|
Motronic posted:He never follows up in the thread, but I guess realized he can't afford that car. So then he starts posintg:
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:00 |
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:Speaking of being bad with money: The US national debt. Are there any good unbiased sources that do the math about various social programs, healthcare programs, tax cuts and so on suggested by the various political figures and sides in the US? I'm sitting here in Europe, scared about US debt. Its still managable at these levels with debt to gdp ratio of 105, its certainly on the upper level of things, when compared to individual European countries. As others have mentioned, being the worlds reserve currency gives a lot of options to protecting the USA economy. But the debt to GDP has been growing extremely quickly over the past decade and with the current deficit, it really can become problematic, especially when the next recession hits, the time a country is supposed to run a large deficit...
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Car loan 72 months and 7.29%APR I love them starting at credit card interest and then bringing it down to the level for unsecured loans to sway him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
You really don’t even need to tax the kinda-wealthy or cut back on military spending. Just tax the ultra-wealthy 580ish billionaires in the US and corporations appropriately, leave everything else the same.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:10
|
|
|
JUST MAKING CHILI posted:You really don’t even need to tax the kinda-wealthy or cut back on military spending. Just tax the ultra-wealthy 580ish billionaires in the US and corporations appropriately, leave everything else the same. Taxing corporations heavily will hurt a wide swathe of the kinda-wealthy who make a lot of money in RSUs/options, and as far as taxing billionaires making any sizable dent in the debt, you would need to be talking wealth taxes as opposed to income taxes. I'm all in favor of a steeper income tax curve at the top end, but there's some dangerous territory in wealth taxes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
It's also worth noting that a huge amount of the US debt is owned basically by the US itself; about a third is owed to actual US government entities or branches like the SS trust fund or the federal reserve and USG retirement vehicles, and another third is owed to US people and institutions. That doesn't make it meaningless or irrelevant, but it's very different than all that money being owed externally to foreign countries or institutions which was the case for somewhere like Greece. China is the biggest single foreign holder, but they only have 7% of the debt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:22
|
|
|
Just get rid of ltcg tax so all capital gains are taxed at the same rate as income.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
baquerd posted:Taxing corporations heavily will hurt a wide swathe of the kinda-wealthy who make a lot of money in RSUs/options, and as far as taxing billionaires making any sizable dent in the debt, you would need to be talking wealth taxes as opposed to income taxes. I'm all in favor of a steeper income tax curve at the top end, but there's some dangerous territory in wealth taxes. The 585 US billionaires have a combined net worth of just north of $3 trillion. The US National Debt is $21 trillion. Confiscate everything the entirety of that $3 trillion, you put a small dent in the national debt, and then you spend it back up to $21 trillion a few years later. What's an "appropriate" corporate tax? It used to be 39%, which was one of the highest statutory rates in the world (and the only ones higher were not-really-countries like Puerto Rico and the UAE). Granted, that's statutory rate, not effective rate, but even if you look at the effective corporate tax rate the US came in at 4th-highest in the world, pretty much the same as the UK's and behind only Argentina and Japan. The statutory rate just went down to 25%, but a number of major deductions were eliminated, we don't have a good handle on what the effective corporate tax rate is for 2018. What's appropriate? The UK's is 18.6%. Canada's is 8.5%.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Aren't BMWs especially lovely because maintenance costs on them are unreasonably high? Yes. The 3 series not nearly as bad as the 7 series (and to some extent the 5 as well). Also, the maintenance is manageable - if it's done on time. It quickly spirals out of control in like every last one of these cars once they hit the $15k range and end up on a tote your note lot, where people who can't afford them just drive until the stop driving with zero maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
I’m confused as to what the big problem will be for the US if the debt gets too high. It’s all in US dollars which are still the world reserve currency and between the demand for dollars and for the debt itself it seems like it won’t really be a problem. If we have another recession the demand for Treasuries will go way up anyway, so the interest rate on the debt will fall.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
