200k HHI is just getting by Six-Figure Salary No Longer Means You're Rich 5k leftover see this chart

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

How is this savings possible? We make 320K and our net is 14k per month, so not sure how you save 12k per month? Can you post a budget please?

It's 401k match, deferred comp and extra equity payments that brings us to 140k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's 401k match, deferred comp and extra equity payments that brings us to 140k.

All of which are tax loopholes that disproportionately favor the rich.

[Anonymous]

What is an extra equity payment?

[Anonymous]

You know what is sad?

- living in a home you own
- providing for a quality education for your children
- being able to afford basic home and car maintenance
- saving for retirement
- ensuring health care continues post working age
- leaving something of a nest egg for your heirs

These are pretty basic things, and should be attainable by our middle class, however you so define it. And yet many of these things no longer are middle class.

I have no real answers on where we've gone wrong as a culture - the rise of dual income households, lack of universal healthcare, eroded taxation, easy debt, etc - all probably play some role.

But I tell you, even as someone more squarely in the "haves" category than the "have not", it's really sad to see such basic aspirations become squarely for the well off and largely unattainable to at least 50% - if not 75% - of our country.

[Anonymous]

You are on the right track with your reasoning as to the "whys". Women entering the workforce en masse was a huge contributor to this problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

How is this savings possible? We make 320K and our net is 14k per month, so not sure how you save 12k per month? Can you post a budget please?

It's 401k match, deferred comp and extra equity payments that brings us to 140k.

So your overall compensation is greater than $320K. We make this much and struggle to save a fraction of what you do. I guess my "luxurious" $840K house and nanny so I can work are luxuries we shouldn't have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know what is sad?

- living in a home you own
- providing for a quality education for your children
- being able to afford basic home and car maintenance
- saving for retirement
- ensuring health care continues post working age
- leaving something of a nest egg for your heirs

These are pretty basic things, and should be attainable by our middle class, however you so define it. And yet many of these things no longer are middle class.

I have no real answers on where we've gone wrong as a culture - the rise of dual income households, lack of universal healthcare, eroded taxation, easy debt, etc - all probably play some role.

But I tell you, even as someone more squarely in the "haves" category than the "have not", it's really sad to see such basic aspirations become squarely for the well off and largely unattainable to at least 50% - if not 75% - of our country.

This is thoughtful and compassionate. Though I must say I do not NOT think people making 200k, even in the DC area, are unable to do all the things you mention, unless they are assuming a "decent" education requires private school or a public school in a neighborhood with $800K+ houses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

How is this savings possible? We make 320K and our net is 14k per month, so not sure how you save 12k per month? Can you post a budget please?

It's 401k match, deferred comp and extra equity payments that brings us to 140k.

So your overall compensation is greater than $320K. We make this much and struggle to save a fraction of what you do. I guess my "luxurious" $840K house and nanny so I can work are luxuries we shouldn't have.

Yes.

A nanny is a luxury that rich people have the option to choose.

So is an almost one million dollar house.

You are still rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

How is this savings possible? We make 320K and our net is 14k per month, so not sure how you save 12k per month? Can you post a budget please?

It's 401k match, deferred comp and extra equity payments that brings us to 140k.

So your overall compensation is greater than $320K. We make this much and struggle to save a fraction of what you do. I guess my "luxurious" $840K house and nanny so I can work are luxuries we shouldn't have.

Yes.

A nanny is a luxury that rich people have the option to choose.

So is an almost one million dollar house.

You are still rich.

+1 Nannies and nearly million dollar houses are absolutely luxuries - EVEN IN THIS AREA. However, many of the well off people, especially on DCUM, like to claim they are necessities because they just COULD NOT find a decent house cheaper. And all the people who DO have houses under 500K and use regular old day cares? Well, gosh, they're just the poors, they aren't even really middle class.

Sorry to the upper middle class: you don't get to alter to reality of the LUXURIES you have to make yourself feel better. And if you don't think they are luxuries, try living like the ACTUAL middle class lives (get a townhome, use an in home daycare, DONT take more than one vacation a year) and then get back to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

How is this savings possible? We make 320K and our net is 14k per month, so not sure how you save 12k per month? Can you post a budget please?

Simple. Make 350K and live as if you made 210K. 350-210=140. Plenty live on 210K or less.

[Anonymous]

I have friends that make 80K per year with twins in SF. They pay 2K/month for an apartment and 1.2K on an au pair. They make it work, but they don't have savings and they don't take vacation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know what is sad?

- living in a home you own
- providing for a quality education for your children
- being able to afford basic home and car maintenance
- saving for retirement
- ensuring health care continues post working age
- leaving something of a nest egg for your heirs

These are pretty basic things, and should be attainable by our middle class, however you so define it. And yet many of these things no longer are middle class.

I have no real answers on where we've gone wrong as a culture - the rise of dual income households, lack of universal healthcare, eroded taxation, easy debt, etc - all probably play some role.

But I tell you, even as someone more squarely in the "haves" category than the "have not", it's really sad to see such basic aspirations become squarely for the well off and largely unattainable to at least 50% - if not 75% - of our country.

This is thoughtful and compassionate. Though I must say I do not NOT think people making 200k, even in the DC area, are unable to do all the things you mention, unless they are assuming a "decent" education requires private school or a public school in a neighborhood with $800K+ houses.

200K can, but 100K cannot.

I was making 100K and was not able to save more than 10K/year for a downpayment. Now at 200K I should be able to save 100K after taxes. I won't be able to buy anything above 600K. Where I live there are no homes under 600K. Three bedroom townhouses start at 430K-600K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People, people, people.
Each post from above is indeed a post by a person whom is NOT rich. It is the situation we live in, where there is no real wage growth. Sure, I agree, $200K looks great on paper. But it is in no way rich. I make about $350K and I am by no means rich.
However, take note, voters:
if you make $250K or more, Obama and his pals consider you part of the 1%, and, somehow, the govt is trying to tax you more. Pay attention. You aren't rich, but, if the govt feels you are rich, then the PC wage gap people will do something about it.

You're nuts. Unless you have three kids or bought an overly expensive home then you're doing something wrong. We make over 350k and save over 140k in a bad year. We weren't able to save this much in a higher col city than DC because housing costs were much higher and so were taxes.

Also taxes really haven't increased much over Obama. There's the Medicare surcharge and that's really it. Also check out trump's platform because he also thinks you're rich at 250k.

Saving over 140k every year does not make you financially rich. Having a multimillion dollar house, multiple vacation houses, buying million dollar cars without batting an eye are some of the things that make you qualify as rich. The world has changed and most of us are wage slaves, some doing marginally better than others financially. FWIW we save over 200k annually apart from 401k and 529s and I would never say we are rich. The truly rich are out of our league.

I totally agree. If you *have* to work for a living, you aren't rich. The English class system, which we base ours on whether you want to admit it or not, was based on this very idea. You were either of the "leisure" class and pursued hobbies all day long or you worked. UMC people could be pretty well off but if you were still working to make money, you were not Upper class.

[Anonymous]

I make 20mm and I am barely getting by -- after you factor in three houses, a staff of 15, fractional jet ownership fees, several club memberships, couture expenses, etc, I have barely 5k left at the end of the month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I come from an Eastern European country. A yearly vacation, a well maintained (albeit small) apartment, a decent school, retirement, maternity leave etc., are considered staples of the middle class not luxuries. When my relatives visit, and see our home and lifestyle, they are not really impressed, they certainly do not consider us rich. I find their perspective interesting and quite in contrast with the trend here of ever lowering standards. Slowly everything is becoming a "luxury" and the middle class is being defined as those who can subsist by putting food on their table and a roof over their head.

YES!!!! Why don't people see this? Oh you can afford to save *some* money for retirement and college? You don't live in a homeless shelter? Why then, you must be rich! NO. That's not how this works!!!!