Are you a millionaire?

[Torie]

On paper today, no. However I draw a state pension. If I wanted the same income from a retirement fund it would require about $3M in assets. Does the equivalent count?

Later this year after probate my wife is due to receive real estate from an inheritance. Combined with our current residence it should put our total real estate close to $1M. So on paper later this year it should be yes, regardless of how one answers the pension question.

Should I vote yes based on pension or future real estate, or should I vote no based on current paper valuation?

You should present value your pension fund as part of your asset calculation, absolutely. You might want to add a percentage point to the discount rate as a risk factor for potential Illinois state insolvency.    You remember that issue don't you, when you broke party ranks?   Add in social security too, using the same calculation, but almost no discount rate, since SS is adjusted for inflation, assuming you get that as a public employee. Maybe your lavish pension is in lieu thereof.

How lavish is it as compared to SS is a question that comes to mind. My monthly SS is $4,087 per month (it got that high due to delaying taking SS until 70 because I am not French  ). Put aside my heart condition, and hey, I do take all my pills and swim every other day, and walk the dog (today it's going to be in Williamsburg* on this glorious day).  So my life expectancy is 13 years, and I assume no default risk from the Feds as opposed to Illinois. So that is 156 months times $4,087, or $637,572.

So yeah, your pension is LAVISH. Damn. You also have almost no unrealized capital gains on your assets that would be subject to taxation either. I am in precisely the opposite situation. Not fair!  

*One of the most fascinating hoods anywhere as the DRA reveals.

[Meclazine for Israel]

AC-DC

Ain't No Fun (Waitin' 'Round To Be A Millionaire)

https://youtu.be/BSIFNuFa-RE

AC-DC wrote that song when they were broke.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

I’m not a millionaire by annual income or by total net worth. But I do have a positive net worth (no student loans or credit card debt and only a small car loan that I could pay off today if the interest rate wasn’t so good compared to inflation). Hopefully enough for a down payment in a few years.

[muon2]

On paper today, no. However I draw a state pension. If I wanted the same income from a retirement fund it would require about $3M in assets. Does the equivalent count?

Later this year after probate my wife is due to receive real estate from an inheritance. Combined with our current residence it should put our total real estate close to $1M. So on paper later this year it should be yes, regardless of how one answers the pension question.

Should I vote yes based on pension or future real estate, or should I vote no based on current paper valuation?

You should present value your pension fund as part of your asset calculation, absolutely. You might want to add a percentage point to the discount rate as a risk factor for potential Illinois state insolvency.    You remember that issue don't you, when you broke party ranks?   Add in social security too, using the same calculation, but almost no discount rate, since SS is adjusted for inflation, assuming you get that as a public employee. Maybe your lavish pension is in lieu thereof.

How lavish is it as compared to SS is a question that comes to mind. My monthly SS is $4,087 per month (it got that high due to delaying taking SS until 70 because I am not French  ). Put aside my heart condition, and hey, I do take all my pills and swim every other day, and walk the dog (today it's going to be in Williamsburg* on this glorious day).  So my life expectancy is 13 years, and I assume no default risk from the Feds as opposed to Illinois. So that is 156 months times $4,087, or $637,572.

So yeah, your pension is LAVISH. Damn. You also have almost no unrealized capital gains on your assets that would be subject to taxation either. I am in precisely the opposite situation. Not fair!  

*One of the most fascinating hoods anywhere as the DRA reveals.

Barring a state constitutional amendment my pension is iron clad and past decisions make it clear that it cannot be diminished and is first in line to be paid if the state is short of funds. There was even testimony at the 1970 constitutional convention to that effect and the justices of the ILSC agreed in a unanimous decision last decade. State employees hired after 2010 have greatly reduced pensions, but those of us in the system before that date are considered untouchable. As for an amendment a minor change was attempted a few years ago and the voters rejected it.

Furthermore the recent tax hikes have helped the state keep up with its pension payments and have substantially increased the state bond ratings. Those tax hikes don't directly affect me since all retirement income is exempt in IL; only my part time work is subject to state income tax. Suggestions to tax retirement income here have proven to be a bit of a third rail in state politics, so I don't see that changing soon.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Lol no and my parents aren’t close either

[Torie]

On paper today, no. However I draw a state pension. If I wanted the same income from a retirement fund it would require about $3M in assets. Does the equivalent count?

Later this year after probate my wife is due to receive real estate from an inheritance. Combined with our current residence it should put our total real estate close to $1M. So on paper later this year it should be yes, regardless of how one answers the pension question.

Should I vote yes based on pension or future real estate, or should I vote no based on current paper valuation?

You should present value your pension fund as part of your asset calculation, absolutely. You might want to add a percentage point to the discount rate as a risk factor for potential Illinois state insolvency.    You remember that issue don't you, when you broke party ranks?   Add in social security too, using the same calculation, but almost no discount rate, since SS is adjusted for inflation, assuming you get that as a public employee. Maybe your lavish pension is in lieu thereof.

How lavish is it as compared to SS is a question that comes to mind. My monthly SS is $4,087 per month (it got that high due to delaying taking SS until 70 because I am not French  ). Put aside my heart condition, and hey, I do take all my pills and swim every other day, and walk the dog (today it's going to be in Williamsburg* on this glorious day).  So my life expectancy is 13 years, and I assume no default risk from the Feds as opposed to Illinois. So that is 156 months times $4,087, or $637,572.

So yeah, your pension is LAVISH. Damn. You also have almost no unrealized capital gains on your assets that would be subject to taxation either. I am in precisely the opposite situation. Not fair!  

*One of the most fascinating hoods anywhere as the DRA reveals.

Barring a state constitutional amendment my pension is iron clad and past decisions make it clear that it cannot be diminished and is first in line to be paid if the state is short of funds. There was even testimony at the 1970 constitutional convention to that effect and the justices of the ILSC agreed in a unanimous decision last decade. State employees hired after 2010 have greatly reduced pensions, but those of us in the system before that date are considered untouchable. As for an amendment a minor change was attempted a few years ago and the voters rejected it.

Furthermore the recent tax hikes have helped the state keep up with its pension payments and have substantially increased the state bond ratings. Those tax hikes don't directly affect me since all retirement income is exempt in IL; only my part time work is subject to state income tax. Suggestions to tax retirement income here have proven to be a bit of a third rail in state politics, so I don't see that changing soon.

Would they be subject to Mass income tax if you move there? Just curious.

You certainly were in the right place at the right time, bad weather and all.

[muon2]

On paper today, no. However I draw a state pension. If I wanted the same income from a retirement fund it would require about $3M in assets. Does the equivalent count?

Later this year after probate my wife is due to receive real estate from an inheritance. Combined with our current residence it should put our total real estate close to $1M. So on paper later this year it should be yes, regardless of how one answers the pension question.

Should I vote yes based on pension or future real estate, or should I vote no based on current paper valuation?

You should present value your pension fund as part of your asset calculation, absolutely. You might want to add a percentage point to the discount rate as a risk factor for potential Illinois state insolvency.    You remember that issue don't you, when you broke party ranks?   Add in social security too, using the same calculation, but almost no discount rate, since SS is adjusted for inflation, assuming you get that as a public employee. Maybe your lavish pension is in lieu thereof.

How lavish is it as compared to SS is a question that comes to mind. My monthly SS is $4,087 per month (it got that high due to delaying taking SS until 70 because I am not French  ). Put aside my heart condition, and hey, I do take all my pills and swim every other day, and walk the dog (today it's going to be in Williamsburg* on this glorious day).  So my life expectancy is 13 years, and I assume no default risk from the Feds as opposed to Illinois. So that is 156 months times $4,087, or $637,572.

So yeah, your pension is LAVISH. Damn. You also have almost no unrealized capital gains on your assets that would be subject to taxation either. I am in precisely the opposite situation. Not fair!  

