Middles Class: $381K is the NEW $100k, Six Figures is no longer Suceessful based on analysis

[Anonymous]

The paraphrasing of the OP and outright inaccuracies are LAUGHABLE. My goodness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

maybe in 3rd world asia

[Anonymous]

OP, unless you believe that the middle class is no longer defined as the median (National income median is $50K, local counties median 80-100K) then you are completely incorrect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

since apparently that is what is expected because of the "everything is bigger in Texas" mentality.

Seriously, people do realize that much space is wasteful, right? What exactly are you filling your house with that you require that much space? Do you have 20 people living there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As most of us suspect, middle class / rich threshold is much higher now a days, $380K nationally and $427k to $617K in the DC area

This is the reason why people in our area feel like they are barely scraping buy on $200k-$300k a year. To feel comfortable and upper middle class you would need to make about $350k-$500K in the DC area.

So, to "feel comfortable and upper middle class" you have to be in the top 1% of incomes?

I think you've pretty clearly described the stereotypical DCUM mindset.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This makes sense to me. We are in our mid 30s make around 280k and can only afford a late 50s rambler 2000 SQRFT home inside the beltway in a good area / school district. To get a normal sized 3500 SQRFT newer home (less than 10 years old), like you would normally buy in other areas of the country (not high end), you would need to make probably 400-500k a year. We bought after the housing boom so I am talking about any new families in their early to mid 30s who were not lucky enough to amass the massive amounts of equity resulting from the boom of 2000-2006.

Woe is me.

I know. First world problems



yeah I said it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

maybe in 3rd world asia

My family of three and 2 dogs live in a 4 bedroom or 3 bedroom plus office mid 50s rambler, finished square footage, including basement: 2050 square feet. We are not cramped. I lived in a 3300sqf home elsewhere in this country and that place was HUGE. 4 full bedrooms, 4 bathrooms. Formal dr and office, HUGE kitchen and family room.

3500 is big by any standard. We just have distorted views about what huge means.

[Anonymous]

btw, can we please name this dead horse? I mean, it has taken enough abuse that it at least deserves a name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

maybe in 3rd world asia

My family of three and 2 dogs live in a 4 bedroom or 3 bedroom plus office mid 50s rambler, finished square footage, including basement: 2050 square feet. We are not cramped. I lived in a 3300sqf home elsewhere in this country and that place was HUGE. 4 full bedrooms, 4 bathrooms. Formal dr and office, HUGE kitchen and family room.

3500 is big by any standard. We just have distorted views about what huge means.

My family of 3 people and 3 cats lives in a 3-bedroom, 1422 sq. ft. townhome (nb this square footage also includes a 1-car garage so this part is not necessarily "living space" either). Gee whiz, folks. Get a grip!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:380K is the national average for the 1%, not the middle class.

600K is the DC average for the 1% because there are a buttloadof people here making over six figures. Which pushes the threshold higher than in other areas.

The median income in this country remains 50K and no one, No one , no one who makes 6 figures or so even in this area is barely scraping by.

Amen to that. OP, please stop trying to paraphrase articles.

It's not so much paraphrasing as fiction. Not very good fiction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

My family of three and 2 dogs live in a 4 bedroom or 3 bedroom plus office mid 50s rambler, finished square footage, including basement: 2050 square feet. We are not cramped. I lived in a 3300sqf home elsewhere in this country and that place was HUGE. 4 full bedrooms, 4 bathrooms. Formal dr and office, HUGE kitchen and family room.

3500 is big by any standard. We just have distorted views about what huge means.

I'm with you. We have a 2200 sf home with 4 BRs and it is plenty big for our family of 3 (and more when people visit us) and a couple pets. We had put in a bid on a home with more than 3000 sf when we househunted last year and that place was absolutely cavernous. There were entire floors we wouldn't have used for years.

[Anonymous]

I'm really really tired of people complaining that they are struggling to get by on tripleK a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf