Rich-o-Meter

[BLADEMDA]

---

Members do not see this ad.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/10/19/what-percent-are-you/


The calculator above shows where your income stands on the wide range of the 99%. An annual salary above $506,000 puts you in the top 1%, while you need to make less than $2,500 a year to be in the bottom 1%. Where do you stand?

 

[Consigliere]

Not in the top 1%...

 

[BLADEMDA]

Not in the top 1%...

An annual salary above $506,000 puts you in the top 1%, while you need to make less than $2,500 a year to be in the bottom 1%. Where do you stand?

 

[D P356]

.

 

[cincincyreds]

I was in the top 1% when I started working out of residency, but after a few years all that call pretty much every weekend got to me.

 

[scudrunner]

Bottom 1%.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Blade, why don't you take the lead on this and put your numbers out there. You're asking others to do it, but will you yourself do it?

This thread was just for fun. No ned to get worked up. BTW, I'm in the top 1% but not for much longer thanks to Obama.

What really matters is take home pay. Avoiding the soon to be 44% income tax is the key to wealth.

 

[Consigliere]

Top 97% - that's a range of $300 - $360k.

 

[deleted126335]

Lots of docs brush up or enter the top 1% for household income. For some of their career. Few get anywhere near the amount to enter the top 1% in terms of household wealth. something like $15 million.

We are the "working rich" Changes to our income derived from working would have a substantial change in lifestyle. Quite a bit different from those that own income producing assets sufficient to make paid employment unnecessary or nearly so which is what the top 1% of household wealth looks like. Very different mindset and level of security and outlook.

 

[yappy]

As physicians, have you guys seen many transition from "working rich" to a place where said physicians continues to work [for professional satisfaction] but also enjoy passive streams of revenue? If so does anyone know of any good reading material on this subject?

property management, franchises, BRIC investments, etc ?

I'm @ 76%

Lots of docs brush up or enter the top 1% for household income. For some of their career. Few get anywhere near the amount to enter the top top 1% in terms of household wealth. something like $15 million.

We are the "working rich" Changes to our income derived from working would have a substantial change in lifestyle. Quite a bit different from those that own income producing assets sufficient to make paid employment unnecessary or nearly so which is what the top 1% of household wealth looks like. Very different mindset and level of security and outlook.

 

[deleted126335]

physician entrepreneurs:

-Part owners of surgicenters, pain clinics, super partners of big groups have a good shot. Although plenty simply expand the lifestyle.

-Most of the docs who are able to achieve the top 1% in household wealth do so after decades of living below their means and saving and investing wisely.

There aren't too many docs who make it to the top 1% of household wealth unless they inherit a good chunk of it.

 

[IveGotTwins]

53%

 

[aneftp]

I am in high 300s/low 400s. Highest I hit was $525k one year. But I worked like a dog. Took about 2 1/2 weeks vacation entire year.

But income is always misleading. Many govt workers with psychology degree earn $100k plus in bull crap defense work (I grew up and lived in DC area half my life so know full well about those jobs). Anyways. Those workers game the system. Their benefits packages are usually worth $40-80k in extra perks. And the maternity leave govt workers game is ridiculous. We are talking sick leave plus temp disability. They can milk close to 3 months full pay on maternity leave as govt workers.

So let's say I will make $400-415k this year. Probably taking 5 weeks off. That's all 1099 income than start subtracting expenses. Malpractice (occurrence I actually get a great rate of $13k). Heath insurance (premiums alone for family of 4 is close to $10k because i pay extra for materntiy rider for my wife and that is with $7000 deductible for self employed). Disability insurance (that's another $8000 that I do not deduct...most cheat and deduct but you are not suppose to deduct unless u want to make it a taxable income when u come collect). Life insurance premiums ($1500 and probably need to increase limit to $2 mil since I have 2 kids now).

So we are talking $30k expenses off the bat. No matching 401k. Sure we can deduct other expenses like phones, cars, etc.

But I'd rather take the office job working 40 hours cushy govt job for $100k no stress with 4 year degree and huge benefits.

Physicans are what CNN calls "Henry". High earners not rich yet.

