, single family home I can buy for 550K anywhere in the DC area.

Not the PP. But there are plenty of homes for under 273K and 550K. They may not be mcmansions, but they are there.

I've grown to accept that I will never make above 60-70K as long as I am working in my field. It's likely that I'll be in the 40K-50K for a while. Yet somehow, we'll survive.

Really? You show me where in the DC metro area there are NEW (not existing) single family (not townhouses) for sale for under 273 or 550K. That's what the stats are saying. So if you can find this in the DC metro area (not Frederick, not Fredericksburg) I'll go get my checkbook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:why is everyone entitled to a new home?

exactly.

I have 2 college degrees and was making just shy of $50K when I left my full time job. My husband makes just shy of 6 figures right now, but more than $85K. On a combined income in the low 6 figures, we wouldn't even TRY to buy a $550K home. We bought a 40-year old SFH in the 22033 zip (Fairfax/Chantilly) that needed work for $450K. We luckily were still up on the TH we bought when we made $85K combined, and had that money for a down payment and some renovations.

Not everyone is entitled to a brand new gigantic home. You have to make choices and trade offs. If we made the same income and worked downtown, we would have had to make further tradeoffs.

I do have to laugh at the people who complain their house is ONLY 2000 sf. Our 4 BR SFH is 2200 and feels HUGE to us. We almost bought one in the same neighborhood that was one room smaller and just less than 2000 and was plenty of space for a family of 4.

Thank you for your post. That straw-man needed a good thrashing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meant to add, so while it may be hard to make that much, it's not hard to "*imagine* making that much.

Is it hard for you to *imagine* living on $43,000/year? Because 50% of the households in the country make LESS than $43k.

No, it's not hard for me to imagine living on $43K. The average person in the US doesn't even go to college.

Exactly. And the average price of a NEW single family home in the US in 2010 was $273K. So you show me where I can buy my average, new, single family home for 273K and I'll be happy to imagine living on 43K.

Now in DC the median was 85K. But I'd still take that after you show me the average, new, single family home I can buy for 550K anywhere in the DC area.

Not the PP. But there are plenty of homes for under 273K and 550K. They may not be mcmansions, but they are there.

I've grown to accept that I will never make above 60-70K as long as I am working in my field. It's likely that I'll be in the 40K-50K for a while. Yet somehow, we'll survive.

Really? You show me where in the DC metro area there are NEW (not existing) single family (not townhouses) for sale for under 273 or 550K. That's what the stats are saying. So if you can find this in the DC metro area (not Frederick, not Fredericksburg) I'll go get my checkbook.

Funny how the PP said there were homes in that range, and you came back with "new" and "single family (not townhouses)". Why not just add "with a boat dock and within walking distance to fabulous restaurants"?