What income do you need to consider purchasing a $10k watch? $100k car?

[zinfamous]

actually no zin... the car can be a tax write off.
So either u pay the government the money in taxes or your write it off and enjoy a fat ride with money that u would of had to give to the government.



Again, depending on income and profession, the car can be a tax write off.

Uh, right, depending on if you can claim it as a business expense. No car purchase defaults to being a deduction in the eyes of the IRS and no--income doesn't matter. It only matters if you can claim a legit need for the car for your work--say you are a sales associate that needs to truck all over your district selling wine and your shitty boss doesn't cover expenses.

Cars and the cost of the car are never an immediate deduction across the board--and I doubt the IRS is going to agree with the individual's needs for a $100k car vs the car that serves the exact same purpose for $12k. Again, this is for those individuals that would actually need to make such a claim to the IRS (a company that would claim that you nee a $100k car would likely loan it to you as a perk, so you wouldn't be deducting any ownership costs--gas only)

I find this argument rather specious.

 

[PricklyPete]

Has nothing to do with salary and everything to do with accumulated wealth.

I wouldn't touch a car like that unless it was less than 1% of my accumulated wealth.

 

[ultimatebob]

pffft...everybody knows only real ballers buy M3's. The Ultimate Driving Machine

It used to be, anyway. A modern Mustang GT or Camaro SS could outperform it on the track now.

 

[child of wonder]

Unless the payments (whether paying in full up front or monthly), maintenance, and depreciation are relatively trivial to your budget and long term financial goals, I wouldn't recommend getting a $100,000 car.

Personally I'd rather put more money into vacations and retirement savings than a $100,000 vehicle that will likely lose $10,000 in value every year.

 

[Eug]

Uh, right, depending on if you can claim it as a business expense. No car purchase defaults to being a deduction in the eyes of the IRS and no--income doesn't matter. It only matters if you can claim a legit need for the car for your work--say you are a sales associate that needs to truck all over your district selling wine and your shitty boss doesn't cover expenses.

Cars and the cost of the car are never an immediate deduction across the board--and I doubt the IRS is going to agree with the individual's needs for a $100k car vs the car that serves the exact same purpose for $12k. Again, this is for those individuals that would actually need to make such a claim to the IRS (a company that would claim that you nee a $100k car would likely loan it to you as a perk, so you wouldn't be deducting any ownership costs--gas only)

I find this argument rather specious.

Indeed. BTW, in Canada, the max write off for a passenger car is CAD$30000 for a purchase, or CAD$800 per month for a lease.

 

[Elganja]

different strokes for different folks ... I have a nice watch that I enjoy... I have a few nice cars that I enjoy (to say cars are a hobby is an understatement)... I go on many vacations with my significant other... those are the things I prioritize

I am a cheap bastard when it comes to other things though... like food, housing (have a modest 2br condo in a nice area, that is more then ample room for myself and my significant other, no need for a gigantic house... yet), etc...

will my priorities shift when I have kids? absolutely... but for now I reach my savings goals, retirement goals, etc... and enjoy life. I never understand why people save save save with no end in sight. life is meant to be enjoyed... enjoy it responsibly and have fun

 

[ultimatebob]

I don't wear watches, so no amount of money would be enough for me to buy a $10K watch for myself.

For the $100K car, I think that I'd want $500K in the bank first. I'd also want a nice house with a two or three car garage to park it in.

 

[Mai72]

How much do you have in your retirement account? It should at the minimum be $1m. At the minimum.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but $100k ain't a lot of money. It's a start. You would be better off living on $3k a month and packing away the rest for a play. IMO, once you get $100k saved then make a play on multi-family apartments. Then, you're broke and that forces you to produce more income.

I'm basically following the same steps to what made Grant Cardone a multi millionaire. 3 companies, $100m plus liquid, nearly $500m in a real estate portfolio and a lear jet. Grant says he didn't buy his first watch until he was 40. He was worth millions and driving a Honda.

Make money.
Make more money.
Make even more money.
Invest, invest and invest.

I'm all about having fun, but it's that reckless spending that will put you in the poor house. Look at pro athletes.

 

[Eug]

How much do you have in your retirement account? It should at the minimum be $1m. At the minimum.

Yeah, for a 25 year retirement at $50000 annually and a 4% annual return, you'd need to have saved $1.4 million.

That would mean it would support you from age 65 to age 90. My grandfather lived to 99, and he smoked like a chimney.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but $100k ain't a lot of money. It's a start. You would be better off living on $3k a month and packing away the rest for a play. IMO, once you get $100k saved then make a play on multi-family apartments. Then, you're broke and that forces you to produce more income.

I have never liked that idea. The money potentially becomes very illiquid, and furthermore, you're at the whims of the real estate market. Most people who do well here either are lucky because of real estate price booms, or else are already wealthy and want steady income, and are prepared to leave the money alone for 25 years or whatever.

I'm basically following the same steps to what made Grant Cardone a multi millionaire. 3 companies, $100m plus liquid, nearly $500m in a real estate portfolio and a lear jet. Grant says he didn't buy his first watch until he was 40. He was worth millions and driving a Honda.

