Register to Comment
Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 141 to 150 of 150
Like Tree92Likes
  1. #141
    Tim Johnston Tim Johnston is offline
    Tim Johnston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,260

    Quote Originally Posted by feargach View Post
    On my €15m a year income, I'm far from being wealthy because I'm still miles away from owning my own tropical island paradise.

    And €150m per year isn't wealthy because you can't afford a luxury condo on the moon.

    There's always some luxury item that'll stretch any budget, but that's nothing to do with whether the label "wealthy" can be attached to a person on a €100,000 income.

    What's the better measure of whether €100K = "wealthy"?

    Option 1: some extreme luxury is or isn't affordable at that income level. The affordability of that luxury, or collection of luxuries, is the determinant of whether that label applies or not.
    Option 2: we look at what the median earnings are, and we look at what proportion of the populace earns less than 100K. If the former is very far below 100K, and if the latter proportion is 90% or higher, then "wealthy" applies.

    It's all very easy if you just think clearly.
    can't dispute you there, because it's slightly subjective what wealthy is.

    this link tells you what kind of mortgage you can get if you are single and make 100k. (= 438,000.)

    This one tells you what kind of properties are on the market in Dublin around that price. (I'm actually quite amazed at what you can get for that now)

    Most of them look very nice, but it is quite subjective as to whether one would consider the owner of each to be 'wealthy', or just a bit richer than average.

    There's another angle too. We make a lot more money than our neighbours, whose houses are worth about the same. Because they bought them ten years ago when pricing was very different. At a glance who is wealthier?
    And how long have they been earning that salary? if this is their first year on the job, they are considerably less wealthy than someone who has made that amount, adjusted for inflation, for ten-fiften years.

    Is there a difference, then, between someone who makes a good income, say 100k, and someone who has accumulated wealth?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #142
    sydney2007 sydney2007 is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    101

    I think, as Fides ssays, that it all depends on what your financial obligations are. A couple with dependent children/students needs to watch their expenditure a lot more carefully than a mortgage free couple whose children are now all financially independent. And Tim is also correct - you have a lot better chance of being wealthy if you have been earning the €100,000 for a number of years.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #143
    Potatoeman Potatoeman is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,889

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Johnston View Post

    this link tells you what kind of mortgage you can get if you are single and make 100k. (= 438,000.)

    This one tells you what kind of properties are on the market in Dublin around that price. (I'm actually quite amazed at what you can get for that now)
    All those prove is that we successfully devalued our own incomes by increasing property prices. A two bed townhouse for half a million in a bankrupt country with high unemployment and low population density is not a good deal. Look here Request Property Details|Sifex French Property Agents|Prestigious properties throughout France you can get a Château for around that price.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #144
    feargach feargach is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    9,279

    Let's roll the clock back to 2006. Let's look at a genuinely middle-class guy with no mortgage. He earns €30,000 But he has definite, expensive outgoings. He has to maintain a good, reliable car for his work, and he visits his widowed mother 50 miles away several times a week. Image is important in his job so he also needs expensive suits and shoes. He studies in a private training college to improve his employability. He needs to be on call at his work 24/7 so he needs to rent a flat very near work in the city centre.

    Now, if we're being consistent, we should have been clamouring to get this guy a tax cut in 2006.

    Like the guys on 100K with their private schools for kids and overstretched mortgages, our hypothetical guy has taken on expensive outgoings that he doesn't perceive as luxuries, and the result is that he's barely able to make ends meet.

    But in 2006, anyone suggesting that that person wasn't really middle class would have been laughed out of town, and rightly so.

    The whole idea is ludicrous. It's crazy to suggest that a given tax band shouldn't exist because someone might have taken on such onerous, far-beyond-median spending commitments.

    Anyone with basic common sense should know that if you commit to spending every cent you earn, you're going to be in pain when a crisis forces the nation to raise taxes. And whinging about tax rises when they happen is stupid.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #145
    feargach feargach is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    9,279

    All of this whinging for such a tiny percentage reduction in take home pay.

