Life is Easy in NW DC on $300k, AMA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread confirms that private schooling is the most insanely wasteful thing ever. I love how people compare it to "luxury cars" where there is really no comparison at all. if you have two kids in private school it's like buying 2 luxury vehicles every year - not one every ten years. ridiculous. so glad I was able to talk my husband out of the private school idea.

You sound envious. Private school is not wasteful if you can comfortably afford it; and if it's the educational environment you want for your children.

People who pay for private schools are losers and suckers. They want to buy "the best" but have no capacity to discern what actually is best.

Not a big deal if you are making millions perhaps but as this threads show @300k one would live a miserable life doing it.

Lol--you are the one who sounds like a loser. A bitter, envious loser who cannot afford private school. It seems as if public school is the ONLY option for your children. And most likely a state university after high school (shudder).

heh envious... you are a sucker and you know it. because you really have no capacity to judge educational quality, do you?

don't worry about my kids they are profoundly gifted and, at their level, the schools truly are irrelevant. there are some thing money can't buy as you and your dumb spawn must well know

Both of our children are Mensa junior honor society members, and they're trilingual. On top of that, we are both Ivy grads who can afford private school. Eat it.

Lol. You people are ridiculous

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread confirms that private schooling is the most insanely wasteful thing ever. I love how people compare it to "luxury cars" where there is really no comparison at all. if you have two kids in private school it's like buying 2 luxury vehicles every year - not one every ten years. ridiculous. so glad I was able to talk my husband out of the private school idea.

You sound envious. Private school is not wasteful if you can comfortably afford it; and if it's the educational environment you want for your children.

People who pay for private schools are losers and suckers. They want to buy "the best" but have no capacity to discern what actually is best.

Not a big deal if you are making millions perhaps but as this threads show @300k one would live a miserable life doing it.

Lol--you are the one who sounds like a loser. A bitter, envious loser who cannot afford private school. It seems as if public school is the ONLY option for your children. And most likely a state university after high school (shudder).

heh envious... you are a sucker and you know it. because you really have no capacity to judge educational quality, do you?

don't worry about my kids they are profoundly gifted and, at their level, the schools truly are irrelevant. there are some thing money can't buy as you and your dumb spawn must well know

Both of our children are Mensa junior honor society members, and they're trilingual. On top of that, we are both Ivy grads who can afford private school. Eat it.

only low class strivers join mensa. i tested for it when I was 12 and didn't want to join because it was too lame

you are apparently trying to buy class but it doesn't seem to be working

You sound as if you're intimately acquainted with all things "lame." I only thought tweens used that term...and they stopped using it more than a decade ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the entire private school sub-thread is really a deflection. The PP gave this very unique bullying hypo to suggest that even though everything is easy for OP on $300k, well, everything would fall apart if they had no choice but to send their 2 kids to an expensive private school.

But, without arguing about whether there are some unique outlier cases where parents truly have "no choice", the simple fact is that's not why the vast overwhelming majority of kids are in private school. They are there because their parents made a choice to send them to private school.

I have nothing against people who make that choice. But it's silly to pretend that OP's situation is imperiled because of the possibility that they are put in a position where they have no choice but to pay $70k per year for private school.

I see it differently.

OP showed how everything is wonderful...when everything is wonderful.

But in many cases, that's not the case. It could be bullying and then private school, or a disease, or alimony payments, or ID fraud and legal bills, or whatever.

$300k is great money when everything is wonderful. But that's not always the case, even in NW DC.

Ridiculous. OP never said they were immune from tragedy. What an absurd take.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the entire private school sub-thread is really a deflection. The PP gave this very unique bullying hypo to suggest that even though everything is easy for OP on $300k, well, everything would fall apart if they had no choice but to send their 2 kids to an expensive private school.

But, without arguing about whether there are some unique outlier cases where parents truly have "no choice", the simple fact is that's not why the vast overwhelming majority of kids are in private school. They are there because their parents made a choice to send them to private school.

I have nothing against people who make that choice. But it's silly to pretend that OP's situation is imperiled because of the possibility that they are put in a position where they have no choice but to pay $70k per year for private school.

I see it differently.

OP showed how everything is wonderful...when everything is wonderful.

But in many cases, that's not the case. It could be bullying and then private school, or a disease, or alimony payments, or ID fraud and legal bills, or whatever.

$300k is great money when everything is wonderful. But that's not always the case, even in NW DC.

No, OP was responding the the endless threads that it is hard to get by in DC on 300K/year with an outline of a pretty good life. He did not say tragedy or hard times will never happen to him, although I hope it does not. All we can do is the best we can. People complaining about not getting by on 300K are not whining about their inability to have fallback plans in the event their children are bullied.

