So much for the 10 percenters not carrying the water

[The Captain]

Dec 13, 2013 14:55:41 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Dec 13, 2013 13:22:51 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

So would either of you support compulsory retirement investing similar to what Australia does?  

Of course it sounds shitty when it comes from someone with plenty of disposable income.  But of course all the working poor has Iphones and 60" Plasmas- it's just a lifestyle choice- at least that is the myth some choose to believe.  Much easier to deal with the problem of the working poor if you just blame them for all of it.

So how do people live below their means when their means do not even cover the cost of living?

BTW keeping up with the Joneses is not the typical behavior of the working poor.  That stuff happens when incomes start to come up.  

1.  Of course my observations are not a wide sample, only what I've seen.  The trick (to me) is to make sure you cost of living is below your means.  Before you go off on me consider this - when I graduated college I made 21K a year, which averaged out to double minimum wage (with unpaid overtime) at the time.  I also had a car payment and $22K in SL to pay off.  I was paid twice a month.  One paycheck covered the rent.  The other covered the car payment, SL, auto insurance and left me with about 200 a month to cover the rest of my expenses/utilities etc.  

I took second job to pay down the loans and have a little breathing room in my budget. I also made sure to contribute enough to the 401k to get the full match.   (Yes the roommate was my sister, but hey we paid and saved well!)  One year later I got a roommate to further reduce expenses and had a roommate until I was married 6 years later.  I did not buy a TV until I had the roommate.  Not everyone starts out with a golden spoon in their pocket but somehow they manage to get ahead. (College was funded less than 25% by my parents, and if they couldn't help out I would have found a way to cover that, it sucked going to school full time and working 50 hours a week but I made it out in four years).

2.  DH and I have been saving for years (living far below our means) and are finally getting into rentals.  We now have 5 units (two properties).  With one exception every one of our tenants have newer, bigger cars/trucks than we do.  They all have multiple TV's (some with one in every kids bedroom).  Again, with one exception, they all have more than two children.  They will NEVER be able to buy a home, invest in the market, build wealth, etc.  They ones who don't try to keep up with the Joneses will not be working poor for long, they will be investors and part of the upper two quintiles. 

The one exception?  I have a feeling they may become part of the 40% if not the top 10%.  I hope I'm right.

In my case I was ALWAYS willing to work harder than the guy next to me even if I was salaried.  My Dad taught me that hard work will bet your ahead and in my case he was right.  It also appears to be true of my peers who have done well in their careers.

[EVT1]

And I do not feel sorry for those people.  The ones I wish to help are the ones working 40+ hour weeks, working multiple jobs and take the bus or drive beaters to minimum wage jobs they could be fired at for taking a day off.  The kind of people that have to pick which medicine they can afford for the month.

Everyone cannot and does not deserve to be wealthy- I only advocate for a rational bottom for a full time job.  We can do that and it isn't going to break the system.

Are your tenants minimum wage employees?  Are they using section 8 with you? 

Some people have no room to sacrifice- consider you started at double minimum wage with a college education. 

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 16:43:28 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Yes, standard of living rises faster when standard of living rises faster.

Where did you get that the top 50% have kept up with productivity but the bottom 50% have not?  (If from that study I posted, well, I must admit I still have not read it yet....)

i just did an average in my head.  the curve for productivity is below the top 1% and above the bottom 50% (household income growth), and about equidistant.  it was an approximate.  it might be slightly less- but i would describe that as "historically normal".

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 17:05:31 GMT -5 @financialtexan said:

Dec 13, 2013 16:26:56 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, i am sure they hear it just fine. 

And that's my main point. Regardless of whether the person does or does not relate to your situation doesn't mean the advice isn't good...or sometimes bad/terrible. Just because you hear something doesn't mean you'll listen to it...which in turn is your problem...Not the person giving it.

That's more my overall point. Let's specifically take you as an example just as an easy reference.

From what I can tell you are a decently successful business man. You've also stated that you've never been in my position. I consider this great. Many other do not and will reject your advice because you're "not one of us". That is a foolish notion to me because you may have what I want. Knowledge on a particular subject that I may be unaware of. I want to build wealth at a great rate and you as a successful business man could possibly teach me more than I can learn by myself since I may not know where to start.

