A personal question, how much do you make, but not really.

Steve_Jones said:

yupididit said:

Dare I side with the poor folks with the "victim mentality"? I mean, a lot of them are victims in some way. Please go easy on me for that last statement, you know who you are 

I grew up very poor, and many people I grew up with still are. I can side with the "victim mentality" and understand why people feel that way, as it is tough to break the cycle. My issue is when people DO break it, they are suddenly the "bad rich guy that took advantage of people" vs being someone that was tired of being a "victim" and figured it out.

Thanks for going easy on me lmao. 

I don't care to blame rich people for anything. I think I read that most millionaires are self made. I don't think majority of people who are poor think that rich people are bad. It might be some envy in small pockets but that's it. Plus rich to some is very middle-class to others. I just want to be comfortably middle-class lol

I think it's important to define wealth accurately though.  I am sorry that several of our board members feel targeted as the owner, boss, CEO, etc., please know that it is valuable to have so many perspectives here, and to discuss them (mostly) in a civil way.  I certainly don't blame you for being successful, I am proud of you for working hard, and happy that your life circumstances and experiences have led you to such a good path!

Also, and I mean this in the nicest possible way, but you guys aren't that successful :).  Neither am I, neither is the local "rich man" business owner in your average town.  Not unless one of you is secretly a billionaire/Jeff Bezos/Elon Musk in disguise, and if so, well done.  There's a saying,

"Do you know the difference between a millionaire and a billionaire?"

"No."

"About a billion dollars."

For the visual learners among us (though this is several years old, I think Musk's blocks would be much bigger now):

Most of us simply cannot comprehend that level of wealth.  It makes you richer than most COUNTRIES on earth, let alone most people.  And while I agree most millionaires are self-made, I would bet very few billionaires are.  Whether it's Elon Musk (he's super successful!  he founded Paypal, Tesla, SpaceX!!!)....wait no, he was given his wealth by his diamond mine owning parents in apartheid South Africa, and bought his way into all three of those companies, then attempted to use his money and legal action to ret-con history and name himself a founder after kicking out all the people that actually built it.  That's some peak 1984 Orwellian creepiness. 

Bill Gates founded Microsoft from the ground up!  Sure, and his first big break was a deal his mom got him with IBM, because she sat on the board with John Opal at another organization and recommended her son's startup for the contract. 

No one is saying the successful are lazy.  That's idiotic.  I am saying the uber-successful had networks and resources that are not available to most people, and it's important to recognize that.  Rather than saying, "Anyone can do what I did.", a more accurate statement would be, "Anyone who's parents gave them hundreds of thousands (or millions) of dollars in startup capital, and talked up the new company to all of their fellow boardmembers can do what I did.".  Alternately, you could say, "Everyone that wants to be successful should review what resources and contacts they have available, and try to use them to help build a business-oriented support network, so that all your hard work is as efficient, successful, and tailored towards growth as possible." 

But putting limits on that 0.000001% of society is a good thing.  When your investments start to look like the biggest pile of minecraft blocks in the video above, it's time to focus on something else.  You don't get to own everything, because doing so makes life worse for millions of other people.  Imagine anyone on this board wanted to buy a car, but I own them all.  And I buy every years' new production, in its entirety.  At some point, you have to wonder why.  And if EVERYONE ELSE would be better served if I couldn't own all the cars.   I can still have a huge number of them, but for the sake of getting to work, or even just spreading the love of a sunday drive around, I shouldn't have ALL of them.  That is wealth distortion at the multi-billion dollar level. 

And to those who say, "Yeah well, you'd think differently if it was you."  Maybe.  But people have been telling me something similar since I started work at 15, making $5.15/hr.  And I'm pretty successful now.  My views on this have only gotten more strong.  If I ever had a 10-figure networth, I'm pretty sure I'd be OK with paying a 1-2% wealth tax as part of being a good citizen and wanting a successful society around me, in the same way that I am OK with my state taxes paying for good schools, despite not having kids.  I pay 4-6x what some of my friends do in taxes, after their exemptions and deductions for kids and other credits.  Is that fair?  I don't know.  I do know I want anyone under 18 to be fed, sheltered, and have a good education.  Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have both commented on tax reform for the same reasons. 

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

I'd bet there are more HNW ($5M-$30M)people here than you'd think, and even some UHNW ($30M+).  Grassroots indeed 

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

I hear you, but those are also VERY extreme examples. 
 

