8% of income is significant for almost everyone. It could be easy for someone living on a lot less to assume that a marginal 20k doesn't matter to "rich people", but lifestyle inflation and regional cost of living differences should be considered.
It would actually mean around 12.5% higher after-tax income. And after considering minimum fixed expenses, such as housing or food, these state tax savings become even more significant.
that's a very good point. in this case, the actual situation being considered is going from a squo of ~230k to 250k if the tax didn't exist/subject was no longer required to pay the tax.
8% of income is significant for almost everyone. It could be easy for someone living on a lot less to assume that a marginal 20k doesn't matter to "rich people", but lifestyle inflation and regional cost of living differences should be considered.
Lol lifestyle inflation. I’m sorry why should we be crying over people when they come up short after buying a new yacht and country club membership?
As a college student, sometimes I don't buy cheese, or I buy $3 gouda, or $6 gouda. arguably any money spent on cheese is an extravagence, one that could wait for my career. But, I spend money on things that are enjoyable, and I spend more when I have more. "lifestyle inflation" isn't something that everyone richer than you does in order to buy more yachts or useless shit, it's something that literally everyone does. There are people poorer than you who "waste" their money on things they enjoy. perhaps they should also pay higher taxes because some third party has decided that their spending is frivolous? Tax rates should consider the well being of the citizens in that bracket, and a serious consideration of well being will require good faith- not condemning discretionary spending as unnecessary.
Why would I want to live in a city and compete with the best of the best? I don't want my kids to go to a top school in an urban environment. I want them to do well in an above-average suburban school and have access to recreational activities outside the city. I want to live an affordable life that allows me to save and build wealth. I want a good work/life balance. I don't see the city providing me any of that. The…
Who's competing? Stack rank firing went out in the 90's. Part of being the best I can be involves surrounding myself with the smartest people I can find. I don't want to be the smartest person in the room, and I find I learn more working alongside the best of the best, even (especially) if I'm the dumbest person there.
8% of income is significant for almost everyone. It could be easy for someone living on a lot less to assume that a marginal 20k doesn't matter to "rich people", but lifestyle inflation and regional cost of living differences should be considered.
I'm in Europe and we generally pay between 33% to 50% of our income in tax. So, yeah, i can't really imagine being angry that you're being asked to contribute back to the society. Especially when you make 250k.
tldr: my point is that people at high income levels still care about marginal income differences, not the morality of the tax.
"asked to contribute back to the society" is a generalization. how much should people be asked to give back? Similarly, even if a rate was fair, isn't it understandable that someone might prefer to pay less in taxes? We aren't talking about tax evasion, rather considering regional differences in taxation as part of the cost benefit analysis of moving. I imagine many in california share your beliefs and feel they are giving back a fair share of their labor. but it feels you are advocating for avoiding the conversation, or perhaps too quick to dismiss them as selfish, which seems to be less productive than understanding why others behave differently.
I manage a team of 10 people in San Francisco and confirm a similar pattern. 8 of them have moved out of their SF apartments either to move somewhere else more spacious or in with their parents outside of the Bay Area. Other people I know at my company have renegotiated rents. Most but not all are open to the idea of moving back depending on how things play out over the next 6-12 months. I think their is still a big…
> I would expect somewhat of a swing back away from remote work when we get a vaccine. I think a lot of people will move back to where offices are located, but I'm wondering if we'll see an increase in people who fly in for a few days every few weeks for meetings then jet back home to a cheaper part of the country. Relationships are hugely important -- and deep relationships are almost always only built in-person --…
These newly remote companies have no idea how difficult it is to be fully distributed. The company I work for have been doing it for years and we’re still dealing with growing pains. You lose a lot when all you do is Zoom with coworkers.
Is this a shitpost? I honestly can't tell. You start off by saying you've only ever visited SF and then go on to make a load of generalisations as if you know SF like the back of your hand. Also this: > there are very few attractive girls at bars, or at offices, or even on the street, compared to just about anywhere in the world. and if that's not why you go to bars, i have to ask -you'd enjoy going to bars with most…
People go out to have sex. Either you haven't noticed somehow (maybe you aren't old enough?) or you're deluding yourself that it's about something else. We're a sexual species. You exist because your parents met and had sex. It's just the way it is.
Okay ? Are you humping everything in sight every time you step out ?
> People are leaving because quality of life has fallen dramatically and the only thing keeping people in SF was their offices. What are these quality of life issues, and how have other cities avoided them?
Here's a short list to get you started: - Homeless issues. Mentally ill people pissing and defecating on the sidewalks in every significant public space. - Vehicle vandalism is extremely common and unchecked by police. - Extremely high income taxes with no perceivable difference in government-provided services. - Property tax law that advantages long-term owners over young people trying to buy at today's inflated pri…
Don't forget the frequent electricity outages, especially given its the tech capital of the world.
I lived in Hayes Valley, across Warby Parker, last year and our electricity went out 3-4 times for the whole night. We paid our bills on time.
People go out to have sex. Either you haven't noticed somehow (maybe you aren't old enough?) or you're deluding yourself that it's about something else. We're a sexual species. You exist because your parents met and had sex. It's just the way it is.
Okay ? Are you humping everything in sight every time you step out ?
I have no idea how to respond to such a silly comment.
lmao at the idea of caring about $20k when you make $250k
It's expensive being well off. If you make $250k a year, you take home $159k in SF. A big chunk of that goes to cost of living such that the $20k means one of your two kids can't go to the college they want because it's $50k per year, and you don't qualify for financial aid.
It’s much, much more expensive to be poor.
Reread this comment and find why most of “regular” America hates the coasts and tech elites.
Unrelated but it cracked me up... I do a bunch of outdoor stuff but really couldn't get into surfing (and downhill skiing) because you have to wait/jostle with people/paddle forever/wait some more until you finally get 1 minute of enjoyment (or more like 10 seconds when you are starting out with surfing). I thought it was the beginner problem because the places where I can be are so few, and I suck at catching waves.…
I suspect part of the problem (for surfing) is the absence of a clear line-up. It's not the wait that bugs me, it's the constant maneuvering (and physical dangers of collisions in the water with boards). If I could join a clear defined lineup, wait my turn, paddle into a wave that I knew was mine to take, get a nice long ride, and re-join the lineup, I'd be fine with it. That there is such a thing as a line up at bre…
On multi-pitch outdoor routes, if you get on first you usually stay first until the end unless there's a much faster party and a bypass pitch they can use, or you let them climb thru or use the same anchor (if they are faster they are not going to be in your way anyway, so why not). So for good beginner climbs you just have to get there super early and it's yours.
Crowds can be a problem at good beginner-friendly single-pitch crags, but yeah lining up for a popular route is pretty straightforward if annoying.