The World's Richest Man Says a $40,000 Salary Goes Further These Days

[basshead444]

I make 43 a year and let me tell you once I'm done paying rent, student loans, health care, retirement, car insurance, gas and groceries I have 0 left.

I don't have Internet
I don't have cable
I don't have a car payment (2000 Chevy blazer)
My cell phone bill is 65 bucks a month

Fuk bill gates

Lol do you live in LA or something? I was living well on 30k, I make double that and feel like a king, and only going up from here.

[Nastradoomus]

Since Roosevelt revolutionized the economy the market has been astonishingly rampant with economical incline. Ask George Bush why the recession showed evident of turmoil and he'll say "Bu bu Bill gets it he's worth a billy".

[BMXcaprisun]

yea but i don't want to live in bumfuk nowhere

plus, i will make 200K once i finish residency and that still doesnt seem enough

You sound like an absolute idiot

i'm pretty sure the world's richest man knows something about finance.

Nope, these miscer's are way more qualified than him. Didnt you know most of them will be making more money than him 5 years after they get their degree?

[iAndrew1994]

Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates, the world’s richest person, said the U.S. economy is strong and that it’s “just nonsense” to suggest current tax rates restrain growth by discouraging innovation.

The world’s largest economy is struggling to gain momentum, and tepid wage growth continues even as the unemployment rate is at the lowest level since May 2008.

Gates, whose net worth is estimated at $86 billion, according to the the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, said a person making $40,000 a year is better off now than someone making an equivalent salary decades ago because inventions like the Internet boost the quality of life.


“It’s not quite as negative a picture as a pure GDP look would give you,” Gates said on CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS” on Sunday. “It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry about middle class incomes, but the comparisons overstate the lack of progress.”

Addressing costs that have climbed, such as the price of a college education, Gates, who left Harvard University without graduating to create Microsoft with Paul Allen, said most people should consider a state university with lower tuition.


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/worlds...182750011.html


how nice of him

Lol at gates trying to ease speculation. The dollar is losing its purchasing power, therefore you're not better off.

[NeonEagle]

lol @ the poverty fuks able to live on $40k a year



better luck next life

[ltrrtl218]

I dont care how smart the guy is, when you're worth $86 billion and have been a billionaire for a large majority of your life, you're so out of touch with reality I can't take anything you say about money seriously.

[squeak419]

Unfortunately we have come to believe that everyone needs the latest phone, primo quality steak for dinner every night, and should be able to have as many kids as they want.

And if they cannot afford to pay for the above, then gosh darn it the government owes it to them.

QFT...

Nobody NEEDS an $800 smartphone or a MAC computer, we don't need to go on international holidays every 6 months or have cable in our homes. If you want these things then you have to work for them, welfare is there to provide someone with the basic necessities to live, to help get out of a rut and make something of your life. Yet when a single mom with 3 kids and a heroin addiction (excuse my harshness and generalization) wants a new phone and cable, the government has to pay for it. The same applies to a $40k salary, you can more than live on that comfortably but if you want luxuries over and above that, you're going to need to work for it.

I could comfortably LIVE on far less than I do, but financially I am in a position to go over and above just 'living'. $40k is enough to live comfortably and still have the occasional pleasure in life, if you want more than that, you've got to earn it, no one owes you that.

It's people's constant efforts to '1-up' each other and 'show-off' that makes people think $40k is not enough to live on.

yea but i don't want to live in bumfuk nowhere

plus, i will make 200K once i finish residency and that still doesnt seem enough

That's not an economic issue, that's your unreasonably high standards and definition of what 'living comfortably' is and there's nothing wrong with that, especially if it gives you drive to earn far more than $40k.

[esmile]

the economy is so fuarked.

[Chasthetics]

Would you agree or disagree that the poor/middle class now, have a significantly better quality of life than the poor/middle class decades ago?

This. If Gates acknowledges this as fact then anyone can, he's definitely more left swinging than average srs.

[LieutenantGains]

Yup the economy is so strong, that's exactly why consumer spending is way the fk down recently.