Nobody in this thread has been talking about the top 10 or so wealthiest people in the world. There has been a lot of discussion about business owners and companies. Most of them likely have a net worth of less than 1% of the net worth of the people you are now mentioning. 
 

I hear you, but that seems like an entirely different discussion. 

This thread isn't even about wealthy people. It's about frequency and percentage of increases in salary. 

I make enough to hold steady. I do have a reserve in the bank, but bad things could make that disappear quickly.  And I don't have a way of building that reserve back up if that happens.  

If I could get rid of my mortgage payment or my health care costs I might be alright.  *sigh*

With luck my house will be paid of by the time I am 65.  (4 years from now)

Steve_Jones said:

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

I'd bet there are more HNW ($5M-$30M)people here than you'd think, and even some UHNW ($30M+).  Grassroots indeed 

All of whom are much closer to being destitute and homeless than they are to being billionaires :). 

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

You define success your way, I'll continue to define it my way. Life is too short to not appreciate what you have for want of what you will never get. 

SV reX said:

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

I hear you, but those are also VERY extreme examples. 
 

Nobody in this thread has been talking about the top 10 or so wealthiest people in the world. There has been a lot of discussion about business owners and companies. Most of them likely have a net worth of less than 1% of the net worth of the people you are now mentioning. 
 

I hear you, but that seems like an entirely different discussion. 

That's fair, it is a separate discussion.  I feel like this thread, the stock trading tax one, and one of the strikes threads all kind of wound up intermixed and covering the same areas (especially the last 2 pages here), and this was the one that was still active after I took a few days off. 

In reply to Steve_Jones :

Just to clarify...

HNW is more than $1million in liquid assets. Not counting their primary residence. I suspect there are a large number of HNW individuals here.

VHNW is $5 million - $30 million. 

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

Also, do you feel the same way about worldwide net worth? Those at the top should give back to others in the world? Should there be a worldwide cap? To put it in perspective, less than $100k net worth puts you in the top 10% of worldwide. Less than $1 million net worth makes you a worldwide 1% er. If we did the above Minecraft video showing your worth Vs. the average person in Somalia, would you call for capping your own net worth? 

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

Also, do you feel the same way about worldwide net worth? Those at the top should give back to others in the world? Should there be a worldwide cap? To put it in perspective, less than $100k net worth puts you in the top 10% of worldwide. Less than $1 million net worth makes you a worldwide 1% er. If we did the above Minecraft video showing your worth Vs. the average person in Somalia, would you call for capping your own net worth? 

They did, it had the median net worth of india, central african republic, usa, and switzerland.  And my post was referencing those far beyond the 1%, but we can start there.  EDIT: Also, I didn't say cap net worth, I'm sorry you're interpreting it that way.  I said either a 1-2% wealth tax, or a revision to the tax code on the uberwealthy to ensure they pay at least what the W2 middle class does on their income (the Buffett proposal), which comes almost entirely from investments or inheritance.  I can see where I said putting limits on the wealthy would be seen that way though. 

Sure.  I would be willing to include the 1-2% "wealth tax" on my current funds to help support those in need worldwide.  I currently do so through my federal taxes (~24% rate, or higher than that on investors/CEOs paid in stock options/LTCG).  But I think you meant it more directly than that, so again, sure...I am currently sending 2.6% of my income to Ukraine in the hopes that it makes a difference in medical relief, food, family support, and fighting back the hordes at their gates.

How about you? :)

Flynlow (FS) said:

And to those who say, "Yeah well, you'd think differently if it was you."  Maybe.  But people have been telling me something similar since I started work at 15, making $5.15/hr.  And I'm pretty successful now.  My views on this have only gotten more strong.  If I ever had a 10-figure networth, I'm pretty sure I'd be OK with paying a 1-2% wealth tax as part of being a good citizen and wanting a successful society around me,

I'm alot of things, very rarely a hypocrite. 

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to yupididit :

When you've always been poor sometimes you just don't know anything but how to survive while poor and doing unwise E36 M3 to help you feel less poor (living outside your means). Of course you can't blame employers as a whole but you also can't always blame poor people too.
 

My experience was similar. I grew up poor and it was normal for me. I knew others had a lot more than I did, but I just accepted that as how things were. I was happy and appreciated what I had. Owning a home or buying a new car were things for other people. Getting ahead meant getting more credit so that I could buy more stuff that I couldn't really afford. I could afford the monthly payments, which I thought was the same thing. Looking back, I realize that I was buying things that I couldn't afford to impress people who didn't care or matter. But at the time, it was important to look like I was doing better than I was. Changing my income did not change that behavior, I just bought nicer things that I couldn't afford as I made more money. Getting out of poverty took more than just changing my income, I had to change my behaviors.