+1. For kids with serious special needs public schools are often better anyway - you have a legal right to free services in public schools vs privates where you have to pay more for tutors, OT. Plus not all privates at $35k. And you can always move to a new school district - while that has transaction costs, it is cheaper than 10+ years of private school. I say this as someone considering private - but I won't come on here to then complain about how tight things are.

That said OP, in my mind the biggest distinction among my friends and how strapped they feel is whether they had to take out major loans for college and/or send money home each month to support their parents in retirement. If you (like me) don't have to do that, you have a big leg up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see so much confusion on here, and I thought I'd try to clear some stuff up. My central point is that life is easy, downright cushy even, on $300k per year gross income in the DC area. My wife (38) and I (40) raise our two kids (6 and 3) in upper NW DC and our gross income in 2016 was $300k. People who suggest they are scraping by at this income are either deluding you or deluding themselves.

I am happy to answer any questions and dispel any other related myths you may see on DCUM.

Some of our details:
- ~$300k gross income
- $about 70k in total income and payroll taxes
- PITI is about $3500 (we bought a 4 BR house near AU park in 2012 for low $800s. Before that we owned a small condo in Logan Circle)
- Public school (but we did daycare for both kids from 4 months - 3 years)
- I graduated from law school in 2004 with about $150k in student loans. Those are all paid off now.
- We don't do fancy luxury cars, but it's not bargain basement either. The last car we bought was in 2012 and it cost about $30k.
- We eat at nice restaurants weekly, travel several times a year, and buy more consumer goods (clothes for her, gadgets for him) than we probably should
- We save amply $36k per year in the 401k/TSP, $10k per year in the 529s, and $30-40k in the taxable brokerage account. Our savings balances include $750k in retirement accounts, $60k in 529s (kids are still young), and $250k in taxable brokerage accounts.
- We give to charity an amount that I think is generous, about $5k per year usually.

You are missing the point of those earlier threads. Few, if any, said $300k is not a nice lifestyle in NWDC. Rather, many correctly said that $300K does not automatically make you "rich" or "wealthy". Because it does not. You are dangerously dependent on your salary, which could disappear overnight (see 2008/2009). If we you lost your job, you'd be in dire financial straits. Actually rich people can afford a great lifestyle independent of a salaried job. That is not you, or most people in AU Park. You are upper middle class. If you don't understand the distinction, it's not surprising. Most Americans are sadly financially illiterate and would not understand this either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this thread confirms that private schooling is the most insanely wasteful thing ever. I love how people compare it to "luxury cars" where there is really no comparison at all. if you have two kids in private school it's like buying 2 luxury vehicles every year - not one every ten years. ridiculous. so glad I was able to talk my husband out of the private school idea.

You sound envious. Private school is not wasteful if you can comfortably afford it; and if it's the educational environment you want for your children.

People who pay for private schools are losers and suckers. They want to buy "the best" but have no capacity to discern what actually is best.

Not a big deal if you are making millions perhaps but as this threads show @300k one would live a miserable life doing it.

Lol--you are the one who sounds like a loser. A bitter, envious loser who cannot afford private school. It seems as if public school is the ONLY option for your children. And most likely a state university after high school (shudder).

heh envious... you are a sucker and you know it. because you really have no capacity to judge educational quality, do you?

don't worry about my kids they are profoundly gifted and, at their level, the schools truly are irrelevant. there are some thing money can't buy as you and your dumb spawn must well know

Both of our children are Mensa junior honor society members, and they're trilingual. On top of that, we are both Ivy grads who can afford private school. Eat it.

only low class strivers join mensa. i tested for it when I was 12 and didn't want to join because it was too lame

you are apparently trying to buy class but it doesn't seem to be working

You sound as if you're intimately acquainted with all things "lame." I only thought tweens used that term...and they stopped using it more than a decade ago.

Lol, both you and PP sound ridiculous. I don’t claim to be a part of Mensa but doubt you or your kids are either

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see so much confusion on here, and I thought I'd try to clear some stuff up. My central point is that life is easy, downright cushy even, on $300k per year gross income in the DC area. My wife (38) and I (40) raise our two kids (6 and 3) in upper NW DC and our gross income in 2016 was $300k. People who suggest they are scraping by at this income are either deluding you or deluding themselves.

I am happy to answer any questions and dispel any other related myths you may see on DCUM.

