Anybody watch state of the union?

brsnow

WKR
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,847
I am from the I can or glass is half full campaign. I think you are looking for any reason to fail. This is the way a lot of people think and I believe it contributes to failure. Sure stuff comes up in life, but to use that as an absolute or reason to fail is absurd. There are lots of scenarios where saving money is not possible, but getting on the right track early on and NOT relying on the Gov't, will help someone get thru these tough times.

I am prepared, I am pointing out most are not. The bankruptcy rate of people with cancer for example is alarming. As dementia rates rise, long-term care or the burden on children to take care of their parents is real. You can be an optimist without ignoring reality.
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2014
Messages
2,520
Location
Phoenix, Az
I agree, that the unforeseen sucks!! Putting money in retirement accounts early on, when you can, protects that money in bankruptcy. Which again goes back to the point of contribute early and often and set yourself up for a better future. You can not predict the future, but you can prepare yourself for it. In the event you get a shit sandwich you have to eat, you sleep easier at night knowing that should you have to do the unthinkable and file bankruptcy, your retirement will not be affected. Life is full of decisions, making bad ones often leads to placing blame on others and not owning up to your own mistakes. Blaming the President, which is how this discussion was started, is the easy way out. I teach my children to own up to their mistakes and not rely on others.

EVERYONE has the opportunity to create their own life. Some have a MUCH, MUCH more difficult path, but it is still possible. Parenting is the problem in the USA not the Presidents tax policy. Plenty of success stories from the absolute worst childhood. Point being, quit blaming the president and take Your future by the horns. Think positive and positive things will happen.
 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,979
Which ones? The boomers and previous generations just discharged them via bankruptcy, hence the closing of that loophole.

If your at the point of bankruptcy due to medical, the best thing you can do is negotiate a payment plan that works for you, not them. Never use credit cards, home equity or pull funds from a 401k to pay for anything medical.
 

CorbLand

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
8,188
At $63k a year you shouldn’t live in a $200k home, drive a new vehicle, play golf and complain. Sorry but when I only made $40k a year I could still save and afford my life, hunting and gear was what I couldn’t afford as much as I can now.

There is zero reason at $63k a year you can’t save.

Also it’s funny your stuck on $19.5, you don’t have to start at the max, no one does but all you have to do is start and keep increasing it with time, it’s pretty easy.

I am not going to argue with you as I agree with a lot of what you said but when was the last time you saw a decent house for 200K?
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2017
Messages
757
You mean the pennies that were brought back to the US economy? Give me a break it wasn’t even close to being revenue neutral. Total loss for US revenue.



In terms of repatriation:

“Balance of payments data show that U.S. firms repatriated $777 billion in 2018, roughly 78 percent of the estimated stock as of end-2017 of offshore cash holdings.”

I’ll take that $777-billion brought back to the USA all day long. The trend of repatriation did continue through 2019 [at a slower rate], we should be seeing that data soon.
 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,979
I am not going to argue with you as I agree with a lot of what you said but when was the last time you saw a decent house for 200K?

Everyday and all day in KC, it will not be new construction or 5 bedrooms and not in the best but in a decent school district. I’ve seen it here where people have to live in a new house or the most expesive neighborhoo, at $63k a year that shouldn’t be a consideration at this point in life.

I live on 2 acres in the city in a crap hole I bought 13 years ago for $100k, I’m building a new house this year with cash, for far less then $200k. It took me 13 yers to get to this point.
 
Last edited:

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,979
In terms of repatriation:

“Balance of payments data show that U.S. firms repatriated $777 billion in 2018, roughly 78 percent of the estimated stock as of end-2017 of offshore cash holdings.”

I’ll take that $777-billion brought back to the USA all day long. The trend of repatriation did continue through 2019 [at a slower rate], we should be seeing that data soon.

Seems like many are an all or nothing mentality.
 

MattB

WKR
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,743
Haha, I just have a mentality that anything can be done, just because something has always been doesn’t mean it has to stay that way. I’m not a tech nerd by any means but I do know that new tech comes out constantly making much of what was key 5 years ago obsolete with new patents coming out daily.

Does Google have any foreign operations? Does it provide the same level of services there that it does here? There is no reason these companies wouldn’t open up operations outside of CA to gain/retain market share but that doesn’t mean the earnings from these operations go back to CA.

