|
$150k / year = 'rich'?
During the recent budget, the Labor party stated that household's earning $150k were rich. What do you think? I'd loving to be seeing that kind of money coming into our bank account but I wouldn't really consider somebody earning that to be 'rich'
|
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by wmoore
(Post 6364102)
During the recent budget, the Labor party stated that household's earning $150k were rich. What do you think? I'd loving to be seeing that kind of money coming into our bank account but I wouldn't really consider somebody earning that to be 'rich'
The reality is that Australia has an equitable tax system which provides a lot of support for families on low to middle incomes. This is in contrast to countries like the US. There is broad public support for this as it helps promote social cohesion. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by Budawang
(Post 6364110)
With $150K income evenly spread between two earners you would be very comfortably off.
|
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
I would say "Well off".
Even if you live in Sydney. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by Budawang
(Post 6364110)
With $150K income evenly spread between two earners you would be very comfortably off. If it was a one earner family then it wouldn't be so good, but still comfortable. I agree that government shouldn't be handing out money to people on or above that income level.
The reality is that Australia has an equitable tax system which provides a lot of support for families on low to middle incomes. This is in contrast to countries like the US. There is broad public support for this as it helps promote social cohesion. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by MartinLuther
(Post 6364122)
I would say "Well off".
Even if you live in Sydney. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
I think it's all relative to what you earn or have earnt before. For me - someone who has never got above £25k total household income (with two working!) then $150k is a fortune and I'd be more than happy with that and would feel very rich....until I got used to it then I would probably think I need more and it wouldn't seem as much anymore.
|
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Comfortable, probably yes, rich no. A couple of teachers working full time would be on about that and no one in their right mind would call that "rich".
|
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by Budawang
(Post 6364110)
With $150K income evenly spread between two earners you would be very comfortably off. If it was a one earner family then it wouldn't be so good, but still comfortable. I agree that government shouldn't be handing out money to people on or above that income level.
The reality is that Australia has an equitable tax system which provides a lot of support for families on low to middle incomes. This is in contrast to countries like the US. There is broad public support for this as it helps promote social cohesion. Rich? No, but I think that at 150k you should recognise that you dont need handouts from the government. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by ex_exile
(Post 6364140)
Agreed
Rich? No, but I think that at 150k you should recognise that you dont need handouts from the government. j |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Comfortable is a more appropriate term for $150k but it depends upon personal circumstances. I would not consider myself rich below $350k. Consider it costs $1M plus to buy a house in many Melbourne suburbs now.
Labor is removing a lot of benefits for whom they consider rich. The baby bonus being an example. I presume the rich have paid their taxes even though the have less entitlement to benefits. |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by MartinLuther
(Post 6364122)
I would say "Well off".
Even if you live in Sydney. Certainly wouldnt mind that kind of money coming in every year... :thumbup: |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
Originally Posted by wmoore
(Post 6364124)
Well off for sure. You're earning a good crust above the average but I don't think that's anywhere near rich to be honest. On $150k, you could impulse buy a large plasma TV, rich means you could impulse buy a new car :D
As for comfortable, I would put that somewhere around $100k |
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
The real issue is whether you managed to get in on the property market when prices were still reasonable - i.e. before 2001. If you are planning to buy now and you have two kids you would only just be comfortable with a combined 150K in the big cities. If you bought in 2000 then you would be doing very nicely with enough discretionary income for overseas trips every year or two, weekend getaways, the occasional high class restaurant etc.
|
Re: $150k / year = 'rich'?
pre tax? or after tax?
either cuold make you secure/comfortable... neither would make you 'rich' .... unless of course you were making 150k off your capital investments.... then you might be rich... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:01 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.