The Gaming Den

Heh, I've got to agree with Frank. I have a bunch of relatives in Santa Cruz, and the only reason thay can afford it is that they've been there about 50 years. Even so, they've been steadily having to move elsewhere (Eureka, for example).

I don't get taxes, so i've got a friend accountant who does mine. I think i'll get somwhere arround 200$ this year. Go me.

Anyway, here in Croatia, there is really no way to get a tax refund unless:

• 
  
• you live on an island - we've got some 1,2K islands. The living there is shitty - no water, no medical or educational facilities, no jobs, etc... People there get big refunds.
  
• You live in the mountains above the height of 5k feet. I don't understand that one.
  
• You fought in the last war.
  
• You live in the town which got the worst beating in the war - Vukovar.
  

And as a side note, 1000$ is my two-monthly paycheck. Don't need sympathy, I'm just saying it for reference purposes.

Catharz wrote:Heh, I've got to agree with Frank.

Agree with Frank on what? That people in California, especially the Bay Area, require more money to fill their basic needs than they do here?

Duh.

I don't dispute that in the least. However, it doesn't touch my point at all. We're not even talking about the same subject.

josephbt wrote:And as a side note, 1000$ is my two-monthly paycheck.

Wow... What a difference. One of my friends is from Russia, and she talks about how her mom is lucky to get $300/month (and even luckier to actually see the check).

How does what you make compare with the people around you (if you don't mind me asking)?

Maj at [unixtime wrote:1176658725[/unixtime]]

Catharz wrote:Heh, I've got to agree with Frank.

Agree with Frank on what? That people in California, especially the Bay Area, require more money to fill their basic needs than they do here?

Duh.

I don't dispute that in the least. However, it doesn't touch my point at all. We're not even talking about the same subject.

Huh, I thought the subject was high variability in cost of living, and how that indicates that there is no set "cost of living" to use in a tax system.

[The Great Fence Builder Speaks Publically for The Last Fucking Time on this matter]

Crissa wrote:
I wasn't being rude. I didn't...refer to anyone specifically.

Bullshit.

Crissa, in response to Waesel's post wrote:
Basically, any time you hear someone (like you) talk about how unfair tax brackets are - they don't realize they're merely showing their ignorance of this basic economic rule.

Emphasis mine.

It is the hostile tone of your post that I, and others, were rankled by. I was okay with your post up until this point. It is a thinly veiled parting shot and thus unnecessary.

If you want to talk further about this, PM me.
[/TGFBS]

Catharz wrote:I thought the subject was high variability in cost of living

And I was under the impression that the discussion concerned the ability of people who make less than the median US income of $46,326 (as of 2005) to actually have 401K plans, health care plans, savings, give to charity, have tax deductions, etc, etc.

Maj at [unixtime wrote:1176661670[/unixtime]]

Catharz wrote:I thought the subject was high variability in cost of living

And I was under the impression that the discussion concerned the ability of people who make less than the median US income of $46,326 (as of 2005) to actually have 401K plans, health care plans, savings, give to charity, have tax deductions, etc, etc.

Right, which varies to some extent based on where you live. I'm not saying that people can't be smart and have control over their finances (as you apparently do).

Maj wrote:And honestly, I'm not trying to suggest that everyone should be able to get by on $1000 a month. I'm merely trying to demonstrate that it's possible.

However, what we've just demonstrated is that it is not possible in many parts of the country. You can get by on 1000 pesos a month in some parts of the world, but that's not actually possible pretty much anywhere in the United States.

Regardless, that in no way, invalidates my point that a large portion of people are poor because their poverty is in their ability to manage money and time, not in actual income.

So your point is that lots of people are stupid and you're so much better than they are because you live in a part of the country where rent is less than it elsewhere? How does that tie into taxes at all?

Or are you attempting to make the point that even very rich people often get into horrendous debt and ruin their lives doing it? If so you said that extremely badly. But if that is what you were saying, then that's one of the major arguments in favor of taxation in the first place - since maintaining a wellfare state actually allows for people to make the bad decisions and have the bad luck that we know that they are going to make and have while still not starving to death. Which is pretty sweet.

