5 ms·

How will the rich and powerful grow if programmers like you are allowed to invest like you describe?

by DSingularity 6y ago

AbrahamParangi 6y ago
If you believe this then write to your congressional representative and tell them to repeal accredited investor rules.
- TomMarius 6y ago
  What if they are one of the people that lost? Not every person gets a representative, only the bigger (but potentially small) portion of voters gets.
- icedchai 6y ago
  Most engineers can clear the accredited investor rules in their 30's. A million isn't what it used to be in the 80's.
  - boring_twenties 6y ago
    Imagine thinking this is even close to accurate
    - icedchai 6y ago
      Sorry, but it is accurate with many engineers I know. Most have pretty fat 401Ks by mid to late 30's. 401K millionaires are not uncommon. Also, many west coast folks or those in high cost of living areas can clear the accredited investor rule based on income alone. ($200K income for 2 years in a row.)
      - boring_twenties 6y ago
        You are aware that most engineers don't live and work in SF or NYC, right? And even of the ones that do, most are not working at FAANG? It's laughable that you think that just because you and your friends have the highest paying jobs, this somehow extrapolates to "most engineers." As for the income rule, it's $300k, not 2.
        icedchai 6y ago
        Yes, I am aware. I am wrong about most. I will say that many engineers should be able to clear the accredited investor rule by their mid to late 30's. The bar is not that high. And you are wrong about the income rule. It's $300k with a spouse. $200k as an individual. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor#United_Sta... : "a natural person with income exceeding $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with a spouse exceeding $300,000 for those years and a reasonable expectation of the same income level in the current year."
        boring_twenties 6y ago
        "Many" could mean anything, so it's impossible to argue for or against. I mean, pretty much everyone in NYC, SF (maybe Seattle too?) makes $200k+. That's a decent number of people to be sure, but a fraction of all engineers in the United States. The average senior software engineer salary nationwide is just over $120k. (That average includes the high coastal salaries, obviously.) Ain't no one getting accredited on that, honey. You're right about the income rule, thanks for the correction.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

How will the rich and powerful grow if programmers like you are allowed to invest like you describe?

AbrahamParangi 6y ago

If you believe this then write to your congressional representative and tell them to repeal accredited investor rules.

TomMarius 6y ago
What if they are one of the people that lost? Not every person gets a representative, only the bigger (but potentially small) portion of voters gets.
icedchai 6y ago
Most engineers can clear the accredited investor rules in their 30's. A million isn't what it used to be in the 80's.
- boring_twenties 6y ago
  Imagine thinking this is even close to accurate
  - icedchai 6y ago
    Sorry, but it is accurate with many engineers I know. Most have pretty fat 401Ks by mid to late 30's. 401K millionaires are not uncommon. Also, many west coast folks or those in high cost of living areas can clear the accredited investor rule based on income alone. ($200K income for 2 years in a row.)
    - boring_twenties 6y ago
      You are aware that most engineers don't live and work in SF or NYC, right? And even of the ones that do, most are not working at FAANG? It's laughable that you think that just because you and your friends have the highest paying jobs, this somehow extrapolates to "most engineers." As for the income rule, it's $300k, not 2.
      - icedchai 6y ago
        Yes, I am aware. I am wrong about most. I will say that many engineers should be able to clear the accredited investor rule by their mid to late 30's. The bar is not that high. And you are wrong about the income rule. It's $300k with a spouse. $200k as an individual. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor#United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accredited_investor#United_Sta... : "a natural person with income exceeding $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with a spouse exceeding $300,000 for those years and a reasonable expectation of the same income level in the current year."
        boring_twenties 6y ago
        "Many" could mean anything, so it's impossible to argue for or against. I mean, pretty much everyone in NYC, SF (maybe Seattle too?) makes $200k+. That's a decent number of people to be sure, but a fraction of all engineers in the United States. The average senior software engineer salary nationwide is just over $120k. (That average includes the high coastal salaries, obviously.) Ain't no one getting accredited on that, honey. You're right about the income rule, thanks for the correction.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]