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

40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 309 posts

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#271

Post by your-nanny »

mikeash wrote: post #168
integration wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless someone is starving, spending more on food as income rises is discretionary. A proper food budget is stable, it should not change as someone earns more money. As someone who ate well on minimum wage, you’re not going to convince me low-income families can’t afford food in America if they’re properly budgeting.

I’m amazed that your personal experience was so representative that you don’t even have to consider that other people’s circumstances might be different.

To abuse the phrase, anecdotes are not data, unless they're your own.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#272

Post by scarface74 »

mcphage wrote: post #240
nightski wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm currently below that threshold. But I could choose to expand my business, maybe hire a few people and create some jobs and productive economic output. But if you are going to tax me heavily for that then no, I'll probably just stick to what I am doing and not bother.

> But if you are going to tax me heavily for that then no, I'll probably just stick to what I am doing and not bother. That’s fine. Since we have a free market economy, someone else who wants that money more than you will do it instead.

I'm an experienced developer with a wide range of skills from web development to AWS architecture. When I looked at doing side work and thought about the rates people were willing to pay me and thought about the 49% marginal tax rate on every dollar I would have earned (Federal, state, social security, Medicare including the self employment tax - pre 2018), I thought "why bother?" My skillset isn't easily replaced.

On the other hand now that my marginal tax rate would be 33.6% (2018 Tax rates) since I'm already over the social security maximum from my primary job, it's much more attractive.

My wife would have jumped at the chance to make an extra work at $15 - $20 an hour (W2) when she was single, now at our combined tax rate, it's not even worth it. We are thinking about her working part time. The main reason she is working at all is for the health benefits that give me the opportunity to aggressively jump between contract, full time, unstable startups, and stable corporate jobs.

Taxes make a difference on how much someone is willing to work, especially if they make enough to be comfortable.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#273

Post by mcphage »

nightski wrote: post #251
mcphage wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if you are going to tax me heavily for that then no, I'll probably just stick to what I am doing and not bother. That’s fine. Since we have a free market economy, someone else who wants that money more than you will do it instead.

Free market economy does not mean everyone has the same money, connections, skills, and ability to produce the economic output.

No, but that’s just a numbers of games—there are millions of developers out there, and only a few hundred high demand skills.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#274

Post by sjg007 »

internetman55 wrote: post #175
seorphates wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like you believe stability is simply a matter of 100% good decision making and that lower middle class is just one bus fare and two transfer passes away. You're painting a picture with a brush as wide as your canvas and with only one color on your palette. I think we are mostly products of our surroundings so, yes, good decisions can help a lot. It just seems placing that level of "blame" is counter-producti…

Tbh I think we should take the people who run scam schools and just ban them for the country. Or have stricter regulation and accreditation I guess

We try to regulate them but republicans keep them in.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#275

Post by ionised »

ryanx435 wrote: post #230
jabgrabdthrow wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like you’re trying to be edgy. Are Democracy and Polio Vaccines actively harmful? Parent comment is right.

Oh are we listing arbitrary inventions or historical events to prove our points? People are selfish and greedy: Subprime mortgage crisis Enron George Soros shorting the British pound The entire Mongolian expansion and their culture of rape and pillaging * Small time Nazi officers stealing Jewish people's wedding rings * Too big to fail * Literally any employment contract where people are laid less than market value.…

For each of those destructive things you mentioned I could name a positive and contributing thing.

Humans aren't all bad or all good. It's a spectrum of traits and behaviours, and they absolutely can be altered and conditioned.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#276

Post by pnj9 »

jabgrabdthrow wrote: post #224
pnj9 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s due to a long and storied history of elites manipulating the masses through intimidation and fear It went from overt violence to less obvious propaganda programs tuning our feelings I wish the “smart” crowd would look into the history of government-corporate propaganda research I’m not talking “deep state”. It’s plainly recorded in government record how they financed propaganda research and gifted it to media fo…

No, you are talking deep state (unelected “eternal beaurocracy”), they’ve just associated that term with crazies and racists like everything else that threatens them, so you’re scared to use it.

Don’t put words in my mouth

Deep state is nonsense. It’s public record what’s going on

Lack of information or looking on the part of the rubes and proles doesn’t mean “conspiracy”

Especially when it’s a Google search away

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#277

Post by scarface74 »

aninhumer wrote: post #185
scarface74 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and when they demand change and start "taxing the rich". You're going to find that a lot of doctors, lawyers, and people in IT who are making low six figures are going to be classified as "the rich".

Yes of course? If you're trying to suggest that higher income socialists won't like it if they're the ones being taxed, then I don't think you understand socialists.

On the other hand, I had to remind my libertarian friends who didn't want "government controlled healthcare" because it would increase taxes that we were already paying $12000 a year for family insurance - well it didn't all come out of our check but that was our contribution plus the company's contribution.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#278

Post by scarface74 »

jadedhacker wrote: post #215
scarface74 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. When a couple of developers can start a software company with nothing but a credit card and an AWS account the concept of "capital" has changed a lot.

I have a feeling this idea is deceptive. Renting equipment has existed time immemorial.

Well, personally, I could set up a few cheap servers in my office and take advantage of my gigabit internet up/down while I'm bootstrapping and then get a colo. The point being that the main capital today is intellectual not physical.

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#279

Post by eli_gottlieb »

jadedhacker wrote: post #129
master-litty wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's so childish putting optimistic people down. Our economy, habits, and mindset can change with a great deal of work and energy. People are becoming more connected than ever before, and with that we can build a new kind of social momentum. Hey, you're right, things suck now, but it doesn't have to be like this.

The piece you're missing is that none of this is a mistake, the entire economy is designed to do this. Apathy and hoping it'll get better will if anything make it worse (not that I'm implying that's your position). The only thing that will make it better is demanding that things change. This means mass unionization, strikes, worker owned businesses, protests, leftist politicians like Sanders and Corbyn, and a whole p…

>The only thing that will make it better is demanding that things change. This means mass unionization, strikes, worker owned businesses, protests, leftist politicians like Sanders and Corbyn, and a whole program of fundamental goods provided free at the point of service like healthcare, education, and child care. We have a lot of work ahead of us.

Of course. That's no excuse to snarf your coffee instead of putting nose to the grindstone and doing the work. Agitate, educate, organize!

Re: 40% of Americans can't cover a $400 emergency expense

#280

Post by eli_gottlieb »

alasdair_ wrote: post #137
jadedhacker wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The piece you're missing is that none of this is a mistake, the entire economy is designed to do this. Apathy and hoping it'll get better will if anything make it worse (not that I'm implying that's your position). The only thing that will make it better is demanding that things change. This means mass unionization, strikes, worker owned businesses, protests, leftist politicians like Sanders and Corbyn, and a whole p…

>the entire economy is designed to do this Unless you are a firm believer in the power of the Illuminati, we have as close to the opposite of a planned (and thus designed) economy as one can get in the present day. Just because a behavior or other feature in a complex system is emergent doesn't mean the system was initially designed that way.

Then explain the extreme degree of market concentration seen in today's "free" economies.
Post reply on HN