I Live Comfortably on Less than $70K After-Tax in DC Area

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You all should go check out the relationship thread where a woman is being excoriated for not spending money on a vacation w/ friends. She's prioritizing her mortgage, childcare, and family ahead of an expensive island vacation and people are reaming her.

People just love to sling stones OP. You won't win - just go home and sleep well knowing you're spared of the financial nightmares plaguing others.

OP here.....just catching up all these posts.

Thanks for your encouraging remarks. I'm really perplexed as to how many people are giving me a hard time. I read somewhere that half the people in this country don't even have $25,000 by the time they're in their 50s. If people would put more away for retirement (and skip the island vacation, as you mention), we wouldn't have a disaster waiting to happen. What do people do when they retire and don't even have $25,000 saved? (But that's another topic altogether.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all should go check out the relationship thread where a woman is being excoriated for not spending money on a vacation w/ friends. She's prioritizing her mortgage, childcare, and family ahead of an expensive island vacation and people are reaming her.

People just love to sling stones OP. You won't win - just go home and sleep well knowing you're spared of the financial nightmares plaguing others.

OP here.....just catching up all these posts.

Thanks for your encouraging remarks. I'm really perplexed as to how many people are giving me a hard time. I read somewhere that half the people in this country don't even have $25,000 by the time they're in their 50s. If people would put more away for retirement (and skip the island vacation, as you mention), we wouldn't have a disaster waiting to happen. What do people do when they retire and don't even have $25,000 saved? (But that's another topic altogether.)

Here's why people are giving you a hard time. From your initial post:

WTF is all this crap about $300k being middle class and $80k being poor? I (single, no kids) live very comfortably on less than $70k (net).

This is a parenting site. We are parents. We are parents who live in the DC metro area, and area with a high COL. It's hard to support a family in this area on $80k around here. To top it off, you quote gross numbers in your "WTF" question, but talk about your net income of $70k instead of your mid-90's gross. You came bitching at us - that's why you're getting a hard time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: OP here. I started this thread to make a point: That despite many DCUMers being incredulous that families can have a comfortable, middle-class lifestyle on less than $250k and/or believing that income below $100k is poor for singles (some people even said it was nearing welfare eligibility!), people are doing just fine on less. I wanted to insert a dose of reality into the forum.

Again, my $70,000 spending level includes not only regular living expenses, but contributions to my retirement plan and health insurance/medical costs. How much my actual salary is is irrelevant. Even if I made $200,000 a year (yeah, I wish), all I really need is $70,000 after tax.

(And for those of you defending me against the people bitching at me, thank you.)

Thank you, OP for starting this thread. You have gavin me the biggest belly laugh I've had all week.

Of course you feel comfortable. You make alot of money and have no responsibilities except to yourself. Many of us have been where you are now and we are telling you YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. So just stop.

P.S. You really, really should max out your retirement savings now. Again, many of us have been where you are. You won't regret it. You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

OP, you ARE one of the people on DCUM who are rich but don't acknowledge it.

You make $94,000 a year and have no family or non-mortgage debt! You are RICH! Not middle-class. Not "comfortable". R-I-C-H.

The fact that you come on here and only acknowledge being "comfortable" makes you just like everyone else on this site: rich but only cop to being middle class; privileged several orders of magnitude beyond average, but only feels about average.

ONE OF US...ONE OF US...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lived comfortably on 30K a year when I was single. Now I earn a LOT more, but money is a lot tighter, because I have to pay childcare for 3 kids, student loans, non-subsidized health insurance, preschool, a safe and large enough car (3 kids in carseats won't fit in a cheap two-door like I had back then), health care, the list goes on and on.

Now back when I was earning 30k, single and had enough left over to travel internationally, I could have been super-smug and claimed that I didn't understand how families making twice or three times my salary weren't rich. But I wasn't a jerk, and wasn't so arrogant as to assume that I knew other people's situations, or that I had a right to judge.

OP here. I wasn't being smug. My comment was in response to DCUMers who keep saying that $80k is poor, even for a single w/o kids. I was showing how that isn't true, and how $70k after tax (which is around $85k gross) is a nice standard of living (if one doesn't insist on living in DC.)

If $70k after tax is $85k gross, I want to speak with you accountant. I'm getting screwed.

Yeah am I doing my taxes wrong? I make over 100k and my net is 68k.

[Anonymous]

OP here. You few posters above are missing the point entirely.

I started the thread to combat all these DCUMers who go on and on about how $200k for families and $100k for singles is barely middle class. I acknowledge that I'm comfortable - very comfortable, in fact. I was trying to show - and some of you got it, but clearly some did not - that the incomes I just named are affluent. Yet, thread after thread, we have DCUMers saying that $300,000 is just a regular lifestyle and $88,000 qualifies for subsidies. We even had some guy in another thread yesterday say that people with a net income of $4 million are not well off - and that it takes $10m and a $1m income. Crazy.

As far as the advice to max out my retirement, I am very close to doing that. My employer matches up to 10% of our income, and I have been contributing 9% (with a 9% match for a total of 18%). I think that's more than adequate - and more than financial advisors suggest, which is 15%. But you are probably giving me good advice, and I can up my contribution to the full 10%. I can change it on Monday, and I will.

Anyway, I'm done. It's a beautiful day....enjoy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lived comfortably on 30K a year when I was single. Now I earn a LOT more, but money is a lot tighter, because I have to pay childcare for 3 kids, student loans, non-subsidized health insurance, preschool, a safe and large enough car (3 kids in carseats won't fit in a cheap two-door like I had back then), health care, the list goes on and on.

Now back when I was earning 30k, single and had enough left over to travel internationally, I could have been super-smug and claimed that I didn't understand how families making twice or three times my salary weren't rich. But I wasn't a jerk, and wasn't so arrogant as to assume that I knew other people's situations, or that I had a right to judge.

OP here. I wasn't being smug. My comment was in response to DCUMers who keep saying that $80k is poor, even for a single w/o kids. I was showing how that isn't true, and how $70k after tax (which is around $85k gross) is a nice standard of living (if one doesn't insist on living in DC.)

If $70k after tax is $85k gross, I want to speak with you accountant. I'm getting screwed.

Yeah am I doing my taxes wrong? I make over 100k and my net is 68k.

By "net," do you mean after your 401k contribution, the 529, health premium, etc.? "Net" means incime after taxes, and someone with a salary of $85k or $90k wouldn't pay more than $20k in taxes if their deductions were high enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. You few posters above are missing the point entirely.

I started the thread to combat all these DCUMers who go on and on about how $200k for families and $100k for singles is barely middle class. I acknowledge that I'm comfortable - very comfortable, in fact. I was trying to show - and some of you got it, but clearly some did not - that the incomes I just named are affluent. Yet, thread after thread, we have DCUMers saying that $300,000 is just a regular lifestyle and $88,000 qualifies for subsidies. We even had some guy in another thread yesterday say that people with a net income of $4 million are not well off - and that it takes $10m and a $1m income. Crazy.

As far as the advice to max out my retirement, I am very close to doing that. My employer matches up to 10% of our income, and I have been contributing 9% (with a 9% match for a total of 18%). I think that's more than adequate - and more than financial advisors suggest, which is 15%. But you are probably giving me good advice, and I can up my contribution to the full 10%. I can change it on Monday, and I will.

Anyway, I'm done. It's a beautiful day....enjoy it.

FYI, "maxing out" retirement savings doesn't mean contributing enough to get the employer match. It is literally crazy not to contribute enough to your 401k to get the full employer match. Maxing out means contributing enough to meet the federal limits for 401k contribution- 18000 per year in 2017. And another FYI, your employer contributions don't count against that 18000 limit so you aren't even close to maxing out.

[Anonymous]

In your position you are absolutely not saving enough for retirement. You may be living fine, but you are shorting your retirement. Also, you should assume 4% for long term growth. At your age I wouldn't include SS either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. You few posters above are missing the point entirely.