So while you think that those that have never been in a certain position can't or shouldn't "lecture" those on that level, I look at it as gaining knowledge from someone whose position, wealth wise, I'd like to be in.

i think what i object to is the cavalier attitude that the rich have about success.  it really doesn't have to do with the advice, it has to do with the condescending way it is delivered.

listening to Romney lecture me about the 47% is a good example.  i know lots of people in that category.  they are not looking for welfare, and they don't vote for Obama.  so he was just dead wrong about them.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 19:03:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

And I do not feel sorry for those people.  The ones I wish to help are the ones working 40+ hour weeks, working multiple jobs and take the bus or drive beaters to minimum wage jobs they could be fired at for taking a day off.  The kind of people that have to pick which medicine they can afford for the month.

Everyone cannot and does not deserve to be wealthy- I only advocate for a rational bottom for a full time job.  We can do that and it isn't going to break the system.

Are your tenants minimum wage employees?  Are they using section 8 with you? 

Some people have no room to sacrifice- consider you started at double minimum wage with a college education. 

You know that only something like 2% of workers toil for minimum wage, and most of those are either teenagers or seniors (supplementing other income), right?

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 19:16:52 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 16:43:28 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Yes, standard of living rises faster when standard of living rises faster.

Where did you get that the top 50% have kept up with productivity but the bottom 50% have not?  (If from that study I posted, well, I must admit I still have not read it yet....)

i just did an average in my head.  the curve for productivity is below the top 1% and above the bottom 50% (household income growth), and about equidistant.  it was an approximate.  it might be slightly less- but i would describe that as "historically normal".

Average of what?  Do you have a link?  I'm just curious about it.

BTW, as I've suspected, that BLS report indicates that computers and globalization have a lot to do with the gap.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 19:30:42 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 13, 2013 19:16:52 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i just did an average in my head.  the curve for productivity is below the top 1% and above the bottom 50% (household income growth), and about equidistant.  it was an approximate.  it might be slightly less- but i would describe that as "historically normal".

Average of what?  Do you have a link?  I'm just curious about it.

i'll see if i can find it in a few mins.....

BTW, as I've suspected, that BLS report indicates that computers and globalization have a lot to do with the gap.

that is what Richard Wolff says.  but he is a Marxist, so i never post anything of his, here. 

[djAdvocate]

here is one, but you know that one.  i thought it was interesting because it shows compensation......
i need to find you a 1% graph.....

[Deleted]

That graph is still totally worthless.  It is not total compensation.  That is why you should use the graph in that BLS report.

www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/01/art3full.pdf

Ballpark, real total compensation is up 45% and real productivity is up about 95% for 1973-2009.  Big difference between that and the claim of roughly 10% vs 100%.  Using the correct data is important.

(BTW, the Heritage claim that the two different inflation rates for productivity and compensation distorts the results is not correct.  According to the BLS report, that represents a very real gap.)

[The Captain]

Dec 13, 2013 19:03:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

And I do not feel sorry for those people.  The ones I wish to help are the ones working 40+ hour weeks, working multiple jobs and take the bus or drive beaters to minimum wage jobs they could be fired at for taking a day off.  The kind of people that have to pick which medicine they can afford for the month.

Everyone cannot and does not deserve to be wealthy- I only advocate for a rational bottom for a full time job.  We can do that and it isn't going to break the system.

Are your tenants minimum wage employees?  Are they using section 8 with you? 

Some people have no room to sacrifice- consider you started at double minimum wage with a college education. 

I made a deliberate decision not to go into Section 8.  It's VERY lucrative here but besides those tenants needing much more maintenance, I have other issues with the program.

FWIW - I did not start double minimum wage with a college education.  I started minimum wage at 15 and saved for three years for college before even starting while working full time+ during the summer and 20 hours a week during the school year.  My father never made it past 5th grade (grandfather was a sharecropper who pulled his sons out of school to help on the dairy farm) but he still managed to support a family by working 6 days a week.  I was the first in my family to go to college.
I would only be guessing about my tenants' wage base.  I have two where only one parent works because the other one "needs" to stay home (while having more children).  Two whom I will assume both parents are working minimum wage (both with 4 kids that a grandparent watches) and one with one child, two parents, one works full time and the mom works part time and is taking community college classes.  Guess who I think will get ahead?

I've posted on another long thread about a family friend who's kid is dealing with issues right now.  He got kicked out of college with a felony plea but managed to land a job at 12.50 an hour that will go up to 15 once he gets one additional certification (he was able to pass two fairly quickly).  He's getting 36 hours a week.  That's 27K a year, not great money and you can't support a family on it, but with two people working the same you'd be pretty comfortable.  His parents are concerned that he will actually get the idea it's not so bad to have such a job for a living.

I live in the Chicagoland area.  We have jobs.  They may not make you rich but with a two income household you will be comfortable and able to save.  With the tax rates (property, sales, income, FICA) I think the days of single income households being comfortable are over (IMHO).  Yet the vast majority of those in the lower two quintiles are on much less than two incomes.

