ADVERTISEMENT

Minimum Wage

And with Stanford and Berkeley in the ACC now, we may even get some regular season games out here on the best coast. I think that we might try to make it back to Tallahassee for the Berkeley game this fall, and we are definitely going to the Miami game at Strawberry Creek.

I am really enjoying the realignment chaos so far. SC has a wild schedule and an unbelievable home slate this coming season.
I was planning on hitting the Stanford home game but I'm not sure we'll still be in the ACC by then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: F4Gary
I never made it to Rudy's, but it reminds me of Steak 'n Shake. They had a good reputation when I was in college, but I recall the one location being way out in the middle of nowhere. I don't think that I have seen one in years.

One place I always stop when I see one is A&W. There is one out near Lake Mead that I typically visit after a hike. I am sure that I probably consume around 3000 calories from the self-serve root beer tap, but damn it hits the spot.
I haven’t seen an a&w in years maybe 15+. I like them too.

I first had in n out burger in San Jose I think. That was a long time ago. They’re in Austin now, which is where I’ve most recently had it.
 
So we can all laugh at Stanford, I wanted to share that I just received an email from their athletics department begging me to buy season tickets for $125. Nah, Stanford, not when I can typically attend your home games for free just by waiting for you to induce me to attend any game with free tickets.
Do you work for/with them now?
 
That is awesome! Congratulations to both of you! That campus is absolutely stunning. The counseling center there is like a glass-enclosed treehouse. My partner's sister got one of her masters at Santa Cruz, and I always enjoyed visiting her there.
Yeah, I told her to enjoy her time there as it will be decades before she can afford to live there again.
 
$25 an hour at a fast food joint is unbelievable.
40 hour week $1,000k or $52k a year, right?

But you know what? Realistically it’s still not enough to live on in SoCal or many other urban settings. It’s still a high school kid or a retiree part time job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Banditking
$25 an hour at a fast food joint is unbelievable.
40 hour week $1,000k or $52k a year, right?

But you know what? Realistically it’s still not enough to live on in SoCal or many other urban settings. It’s still a high school kid or a retiree part time job.
The economy in those areas is very distorted for a variety of reasons. There’s obviously a lot of wealth there. In San Francisco, there’s quite a bit of regulation that artificially inflates real estate prices. The challenge, of course, is, to live well, you’ve got to have and generate a lot of money. Otherwise, it’s a slog. You can live cheaply, ish, in a big city, especially as a young person, and it’s fun. As a fully functioning adult, it’s not the same thing. Exporting California’s minimum wages and regulations is a damaging proposition to areas that don't have the top end wealth to go with it. I am not convinced that California’s economy is sustainable.

The biggest asset to me, relative to California is many areas are beautiful. I’ve considered moving there before. Though, places like Austin are more appealing to me. But, as I get older, moving seems like a larger task. Too complicated.
 
The economy in those areas is very distorted for a variety of reasons. There’s obviously a lot of wealth there. In San Francisco, there’s quite a bit of regulation that artificially inflates real estate prices. The challenge, of course, is, to live well, you’ve got to have and generate a lot of money. Otherwise, it’s a slog. You can live cheaply, ish, in a big city, especially as a young person, and it’s fun. As a fully functioning adult, it’s not the same thing. Exporting California’s minimum wages and regulations is a damaging proposition to areas that don't have the top end wealth to go with it. I am not convinced that California’s economy is sustainable.

The biggest asset to me, relative to California is many areas are beautiful. I’ve considered moving there before. Though, places like Austin are more appealing to me. But, as I get older, moving seems like a larger task. Too complicated.
Fully understood and aware of those realities, having lived in SoCal, although it was many years ago. And other urban areas around the country. Surprise: there are many places in this country that have beauty or are near beautiful areas.

A young single person with three roomies might be able to enjoy life in the moment, but they wouldn’t want that as a lifestyle as they mature. Or try to have a family.
 
Fully understood and aware of those realities, having lived in SoCal, although it was many years ago. And other urban areas around the country. Surprise: there are many places in this country that have beauty or are near beautiful areas.

A young single person with three roomies might be able to enjoy life in the moment, but they wouldn’t want that as a lifestyle as they mature. Or try to have a family.
Yep. Though, there is also more opportunity in wealthy areas of California to make money.
 
