|
Subjunctive posted:$2M could be a week's earnings for some people Pretty sure you're talking out of your rear end here.
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 01:43
|
|
It's burgin' time! 
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:22 |
|
|
I heart bacon posted:Pretty sure you're talking out of your rear end here. Pretty sure you don't realize just how rich some people are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:Pretty sure you don't realize just how rich some people are. I guess not. I was born 5 days ago. We all get there are some seriously rich people, but $2m a week as part of a salary? Come the gently caress on. And even they wouldn't give a crap about wu tang. Hell, I don't give a crap about them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:I guess not. I was born 5 days ago. We all get there are some seriously rich people, but $2m a week as part of a salary? Come the gently caress on. And even they wouldn't give a crap about wu tang. Hell, I don't give a crap about them. That's $110MM a year. There are CEOs that have pulled down that much in a year. There are more that earn $500K to $1MM a week. But you're probably right about them not giving a poo poo bout Wu Tang (but I wouldn't count on it, since some of those are young CEOs). A purchase like that isn't about the music. It's about keeping score. With the status and cachet that comes with owning something literally no one else on earth can.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:I guess not. I was born 5 days ago. We all get there are some seriously rich people, but $2m a week as part of a salary? Come the gently caress on. And even they wouldn't give a crap about wu tang. Hell, I don't give a crap about them. You are so loving naive it hurts. The dude that bought this album made MILLIONS in a matter of months by jacking up the price of a single pill from about $12 to around $700. A pill that was selling THOUSANDS a day. He is a Class A dick nugget. But his is a multimillionaire that absolutely makes more than $2M a week. And of course he doesn't care about Wu-Tang, he cares about being a smug oval office, which he is pulling off in style. Lastly, literally nobody gives a gently caress whether you give a crap about Wu Tang or not because you are completely insignificant in this world and always will be, you were born a street rat, you'll die a street rat, and only your fleas will mourn you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:17
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Pranks like these are a good way to figure out which friends you should count on to save you if you get in danger.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
dpack_1 posted:you are completely insignificant in this world and always will be I'm well aware of this. But, thanks for the update sport.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:I guess not. I was born 5 days ago. We all get there are some seriously rich people, but $2m a week as part of a salary? Come the gently caress on. And even they wouldn't give a crap about wu tang. Hell, I don't give a crap about them. I guess maybe technically not if you're only counting their salary, but once you hit a certain point you stop worrying about things like "take home pay" because it just means you're going to have to pay income taxes on it. Subjunctive's point is that $2 million is a pittance to some people, which is absolutely true. e: hell, when you're talking about people like Bill Gates or Carlos slim, it's less than a pittance. $2 million is a rounding error for them. Wanamingo has a new favorite as of 02:32 on Dec 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Wanamingo posted:I guess maybe technically not if you're only counting their salary, but once you hit a certain point you stop worrying about things like "take home pay" because it just means you're going to have to pay income taxes on it. Subjunctive's point is that $2 million is a pittance to some people, which is absolutely true. I wouldn't quite call it a rounding error, but something they can lose without worrying about too much for sure. Gates let loose on a lot of money, but you know the tax breaks more than made up for his donations. But, yeah that was my point was salary wise. These guys have money to throw around, but they're still very protective about it. That's why the rich are rich and the not so rich are not so rich.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:I wouldn't quite call it a rounding error, but something they can lose without worrying about too much for sure. Gates let loose on a lot of money, but you know the tax breaks more than made up for his donations. But, yeah that was my point was salary wise. These guys have money to throw around, but they're still very protective about it. That's why the rich are rich and the not so rich are not so rich. Nah, it could be a rounding error. Bill Gates has a fortune of $82 billion. $2 million is 1/41,000 of that fortune. In terms of scale, it would be like a few cents going missing from your bank account. On a $15,000 hatchback, that's the equivalent of a 36 cent difference.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Nah, it could be a rounding error. Bill Gates has a fortune of $82 billion. $2 million is 1/41,000 of that fortune. In terms of scale, it would be like a few cents going missing from your bank account. On a $15,000 hatchback, that's the equivalent of a 36 cent difference. Good point. Isn't that more his personal worth and not actual cash assets? I thought net worth was more than what someone has in cash. His for sure didn't happen overnight either. Also wouldn't that include assets he is making payments on also? Seems like that could skew the number a bit also.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:Good point. Isn't that more his personal worth and not actual cash assets? I thought net worth was more than what someone has in cash. His for sure didn't happen overnight either. Also wouldn't that include assets he is making payments on also? Seems like that could skew the number a bit also. It's his net worth. $14 billion is Microsoft stock, while most of the remainder is invested in a bunch of stuff through his private investment firm. $4 billion is cash, small investments, and personal assets like his mansion. He's also donated over $28 billion in cash to philanthropy. A lot of it has come from gradually selling his shares in Microsoft. chitoryu12 has a new favorite as of 02:56 on Dec 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
would have been funnier if this happened with Chinese Democracy
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 03:02
|
|
|
I heart bacon posted:These guys have money to throw around, but they're still very protective about it. That's why the rich are rich and the not so rich are not so rich. They're protective about it, but that's more out of sheer greed rather than any worry about spending away their fortune. Once you get to that level of wealth, it's a challenge in and of itself to give it away faster than it accumulates. Jon Huntsman Sr. Has a net worth of around $1 billion, and throughout his life he's given almost twice that to charity. Whenever his cash reserves dry up he just starts borrowing money so he can give it away, because he knows he doesn't have to do anything to get it back. He's even vowed to die broke, but in spite of that, he's still going strong. The normal rules concerning money that you or I have to follow do not apply to the global elite. Minarch posted:would have been funnier if this happened with Chinese Democracy I wouldn't be surprised if Wu Tang pulled that stunt because they knew their album was crap that nobody would want to buy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
"Outbreak strikes school that welcomes parents who refuse vaccines." http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/e...209-gljzkx.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:08
|
|
|
(I said earnings above, not salary, quite intentionally.)I heart bacon posted:the tax breaks more than made up for his donations People keep saying this about donations, but I've never heard of a tax regime in which donating all of a sum of money leaves you with more money than not donating it and paying part of it in tax. Can someone drop a link or something? None of the finance people I've asked seem to know of any either, but they aren't tax specialists. It would seem to be a very popular thing though, and I'd certainly like to get in on it!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:People keep saying this about donations, but I've never heard of a tax regime in which donating all of a sum of money leaves you with more money than not donating it and paying part of it in tax. Can someone drop a link or something? None of the finance people I've asked seem to know of any either, but they aren't tax specialists. It would seem to be a very popular thing though, and I'd certainly like to get in on it! You are, of course, correct, but amazingly the vast majority of people fill out their tax returns every year without having any loving idea how taxes work. See also: the "don't want to get bumped into a higher tax bracket" myth that is also incredibly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Hey everyone, friendly reminder: 1st rule of economics is that a good is worth exactly as much as someone is willing to pay for it
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:You are, of course, correct, but amazingly the vast majority of people fill out their tax returns every year without having any loving idea how taxes work. See also: the "don't want to get bumped into a higher tax bracket" myth that is also incredibly stupid. If you're just talking about marginal rates, sure, that's stupid, but there are breakpoints for other things such as health care subsidies that can result in you being worse off if you make more money, because what you lose in subsidies due to a higher income isn't offset by the higher income: http://www.sfgate.com/business/networth/article/Lower-2014-income-can-net-huge-health-care-subsidy-4891087.php quote:To get a subsidy, the couple's modified adjusted gross income for 2014 income would need to fall below $62,040, which is 400 percent of poverty for a family of two. (For a single person, the cutoff is $45,960. For other size households, see https://www.tinyurl.com/pwugnus.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Honestly, I can't think of any musical artist who makes such awesome music that an exclusive album by them would be worth $2 million. Any? Are you kidding me? Even if you give no shits about their music, I wouldn't be surprised if an exclusive, completely unheard by anybody, Beatles album would be worth $2 billion, much less million.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:42
|
|
|
Yeah, step-function things like that need small steps or stuff gets weird. I don't think any of that relates to charitable donations, though, because they don't affect gross income.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:10
|
|
|
bigredbutton posted:"Outbreak strikes school that welcomes parents who refuse vaccines." While this is primo grade-A scootyfrooty, I still hope the kids come out okay. It's just chicken pox, right? Not that dangerous? bobjr posted:FREEDOM STRIKES It's a sign!