Some of our details:
- ~$300k gross income
- $about 70k in total income and payroll taxes
- PITI is about $3500 (we bought a 4 BR house near AU park in 2012 for low $800s. Before that we owned a small condo in Logan Circle)
- Public school (but we did daycare for both kids from 4 months - 3 years)
- I graduated from law school in 2004 with about $150k in student loans. Those are all paid off now.
- We don't do fancy luxury cars, but it's not bargain basement either. The last car we bought was in 2012 and it cost about $30k.
- We eat at nice restaurants weekly, travel several times a year, and buy more consumer goods (clothes for her, gadgets for him) than we probably should
- We save amply $36k per year in the 401k/TSP, $10k per year in the 529s, and $30-40k in the taxable brokerage account. Our savings balances include $750k in retirement accounts, $60k in 529s (kids are still young), and $250k in taxable brokerage accounts.
- We give to charity an amount that I think is generous, about $5k per year usually.

You are missing the point of those earlier threads. Few, if any, said $300k is not a nice lifestyle in NWDC. Rather, many correctly said that $300K does not automatically make you "rich" or "wealthy". Because it does not. You are dangerously dependent on your salary, which could disappear overnight (see 2008/2009). If we you lost your job, you'd be in dire financial straits. Actually rich people can afford a great lifestyle independent of a salaried job. That is not you, or most people in AU Park. You are upper middle class. If you don't understand the distinction, it's not surprising. Most Americans are sadly financially illiterate and would not understand this either.

I think we're talking about 2 different things. I have seen people on DCUM people say they are scraping by or living paycheck to paycheck on 300k. Or that 300k is middle class. That's what I'm pushing against.

I definitely never used the terms rich or wealthy. And I never tried to argue we're wealthy enough to not need a salary. In fact the whole point of the past was to show what lifestyle or salaries provide, not to argue that we don't need or salaries.

Of course we're still dependent on our salaries. But one day we won't be. Also, we'd be fine if one of us lost our jobs. We'd only be in "dire straits" if we both lost our jobs. Which is frankly unlikely, bc I work for the federal government.

[Anonymous]

Based on the detail you provided, I’m not convinced you would be fine if one of you lost your job.

And yes, 300k HHI is middle class. You haven’t provided any evidence proving it isn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on the detail you provided, I’m not convinced you would be fine if one of you lost your job.

And yes, 300k HHI is middle class. You haven’t provided any evidence proving it isn’t.

Ok ???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on the detail you provided, I’m not convinced you would be fine if one of you lost your job.

And yes, 300k HHI is middle class. You haven’t provided any evidence proving it isn’t.

What a stupid criterion. Just as those with generational wealth can lean on assets if they lost their jobs, my spouse and I can lean on our degrees and skills to get a new job. Either of us would have multiple job offers by the time our severance ran out if we were laid off.

[Anonymous]

It's just another deflection. First it was, yeah you're fine now but what if your kids we're being bullied so bad that you HAD to pay $70k per year for private school. Next it's, yeah you're fine now but what if you both lost your high paying jobs and become entirely unemployable? What then?!

Silly deflection. OP is doing fine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see so much confusion on here, and I thought I'd try to clear some stuff up. My central point is that life is easy, downright cushy even, on $300k per year gross income in the DC area. My wife (38) and I (40) raise our two kids (6 and 3) in upper NW DC and our gross income in 2016 was $300k. People who suggest they are scraping by at this income are either deluding you or deluding themselves.

I am happy to answer any questions and dispel any other related myths you may see on DCUM.

Some of our details:
- ~$300k gross income
- $about 70k in total income and payroll taxes
- PITI is about $3500 (we bought a 4 BR house near AU park in 2012 for low $800s. Before that we owned a small condo in Logan Circle)
- Public school (but we did daycare for both kids from 4 months - 3 years)
- I graduated from law school in 2004 with about $150k in student loans. Those are all paid off now.
- We don't do fancy luxury cars, but it's not bargain basement either. The last car we bought was in 2012 and it cost about $30k.
- We eat at nice restaurants weekly, travel several times a year, and buy more consumer goods (clothes for her, gadgets for him) than we probably should
- We save amply $36k per year in the 401k/TSP, $10k per year in the 529s, and $30-40k in the taxable brokerage account. Our savings balances include $750k in retirement accounts, $60k in 529s (kids are still young), and $250k in taxable brokerage accounts.
- We give to charity an amount that I think is generous, about $5k per year usually.

You are missing the point of those earlier threads. Few, if any, said $300k is not a nice lifestyle in NWDC. Rather, many correctly said that $300K does not automatically make you "rich" or "wealthy". Because it does not. You are dangerously dependent on your salary, which could disappear overnight (see 2008/2009). If we you lost your job, you'd be in dire financial straits. Actually rich people can afford a great lifestyle independent of a salaried job. That is not you, or most people in AU Park. You are upper middle class. If you don't understand the distinction, it's not surprising. Most Americans are sadly financially illiterate and would not understand this either.

