I Live Comfortably on Less than $70K After-Tax in DC Area
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Honestly there have been threads where people have put down those making 100k (single people).... But no its not hard to live on that amount -- because I have as well. |
Anonymous
Because you and people like you refuse to believe that it's hard to raise kids in this area on $300k (two government lawyer salaries) or less. Kids - as in two or more - are HUGELY expensive. And the COL in this area is expensive if you want to be in a good school district or do private school. |
Anonymous
Agree. There was a thread where people were telling an older single woman that she was a loser because she earned only $100,000. Called her a failure and even said she almost qualified for welfare. |
Anonymous
I'm not the poster you're responding to, but I definitely disagree that it's "hard to raise kids in this area on $300k." We only have 1 kid (I recognize that you said multiple), but we also "only" make $275k gross, and we're beyond comfortable living in NWDC. We'll add a second kid soon, and we may have to cut our annual savings down from $73k, but we'll still have more than enough money. Here's our spending from last year: - Taxes: $65k (includes federal, DC, and FICA) - House: $40k (includes PITI plus HOA plus utilities) - Daycare: $22k - Student loans + kid's 529: $16k - Restaurants: $11k - Travel: $9k - Groceries: $8k - Insurance + Medical: $8k - Clothing: $6k - Cable and Cell phones: $5k - Discretionary/uncategorized/entertainment: $12k - Savings: $73k (includes 401k, IRA, brokerage, etc.) As I mentioned on another thread, this isn't to brag but rather aims to give a reality check to people who say $300k is "middle class" in NW DC. It isn't. It's extremely comfortable and privileged. |
Anonymous
Yep I refuse to believe it. Because we do it on much less. Its all about choices. |
Anonymous
I don't think that's a majority DCUM position. |
Anonymous
I agree. And if it were true, there'd be no problem citing multiple positions and posts with links that state such. I haven't seen it. I think that the OP started by saying that it's easy to live on $70k, and then when people said "That's because you're single!" OP backed into the position that DCUM paints people who make $100k as poor and are barely getting by when that's not exactly the case. |
Anonymous
Just a couple posts above you is someone making the claim that "it's hard to raise kids in this area on $300k (two government lawyer salaries) or less." I think there's another thread on the front page that makes a similar claim -- that $300k HHI is not a lot in this area. I think we're kidding ourselves if we pretend that there isn't a very vocal and active contingent of DCUM believes that $100k is poor. (I have no way of knowing whether these posters are a majority of DCUM, but they are active and visible.) |
Anonymous
I agree with you. |
Anonymous
Yes, exactly. You can't on one hand say that $100,000 for a single is lots of money, and then on the other hand say that it's hard to get by on $300,000 once you add a couple of kids into the picture. There's a big disconnect going on here. If $100k is good money for a single (I believe it is), then $300k is good money for a family. It doesn't take an extra $130,000 (after-tax additional income between $100k and $300k) to raise a family. That's more than $10,000 ADDITIONAL PER MONTH! |
Anonymous
Did you read that thread? She was slammed, it was an all in pile on. Involving multiple people. She was pretty much told she was a loser for not earning more than $100k. The view that $100k or less is "poor" is very common on DCUM. |
Anonymous
Nope. No idea what thread that is. |
Anonymous
It's hard to save as much as you need to if you have kids who you want to send to private college some day. To send my three children to a school that costs 70k right now (as our alma mater does), we have to save $45k a year. Just for college. Then you have retirement to worry about, which is supposed to be your #1 priority. Then your mortgage so they can go to a good school so they can get into that college your saving a small fortune for. If they're little, don't forget that your looking at several thousand dollars a month for daycare. Maybe you have student loans of your own that you're still paying back. Then when your kids are older, you have to pay for wrap around care at school and their activities which very often are not cheap. If you work, you need to pay someone to drive them to said activities. Of course people are going to come in and say "activities are not necessary." Well I disagree. I think it's important for kids to be engaged in their community and to have hobbies outside of school that they care about. Plus, they *are* necessary to get into those colleges you're saving a small fortune for. What's the point of saving that much money if they're not even going to have a shot at getting in? So you do have to play the game and jump through those hoops. It adds up and doesn't leave a lot left over for the nice things that rich people are supposed to have (nice cars, luxurious vacations, country club memberships, etc.). |
Anonymous
|
^ also as a family of five, it costs about 10k every time we fly on vacation somewhere.
It was our choice to have three kids. But the point is, every extra child is very expensive and detracts a LOT from your bottom line. People are crazy if they think a single person's lifestyle and spending looks anything like a person who has two or more kids. |
Anonymous
so true. |