Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ArGee
have had to make the point that it was only the lack of value of money for time that would keep you from taking the raise, not the impact of new responsibilities on your lifestyle.

HMmmmmm. Good point, but I see them as one and the same, namely, that I value my lifestyle more than I value the extra money sacrificing it would command. The higher marginal tax rates that are under discussion exacerbate the situation.

Not to hijack the thread and turn it into a flat tax discussion....but, if my compensation grew at a linear rate (which it does approximately), and was taxed at a linear rate, then I could reasonably expect my compensation to correspond with my level of responsibility. In this wonderfully ideal world, it would be far easier for me to choose my level of output. "If I want to make "X", then I need to work at 'Y'....and if I want to make "2X", then I need to work at "2Y".

Now, this doesn't scale out to infinity...if I want to make "10X", I likely need to find a new profession (or a more gullible employer)...but within reason, I think it would work. Particularly in my field (IT) where it would be very easy to pick up a consulting gig on the side for a few hours a month.

However, instead our current structure forces employees into a system of ever diminishing returns. "I work at "Y", so I take home "X". If I want to take home "2X", I might need to work at "2.5Y" or "3Y"." It's hard to double your output. Tripling or more? Forget it. As I related in my long-winded story that I impolitely imposed on you, I chased those two-birds-in-the-bush once. Never again.

So, ....I choose not to play. I make "X", and that particular bird-in-the-hand is enough.

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, for thinking this way. I see 2-income couples all the time, whose second earner - after day care, commuting, and 40-ish percent (the marginal rate of earner #1) in taxes - is only making a few dollars a week, if that. I figure that if they actually sat down and did the math, they'd be flabbergasted. Or maybe not. People tie an unnecessary amount of self-worth to their jobs.

Does any of this make sense? And BTW, it's nice to have a polite discussion on a topic. 'Tis why I love FR, so many other boards that will remain nameless, usually de-evolve into name-calling and poo-throwing. :-)

102 posted on 12/10/2012 12:02:17 PM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: wbill
I don't know if I'm in the minority here, for thinking this way.

We settled for one income over 30 years ago. We don't vacation much and don't eat out much. I wish we had saved more for retirement instead of spending so much on the kids, but I think we still have time to improve that situation.

I don't pick my job for the tax impact, but I do consider the tax impact when considering a move to a new job.

103 posted on 12/10/2012 12:17:55 PM PST by ArGee (Reality - what a concept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson