US economy thread (2 Viewers)

[(HULK)]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

 

[Keerock]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

 

[Jayrod]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

Unless people strike, there is no influence. They have to be forced to reign it in or else why will they?

 

[Ridgeback]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

Yep, the executives earning millions just don't GAF. They got theirs, the rest of the peasants can eat cake.

 

[SFBayDuck]

All toilets should be those Toto ones with the built in seat warmers and bidets.

In this economy?

 

[AAABatteries]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

 

[Nugget]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

I don’t know the right mix, but likely shifting some of the tax burden from labor to capital would be an Ok start.

 

[AAABatteries]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

I don’t know the right mix, but likely shifting some of the tax burden from labor to capital would be an Ok start.

I liked this but that is the government, which Kee is saying shouldn't be involved. I'm curious how he thinks capitalism can fix this issue - not a gotcha, maybe it can. I'm just skeptical that human nature (greed) can be fixed through an economic system.

 

[Jayrod]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

Ideally, someone (or multiple someone's) decide they are better off by hiring all of the good talent and pay better wages. That drives the market up and copensation begins to stabalize. Similar to what Henry Ford did when he decided his employees needed to be able to afford to buy his cars.

Problem is almost no one sees that as a necessity or even as beneficial. Also, paying a (relatively) small number of executives a big bonus is a lot less money than giving thousands of employees a 10% raise.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

, and am convinced statistics are massaged on the regular. There ar

Yep. Real average weekly earnings have fallen steadily since mid-2020. Yay economy.

Where are you getting this from? Both my wife and I have increased since 2020, as well as both of my kids.

I work at a company that has ~100k employees. They have given out 9% worth of cost of living adjustments since beginning of 2020.

Goods have gone up alot more than 9% since that time. The average employee that works where I am at has had significantly reduced buying power.

Exactly this but 600k employees.

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

The problem isnt capitalism -it’s the people and corruption. We’ve done all this before with the monopolies and it got regulated, I expect the same to happen at some point. Once the circle of elites get small enough the outside elites want in and they consume themselves.

Capitalism isn’t perfect, but it’s better than anything else because all the others have proven to be failures and catastrophic harmful to the citizenry.

 

[Keerock]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

I wish I knew the right answer. There has to be some sort of regulation, but ultimately it needs to be something to guarantee corporate success benefits all employees (proportionally). My comment on eliminating the government was to remove them from the "distribution" of said success/profits (via taxation) to people/causes not affiliated with the company.

I may be overly idealistic, but I think employees would be much more willing to work hard and contribute to corporate success if the profits were trickled down instead of being so top heavy. Unfortunately personal greed is currently taking precedent. Again... maybe it's just me, but I'd like to think if I were making $12MM per year and knew part of that could offset the layoff of 115 people, I'd forego it in a heartbeat.

 

[Stoneworker]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

How do you see this being resolved through capitalistic means?

I wish I knew the right answer. There has to be some sort of regulation, but ultimately it needs to be something to guarantee corporate success benefits all employees (proportionally). My comment on eliminating the government was to remove them from the "distribution" of said success/profits (via taxation) to people/causes not affiliated with the company.

I may be overly idealistic, but I think employees would be much more willing to work hard and contribute to corporate success if the profits were trickled down instead of being so top heavy. Unfortunately personal greed is currently taking precedent. Again... maybe it's just me, but I'd like to think if I were making $12MM per year and knew part of that could offset the layoff of 115 people, I'd forego it in a heartbeat.

Of course everyone wants to share in the profits. The problem is very few are also willing to take the other side of the coin, which is sharing in the losses during bad times (or take no wage during the startup phase when a ton of value is created). When times are bad most people want the security of a fixed wage. That's why there's a disconnect.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

 

[3C's]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

What is good beer?
What is your benchmark for a good beer?

I can get a 15-pack of Founder's All Day IPA or Solid Gold but is that good beer?
I'm sure it's delicious to a lot of folks
And FYI...I drink more Narragansett lager than anyone I know, we sell it for $9.99 6-pack minus my discount I'm at like $7.50 for 6 Tallboys and I am a happy camper during NFL
It's a very drinkable crushable 5.2% lager that I don't get so loopy on and can have a beer in my hand the whole time.