I am 8 years out and managed to save over 1 million in retirement and non retirement cash/stocks. This is after losing over $250k cash on housing losses (real losses cause I sold my homes to take other jobs and never sold home for a profit). So I do manage to save a lot. Both cars paid for in cash. No debt other than manageable mortgage ($2000 a month)

 

[D P356]

This thread was just for fun. No ned to get worked up. BTW, I'm in the top 1% but not for much longer thanks to Obama.

What really matters is take home pay. Avoiding the soon to be 44% income tax is the key to wealth.

Thanks for posting, Blade. You moved up a point in my book. I know I give you crap. But if I don't, who will. Check your inbox.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Thanks for posting, Blade. You moved up a point in my book. I know I give you crap. But if I don't, who will. Check your inbox.

It isn't what your earn but what you keep that matters. Hence, there are jobs with lower pay which offer fantastic retirement plans/benefits that make the job quite good.

When income taxes hit 50% or more in some states next year (federal plus state) the govt. will be taking half your income. In addition, there is FICA, SS, Medicare tax on the first $250,000 as well.

Those who know how to "defer" income tax free can actually earn less money while still doing as well as others earning more Taxable income.

One last point: I believe there is significant income under reported or not reported at all to the government. This under the table money is significant and if fully reported would help immensely with our deficit problem along with raising median U.S. income by $10K.

Ask yourselves if teachers are really "average" income in the USA? I doubt it. Yet, according to the IRS many teachers earn Above average income. Does this seem correct to you? When you look around does the average American appear to be living much better than a teacher's income? The answer is a resounding yes.

 

[BLADEMDA]

About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category, commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from 2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty measure.

 

[BLADEMDA]

About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category, commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from 2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty measure.

So why is it when I see these "low income" individuals who are on Medicaid they have Ipads, Iphones, Gold teeth, fancy jewelry, etc.? If they are indeed below the poverty line how do they ROUTINELY afford all this expensive stuff?

Meanwhile a teacher who has a reported income of 56th percentile is struggling to make ends meet, can't afford an Ipad and doesn't own a Rolex.

 

[BLADEMDA]

How federal and state governments share Medicaid's costs
The federal government provides matching funds to states, to help them fund their Medicaid programs, using a formula called the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, or FMAP. On average, Washington will spend $57 for every $43 that states spend on Medicaid. Over time, this has led many states—like New York—to substantially expand their Medicaid programs, because for every dollar they spend expanding Medicaid for their residents, taxpayers in other states are on the hook for an extra $1.33.
Obamacare takes these incentives to their logical conclusion. Under Obamacare, starting in 2014, everyone with income below 133 percent of FPL will be eligible for Medicaid. For the first three years of the expansion, federal taxpayers will pick up the full cost of the expansion. This 100 percent funding rate will phase down to 95 percent in 2017, 94 percent in 2018, 93 percent in 2019, and 90 percent in 2020.
Many states are rightly worried that, given federal budget pressures, Washington won't continue to cover 90 percent of the costs after 2020. But because the new Medicaid enrollees will now be dependent on the government, states won't be politically or legally able to roll back their programs, leaving state taxpayers with the bill. The Wall Street Journal aptly compares this to "a subprime loan with a teaser rate and balloon payment."

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[DrAwsome]

So why is it when I see these "low income" individuals who are on Medicaid they have Ipads, Iphones, Gold teeth, fancy jewelry, etc.? If they are indeed below the poverty line how do they ROUTINELY afford all this expensive stuff?

Meanwhile a teacher who has a reported income of 56th percentile is struggling to make ends meet, can't afford an Ipad and doesn't own a Rolex.

You are grossly mistaken regarding teacher salaries. In many states, teachers start at around 50k with a bachelors. In IL, Chicago in particular, avg teacher salary is 76k. In Hoffman Estates, ritzy burb, avg salary is 87k. So many many teachers make far more than the avg salary fyi. And this is for a 9 months of work along with 6 figure pensions. So we as a whole are getting screwed royally and no one is doing anything about it.

 

[BLADEMDA]

You are grossly mistaken regarding teacher salaries. In many states, teachers start at around 50k with a bachelors. In IL, Chicago in particular, avg teacher salary is 76k. In Hoffman Estates, ritzy burb, avg salary is 87k. So many many teachers make far more than the avg salary fyi. And this is for a 9 months of work along with 6 figure pensions. So we as a whole are getting screwed royally and no one is doing anything about it.

