He always comments like this. Never commenting a concrete answer. Just look at his history. Hes been doing this for years. Probably as advertisment for himself or to just feel/show superior.
You know what, yeah, I will, in exchange for EU citizenship and it must be fully financed so we have available the best weaponry money can buy (and a written contract that has a big payout for my parents if I die in combat)
Only if you can’t fly to a neutral low-tax country and enjoy low tax and not being sent to war. But you do you, I do me.
(And of course, if they don’t have a problem with stealing over half of the fruits of your labor, do you really think they won’t send you to fight for them when the chips are down anyway?)
50% tax is absolutely not typical in the US as far as I know unless you can provide sources? I thought it was around 30% thanks to all the various schemes and deductions one can use?
I live in Bulgaria. My effective tax rate here is around 20%. Next destination is Dubai which is even lower, because again, if rich politican assholes’ kids are going there to live the good life, why not follow them in their grift?
(Would I recommend Bulgaria? Well the tech money you make is enough to live like a king and privately pay for all the services a government is supposed to provide… but then again it’s no different from the UK where I also had to pay for everything privately except I could barely afford it because I also had to burn 50% of my income on taxes with nothing in return, so from that perspective Bulgaria wins. Make of it what you will. Switzerland appears to be the only place with a functioning government and fair taxes, except the property Ponzi is reaching such breaking points that whatever you save on taxes is getting burnt immediately on rent, so you’re no better)
“Decent” in the form of hopefully not dying while you’re on the waiting list.
And bankruptcy is only a problem when you actually have significant assets, something not easy to acquire in western EU countries. If you’re the average under-30 western EU resident, bankruptcy won’t make a major difference in your lifestyle, it’ll be shit either way.
If you are spending an amount which rounds to zero on world-class healthcare, all of a sudden rent being even half your post-tax income (which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means, if not beyond) isn't so bad.
80k is 6.6k/month. That’s pre-tax, but for the benefit of the doubt let’s go with this figure instead of the post-tax.
Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
> which would indicate you are living near the edge of your means
Real-estate being an investment means its price will adjust to extract maximum value. There’s an entire industry there that makes sure you can’t just work around this problem by adjusting your living standard or eating less Starbucks & avocado. Move to a farther away place? Well now you’re spending that rent reduction on transport instead. Move to a lower quality place? Well now you’re spending it on higher energy bills trying to keep the house warm. Willing to sacrifice all your social life and move in the middle of nowhere with ultra-cheap rent? Most roles are “hybrid” to prevent this very scenario, so can’t do that either.
>Have you seen the prices of stuff nowadays? Whether energy, cars, technology or rent? 6.6k doesn’t go far at all anymore. Of course the post-tax is even lower.
You said tax would be "over 50%". I disproved it. Stop moving the goalposts.
May be, but over 6 years of using Redis with bare minimum setup, I have never lost any data and my use case happens to be queuing intermediate results, so durability won't be an issue.
Agree to disagree. Monkey patching the stdlib is a terrible hack and having to debug non-trivial gevent apps is a nightmare (not that asyncio apps are perfect either).
I fixed housing prices by moving to a place that was completely deregulated then building a shack for $60k. Deregulate and you can make things very cheap even with barely building anything, because the replacement cost to build another livable house is far lower, so now current home owners are bidding against cheap competition.
The actual problem is that voters in municipalities are overwhelmingly homeowners, and their home is overwhelmingly the golden-goose of their wealth, so they do everything possible to protect that, including voting for town leaders who will weaponize regulations to make new builds near impossible.
Right, and we managed to destroy that where I live. Deregulated ("opt-out") houses don't get a certificate of occupancy, so you cannot easily get a mortgage, or easily get insurance. So the house is essentially highly valuable to you but not worth a lot to anybody else. We have no real incentive to regulate because the whole structure of the house paperwork makes it pretty much impossible to use as a goose egg.
What did you actually end up avoiding that would cost so much? Architect/plans/structure permitting? Minimum space/setbacks? Grid hookups? Merely skipping inspections, or did you skimp on actual code compliance?
Also curious where you're at, if you don't mind my asking. The biggest blocker I see here is the concentration of job markets into metropolitan areas (near the centralized money troughs).
One thought that comes to mind is if you could keep remodeling/adding on, and eventually get it to a place where it could get a CoA and become a bubble-worthy house. Kind of an incremental self-mortgage. Not that I don't personally wish to see the bubble smashed to a million pieces, but as long as it isn't, then it is still an attractor.
Minimum space/setbacks? avoided square foot requirements, but there were required setbacks that were legally meaningless since they were smaller than the road easements.
Grid hookups ? yes
Merely skipping inspections, or did you skimp on actual code compliance? skipped inspections and code compliance was not checked.
Have you done any analysis of your biggest sources of savings?
It sounds like the main cost savings was the square foot requirement? Literally just building less structure?
Then maybe followed by grid hookups, the cost of which would have been higher due to being in a less-developed area with cheaper land? With alternatives these days, grid hookups shouldn't really be required for any house, but the state walks on individuals with all the care of a human walking on ants.
Of course there's also the builder overhead, in that professional developers are making a profit based on what the market is willing to pay over the actual cost to build (due to cheap money loans).
To be clear by "code compliance" I meant building things still to code such that they would pass a hypothetical inspection, as opposed to "good enough works for me". Like for example I'd guess that an electric kitchen range will work just fine off of a 12-2 NM. The code has a large margin of safety because over time problems tend to multiply. I tend to do a lot of DIY electrical (legal here), but I make sure to follow the NEC so that an unexpected inspector would have a harder time declaring it "unsafe", so insurance doesn't have any argument that the work was derelict (not that this really matters), and primarily because I accept that I've got unknown unknowns and I don't want to die in a house fire.
Everything is as close to code as possible. I wouldn't wire a range 12-2 willingly but then again I wouldn't hesitate to use one on a 12-2 and then put a 20 amp breaker on it if I had to, and only use one or two burners at a time until I figured out what I could get away with without tripping the breaker :) The NM-B I use is rated for temps well above the steady-state temp at the breaking amperage so the normal 20% derate wouldn't be much a concern.
Not having plans meant I was able to figure out how to do everything, including framing etc on the fly. This made it possible to do the project without having to know everything up front which in my mind would be pretty much impossible for a newcomer. I did not even know how I was going to frame the roof until the walls were already framed.
I believe pretty much everything on my house meets code but it was almost entirely built to the absolute IRC minimum.
I believe part of the savings are the fact I took a lot of risks a builder would never take or at least not without a premium, including buying an unproven well share that worked out perfectly and saved me $~50k over havign to drill my own, doing all my own utility extensions ( DIY underground 200 amp power extension and water main are big ones), and buying unproven land without utilities. It took me 6 months to even get electric connected and it was fortunate I was an electrical engineer who was able to work with the power engineers to get a solution to get power for cheap. I worked with the utility to get exempted from their inspections too so they let me wire the secondary side service entry myself and install the service entry hardware myself.
The lack of inspections though are what made it all possible, because I was able to work a day job and do work on the house on nights/weekends and not have to quit my job to be around during the day for a bunch of inspections.
Square footage definitely a big one. The width of the house was the max size of off-the-shelf dimensional lumber so I was able to build the entire house with no engineered lumber and no load bearing structures anywhere in the interior of the perimeter of the house. I also used 6" grouted cmu foundation which is extremely rare (well normal in latin america) but meets code.
But the biggest savigns were probably just that I was able to do everything DIY without worrying about it getting inspected and then having to do it all over again because an inspector disagreed with something. If it were inspected I probably would have had to hire someone to help me.
Completely not true and in fact dangerously (willfully?) misleading.
Housing is much more complicated than supply and demand - for a start houses are not fungible. Local conditions are extremely important.
A lot of high house prices is due to financial engineering - for example long mortgage periods at low interest rates. Just one of many mechanisms to make the rich richer by making the poor poorer. Any momentary affordability benefit is soaked up by higher prices, and those mortgages have to be paid off for longer with much higher total payments.
High house prices are also caused by demand elasticity - things like AirBnB, 2nd, 3rd, 4th homes for the super rich, and housing as a place to park funny money (regardless of whether the house is actually being used to home people) mean that normal people can't compete with this non-home demand.
That's not true, not if your regulations are sufficiently strict.
For instance, if you tax second homes (or third homes, or homes not occupied at least 8 months out of the year, or whatever specific condition you want to use) at 100% of the value per year, you're going to end the purchase of empty real estate to park money, without directly affecting ordinary middle-class people who just want a place to live.
Unfortunately, such a measure would be politically untenable—frankly, even in the 2024 environment, and exponentially moreso now.
> For instance, if you tax second homes (or third homes, or homes not occupied at least 8 months out of the year, or whatever specific condition you want to use) at 100% of the value per year
Many locales already charge much higher yearly property taxes on homes not owner occupied [1]. Where I used to live my property taxes were ~2k/year or closer to 10k/year if not owner-occupied. Of course most of that increase will just end up passed on to renters.
Well, I think there are two slightly different things we're talking about here:
1) Homestead exemptions, where the extra tax is on properties that are not owner-occupied
2) Taxing vacancy, where the extra tax is on properties that are unoccupied more than a certain amount of the year. (This is the one I was describing.)
Both are worth considering; both have their own pros and cons.
Correct, you do that by building more housing, which naturally makes investments in property less appealing.
There is no other approach. You can follow these paths of taxing, regulating, minimum waging, but none of them create more houses and all of them just push the same air around the inflated balloon.
Eliminating AML controls would probably help. Real estate is a haven asset to exchange value away from the grips of a tightly controlled and monitored banking system, although this is something normally transparent to the middle class.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if interest rates went up 10% tomorrow, housing prices would have to come down if people wanted to actually sell their homes.
I think the biggest challenge you will come up with then, is that if interest rates go up 10% you also just increased their opportunity cost to exchange a house up 10% interest for current owners, and now you have to buy them out of the differential between the ZIRP loan they got and the new interest rate to make it worth their time to sell it.
The 30 year mortgage on ZIRP basically created a ratched effect that locked up the market for 30 years, the only way to unlock it I can think of is to drastically reduce the cost to build a house, you don't even need to hardly even actually build any, just force the hand of current owners by making the replacement cost radically lower.
Housing prices would come down (although many sellers would back out, crushing supply), but mortgage payments would skyrocket. Interest rates and housing is kind of like squeezing a balloon. Building new homes is like letting air out.
They managed to nearly kill inflation without sending the economy into a recession. Housing prices were also slowing though tariffs and increased construction costs are not helping.
Because it sucks compared to gevent (green threads). But for some reason, people always disregard this option. They don't even read it. Like any comment with gevent is shadowbanned and it doesn't register in their mind.
Gevent is too underrated. Even if people don't like the monkey patching you can simply use the gevent namespace API as well. No idea why people prefer the absolute mess that is Python async ecosystem.
Happily using gevent for our backend (IoT+ML) since 2019. Was very glad when I saw it is still being well supported by recent SQLAlchemy and pscycopg releases.
The fundamental problem with any kind of green threads is that they require runtime support which doesn't play well with any active stack frames that aren't aware that they are on a green thread (which can be switched).
