Can You Live off $18,500 Per Year / $350 Per Week?

• 1
• 2
• 3

• • • • 

        lostn on 30/08/2018 - 18:31

        @burns13:

        No. He is not talking no work and no money. He wants to earn only 18.5k, and pay no tax. That's not no money. He's got a property that clears 15k on its own. He only needs to earn 3.5k a year, which is like 2 hours a week at minimum wage.

      • 

        burns13 on 30/08/2018 - 18:41

        @lostn:

        Ha ha ha very clever….have a sticker.

        I was obviously speaking figuratively not literally.

        Poverty line income = having little to no money in my view. Especially if an emergency comes up.

        That is what this guy is aiming for. To be in poverty. He should be amish or something. Join a buddhist monastery. It would make more sense than being a bum by choice

  • 

    RocketSwitch on 30/08/2018 - 15:27

    +1

    What if you're too tired and not motivated to work harder or find a job?

    • 

      burns13 on 30/08/2018 - 18:13

      Be a bum then its your choice….. and cop a lot of crap from the productive workers doing the right thing keeping the country running.

      • 

        RocketSwitch on 31/08/2018 - 11:51

        If productive workers are giving crap to people, I think that says a lot about them :)

        Haven't you seen the signs on the trucks? If trucks stop, Australia stops!

• 

  codinghelloworld on 30/08/2018 - 07:16

  Congrats on your passion to be financial freedom.

  My suggestion is you need to increase your portfolio, let's say 5-10 properties with steady income with 50k per year. This will cover the risk of:
  - vacancy (what happens if the market down and your property is vacant for 3-4 months)
  - unexpected problem (like arson, tenants don't pay, dump the house, strata fee/council fee/electric bill increase)
  - unexpected problem on your side (sick, surgery, school fee for kids,…)

  I would say if your expenses per month is $1000, then you need passive income at least $10000 per month to cover the risk. Based on this number, you will know how many investment property you should have.

  • 

    zooter on 31/08/2018 - 16:28

    why would you need 10x passive income per month of your expenses? If that's the case, people who have 3000 per month as expenses (every average family), do they need 30,000 per month passive income? Your logic is flawed somewhere

    • 

      codinghelloworld on 31/08/2018 - 17:10

      That's just calculation I read from some books. The 10x passive income is to cover the risk of your investment. For example: market down, unemployment rise and the properties can vacant for months, or years, so you can sell your properties for profit, or properties come up with large bill for maintenance (replace roof, floor, or garage door, or kitchen)… These things can eat up to 7k-10k.

      • 

        mysterytal on 31/08/2018 - 17:23

        I don't think the OP cares too much about unemployment rising. The idea is to not to work and live on the passive income.

      • 

        codinghelloworld on 01/09/2018 - 03:15

        @mysterytal:

        Unemployment rising -> tenants don't have money to pay rent -> property vacant -> vacant property is target of break-in in high unemployment rate areas.

• 

  Austaurean on 30/08/2018 - 08:08

  +1

  haven't read all posts, but.
  you may screw yourself for later in life 'life' by not working now, i.e. Superannuation, or at least doing part time, or change to a job you may enjoy
  don't know about anyone else, but I plan on having a good retirement with funds to do the things I want with my partner and to support our children, who will be grown up by then.

  appreciate you get the rental return, but that wont set you up for later in life for a good retirement, support your kids - if you choose to have any, what about aged care and getting into a good nursing home, there are vast differences in the quality of some of these places and cost..

  plus life changes, so what happens if/when your circumstances change and you have to start from scratch.

  • 

    Soluble on 30/08/2018 - 08:12

    +1

    Most responses echo that sentiment. I don't see why instead of stopping work all together why not go for the $37k. Only taxed at 10% overall. Would only have to work 15 or so hours a week as a casual. If that's too much work for anyone then I'd be blown away. Having a casual job also allows you to go 'hey I want to buy that, boss can I work 10 hours more this week?'

    • 

      RocketSwitch on 30/08/2018 - 15:29

      Boss people are mostly dicks. Probably want him to work every hour of the day.