*One of the most fascinating hoods anywhere as the DRA reveals.

Barring a state constitutional amendment my pension is iron clad and past decisions make it clear that it cannot be diminished and is first in line to be paid if the state is short of funds. There was even testimony at the 1970 constitutional convention to that effect and the justices of the ILSC agreed in a unanimous decision last decade. State employees hired after 2010 have greatly reduced pensions, but those of us in the system before that date are considered untouchable. As for an amendment a minor change was attempted a few years ago and the voters rejected it.

Furthermore the recent tax hikes have helped the state keep up with its pension payments and have substantially increased the state bond ratings. Those tax hikes don't directly affect me since all retirement income is exempt in IL; only my part time work is subject to state income tax. Suggestions to tax retirement income here have proven to be a bit of a third rail in state politics, so I don't see that changing soon.

Would they be subject to Mass income tax if you move there? Just curious.

You certainly were in the right place at the right time, bad weather and all.

MA does not levy an income tax on its own state pensions. It also doesn't levy an income tax on pensions from states that don't tax resident annuitants from MA. It's basically reciprocity without a formal agreement.

IL doesn't tax any retirement income (including withdrawals from private 401ks, etc), so they don't tax the pensions of MA annuitants living in IL. Therefore the indirect reciprocity applies to IL pensions received by MA residents. Seems like a good plan to me.

[the artist formerly known as catmusic]

I work in the arts, and I'm not famous. So no. I will probably never get anywhere close to that, and I'm very at peace with that fact lmao.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

in sperm count, yes

in money, no

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No, in 25 even if RS pass a Debt Ceiling with a Filibuster proof Trifecta can repeal the cuts just like the 303 map isnt enshrined in the Constitution the Budgets aren't engraved in Gold either.

30 K not 5 M Newsom isn't gonna pass an Executive order on Reparations because he knows NY and NJ, PA and CA and AZ, CO and VA and GA RS are gonna lose and Rs are in Big trouble in MO, FL, OH, MT and WV S and we get reparations on a natl level

REV BARBER SAID THE EC MAP IS PLENTIFUL SO IT GOES BEYOND 303 TO 538  BUT THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF SOCIAL JUSTICE, HE SAID THAT MANY TIMES ALREADY

USERS STILL THINK EC MAP GOES UP TO 303 ESPECIALLY BLUE AVATARS  that's why it's called PRED MAP NOT RATINGS MAPS

I had IA Lean R but because Reynolds Approvals are back to normal usually IA and OH votes together and we have a chance now in OHIO

Rev Barber wants Sinema out Manchin isn't gonna vote against Voting Rights his own bill with Sinema not there' and D's have 50 votes he just said no DC Statehood

[Spectator]

Nope, but with $140k in investments and $20k in emergency savings fund at age 28, I’d say I’m on track to be a multi-millionaire by retirement age.

[kcguy]

Hopefully by the time I retire.

I was around $770k at the end of 2021 and dropped by about $30k during 2022, due to the stock market drop.  (Stock market values affect my net worth far more than anything else.)

My net worth is roughly:
- 50% in retirement funds (401(k)s and IRAs)
- 25% in house value  (The mortgage gets paid off in 2026.)
- 25% in semi-liquid assets  (such as 36-month Certificates of Deposit)

[FairBol]

Not yet. 

Come on Powerball! Daddy needs a new pair of shoes!!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

As I said net a seat or Two in the S and 17 H seats we should get the reparations it won't be 5M but it's a come up when we get it

RS always want to call stuff Communism or XI when you do it to Rs but it's not Communism when you do it back to businesses, Don Jr didn't work a day in his life for his millions

China is laughing at Trump and says he should move to China so it looks bad to him with D's and Indies and with China

[MarkD]

I'm the first and only quadrillionaire, and my plan is to be a quintillionaire before I die. (I voted option 4 in the poll.)