Gyroscopic Investing

This couple lives on 6% of their income so they can give $100,000 a year to charity

Julia Wise is a social worker and her husband, Jeff Kaufman, is a software engineer. In 2013, their combined income was just under $245,000, putting them in the top 10% of US households. And yet, excluding taxes and savings, they lived on just $15,280, or 6.25% of their income.

http://qz.com/515655/this-couple-lives- ... o-charity/

dualstow wrote: This couple lives on 6% of their income so they can give $100,000 a year to charity

Julia Wise is a social worker and her husband, Jeff Kaufman, is a software engineer. In 2013, their combined income was just under $245,000, putting them in the top 10% of US households. And yet, excluding taxes and savings, they lived on just $15,280, or 6.25% of their income.

http://qz.com/515655/this-couple-lives- ... o-charity/

This sounds like a great example of the Liberal SuperCult Delusion.  You too can work 226 and half days each and every year solely for other people's benefit.   

A lot of non-profit careerists are VERY HAPPY with this couple.  Who cares about mission effectiveness when so many people need guaranteed employment?

P.S.  They live in the Northeast, so probably Maine, Vermont or New Hampshire in low-end, cheap places.

They can do whatever they want to with their own money.  Just leave other people the same right.

Reub wrote: They can do whatever they want to with their own money.  Just leave other people the same right.

But they're giving all the rest of us a bad name!

Here's more of these "extraordinary givers": http://boldergiving.org/stories.php

MachineGhost wrote:

dualstow wrote: This couple lives on 6% of their income so they can give $100,000 a year to charity

Julia Wise is a social worker and her husband, Jeff Kaufman, is a software engineer. In 2013, their combined income was just under $245,000, putting them in the top 10% of US households. And yet, excluding taxes and savings, they lived on just $15,280, or 6.25% of their income.

http://qz.com/515655/this-couple-lives- ... o-charity/

This sounds like a great example of the Liberal SuperCult Delusion.  You too can work 226 and half days each and every year solely for other people's benefit.   

A lot of non-profit careerists are VERY HAPPY with this couple.  Who cares about mission effectiveness when so many people need guaranteed employment?

P.S.  They live in the Northeast, so probably Maine, Vermont or New Hampshire in low-end, cheap places.

Non-profit careerists could very well be happy with this couple.  Should we care?

For-profit careerists would much rather have this couple worrying about staying on the cutting edge of technology, automobile prestige, housing trends and vacation destinations.

I guess to each their own, and God forbid someone else is happy with your decision.

So about $130,000 went to "taxes and savings".  Can't pay much in tax with $100K in charitable contributions.  So they really kept $15K plus "savings".

WildAboutHarry wrote: So about $130,000 went to "taxes and savings".  Can't pay much in tax with $100K in charitable contributions.  So they really kept $15K plus "savings".

Pesky mathematician, you!

"Savings" is kind of a key word here.  Still, they could be saving the same amount they are spending, and still be donating $100K/year to charity.

Of course they have the perfect right to do this, but if they are not actually financially independent then this is just a bit irresponsible.  Neither of those jobs are secure - social work is subject to state budget cuts, and software engineering jobs are being exported to India faster than you can blink.

Other than that, good for them.  I'd be tempted to give up the cubicle job in favor of lounging at home in my pajamas though!