How does your family survive making under 200k hhi

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

Short by what standard? Putting away enough for a public university, putting away 10% of HHI for retirement - is that short? I think you're imagining a family of 200k income living like they make 300 or 400k, which sure plenty of families do, and they make up the difference by not putting away for retirement or college, but the point I've been trying to make on this thread is you don't have to live like that and your standard of living doesn't necessarily have to take a big hit to live more modestly. Living just outside the district and sending your kid to childcare there can easily save you 2k a month that you then can put towards the savings you claim people are short on.

Putting away 10% of HHI for retirement gets you to retire on what percentage of your HHI at what age, and is that sufficient, or will you be relying on Social Security?

My retirement package alone, not counting DH's and excluding Social Security, will have me at 150% of what I currently make. I've been contributing to my retirement account since I was an intern. This is assuming I retire at 62. I could go earlier but we'll see where we are in life when I reach the earliest eligible age. You're probably still inclined to say I'm short because you seem to hold it as a matter of faith that people making 200k can't live financially responsible lives, but 150% of what I make will be plenty for us. We lived on a fraction of that two years ago.

If your current salary is $80K that means that by age 62 your own retirement fund will be at $3M in order to withdraw 4% per year; $120K per year (150% of current salary). That's just from contributing 10% of salary throughout your career? That's excellent

It includes my pension. $3M would be awesome but no, I'm not achieving that with 10%.

[Anonymous]

I'm 30, with young kids, and I mostly agree with you. I think that some of the problem is that people my age are comparing their lives to the way that the 50 to 60 year olds with similar incomes live now. I can make this comparison directly. I grew up in this area, and my parents were a two-fed household, as my husband and I are now. My parents are still working but their kids have long since left the nest. They've paid off their mortgage, they're done paying for college, and their retirement accounts are in good shape. So now they're living it up, and good for them. They're remodeling their house, they go on nice vacations, they eat out when they want to.

But when I was a kid, we rarely ate out, and if we did it was somewhere where kids eat free. We never went on vacation anywhere we couldn't get to by car. We lived in a 1960s split level in a non-fancy suburb. They lived much like my husband and I live now.

I will say that one thing I think has changed is that it is much more difficult and expensive to live close to the city, because people value urban living and walkability much more than they used to. And living further out has gotten more difficult, because the traffic is so much worse than it was, say, 20 years ago. We live in a smaller place than my parents did, because I'm not willing to do that commute. But a generation ago it wasn't so bad.

I'm in my mid 20s and I mostly agree with both of you. I also grew up in this area, and although housing close in was way, way less expensive (my father was a federal attorney, my mom a SAH and then part time and we lived in Chevy Chase DC for half of my childhood). But the prices my mom remembers for daycare, adjusting for inflation, seems pretty much the same. Their first house (not in CCDC) was a two bedroom semi-detached rowhouse that was very old and not at all updated and very much a "starter home" which they didn't buy until their early 30s. I also don't remember going out to eat that much, and when we did, it was usually someplace cheap. We never had fancy cars, just practical cars like a Ford station wagon that we drove until it died. Now that my brother and I are out of the house, my parents also do things like remodel the house, go on nice vacations, and go out to eat at really nice restaurants, and splurge on luxury items like nice cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

Citation please.

Our HHI is $180K.

We have about $700K equity in our house and less than $100K to pay on the mortgage.

Retirement accounts total $1.5M. We are 50yo.

College savings total $250K for two kids ages 15 and 12.

We are not "way short." Not by a long shot.

Wow, very impressive! Good for you.

Thank you. We are aggressive savers and planners.

Anyone who uses "$200K" and "survive" in the same sentence is clueless. With a HHI of $180K, we consider ourselves rich.

But you're at a different stage in life. You bought your house when before the bubble, when gas was cheaper, when economy was better, and when families were able to live on one income. Try starting out with 2 kids in daycare and paying for a house now on 180k.

PP here. That will always be true. We didn't make $180K when we were starting out, not even close. We struggled just as you do. It's what life is like, starting out, for most people.

I still say $200Kish is a LOT of money.

What did the home cost compared to your income. No way in hell someone would make that equity and be in the same position if they bought now and fast forwarded 20 years.

IIRC, we were making about $90K or $100K together when we bought our house for $360K in 2000. (Families in this area were definitely not able to live on one income at that time. No way.) At the time we had two kids in daycare (later pulled them and did a nanny-share) and for a few years we were in the red, with more going out to childcare etc. than we had coming in.

