2 2
turtlespeed

DNC Hopefuls

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, airdvr said:

You can twist it any way you want.  The question still stands.

Now, is Trump the best the R's have to offer...obviously no. 

Obviously yes.  He was chosen by Republican voters to represent them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Now, is Trump the best the R's have to offer...obviously no.  But your DNC gave us Trump by trying to install one of the most divisive persons you could possibly find.

How ironic that the Republicans turn out to be allergic to taking responsibility for their actions. The Reublican party chose Trump over all the other candidates available before it was a case of him vs Clinton, and Clinton wasn't any more divisive than any other candidate until the Rs used their elected offices to run a sustained, vicious and ultimately highly effective character assassination campaign against her.

 

Trump is your deal, not theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, airdvr said:

Where I come from a 2 million dollar net worth is pretty rich.

Once again - how rich is it compared to any other candidate selected by either party? 

 

Ultimately, Sanders has been a popular politician for a long time and he wrote a book. I don't really see any way he could be less well off than he is right now unless he was dedicated to giving away everything he has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so. But your congressman earns about $175,000 per year, too. And have since 2009. If they save 10% of net (let’s figure that at 75% of gross), that’s $1000/week. At simple interest of just 4% (way under what most IRAs would earn), that’s over 150,000 just in savings. Add real estate appreciation (Vermont and Washington DC both are appreciating markets), and book earnings, and it’s not surprising that in 60 or so years of working and frugal living (look at him — he’s not a large liver :D) he’d have a couple of million between him and his working wife. 

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, jakee said:

How ironic that the Republicans turn out to be allergic to taking responsibility for their actions. The Reublican party chose Trump over all the other candidates available before it was a case of him vs Clinton, and Clinton wasn't any more divisive than any other candidate until the Rs used their elected offices to run a sustained, vicious and ultimately highly effective character assassination campaign against her.

Trump is your deal, not theirs.

I've heard other Republicans say the same, yet somehow Trump is LESS divisive?  In the end after all the accusations, all the investigations that turned up nothing, all the congressional hearings that concluded the same way, all the conspiracies about murders and bribes you'd STILL hear them say, "Well, when there's smoke there's fire!"  Yes, from the fires she keeps putting out every time they try to burn her at the stake.

3ro1m3.jpg

Edited by DJL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Maybe so. But your congressman earns about $175,000 per year, too. And have since 2009. If they save 10% of net (let’s figure that at 75% of gross), that’s $1000/week. At simple interest of just 4% (way under what most IRAs would earn), that’s over 150,000 just in savings. Add real estate appreciation (Vermont and Washington DC both are appreciating markets), and book earnings, and it’s not surprising that in 60 or so years of working and frugal living (look at him — he’s not a large liver :D) he’d have a couple of million between him and his working wife. 

Wendy P. 

Except for the totally uncalled for liver joke, this is spot on. airdvr maybe, compared to liberals, you just suck at capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2020 at 12:24 PM, wmw999 said:

Either that, or she is waiting to make a deal or see what happens between now and the convention. 

Hi Wendy,

'Sanders campaign co-chair floats Warren for VP slot'

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/06/elizabeth-warren-vp-pick-bernie-sanders-122833

Maybe you should hire out as a political consultant.

Jerry Baumchen

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, airdvr said:

Where I come from a 2 million dollar net worth is pretty rich.

A net worth of that size at the age Bernie is would be fairly solidly upper middle class. I suspect several regular posters here have a net worth of at least that much. It is not really that high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Wendy,

'Sanders campaign co-chair floats Warren for VP slot'

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/06/elizabeth-warren-vp-pick-bernie-sanders-122833

Maybe you should hire out as a political consultant.

Jerry Baumchen

 

That'll secure the nomination for Biden, I suspect.

 

I might be off in my reckoning, but I think what most average Democratic voters want for the next 4 years isn't a protracted fight about gun rights, or healthcare, or abortion, or any of the typical 'lefty issues'; it's simply to steady the ship and have an end to the absolute insanity of the current President and the new type of politics.

Under Trump the established government social rules have been changed. Openly lying is OK. Corruption, racism, bigotry and vice are acceptable. Communication in 128 characters of less is the appropriate channel from the ultimate authority. Loyalty to the CIC is more important than honesty and integrity to the country...

I think voters are uncomfortable with this change to their understanding of what 'politics' was and how the game was played, so it wouldn't surprise me to see them vote for the old establishment for this election, just to get back to a set of rules they understand. Bernie is almost too far in the opposite direction generally, and a female VP would be another 'change' to the old and comfortably understood rules.

 

When your car is on fire and pissing gas everywhere, it's probably the wrong time to start thinking about improving engine efficiency and installing eco-friendly seat covers, is all I'm saying. ;) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, yoink said:

I might be off in my reckoning, but I think what most average Democratic voters want for the next 4 years isn't a protracted fight about gun rights, or healthcare, or abortion, or any of the typical 'lefty issues'; it's simply to steady the ship and have an end to the absolute insanity of the current President and the new type of politics.

Exactly.  There is only one issue that matters in this election: Putting a functioning adult in the Whitehouse.

I get so damned tired of the candidates laying out elaborate plans, and attacking each other in a circular firing squad. Newsflash: The Executive branch does not make the law; The Legislative branch does that. Need proof? After promising to replace ACA with "something better, that is cheaper, and covers everybody", the current Whitehouse Clown spent two years trying to sabotage ACA while his party controlled the House & Senate, yet failed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, yoink said:

That'll secure the nomination for Biden, I suspect.

 

I might be off in my reckoning, but I think what most average Democratic voters want for the next 4 years isn't a protracted fight about gun rights, or healthcare, or abortion, or any of the typical 'lefty issues'; it's simply to steady the ship and have an end to the absolute insanity of the current President and the new type of politics.

Under Trump the established government social rules have been changed. Openly lying is OK. Corruption, racism, bigotry and vice are acceptable. Communication in 128 characters of less is the appropriate channel from the ultimate authority. Loyalty to the CIC is more important than honesty and integrity to the country...

I think voters are uncomfortable with this change to their understanding of what 'politics' was and how the game was played, so it wouldn't surprise me to see them vote for the old establishment for this election, just to get back to a set of rules they understand. Bernie is almost too far in the opposite direction generally, and a female VP would be another 'change' to the old and comfortably understood rules.

 

When your car is on fire and pissing gas everywhere, it's probably the wrong time to start thinking about improving engine efficiency and installing eco-friendly seat covers, is all I'm saying. ;) 

Bingo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, gowlerk said:

A net worth of that size at the age Bernie is would be fairly solidly upper middle class. I suspect several regular posters here have a net worth of at least that much. It is not really that high.

And not impossible to achieve. 1. Work hard, two jobs if possible. 2. Don't waste money on flashy cars or jacked up muscle trucks no one needs. 3. Don't waste money on designer crap that can be bought at Ross for 80% less. 4. Save and invest in diverse mutual funds and real estate. 5. Don't buy a house you don't need. Instead buy two, one for you and one to rent. 6. Continue working hard. 7. Don't have kids until you can actually afford them.

Start early enough and even if hell hits you might have a shot at a reboot. You don't need to be a Super Genius like Donald J. Trump to pull it off, you just need to want it more than short work weeks and all of that so precious personal time. It isn't about home runs, either. I know an immigrant family that has made it at least half way there in 7 years selling dollar tacos. 
 
If you'd rather live a carefree life of catfishing and darts at the local pub and have more kids than you can beat in a single afternoon that's just wonderful. If being old and poor is a risk you'll take in exchange for the constant effort of getting ahead that's cool, too. But don't talk numbers when you are deciding what is rich and what is poor. That's not your game.
 
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, airdvr said:

Where I come from a 2 million dollar net worth is pretty rich.

Anyone in their 70s who's been employed in a professional career all their life SHOULD be worth $2M net (including a paid-off home).  If not, they must have just spent their money on hookers, booze and skydiving, and wasted the rest.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Maybe so. But your congressman earns about $175,000 per year, too. And have since 2009. If they save 10% of net (let’s figure that at 75% of gross), that’s $1000/week. At simple interest of just 4% (way under what most IRAs would earn), that’s over 150,000 just in savings. Add real estate appreciation (Vermont and Washington DC both are appreciating markets), and book earnings, and it’s not surprising that in 60 or so years of working and frugal living (look at him — he’s not a large liver :D) he’d have a couple of million between him and his working wife. 

Wendy P. 

175000 x .75 = 131250

131250 x 10% = 13125/yr = 252.40/Wk.

:E

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

175000 x .75 = 131250

131250 x 10% = 13125/yr = 252.40/Wk.

:E

 

Leave the math to BillVon, try philosophy instead: save, save and save until you have a million dollars. IRA's, Roth's, 401K's or whatever is on offer. If you are making $150K per year you are likely taking home around $100K. Live on $50 or $60 or even $70K if you must and bank the remainder in the most tax friendly way possible. Time passes fast and a million is not decades away for the frugal. Or, don't give a shit, that also works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

175000 x .75 = 131250

131250 x 10% = 13125/yr = 252.40/Wk.

Going with Wendy's numbers, he'd have $2.7 million after 56 years of working (assuming he started earning when he was 22.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Leave the math to BillVon, try philosophy instead: save, save and save until you have a million dollars. IRA's, Roth's, 401K's or whatever is on offer. If you are making $150K per year you are likely taking home around $100K. Live on $50 or $60 or even $70K if you must and bank the remainder in the most tax friendly way possible. Time passes fast and a million is not decades away for the frugal. Or, don't give a shit, that also works.

You don't have a clue as to why I posted that do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, billvon said:

Going with Wendy's numbers, he'd have $2.7 million after 56 years of working (assuming he started earning when he was 22.)

Going with Wendy's numbers - he is saving 10% of his income after taxes (of 25%) and that is somehow  1000/Week.

Work that up in reverse to see what that annual income is.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I assumed there was no reason other than you just like posting.

Perhaps you shouldn't rely on your assumption quite so much.

In Wendy's scenario, the annual income of 175K, then nets (in a 25% bracket) 131250.

She then said saving 10% would be 1000/week. 

The actual amount of someone saving 1000/Week would be 52000/annual in savings.  Since that is 10% of Net in her scenario, net would be 520k.  Tax bracket of 25% would make the actual income 650K.

 

I was just surprised she would make an error like that - she's a rocket surgeon, you know.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Perhaps you shouldn't rely on your assumption quite so much.

In Wendy's scenario, the annual income of 175K, then nets (in a 25% bracket) 131250.

She then said saving 10% would be 1000/week. 

The actual amount of someone saving 1000/Week would be 52000/annual in savings.  Since that is 10% of Net in her scenario, net would be 520k.  Tax bracket of 25% would make the actual income 650K.

 

I was just surprised she would make an error like that - she's a rocket surgeon, you know.;)

You're right. I should have assumed you just like arguing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2