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

141–150 of 195 posts

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#141

Post by scarface74 »

nunez wrote: post #134
scarface74 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many college students have to stay on campus? How many could go to two year college, stay at home and then transfer two years later? I went to a small state college with a horrible computer science department. Four years out of college I was making just as much as people who had way more debt than I had (I.e. none)

Most people who go to a CC with the intent of transferring to a larger school don’t do it. Too many distractions get in the way.

Isn't better for distractions to get in their way while they are at community colleges and not out of as much money than for the same distractions to get in their way at a more expensive school and either way not come out with a degree?

I didn't go to a community college but I did go to a cheap state school with the intention of transferring to GA Tech under a 3 + 2 program - I was accepted straight out of high school but I got a scholarship to go to the no name school.

When it was time to make a decision, I felt GT was a waste of time for me. I didn't want to be a "computer engineer" I wanted to develop software. I don't see my career trajectory being any different. No one cared what school I graduated from three years after I started working.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#142

Post by scarface74 »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #140
scarface74 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At any price that they could still harvest the food and sell it at a price that people would be willing to buy the food.

I suspect the consumers will get over it once hunger sets in. I'm not really sympathetic to the consumers who may lose access to artificially low pricing subsidized by policies intending to keep wages low amongst the poorest people in our country.

Poor people already often can't afford healthy food. What do you think happens when food prices go up because farmers have to pay 5x as much to attract labor? Yes there are farmers who are offering five times as much and still can't find reliable labor.

On the other hand, I'm sure overprocessed sodium filled food and fast food will become a lot more attractive than even what it is today.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#143

Post by abalashov »

scarface74 wrote: post #138
abalashov wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dropped out of UGA 2.5 years in and moved to Atlanta to pursue a burgeoning tech career. :-) I can tell you that UGA requires freshmen to live on campus, though in my case I was able to get a waiver because my parents were local. And I get the impression that their housing costs are actually fairly competitive compared to local commercial rent.

If someone's ultimate goal is to graduate from UGA and they are not local, they still could probably find a two year college where their core credits would transfer (English, math, etc.)

I think that's probably true.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#144

Post by abalashov »

scarface74 wrote: post #141
nunez wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people who go to a CC with the intent of transferring to a larger school don’t do it. Too many distractions get in the way.

Isn't better for distractions to get in their way while they are at community colleges and not out of as much money than for the same distractions to get in their way at a more expensive school and either way not come out with a degree? I didn't go to a community college but I did go to a cheap state school with the intention of transferring to GA Tech under a 3 + 2 program - I was accepted straight out of high schoo…

Well, indeed, and I followed a similar career path to you. I was a philosophy major at UGA, and by the time I was 20 I was the senior technical personality at a small local ISP and interested in VoIP. I had been working nearly full time since my second semester. By the time my sophomore year began, work had rapidly evolved to take up 98% of my time and attention. I technically lingered into the first part of my junior year, but by that point long a very token and symbolic presence in class. The next step up from there was going to be a move to Atlanta and a big-boy corporate job, so I took it.

However, you can't just extrapolate from these experiences to everyone going to college across the entire work force. Our field is a bit uniquely ... democratic.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#145

Post by gizmo »

cperciva wrote: post #93
gizmo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Confiscatory taxes on the wealthiest would bring in hundreds of billions. That's not "very little impact", the money could be used to massively improve the lives of millions. Yes, there are few people, numerically, in the top 0.01%, but that doesn't mean their taxes are inconsequential. Otherwise you might as well argue that they should pay no taxes at all. Absurd.

Confiscatory taxes could bring in hundreds of billions of dollars... once. But you can only expropriate someone's property once.

Every dollar in the economy is spent and taxed many times. Taxation doesn't make money disappear.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#146

Post by Consultant32452 »

scarface74 wrote: post #142
Consultant32452 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect the consumers will get over it once hunger sets in. I'm not really sympathetic to the consumers who may lose access to artificially low pricing subsidized by policies intending to keep wages low amongst the poorest people in our country.

Poor people already often can't afford healthy food. What do you think happens when food prices go up because farmers have to pay 5x as much to attract labor? Yes there are farmers who are offering five times as much and still can't find reliable labor. On the other hand, I'm sure overprocessed sodium filled food and fast food will become a lot more attractive than even what it is today.

>Poor people already often can't afford healthy food.

That's a serious problem, if only there was some way to raise their wages.

>farmers have to pay 5x as much to attract labor

Yep, there it is. Some of those poor people will transition to these new higher wages in farming. This will reduce labor supply in other sectors which will push wages up across the board. Rinse and repeat for other industries full of illegal immigrants: construction, maid services, etc.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#147

Post by harryh »

gizmo wrote: post #145
cperciva wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Confiscatory taxes could bring in hundreds of billions of dollars... once. But you can only expropriate someone's property once.

Every dollar in the economy is spent and taxed many times. Taxation doesn't make money disappear.

Sure, but if you confiscate the wealth of the 0.01% then it's not in their hands anymore and you can't take it from them again.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#148

Post by RickJWag »

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…

Just read an article in Fortune mag. about a venture capitalist that's working to move more remote tech jobs to middle America.

I hope he succeeds. The more we share jobs/experiences/wealth/etc. the more we'll understand each other.

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#149

Post by RickJWag »

rayiner wrote: post #70
flatline wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crap cars are also expensive as hell to keep running nowadays. Buying new or nearly new, if you need the transportation for your job, can be more economical. That wasn’t the case 40 years ago. That labor that his mom presumably put in is also not without monetary value - two working parents cost a fortune in childcare, and many people need both salaries to make the equivalent of what just one used to.

That's a falsehood people tell themselves to justify buying a new car. One of my parents' cars is a 2003 Acura. It's never needed anything but oil changes since we got it. Cars these days are much cheaper to operate than they used to be.

Totally true. Just about every reputable financial advisor says to drive used cars and run them 'till the wheels fall off.

Today's used cars are fantastically reliable, historically. (At least if you stick with 'Best Buy' recommendations.)

Re: Living on $100k a Year

#150

Post by RickJWag »

ams6110 wrote: post #71
flatline wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crap cars are also expensive as hell to keep running nowadays. Buying new or nearly new, if you need the transportation for your job, can be more economical. That wasn’t the case 40 years ago. That labor that his mom presumably put in is also not without monetary value - two working parents cost a fortune in childcare, and many people need both salaries to make the equivalent of what just one used to.

Really, any "mainstream" car made in the last 15 years is going to be quite good. I'm talking about Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, etc. My newest car is a 2004 Honda with 230,000 miles. I bought it used when it had about 80,000 miles. It's been very reliable. I've likewise had a good experience with a 2002 Ford. 40 years ago, 100,000 miles was considered the practical life of a car. If it hadn't rusted out by then it h…

Agree, totally. We're living in an automotive 'golden age', where reliability, safety and performance are at all-time highs.
Post reply on HN