I am not "mistaken" about teacher income. 56th percentle is correct for my State.

It isn't the Teacher's salary that is the problem but rather the teacher Union which won't allow any free market competition.

In a free market the best teacher's would earn over $100K while the worst ones would lose their jobs. Under the current system all teachers get paid a mediocre salary while the kids get a mediocre education.

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[BLADEMDA]

Chicago teachers strike over basis for pay increase







2012-09-12 Chicago teachers strike over basis for pay increaseThe Pantagraph Editorial Boardpantagraph.com


The strike by Chicago public school teachers is an illustration of the teachers' union wanting its members to be paid without any evaluation of their performance.
In a city where unemployment has hit 11 percent, teachers are striking not over money, but over how they are evaluated and whether principals should have a say over which teachers work in their buildings.
Although the union disputes it, those are the two issues. And the teachers are wrong on both counts.
The city of Chicago has offered teachers a 16 percent raise over the four years, and has agreed to hire back tenured teachers who were laid off so Chicago schoolchildren can attend school more hours per day. The longer school day — implemented in some schools this year — requires at least seven hours of instruction each day. Previously, some schools were only in session for five hours and 45 minutes a day.
The average Chicago teacher's salary is $71,000 per year. But that's not the issue. In fact, good teachers are underpaid. Excellent teachers are grossly underpaid.
The key is to quit paying every teacher merely on their longevity and advanced degrees. Teachers should be evaluated on how well they teach.
One of the key issues is a state law that requires a new teacher evaluation system and that student performance on standardized tests make up at least 25 percent of that evaluation. Chicago teachers are balking at that idea.
There are issues with standardized tests and no system should rely solely on tests for a teacher evaluation. At the same time, these tests are one measure of how well a teacher performs. In some classrooms, student achievement on the tests improves year after year. In other classrooms, students tread water or their performance recedes. The difference, over the years, is the teacher. Those who move their students forward need to be rewarded. Those who don't need to adopt new methods or, if performance issues persist, be encouraged to find another profession.
The other sticking point is allowing principals to select the teachers who work in their schools. Principals, who are measured on their school's performance, need to have the right to hire the teachers that will help them succeed. Currently, the Chicago teachers' union has a large say in where teachers are assigned. Some principals are understandably upset when they are assigned sub-par teachers, yet expected to improve a school's results.
The union, in other words, doesn't want teachers to compete for jobs. If principals are allowed to hire their own teachers, it will undoubtedly lead to the sub-par teachers being identified and "left behind."
Evaluations based on objective performance data and competition for positions is standard in the business world. Most private sector employees are evaluated at least annually and are expected to meet certain standards. To varying degrees, pay is based on performance.
That's the issue at the heart of this dispute. Chicago teachers want to be paid, but they are objecting to measures of their performance.

 

[DrAwsome]

Chicago teachers strike over basis for pay increase







2012-09-12 Chicago teachers strike over basis for pay increaseThe Pantagraph Editorial Boardpantagraph.com


The strike by Chicago public school teachers is an illustration of the teachers’ union wanting its members to be paid without any evaluation of their performance.
In a city where unemployment has hit 11 percent, teachers are striking not over money, but over how they are evaluated and whether principals should have a say over which teachers work in their buildings.
Although the union disputes it, those are the two issues. And the teachers are wrong on both counts.
The city of Chicago has offered teachers a 16 percent raise over the four years, and has agreed to hire back tenured teachers who were laid off so Chicago schoolchildren can attend school more hours per day. The longer school day — implemented in some schools this year — requires at least seven hours of instruction each day. Previously, some schools were only in session for five hours and 45 minutes a day.
The average Chicago teacher’s salary is $71,000 per year. But that’s not the issue. In fact, good teachers are underpaid. Excellent teachers are grossly underpaid.
The key is to quit paying every teacher merely on their longevity and advanced degrees. Teachers should be evaluated on how well they teach.
One of the key issues is a state law that requires a new teacher evaluation system and that student performance on standardized tests make up at least 25 percent of that evaluation. Chicago teachers are balking at that idea.
There are issues with standardized tests and no system should rely solely on tests for a teacher evaluation. At the same time, these tests are one measure of how well a teacher performs. In some classrooms, student achievement on the tests improves year after year. In other classrooms, students tread water or their performance recedes. The difference, over the years, is the teacher. Those who move their students forward need to be rewarded. Those who don’t need to adopt new methods or, if performance issues persist, be encouraged to find another profession.
The other sticking point is allowing principals to select the teachers who work in their schools. Principals, who are measured on their school’s performance, need to have the right to hire the teachers that will help them succeed. Currently, the Chicago teachers’ union has a large say in where teachers are assigned. Some principals are understandably upset when they are assigned sub-par teachers, yet expected to improve a school’s results.
The union, in other words, doesn’t want teachers to compete for jobs. If principals are allowed to hire their own teachers, it will undoubtedly lead to the sub-par teachers being identified and “left behind.”
Evaluations based on objective performance data and competition for positions is standard in the business world. Most private sector employees are evaluated at least annually and are expected to meet certain standards. To varying degrees, pay is based on performance.
That’s the issue at the heart of this dispute. Chicago teachers want to be paid, but they are objecting to measures of their performance.