I don't know anyone who works full time for a minimum wage job.  I know people who work part time hours at multiple minimum wage jobs.  Those are not career jobs, but "filler" jobs that (at least around here) people work who don't have the ambition or moxy to go after more.

Just my observations.  It may be different elsewhere.  

[EVT1]

Dec 13, 2013 19:25:42 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 13, 2013 19:03:22 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

And I do not feel sorry for those people.  The ones I wish to help are the ones working 40+ hour weeks, working multiple jobs and take the bus or drive beaters to minimum wage jobs they could be fired at for taking a day off.  The kind of people that have to pick which medicine they can afford for the month.

Everyone cannot and does not deserve to be wealthy- I only advocate for a rational bottom for a full time job.  We can do that and it isn't going to break the system.

Are your tenants minimum wage employees?  Are they using section 8 with you? 

Some people have no room to sacrifice- consider you started at double minimum wage with a college education. 

You know that only something like 2% of workers toil for minimum wage, and most of those are either teenagers or seniors (supplementing other income), right?

I am losing you using minimum wage- I am referring to wages that pay less than it costs to survive.  
 
 

[billisonboard]

Dec 13, 2013 21:10:00 GMT -5 The Captain said:

... My father never made it past 5th grade (grandfather was a sharecropper who pulled his sons out of school to help on the dairy farm) but he still managed to support a family by working 6 days a week. ...

So your father was able, with a 5th grade education, to support a family and fund some of your college. I would be interesting in knowing the time frame of this and what further education/training he received.

[EVT1]

One thing for sure- graphs or not- wages do not follow productivity on the top or the bottom. 

Good reason though- the folks on the bottom do not get to set the pay rates of their peer group. 

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2013 0:20:00 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

One thing for sure- graphs or not- wages do not follow productivity on the top or the bottom. 

Good reason though- the folks on the bottom do not get to set the pay rates of their peer group. 

That has nothing to do with it.  Almost nobody gets to set the wages of their peer group.  And when compensation was keeping up with productivity, they still did not get to set the wages of their peer group.

[Deleted]

Dec 13, 2013 21:56:56 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Dec 13, 2013 19:25:42 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

You know that only something like 2% of workers toil for minimum wage, and most of those are either teenagers or seniors (supplementing other income), right?

I am losing you using minimum wage- I am referring to wages that pay less than it costs to survive.  
 

Well, you did say "minimum wage".  I assume, then, you're talking about mom and pop stores that tend to pay less than the big box places and also have fewer opportunities for advancement?

[AGB]

Dec 10, 2013 20:36:07 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Sure the bottom feeders pay taxes but with whose money? Not their own but money they stole from taxpayers to begin with.

I get that I'm a bottom feeder in your eyes because I have negative average FIT rate. I get that I'm a thief in your eyes because I file my taxes according to the same IRS code you do. I also get that you are not alone in feeling this way. What I don't get is what you're hoping to accomplish by making such comments. If you're hoping to alienate 40% of people solely because we have a household income of less than $41k, then mission accomplished and keep up the good job.

Fyi, I voted for Romney. I still believe he would have been the better choice for America, but his 47% comment, how he would never convince them to take personal responsibility for their lives, and how his job was not to worry about "those people"... it was a punch in the gut to hear from someone I was hoping to call my president. I imagine I'm not the only conservative who felt like that.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 13, 2013 20:07:55 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

That graph is still totally worthless.  It is not total compensation.  That is why you should use the graph in that BLS report.

www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/01/art3full.pdf

Ballpark, real total compensation is up 45% and real productivity is up about 95% for 1973-2009.  Big difference between that and the claim of roughly 10% vs 100%.  Using the correct data is important.

(BTW, the Heritage claim that the two different inflation rates for productivity and compensation distorts the results is not correct.  According to the BLS report, that represents a very real gap.)

do you ever post graphs, ib?  just asking.  if not, why not?

[djAdvocate]

Dec 14, 2013 13:18:59 GMT -5 AGB said:

Dec 10, 2013 20:36:07 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Sure the bottom feeders pay taxes but with whose money? Not their own but money they stole from taxpayers to begin with.

I get that I'm a bottom feeder in your eyes because I have negative average FIT rate. I get that I'm a thief in your eyes because I file my taxes according to the same IRS code you do. I also get that you are not alone in feeling this way. What I don't get is what you're hoping to accomplish by making such comments. If you're hoping to alienate 40% of people solely because we have a household income of less than $41k, then mission accomplished and keep up the good job.