It's a mindset that needs to be overcome. I come from poor. Many of which are just above poor now. Mom and Dad built their house over a span of almost 15 years on credit cards and personal loans. That is not the best way to do it. We had a farm that made money for a few years before the late 80's livestock crash. Took almost 10 years to build up to almost 400 head of hogs. Never enough to cover the mortgage taken out to start it. Break even at best. They would buy cars, but roll in the costs of the one they traded in or just take a personal loan at a high interest rate to buy a used one. Credit cards were almost always maxed out.

When I went to college (first person in my family to do so) I took those same money handling techniques. Guess what? It doesn't work well. I had 2 credit cards maxed, was working 45-50 hours a week at $7/hr to cover my rent, electric, gas for two weeks and my loan payment for school while I was taking classes. I left after 2 years with debt, no degree and a lot of anger. I met my wife who came from a different world. Dad is an accountant that taught all the kids to pay for their stuff outright or don't buy it. To save for the future and build personal wealth while enjoying life. There were a lot of arguments in those early years. We paid off my debts. My credit score was 480 when we got married. By the time we built our house I was up to 600. We have maintained no credit card debt, paid off all our loans as early as possible, put away fora  good retirement and put a nest egg back for emergencies or whatever. All on a teacher's salary and a parts guy salary. I've never made more than $60k in a year gross in my life. Doubt I really ever will at this point and that's fine. I don't need a big number to measure my manhood against. 

All this to say, there is a mindset that has to be overcome if you want to succeed and blaming companies/corps/rich people for your income level shows that you have not overcome it. Its still got a firm hold of you at that point and taxing/limiting/punishing rich/corps/companies will never fix it. 

Hey, man.  Sheryl Crow may not have said it first, but

"It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got."

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

and Luther Vandross said if you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with

SV reX said:

In reply to Steve_Jones :

Just to clarify...

HNW is more than $1million in liquid assets. Not counting their primary residence. I suspect there are a large number of HNW individuals here.

VHNW is $5 million - $30 million. 

I have seen a few definitions, but UHNW is Ultra High Net Worth, or above $30M. With a quick Google search it looks like it is now

HNW (over 1) VHNW (5-30) and UHNW (over 30, some say over 50). I agree with you, I think there are more HNW than you'd think  and even a few VHNW and UHNW that hang out here, so the statement of  "You're not that successful" is foolish. They might not have $1B, but they are doing fine. This board is made up of people that have toy cars, so most are doing ok, even if they want to bitch that they're not.

I'm not sure how we got from "are you happy with your pay over the years" to "But the really wealthy have X" though

In reply to Steve_Jones :

I'm happy it struck a chord :).  I agree they are doing fine.  It should perhaps read, "You're not THAT successful", in a lighthearted way.  It was an attempt to show that we are all much closer in wealth/abilities/mindset than we sometimes realize.  If you were to lay out a scale of:

1. The poorest person in Somalia that Boost_Crazy was talking about
2. The lowest paid person on this board
3. The highest paid/highest NW person on this board
4. Someone from the level that people think of when they think rich/billionaire (Warren Buffet, Michael Jordan, Musk, Bezos, Kardassian, Saudi Prince, Russian Oligarch, pick your example)

The scale would look something like this:

1...................................2.....3...............................................................................................................................................................................4

That was my point.

2011- Finished school with bachelors degree in mechanical engineering.

2012- 3% raise IIRC

2013- 3% raise IIRC

2014- laid off due to company moving locations and downsizing. Got new job. Around 13% raise.

2015- no raise

2016- no raise

2017- startup I was working for ran out of money. Moved job. 15% raise

2018- 2.5% raise

2019- 2.5% raise

2020- 2.5% raise. Decided to move job because I was getting nervous about the company I was with. Got 15% raise with new job but also better benefits and bonuses.

2021- 3% raise

2022-3% raise

2023- 3.5% raise.

Honestly I have accepted the only way I am going to get a real raise is by moving jobs. But right now I am going I am happy with the amount of money I make especially once I stop having to pay for daycare next summer and I like my job. Would it be nice to make a little more yeah. It would allow more saving for retirement and probably get the add on I would like to do to the house done earlier but I am happy at this job so that is good. Things that would lead to me moving, suddenly having to work a lot more overtime. I did 55-60 hour weeks at the startup company I worked at. I am never doing that again. The company looking to be in financial issues. I have been laid off twice because of financial issues at a company and I have no berkeleying interest in going through that again. 

