NY just passed a Family Leave bill. This is why I can never move to one of those warm low tax states. I need to live where my government recognizes it’s the 21st Century.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/new-york-paid-family-leave_us_5702ae75e4b0daf53af042b7
Agree Emilybee. Just hope I can afford to stay here as the taxes keep going up.
Well there is the property tax relief you get when you turn 65 which helps a little.
H’s state pension also isn’t taxed by the state but only if we live here.
"“I think all of this tangent started with comments about what kind of inflation we may see and how to address it.”
In other words, it’s all @dstark’s fault!"
Exactly, doschicos. It usually is. 
And I am obviously a glass half full (as long as it’s of something tasty) person. emilybee was right, it depends upon what’s in the glass.
I’ve been waiting for interest rates to go up for years, thinking we should be refinancing, because they must be going up any day. And they stay low. I think when that happens, you are going to see the middle class in complete misery. People are living on debt, barely hanging on now, but if those rates start going up significantly, instead of struggling, people might be drowning. And who want to be part of the entity responsible for that? No wonder they’ve kept them low (at the cost to people with interest based assets).
No chance, Haleakala will become beach front property. Time to buy is now. 
Paid parental leave, (almost) universal healthcare, the possibility of free universities (albeit just community colleges). How radical…if this was 1955. Similar things were introduced in many other countries decades ago.
As for low taxes, I was shocked when I moved from Virginia to Britain in 2005 and my after tax pay went UP. Low tax states are a myth. They just find other ways to collect the revenue. Or you can be low tax with appalling public services, schools and universities as in many parts of the south, including where I lived as a child.
“They just find other ways to collect the revenue.”
And they are always regressive and hurt the poor disproportionately.
I can feel bad for the author, but it doesn’t rise to the level of wanting to help him in a monetary way. There are people I believe society should help out financially. I support the concept of a social safety net. University of Chicago professor, Harold Pollack says it better than I could. He wrote the all-you-need-to-know-about personal finance fits on a 4x6 index card that went viral a while ago. Rule #9 says in brief, “Do what you can to support the social safety net.” In an interview, Prof. Pollack said about that inclusion:
Q. You kept in place the last rule, even though it got some criticism, which is to support the social safety net.
A. Some people felt that it was political, not financial. But it’s something that I felt was really important, and it would have been dishonest not to include it. No matter how much we plan and save, we all run the risk of being hit by a catastrophe—illness, disability, job loss. We have to protect to each other against those life risks that would crush any one of us if we had to bear it alone. Even when things are going well, most of us depend on government programs—whether entitlements like Medicare or Social Security, or subsidies and tax breaks that work like a social safety net, such as federal student loans or deductions for employer-provided health insurance. In my own life, I have a brother-in-law with disabilities, and even though I have a good job and income, I could never have managed his care on my own. So my family has been helped by safety net programs. It’s in all our interests to make sure these programs are strengthened and continue.
Just catching up on the thread, but this one point from PG struck me. W’s business has 7 employees. What did she get last year for her 70 hour work weeks? About the same as the receptionist, but without the health insurance.
I “love” the fact that as small business owners, my husband and I pay for unemployment insurance, but we can never collect unemployment ourselves. And we have no other employees.
Does it occur to anybody here that, by keeping the interest rate close to zero and at the same time keeping the inflation low, it helps those who are truly “working class” and do not have much savings in the bank. In other word, it is quite a “progressive” policy and it may help slowing down the “trickling up” process.
As much as I hate the rate being kept so low, I think I would be more nervous if the inflation is up.
Is there a lot of money flowing into this country now, even with such a low interest rate? (Let more governments in the world be more corrupt. This will likely keep the money flowing to this country and the only job we need to do is to make our dollars be attractive to them hopefully even with almost zero interest rate.) I once read somewhere that a “college town” city with real jobs in the city for their graduates will keep drawing new people and their money into that city. A lot of our colleges keep attracting full pay foreign students into this country. Those students’ families may transfer a significant portion of their wealth when their offsprings are here paying hefty tuitions and could bring in more money if some of them manage to stay here after graduation. (Incidentally, I noticed many of my coworkers could afford to buy a condo or house even though they have been in this country like only 3-4 years – the kind of property that I might be still incapable of buying after I have been in this country 10 times longer than them. The amount of wealth transfer must be enormous – but this is not a “progressive” policy at all: The colleges welcome the rich more than the poor, and whoever are rich have the door (more) open for them, no matter what their citizenship is. It is just like a company which would go find a cheaper “talents” everywhere in the world. When the median household income of this country is, say, $54,000, and the same for another country across the pond is $8000, how can the workers in the former country be competitive (without government’s intervene) in terms of their “value” to a company if/when what is taught in the MBA program is correct?)
