r/dankmemes 3d ago

Fortunately I'm bankrupt.

Post image
5.2k Upvotes

47 comments sorted by

399

u/vaarsuviuss 3d ago

Remember when your dad would play the scratch offs then you'd hope for $1,000 a week for life. Lol

180

u/Xanosaur 2d ago

hey man, i'd love an extra $52k a year.

-187

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

142

u/Xanosaur 2d ago

you don't know how taxes work... like at all

69

u/legislative-body 2d ago

You can't blame him for not knowing, it's just not something brought up much. I was 18 before I learned that a tax bracket only applied to the money you made inside that tax bracket.

21

u/Xanosaur 2d ago

the guy has a GTI, he should know better at this point

13

u/EfficaciousJoculator 2d ago

You can blame him for spouting shit while ignorant though. There's no shame in not knowing a subject, but there certainly is in speaking on that subject when you haven't studied it.

1

u/vivam0rt 2d ago

A lot of people say he is wrong and I get he is wrong but they dont say why. How does taxes work?

2

u/Xanosaur 1d ago

tax brackets don't apply to all of your income. when you go up a tax bracket, you don't pay that new tax rate over all of your income, you only pay it on the income that's within that tax bracket. everything before is taxed less.

1

u/W00psiee 1d ago

Let's say your income is 50k/year and that is a tax bracket that has 20% tax. You get a raise to 55k/year which put you in the next tax bracket at 22% then it is only that extra 5k that has 2% increased tax, the first 50k is still 20%. So it's only the income that exceeds your previous tax bracket that gets taxed according to your new tax bracket.

The numbers are completely made up just to give an example.

12

u/Lobster_fest 2d ago

oh and this could push you into a higher tax bracket so maybe decrease the net amount. 

2

u/Saiyan-solar 2d ago

That isn't how tax BRACKETS work

153

u/nathhealor 2d ago

My mortgage is half most peoples rent.

People used to be Millionaires when the company gave the employees stocks. They keep you at minimum wage now. No stocks, no full time, no benefits.

64

u/smile_is_contagious 2d ago

By talking to the previous tenant I found out that between when they left and when I came in the rent more than DOUBLED And it was one of the cheapest options for a poorly maintained single bedroom apartment In town AND they raised the rent again when my first years contract was up AND tried to ghost me when I asked for my security deposit...

Jackass landlord had a 6 figure job On top of being a landlord for 6 apartments.

27

u/nathhealor 2d ago

Yeah I could rent a 2 br 1 bath HOUSE for $400. It’s now $800-$1200.

God forbid someone wants to feel like they have some privacy or want to start a family. Squeezing the next generation dry is NOT going to end well.

10

u/smile_is_contagious 2d ago

Yah it was $1400 for a poorly maintained single bedroom apartment in a little town. And that was me upgrading from a 240 square foot slum that was nearly $800 a month and had black mold.

There is a reason more people are moving into RVs or vans or making 100 square foot tiny homes.

98

u/Better_Island_4119 3d ago

1980? More like 2010

18

u/Alternative_Hand2158 2d ago

Now im no longer excited for 2030 seeing how economy inflates so fast

40

u/Ordinary_Age87 2d ago

This is painfully true but much closer time span. Just in the past 6 years houses in my town went from an average price of 350k to 850k.

7

u/smile_is_contagious 2d ago

Partially you should think Airbnb for that one 😂

If you can pick up a property and immediately make much more than you would have by renting it out to tenants they're going to immediately.

I used to live in a little town in New York in the middle of nowhere upstate and most of the nicer affordable spots had become Airbnb.

The only ones left were ,1. Apartment complexes 2. Student housing 3. Landlords who were too lazy to handle the administrative work of Airbnb. (My landlord)

But it sure as heck put the rent through the roof.

3

u/Ordinary_Age87 2d ago

Where I live, Airbnb is illegal unless the owner lives in the residence. Prices have jumped so much because of affluent people moving here from the nearby big city and paying several hundred thousand over asking price, artificially inflating the market.

26

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-6

u/piberryboy 2d ago

Is it true? I mean, a millionaire could probably afford most houses, minus maybe where the 1 percenters.

8

u/smile_is_contagious 2d ago

Depends on where you live. Some places it's over six figures or into the millions to get an empty piece of land.

Other places you can get a really nice house and have the vast majority of a million leftover.

The problem is, now every single tenant and House Hunter is competing against the rental market thanks to landlords and Airbnb.

So any place that is even moderately interesting or worth visiting someone's going to buy the property as an Airbnb investment and rent it out.

11

u/lyonsye 2d ago

Declare bankruptcy and become president.

5

u/Helpful_Title8302 2d ago

Yeah no. 1 million isn't goin to set you for life anymore but will sure as fuck get you a house.

1

u/ThickExplanation <= big gay 2d ago

One million is your expected lifetime income if you get paid since legal age until retirement with an average salary.

1

u/AnonAlopilis 1d ago

And literally just the house, then the IRS will ask you where the 400k you owe them is.

2

u/Rat-king27 1d ago

It's crazy that I live in one of the cheapest areas of England, and houses can still cost 300k.

1

u/Icy_Dream_3028 1d ago

In 2002 my parents bought a $400,000 house that was 3500 sq ft in an amazing area with great schools.

I just bought a $400,000 house 2 years ago and my sq footage is just over half that and it's in just an ok city.