    Think of someone on 120K. At present, he must pay 41% of the 20,000 he gets in excess of 100K, so €8,200.

    If it were racked up to 50% on income above 100K, that figure would be €10,000. A whopping 1.5% of his gross pay gone. Compare that to the percentage losses of the working poor, where 25% gross pay reductions are normal, run-of-the-mill crisis-related events.

    How pathetic that such a tiny amount of pain gets 15 pages of whinging.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #146
    bob3367 bob3367 is offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    8,920

    Quote Originally Posted by feargach View Post
    All of this whinging for such a tiny percentage reduction in take home pay.

    Think of someone on 120K. At present, he must pay 41% of the 20,000 he gets in excess of 100K, so €8,200.

    If it were racked up to 50% on income above 100K, that figure would be €10,000. A whopping 1.5% of his gross pay gone. Compare that to the percentage losses of the working poor, where 25% gross pay reductions are normal, run-of-the-mill crisis-related events.

    How pathetic that such a tiny amount of pain gets 15 pages of whinging.
    The so called "poor" have no right to my money, btw define poor, is it the gap between sky sports and saorview?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #147
    Racist Racist is offline
    Racist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,244

    Quote Originally Posted by Fides View Post
    Given they are paying extra tax in a variety of ways they are not going to be able to have the same lifestyle as before the recession. But yes if you are on a €100k you should be comfortable unless you overstretched yourself madly and that's your own fault. I have been there in my working career, not at the moment but it is my target again for the future and if I get there I'll be living nicely.

    On that salary you pay for everything - doctor, college fees, life policies, medical, accomodation etc. There are no handouts which is fine.

    The real question being asked by some is why should some people earn over €100k when others are struggling. I have seen many threads where someone has said tax everything over €100k at 100%. That then begs the question what type of society do we want which is a much deeper question. Socialists don't believe there should be much of a difference in income whether you are unemployed, drive a bus or run a business with 1000 employees. Capitalists would argue you need to incentivise the person running the business with 1000 employees and reward them for the extra responsibility and risk taking or they won't do it. Or they will go somewhere where they will get those sorts of rewards.

    The issue with the top tax band is not that it is not high enough, it is that there are too many ways of reducing it. Tackle the tax credits and you'll see a big increase in tax paid by the higher paid. You will also see some negative effect from that. Many people are kept in employment by rich people spending their money!
    I personally have earned 100,000 euro a year and know someone earning this type of money is far from wealthy. Sure you can afford a nicer house, car , holidays, than say someone on 50,000 a year. But most people earn this type of money based on "merit. Which is where I believe now it has become an issue, because most of our politicians bankers ,some civil servants, earn, receive as pensions,100,000 euro plus a year. Certainly not on "merit
    Last edited by Racist; 4th August 2012 at 08:31 PM.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #148
    Disillusioned democrat Disillusioned democrat is offline
    Disillusioned democrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,240

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonewolfe View Post
    Do you believe that those on 100k + are going to suffer more out of increased taxes and cut backs in this recession?
    If by suffer more you mean pay even more tax than everyone else earning less than them, then eh, yes. The would be giving an even greater slice of their earnings to the government to fund public services and wealth distribution.

    Where does the notion that everyone has to suffer equally come from?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #149
    feargach feargach is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    9,279

    Quote Originally Posted by Disillusioned democrat View Post
    If by suffer more you mean pay even more tax than everyone else earning less than them, then eh, yes. The would be giving an even greater slice of their earnings to the government to fund public services and wealth distribution.

    Where does the notion that everyone has to suffer equally come from?
    There's a specific and detailed answer to that question here:

    Reciprocity (social psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The short answer is that equality and a sense of fairness is a deeply-seated instinctual part of human brain processes.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #150
    scallioneater scallioneater is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    432

    Quote Originally Posted by Sister Mercedes View Post
    Irish people's definition of "high income earners" tends to be anyone who earns 10 or 20 grand more than they do.
    "A TD on the basic salary of €100,190 will see their pay fall by €7,519 to €92,671." from 2010, Guess that might be a factor
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment