[raptorduck]

It really depends on the area he is in. Chemical Engineers are generally the highest paid in the profession. It used to be that vacume engineers were paid a lot, but now they have fallen down the engineering earning list some.

Here in Silicon Valley, sofware, EECS, and EE’s, make a great deal due to demand with folks with that kind of experience making well above what he was asking for. But I don’t know the SD levels.

[raptorduck]

It really depends on the area he is in. Chemical Engineers are generally the highest paid in the profession. It used to be that vacume engineers were paid a lot, but now they have fallen down the engineering earning list some.

Here in Silicon Valley, sofware, EECS, and EE’s, make a great deal due to demand with folks with that kind of experience making well above what he was asking for. But I don’t know the SD levels.

[raptorduck]

It really depends on the area he is in. Chemical Engineers are generally the highest paid in the profession. It used to be that vacume engineers were paid a lot, but now they have fallen down the engineering earning list some.

Here in Silicon Valley, sofware, EECS, and EE’s, make a great deal due to demand with folks with that kind of experience making well above what he was asking for. But I don’t know the SD levels.

[raptorduck]

It really depends on the area he is in. Chemical Engineers are generally the highest paid in the profession. It used to be that vacume engineers were paid a lot, but now they have fallen down the engineering earning list some.

Here in Silicon Valley, sofware, EECS, and EE’s, make a great deal due to demand with folks with that kind of experience making well above what he was asking for. But I don’t know the SD levels.

[raptorduck]

It really depends on the area he is in. Chemical Engineers are generally the highest paid in the profession. It used to be that vacume engineers were paid a lot, but now they have fallen down the engineering earning list some.

Here in Silicon Valley, sofware, EECS, and EE’s, make a great deal due to demand with folks with that kind of experience making well above what he was asking for. But I don’t know the SD levels.

[raptorduck]

I considered a construction loan as well on some tear downs up here. But after researching what it takes and how the loans work and how you get them and all the particulars (not to mention the hassels with the construction itself), I decided it would take far too long, with too much risk. Instead, I would rather buy a fixer upper I can improve over time with cash, rather than financing.

Raw land construction loans were even more risky to me after looking into it.

[raptorduck]

I considered a construction loan as well on some tear downs up here. But after researching what it takes and how the loans work and how you get them and all the particulars (not to mention the hassels with the construction itself), I decided it would take far too long, with too much risk. Instead, I would rather buy a fixer upper I can improve over time with cash, rather than financing.

Raw land construction loans were even more risky to me after looking into it.

[raptorduck]

I considered a construction loan as well on some tear downs up here. But after researching what it takes and how the loans work and how you get them and all the particulars (not to mention the hassels with the construction itself), I decided it would take far too long, with too much risk. Instead, I would rather buy a fixer upper I can improve over time with cash, rather than financing.

Raw land construction loans were even more risky to me after looking into it.

[raptorduck]

I considered a construction loan as well on some tear downs up here. But after researching what it takes and how the loans work and how you get them and all the particulars (not to mention the hassels with the construction itself), I decided it would take far too long, with too much risk. Instead, I would rather buy a fixer upper I can improve over time with cash, rather than financing.

Raw land construction loans were even more risky to me after looking into it.

[raptorduck]

I considered a construction loan as well on some tear downs up here. But after researching what it takes and how the loans work and how you get them and all the particulars (not to mention the hassels with the construction itself), I decided it would take far too long, with too much risk. Instead, I would rather buy a fixer upper I can improve over time with cash, rather than financing.

Raw land construction loans were even more risky to me after looking into it.

[raptorduck]

DWCAP. Yes, my table focused on just individuals, not households. I was speaking of individual relative financial wealth.

And I say liquid net worth to exclude equity in a home or other fixed/capital assets with limited or no liquidity. Liquid should be something you can turn to predictable cash in short order.