Point is that teachers have been over paid while other people are getting the shaft. The union president, Karen Lewis, makes 226k. So while doctors are shown as "greedy" we are actually getting shafted from all angles. Unless we really make some display as these buffoons, we are done.

 

[sevoflurane]

To be fair... my brother is a teacher in California and once you take into account the cost of living... well... he isn't making squat.

Some teachers make more than others... some make a lot less. Kinda depends where you live and what population you are taking care of.

The same applies to police officers... and IMO, they make way too much money.

When I lived in Boston (South Natick), I was shocked to find that their income was 100K+. As far as I know... you don't need an advanced degree to be a cop. In fact, you can go in after highschool.

It is well known that cops can make 200K in South Natick with some time on the force + overtime. Not bad for a HS education.

http://statetroopersalary.com/MA/Natick/salary/Police-Officers-Salary

 

[sevoflurane]

This is an interesting chart.

 

[sevoflurane]

Most cops in the Boston (Natick area) area are in the 90% on the rich-ometer scale.

 

[DrAwsome]

To be fair... my brother is a teacher in California and once you take into account the cost of living... well... he isn't making squat.

Some teachers make more than others... some make a lot less. Kinda depends where you live and what population you are taking care of.

The same applies to police officers... and IMO, they make way too much money.

When I lived in Boston (South Natick), I was shocked to find that their income was 100K+. As far as I know... you don't need an advanced degree to be a cop. In fact, you can go in after highschool.

It is well known that cops can make 200K in South Natick with some time on the force + overtime. Not bad for a HS education.

http://statetroopersalary.com/MA/Natick/salary/Police-Officers-Salary

I love Natick for one! 🙂 But yes, something's not right here. And while the 200k is not average, I do know that some police certainly make that which is outrageous. I ask again-why are we always being portrayed as greedy, when we are a miniscule number of an important profession, and our salaries are squat when you take into account the education, cost, liability? Why should a police officer make 200k when a PCP makes the same?

Why is no action being taken to do something about our livelihood?

 

[DrAwsome]

Most cops in the Boston (Natick area) area are in the 90% on the rich-ometer scale.

Why is there no outrage with cops making the same as PCPs and probably half of MDs? Now even the more well paying specialties-anesthesia, rads, rad onc are getting shafted. What gives? If our incomes fall this much, why would anyone do this?

 

[sevoflurane]

Just imagine landing a job with the South Natick police force when you are 20 y/o. You put in your time for 20 yrs.... add pention plans and other bennies.... By the time you are 40 y/o you are golden and ready to go 1/2 time or retire.

I agree with you Dr. Awesome. I just wrote a check to the IRS and State Revenue Dept for this quarter. Let's just say my tax dollars in my household went to pay the salary of ONE police officer.... this quarter. 4 police officers by the end of the year.

Look what happened at the embassy yesterday.... will our government start investing in Halliburton again....? with our tax money? Man, companies like that absolutely ripped us off.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/news/dpc_hearing062705.html

 

[sevoflurane]

"According to the nonprofit Taxpayers for Common Sense, the Truman Committee was launched with just $15,000, but may have saved in excess of $15 billion during the wars with Germany and Japan. The Truman Committee is often described as the most successful government investigation effort in U.S. history because of the billions of dollars it saved. "

 

[DrAwsome]

Just imagine landing a job with the South Natick police force when you are 20 y/o. You put in your time for 20 yrs.... add pention plans and other bennies.... By the time you are 40 y/o you are golden and ready to go 1/2 time or retire.

