Middles Class: $381K is the NEW $100k, Six Figures is no longer Suceessful based on analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

as I said, everything is bigger in TX

I think you are the same poster who tried to argue this in the WaPo article post. You're just wrong. You are basing your assumptions on markets where land is cheap and these gigantor homes you think are the norm are being built. But the reality is that the average new home size in the country is in the 2400 range - NOT 3500. I can track down the same article again that I posted in the previous post - those numbers were quite recent and have not changed.

[Anonymous]

its sad that the middle class in our area has to live in smaller homes than the upper middle class in most of America.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

THANK YOU to people who actually base arguments on real numbers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:its sad that the middle class in our area has to live in smaller homes than the upper middle class in most of America.

I think you said this backwards...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

THANK YOU to people who actually base arguments on real numbers

whatever makes you feel better about buying tiny cracker box homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

THANK YOU to people who actually base arguments on real numbers

whatever makes you feel better about buying tiny cracker box homes

as long as you're fine knowing that you are the poster child for conspicuous consumption...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

aspiring to mediocre?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

maybe in 3rd world asia

It's big. The average new single family home is about 2500 sf.

3500 square feet is in the 80th percentile for new single family homes in the US (but, hey, aren't DCUMers in the 80th percentile of everything?)

http://www.census.gov/construction/chars/completed.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

aspiring to mediocre?

No, actually, I live in a 1200 sqft home with a basement. So far from it ! But you know what? I have a heck of a time keeping up with the housework in our 'cozy' place. Can't imagine anything bigger!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And since when is 3500 normal sized? That's pretty damned big.

Not for the rest of the country

Only if the 'rest of the country' = Texas.

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

aspiring to mediocre?

No, actually, I live in a 1200 sqft home with a basement. So far from it ! But you know what? I have a heck of a time keeping up with the housework in our 'cozy' place. Can't imagine anything bigger!

+1

Less is more.

[Anonymous]

Median income in DC as of 3/2012 -

In Loudoun County, median income is the highest at about $120,000 a year -- an 8 percent increase from four years ago. The District also increased 8 percent to $61,000.
Demographers tell The Examiner that the increases can be attributed to a growing population of young professionals.

Prince William County also saw a big jump, while Montgomery and Fairfax counties, along with Alexandria, saw big drops in household income.

Experts attribute the declines to growth in lower-paying service jobs.

http://www.wtop.com/41/2881173/Loudoun-County-DC-see-jump-in-median-income

[Anonymous]

The people in the rest of the country are also much fatter than the yummy mummies of upper NW DC. I'm sure that the person who weighs twice as much as I do would feel more cramped in my house than I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

To add, the national average home sq ft in 2010 was 2,200.

http://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sftotalmedavgsqft.pdf

THANK YOU to people who actually base arguments on real numbers

whatever makes you feel better about buying tiny cracker box homes

To dispell this poster's notion that 2200 sf is a cracker jack house, let me tell you what my 4 BR/2.5 BA home with that square footage has:

4 good sized bedrooms (our master suite has a king sized bed with plenty of floor space to spare, a walk in closet and a good sized master bath)
2 living areas (good-sized living room and den)
a formal dining room
an open kitchen with a breakfast room to the side
a 2 car garage and a quarter-acre of land

Our previous home was about 1000 square feet - THAT was pretty small, but also big enough for a couple bedrooms, 2 living areas and 2 bathrooms. We were able to live there comfortably for almost a decade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As most of us suspect, middle class / rich threshold is much higher now a days, $380K nationally and $427k to $617K in the DC area

This is the reason why people in our area feel like they are barely scraping buy on $200k-$300k a year. To feel comfortable and upper middle class you would need to make about $350k-$500K in the DC area.

Some key findings from the articles:
[b]Nationally, the top 1 percent of all households had annual incomes of $387,000 or more in 2010.]/b]
The District’s threshold for a 1 percenter — $617,000
Maryland had the fifth-highest threshold, almost $477,000
Virginia’s was eighth highest, at more than $427,000.

Think Six Figures Makes You Successful? Not Anymore
http://www.cnbc.com/id/47980347

What it takes to be a 1 percenter in the Washington area
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/what-it-takes-to-be-a-1-percenter-in-the-washington-area/2012/02/01/gIQA571JiQ_story.html

It's pretty sad that someone with your level of reading comprehension qualifies as upper middle class or rich.

The MIDDLE class is the 25th to 75th percentile, e.g. the middle 50% of the economic scale. Roughly 25th-40th percentile is lower middle class. Roughly 40th-60th percentile is middle class and roughly 60th-75th percentile is upper middle class. Your are talking about the 99th percentile. So, what does the annual incomes of the 99th percentile have to do with the middle class?!?

If instead of some random media article with no statistics, no numbers and no facts, you resort to looking at say, census data (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/11000.html), you will see that it says that median income for all households is $58,526 in the District of Columbia and $51,914 nationwide. That is the 50th percentile. And if you calculate per capita (that means dividing by the number of people in the household), the median income per capita in DC is $42,078 and nationwide is $27,334. So in DC, average household size is 1.4 people and nationwide the average household size is 1.9.

Maryland state median income (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/24000.html) is $70,647 with average household size 2.02 and Virginia state median income is $61,406 with an average household size of 1.9 persons.

Those are the 50th percentile mark. So, while DC is high, it is not as relatively high as Maryland or Virginia. What is deceptive is that you probably do have more 1% in DC, but you also have more below the poverty level which is why the median value is lower than Maryland or Virginia.

However, it still means that middle class is somewhere in the $40-90K range for the DMV region.

Those who feel they are "barely scraping by" on $200-300K in this area have their heads in the clouds. Middle class is not a perception, but an economic state. Yes, middle class can afford more in areas around the country outside of the major metropolitan areas, but that doesn't mean that when you can't afford what middle class allows in other regions that you are middle class. It means you live in an exceptionally high COL region and that you need more to make ends meet. Sad the people that don't understand this.

[Anonymous]

If you make 40k you qualify for wic