In reply to Steve_Jones :

It always ends up at the teeth gnashing and pointing fingers at others. That's what people do. 

I started a job in 1989 that paid me $36,000/year plus commissions on my sales.

Never received any adjustment to this but my pay kept going up because I kept selling more.

I had major dips in 2001 (after the Y2K scare) and 2008 but all and all it was great.

A new owner took over in late 2013 and immediately cut my commission rate in half. He said I was making too much money so I asked him if I should sell less. He said that's not how it was going to work. I put in my two weeks notice the next morning so he relented.

I retired in early 2014 at 56 YO because the new owner was a dick in many other ways. My biggest customer ($63 million/year) went to the competition 3 months later. The new owner lost the OEM contract 2 years later and sold the business.

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

It struck a chord because no one here is poor, no mater how much they'd like to think they are. Everyone here has shelter, food, internet access, cell phone, etc. yet they want to complain how they don't have enough, because someone else has more. There are plenty of people that would love to be as poor as the poorest guy here. 

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

And Ted Nugent said when in doubt I whip it out, I got me a rock and roll band, It's a free-for-all.

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to Flynlow (FS) :

Also, do you feel the same way about worldwide net worth? Those at the top should give back to others in the world? Should there be a worldwide cap? To put it in perspective, less than $100k net worth puts you in the top 10% of worldwide. Less than $1 million net worth makes you a worldwide 1% er. If we did the above Minecraft video showing your worth Vs. the average person in Somalia, would you call for capping your own net worth? 

They did, it had the median net worth of india, central african republic, usa, and switzerland.  And my post was referencing those far beyond the 1%, but we can start there.  EDIT: Also, I didn't say cap net worth, I'm sorry you're interpreting it that way.  I said either a 1-2% wealth tax, or a revision to the tax code on the uberwealthy to ensure they pay at least what the W2 middle class does on their income (the Buffett proposal), which comes almost entirely from investments or inheritance.  I can see where I said putting limits on the wealthy would be seen that way though. 

Sure.  I would be willing to include the 1-2% "wealth tax" on my current funds to help support those in need worldwide.  I currently do so through my federal taxes (~24% rate, or higher than that on investors/CEOs paid in stock options/LTCG).  But I think you meant it more directly than that, so again, sure...I am currently sending 2.6% of my income to Ukraine in the hopes that it makes a difference in medical relief, food, family support, and fighting back the hordes at their gates.

How about you? :)

Flynlow (FS) said:

And to those who say, "Yeah well, you'd think differently if it was you."  Maybe.  But people have been telling me something similar since I started work at 15, making $5.15/hr.  And I'm pretty successful now.  My views on this have only gotten more strong.  If I ever had a 10-figure networth, I'm pretty sure I'd be OK with paying a 1-2% wealth tax as part of being a good citizen and wanting a successful society around me,

I'm alot of things, very rarely a hypocrite. 
 

Sorry, I read limit as a cap. A limit is a barrier to prevent passage.  You want to add an obstacle to make passage- accumulation of wealth- more difficult? I'm still not a fan. We already taxed their wealth when they accrued it. We already tax their wealth when the spend it. Now you want to tax their wealth just for having it. And I'm sure that you realize that much of their wealth is in the form of unrealized gains, which I really have a problem with taxing. You justify yourself with the "we need it more than they do" explanation, but in the end you are taking from someone that which you did not earn. 
 

If you are okay with adding a 1-2% wealth tax on yourself, go right ahead. There is a line on your tax form where you can pay extra. I can't fathom why anyone would do such a thing, but you are free to do whatever makes you happy. I personally have little trust in charities, as the majority exist to enrich themselves off of the big hearted but mis-guided donors. I vet who I send money to, and try to keep it local. I already "donate" a disproportionate share to Uncle Sam to distribute on my behalf. But donating by choice is not the same as confiscating against your will.

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

I'm a firm believer in local charities that actually do good works. Probably my favorite is the Lowcountry Food Bank.

I can't bring myself to read pages 2-7, but here I am for page 8 

I'd have to dig for the year over year data but after 22 years, same company, number of different roles I'm at 2.3x my starting salary. At this point more money is fine, but really looking to improve stress/$ ratio. I have had a few trying years and the money isn't always worth the hassle.