I agree with you Dr. Awesome. I just wrote a check to the IRS and State Revenue Dept for this quarter. Let's just say my tax dollars in my household went to pay the salary of ONE police officer.... this quarter. 4 police officers by the end of the year.

Look what happened at the embassy yesterday.... will our government start investing in Halliburton again....? with our tax money? Man, companies like that absolutely ripped us off.

http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/news/dpc_hearing062705.html

So what can we do about it? I also get frustrated when people say, hey dont complain you get paid well for what you do. Really? Not when over 30% of our salary goes to taxes, we've lost almost 10 years of pay, and we have no retirement to fall back on. In these days, it's not financially smart to be a physician. Best bang for your buck is to be a public employee. No education needed for the most part, pension guaranteed, ton of time off, and people will think you are a saint and side with you if you ever complain about your pay.

 

[pgg]

So why is it when I see these "low income" individuals who are on Medicaid they have Ipads, Iphones, Gold teeth, fancy jewelry, etc.? If they are indeed below the poverty line how do they ROUTINELY afford all this expensive stuff?

Meanwhile a teacher who has a reported income of 56th percentile is struggling to make ends meet, can't afford an Ipad and doesn't own a Rolex.

At risk of stating the obvious, one important reason poor people are poor because they make bad financial decisions. The low income teacher doesn't have an iPad or Rolex because he has a mortgage that's current and a 401(k). The low income ***** with the gold teeth and car with neon lights and go-fast stickers has a credit score of 150 because he hasn't paid his rent in 2 months.

I wouldn't say they routinely "afford" that expensive stuff, any more than the stereotypical 18 yo newly enlisted Marine can "afford" the new Mustang financed at 22%.

 

[BLADEMDA]

So what can we do about it? I also get frustrated when people say, hey dont complain you get paid well for what you do. Really? Not when over 30% of our salary goes to taxes, we've lost almost 10 years of pay, and we have no retirement to fall back on. In these days, it's not financially smart to be a physician. Best bang for your buck is to be a public employee. No education needed for the most part, pension guaranteed, ton of time off, and people will think you are a saint and side with you if you ever complain about your pay.

IMHO, ObamaCare will result in your becoming a govt. employee. The health system completely collapses under Obama's plan in about 15 years.

 

[Darkskies]

Something that everyone here seems to have overlooked is that the calculator is determining your HOUSEHOLD income which by definition would mean every single member of your household who earns an income. Many doctors and their families as a result are in the top 1% of the income bracket(since usually the wife/husband works too). For individual income, you're already over the 5% bracket if you earn over 100k.

 

[ssmallz]

The whining in this thread is really sad. Everyone one of us came out of college looked at a teachers salary and said "I can't live on that much, I'm gonna do something else". We all knew the score when we got into this so don't complain about it now. I would never ever want to trade places with a teacher or a cop and I have faith that with solid planing I will still come out a head of them in spite of my higher tax bracket.

We don't get a retirement plan? Really? You sure about that? As an independent contractor you're responsible for your own benefits so set up your own retirement plan and stick to it. You can put 50k toward your own retirement tax free, then another 10k toward your kids education, tax free. Invest wisely in diversified low cost index funds and you'll do fine by the time you're 50. Tack on all the deductions you can get from buying a house and you're doing pretty well. The best part is that since all this income comes off the top you're overall tax bill isn't gonna be too bad. Keep yourself out of bad debt, pay off your loans, buy yourself a reasonable house maybe something in the 400-500k range and you should be able to retire by 55 without a problem.

If you can't figure out how to bank cash making 300k/yr something is very wrong with your finances

 

[chocomorsel]

The whining in this thread is really sad. Everyone one of us came out of college looked at a teachers salary and said "I can't live on that much, I'm gonna do something else". We all knew the score when we got into this so don't complain about it now. I would never ever want to trade places with a teacher or a cop and I have faith that with solid planing I will still come out a head of them in spite of my higher tax bracket.