But I'm a realist that not everyone likes that beer. The 7% local IPA from Civil Society here in Jupiter sells for $19.99 4-pack Tallboys, it's good too but i prefer a Narragansett mostly

 

[dkp993]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Wow. Informative and powerful.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

You have just elevated into a new stratosphere for me. Probably the Kiss of Death around here but I am absolutely stunned to read somebody who is able to explain all this.
Thank you!

 

[Godsbrother]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

I brew 1/2 barrels (roughly 165 cans) of good beer for about $70-$80. Definitely the way to go...

 

[tommyGunZ]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

Unless people strike, there is no influence. They have to be forced to reign it in or else why will they?

Now you're getting warmer. Want to take a guess at why there's been a systemic attack on labor unions the past 30-40 years?

 

[3C's]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

What is good beer?
What is your benchmark for a good beer?

I can get a 15-pack of Founder's All Day IPA or Solid Gold but is that good beer?
I'm sure it's delicious to a lot of folks
And FYI...I drink more Narragansett lager than anyone I know, we sell it for $9.99 6-pack minus my discount I'm at like $7.50 for 6 Tallboys and I am a happy camper during NFL
It's a very drinkable crushable 5.2% lager that I don't get so loopy on and can have a beer in my hand the whole time.

But I'm a realist that not everyone likes that beer. The 7% local IPA from Civil Society here in Jupiter sells for $19.99 4-pack Tallboys, it's good too but i prefer a Narragansett mostly

Sierra Nevada, Stone, Lagunitas, Sam Adams, Founders, Great Lakes...just to name a few (quite a few others). Corona however is not a good beer IMO. Would go Modelo before that and a store I was in this morning had it for $17/12. Total Wine is a little less but not nearly as close. Corona is $15.50/12 there.

And yes, Narragansett is a pretty tasty and "cheap" lager. ~$8.50 for a 6 pack of tallboys at Total Wine.

 

[3C's]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

I brew 1/2 barrels (roughly 165 cans) of good beer for about $70-$80. Definitely the way to go...

Oh I know, but there's no way I'm getting into that. I had a kegerator for a while and would keep 2 sixtels on tap. Used to have help drinking it but then the pandemic came and all that. No way am I drinking 100+ beers in a month or 2 at home and I don't want beer getting old so I sold the kegerator. It was for the best.

Though it's not the cheapest route I like to go out to the local breweries to enjoy a beer while people watching or talking/hanging out with others. Actually heading out for a bike ride on a trail that just so happens to have a brewery at the end.

Also, I have a friend who brews his own. He thinks it's good. I bring beer to his house. Not saying that's you at all (I know it's not) but if I brewed a bad batch it would kill me to pour it out since I'm cheap.

 

[Mitchie]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

you're asking people to act outside of their self interest, will never happen

 

[Mitchie]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Nominee for Shark pool post of the year right here. Often get into discussions about real estate investing with friends on a very surface level and these are things I never knew or thought about.

 

[NutterButter]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

Right? It's kind of silly, but even though the whole package certainly appreciates over time, the IRS gives you credit for the physical materials depreciating. The actual physical roof deteriorates over time, and looked at on its own is less valuable each year as it gets older and more worn out, even though the market value of the property as a whole likely appreciates over time.

The land is actually subtracted out of the depreciation schedule. So technically when coming up with the depreciation schedule you are supposed to separate the land from the physical home. Theoretically if the home is just a crappy home on a very valuable piece of land you would be able to depreciate a smaller percentage of the purchase price (since a larger percentage of the purchase price is land rather than the physical home) but in practice there are enough ways to divide up the land from the home that are accepted by the IRS that most people can typically find one that heavily undervalues the land when making the depreciation schedule. Most CPAs don't even ask their client what percentage of the purchase price should be attributed to the land vs the physical structure. They just use the basic split or look up the tax value of the land on the county website (which is often significantly underreported). And of course buyers for whom the depreciation is a priority can purposefully buy homes more heavily weighted towards the physical structure, like properties located in PUDs (where the HOA owns all the land that the home is not physically sitting on).