I don't think you know what your house will be worth in 20 years. (We've owned for almost 14, not 20.)

It's very unlikely that housing will triple in next 15 yrs like yours did.

And a comparable housing cost would be 600k, which means you are living at out and paying more in gas and extended care or live closer in and pay for private.

Different world now. We should all move tonPitt or nC.

Huh? How do you figure our housing value tripled? $360K x 3 = $1M+. Our house is worth about $800K. So it doubled, plus a little more. Yours might too, in the next 15 years. Unless you have a crystal ball, we don't know.

I don't know what you mean by comparable housing cost. Do you mean that is what we would be buying now with our income? Perhaps so. We live in close-in Silver Spring and put gas in our cars 1x/month as we don't drive that much. Our kids go to public school. People buy houses in our area for $600K today and make these same choices.

Your situation is really not any different from what ours was 14 years ago. It just isn't.

Except, when you bought your house the value was 3.6x your salary. Now, making 180k would mean the house is 4.4x the salary.

Like I said, not vastly different.

And not living in the hinterlands, or paying for private schools.

Let me break down the math for you.
In real dollars 3.6x vs 4.4x is 160k more today. A 30 year mortgage would mean shelling out extra 1000 dollars a month. Maybe that's not a lot to you.

Not really. Interest rates were a lot higher when we first bought, in 1996. I think our first mortgage had a rate well over 6%, maybe 7%.

Well in rough terms, you took on a mortgage 2.5x your salary earlier. Today you would be taking on a mortgage 3.5x your salary. Real estate prices have outpaced income increases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

We have earned between 140 - 160 for the last 10 years on one income. We have 2 kids but no student loans. Both kids went to good preschools and do after school activities (education is a priority for us). We live in the DC area. We have bought a house at the peak with 25% down and sold it 8 years later for a minor profit. We have 450K cash equity in the market, and maxed out 401K. This is with no family help. Of course we are not crazy rich, but will retire and still be able to maintain our standard of living unless the market wipes us out (except it will wipe everyone else out concurrently). We travel abroad once every 2 years to see family, eat out and even have someone come in a couple of times a month to clean house. We average about 40-60K per year savings (excluding 401K).


It's doable.

Are you in your 30s? How have your housing costs been? I suspect you live someplace on edge of DC metro like Loudoun? And one of you works out there too. That is an enviable situation big you can get it bc you avoid the ridiculous cost of housing most of us pay to maintain shorter commutes. And I mean shorter not short.

We live in DTSS about 1.2 miles from the metro. House is small and not extravagant. We are fairly minimalistic (partly nature, partly circumstance). DH commute is 20mins to college park. If one is willing to forgo some bells and whistles it is doable.

I would guess your house was 300k or so? How do you feel about schools? That is a great commute even to downtown, but we aren't sure about school quality is dtss. But the area is rapidly changing and schools should improve. We are more risk adverse regarding schools so sadly small homes in our preferred close in school district start at 700k. I suspect that maybe part of the 450k you have saved up! What do you consider bells ad whistles? We have $30 internet, low end Hondas (1 car is nice but two kids & two working parents make that harder). No cable. We just got our first smartphone (only 1) and that was cheapest version.

Our expense are dominated by housing, daycare (equals the mortgage), and to a much lesser degree annual travel to far away family. What are we forgetting? This is an issue seen in another warren book, the 60% solution. Cutting out Starbucks won't fund college; you have to make changes to these big recurring expenses, and that can mean moving, finding different jobs, etc. whistles and bells prob weren't funding your awesome nest egg, right?

[Anonymous]

I grew up in this area in the 90s.

Dad was a fed and mom stayed at home.

Dad made about 150k.

We had a 3200 SF house in fairfax woodson district.

2 cars paid cash and kids had college fully paid through masters.

Dad has pension and 401k and full health benefits till death.

So yes it sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in this area in the 90s.

Dad was a fed and mom stayed at home.

Dad made about 150k.

We had a 3200 SF house in fairfax woodson district.

2 cars paid cash and kids had college fully paid through masters.

Dad has pension and 401k and full health benefits till death.

So yes it sucks.

let me correct that dad made 150K but often took TTDYs in hardship posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There have been multiple people in very different phases of life (50+, 30s, single moms, sahm, renters) who have lived very comfortable lives in the area on 200k and far less. There has been an excuse thrown out for each how those don't apply - you bought before the real estate boom, you had a big down payment, you have one high wage earner.

