this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
77 points (97.5% liked)

Personal Finance

3824 readers
1 users here now

Learn about budgeting, saving, getting out of debt, credit, investing, and retirement planning. Join our community, read the PF Wiki, and get on top of your finances!

Note: This community is not region centric, so if you are posting anything specific to a certain region, kindly specify that in the title (something like [USA], [EU], [AUS] etc.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago (12 children)

Almost like the wealthy should be taxed 90% and healthcare should be free, and rent should be strictly regulated, and everyone should have a labor union.

[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

How about this. If you make it to a net worth of $1 Billion, we get you a nice gold plaque that says, "Congratulations! You have won capitalism." Then, any income you earn after that is taxed at 100%.

[–] r_thndr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Income and net worth are different concepts though. You can have a car and be too broke to buy gas.

[–] jubilationtcornpone@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I think you might be failing to envision just how much money a billion dollars is. If your net worth (Assets - Liabilities + Equity) = one billion dollars, you are among the wealthiest of the wealthiest people in the world.

Now, that probably isn't all just sitting in investments. I'll be very conservative and say half of it is. If you earned 4% annually on that $500M, which is a pretty decent average, you would gross $20 Million.

I don't know about you, but if I had $20 Million, I would never have to work another day for the rest of my life. You see where I'm going with this?

[–] notfromhere@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wouldn’t the $20 Million be subject to the 100% income tax at that point, meaning the net worth billionaire wouldn’t be able to earn any income as it’s all taxed away?

[–] spamellama@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Sure, but let's say they spent 20m. Then their net worth would be under a billion and the next couple of years of earnings would have a lower tax rate.

Even if they never were able to make money again, 20m goes into a billion 50 times. They could overspend for 50 years without making a cent on investments.

I'm sure they'd come up with fun new accounting loopholes though so their assets didn't appear to increase.

[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You can always move to a town in Greece, in the mainland (something smaller than 5k people), close to the beach. You can live amply with 20k euros per year (about $22k) for you and your spouse. Buying a house is about $100k to $150k, taxes are rather low for most professions, and you can have your own vegetable garden, trees, and chickens. Fresh fish, goat meat (best kind of meat for humans). Car repairs and other repairs are much cheaper than in the US (my husband was expecting a $2500 bill to replace the car engine's chain, and it was just $600).

If you're in your 30s right now, and you're going to live until you're 100, that's "only" 1.4 million euros. If you get a couple of kids, that's 1.8 to 2 mil euros. Definitely not 20 million though.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yes, of course. There's even a treaty to not be double-taxed.

[–] eugenia@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago

Also, healthcare is free (in the public hospitals, they also have dentists in there), and education is free.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Then, any income you earn after that is taxed at 100%.

For the rest of your life!

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Steve@communick.news 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

It's a long-standing theme. Thomas Pikettey claims that, throughout the 20th century, about 50% of people own nothing, 40% own their "stuff" - house & car - and 10% own everything else. And, really, that it's even just the top 2-3% who own the vast majority of that everything-else, except for a brief window after world wars destroyed all the capital, and temporarily put the world into a slightly less unequal condition.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If you consider yourself broke and would like help, please make a post here. I and many others would love to help, but we need some information, such as:

  • household income
  • monthly expenses - broken down by category, like rent, utilities, groceries, restaurants, etc
  • debts - amount owed by account, type of account, interest rate, minimum payment
  • assets - value of car(s), cash, etc
  • skills/education - in case we want to explore more ways to make money

A lot of people get discouraged and believe that they're screwed, but I firmly believe there's always a way to financial stability, it just takes a lot of work and humility.

[–] iamdisillusioned@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

That's very noble of you, but in our capitalist systems, those who provide the most needed and valuable services are often paid the least. You may feel that telling someone to get better educated and moving somewhere cheaper will solve their problem, but then someone else will fill their past role. Our most expensive cities will always need janitors, line cooks, laborers, shelf stockers and many other roles that will never pay much. We can't all be coders making 6 figures working remotely from bumbfuck nowhere. This doesn't even take into account disabled people who can't provide much or any value in the eyes of our system. You basically want to tell people to bootstrap, just in a gentler way.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I'm not sure why you got up on your soapbox to put someone down like that. They didn't say any of the things you said. Their comment isn't even edited, and yours is...

load more comments (6 replies)

Um, no. I want to help people end their own cycle of poverty. There's nothing wrong with being a janitor, line cook, etc, and my point here isn't to push people to change their careers, but to end the paycheck to paycheck cycle and get more control over their financials. That's it.