Lunch obtained. The three meals on the menu (Double Double, cheeseburger, hamburger) are $10.80, $9.00, and $8.50; respectively. I got a Double Double Animal Style, a hamburger + grilled onions, and two fries for $15.93.

Coincidentally, I dropped by the McDonald's across the street to compare. Big Mac meal is $10.48; 2 Cheeseburger meal is $8.79. The McDonald's had a "Now hiring starting at $20" sign. The In-N-Out's sign has been updated to say "starting at $25."

Do you use apps for these places?

They have great deals.
 
I do not.
Just for kicks, for a hypothetical cali resident. Median income in Palo Alto is ~200k.


I’m sure you make more than this.

Average house in Palo Alto is 3.4 million. Property tax on that is 44k. Yes, I understand a 3.4 million dollar house for a household income of
200k a year is unrealistic. Let’s say you inherited it.

That would be 110k or so of fed plus state taxes (including property) ie >50% take home pay. A more pedestrian house, and you’re still over or close without including all taxes.

This doesn’t count sales tax, gas taxes, etc.

So yes, Goldmom’s point about taxes isn’t unreasonable. Though, it’s bad pretty much all over the country if you are in the middle to upper middle class. You get soaked. Many people work ~ half a year for the gov before they get to use their own money, effectively. To quote our libertarian friends, “Taxation is theft.”
 
Last edited:
Again, I absolutely do not now nor have I ever paid anywhere close to 50% of my income in taxes.

I also will not ever be inheriting or otherwise obtaining a $3,4 million house. 😂
Be that as it may, if I moved there per the scenario Goldmom was responding to, I’d be paying ~50% Yes, the tax and expense issues there are a detractor. So, good that you’re in a pocket that isn’t “close to 50%.”

 
Last edited:
I mean, it is pretty obnoxious for you to assert that you know more about my personal financial situation than I do.
I didn’t assert that I do. I said probably. And, it was based on generic data. Nothing any more obnoxious than deflecting goldmom’s comment about taxes being high in cali with a personal anecdote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noletaire
I can understand how you could pay 50% of your income in taxes were you to move to California. I am just saying that in my actual experience living here for 20+ years, I have never gotten anywhere close to that amount. Unsurprisingly, I do discuss financial matters with my friends, colleagues, and family who live in California, and I have never heard any of them mention dealing with a tax burden that high. Again, I acknowledge that it is certainly possible, hypothetically, for a person to pay that much in taxes, but in my personal experience living in California, it is not typical.
Seems typical based on the article I posted earlier. But, maybe your casual financial discussion with a few friends is more accurate. Possible.


This is a nice tool. In cali 400k per year = 60 percent take home pay. That pretty close to half going to the gov and accounts for no other taxes.

Sure, there are ways around this. Loans if you are working from a large asset base, for example. But, that’s an annoying thing to have to do to avoid taxes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: noletaire
Yes, you did, specifically by saying "probably." You have no data on which to base your assertion about my personal tax burden, yet you are directly stating that I am likely wrong about it. You are applying generic data to my specific lived experience and asserting that I am mistaken about my own financial situation, and I find that to be obnoxious. Belem, being the other California resident in the thread, reacted more kindly than my initial inclination.

I did not deflect goldmom's comment. I provided my personal experience and clearly identified it as such. That my personal experience is not consistent with that comment is not deflecting that comment.
Not no data. Know you have a PhD. Know you work in medical related discipline. Know you live in la area, have for decades, and have expensive tastes. You likely hang out with educated professionals. Many people don’t fully understand their tax burden. That’s more the norm than not.

You were deflecting/countering her comment with your anecdotal lived experience. Anecdotal lived experience inconsistent with typical experience in the area and counter to a narrative that would paint California in a more negative light. Ie the issue intersects with political issues in which you tend to come down in specific ways. It was not surprising that you’d offer a counter to someone saying the taxes are high in California. Doubling down on this, you brought in your colleagues and friends and asserted what I said is not typical, again based on your anecdotal data and specifically to deflect/counter goldmom’s observation. Based on your prior posting history, I surmised you possibly didn’t know your tax burden or were just obfuscating in some way (eg not counting fica/medicare/ss as a tax).
 
