Getting closer to FIRE!

[Purron]

DH and I have a friend former friend who bragged to us about how he lives in a state with no sales taxes and claims residency in a state with no income taxes via a mail forwarding service. The only time he goes the his *resident* state is to renew his driver's license. He insists it's legal because he has a RV and property overseas so they can't prove where he lives most of the time.

We must be pretty stupid since we pay sales and income taxes to our state. Plus, we both worked our way through college without ever taking a student loan or money from our family.

At least we can take comfort in the fact our portion of the tax burden supports those in need those who figure how how to aviod/evade their share.

[bulletbiter]

Why would anyone want to shamelessly boast on this forum about taking advantage of a loophole in the system (which directly affects our forum community's bottom line through higher taxes in the long run and/or reduced education benefits for those who truly need them) is beyond comprehension. You signed for a loan knowing full well you did not intend to pay it in full (even though you have the means to do so). At least keep it to yourself so people can THINK you were able to ER by more ethical means.

[73ss454]

Remember one thing,"what goes around comes around"

In my 62 years I've seen it over and over. So, who ever knows in their heart they are doing the wrong thing gets it worse in the end.

[teejayevans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 73ss454 Remember one thing,"what goes around comes around" In my 62 years I've seen it over and over. So, who ever knows in their heart they are doing the wrong thing gets it worse in the end.

Oh how I wish that was true

TJ

[Rambler]

I'll be lobbying my elected representatives to eliminate this and all other freebies like it for people who simply don't want to work. Mind you, I have no problems paying my taxes to protect the country, to help the poor those in need with a hand up (not a hand out such as this is) and such. And I certainly have no issues with people who work hard and save enough to fund their own retirement. I have no qualms with pensions, government or otherwise, that are offered as part of compensation when hired. But this is simply an immorality. With the stuff going on in congress right now, I hope we can put a stop to this nonsense before another freeloader can take unfair, unethical, and immoral advantage of it.

Thanks for lighting a fire under me to write to my congressmen. They WILL get an ear full, and I will provide them with a link to this thread so they understand why a lot of us around here are so furious.

R

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Culture I have to admit that as I get older, I am moving more and more toward a position similar to Fuego. In the past, I was happy to pay taxes to finance the public good. However, I now realize that the majority of the county is looking out one for number 1 (themselves)...

I have to say that when I was young and an idealist, I used to be more liberal. But as I got older and had to raise two children, I gradually became more conservative.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - Karl Marx.

My children demonstrated this principle to me on the daily basis, in their teenage years. They had all those needs, like money for clothes and the movies, etc... But came time for house chores, boy oh boy, they suddenly had no abilities whatsoever. I couldn't throw them out on the street when they made me mad, but I knew that I had to wean them off, else they would be dependent on me for the rest of my life. I knew an old engineer who was still working in his 70s to support his daughter, who was in her 50s and able-bodied. She had "a lot of needs", while the old man had "abilities".

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by donheff I fumed mightily at the Bush tax cuts (and at the Reagan cuts before them) despite the fact that they would clearly be a bonanza for me...

Although I may agree with you about the need to raise taxes to balance our budget, I don't see how any tax cut can be compared to money that is given away.

A tax cut means somebody is now taxed less than he was before. The proper question should be "Was the earlier tax too high?" or "Is the tax now too low?".

With a tax cut, we now take less from the rich than we did before. We now take 35% from them, in lieu of the 39.6% that we did before. It is not the same thing as "giving money" to the rich.

[KingB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rambler Thanks for lighting a fire under me to write to my congressmen. They WILL get an ear full, and I will provide them with a link to this thread so they understand why a lot of us around here are so furious. R

I was thinking of doing this too but I am not very good at words (or anything).
Can you PM me your letter so I can also send it to my congressman/senators.

[traineeinvestor]

The notion of adopting a course of action intended to avoid repaying a loan and imposing the resulting cost on the already overburdened taxpayer is ethically challenging. In addition, widespread abuse should in theory make it harder for future generations to obtain access to the same funding.

That said, if the rules provide for it, it's not really any different from a number of other problems with the rules which determine how much each person pays into or gets out from the system. It's the system that needs to be tossed overboard and completely replaced fixing.

[donheff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Although I may agree with you about the need to raise taxes to balance our budget, I don't see how any tax cut can be compared to money that is given away. A tax cut means somebody is now taxed less than he was before. The proper question should be "Was the earlier tax too high?" or "Is the tax now too low?". With a tax cut, we now take less from the rich than we did before. We now take 35% from them, in lieu of the 39.6% that we did before. It is not the same thing as "giving money" to the rich.