-Username17

You know, when I posted what I did, I was not aware that the median income of the US was more than $35,000. I actually thought it was lower than that. And to find out that it's $46K floored me.

You could triple my monthly expenses (insurance, rent, groceries, internet, electricity, etc, etc), and I still would be spending less money per month than the median income after taxes (assuming 20%). The idea that $46,000 a year isn't enough for people to basically function is ridiculous to me.

So yeah, I guess I am saying that lots of people are stupid, and that I'm better than they are.

How can you have an education (I assume you do since you seem smart) yet still make so relatively little?

MrWaeseL wrote:How can you have an education (I assume you do since you seem smart) yet still make so relatively little?

Technically speaking, I don't make anything. I'm a housewife. My job is to save my husband's money. We don't make that little; we just spend that little, though admittedly, beginning this month we upped our food budget to take personal health issues into consideration.

@Maj

I don't mind. Actually, i was ballparking my income in $. Now that i've used a calculator, it seems that i make 636$ a month.

Statistics say that it's an average. I do get my paycheck mostly on time(around 11-20 in the month) and none of the paychecks are missing, so i guess i'm one of the lucky ones. Sort of.

I still can't do much with that money. I live with my parents. It may sound like a looser situation, but over here it's a very common situation. Why?
Room rent(not apartment, one single room)is somewhere arround 220$, food for me would be about 300$, factor in the life insurance and my credit loan and various stuff like internet(50$), electricity and water, etc... I'm way in red.

Another job is not an option. With a 20% unemployment rate, i'm lucky to have this one.

It's not all that bad. I'm in love, i've got parents that understand my situation, i've got friends that don't quit. I'm not complaining. It'll get better.

My rent, in a highest density neighborhood, in a 50 year old complex which has not been updated to code (as most occupied buildings are not) is $1100 for two bedrooms. Most of these units are occupied by four to eight people each - there's a few two-person families (like my spouse and I) but those I can count on one hand.

In California (I'm not going to look this up for you) the poverty level is just under $40K. Gross. (that's before taxes.) 80% of the country grosses under $55K. Half the country lives in high-value blue states like mine.

It may be possible to live on $1000 a month... Did you know that Oregon, for instance, has the highest rate of people 'skipping meals' as a means to make ends meet?

It's only possible for you to live on how much you do because of work I, my parents, and others have done. It's only possible because the poorest states in the nation take in more money from the Federal Government than they spend in taxes - and the state of California gets less than it pays the federal government.

The fact is, most people in the United States of America do not live where you do. They do not live where they can pay so little for housing - do you have your parent's house? I do not. Half in the lower half do not. Most do not live where they can walk to a suburban-style grocery store, even. (Although that fact is harder to look up)

Your money and time management is so good, I'm sure. As most people in the US are not starving, they must be just as good. And obviously, you provide a large portion of the income to the Federal Government, don't you? That's why your proportion of gross income to taxes paid should be shared by all. Isn't that the argument you're making?

Irrelevant parts of the post deleted.-fbmf

-Crissa

MrWaeseL at [unixtime wrote:1176668130[/unixtime]]How can you have an education (I assume you do since you seem smart) yet still make so relatively little?

simply having an education in no way implies a job out of school. A 'good job' is damn hard to find, things work a bit different here in the good ol' US of A than in Europe dude... (I think I remember you saying you were from the Netherlands)

I had a hard enough time finding a lame blue-collar job when I was tearing myself apart when I got out of highschool, and after about 3 months of applying I was granted the great honorable opportunity of working a 3 am shift in a warehouse littered with rat feces and urine, with no heating, during the christmas season for minimum wage

...AFTER my sister-in-law had her manager put in a good word for me.

Really, i can't imagine the hoops I'll have to jump through to get a job when I'm done with Uni...

1000 a month? Que?

I've done the rough math and I would live on the shit-level for 1,000 a month if I were to basically never go out, not buy anything remotely interesting, get a really cheap apartment, and somehow pray that furniture magically appeared in my apartment when I got there.

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1176686744[/unixtime]]The fact is, most people in the United States of America do not live where you do. They do not live where they can pay so little for housing ...