Last edited:
The article that you posted earlier indicated a 32.6% tax burden for a person making $200K/year. That seems accurate and is consistent with my "casual financial discussion with a few friends," which is - by the way - a dismissive mischaracterization of what I said.

It is not consistent with your assertion that I and my friends, family, and colleagues are "probably" paying 50% of our income in taxes.

Using the tool in this most recent post, my calculated tax burden is less than 25%. Even with your $400K/year example, the burden of 40% is explicitly not 50%.
I used ~, which equals “about.” 32 percent on that is 134,000/200,000. That’s inclusive of fed and state income. It’s 48th or so out of the 50 states according to that website, consistent with the thrust of goldmom’s post. I used median home values, but an accessible and common house for low 7 figures puts someone over 40 percent in that example. That’s not including many other forms of tax paid daily in California. Close enough to 50. But, that’s a subjective element in my post.

A more honest response from you would have been “yeah. Taxes are high here.”
 
You are asserting that I either "don't fully understand" my tax burden, that I "didn't know" my tax burden or that I am "obfuscating in some way." You assume to know more about my personal financial situation than I do. You further dismiss my lived experience as anecdotal and atypical with no support for that dismissal beyond a couple of superficial, generic articles and calculators. You assume to know what is "typical" about living in California better than I do. Yea, you are just being obnoxious.

I did not offer a counter to someone saying the taxes are high in California. I know the taxes are high in California: I have consistently voted to raise many of them. I stated my actual experience with being a California taxpayer who has never gotten anywhere close to paying 50% of my income in taxes. My lived experience is also counter to any narrative that paints California in a negative light. That is not political rhetoric; it's my actual experience.
I thought you were “probably” in at least a top 10 percent income bracket. Probably. Lived experience = anecdotal. I brought real numbers from non anecdotal sources to support “typical.” You were arguing “typical” based on you and your colleagues’ “lived experience.” That’s fine. Potato, potato.

Why would Goldmom care that you specifically don’t think you pay close to 50 percent?
 
Your real numbers from non-anecdotal sources do not support the assertion that I or the "typical" Californian are paying 50% of our incomes in taxes. You were just wrong, and, worse, you were rude in your wrongness. You also seem to be completely unable to just acknowledge that you were being unnecessarily rude and condescending.
That’s a lot of adjectives.

I do not agree I was rude or condescending. Thus, yes, you are correct that I am not able to acknowledge that. All of our posts are unnecessary. That I agree with.

Again, the experience we are talking about here started out with me moving to California as a hypothetical. Goldmom stated something to the effect of why would I do that, do I want to pay 50 % of my income in taxes? She based that on I’m sure similar assumptions to what I was making about you. If I were in the bottom income tax brackets, we’d be having a different conversation. All of the examples I’ve used have been in people making 200-400k with a million to 3 million dollar home. Based that starting point on averages in Palo Alto as you previously indicated attendance at Stanford football games. We are talking about what is typical in the upper registers. Not typical of all Californians.
 
Last edited:
I explicitly told you twice that I do not pay over 50% of my income in taxes. I do not know why you were unable to accept that and move on. I understand that you do not think that you were being rude and condescending in assuming to know more about my personal financial situation than I do. It seems that you believe that you are being perfectly reasonable and friendly in this conversation. I have not experienced it similarly, and I will excuse myself now.
I echo the feeling that you have been condescending and rude. But, I don’t terribly care much. Good night to you.
 
I sincerely apologize to you. At no point did I intend to be condescending or rude to you, and I am sorry that my responses impacted you in that manner. I will attempt to avoid any similar responses in the future.