I didn't want to get too into the weeds in the original post but this is actually exactly how the cost segregation part of what I mentioned in my post works. The cost segregation is where you hire someone to go in and breakdown a depreciation schedule based on how fast each individual piece of the home deteriorates. At a baseline the entire property depreciates over 39 years (for an investment property). But the carpet deteriorates much faster than that. So a cost segregation engineer goes in and breaks it down piece by piece into separate buckets. The carpet depreciates over 8 years, the cabinets and countertops over 15 years, the roof over 30 years, etc.

Then what bonus depreciation lets you do is accelerate all of the buckets under a certain number (can't remember off the top of my head, I think maybe everything that's 15 years or less) and take it all in the first year instead of spread out over 15 years.

This is why in my example I said a $1M property would end up being around a $350k writeoff as an estimate. Once the cost seg engineer goes in there and splits out the land and breaks every piece down into a separate bucket, it's usually around 30-35% of the pieces that fall into the < 15 years bucket that can be taken as a year 1 writeoff. The leftover items continue to depreciate over the schedule that the cost seg engineer laid out.

 

[HellToupee]

drink more Narragansett lager than anyone I know

Ages ago in my hs/college drinking days we referred to it as Nastygansett. Twelve packs of bottles were sold in plastic milk crates. The reboot of Narragansett is 100x better

 

[NutterButter]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

Right? It's kind of silly, but even though the whole package certainly appreciates over time, the IRS gives you credit for the physical materials depreciating. The actual physical roof deteriorates over time, and looked at on its own is less valuable each year as it gets older and more worn out, even though the market value of the property as a whole likely appreciates over time.

Even if it was for actual expenses like replacing a roof (rather than a schedule where you get the write off regardless of whether or not you had some actual repair cost) why incentivize real estate investment in the 1st place. Maybe a good idea for a building being used for a business to encourage more businesses to open which means more employment and tax revenue, but why in the residential space where there's already a shortage? It seems like the last thing we need is to encourage more residential investment.

 

[massraider]

drink more Narragansett lager than anyone I know

Ages ago in my hs/college drinking days we referred to it as Nastygansett. Twelve packs of bottles were sold in plastic milk crates. The reboot of Narragansett is 100x better

I am amazed this is a viable beer now. Shocked

 

[jwb]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

Right? It's kind of silly, but even though the whole package certainly appreciates over time, the IRS gives you credit for the physical materials depreciating. The actual physical roof deteriorates over time, and looked at on its own is less valuable each year as it gets older and more worn out, even though the market value of the property as a whole likely appreciates over time.

Even if it was for actual expenses like replacing a roof (rather than a schedule where you get the write off regardless of whether or not you had some actual repair cost) why incentivize real estate investment in the 1st place. Maybe a good idea for a building being used for a business to encourage more businesses to open which means more employment and tax revenue, but why in the residential space where there's already a shortage? It seems like the last thing we need is to encourage more residential investment.

Bonus depreciation is meant to be a business tax deduction, to encourage businesses to buy equipment/etc. It's pretty similar to Section 179 (and sometimes takes over when S179 limits are met). But yea, it can be used on rental properties/etc (likely whether you rent them or not). But you do have to have a business (easy enough to do of course).

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

What is good beer?
What is your benchmark for a good beer?

I can get a 15-pack of Founder's All Day IPA or Solid Gold but is that good beer?
I'm sure it's delicious to a lot of folks
And FYI...I drink more Narragansett lager than anyone I know, we sell it for $9.99 6-pack minus my discount I'm at like $7.50 for 6 Tallboys and I am a happy camper during NFL
It's a very drinkable crushable 5.2% lager that I don't get so loopy on and can have a beer in my hand the whole time.

