Okay, I gotcha.... Sorry, I couldn't read anything on your map.
Still doesn't say what a "decent income" is.
As far as your post above with the bar graph, I have some answers to those questions.
How did the economy grow in the '50s: There are several factors, among which would be that war bonds matured. Our workforce was becoming more educated (GI bill).
Also, the higher tax rates were because once taxes are raised (such as during WW2), we know it usually goes down much slower...
I don't really understand the point of the question concerning the period between '25-'28... The economy was good. Lots of new industry.
Which is why I said usually. After WW1 Harding wanted to get rid of the high "wartime taxes". After WW1 there was a surplus of Federal funds.
Shortly thereafter, Hoover came in and started changing things up...
How hard is their job, and how much risk does it require?
Hours worked, benefits, skill level, many things are needed to know before I can say what I think is a fair wage?
And its different if self employed, they should make more as they did it on their own, and took a chance in going it on their own.
Really it could vary from $8/hour to $800/hour.
__________________
We do NOT need to raise taxes on the people. The government needs to spend less is the answer.
How hard is their job, and how much risk does it require?
Hours worked, benefits, skill level, many things are needed to know before I can say what I think is a fair wage?
And its different if self employed, they should make more as they did it on their own, and took a chance in going it on their own.
Really it could vary from $8/hour to $800/hour.
The question sort of stems from the article at the beginning of the thread. In the article, the folks couldn't get by on I think it was $250,000 (which is ridiculous in my opinion). I guess the question is what is the "lowest" income at which there is likely no good excuse for someone to get in the hole.
I know it is a subjective question.
The question sort of stems from the article at the beginning of the thread. In the article, the folks couldn't get by on I think it was $250,000 (which is ridiculous in my opinion). I guess the question is what is the "lowest" income at which there is likely no good excuse for someone to get in the hole.
I know it is a subjective question.
Yes, it is nuts if you cannot make it on $250,000 /year.
I think a nice income for an averaged sized family of say 3 to 5 people is about $80,000 to $120,000 combined income.
__________________
We do NOT need to raise taxes on the people. The government needs to spend less is the answer.
Yes, it is nuts if you cannot make it on $250,000 /year.
I think a nice income for an averaged sized family of say 3 to 5 people is about $80,000 to $120,000 combined income.
Linear Mode