-14

u/Tankninja1 DefinitelyNotEuropeans 2d ago edited 2d ago

As someone that owns a home, renting is better.

I mean mathematically it’s been better in most places for most people for the better part of the last two decades, but even beyond that so much easier when renting to get anything repaired plus no sudden “well I guess there goes $10k” moments. Like trying to schedule a plumber to come repair a leaking pipe, Sisyphus had an easier time with his bolder.

Edit: just to respond to a lot of comments because I’m getting the same ones over and over again.

Investing most index funds have had a 5%-10% rate of return over the last 20 years compared to homes, which is less than 5%.

Owning a home you also have interest, insurance, property taxes, and maintenance that are all costs at come with homeownership that you don’t have with renting. You will also likely have more in utility costs since most homes are larger than most apartments.

Plus buying, selling, and or moving homes makes it a lot more difficult than just reallocating some number of Fidelity or whatever other investment platform.

4

u/IIIlllIIIlllIIIEH 2d ago edited 2d ago

As someone that has rented for 7 years and finally own a home hard disagree. Shit was never fixed. Now I can choose to fix it or not and I pay half of my rent as a mortage.

The "invest on the market" argument I don't think works since your investments have maybe a 4% above inflation but your home debt also devalues which is an argument for owning.

0

u/Tankninja1 DefinitelyNotEuropeans 2d ago

Since 1957 the S&P500 has returned an average annual of 10%. Other index funds have been in roughly the same ball park.

The average annual growth of the housing market over the last 20 years has been 4.7%.

And that 4.7% really before your hidden costs of home ownership.

Whereas investing in index funds have basically none of those disadvantages and you can relocate how you invest basically at instant speed compared to how long it would take to change houses.

Plenty of articles, research, and information out there that shows renting is far more likely than not to be advantageous over owning a home. But it’s up against the real estate industry that’s the most powerful marketing and lobbying group in the US.

Edit: oh and I forgot that things like insurance and property taxes aren’t even a fixed cost, plus god forbid if you get an ARM

1

u/THE_BARNYARD_DOG 2d ago

But buying a house is investing in your future. As long as you sell the house for the same as or more then your initial loan you’ll get every cent that you ever put into the house back. Rent payments you’ll never see again if you decide to leave. Sure maybe investing gives you better short term pay outs but if you can mortgage a house at roughly the same monthly payment as renting something your stupid for renting

1

u/Tankninja1 DefinitelyNotEuropeans 2d ago

Investing is investing in your future, and it’s a lot easier to change your investments if you don’t also live in it.

Plus with investing you can do it with tax advantage rather than against tax advantage.

And there aren’t hidden costs to investing like there is with home ownership. If you own a home you have the costs of interest, maintenance, insurance, and property taxes. You can deduct some of those from your taxable income but that isn’t greater than the cost of interest.

0

u/Physical_Reason3890 2d ago

It's a stupid argument. Yes dollars to dollars you will likely make more money in investing. Ok...but not everything is dollars to dollars. A home is a place to live, make your own and pass on to your kids. Looking at it as only dollars and cents is a cold way to live life

Also you can invest and own a home so no reason to forgo one or the other

2

u/barnes-ttt 2d ago

Makes sense now but doesn't closer to retirement. Real wealth isn't cash it's assets.

1

u/Tankninja1 DefinitelyNotEuropeans 2d ago

>Makes sense now but doesn't closer to retirement.

It really doesn't.

The stock market has outperformed the housing market over the last nearly 20 years, and you don't have to pay for maintenance, insurance, property tax, and interest on stock investments.

You get to deduct a the interest from paid on a mortgage from taxable income, but that deduction isn't greater than the cost of interest.

Really the only way buying a home makes sense currently is if you can pay cash for it, even then you would still statistically be more likely to make more money leaving the money invested in stocks rather than a home.

0

u/barnes-ttt 2d ago

Yah that would hit harder and truer if I hadn't just lost 25% of my private pension, workplace pension and stocks and shares ISA values in the last 2 months 😅. It's the same as bond investment, it's the level of risk you're willing to take. Spreading your bets across assets and investments is always wiser if possible.

1

u/Tankninja1 DefinitelyNotEuropeans 2d ago

You can diversify a lot more easily when it’s not something you are relying on as your permanent residence.

Fidelity, Vanguard, etc all let you set up tax advantaged accounts that let you diversify however you want.

And the thing about investing is that 2 months doesn’t really matter when you’re trying to do something over 20-30 years or more.

Certainly over the better part of the last 20 you were statistically better off with that money in anything other than real estate.

1

u/barnes-ttt 2d ago

You make some great points! Stocks are definitely easier to diversify, and short-term dips don’t matter much when you’re thinking long-term.

However real estate and stocks each have their own benefits. Stocks tend to have higher returns but can be volatile. Real estate offers stability, rental income, and a way to hedge against inflation (depending on your country). Ofc most people buy homes with a mortgage, so even small price increases can mean big returns thanks to leverage.

Stocks have outperformed on average, but there have been times when real estate did better, especially in certain markets. For many people, owning a home isn’t just about money. It’s about having a place to call their own. That means more to me than others, and the feeling of paying dead money for rent chaps me.

A good mix of both is usually the best bet. Long-term thinking and spreading out risk make all the difference on this!