But I'm a realist that not everyone likes that beer. The 7% local IPA from Civil Society here in Jupiter sells for $19.99 4-pack Tallboys, it's good too but i prefer a Narragansett mostly

Sierra Nevada, Stone, Lagunitas, Sam Adams, Founders, Great Lakes...just to name a few (quite a few others). Corona however is not a good beer IMO. Would go Modelo before that and a store I was in this morning had it for $17/12. Total Wine is a little less but not nearly as close. Corona is $15.50/12 there.

And yes, Narragansett is a pretty tasty and "cheap" lager. ~$8.50 for a 6 pack of tallboys at Total Wine.

I appreciate that
I run a small craft beer store, we have an old school drive thru that reminds me of places I would see when i was a kid
You would drive up and get milk, ice cram and maybe a loaf of bread, 7-11 but a drive thru, you were not able to physically walk into them, Farm Stores we called them

-I like most of the beers you listed and we carry many of them but they aren't part of the "craft beer" we sell.
Most of those brands you can find at a mainstream grocery store like Publix
My bread n butter are the $20 Tallboy 4-packs from numerous breweries throughout Florida, New York, some Midwest and of course Colorado/California. I wish we carried more beers from North Carolina/Asheville but I'm limited in what I can order thru the distributors.

1st "craft" beer I drank a lot was Sierra Nevada back in the mid-90s, I used to always have it around. I liked the XMas edition they would release
Looking forward to the New Belgium's Accumulation which should be out soon
-One more shout out for a mainstreamer I love and is only out for about 2-3 weeks, "Cold Snap" by Sam Adams, late Jan-Early Feb, just love it.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Beer!!! 12-pack of Corona in bottles will run you close to $25 with tax now...maybe you can occasionally get it on sale for $20

I can get actual good beer for less than $20 a 12 pack. Maybe it's more expensive in FL

I brew 1/2 barrels (roughly 165 cans) of good beer for about $70-$80. Definitely the way to go...

Oh I know, but there's no way I'm getting into that. I had a kegerator for a while and would keep 2 sixtels on tap. Used to have help drinking it but then the pandemic came and all that. No way am I drinking 100+ beers in a month or 2 at home and I don't want beer getting old so I sold the kegerator. It was for the best.

Though it's not the cheapest route I like to go out to the local breweries to enjoy a beer while people watching or talking/hanging out with others. Actually heading out for a bike ride on a trail that just so happens to have a brewery at the end.

Also, I have a friend who brews his own. He thinks it's good. I bring beer to his house. Not saying that's you at all (I know it's not) but if I brewed a bad batch it would kill me to pour it out since I'm cheap.

When I was traveling thru Atlanta a few months back, there is a big walking trail/cycle trail that wraps around and lots of folks use it. There are breweries that set up shop along the way, really enjoyed being able to walk for several miles and then end up at the brewery. Fun to walk the beers off before you arrive.

 

[massraider]

The sub headline on that GDP growth was that it was driven in a big way by consumer spending. People are still out there, buying stuff

 

[(HULK)]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

Capitalism is far and away the best system we have, but that doesn't mean we let it run free, unchecked, and unfettered. It's gotten way out of balance in the US.

 

[(HULK)]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

You can dodge that with a like-kind exchange. Sorry if someone already pointed that out, catching up on today's posts still.

 

[NutterButter]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

You can dodge that with a like-kind exchange. Sorry if someone already pointed that out, catching up on today's posts still.

What the recapture? I was thinking more at some point, you'd sell to actually enjoy that money unless you're intention is to just pass it along to your offspring.

 

[(HULK)]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Why is there any depreciation write off to begin with? Most real estate appreciates. I know there's the recapture that happens at sale time (unless you leave it to your heirs so you get the step up which is another head scratcher) but its for the most part just a free loan.

You can dodge that with a like-kind exchange. Sorry if someone already pointed that out, catching up on today's posts still.

What the recapture? I was thinking more at some point, you'd sell to actually enjoy that money unless you're intention is to just pass it along to your offspring.

You can just do the tax free like kind exchange and then start using the new property as a tax shield (or sell that new property after a year or two, can't remember the exact timeframe). The exchange resets all depreciation tax liability.