Fyi, I voted for Romney. I still believe he would have been the better choice for America, but his 47% comment, how he would never convince them to take personal responsibility for their lives, and how his job was not to worry about "those people"... it was a punch in the gut to hear from someone I was hoping to call my president. I imagine I'm not the only conservative who felt like that.

AGB- this is why i really like you as a poster.  you speak your mind, and you do it in a respectful way.  it gives you tons of credibility.  very well done.

i stand by what i said to Paul during the campaign- that most of the 47% actually likely to vote were potential GOP voters.  alienating them cost Romney the election, imo.  if he had won them over rather than telling them they were freeloading Obama scum, we might be talking about how president Romney can't get anything through the Senate right now.

[Deleted]

Dec 14, 2013 15:00:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 13, 2013 20:07:55 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

That graph is still totally worthless.  It is not total compensation.  That is why you should use the graph in that BLS report.

www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2011/01/art3full.pdf

Ballpark, real total compensation is up 45% and real productivity is up about 95% for 1973-2009.  Big difference between that and the claim of roughly 10% vs 100%.  Using the correct data is important.

(BTW, the Heritage claim that the two different inflation rates for productivity and compensation distorts the results is not correct.  According to the BLS report, that represents a very real gap.)

do you ever post graphs, ib?  just asking.  if not, why not?

I tried posting the one from the BLS study, but couldn't figure out how to.  I could only see where I can link to a picture that is posted online, but not one in a PDF.  I tried saving at attaching, but I'm not sure how to do that either.

Besides, dj, you said you like data, not graphs....

[EVT1]

Dec 14, 2013 7:43:55 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 14, 2013 0:20:00 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

One thing for sure- graphs or not- wages do not follow productivity on the top or the bottom. 

Good reason though- the folks on the bottom do not get to set the pay rates of their peer group. 

That has nothing to do with it.  Almost nobody gets to set the wages of their peer group.  And when compensation was keeping up with productivity, they still did not get to set the wages of their peer group.

Really?  So who sets the compensation of management?  The rank and file?  (I am generally referring to CEO pay in mainly large public companies- not the 1% as a group)

These people set the trend in motion, and began the era of the entitled CEO.

[The Captain]

Dec 13, 2013 22:42:22 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Dec 13, 2013 21:10:00 GMT -5 The Captain said:

... My father never made it past 5th grade (grandfather was a sharecropper who pulled his sons out of school to help on the dairy farm) but he still managed to support a family by working 6 days a week. ...

So your father was able, with a 5th grade education, to support a family and fund some of your college. I would be interesting in knowing the time frame of this and what further education/training he received.

During the late 60's, 70's, and 80's.  He drove a delivery truck for a bakery in Chicago.  He learned the product and was an outstanding salesman.  Besides base pay he received a % commission for every new customer he added to his route.  When the company wanted an area developed they would assign him to the route knowing he would grow it.  Always.  It was not uncommon for them to have to split his old route between two guys when they switched him.

He had to leave the house at midnight to get to the bakery by 1am.  He made most of his delivery's before the business opened (he had keys to a lot of them).  Most of his route would be done by 9 or 10 am.  He'd come home and sleep from 11 to 6.  Get up and have dinner with us, watch TV for an hour or two and be back in bed by 8 or 9.  He worked 6 days a week most of his career.

He took care of his customers.  It was not uncommon for one of the hospitals to call on a Sunday morning, we're out of bread.  He'd run to the bakery, load up his car and make a special delivery.  He'd get younger guys jobs, they'd last two or three months, then they'd quit because the wife or the guy couldn't handle the schedule.

Those jobs still exist, they still pay well, and they still have a hard time keeping them filled.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 14, 2013 15:53:05 GMT -5 @investorbob said:

Dec 14, 2013 15:00:01 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do you ever post graphs, ib?  just asking.  if not, why not?

I tried posting the one from the BLS study, but couldn't figure out how to.  I could only see where I can link to a picture that is posted online, but not one in a PDF.  I tried saving at attaching, but I'm not sure how to do that either.

Besides, dj, you said you like data, not graphs....

i prefer links for data.  but graphs are fine for visually representing data on a board.  only a complete geek like me would rather see the tables.

i didn't ask you if you posted tables tho.  you have done that.  you posted deficit tables.  i LOVED that. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

The point being- if you want a raise, give yourself a raise. The "how to" of that is fairly obvious- make yourself valuable to the company. You don't do that showing up and putting in an honest 8. <--- That is doing minimums. And I am by no means saying that EVERY company will recognize you are growing their customer base, and do right by you. BUT if you are that kind of person, you can afford to leave and find a company that will.