The simple fact is that it can be done and in a variety of ways. YOU might not be able to do it, but it is not because it is not possible, but because you make different choices or have expectations/entitlements that are out of line with your income.

The simple truth is that if you are broke at 200k you would probably be broke at 300 or 400k. 100/150/200 are plenty to live comfortably, raise children, live close in, and save for a great retirement. What do they have in common? Live below their means in some ways, save aggressively, prioritize their wants and needs, and realize how fortunate they are to make so much money.

There will always be excuses.

I think people who make statements like these have no idea or experience with starting a family in this area today. That would've been me saying the same thing before I had kids. Once kids came along, childcare is a second mortgage, diapers, wipes, etc. I haven't gotten a haircut in over a year, manicure over 4 years ago, new clothes bought 2 years ago because of my growing belly... 200k is a lot less after taxes etc. its enough to cover childcare, mortgage, food, utilities, insurances, etc but its far from luxurious living. We still need to budget carefully.

I am 50yo. It was like this for us, too. It is not "today." It is what it is like to start out, given childcare costs and everything else you cite. For our generation too.

I'm 30, with young kids, and I mostly agree with you. I think that some of the problem is that people my age are comparing their lives to the way that the 50 to 60 year olds with similar incomes live now. I can make this comparison directly. I grew up in this area, and my parents were a two-fed household, as my husband and I are now. My parents are still working but their kids have long since left the nest. They've paid off their mortgage, they're done paying for college, and their retirement accounts are in good shape. So now they're living it up, and good for them. They're remodeling their house, they go on nice vacations, they eat out when they want to.

But when I was a kid, we rarely ate out, and if we did it was somewhere where kids eat free. We never went on vacation anywhere we couldn't get to by car. We lived in a 1960s split level in a non-fancy suburb. They lived much like my husband and I live now.

I will say that one thing I think has changed is that it is much more difficult and expensive to live close to the city, because people value urban living and walkability much more than they used to. And living further out has gotten more difficult, because the traffic is so much worse than it was, say, 20 years ago. We live in a smaller place than my parents did, because I'm not willing to do that commute. But a generation ago it wasn't so bad.

People aren't saving gobs of money by eating out or not. Besides we are parents and who had time to eat out someplace expensive?

The real cost is housing. Period. And you 60s slit level was probably 20 yrs old when you lived in it. A 20 year old house close in is radically expensive, and so we settle for the worn out mid century housing and pay thru the nose for mortgage and maintenance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Let me break down the math for you.
In real dollars 3.6x vs 4.4x is 160k more today. A 30 year mortgage would mean shelling out extra 1000 dollars a month. Maybe that's not a lot to you.

Not really. Interest rates were a lot higher when we first bought, in 1996. I think our first mortgage had a rate well over 6%, maybe 7%.

Well in rough terms, you took on a mortgage 2.5x your salary earlier. Today you would be taking on a mortgage 3.5x your salary. Real estate prices have outpaced income increases.

Yes, but you're missing is that in the mid-90s, the mortgage worth 2.5x your salary cost you not much less, on a monthly basis, than the mortgage worth 3.5x your salary, because interest rates were that much higher. If your HHI is $100,000, and you take out a mortgage at 2.5x your income ($250,000) at 6.5% for 30 years, your monthly payment is $1580. If you take out a mortgage at 3.5x your income ($350,000), but the interest rate is 3.5% for 30 years, your monthly payment is $1572.

Note, too, that historically as interest rates have risen, real estate prices have dropped and vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in this area in the 90s.

Dad was a fed and mom stayed at home.

Dad made about 150k.

We had a 3200 SF house in fairfax woodson district.

2 cars paid cash and kids had college fully paid through masters.

Dad has pension and 401k and full health benefits till death.

So yes it sucks.

sorry, what fed was making $150k in the 90s? Most feds 20 years later aren't making anywhere near that much.

At any rate, assuming that amount of money is correct, 150k in 1995 dollars is worth $230k in today's dollars. That still buys a large home in the Woodson district of Fairfax, and if you are a fed, you are still earning a pension and 401k and getting full health benefits in retirement.