Lear jet? Pointless waste of money IMO. A bazillion times worse than a $100000 car in fact.

BTW, that paragraph makes it sound like you go to conferences by motivational speakers for investment advice.

 

[Mai72]

On a side note, there are a couple of guys in my area who drive a Lamborghini, and 2 Nissan GTR's. Those GTR's are hot. They go for over $100k easy.

When I took care of my uncle a few years ago he had an $80k Mercedes Benz. Beautiful car. Driving the car, I felt like the man. For about a week. Then the effect wore off. Which bring me to an important point.

I try to focus personal development. Expensive watches, cars, homes are nice but none of that stuff is going to make your life better in the long run. There is a reason why the poorest countries tend to be the most happiest.

 

[Eug]

I try to focus personal development. Expensive watches, cars, homes are nice but none of that stuff is going to make your life better in the long run. There is a reason why the poorest countries tend to be the most happiest.

That is commonly repeated, but it is simply false.

According to the UN supported World Happiness Report, the top 10 most happy countries in the world are all first world countries - specifically the Scandinavian countries, Canada, Switzerland, Australia, and New Zealand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report

USA makes the top 15. Most of the poorest countries are either at the bottom of the list or somewhere in the middle.

 

[DigDog]

so, the correct answer is "you can buy useless things when the price is irrelevant".
if the things are not useless (say, a house, which holds its value. a watch, which might hold some of its value. a sports car, will hold a smaller portion of its value. and so on) then you adjust the cost to calculate how much is lost money, and how much is retained.

 

[zinfamous]

That is commonly repeated, but it is simply false.

According to the UN supported World Happiness Report, the top 10 most happy countries in the world are all first world countries - specifically the Scandinavian countries, Canada, Switzerland, Australia, and New Zealand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Happiness_Report

USA makes the top 15. Most of the poorest countries are either at the bottom of the list or somewhere in the middle.

I guess most humans tend to be happiest when they are younger--kids into young adulthood. Less problems in the world. I suppose the myth of "poor communities" being happiest persists because those countries also have abysmal life expectancies? Say, more of your people will be happiest within a population that tends to die off at 35 as opposed to one that tends to die off at 72.

:hmm:

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Coworker has a $100k car. It's 3 years old and he's been talking about his next one.

Since he's young, and makes less than that per year, I figure he's either completely devoted, living in a cardboard box, and spending all of his surplus income on fast cars, or he's got family money.

If it's family money, well, ok. If he's really spending that big a chunk of his income on a rapidly depreciating asset... that's kind of sad, IMO.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Enough that you can do so without worrying. I don't mind a $400 car payment. Some people don't mind a $1200 payment. I would though.

 

[Fritzo]

You need the amount of cash it takes to buy those things straight up without loans, and to not put yourself in debt with other cost of living expenses. Say you don't plan to save any money for a year, and you only spend 30k/year living, then you need to pull in $140k after taxes in one year.

Or save for x years to make those purchases.

Most financial advisors say financing a vehicle is fine, but never purchase a car that you can't pay off in 24 months. After 24 months, the vehicle's residual value vs loan puts you in danger of being upside down in value.

As for watches and other luxury items, you don't need to wear that stuff unless you're making $10k/hour.

 

[Phoenix86]

Afford? Low end probably $200-250K depending on cost of living but that'd be a terrible decision unless owning/leasing these things directly translate into making that kind of money. As others have said, to truly afford these kinds of things you'd need wealth not income. Even then it's a terrible decision.

 

[z1ggy]

As long as you can get the credit, now a days it doesn't matter how much you make, just slap it on the credit card!!!

 

[Eug]

I guess most humans tend to be happiest when they are younger--kids into young adulthood. Less problems in the world. I suppose the myth of "poor communities" being happiest persists because those countries also have abysmal life expectancies? Say, more of your people will be happiest within a population that tends to die off at 35 as opposed to one that tends to die off at 72.

:hmm:

Be careful about how you interpret those ages for life expectancy. Usually it means life expectancy at birth. So if you're talking about some poor country suffering from famine, and with no clean water and an uneducated population, you're going to have a comparatively large number of babies dying and young children dying. Sad but true, and it skews the statistics. For example, if you have two people, one who lives to 85 and another who lives to 1, then the average life span for those two people is only 43. Lately though in Africa, AIDS has a played a big part too.

Also, at the risk of way oversimplifying things, if you have a country with famine and a bunch of kids dying and lots of AIDS, they're not going to be so happy.

 

[JulesMaximus]

You need the amount of cash it takes to buy those things straight up without loans, and to not put yourself in debt with other cost of living expenses. Say you don't plan to save any money for a year, and you only spend 30k/year living, then you need to pull in $140k after taxes in one year.

Or save for x years to make those purchases.

That's ridiculous, with interest rates as low as they are on car loans you'd have to be an idiot to pay cash for a car unless you just happen to have millions of dollars lying around to throw $100k at a new car.

