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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's whole lot that's not represented here - utilities, phone, household goods, student loans, personal care, medical expenses, health insurance, restaurants, entertainment, etc.

So you could be negative

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn't quite track since it has child care and only one spouse maxing out. Is this dual income or single? If it's single, there's no child care bill.

And also, $8,000 in vacations per year and still having nearly $6,000 left over is pretty comfy.

So this is rich? Having 6k leftover a year?

I'm pretty sure the "rich" part comes in where you have a $700,000 house and take two vacations a year for thousands of dollars each and pay $2,000 a month for childcare. Those things are discretionary, lovely, wonderful, desirable things to have. But if you bought a $400,000 townhouse further out, sent your kid to an in-home day care, and spent $1,000 for driving/camping vacations you'd have a heck of a lot more left at the end of the year and you'd probably feel rich because of that...and because the people in your neighborhood who you are now comparing yourself to are doing the same.

Since 200k is rich to you people I thought a mcmansion was in order

More than likely, the home of the couple in the article is small, probably 2br. It's in SF.

[Anonymous]

I grew up in what I thought was a fairly middle-class existence and we almost never went on vacation, much less two of them per year.

Also I know my parents never saved that much money per year (nearly 10% of income going into 401k).

And once a child is 5 that childcare bill will not be so high.

It looks like a fairly comfortable life to me, with perks such as savings, vacations, and children's lessons, and what is most likely a decent house with a mortgage that high, assuming that a down payment was made.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand how people immediately jump on housing costs. Where are we supposed to live without spending even more on privates? $700k within a non-horrible commute in the DMV is a pretty good deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These threads make me angry. If those people making $200k are just getting by then how do we describe the significant majority of people who make less?

can you say that again 100000000000000000000000000000000000000 freaking times!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

What is people's definition of "rich"? Does taking 2 vacations, lessons for kids, and having 500/mo leftover = rich?

I grew up lower/middle class, and I wouldn't say that this is "rich".

Rich to me means you can buy expensive cars, go on more than 2 lavish vacations (like costing $10K per), have a mcmansion, etc.. and not be in debt.

To me, this couple in the article is well-off, comfortable, but not "rich'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn't quite track since it has child care and only one spouse maxing out. Is this dual income or single? If it's single, there's no child care bill.

And also, $8,000 in vacations per year and still having nearly $6,000 left over is pretty comfy.

So this is rich? Having 6k leftover a year?

I'm pretty sure the "rich" part comes in where you have a $700,000 house and take two vacations a year for thousands of dollars each and pay $2,000 a month for childcare. Those things are discretionary, lovely, wonderful, desirable things to have. But if you bought a $400,000 townhouse further out, sent your kid to an in-home day care, and spent $1,000 for driving/camping vacations you'd have a heck of a lot more left at the end of the year and you'd probably feel rich because of that...and because the people in your neighborhood who you are now comparing yourself to are doing the same.

My childcare for 1 infant in SF was $2800 a month (in a center that had a 14 month waitlist). I wish it were discretionary. I wish I could get a spot in an in home daycare - called many 10 months in advance, no spot. A $700K home gets you a long commute and maybe 1300sqf.

There are some things that can be trimmed from the budget (child lessons etc) but there are also expenses that are miscalculated. 401K is only for one spouse, the effective tax rate calculated is low, California has an insane state tax in addition to paying into a state disability fund etc. It does not take into account big one off expenses - buying furniture, a new roof, an illness with high medical bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These threads make me angry. If those people making $200k are just getting by then how do we describe the significant majority of people who make less?

I would describe it this way: those making $100K slaves, those making $200K house slaves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw this article. I believe it's a dual income household living in SF area. We used to live around there. Yes, they take vacations and provide lessons for their kid. But, I think what this chart is showing is that 250K can give you a comfortable life, no doubt, but it's not as extravagant as people might think if you live in a high COL area. The chart also shows 1 child. Imagine if you had 2. And they haven't even started saving for college.

Plus, imagine that public schools are a disaster (as in San Francisco) and you need to pay 2 private tuitions. No way to manage at $200k (which is why so many families have to leave the city)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's whole lot that's not represented here - utilities, phone, household goods, student loans, personal care, medical expenses, health insurance, restaurants, entertainment, etc.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For starters, do not get a 3K mortgage (that is 36K/12 months).

You can save money on food simply by digital/paper coupons.

At 200k you don't want to be in bad school districts or a shack.

I knew someone would say this.

I grew up in the DC area, elementary through HS, and I felt all the public schools were the same. I have friends in the town I grew up in and they do not complain about schools, and their mortgage is not 3K or remotely close to it.

Define shack, in terms of square footage. I have seen houses under 2K in square feet that are a lot nicer than the houses that are valued at 500K simply because of where it is.

[Anonymous]

I don't think 3K on mortgage, 2 vacations a year, and maxing out retirement is just getting by.

[Anonymous]

House poor does not equal middle class if you are choosing to live in a $700K+ house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That doesn't quite track since it has child care and only one spouse maxing out. Is this dual income or single? If it's single, there's no child care bill.

And also, $8,000 in vacations per year and still having nearly $6,000 left over is pretty comfy.

So this is rich? Having 6k leftover a year?

I'm pretty sure the "rich" part comes in where you have a $700,000 house and take two vacations a year for thousands of dollars each and pay $2,000 a month for childcare. Those things are discretionary, lovely, wonderful, desirable things to have. But if you bought a $400,000 townhouse further out, sent your kid to an in-home day care, and spent $1,000 for driving/camping vacations you'd have a heck of a lot more left at the end of the year and you'd probably feel rich because of that...and because the people in your neighborhood who you are now comparing yourself to are doing the same.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For starters, do not get a 3K mortgage (that is 36K/12 months).

You can save money on food simply by digital/paper coupons.

At 200k you don't want to be in bad school districts or a shack.

I knew someone would say this.

I grew up in the DC area, elementary through HS, and I felt all the public schools were the same. I have friends in the town I grew up in and they do not complain about schools, and their mortgage is not 3K or remotely close to it.

Define shack, in terms of square footage. I have seen houses under 2K in square feet that are a lot nicer than the houses that are valued at 500K simply because of where it is.

There is a poster here who's obsessed with shitshacks, Great Schools, and says that $350K is the "minimum" needed to get by. That's probably who OP is.