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:While this is primo grade-A scootyfrooty, I still hope the kids come out okay. It's just chicken pox, right? Not that dangerous? Chickenpox is pretty common in elementary schools and most kids aren't vaccinated against it until a certain age and only unless they haven't already had it (I never got it and at 16 got the vaccine just in case). It's very dangerous for adults and kids with compromised immune systems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:While this is primo grade-A scootyfrooty, I still hope the kids come out okay. It's just chicken pox, right? Not that dangerous? The kids will be fine, and the parents will come out of it believing in the anti-vax stuff even more. The real problem is going to start when one of the moms throws a measles party.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Eponine posted:Chickenpox is pretty common in elementary schools and most kids aren't vaccinated against it until a certain age and only unless they haven't already had it (I never got it and at 16 got the vaccine just in case). It's very dangerous for adults and kids with compromised immune systems. I got it at 15, and it was awful. I ended up missing a week of school and covered in lesions, feeling like I had the flu. I still remember the dose of horror I got in the early morning, stumbling into my bathroom and getting the first glimpse of my face as I tried to shower for school. The only good news that came out of it is that it occurred when GTA IV came out and I had pre-ordered it, so I at least had something to do while I was gone. I still have two scars (one of which is a crater in the side of my nose) from lesions that I ended up rubbing off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Edit: Oh my God this loving quote.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
Lazlo Nibble posted:Before you brag about doing something for the first time in the history of recorded music, you should probably make sure you're actually doing it for the first time in the history of recorded music. I was more baffled by the "like the scepter of an Egyptian king" line. Because clearly, royal artifacts of an ancient civilization are on par in prestige and value on your shelf with music by the Wu Tang Clan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:You are, of course, correct, but amazingly the vast majority of people fill out their tax returns every year without having any loving idea how taxes work. See also: the "don't want to get bumped into a higher tax bracket" myth that is also incredibly stupid. Well the tax bracket stuff matters, but only when you're near the edges. Bonus related schadenstory: In college I had two roommates that both got the same job at a local pizza delivery place. The two were best friends, but one was a slacker, and the other a clean cut, nose to the grindstone type. A couple months in, the hard worker's diligence paid off and he got a small promotion which included a raise that was less than a dollar more an hour. However, it WAS enough to bump him up to the next tax bracket on his paycheck, which meant while his gross pay was higher than the slacker, after taxes it was less! He did not find this funny. We all did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:16
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Well the tax bracket stuff matters, but only when you're near the edges. That's not how tax brackets work. Google terms of interest may include "marginal tax rate". Was this pizza guy Albert Einstein?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Well the tax bracket stuff matters, but only when you're near the edges. No, it doesn't. If you make more money before tax, you make more money after tax. There is no mythical place in the tax bracket system where you can get a tiny raise and take home less money. Furthermore, your story is bullshit. The reason it's bullshit is that all of your old income is taxed exactly the same as it was before your raise, but the new extra bit of income is taxed at a slightly higher rate. So, for example, say you earned 20 bucks an hour and calculated over a whole year this comes out to you taking home 18 an hour after taxes. You get a raise of 20 cents, and it just so happens that this exactly pushes you over a tax bracket, so all your new income is in that new bracket. Your original 20 bucks is taxed exactly the same, so you still pay that same 2 dollars, but of that new 20 cents, you pay 3 cents instead of the 2 you would have paid under the old bracket. So your take-home income is now 18.17 - less than you would have expected if you hadn't gone up a bracket, but still more than you earned before the raise. You do NOT have all your income taxed at that new rate, which would have you paying 3.03 and taking home 17.17, that's just not how it works, that never happens, and 
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:29
|
|
|
I know a guy it happened to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
It's the old "Put your hand on that dart board and I'll throw the dart between your fingers, I promise" trick! http://imgur.com/gallery/MT7aVoD synthetik posted:I'm looking for the article and I'll edit it in when I find it, but it's basically the other way around - the guy that bought it actually bought exclusive rights to the album, the buyer can redistribute and sell or give it away or whatever, WT now has no rights to it. Apparently they built a loophole into the contract: 
Snowglobe of Doom has a new favorite as of 07:02 on Dec 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
Choco1980 posted:Well the tax bracket stuff matters, but only when you're near the edges. This is very much not how taxes work in the United States or, I would reckon, any English-speaking country. Your friend was using that as an excuse to skip buying rounds by blaming taxes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 07:11
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:It's the old "Put your hand on that dart board and I'll throw the dart between your fingers, I promise" trick! That's a pretty big fuckin loophole
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 07:18
|
|
|
http://kfor.com/2015/12/09/teenager-killed-after-being-pulled-into-wood-chipper-on-first-day-of-work/ They have had a doozy of a day.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:http://imgur.com/gallery/MT7aVoD Oh my god, this is amazing. Really hope they actually go through with it, and that Shkreli doesn't just put it in a safety deposit box or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 07:40
|
|
|
Can they perform the music/songs without commercial intent? I wonder what does the contract say about that
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 08:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 20:22 |
|
|
do people really think that is from the contract?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2015 08:12
|
|