ranbo das posted:Just get rid of ltcg tax so all capital gains are taxed at the same rate as income. Just graduate it more, don't treat middle-incomes having investments on the same level as people getting millions in LTCGs a year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:The 585 US billionaires have a combined net worth of just north of $3 trillion. The absolute national debt doesn't matter, it doesn't need to ever be paid back really. Phanatic posted:What's an "appropriate" corporate tax? It used to be 39%, which was one of the highest statutory rates in the world (and the only ones higher were not-really-countries like Puerto Rico and the UAE). Granted, that's statutory rate, not effective rate, but even if you look at the effective corporate tax rate the US came in at 4th-highest in the world, pretty much the same as the UK's and behind only Argentina and Japan. The statutory rate just went down to 25%, but a number of major deductions were eliminated, we don't have a good handle on what the effective corporate tax rate is for 2018. What's appropriate? The UK's is 18.6%. Canada's is 8.5%. If you can design a tax system freely (which we obviously can't, we can't do anything at all about taxes) then it would be better to tax corporations at 0% and make sure all ways to get money out of a corporation is taxed apropriately (heavily, ideally in some way tied to the payroll taxes so that it punishes extra hard if there are not commensurate wages paid). Then add heavily progressive income and wealth taxes. Corporate taxes are a mess mostly. The US is bad with money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
US Gov't: we are running on a huge deficit. here is my budget. help, my people are dying! budget - food: $100 medicine: $200 shelter: $300 industrial military complex: $874,400,000,000 "spend less on industrial military complex" US Gov't: no
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:I’m confused as to what the big problem will be for the US if the debt gets too high. It’s all in US dollars which are still the world reserve currency and between the demand for dollars and for the debt itself it seems like it won’t really be a problem. If we have another recession the demand for Treasuries will go way up anyway, so the interest rate on the debt will fall. A lot of this hinges on what is meant by "too high", but the basic way this ends poorly is if the USA debt continues to grow. Investors may start worrying about the USA's potential to service the debt (granted we are a long way from this point) and that pushes the interest rate on the debt up. As the currency further devalues (via printing money to service the debt) and interest rates need to continuously be raised, countries around the world would effectively abandon the US $ as the global reserve currency. Like I said though, this scenario is a very long way off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
When you can issue debt in your own currency, the rules are different. Japan is running debt way above the US in terms of debt to gdp ratios, but can borrow in yen so they have low borrowing costs. Japan’s economic slowness is more about demographics than public debt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Cybernetic Vermin posted:The absolute national debt doesn't matter, it doesn't need to ever be paid back really. That's a very BWM take. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-bonds-foreign-graphic/foreign-buyers-find-u-s-treasuries-less-appealing-idUSKCN1NV27V
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:That's a very BWM take. That's very much a question of the relative change of the national debt though, which, depending on magnitude, can be an issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 17:09
|
|
|
Concerned about the house we bought and our overspending. First time finance poster. https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/comments/a0vzny/concerned_about_the_house_we_bought_and_our/ quote:My husband and I just moved into a new house that on paper we could afford. I work full time and he’s in school full time. I make 6 figures, but with a big mortgage and his school payments, we’re living uncomfortably tight and often not meeting our budget requirements. $7120/mo, $85k/yr take home, so barely $100k gross. $7383/mo in expenses One of them not working. $2300/mo mortgage, only put 5% down, so they bought a $500k house. On $100k/yr. Reddit, why didn't this work they way I thought it would? quote:decaturbob Also: quote:breezy727
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 17:51
|
|
|
Motronic posted:
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
It’s complex. You see 21 trillion and that’s a lot, but like’s been said we owe a lot of it to ourselves and a lot that we owe to others is just there as a hedge or place to park money. It’s the world’s safest investment and people will take a small loss in uncertain times just to avoid a large loss. There was a quick minute when it looked like the Euro might be preferable to the Dollar and then Greece happened and now everyone’s loving on the Dollar again. As for how much to tax. A lot and across all income brackets. We will probably need a new payroll and a higher consumption tax. Ironically the system now is more progressive than it’s been in awhile, although that will change when the lower income tax cuts sunset. We will need to tax rich people at least at 1990’s levels, but you can’t dig yourself out of this sized entitlement hole increasing taxes only on the wealthy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
$500 every two weeks for groceries is absolutely outrageous for a family of three, moreso when one is a child. They have to be shopping at Whole Foods.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Motronic posted:Concerned about the house we bought and our overspending. First time finance poster. You buried the lede quote:We were overspending quite a bit in the “entertainment category” so I upped it to $400. Maybe that’s too much, maybe too little. I honestly don’t know. But I lumped many things into that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Their grow op clearing isn’t bringing in enough to justify their $681 utility expense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
If they figured out how to eat cheaper they could break even. Lots of things they could be doing to tighten their belt just a little. And yeah $681 utilities wtf
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
The husband is racking up debt and not working for the next 2-3 years to become a teacher. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
