Is $200K enough?
-
@89th said in Is $200K enough?:
@LuFins-Dad Yes I suspect it's a combination of what you mentioned. Early retirement, divorce, maybe (as in my case) conversion to single-income for other reasons, maybe health?
I don’t think too many households 55-64 are converting to single income households for the same reason you did, 89th…
@LuFins-Dad LOL true
-
@Jolly said in Is $200K enough?:
Down here, most would consider that a little better than good.
And that’s the issue not addressed nearly well enough… Good enough for where? I could live like a king off of $200K a year in Southwestern, PA. And I mean like a king…Cleaning/Cooking staff, live in nanny, 5000 square foot home, etc…
In Norrhern, VA? Not so much…
-
Have not found the definition for "income" yet for that article. E.g., is it the AGI figures from US tax returns, is it Social Security wages or Medicare wages off your tax forms, does it account for employer sponsored/subsidized benefits (employer paid portion of medical insurance premiums), etc. ?
Regardless, when you read the word "income" in this sort of discussion, what definition of "income" comes to your mind?
For W2 employees, would that be your pre-tax, pre-deduction (for things like healthcare insurance premiums, retirement savings) income, post-tax income, or just the net take-home pay? Do you mentally add in (or deduct as the case may be) bank interests or investment dividends? Capital gains?
For the self-employed, it may just get even more complicated.
How about retirees? What definition comes to your mind when you read the term "household income"?
-
@jon-nyc said in Is $200K enough?:
I guess a Nobel prize winning discovery isn’t in the cards for me.
I've got 6 months left, I'm gonna pwn the shit outta you.
Please love yourself.
-
It was a privilege just to be nominated.
-
@jon-nyc said in Is $200K enough?:
I guess a Nobel prize winning discovery isn’t in the cards for me.
I've got 6 months left, I'm gonna pwn the shit outta you.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is $200K enough?:
@jon-nyc said in Is $200K enough?:
I guess a Nobel prize winning discovery isn’t in the cards for me.
I've got 6 months left, I'm gonna pwn the shit outta you.
I only have 4 months left. Ugh, really ought to spend time proving out my perpetual motion machine. I still remember freshman year when Aqua told me my idea was impossible. Little does he know the machine hasn't stopped in 23 years! Hahahaha
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is $200K enough?:
@jon-nyc said in Is $200K enough?:
I guess a Nobel prize winning discovery isn’t in the cards for me.
I've got 6 months left, I'm gonna pwn the shit outta you.
I only have 4 months left. Ugh, really ought to spend time proving out my perpetual motion machine. I still remember freshman year when Aqua told me my idea was impossible. Little does he know the machine hasn't stopped in 23 years! Hahahaha
@89th said in Is $200K enough?:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Is $200K enough?:
@jon-nyc said in Is $200K enough?:
I guess a Nobel prize winning discovery isn’t in the cards for me.
I've got 6 months left, I'm gonna pwn the shit outta you.
I only have 4 months left. Ugh, really ought to spend time proving out my perpetual motion machine. I still remember freshman year when Aqua told me my idea was impossible. Little does he know the machine hasn't stopped in 23 years! Hahahaha
Aqua is going to be so embarrassed.
-
Totally. You see, I placed a device in Papau New Guinea where gravity is the strongest on earth, what it does is a marble drops into a shoot that uses the extra strong gravity to accelerate its decent until it hits a ramp that shoots the ball back up and then back into the same shoot. This repeats over and over. The trick is I placed a small windmill of sorts that the ball hits and rotates the blades. The reduction of energy from the ball hitting the blade is less than the gravitational strength gained in this part of the world so the ball never slows down enough to stop. Therefore there is a net positive amount of energy produced each cycle. Then I placed 10 billion of these devices across the country, and placed them so that the wind produces from the first windmill generates actual wind to aid the windmill of the second loopty-loop device thereby increasing the net energy produced for the 2nd device. So on and so forth until the 5,001,618th device is able to run without a marble at all! So far this has generated enough power to create one bitcoin, which has since lost $50,000 in value since its creation.
-
Just put liquid nitrogen inside a steam machine and call it a day.