My point had nothing to do with whether I was right to think the tax cuts were bad. My point was that I personally benefited from a tax cut I opposed as bad for the country and do not think that ethics or integrity would call on me to give the bounty to the Government as many often argue.

[obgyn65]

Well done Fuego. Congratulations.

[accountingsucks]

Wow, nice work - I think I'm being ambitous thinking I can pull the plug in my early 40's. Just wondering though, does your budget include stuff like auto replacement and home maintenance? These things don't necessarily occur every year, but eventually you will have to spend the $. I am banking on $5-$6K on average every year for these two things.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by accountingsucks Wow, nice work - I think I'm being ambitous thinking I can pull the plug in my early 40's. Just wondering though, does your budget include stuff like auto replacement and home maintenance? These things don't necessarily occur every year, but eventually you will have to spend the $. I am banking on $5-$6K on average every year for these two things.

I have factored those in to what I will need above and beyond my current spending levels. I do track house maintenance as a separate category, but it was running less than 1% of the value of my house. I figure I'll add in enough money to at least cover 1% of my house value (and maybe then some), or in the alternative, put together a detailed spreadsheet showing replacement costs for key depreciating items (roof, a/c and furnace, paint/siding, appliances, hot water heater, etc) and figure out an annualized replacement cost for these items, plus enough to cover recurring annual expenses (minor repairs and maintenance tasks, lawn care, etc).

Cars? I am including roughly enough to have a new-ish car every so often. That is above and beyond my current spending (which only includes maintenance and associated carrying costs for our 2 cars).

And I have a 10% contingency above my basic costs to allow for variations above the baseline. My hope is that after a few more years of detailed expense tracking I can see how expenses vary.

Then I have a certain amount included for "higher kid related expenses" to cover the teen years.

In reality, my ER spending target is a moving target at this point, as is my ideal SWR. As a result I don't know exactly how much I "need" for ER, other than that I may have roughly enough in a few more years (unless we want to work for "just one more year"). And I may consider switching to part time consulting in a few more years.

[boont]

Based on FUEGO's statements I would think that a slightly closer look at his world would yield far more shady things than so far revealed.

The funny thing is, that the cops and the IRS are looking more and more at "social" type sites on the internet. I would include this one, as one to monitor.

I think FUEGO has given more than enough clues to smoke him out.

Good luck under scrutiny.

[Aiming_4_55]

Interesting thread!

I guess... should one accept freebies when offered? There's another thread on accepting Senior Discounts.

Life is a game, we're always looking for the best strategy to reduce how much we pay in taxes, i.e. TIRA vs. Roth IRA, short vs. long term investments, 529 vs out of pocket, etc. it's just a game in the long run.

Just have to learn the rules.

[Packman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO I have factored those in to what I will need above and beyond my current spending levels. I do track house maintenance as a separate category, but it was running less than 1% of the value of my house. I figure I'll add in enough money to at least cover 1% of my house value (and maybe then some), or in the alternative, put together a detailed spreadsheet showing replacement costs for key depreciating items (roof, a/c and furnace, paint/siding, appliances, hot water heater, etc) and figure out an annualized replacement cost for these items, plus enough to cover recurring annual expenses (minor repairs and maintenance tasks, lawn care, etc).

I've done exactly the same thing with regard to calculating spend on items that do not occur regularly. I showed my quite extensive list to a financial planner and he said no need to do that. He stated that when these non-regular expenditures come up, just use/sell appreciated portfolio assets to pay for these. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I haven't changed my plan for calculating these "depreciating assets" into my annual spend. For me, this amounts to about $6,000/year.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boont Based on FUEGO's statements I would think that a slightly closer look at his world would yield far more shady things than so far revealed. The funny thing is, that the cops and the IRS are looking more and more at "social" type sites on the internet. I would include this one, as one to monitor. I think FUEGO has given more than enough clues to smoke him out. Good luck under scrutiny.

Thanks for the well wishes. But I have all my ducks in a row, so luck isn't really required. If the law changes, I will comply with the new laws. Until then I will comply with current laws.

I have been nothing but honest and fully disclosed everything that I am planning on doing. Some here have found it helpful. Others find it morally/ethically/legally offensive. I'm ok with that.

[FUEGO]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packman I've done exactly the same thing with regard to calculating spend on items that do not occur regularly. I showed my quite extensive list to a financial planner and he said no need to do that. He stated that when these non-regular expenditures come up, just use/sell appreciated portfolio assets to pay for these. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but I haven't changed my plan for calculating these "depreciating assets" into my annual spend. For me, this amounts to about $6,000/year.

I think you have to account for the "one time non-regular" expenses explicitly. One thing is for certain, these one time non-regular expenses happen all the time and they will have to be funded out of your portfolio one way or another.