Today's federal retirement is much more 401k than outright pension, so that's one difference. The biggest difference though is that the cost of college has risen astronomically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

We have earned between 140 - 160 for the last 10 years on one income. We have 2 kids but no student loans. Both kids went to good preschools and do after school activities (education is a priority for us). We live in the DC area. We have bought a house at the peak with 25% down and sold it 8 years later for a minor profit. We have 450K cash equity in the market, and maxed out 401K. This is with no family help. Of course we are not crazy rich, but will retire and still be able to maintain our standard of living unless the market wipes us out (except it will wipe everyone else out concurrently). We travel abroad once every 2 years to see family, eat out and even have someone come in a couple of times a month to clean house. We average about 40-60K per year savings (excluding 401K).


It's doable.

Are you in your 30s? How have your housing costs been? I suspect you live someplace on edge of DC metro like Loudoun? And one of you works out there too. That is an enviable situation big you can get it bc you avoid the ridiculous cost of housing most of us pay to maintain shorter commutes. And I mean shorter not short.

We live in DTSS about 1.2 miles from the metro. House is small and not extravagant. We are fairly minimalistic (partly nature, partly circumstance). DH commute is 20mins to college park. If one is willing to forgo some bells and whistles it is doable.

I would guess your house was 300k or so? How do you feel about schools? That is a great commute even to downtown, but we aren't sure about school quality is dtss. But the area is rapidly changing and schools should improve. We are more risk adverse regarding schools so sadly small homes in our preferred close in school district start at 700k. I suspect that maybe part of the 450k you have saved up! What do you consider bells ad whistles? We have $30 internet, low end Hondas (1 car is nice but two kids & two working parents make that harder). No cable. We just got our first smartphone (only 1) and that was cheapest version.

Our expense are dominated by housing, daycare (equals the mortgage), and to a much lesser degree annual travel to far away family. What are we forgetting? This is an issue seen in another warren book, the 60% solution. Cutting out Starbucks won't fund college; you have to make changes to these big recurring expenses, and that can mean moving, finding different jobs, etc. whistles and bells prob weren't funding your awesome nest egg, right?

NP. To me, the problem is that you are trying to do too much at the same time. Look what you just wrote: you have the equivalent of another mortgage payment due to daycare costs. When those daycare costs go away, so do a lot of your money troubles. Why not look to shorter-term housing solutions? Buy the smaller home in the more "risky" school district until you are done with daycare. Your oldest kid goes to school there for a few years. Then when your youngest is ready to start school, you can afford to make the move to a better school district, if you still feel that is necessary, or if you want to a larger home in same district if by that time you have become comfortable in that district.

At a HHI of $200,000, you may be able to have much of what you want. Just not all at the same time. Like some PPs noted, my very middle class parents (that is, HHI much less than $200k) eventually ended up in the lovely home they had always wanted....once their kids were out of college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There have been multiple people in very different phases of life (50+, 30s, single moms, sahm, renters) who have lived very comfortable lives in the area on 200k and far less. There has been an excuse thrown out for each how those don't apply - you bought before the real estate boom, you had a big down payment, you have one high wage earner.

The simple fact is that it can be done and in a variety of ways. YOU might not be able to do it, but it is not because it is not possible, but because you make different choices or have expectations/entitlements that are out of line with your income.

The simple truth is that if you are broke at 200k you would probably be broke at 300 or 400k. 100/150/200 are plenty to live comfortably, raise children, live close in, and save for a great retirement. What do they have in common? Live below their means in some ways, save aggressively, prioritize their wants and needs, and realize how fortunate they are to make so much money.

There will always be excuses.

I think people who make statements like these have no idea or experience with starting a family in this area today. That would've been me saying the same thing before I had kids. Once kids came along, childcare is a second mortgage, diapers, wipes, etc. I haven't gotten a haircut in over a year, manicure over 4 years ago, new clothes bought 2 years ago because of my growing belly... 200k is a lot less after taxes etc. its enough to cover childcare, mortgage, food, utilities, insurances, etc but its far from luxurious living. We still need to budget carefully.

I am 50yo. It was like this for us, too. It is not "today." It is what it is like to start out, given childcare costs and everything else you cite. For our generation too.

I'm 30, with young kids, and I mostly agree with you. I think that some of the problem is that people my age are comparing their lives to the way that the 50 to 60 year olds with similar incomes live now. I can make this comparison directly. I grew up in this area, and my parents were a two-fed household, as my husband and I are now. My parents are still working but their kids have long since left the nest. They've paid off their mortgage, they're done paying for college, and their retirement accounts are in good shape. So now they're living it up, and good for them. They're remodeling their house, they go on nice vacations, they eat out when they want to.