      • 

        Soluble on 01/09/2018 - 08:20

        I've had plenty of casuals that work a couple of days a week. I had a qualified accountant working for me for 4 years. He chose to be the stay at home dad. I didn't pressure him to work extra hours because I understood. The 10-15 hours a week working retail was pretty much his down time. He was more productive than a lot of other employees and enjoyed the work.

      • 

        RocketSwitch on 03/09/2018 - 09:40

        @Soluble: You sir, are exemplary. Well done for being the person you are, so many others can take note!!

• 

  Willy Stains on 30/08/2018 - 09:29

  +2

  Hey OP,

  I didn't read all the post cause i am at work and meant to be working but reading your post it sounds like you are not getting much satisfaction from your job.

  I believe its always a good idea to travel and broaden your horizons if the circumstances are right. I do suggest travelling internationally to high tax rate countries see what it's like and minimal tax rate countries vice versa. It may give you more direction in life.

  cheers,

• 

  sbot on 30/08/2018 - 09:50

  I've done it, there was one skint 'underemployed' year and thats really close to what my annual income was.

  I did have a savings buffer so if anything urgent came up like a medical expense, I wasn't living on the edge. But it's totally possible to live on that amount. As long as your rent/living expenses are cheap (I was sharing a pretty cheap apartment).

  • 

    sbot on 30/08/2018 - 10:38

    I will say this, living on a narrow margin requires a lot more mental effort invested into managing miniscule details of money. Which exact day is this bill getting paid will impact which day you can do your grocery shop. You have to keep your eye on your account all the time to ensure you don't have some forgotten bill that tips you over. It's a lot more energy expended on feeling mildly anxious about how much money you have. I'm glad I don't have to be that aware of money any more.

• 

  Plug on 30/08/2018 - 10:36

  Depends on which country you're living in.

• 

  outlander on 30/08/2018 - 11:26

  If you're so concerned about paying tax, you're obviously just working for inertia and not as you should, which is working towards something. A break might be good to get your head clear. But you can't really live off that. People on that sort of income are not living, just dying slowly. Some exceptional people can make it work, but exceptional people can do well in almost any circumstances, so thats not really proof of anything.

  Just be aware that when you decide you've had enough and want to get back in the game, you will probably have to settle for a fair bit less, and it will likely be a bit of a struggle to find a job.

• 

  Terbo on 30/08/2018 - 11:53

  +1

  Its a nice idea - as long as you have an ok place to live, food, clothing and transport dont have to cost much and there is plenty of free things to do - volunteering, exercise, learning new stuff - you can always haunt your local library for free wifi in comfort.
  Try using this website to check your tax payable at different levels https://www.taxcalc.com.au/
  You can have taxable income up to ~$22,000 and pay no tax, and even after that its only 19% up to $37,000, still not too much being paid
  You can also make tax deductible contributions to a Super fund - reduces your personal taxable income, money into Super is only taxed at 15% and you are creating another investment for the future, in parallel to your property.
  So you could still earn up to 30 - 40K working part time + rental income and put some into your Super to keep net tax down and live on the rest. This might be a better option initially.
  Dont forget you may not always be able to work/get rent/have a major expense so I would suggest building a cash reserve before you retreat from the working world completely.

• 

  peterw1 on 30/08/2018 - 11:54

  your question reminds me of the stewart francis joke about having more than enough to live on till I die, so long as I die by next Tuesday.

• 

  Donaldhump on 30/08/2018 - 12:14

  +2

  id rather work 5 days a week and have a really good 2 days a week,
  as opposed to sitting around 7 days a week doing nothing because i have no money. Then once a year take 5 weeks a to go on holiday and in the mean time contribute to super.

  if i lived on 18,500 all i could afford to do is watch TV, id be bored in 3 days.

  Everyone different, when i went backpacking you would see backpackers doing nothing but lie in hammocks but claim their holiday was 6 months long. id rather just work 4 months then smash 2 months

  • 

    dcep on 30/08/2018 - 12:45

    +2

    have you found what are you living for ?

    or just trying hard to occupy your life to avoid questioning your existence.

    • 

      Donaldhump on 30/08/2018 - 21:34

      Yeh I live to travel, sleep in, Goto work unshaven in my shorts in a job I enjoy, drinking piss on weekends, do my best to make my wife happy, watch and attend sport, enjoy cruises, reading, making things with Wood.

