Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I think bothers some people here is that it doesn’t fit their narrative that a couple whom see themselves in aren’t as rich as they ‘should be.’ Surely this man could have obtained more than your combined 350k pay or whatever, or your husband’s pay at a second tier law firm. The Judge chose to have intellectually challengeing jobs that will place him in the history books. By contrast, you will toil away in obscurity, worrying about things like OBX decals and what they mean.

I don’t think anyone is critizing his career choice. The issues are his stupid financial decisions to live beyond his means and the question of who paid off the debt he was carrying for years. We expect more from a Supreme Court nominee.

No, the issue is you are an idiot and won't acknowledge that he as of 2006, at age 41, he was appointed to a golden parachute retirement. He knew that even if he simply maintained the status quo, he could spend what he wanted because his retirement was in the bag. He didn't even need the TSP. That's a bonus and perfectly reasonable to borrow from in his enviable position of financial security.

Why would he save more and be a penny pincher? Is this virtuous to you? Hoarding money you dont need? Did he run up debt he couldn't pay back? Nope. Did he have to go on welfare to feed himself? Nope. Did he use the public school system? Nope. Did he pay his taxes? Yes. What makes you think he lives beyond his means? We are reading the same article, correct? It says he paid off all his revolving debt. Do you have insider information that this debt is in collections?

Starting in 2006, he was on a fixed income and he lived beyond it. He's still on a fixed income. Let's see if he can live within his means. He hasn't shown that yet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or basics like how much you’d need to save in order to generate $220k annually!

TEST: how much does one need to save in order to generate $220k (gross) annually in retirement. Bonus If you factor in adding tax responsibility (how much you need to have $220k NET annually).

Extra bonus: how many of you have this saved?

Except once the house is paid off and the kids are grown and gone (all pre-retirement) most people do not need to match their annual salary in retirement, or anything near it. Clearly the bulk of his salary is going toward his mortgage and kids' expenses.

Presuming he'll stay on the bench another 20 years, which is likely, then the above will apply. With a generous pension, and his current key expenses done with, he's in okay shape. I do hope he has life insurance though.
I'm not sure about your math. His house is decades away from being paid off and his kids are nowhere near being grown/done with college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he's more the norm than people would like to admit in DC. $300K income but house-poor with a $1.2 MM home in Chevy Chase and private school tuition. His parents were typical white-collar in CC as well. He likely had student loans that were paid off, so he didn't start saving for retirement until later (thus the $500K TSP). He has wealthy friends and a slight desire to keep up with the Joneses (see said house and the expensive baseball tickets). I think he's pretty typical.

“Kavanaugh has a government retirement account worth nearly half a million dollars.” At age 53, he doesn’t even have $500k in his TSP—“nearly” means anything from $450k to $499k. This guy has been doing it all wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I think bothers some people here is that it doesn’t fit their narrative that a couple whom see themselves in aren’t as rich as they ‘should be.’ Surely this man could have obtained more than your combined 350k pay or whatever, or your husband’s pay at a second tier law firm. The Judge chose to have intellectually challengeing jobs that will place him in the history books. By contrast, you will toil away in obscurity, worrying about things like OBX decals and what they mean.

I don’t think anyone is critizing his career choice. The issues are his stupid financial decisions to live beyond his means and the question of who paid off the debt he was carrying for years. We expect more from a Supreme Court nominee.

No, the issue is you are an idiot and won't acknowledge that he as of 2006, at age 41, he was appointed to a golden parachute retirement. He knew that even if he simply maintained the status quo, he could spend what he wanted because his retirement was in the bag. He didn't even need the TSP. That's a bonus and perfectly reasonable to borrow from in his enviable position of financial security.

Why would he save more and be a penny pincher? Is this virtuous to you? Hoarding money you dont need? Did he run up debt he couldn't pay back? Nope. Did he have to go on welfare to feed himself? Nope. Did he use the public school system? Nope. Did he pay his taxes? Yes. What makes you think he lives beyond his means? We are reading the same article, correct? It says he paid off all his revolving debt. Do you have insider information that this debt is in collections?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I think bothers some people here is that it doesn’t fit their narrative that a couple whom see themselves in aren’t as rich as they ‘should be.’ Surely this man could have obtained more than your combined 350k pay or whatever, or your husband’s pay at a second tier law firm. The Judge chose to have intellectually challengeing jobs that will place him in the history books. By contrast, you will toil away in obscurity, worrying about things like OBX decals and what they mean.

I don’t think anyone is critizing his career choice. The issues are his stupid financial decisions to live beyond his means and the question of who paid off the debt he was carrying for years. We expect more from a Supreme Court nominee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The difference in public vs. private sector.

Seems typical of my friends in the public sector.

I have dozens of friends in the public sector and exactly zero of them would raid their retirement for an entertainment expense. Give me a break.

And exactly ZERO of them are like Kavanaugh, a district judge who will be collecting a LIFETIME benefit of 225k in annual pension, now raised to 255k. Even a 2M tSP is nowhere near the value of a lifetime pension of 225k.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being a Supreme Court Justice with a lifetime pension is not something he has been planning on his whole working life. So moving forward he does not have to worry, he got lucky, otherwise their savings did not really appear to be on track. Hopefully he carries significant life insurance.

He became a district judge in 2006, at age 41. He's been planning at least that long. Same pension benefit. Same lifetime appointment.

Next.

FALSE. He became a Circuit Court Judge. So your statement is FALSE.

Huh? What’s the difference?

You don’t know the difference between federal district courts and appellate courts?

I do. But I don’t know the differences in re pay and pension. Since such difference, if any, is material to the FALSE poster’s point being a sound one (no differences or circuit court judges being paid more would actually make said post fully idiotic) I want to know what they are.

The false part was that it was alleged he was a district court judge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure, but it looks like he’ll get his Suoreme Court full salary, for life, with 15 years service on the Court (plus his other pension, I guess). By then, I would guess the salary will be close to 300k and more of he’s Chief. If he retires then, and assuming the US is still a functioning country with its institutions and democratic values intact (I assume nothing in life) he can seek employment with a firm and take care of any and all money needs in a couple years.

Good financial planning then, to plan to be a Supreme Court justice. We should all emulate him.

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure, but it looks like he’ll get his Suoreme Court full salary, for life, with 15 years service on the Court (plus his other pension, I guess). By then, I would guess the salary will be close to 300k and more of he’s Chief. If he retires then, and assuming the US is still a functioning country with its institutions and democratic values intact (I assume nothing in life) he can seek employment with a firm and take care of any and all money needs in a couple years.

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure, but it looks like he’ll get his Suoreme Court full salary, for life, with 15 years service on the Court (plus his other pension, I guess). By then, I would guess the salary will be close to 300k and more of he’s Chief. If he retires then, and assuming the US is still a functioning country with its institutions and democratic values intact (I assume nothing in life) he can seek employment with a firm and take care of any and all money needs in a couple years.