My offer stands. If you or anyone else wants to discuss personal finance, provide some details and I or someone else here would love to lend a pair of eyes. However, if you're intent on maintaining your status quo, I guess good luck to you and I hope you find success in whatever way you choose to define it.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They're asking for info so they can help with a budget or a debt paying strategy.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

A budget is a luxury that requires a minimum amount of income. They are presuming people are just being bad with their money, and it completely sidesteps the real issue and story here that income is far too low for basic costs for a large number of people.

It reeks of "work harder" bullshit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Hahahaha. Are you preaching work harder pick yourselves up by your bootstraps?

People need to make a minimum amount of money to do that. If their housing alone is more than 50% of their income, what you are thinking won't work. The money isn't there.

Also, changing jobs and moving are luxuries that some people struggle to enjoy. Sometimes it requires money upfront, sometimes it requires education people may not have, or some people are unfairly held back with disabilities.

I think you are genuinely trying to help, but this does smell a bit of never having experienced being "in the red" poor no matter what you do. Those people have next to no options.

I'm talking like $30k in income, which far too many families deal with and is unliveable anywhere.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you're making $30k, you qualify for a ton of welfare programs throughout the country. So saying "$30k income isn't livable" doesn't make sense on its own without taking into account the various programs available. It may still be unlivable, but the income number on its own can't really determine that.

So that's why talking about expenses and skills is important. Many problems can be solved with proper budgeting, but some may need a job change to increase income. Increasing income on its own can't solve budgeting problems (i.e. "you can't outrun your fork"). Even people with middle and upper middle class incomes live paycheck to paycheck, nearly 1/3 of lottery winners go bankrupt, and nearly 80% of retired NFL players go broke. The reason behind most of those is the same thing I'm talking about: lack of personal finance education and skills.

Not all problems can be solved with budgeting and changing jobs, but a lot of them can be. That's why I recommend anyone who would like to improve their situation to reach out, more often than not a few extra pairs of eyes can help get you on track to financial security.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You sure make knowledge of and access to resources sound sooooooo simple.

I'm happy to help.

[–] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I've come to the conclusion that I will be broke for the rest of my life. Outside of a winning lottery ticket, there is no way I will ever have a day when I'm not dodging collection agencies, praying I don't get pulled over for expired tags (because I can't afford insurance), or being one missed paycheck away from homelessness.

And since cheap liquor only comes in plastic bottles (and therefore when thrown will not explode on impact), I don't see any way to change anything.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you'd like someone to review your income and expenses, I'm willing to help, and I'm sure many others are as well. Please make a post if you would like some advice.

[–] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I appreciate the offer, but my income just isn't enough to live on. I track every penny and while there are a few expenses I could cut, the money saved by depriving myself of those little luxuries wouldn't pay a single overdue bill. And after job searching for almost an entire year while unemployed, I also know there are no higher paying jobs that I'm capable of getting.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That may be, or it may not. I don't know your income, expenses, or what's reasonable in your area. However, if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got, and by your own words, what you've got isn't working for you.

If you think your income is the issue and you're having trouble finding better paying work, you should probably try something different. Talk to a career counselor, get a certification/degree, start a business, etc. There are lots of options for improving your job options, such as:

  • apprenticeship at a trade - plumbers and electricians are in high demand I hear
  • apply to drive a truck and get a CDL - I see signs in my area saying they'll pay for your training to drive, and once you get a CDL, your options expand a lot
  • night school - nursing is a big one in my area, but lots of programs exist; you may qualify for assistance as well

You can't control who will pay you, but you do control how you spend your money and your time. Getting a better paying job takes a lot more than just sending out applications, it involves being bold, following up (call places you've applied), and adjusting your resume based on the feedback you're getting (if you're not getting interviews, make some changes for the next batch of applications, and ideally tailor your resume for each job). You have nothing to lose when applying for a job (worst they can do is say no), so you might as well give it your all.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

but you _do_ control how you spend your money and your time.