I wonder what part of the country they live in. It would really effect how extra stupid that 500k house is. That utility budget would make sense if they are in a cheap city like Cleveland and have to heat/cool a stupid 4k+ sqft mcmansion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
Doccykins posted:You buried the lede Candles $3,600
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:I wonder what part of the country they live in. It would really effect how extra stupid that 500k house is. That utility budget would make sense if they are in a cheap city like Cleveland and have to heat/cool a stupid 4k+ sqft mcmansion. Yeah that was what I was thinking, enormous house and lovely insulation
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Also I'm kinda surprised they managed to get all the way through the process without anyone telling them how bad of an idea this was. That has to have been right on the edge of the max they could legally borrow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:Also I'm kinda surprised they managed to get all the way through the process without anyone telling them how bad of an idea this was. That has to have been right on the edge of the max they could legally borrow. Mortgage originators and real estate agents give zero shits beyond making the sale
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:Speaking of being bad with money: The US national debt. Are there any good unbiased sources that do the math about various social programs, healthcare programs, tax cuts and so on suggested by the various political figures and sides in the US? I'm sitting here in Europe, scared about US debt. I know this is a little ways back but weirdly, Steve Ballmer started a nonprofit for this last year: https://usafacts.org It's got some fascinating data. Say what you will about him as a CEO but I thought it was a pretty cool project. Turns out, it's really loving hard to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 18:54
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:Also I'm kinda surprised they managed to get all the way through the process without anyone telling them how bad of an idea this was. That has to have been right on the edge of the max they could legally borrow. They most likely bought right on the edge of what their borrower would give them, but no one tells people that it's a bad idea to borrow that much, even if the bank says you can afford it. I would never survive if I borrowed what the bank was willing to lend me when I bought my house.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
I’m spending over my budget! I know, I’ll just increase my budget and walla look at that I’m now UNDER budget 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:04
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LunaticPreserve/status/1067481586369626113
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:They most likely bought right on the edge of what their borrower would give them, but no one tells people that it's a bad idea to borrow that much, even if the bank says you can afford it. I would never survive if I borrowed what the bank was willing to lend me when I bought my house. I remember when I was making around $32k/year and the lender was willing to loan me over $165k for a home, and were pushing a 40-year interest-only loan with a 5-year balloon. The girl had the audacity to tell me that house prices never go down when I asked what happens if the house is worth less than when I paid for it in 5 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
I must have just been lucky with my LO. I remember she said "So we can lend you up to xxx if you really want, but it would be a bad idea to spend anywhere near that." It might have been that I was already coming in with a budget to spend so it wasn't worth trying to push my numbers up. She did also say that a lot of people seemed offended at the idea they shouldn't spend near the max though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:25
|
|
|
Hoodwinker posted:Aren't BMWs especially lovely because maintenance costs on them are unreasonably high? The next 5 years of car ownership will cost the same, but in one scenario he isn't also going to be paying $500/month in insurance premiums and 8% interest. Motronic posted:Concerned about the house we bought and our overspending. First time finance poster. And that's 0% 401k I would imagine. Certainly $0 IRA. H110Hawk fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Nov 27, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Whether or not the lender keeps their own loans makes a difference. No one cared before the Great Recession because a lot mortgages were bundled with AAA ratings and sold off almost immediately. If you’re banking on decades of income from the borrower then you make safer loans. If all you care about are fees then you make big lovely deals that you offload as fast as possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:48
|
|
|
Nocheez posted:I remember when I was making around $32k/year and the lender was willing to loan me over $165k for a home, and were pushing a 40-year interest-only loan with a 5-year balloon. The girl had the audacity to tell me that house prices never go down when I asked what happens if the house is worth less than when I paid for it in 5 years. You don't have to sell the house after 5 years, just get it refinanced They'll give you a new higher valuation in order to sell you another mortgage product with more origination fees No additional money leaves their pocket, it just increases the upside for them if you stay current on your loan
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:00 |
|
|
Devor posted:You don't have to sell the house after 5 years, just get it refinanced This may shock you, but it was 2006 and the housing bubble hadn't burst yet. I would have been turbofucked if I had a 5-year balloon due on an interest-only loan at that point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2018 20:01
|
|