“I “love” the fact that as small business owners, my husband and I pay for unemployment insurance, but we can never collect unemployment ourselves. And we have no other employees.”
That is so wrong. I’m surprised that has not been fixed by now, but then again, I think whomever is writing the rules assumes that small businesses are all making such a massive profit that they can tax and create as many fees as possible, and they can just take it out of their massive profit. Seems people are too busy looking out for the big businesses to make things easier for the small ones.
"Does it occur to anybody here that, by keeping the interest rate close to zero and at the same time keeping the inflation low, it helps those who are truly “working class” and do not have much savings in the bank. In other word, it is quite a “progressive” policy and it may help slowing down the “trickling up” process.
As much as I hate the rate being kept so low, I think I would be more nervous if the inflation is up"
I agree with this, that is what is saving the working class from complete devastation. However, it certainly isn’t helping the elderly with their conservative investments. If inflation and interest rates go up significantly=disaster, in my opinion.
@busdriver11, What you wrote in post #852 is so true.
I am (almost there) an elder with a conservative investment, unfortunately. This makes me nervous.
^ @MaineLonghorn my H, also self employed with no employees, shares your sentiments.
Not a small business owner, so wondering why you have to pay unemployment insurance if your “jobs” are not covered? Does it count as a business expense against any profits?
For everyone, but especially for lower income people -
Rule #1: Don’t drop out of high school before you graduate. About 20% of the current generation of kids do not get a high school diploma (though some get a GED later in life). They mostly end up in the lower-income class.
Rule #2: Don’t have kids before you’re in a stable marriage/relationship, and certainly don’t if you’re a teenager. Over 40% (and rising) of children in the US are now being born out of wedlock. For lower-income class people, this number is already over 65%. It’s bad for the kids, their parents, and for society. There isn’t enough money and resources in the solar system to fix the resulting social problems, and we’re kidding ourselves to pretend otherwise.
For everyone -
Rule #3: Try to avoid getting divorced - Picking the right person to marry is probably the most important life decision that someone makes … much more important than what college to attend. In addition to the human toll on the family, getting divorced is often a financial catastrophe as well. Probably second only to dying or being very ill.
Rule #4: Don’t treat your home equity like a piggy bank you can raid (of course, if you’re saving 20% of your income like Pollack says then you shouldn’t be doing this anyway). Yes, borrowing against your home equity is better than keeping credit card balances, and yes, the interest is (often) deductible. But between price appreciation and paying down your home mortgage to zero over your working life, this is a great forced savings plan. For many people it can be their single biggest financial asset when they retire. Personally, I think one reason the previous generation had fewer financial problems is that it wasn’t so easy to tap home equity lines 30 years ago.
For upper middle class people who remember their math -
Rule #5: Spend 20 hours every few years making sure you really understand your tax situation. Make a spreadsheet. Make sure you understand what “net marginal return” means and how it should affect your financial decisions. This is way too important to blindly turn over to an accountant.
Some 2014 stats -
ML- another one here paying unemployment on myself that I can never apply for.Ugh.
ML, me 2
Implementation of some of the rules regarding saving above is getting harder all the time, due the the more widespread resentment of government employees, teachers and so on with middle class incomes. What was previously seen as a generous benefit package in lieu of higher private sector wages have become perceived as entitlement. When employees need to fund more and more of their own retirement, their own health insurance, and working jobs that have not kept up with COL, saving 20% per year is getting to be pie in the sky. Personally, two things that have kept me from my savings goals are cell phone costs for a family and ever increasing property taxes. My one luxury, travel, happens only because I’m good with FF miles.
In general I certainly agree with all the above. Returning society to these values is both cultural shift and enabling the average working person to not spend all their take home pay on food, transport, shelter and health care.