Of course, you could move there. It's not like you have to live in one of the most expensive areas of the country.

Zherog at [unixtime wrote:1176692491[/unixtime]]Of course, you could move there. It's not like you have to live in one of the most expensive areas of the country.

...And then the rent there wouldn't be so low. And where would the income come from? People tend to move places because of jobs, not rent. Cost of living then goes up to try to pry the monies out of the hands of those with income, etc.

Which is why most people live where it's expensive. ...Because it's expensive because most people live there.

But this only explains why flat deductions based upon assumed average living expenses across broad swaths of varied economies is undoable.

It doesn't undermine progressive taxation.

-Crissa

Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1176698284[/unixtime]]
...And then the rent there wouldn't be so low.

Don't be so full of yourself. Rent won't go up because you move to Washington State, or Nebraska, or wherever.

Zherog at [unixtime wrote:1176698689[/unixtime]]Don't be so full of yourself. Rent won't go up because you move to Washington State, or Nebraska, or wherever.

That's the same argument people make against global warming. Littering. Pollution. Waste. Deforestation. Hunger. Disease. Racism.

Or anything peer-related. 'Well, it's just one...'

Then it's 'But x did it too...'

Everything you do has an impact. A small impact is no less an impact.

Planning on using that excuse not to pay your taxes? 'Well, it's just one...'

-Crissa

Assuming your rent has been high where you are now for some time its clear that rent imbalances don't change overnight. So if you move somewhere now it will be several years before the rent goes up.

Crissa, you're full of shit on this one. If you pack up and move to (just as an example of someplace generally thought of as inexpensive) Wyoming, I really don't think the landlord is going to say, "Oh, look, here comes Crissa! Quick - raise the rent!" And I have serious doubts the Nebraska legislature is gonna say, "Sweet! That chick from Northern California moved here. We need to implement higher taxes. She won't mind - she's used to paying California taxes."

You're free to believe whatever you want, of course. I'll opt to believe that you could move from Northern California to Nebraska or Wyoming or Washington or wherever else and the rent and taxes in both places (CA and wherever you end up) will remain unchanged.

Zherog wrote:I'll opt to believe that you could move from Northern California to Nebraska or Wyoming or Washington or wherever else and the rent and taxes in both places (CA and wherever you end up) will remain unchanged.

Not that it's really important, but I've lived here for six years and during that time, my rent has increased a total of $60 per month.

Maj at [unixtime wrote:1176744221[/unixtime]]

Zherog wrote:I'll opt to believe that you could move from Northern California to Nebraska or Wyoming or Washington or wherever else and the rent and taxes in both places (CA and wherever you end up) will remain unchanged.

Not that it's really important, but I've lived here for six years and during that time, my rent has increased a total of $60 per month.

$60 per month... each month over 6 years?

That's... a lot. I'm guessing typoe.


[edit]
Ooooh, nevermind. I need a reading hat or something that can bottle up my stupidity.

Zherog at [unixtime wrote:1176728521[/unixtime]]Crissa, you're full of shit on this one. If you pack up and move to (just as an example of someplace generally thought of as inexpensive) Wyoming, I really don't think the landlord is going to say, "Oh, look, here comes Crissa! Quick - raise the rent!" And I have serious doubts the Nebraska legislature is gonna say, "Sweet! That chick from Northern California moved here. We need to implement higher taxes. She won't mind - she's used to paying California taxes."

You're free to believe whatever you want, of course. I'll opt to believe that you could move from Northern California to Nebraska or Wyoming or Washington or wherever else and the rent and taxes in both places (CA and wherever you end up) will remain unchanged.

Rent won't increase perceptibly when one person moves, but if you live in one place for a while and people keep moving there, you'll probably notice the change.

Maj--

you've said you actually make more money than the dollar figure you quoted to live on?

You might want to consider that poverty is expensive. It's a lot easier to live on $X per month when you have good credit, and can buy expensive items rather than renting or financing them.

Likewise, it's easier to eat cheaply when you can afford to buy food in bulk, when you own freezers and refrigerators, and appropriate cooking equipment.

Quality of life has to do with more than just income, or money spent. It also has to do with what they call "access to wealth."