 

[Stoneworker]

The sub headline on that GDP growth was that it was driven in a big way by consumer spending. People are still out there, buying stuff

Yes. People spent more and saved less. Q3 personal savings dropped almost $225 billion, from 5.2% to 3.8%. This YOLO-esque anecdote from WSJ captures it well.

Nashville, Tenn., resident Joel Delgado spent $600 on a ticket to see soccer team Nashville SC host Inter Miami CF in August, which put him 20 yards away from Lionel Messi when the Argentine legend scored.

“I can tell my kids about that goal,” Delgado said. “It was one of the most exciting things I’ve ever seen.”

Delgado also recently took trips to Florida and Texas, and attended an Astros baseball game and a Tears for Fears concert. Meanwhile, he eased off on saving for a down payment for a home, feeling that goal is out of reach.

 

[Stoneworker]

All the Q3 GDP cheerleaders may need to sit on their pom poms after the Q4 numbers eventually come out. The Atlanta Fed has just revised their Q4 estimate downward to 1.2 percent due to weakening manufacturing and construction.

The growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) is a key indicator of economic activity, but the official estimate is released with a delay. Our GDPNow forecasting model provides a "nowcast" of the official estimate prior to its release by estimating GDP growth using a methodology similar to the one used by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.

The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model mimics the methods used by the BEA to estimate real GDP growth.

GDPNow

GDPNow forecasting model provides a

www.atlantafed.org

 

[massraider]

https://youtu.be/miWLE1yhMG0?si=TlGcbeCOyodL8R_7

Cool little video on zombie corporations

 

[beer 30]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

We recently did an employee survey at my company. We've posted record profits/earnings/ROI's/pick a metric for the last 10 years, no ****, a straight decade of just crushing it. Mostly double digit increases in any metric you can pick. Throughout all of this our raises have been 3%. I'm not ungrateful because a raise is a raise so it's a difficult subject to address but on the comment section of the survey I said the optics of celebrating our company victories with the typical email blasts telling us all how great we are and are outperforming everyone in the industry are beginning to flat when no matter what we do, 3% is top of the food chain. The optics of it are tough. I'm not asking for a huge bump, just a different number than 3%. 3.5...4...(gasp) 5 for those super performers.

 

[stbugs]

As long as the people with the money control the narrative and can distract people with social issues wealth inequality will continue to be an ever worsening problem.

I can provide an extremely relevant example and I will try to keep it as apolitical as possible, though the timeline will naturally imply some of that automatically. And I just want to be very clear that this isn't meant to pick on a side as both sides do it with various things, but this is just an extremely relevant example of how, firsthand, I can break down one of the ways that the system is designed to make high wage earners like myself richer at the expense of the average everyday American.

My new worth has quadrupled over the last 5 years, and this is one of the tools that enabled that.

Slipped into the 2020 tax bill was the return of bonus depreciation via cost segregations which had been phased out previously (and is in the process of being phased out again now). The long and short of it is that this allows people like me to get a gigantic tax writeoff when buying secondary properties to cancel out nearly our entire tax liability in a given year. Essentially an investment property normally depreciates in the eyes of the IRS over 39 years, so if I buy a $1M property I get a $25k tax writeoff every year for the next 39 years. That is always the case. But bonus depreciation via cost segregation that was re-enacted in 2020 allows me to accelerate a large chunk of that depreciation into year one, usually around 35%. That means if I buy a $1M property I can get a $350k tax writeoff in the 1st year.

But that's only for that year, and I need a tax writeoff next year too. So what should I do? Buy another property, of course. And where do I get the cash for that? Well if some of my income comes from a high wage W2 job that means they've probably been taking out taxes all year based on my salary, but now I'm writing off a huge chunk of that salary, which means I'm going to get a massive tax refund. What better to do with that refund than buy another $1M property so I can do it again next year? And then use next year's tax return to buy another one the year after that? Maybe now I'll buy two for an even bigger writeoff. And the next year maybe 3.