In terms of economic purchasing power and community wealth, I think HH income figures are most useful. You often see income figures for towns reported in per-capita income. I don’t think that is useful as a measure of purchasing power of a family or community demographic. My table above is per-capita, but it is focused on individuals. Per-capita in statistics, when reported as a group average, includes kids etc, and the average not very meaningful. A HH average is more meaningful.

As for the $250k mark that the Democrats use to draw a line above which they will tax those evil HH who make more than that. Well that is a separate topic, but a lot of people make above that line as individuals, let alone households, and it is ignorance to think that overtaxing that group will not have a negative impact on the group below. It will.

[raptorduck]

DWCAP. Yes, my table focused on just individuals, not households. I was speaking of individual relative financial wealth.

And I say liquid net worth to exclude equity in a home or other fixed/capital assets with limited or no liquidity. Liquid should be something you can turn to predictable cash in short order.

In terms of economic purchasing power and community wealth, I think HH income figures are most useful. You often see income figures for towns reported in per-capita income. I don’t think that is useful as a measure of purchasing power of a family or community demographic. My table above is per-capita, but it is focused on individuals. Per-capita in statistics, when reported as a group average, includes kids etc, and the average not very meaningful. A HH average is more meaningful.

As for the $250k mark that the Democrats use to draw a line above which they will tax those evil HH who make more than that. Well that is a separate topic, but a lot of people make above that line as individuals, let alone households, and it is ignorance to think that overtaxing that group will not have a negative impact on the group below. It will.

[raptorduck]

DWCAP. Yes, my table focused on just individuals, not households. I was speaking of individual relative financial wealth.

And I say liquid net worth to exclude equity in a home or other fixed/capital assets with limited or no liquidity. Liquid should be something you can turn to predictable cash in short order.

In terms of economic purchasing power and community wealth, I think HH income figures are most useful. You often see income figures for towns reported in per-capita income. I don’t think that is useful as a measure of purchasing power of a family or community demographic. My table above is per-capita, but it is focused on individuals. Per-capita in statistics, when reported as a group average, includes kids etc, and the average not very meaningful. A HH average is more meaningful.

As for the $250k mark that the Democrats use to draw a line above which they will tax those evil HH who make more than that. Well that is a separate topic, but a lot of people make above that line as individuals, let alone households, and it is ignorance to think that overtaxing that group will not have a negative impact on the group below. It will.

[raptorduck]

DWCAP. Yes, my table focused on just individuals, not households. I was speaking of individual relative financial wealth.

And I say liquid net worth to exclude equity in a home or other fixed/capital assets with limited or no liquidity. Liquid should be something you can turn to predictable cash in short order.

In terms of economic purchasing power and community wealth, I think HH income figures are most useful. You often see income figures for towns reported in per-capita income. I don’t think that is useful as a measure of purchasing power of a family or community demographic. My table above is per-capita, but it is focused on individuals. Per-capita in statistics, when reported as a group average, includes kids etc, and the average not very meaningful. A HH average is more meaningful.

As for the $250k mark that the Democrats use to draw a line above which they will tax those evil HH who make more than that. Well that is a separate topic, but a lot of people make above that line as individuals, let alone households, and it is ignorance to think that overtaxing that group will not have a negative impact on the group below. It will.

[raptorduck]

DWCAP. Yes, my table focused on just individuals, not households. I was speaking of individual relative financial wealth.

And I say liquid net worth to exclude equity in a home or other fixed/capital assets with limited or no liquidity. Liquid should be something you can turn to predictable cash in short order.

In terms of economic purchasing power and community wealth, I think HH income figures are most useful. You often see income figures for towns reported in per-capita income. I don’t think that is useful as a measure of purchasing power of a family or community demographic. My table above is per-capita, but it is focused on individuals. Per-capita in statistics, when reported as a group average, includes kids etc, and the average not very meaningful. A HH average is more meaningful.

As for the $250k mark that the Democrats use to draw a line above which they will tax those evil HH who make more than that. Well that is a separate topic, but a lot of people make above that line as individuals, let alone households, and it is ignorance to think that overtaxing that group will not have a negative impact on the group below. It will.

[Author]

Posts