I think we're talking about 2 different things. I have seen people on DCUM people say they are scraping by or living paycheck to paycheck on 300k. Or that 300k is middle class. That's what I'm pushing against.

I definitely never used the terms rich or wealthy. And I never tried to argue we're wealthy enough to not need a salary. In fact the whole point of the past was to show what lifestyle or salaries provide, not to argue that we don't need or salaries.

Of course we're still dependent on our salaries. But one day we won't be. Also, we'd be fine if one of us lost our jobs. We'd only be in "dire straits" if we both lost our jobs. Which is frankly unlikely, bc I work for the federal government.

Seems like a very middle class life to me. You send your kids to public schools, drive average cars, save for kids' colleges, etc. Doesn't seem like you do anything particularly luxurious except for dining at some nicer restaurant and some consumer goods. Again, very middle class. Your life isn't any fancier than someone middle class who lives in Kansas City. Except the person in Kansas City probably isn't saving as much for college, but then again their child probably won't attend as expensive of a college.

If you earned another 100-150k you could add in some more UMC things like a lot of expensive travel, nicer home etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see so much confusion on here, and I thought I'd try to clear some stuff up. My central point is that life is easy, downright cushy even, on $300k per year gross income in the DC area. My wife (38) and I (40) raise our two kids (6 and 3) in upper NW DC and our gross income in 2016 was $300k. People who suggest they are scraping by at this income are either deluding you or deluding themselves.

I am happy to answer any questions and dispel any other related myths you may see on DCUM.

Some of our details:
- ~$300k gross income
- $about 70k in total income and payroll taxes
- PITI is about $3500 (we bought a 4 BR house near AU park in 2012 for low $800s. Before that we owned a small condo in Logan Circle)
- Public school (but we did daycare for both kids from 4 months - 3 years)
- I graduated from law school in 2004 with about $150k in student loans. Those are all paid off now.
- We don't do fancy luxury cars, but it's not bargain basement either. The last car we bought was in 2012 and it cost about $30k.
- We eat at nice restaurants weekly, travel several times a year, and buy more consumer goods (clothes for her, gadgets for him) than we probably should
- We save amply $36k per year in the 401k/TSP, $10k per year in the 529s, and $30-40k in the taxable brokerage account. Our savings balances include $750k in retirement accounts, $60k in 529s (kids are still young), and $250k in taxable brokerage accounts.
- We give to charity an amount that I think is generous, about $5k per year usually.

You are missing the point of those earlier threads. Few, if any, said $300k is not a nice lifestyle in NWDC. Rather, many correctly said that $300K does not automatically make you "rich" or "wealthy". Because it does not. You are dangerously dependent on your salary, which could disappear overnight (see 2008/2009). If we you lost your job, you'd be in dire financial straits. Actually rich people can afford a great lifestyle independent of a salaried job. That is not you, or most people in AU Park. You are upper middle class. If you don't understand the distinction, it's not surprising. Most Americans are sadly financially illiterate and would not understand this either.

I think we're talking about 2 different things. I have seen people on DCUM people say they are scraping by or living paycheck to paycheck on 300k. Or that 300k is middle class. That's what I'm pushing against.

I definitely never used the terms rich or wealthy. And I never tried to argue we're wealthy enough to not need a salary. In fact the whole point of the past was to show what lifestyle or salaries provide, not to argue that we don't need or salaries.

Of course we're still dependent on our salaries. But one day we won't be. Also, we'd be fine if one of us lost our jobs. We'd only be in "dire straits" if we both lost our jobs. Which is frankly unlikely, bc I work for the federal government.

Seems like a very middle class life to me. You send your kids to public schools, drive average cars, save for kids' colleges, etc. Doesn't seem like you do anything particularly luxurious except for dining at some nicer restaurant and some consumer goods. Again, very middle class. Your life isn't any fancier than someone middle class who lives in Kansas City. Except the person in Kansas City probably isn't saving as much for college, but then again their child probably won't attend as expensive of a college.

If you earned another 100-150k you could add in some more UMC things like a lot of expensive travel, nicer home etc.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

^^and I say that as someone with similar HHI. We are very middle class.

[Anonymous]

They could add 30k per year in fancy travel and luxury cars and still be saving 50k per year. My point is, it seems they could easily afford fancier lifestyles of they wanted them. Instead they're dumping a lot into brokerage account.