I thought about just throwing a laughing emoji on this like our recently banished from the other site, Belem, likes to do. Seemed like an ending to the discussion with some symmetry, as that was the impetus for you engaging me as you have, my pointing that out. Alas, I too will attempt to refrain from similar engagements with you in the future.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BelemNole
I explicitly told you twice that I do not pay over 50% of my income in taxes. I do not know why you were unable to accept that and move on. I understand that you do not think that you were being rude and condescending in assuming to know more about my personal financial situation than I do. It seems that you believe that you are being perfectly reasonable and friendly in this conversation. I have not experienced it similarly, and I will excuse myself now.
According to Nerd Wallet the tax rate in California for someone making 136 - 698 per year is 9.3%, at the federal level that would get in the 22 - 24% range or higher. Cali sales tax is 8.8 %. Just right there you're looking at 40-42% and we haven't even discussed social security, property, gas tax, taxes on utilities, retirement taxes, medicade ect... I would think you're paying < 50% but who knows?
 
According to Nerd Wallet the tax rate in California for someone making 136 - 698 per year is 9.3%, at the federal level that would get in the 22 - 24% range or higher. Cali sales tax is 8.8 %. Just right there you're looking at 40-42% and we haven't even discussed social security, property, gas tax, taxes on utilities, retirement taxes, medicade ect... I would think you're paying < 50% but who knows?
Lived experience > math. Also math = rude and condescending.
 
Last edited:
That's the new tolerance= if you disagree, then you're rude and condescending...
LMFAO.

Though in his defense, he took it as if my “probably” was asserting absolute knowledge. He claims 25 percent. There’s a lot of ways to get there. And, he’s right we don’t know his personal situation.

Could be dodging taxes.

- could have a private practice and write off a lot of expenses and hide behind capital accrual in an llc. I once knew of a family whose child was on Pell grants and they spent their summers on their yacht. Mandatory minimum income….

- could have enough assets to function on loans.

- could spend 51 percent of his time in another more tax friendly state.

- Could have incorporated a company in a tax friendly state.

But, it’s also not typical of the area.
 
Last edited:
Though in his defense, he took it as if my “probably” was asserting absolute knowledge. He claims 25 percent. There’s a lot of ways to get there. And, he’s right we don’t know his personal situation.

Could be dodging taxes.

- could have a private practice and write off a lot of expenses and hide behind capital accrual in an llc. I once knew of a family whose child was on Pell grants and they spent their summers on their yacht. Mandatory minimum income….

- could have enough assets to function on loans.

- could spend 51 percent of his time in another more tax friendly state.

- Could have incorporated a company in a tax friendly state.

But, it’s also not typical of the area.
Wasn't talking about anyone in particular, just noting a general pattern on this board by the apostles of tolerance. There's condescension on both sides of every one of these discussions, but the group that professes tolerance takes great offense at the condescension though they give it out as much anyone else.... LMFAO.... really its pure comedy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Banditking
Though in his defense, he took it as if my “probably” was asserting absolute knowledge. He claims 25 percent. There’s a lot of ways to get there. And, he’s right we don’t know his personal situation.

Could be dodging taxes.

- could have a private practice and write off a lot of expenses and hide behind capital accrual in an llc. I once knew of a family whose child was on Pell grants and they spent their summers on their yacht. Mandatory minimum income….

- could have enough assets to function on loans.

- could spend 51 percent of his time in another more tax friendly state.

- Could have incorporated a company in a tax friendly state.

But, it’s also not typical of the area.
I would be skeptical of anyone telling me their total tax burden in California is 25%. What you pay and owe are different things.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Banditking
I would be skeptical of anyone telling me their total tax burden in California is 25%. What you pay and owe are different things.
If you were in the bottom 50 percent, maybe. Though even then, consumption taxes, payroll if you work… add up.
 
If you were in the bottom 50 percent, maybe. Though even then, consumption taxes, payroll if you work… add up.
I guess if you're in the federal 12% bracket and 4% to the state with 8.8 % sales tax you could stay under 25% but that's for someone pulling less than 50k a year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Banditking
You’re welcome. Always happy to help people who are struggling to understand things.
Yep. Pure comedy.... Dude is getting financially raped by the state he glorifies and acts smug about it. Brilliant fellow, that one. LMFAO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeddyLee09
Yep. Pure comedy.... Dude is getting financially raped by the state he glorifies and acts smug about it. Brilliant fellow, that one. LMFAO.
Brainvision is only paying 25% total tax, nowhere close to 50%. That's not bad. Makes sense why he might be voting for tax increases. Maybe Belem is in the same category. Perhaps they were grandfathered in to the best tax situation in the US. . . in california.
 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT