The Democrats!

Entire article can read at
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and
middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the
majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth
concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael
Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage
Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest
congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were
concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional
districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of
those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.

I wonder if they are the ones buying up all the Grand Banks?

Lu Powell wrote:
The Democrats!

Entire article can read at
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/...111230087/1002

Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and
middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the
majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.

In a state-by-state, district-by-district comparison of wealth
concentrations based on Internal Revenue Service income data, Michael
Franc, vice president of government relations at the Heritage
Foundation, found that the majority of the nation's wealthiest
congressional jurisdictions were represented by Democrats.

He also found that more than half of the wealthiest households were
concentrated in the 18 states where Democrats hold both Senate seats.

"If you take the wealthiest one-third of the 435 congressional
districts, we found that the Democrats represent about 58 percent of
those jurisdictions," Mr. Franc said.

A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.

On Feb 6, 1:10�pm, Tim wrote:
I wonder if they are the ones buying up all the Grand Banks?



A key measure of each district's wealth was the number of single-filer
taxpayers earning more than $100,000 a year and married couples filing
jointly who earn more than $200,000 annually, he said.- Hide quoted text -


Hardly. Families with a total household income of $200k aren't in a
realistic position to dump well over $1mm into a boat. At 6.75 APR,
payments on a $1mm balance for 15 years are $8850 a month. Stretching
to 20 years drops the note to $7600. In either case, that boat is
going to cost soemthing close to $10,000 a month all in, all done,
before it ever leaves the dock. That would be 60% of the gross income
of a $200k per year family, and maybe 70-75% of spendable net.

Paying cash simply creates an opportunity cost instead of interest
expense. The amount of money $1mm could earn in a low or moderate risk
investment then becomes the "cost" of buying a relatively pricey boat.

If anybody asked my financial advice (and nobody does) I'd suggest
that about 10% of net worth is good figure to tie up in all toys
combined. If all you have is a boat, fine, spend 10%. But if you've
got a motorhome, some expensve motorcycles, off road vehicles, etc the
total sunk into all of them combined should be about 10%. IMO.
A typical management-level family earning $200k probably has a net
worth of somewhere between $1mm- $5mm, depending on age, whether
anything has been inherited along the way, and whether there has been
any financial discipline in personal money management.

According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
:-)

On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

On Feb 7, 8:48�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. �That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 7, 8:48�pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.
It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. �That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


A one million dollar boat loan?

A couple grossing $200,000 a year should look at a boat under $500,000?

Yeah, well under.

Hehehehe.

Fools and their money...

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 8:48?pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:00:54 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould

wrote:
According to Uncle Chuck's Sage Financial Advice, two mid-managers
grossing $200k should *typically* be looking at a boat somewhere under
$500k.

It's also important to understand whether or not the boat will qualify
for a "second home" deduction. ?That can improve net cash flow by
quite a lot in some cases.

Yes, and you simply recover the amount of income tax paid on the money
needed to make the interest portion of the payment. A family in the
30% tax bracket would probably save about $2000/month in taxes during
the early years of a $1mm boat note. Brings the net total down to
$8,000 per month before the boat ever leaves the dock, or about half
the total *gross* income for the family. My point remains, $200k per
year families are not buying $1mm boats......not unless great aunt
Harriet kicks the bucket and leaves them $500k to use for a DP.


Just doesn't make sense to me that high earners should get a tax break on a
luxury purchase such as a boat.
The US gov't should be putting that money toward your national debt.