This is a privileged viewpoint that doesn't realize that the poor literally have less time and less flexibility, and in a lot of cases no control over how they spend their money because it ALL goes into basic necessities like housing and food.

There's a reason they say the easiest way to get rich is to start with a lot of money. Money buys flexibility and time. When you are very poor, there is a ceiling that is near impossible to break out of without a lot of luck and some form of privilege that one may not recognize others might not have the same access to.

I broke out of that through years of turmoil in school and obscene student debts. I would not have been as able to without someone to live with who took care of me (my now wife) and had a much better job than me at the time. I also likely would never have been able to if I were a parent at the time, or more severely disabled.

I caution how easy you make it sound. It's offensive to some who literally can't "just go to night school." Time is a luxury the rich have more of than the poor.

the poor literally have less time and less flexibility

I never said it's easy, I said it's important. In fact, the harder it is to stick to a budget, the more important it is. I'm not going to preach budgeting to people who are already financially stable because that's not going to help them (I'd probably talk about investment strategies instead).

the easiest way to get rich is to start with a lot of money

It may be the easiest, but that assumes discipline. I think you're more likely to get rich if you start very little, but you're disciplined with it. Generational wealth tends to disappear after 3 generations, and a lot of that is because you're not as motivated to manage it well if you didn't earn it. If you don't believe me, look at various posts on Reddit or elsewhere where people regret wasting their inheritance, e.g. here and here, or this non-reddit story. People tend to suck at managing inherited money.

If you can manage to be financially stable, you have a lot more ability to take advantage of opportunities. Let's say a family member or friend is starting a company and needs help, but can't pay for a couple months until money starts coming in. If you have 3 months expenses saved up, you can jump on it because you know you can at least last three months. Maybe it goes bust, or maybe it ends up being a really good opportunity. But if you didn't have that safety buffer, you wouldn't be able to even try.

It's certainly not easy, but it is important. Being in debt is kind of like dealing with psychological trauma, and the steps are roughly:

  1. not relevant to personal finance IMO, we generally ignore what happened in the past
  2. validate any feelings of stress, anxiety, etc - this generally happens before asking for help online, so I tend to skip this
  3. list all of the facts (debt, regular expenses, income, skills, etc) and look at the balance - this is usually enough to spark someone to be motivated to change
  4. make a new plan that provides a surplus over necessary minimums that makes progress on debt or savings, or if that's not feasible, plan how to make more money so you can have that surplus
  5. actually execute on the plan - this is the hardest part

In most cases, becoming financially stable is possible, and sometimes it takes a second pair of eyes to see it. The whole point here is to create hope from despair, with that hope can turn into action. I firmly believe the vast majority can achieve financial stability and eventually financial independence (i.e. have the option to retire), but it takes hard work and a plan. I can't help with the hard work, but I can help with the plan.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Our entire system is designed to make people spend every dollar they make on stupid toys and other things they don't need. People make hundreds of thousands a year and spend it all in monthly payments. I know lots of "well off" people who can't survive more than a few months before being in serious financial trouble.

As long as the payments can be made it's encouraged to just buy more and more and more.

[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think most of these huge payments are not due to stupid toys, it's due to college debt, mortgages, and medical debt. I wish it was spent on toys instead.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 months ago (3 children)

For some that's true, but go count the number of trailers, ATVs, watercraft and other toys that way too many people have. Same goes for cars and houses. Buy the most expensive stuff you can so you can stay ahead of your friends!

[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 months ago

The sad thing is that a nice toy is like 5% of the cost of 4 years of college tuition these days.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago

It's hard to feel financially secure when the big 3 expenses keep rising faster than inflation: Housing, college, and medical expenses, the latter of which is unexpected.

If only those 3 expenses were reasonable, then we would have more money to spend on things we like and enjoy.

[–] crawancon@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

at first glance the thumb nail looked like the box from hellraiser and I thought damn that's bleak.

load more comments
view more: next ›