Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Living on $100k a Year

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 195 posts

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#171

Post by notyourday »

scarface74 wrote: post #169
notyourday wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the rules of the NFL team that has the ball longest is not the team that wins the game - team that scores does. Those are the rules.

I'm not sure that it's a bad thing that the electoral college is used for deciding the presidential election and that the senate isn't representational of the population. Even considering that "my side" loss twice because of it. The needs of the least populous states - trump country -have been ignored in the national conversation for too long by both parties. Trump was just paying lip service to their needs and is ac…

It is irrelevant if rules are bad or rules are good. It is only relevant what the rules are at the time of the competition.

Rules can always be changed but it must be done before the beginning of the game.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#172

Post by notyourday »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #116
notyourday wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to presume that your family has a combined income of 100k or more. Lets engage in a very simple intellectual exercise: remove all immigration restrictions and all protections that we have. Do you believe that a) your family in a short term would be better off/not different/the worse off? b) your family in a long term would be better off/not different worse off?

I'm not the person you asked, but I'll give it a shot. In the short term I think I would be much better off. I don't believe enough people who can compete with me economically would be all that interested in coming here, and/or them coming here doesn't improve their ability to compete with me. However, I'd be able to hire poor people for slave-like wages to perform all sorts of odd jobs for me around the house. I'd h…

> In the short term I think I would be much better off. I don't believe enough people who can compete with me economically would be all that interested in coming here, and/or them coming here doesn't improve their ability to compete with me.

This is where I fundamentally disagree - every single developer in the US making US salaries will lose to eastern european/Indian/Chinese developer moving to the US because they will accept lower salary. Not much lower, but 20-30% lower because for them it would be amazing increase in their quality of life.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#173

Post by tptacek »

scarface74 wrote: post #118
killercup wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's something I always forget about when talking to people from the US: I don't have any student loans. A semester at a university in Germany costs around 250€ (plus housing and food), so it's hard to get to a point where you need 10 years to pack back loans. I had a part time job all through university and even saved up a reasonable amount of money.

There is really no reason for an American to have a unaffordable student loan. They could easily go to a state school instead of a private college and save thousands.

In-state tuition at the University of Illinois is $31,000 per year.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#174

Post by pm90 »

scarface74 wrote: post #118
killercup wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that's something I always forget about when talking to people from the US: I don't have any student loans. A semester at a university in Germany costs around 250€ (plus housing and food), so it's hard to get to a point where you need 10 years to pack back loans. I had a part time job all through university and even saved up a reasonable amount of money.

There is really no reason for an American to have a unaffordable student loan. They could easily go to a state school instead of a private college and save thousands.

I don't understand why this comment is downvoted. There are many many inexpensive state/community colleges that have pretty affordable programs which would probably provide the same level of education. If one is hell-bent on getting a degree from a better Uni, you can always apply and transfer later.

This option should most certainly be made clearer to students. I don't want to play a blame game, but I think its somewhat related to the culture of parents wanting "the best" for their kids and considering all money spent on education as an "investment". Its not. Its a huge financial commitment and should be thought through carefully.

Now, its not like college is completely useless. The connections you form there last for life. Many founders initially met in college and so on. But someone considering taking on ginormous student loan debt probably should consider whether that is worth paying off loans for decades.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#175

Post by scarface74 »

tptacek wrote: post #173
scarface74 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is really no reason for an American to have a unaffordable student loan. They could easily go to a state school instead of a private college and save thousands.

In-state tuition at the University of Illinois is $31,000 per year.

I just looked on the website - it's $17100 a year (for engineering). But how much is a two year state school? That would save some money at least for the first two years before transferring.

GA Tech is $12,500 if you don't stay on campus for a GA resident. If you meet the HOPE scholarship requirements (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOPE_Scholarship), it will pay 90% of the tuition costs - not including books and fees - reducing that cost by about $9000 a year.

If you don't have the qualifications for Hope, more than likely you wouldn't be admitted into GT anyway.

Yes the ethics of using the lottery to fund education is unclear and no it doesn't apply to every state, but is the University of Illionois worth it unless you are qualified for a high paying job to make the expense worth it (serious question - I don't know)? If not, are their cheaper state schools?

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#176

Post by tptacek »

scarface74 wrote: post #175
tptacek wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In-state tuition at the University of Illinois is $31,000 per year.