      I could not imagine not working, waking up to do nothing as you have. I money and having nothing to do, then again I enjoy my job.

      Everyone could Goto rent in muranba for a hundred a week, get the dole and eat bread .

      • 

        dcep on 30/08/2018 - 22:29

        ohh well, that's only if one loves his job, which is the fortunate few, hence you can brag how you enjoy working everyday.

        ppl hate working because they hate their job so much that it kills them slowly everyday for waking up just to skip through 8 to 5 like zombie.

      • 

        Donaldhump on 31/08/2018 - 00:47

        @phunkydude: find an occupation you enjoy, study and gain employment, I scrubbed sh*t off airport toilets for 5 years while studying making jack sh8t of a wage, and for what it’s worth human sh8t like pigs in airports.

        Pay kept me alive so I didn’t complain.

• 

  MoonlapseVertigo on 30/08/2018 - 13:04

  If you have $150k in the bank, have minimal expenses then YES i could manage for about a year or so

• 

  jackofspade on 30/08/2018 - 15:11

  This book might inspire you http://www.erniezelinski.com/The-Joy-of-Not-Working.html

• 

  Jammar on 30/08/2018 - 15:36

  You pay more tax because you earn more to spend more.

• 

  lincz11 on 30/08/2018 - 16:02

  Living off that amount is possible, yes. But will you feel alive?

• 

  Mia03 on 30/08/2018 - 16:57

  I earn around 50K a year and I've been spending 13K a year on living expenses for the past 3 years. I have monthly data to show what and where I'm spending- the rest goes into my Savings acc.

  I travel internationally once a year- which is an extra 3k to 4k. I have a car and I rent a studio apartment (both shared with my partner).

  I actually eat out quite regularly- but the thing that works best for me is that I put aside the savings first before starting to spend. If I know I have less to spend, I end up spending less- it's as simple as that.

• 

  fovean on 30/08/2018 - 17:03

  OP is single and childless. Of course you can live off that amount. If you couldn't we'd have hundreds of thousands of Australians dying in the street every year. People fall into this mindset that the amount they spend is the correct amount, and that people in similar circumstances that spend less are cheap and unfulfilled and that people that spend more are irresponsible and wasteful.

• 

  thord on 30/08/2018 - 17:49

  Can You Live off $18,500 Per Year / $350 Per Week?

  Yes, you can. It'll suck. But you absolutely can do it.

• 

  O15 on 30/08/2018 - 17:53

  That's less than this year's camera equipment budget.
  So, probably not…

• 

  dlakers3peat on 30/08/2018 - 20:39

  -2

  Whoever said yes has no grip of reality.

  • 

    idonotknowwhy on 31/08/2018 - 15:20

    +1

    "There are levels of survival we are prepared to accept."

• 

  PAOK11 on 30/08/2018 - 21:48

  Might as well live off the grid at $350pw

• 

  Cheapharry on 31/08/2018 - 00:02

  As someone working for the big 4 working with customers in financial hardships , I can honestly vouch for no. There are major expenses like rent, groceries, petrol (or public transport) and utility bills that can chew up your savings. The dole is around $550 a fortnight so rent in Australia can chew up $300 per fortnight (give or take), then followed by groceries and then the big utility bill during summer and winters. It's definately not enough and I can say that off the many customers I talk to on a daily basis.

• 

  GregMonarch on 31/08/2018 - 00:18

  It depends what you plan to do and what expense that requires, but $15,000 is only $288/week. Obviously if you were free camping in a tent or campervan it would cost less than paying rent. If you weren't paying rent, using cheap SIMs for internet, solar for electricity, and only spent your days fishing, reading library books, preparing most of your own food - and only moving from that spot once every week or two, it's possible. But I'd be building for a while to get that 'income stream' up first.

  i.e. There must be things you can do to pay less tax. Like eepending on the laws in your state, transfering the investment property into a trust that pays you a annual distribution, but retrains the rest in the trust which is banked/used to buy another positive cashflow property/shares/etc. may not be counted as your personal income - which in turn reduces the tax you pay on your wage.