We don't get a retirement plan? Really? You sure about that? As an independent contractor you're responsible for your own benefits so set up your own retirement plan and stick to it. You can put 50k toward your own retirement tax free, then another 10k toward your kids education, tax free. Invest wisely in diversified low cost index funds and you'll do fine by the time you're 50. Tack on all the deductions you can get from buying a house and you're doing pretty well. The best part is that since all this income comes off the top you're overall tax bill isn't gonna be too bad. Keep yourself out of bad debt, pay off your loans, buy yourself a reasonable house maybe something in the 400-500k range and you should be able to retire by 55 without a problem.

If you can't figure out how to bank cash making 300k/yr something is very wrong with your finances

Ssmallz, you are right on the money. I agree. How about we stop with the comparisons, and be happy with being in the top 5% bracket. I am not complaining and I am doing just fine.

 

[deleted126335]

Ssmallz, you are right on the money. I agree. How about we stop with the comparisons, and be happy with being in the top 5% bracket. I am not complaining and I am doing just fine.

You do have a point. But...
-Docs are a competitive bunch.
-The American Dream for many is to get rich. (right or wrong)
-Money is not a dirty word.

 

[yappy]

I was a volunteer firefighter at a professional city department. Some of those guys do very well. But, like medicine, it isn't the young guys.

I had an older training capt. who was planning to retire in coming years. He was ~60. His plan was to retire in 1-2 years. His annual base income as a training capt was 92k. However, this guy worked OT like no other. He admitted to working ~ 10 hours a day @ 6 days a week.

So his base rate was 50/hr for 40 hrs and then for 20 hours he got OT 75/hr. Grand total of 164k /yr.

That is great for a guy who has enjoyed the same job since 22, great benefits, job security, pretty fun job duties etc.. However, it gets better (and this is where the younger guys lost out). He told me that his retirement will be based on 50% of his average total income (including OT) for his last three years on the department. This was why he was wracking up so much OT. When he retires he will make ~ 82k/yr until he dies.

Where I live this is good money. Avg house costs ~200-250k. I imagine he's enjoying him self right now in retirement - though - knowing him he's most likely dropping by stations to visit old friends. He most likely would have worked for free. They nixed a lot of these benefits for the younger guys on the department.

 

[thomprya]

One of the biggest discrepancies in our tax code is there is no distinguishable difference between the 'working 1%' and the 'investment 1%' I find that doctors are an interesting demographic since they often find themselves in the 1% but they worked very hard to get there and then they work very hard to stay there. Plenty of people in the 1% make it off investments and hardly work at all. I feel a distinction should be made and we should value labor over investments.


BTW highest I have ever been is 28% so anything on the positive side of 50% looks pretty damn good to me.

 

[countingdays]

IMHO, ObamaCare will result in your becoming a govt. employee. The health system completely collapses under Obama's plan in about 15 years.

Good riddance. I fail to see how being a government employee is worse than being employed by large groups that monopolize anesthesia practice in every major city.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Good riddance. I fail to see how being a government employee is worse than being employed by large groups that monopolize anesthesia practice in every major city.

Maybe you are right. Physicians will likely embrace Canadian style Heath care in 2018 when Obamacare collapses the system.

 

[ghost dog]

Why is there no outrage with cops making the same as PCPs and probably half of MDs? Now even the more well paying specialties-anesthesia, rads, rad onc are getting shafted. What gives? If our incomes fall this much, why would anyone do this?

But the police are so respectful when you speak to them ( sarcasm ).

I once had to call these gentlemen to my practice for a mentally ill patient who was acting aggressively ( with homicidal ideation ) and it took the "boys in blue " 3 ( three ) hours to arrive. You can't beat service like that, and I can now see why we pay them so well.

Unbelievable.

 

[powermd]

So why is it when I see these "low income" individuals who are on Medicaid they have Ipads, Iphones, Gold teeth, fancy jewelry, etc.? If they are indeed below the poverty line how do they ROUTINELY afford all this expensive stuff?

Meanwhile a teacher who has a reported income of 56th percentile is struggling to make ends meet, can't afford an Ipad and doesn't own a Rolex.

They probably sell drugs.

The po' folk where I live (far Northeast) don't have any of these things, but they do have very bad teeth.