Skip to main content

Homelessness More Lucrative than $150,000/Year Job in SF Bay Area

Most people in the United States long for a $150,000-per-year salary. This makes sense, as the nation's median personal income is roughly 80 percent below that mark. 

It's a lot of money. 

In fact, this income level qualifies for the top 4 percent of Americans and the top 0.1 percent of the world's population; it is 109 times the global average.

If this is true, how could an unemployed homeless person possibly make more money? Well, the federal, state and local governments: that's how!

Let's take a look at the numbers.

A single Bay-Area Californian earning $150,000 per year pays an effective income tax rate of 32.23 percent: this figure is inclusive of a 7.20-percent effective state income tax (and 9.30-percent marginal rate), an 18.27-percent effective federal income tax (and 24.00-percent marginal rate), and a 6.76-percent effective rate for Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes. 



In addition to income taxes, the homeowner incurs an annual mortgage cost amounting to roughly $48,000, along with annual property taxes in the neighborhood of $8,000. 

Accounting for these costs, even excluding the 10-percent sales tax, that worker is left with $45,661.

After accounting for $3,600 from annual utilities expenses, $5,300 for annual health insurance costs, the worker is left with $36,761 before groceries, transportation, auto insurance, maintenance and repair costs. 

After accounting for these factors and the 10-percent sales tax, the worker is left with roughly $1,000 per month for entertainment, discretionary expenses, savings and investment. 

Meanwhile, the indigent qualifies for subsidized transportation assistancesubsidized healthcaresubsidized housing and Supplemental Security Income, netting the unemployed indigent more than $1,000 of unearned income each month — in addition to a cash value greater than $3,000 for monthly healthcare and housing — to spend however he likes. 
Remain always wary of the bureaucrats' crafty attempts at substituting the word 'free' for 'subsidized.' It's everywhere an insidious means to conning the public into funding projects that would otherwise fail to interest them if they only knew how they were paying for them.
Of course, all of this is available in addition to CalFresh, formerly known as Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which covers the costs of food, rent, clothing, and other basic living expenses. Indeed, it is potentially far more lucrative to bilk the system as a family than as an individual. 

The indigent enjoys every bit of this without incurring any of the costs, responsibilities or burdens of employment, and his benefit is derived exclusively at the expense of taxpayers who fail to gain anything from the unaccountable investment, which produces nothing in return and merely bids up the prices of scare goods and services that the financiers — the taxpayers — intend to buy or rent. 

So, not only does the redistribution ensure that the indigent will make a living out of non-work, and not only does it prove a wasteful investment for the taxpayer, but the taxpayer pays doubly when he’s faced with those higher prices bid up by the indigent he was forced to support. 

As it turns out, being homeless in California is more lucrative than a $150,000-per-year job, and the professional is being dragged through the mud, fleeced and enslaved as political correctness prevents him from denouncing the fraud.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century. 

Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties? 

The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery. 

It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession. 

It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860.

It was a war that would blur the lines and jurisdictions between sovereign states, that would indiscriminately sacrifice the founding principles etched …

Bitcoin: An Ornately Compelling Transfer of Wealth

In a 2017 interview with Fox Business, venture capitalist Peter Thiel identified bitcoin (XBT) as the "cyber equivalent to gold." 

While talk of this comparison has endured for just about as long as the cryptocurrency itself, Thiel's statement showcases more acutely just how highly imaginative and seductive the mental gymnastics have become: not only have successful entrepreneurs bought into its functionality, they have also endorsed a comparison between one asset that is usable in and of itself, absent trade, and another whose usability stems exclusively from its tradability.

Gold and silver are valuable not strictly because they require strenuous work to be extracted from the earth, but because of the valuable properties they present. 

It's their unique set of properties that first makes gold and silver worth the effort, both of which operate from a "proof of utility" instead of some measly "proof of work." 

The assignment of value operates not from…