I started the thread to combat all these DCUMers who go on and on about how $200k for families and $100k for singles is barely middle class. I acknowledge that I'm comfortable - very comfortable, in fact. I was trying to show - and some of you got it, but clearly some did not - that the incomes I just named are affluent. Yet, thread after thread, we have DCUMers saying that $300,000 is just a regular lifestyle and $88,000 qualifies for subsidies. We even had some guy in another thread yesterday say that people with a net income of $4 million are not well off - and that it takes $10m and a $1m income. Crazy.

As far as the advice to max out my retirement, I am very close to doing that. My employer matches up to 10% of our income, and I have been contributing 9% (with a 9% match for a total of 18%). I think that's more than adequate - and more than financial advisors suggest, which is 15%. But you are probably giving me good advice, and I can up my contribution to the full 10%. I can change it on Monday, and I will.

Anyway, I'm done. It's a beautiful day....enjoy it.

Just a stupid thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. You few posters above are missing the point entirely.

I started the thread to combat all these DCUMers who go on and on about how $200k for families and $100k for singles is barely middle class. I acknowledge that I'm comfortable - very comfortable, in fact. I was trying to show - and some of you got it, but clearly some did not - that the incomes I just named are affluent. Yet, thread after thread, we have DCUMers saying that $300,000 is just a regular lifestyle and $88,000 qualifies for subsidies. We even had some guy in another thread yesterday say that people with a net income of $4 million are not well off - and that it takes $10m and a $1m income. Crazy.

As far as the advice to max out my retirement, I am very close to doing that. My employer matches up to 10% of our income, and I have been contributing 9% (with a 9% match for a total of 18%). I think that's more than adequate - and more than financial advisors suggest, which is 15%. But you are probably giving me good advice, and I can up my contribution to the full 10%. I can change it on Monday, and I will.

Anyway, I'm done. It's a beautiful day....enjoy it.

Just a stupid thread.

...and just an unnecessary response.

[Anonymous]

I agree with OP even though other posters got mad at me and said I missed the point of the thread. How interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. You few posters above are missing the point entirely.

I started the thread to combat all these DCUMers who go on and on about how $200k for families and $100k for singles is barely middle class. I acknowledge that I'm comfortable - very comfortable, in fact. I was trying to show - and some of you got it, but clearly some did not - that the incomes I just named are affluent. Yet, thread after thread, we have DCUMers saying that $300,000 is just a regular lifestyle and $88,000 qualifies for subsidies. We even had some guy in another thread yesterday say that people with a net income of $4 million are not well off - and that it takes $10m and a $1m income. Crazy.

As far as the advice to max out my retirement, I am very close to doing that. My employer matches up to 10% of our income, and I have been contributing 9% (with a 9% match for a total of 18%). I think that's more than adequate - and more than financial advisors suggest, which is 15%. But you are probably giving me good advice, and I can up my contribution to the full 10%. I can change it on Monday, and I will.

Anyway, I'm done. It's a beautiful day....enjoy it.

FYI, "maxing out" retirement savings doesn't mean contributing enough to get the employer match. It is literally crazy not to contribute enough to your 401k to get the full employer match. Maxing out means contributing enough to meet the federal limits for 401k contribution- 18000 per year in 2017. And another FYI, your employer contributions don't count against that 18000 limit so you aren't even close to maxing out.

Seriously. My gross is less than your net, and I'm halfway to maxing out (I put in well above my employer match, just can't afford to max out quite yet) and I have a young child in elementary school.

Since you're so well off OP you won't miss the extra money you save to max out your retirement.

[Anonymous]

OP is spending a LOT of money for eating out and entertainment - 600 a month. As well as donations. This is living very comfortably in under $70K. DH and I did that when we were starting off on 70K. It is doable and it is a lot of money.

Most people find DC unaffordable because of 3 things - high mortgage, childcare cost and college loans.

THanks OP for writing this. We are now a 300K household. We have a low mortgage, no private school cost, no college loans, and no childcare cost. I SAHM and we save a whole lot of money and consider ourselves very well off.

[Anonymous]

Why did everyone assume OP is a woman? I'm guessing man.