But when I was a kid, we rarely ate out, and if we did it was somewhere where kids eat free. We never went on vacation anywhere we couldn't get to by car. We lived in a 1960s split level in a non-fancy suburb. They lived much like my husband and I live now.

I will say that one thing I think has changed is that it is much more difficult and expensive to live close to the city, because people value urban living and walkability much more than they used to. And living further out has gotten more difficult, because the traffic is so much worse than it was, say, 20 years ago. We live in a smaller place than my parents did, because I'm not willing to do that commute. But a generation ago it wasn't so bad.

People aren't saving gobs of money by eating out or not. Besides we are parents and who had time to eat out someplace expensive?

The real cost is housing. Period. And you 60s slit level was probably 20 yrs old when you lived in it. A 20 year old house close in is radically expensive, and so we settle for the worn out mid century housing and pay thru the nose for mortgage and maintenance.

From where I sit (in my 1400 square foot house close in with school-aged children), the real cost is daycare. Period. Once you are done paying for daycare, you have much more money for housing and many other things as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in this area in the 90s.

Dad was a fed and mom stayed at home.

Dad made about 150k.

We had a 3200 SF house in fairfax woodson district.

2 cars paid cash and kids had college fully paid through masters.

Dad has pension and 401k and full health benefits till death.

So yes it sucks.

let me correct that dad made 150K but often took TTDYs in hardship posts.

Sorry, what's a TTDY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

People aren't saving gobs of money by eating out or not. Besides we are parents and who had time to eat out someplace expensive?

The real cost is housing. Period. And you 60s slit level was probably 20 yrs old when you lived in it. A 20 year old house close in is radically expensive, and so we settle for the worn out mid century housing and pay thru the nose for mortgage and maintenance.

I think I agree with the spirit of your post, but its really not just housing. DC costs more across the board. Groceries, utilities, transportation, health care, insurance, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

We have earned between 140 - 160 for the last 10 years on one income. We have 2 kids but no student loans. Both kids went to good preschools and do after school activities (education is a priority for us). We live in the DC area. We have bought a house at the peak with 25% down and sold it 8 years later for a minor profit. We have 450K cash equity in the market, and maxed out 401K. This is with no family help. Of course we are not crazy rich, but will retire and still be able to maintain our standard of living unless the market wipes us out (except it will wipe everyone else out concurrently). We travel abroad once every 2 years to see family, eat out and even have someone come in a couple of times a month to clean house. We average about 40-60K per year savings (excluding 401K).


It's doable.

Are you in your 30s? How have your housing costs been? I suspect you live someplace on edge of DC metro like Loudoun? And one of you works out there too. That is an enviable situation big you can get it bc you avoid the ridiculous cost of housing most of us pay to maintain shorter commutes. And I mean shorter not short.

We live in DTSS about 1.2 miles from the metro. House is small and not extravagant. We are fairly minimalistic (partly nature, partly circumstance). DH commute is 20mins to college park. If one is willing to forgo some bells and whistles it is doable.

I would guess your house was 300k or so? How do you feel about schools? That is a great commute even to downtown, but we aren't sure about school quality is dtss. But the area is rapidly changing and schools should improve. We are more risk adverse regarding schools so sadly small homes in our preferred close in school district start at 700k. I suspect that maybe part of the 450k you have saved up! What do you consider bells ad whistles? We have $30 internet, low end Hondas (1 car is nice but two kids & two working parents make that harder). No cable. We just got our first smartphone (only 1) and that was cheapest version.

Our expense are dominated by housing, daycare (equals the mortgage), and to a much lesser degree annual travel to far away family. What are we forgetting? This is an issue seen in another warren book, the 60% solution. Cutting out Starbucks won't fund college; you have to make changes to these big recurring expenses, and that can mean moving, finding different jobs, etc. whistles and bells prob weren't funding your awesome nest egg, right?