[Chasthetics]

you guys saying, "he's right, you can live a very comfortable life on 40k" are completely missing the point. the reason people argue income inequality is because relatively speaking quality of life isn't in line with the gains being made. are humans living more comfortably than they are 200 years ago? of course, that's ****ing obvious. we develop as a people, because we work together as a people. the PROBLEM comes in when the quality of life isn't improving at a reasonable rate for everyone and IN LINE with the rate of production of humanity. this is why people argue that there's too much disparity. because the boost in productivity of our economy isn't being transferred onto the people that help make it happen. RELATIVE quality of life isn't improving equally for everyone, and the middle class is RELATIVELY worse off than they were decades ago. just because the world has improved doesn't mean income equality isn't an issue. this is probably one of the dumbest things I've heard gates ever say

tldr; just because humanity develops doesn't mean its ok for there to be a massive disparity in how each group in society develops. gains being made by humanity should be SHARED by humanity, not just the upper echelon

What a stupid, warped, whiney, out-of-touch, and economically illiterate liberal perspective.

[HockeyJon]

He's right in a lot of respects on that. Gates is a good dude, I don't understand the hate. Yeah, he's rich, we know. Get over it.

[LaCosaNostra90]

Just because he knows computers doesnt mean he knows **** all about anything else. Hes just proving this point.

[HockeyJon]

you guys saying, "he's right, you can live a very comfortable life on 40k" are completely missing the point. the reason people argue income inequality is because relatively speaking quality of life isn't in line with the gains being made. are humans living more comfortably than they are 200 years ago? of course, that's ****ing obvious. we develop as a people, because we work together as a people. the PROBLEM comes in when the quality of life isn't improving at a reasonable rate for everyone and IN LINE with the rate of production of humanity. this is why people argue that there's too much disparity. because the boost in productivity of our economy isn't being transferred onto the people that help make it happen. RELATIVE quality of life isn't improving equally for everyone, and the middle class is RELATIVELY worse off than they were decades ago. just because the world has improved doesn't mean income equality isn't an issue. this is probably one of the dumbest things I've heard gates ever say

tldr; just because humanity develops doesn't mean its ok for there to be a massive disparity in how each group in society develops. gains being made by humanity should be SHARED by humanity, not just the upper echelon

They are shared by humanity, except if you do nothing but sit on your ass or decided that you wanted to get a Ph.D in drinking while in college, than perhaps you might not be able to partake in as much as others, but perhaps that's fitting as well.

[HockeyJon]

Just because he knows computers doesnt mean he knows **** all about anything else. Hes just proving this point.

He's actually a good investor and does a lot more than just computers. He's quite business savvy. He certainly is above average when it comes to philanthropy, as well. I don't understand why people hate the guy for being rich.

[willBstrong]

Strong username to bill gates ratio

[Big_Pete1000]

Assuming that someone has 0 debt, he's absolutely correct.

This is completely correct. A mortgage is one thing but then after that your money goes quick with car payments, student loans, etc...

Plus throw in the cell phone, Internet, and utilities. Hopefully no credit card debt.

[0thersid3]

40k-50k as a single male without debt and stupid things that pour money down the drain like leases/rent leaves you with a ton of money to start saving and doing things

[Leon09]

Obviously it depends on where you live, bills etc.

Utah brah here

380 rent with roomates
180 for three phone lines
190 car insurance
230 car payment

980 on pure bills

Take home around 2100 monthly after tax, insurance etc.

Plenty of money left for food, gas, drinking etc

[IronRooster2]

He is completely wrong. $40k back then, you could buy a house with. Then you'd owe just property taxes instead of rents, which would mean making tons of money for yourself in the long run.

Abject poverty is more tolerable thanks to the internet, though.

The world’s largest economy is struggling to gain momentum

And this is a ****ing outright lie. The economy is doing great. Guess what? The economy doesn't mean **** whether there are more or less jobs. That's a separate thing altogether.

[ZenBowman]

lol he's trying to justify depressing his employee's wages, pure and simple.