I paid cash for a car once in my life and that car cost less then $3k. Otherwise I have financed every car purchase I've ever made. Just make sure you have the income to easily make the payments and keep some money in savings for emergencies/job loss etc and make sure to put enough down that you're not hugely upside down in the car. Also, don't do long term loans on a car. Pay it off as soon as possible. You'll get the best rate that way anyway (assuming you have great credit).

 

[Ne0]

I have a small watch collection with watches over $10k (Rolexes) and $30k (Audemars Piguet / Patek Philippe), all of them are in stainless steel (used to have rose gold Royal Oak 15202OR but sold it). None of the watches are noticed by people and I like it that way (stay under the radar), I could also sell them at near the prices I bought them for and I have insurance on them. I also have a car that was around $90k after taxes / fees (Maserati Ghibli). This car does bring me some attention and I feel a bit uncomfortable at times. The car has depreciated to around $83k now. I won't reveal my income but I would say you should be making at least $500k before making these purchases. I have a nice amount saved up in savings (also some money in Vanguard ETFs and stocks, mostly facebook which I bought at $35) and have a lot of disposable income. I bought everything in cash and have no debt (mortgage paid off, cars / watches paid in cash). It also helps to be single instead of raising a family.

 

[Eug]

That's ridiculous, with interest rates as low as they are on car loans you'd have to be an idiot to pay cash for a car unless you just happen to have millions of dollars lying around to throw $100k at a new car.

Depends on the car. High end luxury cars often won't come with uber low financing rates.

Anyways, if you're buying a $100000 passenger car, I'd say you'd better have a shitload of cash or liquid assets available, or else you're a moron.

OTOH, if you're buying a $30000 family car, most people won't have that cash lying around, so they're forced to finance, cuz like they actually need to drive their kids to school and get to work on time without having to take a 1.5 hour bus ride.

It also helps to be single instead of raising a family.

Indeed. If someone is making $400000 but is taxed at a high marginal rate, has a wife and two kids, with wife making very little in comparison and the kids both going to private school at $30000 per year each, all of a sudden that $400000 doesn't seem at that amazing any more. Yeah, they're still in the 1%, but just barely, and $100000 cars become undesirable. Wealthy people usually need to budget too.

 

[JulesMaximus]

One of my colleagues makes CAD$350000 a year and he still wears one like that. And he doesn't even own a car AFAIK. He takes the bus. Or if he does own a car I've never seen him use it. And his computer is a 6 year-old Pentium dual-core.

And it most likely keeps better time than most Rolexes. I remember reading an article back in the 80s about an actor. I think it was Steve Martin but I'm not sure. The reporter knew he had a Rolex or two but noticed the actor was wearing a Seiko worth "just" a couple of hundred dollars so the reporter asked why. The answer was simple. The Seiko seemed fine as a watch and kept better time than his Rolex.

True that.

I wear a $3k TAG-Heuer Calibre 5 Automatic and it isn't very accurate. It loses about a minute or two every month, which is fine because every other month I have to adjust the date anyway (every month is 31 days so on months with less than 31 days I have to adjust it). A Rolex should be more accurate than my TAG but it won't be as accurate as a quartz or electronic watch.

Unfortunately, TAGs do not hold their value well. I probably should have bought a Rolex as they do hold their value. BTW-I wouldn't finance a Rolex. Pay cash for it or don't buy it at all. I paid cash for my TAG so it doesn't really bother me that I couldn't sell it for even half what I paid for it.

By the way, nobody notices watches. Get it because you like it, not because you think it will make you look cool.

 

[QueBert]

Coworker has a $100k car. It's 3 years old and he's been talking about his next one.

Since he's young, and makes less than that per year, I figure he's either completely devoted, living in a cardboard box, and spending all of his surplus income on fast cars, or he's got family money.

If it's family money, well, ok. If he's really spending that big a chunk of his income on a rapidly depreciating asset... that's kind of sad, IMO.

I make pretty shit money compared to a lot on here. It'll be $35k this year, if I'm lucky. I rent a room and have almost no bills. I make nowhere close to 6 figures, but I could easily afford a $100k car without changing a single thing about my current lifestyle. Would it be smart? No, but it would be easy to do, guess it's all about priorities.

*EDIT*
Scratch the not having to change a single thing, I wouldn't be able to drink beer like I do.

 

[DigDog]

i own 4 watches .. only. lost a few along the way.
one is a fake rolex, looks like a datejust. fools most people into thinking it's real (it even has the "seconds split in 4" movement) and it cost maybe 200euro.
i also have a diesel watch i bought from ebay for fifty pounds, and two garbage watches that cost me like $10 each. i don't wear any of them because they are bulky, and my phone is more accurate anyway. but, i'll wear one at a job interview.
best looking watch i've owned was a Nixon TheBanks, stainless. 250 pounds new. ran horribly, had to tune it every day.

 

[BoberFett]

I make six figures and bristle at the thought of spending even $30K on a car. My purchased off-lease Camry gets me around just fine.