3 ms·

> so if you make $63k and live like you make $35k, you should be able to save at least $10k a year or more. You're discounting tax. At least in Ireland, as a P

by dbspin 2y ago

> so if you make $63k and live like you make $35k, you should be able to save at least $10k a year or more. You're discounting tax. At least in Ireland, as a PAYE worker (employee) your take home would be 32,228. Given rent, food and bills, it is not remotely realistic to assume savings of that level. Still less save for a deposit or a house or apartment, climbing onto the property ladder. Can you live below your means, sure? Will this provide enough capital to meaningfully invest? On its own absolutely not. It's much harder for me to guesstimate tax and expenses for the US, but I'd assume similar is true. You're also assuming no children - which is a pretty grim, but realistic assessment given these income levels. At a median income level having children now actively puts you in poverty.

bombcar 2y ago
The USA actually has some of the most advantageous tax policy for low-wage earners (and those with children, even more) in the world. And by low-wage earners I mean anywhere from way below the poverty line to ... barely scraping by at $400k a year for some of them? You start with the Earned Income Tax Credit - which basically takes your 0% federal rate and refunds even more to compensate and overtake social security tax. Then you have ACA subsidies that eliminate healthcare costs (or greatly reduce it). And then there's the Child Tax Credit - up to $2k per child. This one isn't refundable so you end up having some room. All of this is just on the tax form - this does NOT count any of the other assistance available. The surest way out of poverty in the USA - assuming someone is actively trying their best and not wasting anything, time, talent, treasure - is to be stably married and have some kids. (All my comments are around the USA of course, I have no experience of Europe or Ireland in particular - but everyone online always assures me that Europe is a paradise compared to the complete hellscape that America is ;) - so I assume y'all doing pretty well. If not, come on over! We have some statue about it.)
- dbspin 2y ago
  I'm genuinely curious - how could having children possibly be a way out of poverty? Unless you're making the assumption that they'll be in an economically better position than you and 'take care of you in your retirement', or similar? 2K per child per year isn't going to approach the cost of raising a child. Which seems to be closer to 20k per year - https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child Cursory search seems to indicate that ACA is still quite expensive for low earners - https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/how-much-is-obamacare/#:~:text=The%20average%20Obamacare%20plan%20costs,all%20affect%20ACA%20plan%20costs https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/how-much-is-.... I really don't know what you're suggesting here... We're discussing the possibility of attaining wealth by saving / investing on a median income, and you simply haven't supported the assertion that that's possible or likely with anything you've posted. Income inequality is larger, and social mobility lower in the US than at most points in history, and this is largely true for Europe too - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States#:~:text=Socioeconomic%20mobility%20in%20the%20United%20States%20refers%20to%20the%20upward,health%20changes%20or%20other%20factors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_.... As someone actually living on an income in this ball park, I can assure you that tax credits aren't money, they're just less tax debt. And that the concept of having kids on a low income would actually be terrifying.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    > I can assure you that tax credits aren't money, they're just less tax debt But ... they are? Money is fungible; if you owe $1k in taxes and you get given $1k in cash, that's the same as if they just make your tax burden go away. And it's clearly obvious that it can't cost $20k a year to raise a child, as many families are below that in income ("In 2022, there was a total of 7.4 million families living below the poverty line in the United States.") - if it costs $20k to raise a child, and there are 11.6 million kids in poverty in 2022, then the average poverty family has 1.5 kids, costing $30k a year - but the poverty line is between $23k-27k for a family of 3.5! So the kids cost more than total income, which is patently absurd. Anyway, the whole point of it is - are you the lowest earner in the country? No? Then someone makes less than you and lives on it. If you mimic them, you will have something to save. But people don't want to do that. They want to say "woe is me, everything is shit, might as well buy that burger" and continue as a debt-slave to the corporations. As to the first, the benefits of children are somewhat financial, if you take advantage of them and you'll be too damn busy to spend any money on anything but. But the "stable marriage" part may be way more important.

by dbspin 2y ago

bombcar 2y ago

The USA actually has some of the most advantageous tax policy for low-wage earners (and those with children, even more) in the world. And by low-wage earners I mean anywhere from way below the poverty line to ... barely scraping by at $400k a year for some of them? You start with the Earned Income Tax Credit - which basically takes your 0% federal rate and refunds even more to compensate and overtake social security tax. Then you have ACA subsidies that eliminate healthcare costs (or greatly reduce it). And then there's the Child Tax Credit - up to $2k per child. This one isn't refundable so you end up having some room. All of this is just on the tax form - this does NOT count any of the other assistance available. The surest way out of poverty in the USA - assuming someone is actively trying their best and not wasting anything, time, talent, treasure - is to be stably married and have some kids. (All my comments are around the USA of course, I have no experience of Europe or Ireland in particular - but everyone online always assures me that Europe is a paradise compared to the complete hellscape that America is ;) - so I assume y'all doing pretty well. If not, come on over! We have some statue about it.)

dbspin 2y ago
I'm genuinely curious - how could having children possibly be a way out of poverty? Unless you're making the assumption that they'll be in an economically better position than you and 'take care of you in your retirement', or similar? 2K per child per year isn't going to approach the cost of raising a child. Which seems to be closer to 20k per year - https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-true-cost-of-raising-a-child Cursory search seems to indicate that ACA is still quite expensive for low earners - https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/how-much-is-obamacare/#:~:text=The%20average%20Obamacare%20plan%20costs,all%20affect%20ACA%20plan%20costs https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/how-much-is-.... I really don't know what you're suggesting here... We're discussing the possibility of attaining wealth by saving / investing on a median income, and you simply haven't supported the assertion that that's possible or likely with anything you've posted. Income inequality is larger, and social mobility lower in the US than at most points in history, and this is largely true for Europe too - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States#:~:text=Socioeconomic%20mobility%20in%20the%20United%20States%20refers%20to%20the%20upward,health%20changes%20or%20other%20factors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_.... As someone actually living on an income in this ball park, I can assure you that tax credits aren't money, they're just less tax debt. And that the concept of having kids on a low income would actually be terrifying.
- bombcar 2y ago
  > I can assure you that tax credits aren't money, they're just less tax debt But ... they are? Money is fungible; if you owe $1k in taxes and you get given $1k in cash, that's the same as if they just make your tax burden go away. And it's clearly obvious that it can't cost $20k a year to raise a child, as many families are below that in income ("In 2022, there was a total of 7.4 million families living below the poverty line in the United States.") - if it costs $20k to raise a child, and there are 11.6 million kids in poverty in 2022, then the average poverty family has 1.5 kids, costing $30k a year - but the poverty line is between $23k-27k for a family of 3.5! So the kids cost more than total income, which is patently absurd. Anyway, the whole point of it is - are you the lowest earner in the country? No? Then someone makes less than you and lives on it. If you mimic them, you will have something to save. But people don't want to do that. They want to say "woe is me, everything is shit, might as well buy that burger" and continue as a debt-slave to the corporations. As to the first, the benefits of children are somewhat financial, if you take advantage of them and you'll be too damn busy to spend any money on anything but. But the "stable marriage" part may be way more important.