  You might move into the property yourself (or sell it to buy another you CAN move into) so you can rent the spare rooms out. Then grow your own food in the yard, raise chickens for eggs and meat, and/or rabbits, sell plants on the front lawn, etc.

  Or build a four car garage on that space, rent them out to people who want to store cars/boats, and buy your food instead of the hassle of growing your own.

  So again it depends what you want to be doing once you're not working.

  I'd get a clear goal of what you plan to do and how much money that needs per week. Then go to an accountant that specializes in property, finding ways to restructure to reduce tax, stick at the job for a couple/few years, and save every cent you can by looking at everything you buy and finding a way to do without it, replace it, or make it yourself. And go without for those few years until the interest/income from whatever the accountant arranges for savings/investments/more positive cashflow properties in the trust - provides enough income to do what you want.

• 

  chrisd82 on 31/08/2018 - 01:07

  If starting of debt free and living somewhere cheap in in South East Asia like Philippines doing things the way locals do then Yes. In Australia definitely no - barely scraping by with over twice that amount living at home and barely going out. Sydney is just too expensive and have gotten more the past 5 or so years.

  • 

    mysterytal on 31/08/2018 - 11:09

    +1

    But…you're living at home (I'm assuming you're living with your parents and paying minimal board) and you're barely going out. I don't get it. It doesn't cost anything to sit at home barely going out so what are you spending all that money on?

    • 

      chrisd82 on 01/09/2018 - 12:08

      Repayments on debt from the past decade account for half. There's always plenty of unexpected expenses from car/equipment repairs to dental/medical treatments which adds up on the debt side.I also freelance as a photographer/artist and though I've barely bought any new gear in the past 5 years the maintenance of existing photo/lighting/printing equipment can build up. I take an overseas trip end of year sometimes which accounts for $2-4k and whats left either goes into extra repayments or a few various small investments.

• 

  RefusdClassification on 31/08/2018 - 04:41

  $18,000 a year is roughly equivalent to a full single retirement pension from the government with all the extras. Basically, if you own a house 100% you can live a modest lifestyle on $18,00 with enough for a car, home maintainence and hobbies, but if you don't own property you are in a world of pain and will either have to share house with a lot of other people or apply for government housing (possibly waiting years in the process), the ultimate humility.

• 

  kaleidoscope on 31/08/2018 - 07:08

  +1

  My rent alone for 2 bedder is 430p/w

• 

  Janko on 31/08/2018 - 07:51

  +1

  I have no problem with you paying no tax - you're simply legally minimising tax, no different than someone on $150k minimising their tax.

  But most people go downhill when they don't work. They get used to the easy lifestyle and find it hard to even want to work part time. They lose self-worth. Like people in this thread have, you'll be judged to be a bludger. Your friends will get jealous because they've made silly decisions that have them no choice but to work in jobs they don't enjoy. A partner will likely see you as having no ambition and find it hard to see any future with you. At the least they'll want to feel secure, but more likely want to feel like you're getting ahead. And when you do find you need to work full time again, you'll have a big gap to explain to employers.

  I went through a phase once where money was tight, and although I was still working 60-80 hours a week on a struggling business, I had to be very frugal. What I hated most from that period was having no choice but to buy low quality stuff. So I'd be wasting good time fixing stuff that would break ridiculously quickly, and eating poorer quality food. I wouldn't routinely visit the dentist and only get the car serviced only when absolutely needed.

  I reckon stay in your job until you find another job that you like, even if that new job is part time. But when you like what you do, a full time job is like a hobby.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 31/08/2018 - 11:02

  I lived on $5/day for a few months ages ago. So definately I think.
  In England the old age penion is (I believe) 108pounds p/week. People adjust to it.

• 

  Euphemistic on 31/08/2018 - 13:01

  I'd love to pay less tax, but it's not the focus. I don't begrudge paying taxes because we have a pretty good healthcare system, decent transport options and a pretty decent society to live in largely made possible by the payment of taxes.

  I'd rather focus on minimising my net income to a point where I feel I could live comfortably and support my family and find a job that I loved and felt was worthwhile (not my current one!). I suspect income would be a fair bit more than $18k, but less than what we have now.

  • 

    idonotknowwhy on 31/08/2018 - 15:19

    I'd rather focus on minimising my net income

    I can help you with that if you like :)

• 

  freakatronic on 31/08/2018 - 13:58

  +4

  Everyone huffing and puffing like you're entitled to make someone else work so you can charge them taxes…pathetic.

• 

  Sean R on 01/09/2018 - 01:58

  +2

  OP, I don't see why you place so much importance on how much tax you're paying. Instead, I suggest that you should focus on how much you take home (ie. your net pay).

  Here's an example:

  Option A - job with $18,500 take-home pay ($0 tax)
  Option B - job with $21,000 take-home pay ($0 tax)
  Option C - job with $22,200 take-home pay ($0 tax)

  Which would you choose, assuming all things were equal? Most people would choose Option C*.

  Here's another example:

  Option X - job with $18,500 take-home pay ($0 tax)
  Option Y - job with $21,000 take-home pay ($0 tax)
  Option Z - job with $22,200 take-home pay ($22,394 gross; $194 tax)

  Which would you choose, assuming all things were equal? If you chose Option C in the first example, then it would be irrational not to choose Option Z!

  This is because the $194 tax does not change what you take home. In other words, if you'd prefer $22,200 instead of $18.5K, what does it matter that the tax man will happen to get extra? Don't focus on what the tax man is getting - focus on what you're getting.

  *I understand that with a progressive tax system, there are diminishing returns as you earn more, since the hourly rate drops as the tax increases. This can mean that extra hours aren't worth the time spent, and can make part-time work attractive (eg. switching to a four day week can often mean more than 80% of the pay for 80% of the days worked). However, it doesn't seem like that is your conundrum.

  Instead, some of your posts come across more as a pathological aversion to paying any tax whatsoever, regardless of your hourly rate or financial goals. If all other things are equal - job satisfaction, hours, commute, etc - then I think your decision should be based on how much you take home, not how much you pay in tax/the percentage you pay in tax.

  To answer the question posed in the subject, I definitely think $18K is do-able, at least in the short-term. However, it wouldn't allow me to live the kind of lifestyle I want to live.

  I also think that unless you have a significant emergency fund/savings stash then there are risks you'll experience financial troubles sooner or later, particularly as your investment property rental profit is not guaranteed. Mitigating this is that $50K jobs are a dime a dozen, so you could gain employment at a similar pay grade to what you're currently on without much trouble. If you're opting out of work at a relatively young age, there might be some negative long-term financial implications given little savings/investments, no superannuation, no job progress/history, etc. (Others have already touched on the impact going outside the norm can have in a social sense).

  OP, if you're interested in frugality and early retirement/working less etc, I second the comments from people mentioning FIRE (financial independence; retirement early), Mr Money Mustache, and so forth. Check them out and see if it's something that resonates with you. It it does, do some research and think hard about your long-term goals/desires and how you can manage risk.

  TL;DR - Focus on how you want to live and how much you need to live that life, not how much you are paying in tax.

• 

  AlienC on 01/09/2018 - 11:33

  I support it. But if you do decide to get more free time I highly suggest picking up a hobby hopefully maybe something that can somehow benefit society like software programming or game development or something. Who knows you might become a genius with all the free time to tinker and play around and experiment with cool cutting edge technology and complex ideas related to programming.

  Of course if you want to do this for health reasons then by all means do so.

  Most jobs are pretty pointless and ultimately if you can design the next robot or automation technology that can free humanity of some labour you could be the next hero the world needs.

  I hear Tesla has no competition much atm.. you could use the free time on that.. shouldn't be too hard most of the initial hard work has been done and set.

• 

  Shiny Mew on 01/09/2018 - 18:34

  Yes, I lived on $300 per week while at uni ($160 rent p/w, $50-60 for food p/w and remainder for everything else). Hellish but doable. Unfortunately, it's next to impossible to afford to rent in overpopulated states like NSW and Vic on that budget without living with several messy students.

• 

  Shutterfish on 01/09/2018 - 19:33

  Op, maybe try working in charity so you don’t get paid and pay no tax but have a meaningful job. I don’t think jobs are just for surviving.

• 1
• 2
• 3