Remember: this is the same guy that asked Congress to allow more H1's because there was a "labor shortage" while simultaneously cutting 18,000 jobs from his own company

He's right with the college thing, but let's call a spade a spade

His employees make in the mid 100s on average.

This could not come from a more credible source. He is not a Mr. Scrooge trying to screw people over, he has essentially pledged his life and fortune to helping the truly poor. The issue is, a person making 40k is not be poor, American libs have a very skewed concept of poverty and he is setting them straight.

[JUGGERNAUT1333]

While i do lol at a guy who can find 40k laying around in his couch cushions giving insignt on this, I do agree.

I make 40K and have a home, newer vehicle, and a daughter. If it wasn't for internet bills, loans and CC payments I'd be living pretty easy, but stilll I have a fairly comfortable life.

[gmenfan40]

I want to ****** to lose access to his billions, and just live on a $40,000 salary for two years. Then try to say the same thing...

[Fist-Of-Freedom]

He is completely correct.

Unfortunately we have come to believe that everyone needs the latest phone, primo quality steak for dinner every night, and should be able to have as many kids as they want.

.

The economy runs on this very principle. It depends on it... it also depends on debt.

[MA5Bergey]

The problem is, today people think they're destitute because they can't afford to go on vacation or because their smartphone is 3 years old.

In the 1930s, this is what the poor looked like in our country:

[sticktoyogut]

Honestly I dont know the situation in America but I couldnt imagine living well here in Sydney by yourself without a 100kish salary at around 28 or something. I've heard big American cities are similar, it all depends on where you live to be honest. But he is right in what he says because QOL has improved massively in general

[jesteraq]

Depends on the state.

[FitnessCPA]

He is completely correct.

Unfortunately we have come to believe that everyone needs the latest phone, primo quality steak for dinner every night, and should be able to have as many kids as they want.

And if they cannot afford to pay for the above, then gosh darn it the government owes it to them.

Gates is the man.

Entertainment is cheaper (the Internet). Food is cheap relative to most other countries. Public transportation is increasingly available.

No reason at all someone cannot live well on 40k. And before people say "What about the people making 40k who are single with 5 kids?". Sorry, having children is a choice. Having them while unmarried is a choice.

We should ensure that people do not starve or suffer horrible deprivation, but apart from that, people need to make smart choices.

Gates is not an entitled out of touch rich looney, he is saying this because he has experience helping people in real poverty.

Rockclapping.gif

I have strong opinions and would love to elaborate on your post and add my thoughts, but you pretty much covered it.

On a related note, I was thinking about the people trying to get $15 an hour minimum wage. The reasons they cite are that they cannot support their family on their current wage. Well, who the fuk ever said that an entry level job requiring no skills or secondary education was supposed to support your family? It can't, it won't, and it never will, even if they force wages to $50/hour, because in that case either the business will shut down or prices will be sky high that their $50/hour will go no further then than their $9/hour goes now.

[uabeng]

why shouldn't teachers make good money? we need them to support the younger generations. once upon a time, professors were respected and revered. what happened to that?

you're confusing teaching degrees with music degrees or liberal arts degrees

professor != teacher

[FitnessCPA]

Anyone who brings "income inequality" into an argument should be automatically disregarded.

Assume the following example:

In Year 1, Person A is making $40k and Person B is making $400k.
In Year 5, Person A is making $50k and Person B is making $800k (in Year 1 dollars).

A smart, logical person would say, "Great, everyone's income increased!"
A stupid, illogical idiot would say, "Der herr the pay gap has widened, we need to fix it!"
It basically becomes more about envy and trying to take from Person B than actually caring about Person A, who has done quite well.

Would idiots find the following to be good or bad?

In Year 1, Person A is making $40k and Person B is making $400k.
In Year 5, Person A is making $30k and Person B is making $100k (in Year 1 dollars).

Based on the logic I've seen from the "income equality" police, they'd rather this scenario than the first.

It shouldn't be about income equality. It should be about everybody improving.