-
Totally. You see, I placed a device in Papau New Guinea where gravity is the strongest on earth, what it does is a marble drops into a shoot that uses the extra strong gravity to accelerate its decent until it hits a ramp that shoots the ball back up and then back into the same shoot. This repeats over and over. The trick is I placed a small windmill of sorts that the ball hits and rotates the blades. The reduction of energy from the ball hitting the blade is less than the gravitational strength gained in this part of the world so the ball never slows down enough to stop. Therefore there is a net positive amount of energy produced each cycle. Then I placed 10 billion of these devices across the country, and placed them so that the wind produces from the first windmill generates actual wind to aid the windmill of the second loopty-loop device thereby increasing the net energy produced for the 2nd device. So on and so forth until the 5,001,618th device is able to run without a marble at all! So far this has generated enough power to create one bitcoin, which has since lost $50,000 in value since its creation.
@89th said in Is $200K enough?:
Totally. You see, I placed a device in Papau New Guinea where gravity is the strongest on earth, what it does is a marble drops into a shoot that uses the extra strong gravity to accelerate its decent until it hits a ramp that shoots the ball back up and then back into the same shoot. This repeats over and over. The trick is I placed a small windmill of sorts that the ball hits and rotates the blades. The reduction of energy from the ball hitting the blade is less than the gravitational strength gained in this part of the world so the ball never slows down enough to stop. Therefore there is a net positive amount of energy produced each cycle. Then I placed 10 billion of these devices across the country, and placed them so that the wind produces from the first windmill generates actual wind to aid the windmill of the second loopty-loop device thereby increasing the net energy produced for the 2nd device. So on and so forth until the 5,001,618th device is able to run without a marble at all! So far this has generated enough power to create one bitcoin, which has since lost $50,000 in value since its creation.
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
-
@89th said in Is $200K enough?:
Totally. You see, I placed a device in Papau New Guinea where gravity is the strongest on earth, what it does is a marble drops into a shoot that uses the extra strong gravity to accelerate its decent until it hits a ramp that shoots the ball back up and then back into the same shoot. This repeats over and over. The trick is I placed a small windmill of sorts that the ball hits and rotates the blades. The reduction of energy from the ball hitting the blade is less than the gravitational strength gained in this part of the world so the ball never slows down enough to stop. Therefore there is a net positive amount of energy produced each cycle. Then I placed 10 billion of these devices across the country, and placed them so that the wind produces from the first windmill generates actual wind to aid the windmill of the second loopty-loop device thereby increasing the net energy produced for the 2nd device. So on and so forth until the 5,001,618th device is able to run without a marble at all! So far this has generated enough power to create one bitcoin, which has since lost $50,000 in value since its creation.
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
-
@Horace said in Is $200K enough?:
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
But did you file a patent application for the invention before he did?
@Axtremus said in Is $200K enough?:
@Horace said in Is $200K enough?:
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
But did you file a patent application for the invention before he did?
On advice of my lawyer, I am not at liberty to discuss details of pending litigation regarding this matter of an invention that 89th completely stole from me. It might prejudice jurors if they knew the truth of 89th's brazen theft of my ideas, so I cannot discuss the obvious and provable guilt of 89th in this pending litigation.
-
@Axtremus said in Is $200K enough?:
@Horace said in Is $200K enough?:
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
But did you file a patent application for the invention before he did?
On advice of my lawyer, I am not at liberty to discuss details of pending litigation regarding this matter of an invention that 89th completely stole from me. It might prejudice jurors if they knew the truth of 89th's brazen theft of my ideas, so I cannot discuss the obvious and provable guilt of 89th in this pending litigation.
@Horace said in Is $200K enough?:
@Axtremus said in Is $200K enough?:
@Horace said in Is $200K enough?:
I invented that exact same thing probably a week or so before you did. See you in patent court.
But did you file a patent application for the invention before he did?
On advice of my lawyer, I am not at liberty to discuss details of pending litigation regarding this matter of an invention that 89th completely stole from me. It might prejudice jurors if they knew the truth of 89th's brazen theft of my ideas, so I cannot discuss the obvious and provable guilt of 89th in this pending litigation.
You should be fine if you can show that the other party derived his invention from you.