And if that's driving the prices of those properties up, who cares? Higher prices just means a bigger tax writeoff. The properties don't actually have to make sense as an investment. Even if they're losing a little money I'm getting back way more than that in deferred taxes, and now I'm leveraged into a high value asset that will build equity on the renters dime and blow up in value in the next real estate run-up.

So let's think about what this is from a generic level. We're stimulating demand of high income earners into buying more secondary properties at higher prices during a time where our biggest housing problem is that there is already too much demand and too little supply for people to buy primary properties. Stimulating demand for people to buy 3rd and 4th and 5th properties during a time in which there is not enough supply for people to buy their 1st property. And that completely unnecessary stimulation ain't free. We're paying for it in fewer taxes collected from me for social programs, to battle the debt crisis, etc.

It makes no sense. Completely unnecessary and harmful stimulation of something that is already overstimulated all so high earners can pay fewer taxes.

So how do things like this exist? Now this is where it gets unavoidably political. And again, I want to clarify that both sides do this exact same thing with various issues, this is just the one I have first hand knowledge with.

When was the last time you heard a politician mention the words "cost segregation"? When was the last time you discussed it with someone when talking politics? When was the last time a wealthy person told you that you needed to vote guy X because he believes in bonus depreciation via cost segregations? They're not dumb. They know if they said "hey you need to vote for that guy so you can help make me richer by leveraging properties to avoid tax payments while driving up the price of housing and rent" it would be opposed by a huge majority of Americans.

So what do they do instead? "Look, that other guy wants people to choose their own pronouns, let's talk about THAT!".

In reality, I live in Utah but I spend a lot of time in the bay area (my brother lives there) and Disney (where I own a hospitality company) and even in those two pronoun hot spots I literally not one single time in my life have ever run into a situation where I was corrected on what pronoun to use. I would imagine that is true of most people. So now consider the info you're getting.

How often do pronouns actually affect your life?
Mostly not at all.
But how often do you see it being talked about on the news?
Practically every day.

And the inverse.

How often do cost segregations that have raised home/rent prices while widening the wealth gap affect your life?
Practically every day.
And how often do you see them being talked about on the news?
NEVER.

Damn, I wish I knew this back in 2020. Unfortunately, I love my parents but my dad was not good financially so rental properties were never discussed and I absolutely didn’t realize how much it could have helped with tax bills. Like you said, I might have done it just for that.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

The most recent CarDealershipGuy podcast has an executive from cars.com on. He had someone from Cox Automotive (AutoTrader, Kelley Blue Book, Manheim Auctions) a few weeks ago - both with pretty fascinating insight into recent market trends. One takeaway from both shows is that even though prices and interest rates are both up (and not coming down), people are still buying cars. There is essentially no budget new car market anymore (only one production car under $20k) and more than half of the consumer market cannot afford the average car payment. The Cars.com guy said the biggest recent change they've seen is searches based on payment have gone way up - meaning people are looking at monthly payment rather than make, model, price or location to find their new cars.

 

[massraider]

. One takeaway from both shows is that even though prices and interest rates are both up (and not coming down), people are still buying cars

Exactly.
Why make them more affordable, people keep buying them.

 

[Doug B]

Why make them more affordable, people keep buying them.

Capitalism is, thus, broken. "As many people as possible having virtual-necessity X" should be, at bare minimum, an equal consideration to "How many units are we moving?"

I know, I know ... business doesn't work that way. Keep selling in numbers to fewer and fewer people.

 

[Socrates11]

The most recent CarDealershipGuy podcast has an executive from cars.com on. He had someone from Cox Automotive (AutoTrader, Kelley Blue Book, Manheim Auctions) a few weeks ago - both with pretty fascinating insight into recent market trends. One takeaway from both shows is that even though prices and interest rates are both up (and not coming down), people are still buying cars. There is essentially no budget new car market anymore (only one production car under $20k) and more than half of the consumer market cannot afford the average car payment. The Cars.com guy said the biggest recent change they've seen is searches based on payment have gone way up - meaning people are looking at monthly payment rather than make, model, price or location to find their new cars.

That may be, but type 'car loan' into Google and select News and most of the stories it brings back read like this:
*Auto loan delinquencies indicate the consumer is falling behind, says PIMCO Co-Founder Bill Gross
*Why people are suddenly desperate to get rid of their cars
*Americans past due on auto loans at highest rate in almost 30 years
*Slammed by interest rates, many Americans can't afford their car payments

Sounds to me like a system running on borrowed time, with everyone holding their breath to see what's going to happen next.

 

[massraider]

Capitalism is, thus, broken

I would say lack of consumer discipline broke it, then.

When I see "regular" people complain about prices of whatever, I think about people I know who do this, but I am unaware of what changes they have made to adjust. This is mainly my extended family I am thinking of here.

Have they cut out the coffee stop every day? No. Did they sell the car with a $800/ month car payment? No. Do they skip fast food drive-thru (which is now more expensive than an actual deli, dummies!!)? No. Did they get a new phone? Yes. Did they cancel Netflix? No.

Do they complain about all of the above? Yes

Household is a business. Run it like one. Run lean, cut the fat.

 

[Mitchie]

Why make them more affordable, people keep buying them.

Capitalism is, thus, broken. "As many people as possible having virtual-necessity X" should be, at bare minimum, an equal consideration to "How many units are we moving?"

I know, I know ... business doesn't work that way. Keep selling in numbers to fewer and fewer people.

A new car is not a necessity.

 

[Stoneworker]

. One takeaway from both shows is that even though prices and interest rates are both up (and not coming down), people are still buying cars

Exactly.
Why make them more affordable, people keep buying them.

I don't think that's true about prices. Apparently pent-up demand + more availability + prices coming down slightly is what's driving the sales figures. But yes, in spite of higher interest rates.

Dealers and car companies say this year’s strong sales are partly driven by buyers who put off purchases during a period of vehicle shortages a in past years, which pushed many cars to be sold above manufacturer-suggested retail prices.

The third-quarter sales results were buoyed by fuller dealer lots, which in turn, meant fewer price markups and more discounts on the new-car lot.

As a result, the average price paid by car buyers in the third quarter fell slightly over the year-earlier period to $45,516 a vehicle, J.D. Power’s data shows.

Source: WSJ

 

[The Z Machine]

The economy growing at an amazing 5% rate and most people still struggling... Seems obvious what the issue is.

Income disparity is off the chain in the US. Ever since corporate donation money was deemed to have 1st amendment rights it's just been accelerating. The people at the tippy top don't want a rising tide that lifts all boats anymore, they want their boat to rise and for everyone else to become wage slaves.

I'm all for capitalism... very much so actually. But I'm afraid you're right. Companies (NOT the government) need to share the wealth with their employees.

My current company is a perfect example. CEO cleared over $12MM in 2022. Other C-Suiters also pulling down huge incomes. Company is now offshoring 115 positions to save <$2M per year. I see a better, dare I say more equitable solution

We recently did an employee survey at my company. We've posted record profits/earnings/ROI's/pick a metric for the last 10 years, no ****, a straight decade of just crushing it. Mostly double digit increases in any metric you can pick. Throughout all of this our raises have been 3%. I'm not ungrateful because a raise is a raise so it's a difficult subject to address but on the comment section of the survey I said the optics of celebrating our company victories with the typical email blasts telling us all how great we are and are outperforming everyone in the industry are beginning to flat when no matter what we do, 3% is top of the food chain. The optics of it are tough. I'm not asking for a huge bump, just a different number than 3%. 3.5...4...(gasp) 5 for those super performers.

Some companies don't like to actually give bigger bumps to better performers, smaller bumps to worse performers. They think it could be an HR problem, so everyone get the peanut butter spread of 2.5-3.5% regardless of performance. Then just just give the high performers more work to do to cover those that aren't as good.

 

[Steeler]

Thought this was interesting in light of the earlier discussion about the employment numbers:

https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1720429980935487995

The much more accurate and less manipulated Household survey shows employment collapsed by 348K, the biggest drop since the Covid shutdown.