Think of Apple and Google having billions in cash sitting overseas from their operations there, they wouldn’t bring back that cash until the recent changes.

If CA separated it is highly likely the Corp tax rate would skyrocket there, over 50%, all you have to do is see the direction their politicians are going with this.

The businesses in CA aren’t just going to stop making money off the US consumers but it’s highly unlikely their only operation will be in CA.

You seem to have the mentality that you could just snap your fingers and solve situations that our country hasn't been able to crack over the past 15+ years - especially if the vast majority of the dollars and will to try to affect change were all of a sudden on the other side of a wall and became the competition. That isn't optimism, and I don't think hubris begins to describe it. It's simply irrational.

Companies do not necessarily bill/generate revenue/pay income tax in the jurisdiction in which they sell, and I'd think someone who has it all figured out would already knw that.
 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,979
You seem to have the mentality that you could just snap your fingers and solve situations that our country hasn't been able to crack over the past 15+ years - especially if the vast majority of the dollars and will to try to affect change were all of a sudden on the other side of a wall and became the competition. That isn't optimism, and I don't think hubris begins to describe it. It's simply irrational.

Companies do not necessarily bill/generate revenue/pay income tax in the jurisdiction in which they sell, and I'd think someone who has it all figured out would already knw that.

Haha, far from that but I am of the mentality we can try new things, yup there is risk, but there is also opportunity. Also I haven’t even been serious in this discussion but I do know our country wouldn’t fail if CA was gone. And say our GDP drops 1/7th but we have no debt and $6T in the bank, you still think we couldn’t survive without CA? Do you really think the US would crumble?
 
Last edited:

MattB

WKR
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
5,743
You mean the pennies that were brought back to the US economy? Give me a break it wasn’t even close to being revenue neutral. Total loss for US revenue.



The article you posted basically supports what I had previously stated, so not sure your point. The move shouldn't have been viewed or billed to increase tax revenue or even be tax-neutral. It was made to put US corporations on a level playing field internationally. When viewed from that perspective, US corporations have been subsidizing the tax burden of our citizens for decades, to our detriment as participants in the world economy.
 

CorbLand

WKR
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Messages
8,188
Everyday and all day in KC, it will not be new construction or 5 bedrooms and not in the best but in a decent school district. I’ve seen it here where people have to live in a new house or the most expesive neighborhoo, at $63k a year that shouldn’t be a consideration at this point in life.

I live on 2 acres in the city in a crap hole I bought 13 years ago for $100k, I’m building a new house this year with cash, for far less then $200k. It took me 13 yers to get to this point.

Consider yourself lucky then. I can’t even find a shit hole for under 200K.

Once again, not arguing but 13 years ago was the middle of the recession. Those prices are long gone man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

tdhanses

WKR
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,979
Consider yourself lucky then. I can’t even find a shit hole for under 200K.

Once again, not arguing but 13 years ago was the middle of the recession. Those prices are long gone man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t consider myself lucky, I worked my ass off and didn’t buy the $600k home others did. Yup the prices are long gone but you can still put a roof over your head and be in a safe area for under $200k.

Also this comes at a cost, I don’t live in the mountains. But this also goes back to choices, I live where I can make a good living and have reasonable expenses.
 

ODB

WKR
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
4,056
Location
N.F.D.
Which ones? The boomers and previous generations just discharged them via bankruptcy, hence the closing of that loophole.

Funny how everyone forgets about generation X , we just plod along, paying our bills, making the numbskulls look good...

As far as I recollect, chapt 7 or 13 do not include school loans.
 

brsnow

WKR
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,847
Funny how everyone forgets about generation X , we just plod along, paying our bills, making the numbskulls look good...

As far as I recollect, chapt 7 or 13 do not include school loans.
It used to, but older generations abused it, so legislation was passed to exclude. I am a member of gen x.
 

Savagenut

WKR
Joined
Dec 2, 2018
Messages
1,287
The article you posted basically supports what I had previously stated, so not sure your point. The move shouldn't have been viewed or billed to increase tax revenue or even be tax-neutral. It was made to put US corporations on a level playing field internationally. When viewed from that perspective, US corporations have been subsidizing the tax burden of our citizens for decades, to our detriment as participants in the world economy.

So revenue is down and overall tax burdens down on corporations and US spending is up. And thedebt is at an all-time high.And very few companies actually moved their money back to the US so yes if that was your goal then rock on buddy.
 
Top