Our 1940's house is 625K. Our school is 8 on great schools (if that means anything - we like it FWIW). Our kitchen which churns out 18 meals a week is functional but not fancy, our baths drain our toilet flushes but our tile is older. We have new HVAC and insulation but unattractive landscaping. These are the bells and whistles we do without. We buy homes with good bones not pretty dresses. That can make a difference in how much house you can afford and how much you save by not having to do too much maintenance - which can also make owning prohibitive. Also on one income we saved daycare cost which as some have said is like a second mortgage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband makes $160k and I stay at home with two small kids. These threads always surprise me because at $160k we do pretty darn good! Rent a townhouse for $2300/month, aggressively paying off both cars so we spend $1000/month on that, $131/month insurance for both cars. $280/month for preschool, around $200/month for power and gas, $400 for cable/internet/cell phones. We have a house in another state but the mortgage is covered by a renter so we don't make money on that but we aren't in the red either (this year at least). In a normal 2 paycheck month we net around $8500 and very very rarely do we feel pinched unless a few major expenses come up at once (property taxes, new tires for cars, medical bills, things like that). I mean we aren't wealthy by any means but I feel we do much better than "survive."

You don't own, you don't save for college for the kids, and what are you doing for yourself as a SAHM for retirement? Households with income totalling less than $200K, with kids, are almost always way short on house equity, retirement and college savings.

We have earned between 140 - 160 for the last 10 years on one income. We have 2 kids but no student loans. Both kids went to good preschools and do after school activities (education is a priority for us). We live in the DC area. We have bought a house at the peak with 25% down and sold it 8 years later for a minor profit. We have 450K cash equity in the market, and maxed out 401K. This is with no family help. Of course we are not crazy rich, but will retire and still be able to maintain our standard of living unless the market wipes us out (except it will wipe everyone else out concurrently). We travel abroad once every 2 years to see family, eat out and even have someone come in a couple of times a month to clean house. We average about 40-60K per year savings (excluding 401K).


It's doable.

Are you in your 30s? How have your housing costs been? I suspect you live someplace on edge of DC metro like Loudoun? And one of you works out there too. That is an enviable situation big you can get it bc you avoid the ridiculous cost of housing most of us pay to maintain shorter commutes. And I mean shorter not short.

We live in DTSS about 1.2 miles from the metro. House is small and not extravagant. We are fairly minimalistic (partly nature, partly circumstance). DH commute is 20mins to college park. If one is willing to forgo some bells and whistles it is doable.

I would guess your house was 300k or so? How do you feel about schools? That is a great commute even to downtown, but we aren't sure about school quality is dtss. But the area is rapidly changing and schools should improve. We are more risk adverse regarding schools so sadly small homes in our preferred close in school district start at 700k. I suspect that maybe part of the 450k you have saved up! What do you consider bells ad whistles? We have $30 internet, low end Hondas (1 car is nice but two kids & two working parents make that harder). No cable. We just got our first smartphone (only 1) and that was cheapest version.

Our expense are dominated by housing, daycare (equals the mortgage), and to a much lesser degree annual travel to far away family. What are we forgetting? This is an issue seen in another warren book, the 60% solution. Cutting out Starbucks won't fund college; you have to make changes to these big recurring expenses, and that can mean moving, finding different jobs, etc. whistles and bells prob weren't funding your awesome nest egg, right?

NP. To me, the problem is that you are trying to do too much at the same time. Look what you just wrote: you have the equivalent of another mortgage payment due to daycare costs. When those daycare costs go away, so do a lot of your money troubles. Why not look to shorter-term housing solutions? Buy the smaller home in the more "risky" school district until you are done with daycare. Your oldest kid goes to school there for a few years. Then when your youngest is ready to start school, you can afford to make the move to a better school district, if you still feel that is necessary, or if you want to a larger home in same district if by that time you have become comfortable in that district.

At a HHI of $200,000, you may be able to have much of what you want. Just not all at the same time. Like some PPs noted, my very middle class parents (that is, HHI much less than $200k) eventually ended up in the lovely home they had always wanted....once their kids were out of college.

Daycare costs don't go away. Between extended day and summer care, my monthly nut is about 10% less. Maybe by the time they are 12 they can think about being independent , but college costs loom then.

As for houses, the only thing we care about is good schools and commute. We have no interest in a dream house and will probably move into tiny condo once kids graduate.

200k is manageable if you compromise on school quality, commute, or have a single earner which eliminates daycare costs. Additionally, if you have someone home, longer commutes are less of an issue (long commute means you never see your kids). And you can take a chance on riskier schools b/c you have a parent on the ground who can manage tutoring and homework help much more easily.

So if the 200k is single earner, much easier and I think that's why some people scoff at surviving. But if two incomes, the costs in money and time push you to the brink.