I just looked on the website - it's $17100 a year (for engineering). But how much is a two year state school? That would save some money at least for the first two years before transferring. GA Tech is $12,500 if you don't stay on campus for a GA resident. If you meet the HOPE scholarship requirements ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HOPE_Scholarship ), it will pay 90% of the tuition costs - not including books and…

I have a kid there; my number comes from the actual invoices.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#177

Post by uoaei »

notyourday wrote: post #52
d4mi3n wrote: post #3

> "And now I'm one of those coastal elites, a term, you know, that people in Middle America use. And it feels like betrayal," he says. "But what I've learned in moving to the coast is there's real inequality. And the biggest driver of that inequality is the tax code. The biggest social welfare has been to the rich and powerful, giving them loopholes and abilities to keep money from the government and keep money from…

> A take-away I had from Trump's election was that there still is a lot of economic struggle in the interior of the US. Nobody seems to be interested in improving the situation, and very few of these communities have the means and/or the willingness to move towards greener pastures. Is there anything that can be done to improve the situation? I work in a typical liberal as hell company in a very expensive city. The l…

That's not being a progressive. They can call themselves whatever they want but we don't want them.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#178

Post by pm90 »

Tiksi wrote: post #164
vostok wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it's not so simple. > Those who benefit from the education are "taxed" for it in the form of loan payments for a few years, those who don't benefit (directly) from the education are not. Not only that, but the benefits of free/cheap education largely accrue to the middle and upper classes whereas the lower class also has significantly higher taxes under the European system. I'm most familiar with the UK…

>the lower class also has significantly higher taxes This could be fixed by increasing the taxes on the middle class and up, leaving the lower class taxes the same. >are all overwhelmingly middle class. There are likely factors other than cost for people from lower classes to going to university at a lower rate, but it's the opportunity to do so that's important and cost is often the biggest impediment to it.

> This could be fixed by increasing the taxes on the middle class and up, leaving the lower class taxes the same.

How exactly would you sell that? It requires a certain amount of commitment to furthering society to ask people to pay more in taxes. And there is all this right-wing media and people who will constantly shout "Big Government is taking all your hard earned money!" argument.

Its rather amazing that Europeans have accepted high taxes on middle and upper classes as a fact of life. But then, If you look at history, it was the poor who got taxed the most in pre-revolutionary France, while the rich got away with massive tax cuts. I fear this might lead to something similar in the US in the future: push too many people into poverty and they will rise in revolution.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#179

Post by pm90 »

xor1 wrote: post #72
mberning wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dad retired and had a modest 401k. He also gets social security now. My mom works part time in the kitchen for the local school district. They are doing ok! I imagine they will come live with my wife and I when they are ready. I won’t put them in a home.

What about the rest of your siblings? Are they going to help? I ask because my parents are retired, and they are nearing the age where they will need assistance. It's just going to be my sister and I when it comes time to deal with figuring out what we are going to do. My mother has been financially dependent on my father throughout their entire relationship. I currently live near them and visit once a week, but I do…

You should absolutely have an honest conversation with her about her finances and talk to both of them about at least informing you about any changes they wish to make before they make them. Old people are very impressionable, and there are some very shitty people out there who give bad advice. They also scare easily, so they might take all their money out of their accounts when the market starts to go down even a little.

Apologies, no harm intended towards older people, just have seen a lot of them get screwed over. e.g. my managers Mom had all her (late) husbands retirement money in a pretty great account which was sponsored by her husbands company. But her friend convinced her to take it all out and hold it in cash, which turned out to be really really bad advice.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#180

Post by pm90 »

Y7ZCQtNo39 wrote: post #98
Spooky23 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between you and the 1987 version of you is that you are kneecapped from an earning power perspective. Barring equity compensation that appreciates, you’re likely to grow your income until around 35. Then you plateau. You’re also unlikely to retain companies or career skill set through to retirement. So you’re facing a crisis where you need to transition and maintain salary around age 40, where 1987 you…

Your children can always borrow for college. You can't borrow for retirement, so it makes sense to prioritize retirement savings. I agree, though, that the purchasing power is nowhere near 1987 and that the plateau comes earlier. I suppose it's what makes saving earlier and saving more ever pertinent for the younger generation. If I can get to 200k before I plateau, I'd be happy. If I have a working spouse that makes…

If you're making that good already and working in tech, I doubt it will be hard for you to reach that target income. Keeping up with the latest technology, learning skills and delivering on projects has got me very far in my professional career, and I've worked with Senior Engineers who continue to do engineering and switch jobs (although perhaps less frequently since it means changing a lot of things).

I guess what I'm trying to say is: financially, you are likely to be OK, if you manage to have a spouse that will be a good partner and you both stay together while bringing up the kids (and that is a BIG IF). It get VERY dicey if you do split, in which case you have to pay for spousal and child support (I've seen this happen wayy too many times).

Which brings me to what has been my most important realization perhaps: be VERY VERY careful when you choose your spouse and how you combine your finances. I'm not saying that you spouse will be bad; but statistically it seems like there is a 50% chance that it won't work out, for whatever reason. This can ruin your finances. So spend some significant time and effort to try to make the right decision there. This is kinda hard when society emphasizes getting married and having kids ASAP.

Post reply on HN