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

Being frugal is for the rich

theoutline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 305 posts

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#191

Post by nunez »

mikeash wrote: post #157
nunez wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

net income is pretty close to gross income in income-tax-free states. everyone everywhere pays some form of property taxes, so that's moot.

State income tax is not generally the important part. From a quick search, the highest rate in the nation is 13.3% in California. The Federal income tax rate tops out at 37%, and there's also 7.65% Federal payroll tax.

Yes it is because that 13.3% is on top of your federal taxes (which don't change). A Californian making $150k is making $20,000 less than a Texan making $150k. That's sizeable! And Californians pay more in property taxes!

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#192

Post by manigandham »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #172
manigandham wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What resources or "connections" do you need? Thinking you need all these things before you can start is the biggest obstacle to actually starting.

"What resources or "connections" do you need?" Money, for one. Time for two.

We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#193

Post by s73v3r_ »

gowld wrote: post #26
tjpaudio wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

City-based salary adjustments are really something only educated professionals get, low-wage earners are screwed in big cities. I think also it will shock you how much every day items are compared to Europe. For one, public transportation is not available to most of America. So you have to have a car and car insurance, thats hundreds of dollars more per month right there. Cellphone service costs 3x as much as anywher…

> City-based salary adjustments are really something only educated professionals get, That's not entirely true. In many cities, minimum wage is substantially higher ($12-$15/hr) than the Federal minimum ($7.25/hr) > in big cities > So you have to have a car and car insurance Not in big cities.

I can think of maybe 2 or 3 cities where minimum wage is anywhere near that high. And at least one of them that's coming close, Los Angeles, you absolutely need a car. New York, maybe San Francisco or Portland, you could reliably get around without a car.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#194

Post by vilmosi »

T2_t2 wrote: post #103
joefourier wrote: post #11

American salaries are difficult to make sense of from a European perspective. The referenced average salary of $36,000/year for millennials with only a high-school diploma would be a normal entry-level salary for a software engineer in most of Western Europe, and a very good salary for experienced engineers in Eastern Europe. Tax burden is higher here as well, and while the cost of housing is exorbitant many parts of…

As a fellow non-American, it took me years the realise there is no America. It is the Unites STATES of America, where the states are all very, very different. As an example, last I looked the GDP per capita in San Francisco is $48K, whereas in Miami it is $24K. That is a pretty massive difference, and leads to very different outcomes in a lot of areas. The best way to think of the USA - and China BTW, which has an ev…

So are many countries in Europe. Look at East vs West Germany or Catalonia vs Extremadura

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#195

Post by mcguire »

nunez wrote: post #130

I was expecting the article to say how they've inherited a massive amount of money or how their parents paid for their education/first home/etc., which made them deciding to go frugal by achieving financial independence a hell of a lot easier. I didn't see any of that. Furthermore, the author doesn't fully explain how these two were "rich" before pursuing their journey to frugality aside from purchasing a home in Cam…

A dual-income tech salary may well qualify as rich. The median household income in MA is about $75,000 (much higher than the national median). That's also about what the median software developer is paid. (https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Developer/...)

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#196

Post by s73v3r_ »

bhandziuk wrote: post #184
azernik wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence why I mentioned "average-wage" in GP; usually you can avoid owning a car only by living in housing that is out of reach for anyone making <$6k/month.

I don't understand the comment. Is Seattle not doable for <6k $/mo?

Most places in the US, housing near transit options is pretty expensive. Further out, where you get to housing being affordable, is nowhere near transit.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#197

Post by liveoneggs »

manigandham wrote: post #153
mandelbrotwurst wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More entertainment, maybe, but "more" overall? Would you rather live in a world with no smartphones where you afford a house/apartment, or one with smartphones where you can't?

EDIT: Poor decisions are poor decisions and it's much easier to be productive today than ever before, if that's what you choose to be. There's no reason you can't "afford" a house, everything is relative.

are you arguing that a person is "making poor decisions" if they are unable to parlay smartphone ownership into enough money to buy a house?

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#198

Post by s73v3r_ »

manigandham wrote: post #192
s73v3r_ wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"What resources or "connections" do you need?" Money, for one. Time for two.

We all have exactly the same amount of time every day. How you spend it is up to you. You can choose differently, especially if you're on HN discussing it in the first place.

Someone who's working two jobs would disagree with you.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#199

Post by mod »

gnicholas wrote: post #162
mod wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay $75/month for 10mbps upstream, 1mbps downstream DSL. That's the advertised speeds, I get lower speeds in practice. I'm not complaining. I'm happy to have those speeds as I live in a very rural area (South/Midwest). I can stream netflix or youtube without hitches, almost all the time.

Are we talking megabits or megabytes here? I'm guessing bits, but I would be a little surprised that this can stream at 1 megabit per second. And I second @sokoloff—I've never heard of a plan that had an order of magnitude greater for upstream!

I mixed the numbers up. 10down/1up.

Re: Being frugal is for the rich

#200

Post by mod »

sokoloff wrote: post #155
mod wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay $75/month for 10mbps upstream, 1mbps downstream DSL. That's the advertised speeds, I get lower speeds in practice. I'm not complaining. I'm happy to have those speeds as I live in a very rural area (South/Midwest). I can stream netflix or youtube without hitches, almost all the time.

Your plan is the first I've seen with a higher upstream than downstream rate.

I mixed the numbers up. 10down/1up.
Post reply on HN