Study shows that 350k/year is barely scrapping by as middle class

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree atrongly with the above. The median HHi in the US is $65K and the median retirement balance is disgustingly low (like less than $200K for people in their 60s)

The difference between relatively wealthy DCUM’ers (myself included) who make great money but don’t live a “rich person” type of lifestyle is that for the most part those who don’t feel rich are saving much more than the rest of America which is just plain poor and undrrsaved for retirement. DCUMers are saving for their kids college. Many Americans buy a degree of little real value and it sends them into lots of debt.

Fully funding college and retirement feel like “necessities” but are actually luxuries that few people do. The value of making $300K isn’t to drive a new Benz, it’s the fact that with 401k, match, and mortgage amortization most are saving more in a year than the masses save in a decade. You don’t really feel the benefit of that now (other than the joy of watching the balances go higher).

Avoidance of disaster and decrepitude is rich in a US and global context, both today and historically. If you’re throwing $38K in the 401k getting $20K of match, servicing an $800K low interest mortgage, and have dough left over to save beyond that l, you’re going to be better off than almost everyone in the world and the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/amp/retirement/average-retirement-savings-14881067

This points to one of the key issues, people feel like only maxing out 401k and setting aside money for kids college while also paying the mortgage puts them in the middle class range. Doing all of those things adds up significantly over time and will leave you well off in retirement.

Setting aside 38k in retirement savings and 12k 529 savings is simply not attainable at the average middle class income of 75k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another thing is that while social security is very progressive, high earners, will (for now at least) get much more in social security than their low earning counterparts. I think my parents are about to get something like $3k/month each after long good careers. My single mother in law is set to get $1000 o something after a bit so long or good career. This is another element of “you don’t feel rich now, but you are way better off than most”. That might change with cuts and or increased progressivism

I'm (literally) not counting on that Social Security check. If I get half of what my annual statement says I will, I'll be surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree atrongly with the above. The median HHi in the US is $65K and the median retirement balance is disgustingly low (like less than $200K for people in their 60s)

The difference between relatively wealthy DCUM’ers (myself included) who make great money but don’t live a “rich person” type of lifestyle is that for the most part those who don’t feel rich are saving much more than the rest of America which is just plain poor and undrrsaved for retirement. DCUMers are saving for their kids college. Many Americans buy a degree of little real value and it sends them into lots of debt.

Fully funding college and retirement feel like “necessities” but are actually luxuries that few people do. The value of making $300K isn’t to drive a new Benz, it’s the fact that with 401k, match, and mortgage amortization most are saving more in a year than the masses save in a decade. You don’t really feel the benefit of that now (other than the joy of watching the balances go higher).

Avoidance of disaster and decrepitude is rich in a US and global context, both today and historically. If you’re throwing $38K in the 401k getting $20K of match, servicing an $800K low interest mortgage, and have dough left over to save beyond that l, you’re going to be better off than almost everyone in the world and the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/amp/retirement/average-retirement-savings-14881067

This points to one of the key issues, people feel like only maxing out 401k and setting aside money for kids college while also paying the mortgage puts them in the middle class range. Doing all of those things adds up significantly over time and will leave you well off in retirement.

Setting aside 38k in retirement savings and 12k 529 savings is simply not attainable at the average middle class income of 75k.

310K PP here. This helps put it in perspective. I'm not living the rich person lifestyle now, but I am setting myself up to not have to worry about anything at 60.

[Anonymous]

yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

[Anonymous]

meant to say $20K match

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

Frank Flyover has had the same quality of life as the $350k earner for the BULK of his life, and will likely continue a similar lifestyle into retirement. He will not need to uproot himself at 66 to a different locale, away from family and friends, to afford to retire comfortably. His children will be eligible for merit aid in college. He himself will be eligible for subsidies, starting with healthcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

Frank Flyover has had the same quality of life as the $350k earner for the BULK of his life, and will likely continue a similar lifestyle into retirement. He will not need to uproot himself at 66 to a different locale, away from family and friends, to afford to retire comfortably. His children will be eligible for merit aid in college. He himself will be eligible for subsidies, starting with healthcare.

Nope. Frank flyover will have a smaller retirement portfolio and less money considering that many expenses in retirement (food, healthcare, travel) are the same regardless of where you live.

Also no one should count on merit aid!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

Frank Flyover has had the same quality of life as the $350k earner for the BULK of his life, and will likely continue a similar lifestyle into retirement. He will not need to uproot himself at 66 to a different locale, away from family and friends, to afford to retire comfortably. His children will be eligible for merit aid in college. He himself will be eligible for subsidies, starting with healthcare.

Nope. Frank flyover will have a smaller retirement portfolio and less money considering that many expenses in retirement (food, healthcare, travel) are the same regardless of where you live.

Also no one should count on merit aid!

He will have enough to continue the same lifestyle and as I said likely be eligible for a subsidy on one of the highest expenses, healthcare. Frank Flyover can also be “rich” in retirement if he moves to a low cost country.

And I misspoke when I said merit aid, meant to say need based aid.

[Anonymous]

In high price Urban areas folks often get married later in life. I got married at 35 to a 33 year. We had three kids.

When kids were little my father was already dead and mother in poor health, my father in law was in poor health. My mother in law to this day is healthy. But my father in law did not finally did till after the kids were already outside pre-school age.

My youngest who is 12 I had at 45. If she has first kid at 32 I will be 77.


Now my wifes sister got married at 19. Guess what she got no help either as having the kids young her parents and inlaws still worked full time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In high price Urban areas folks often get married later in life. I got married at 35 to a 33 year. We had three kids.

When kids were little my father was already dead and mother in poor health, my father in law was in poor health. My mother in law to this day is healthy. But my father in law did not finally did till after the kids were already outside pre-school age.

My youngest who is 12 I had at 45. If she has first kid at 32 I will be 77.


Now my wifes sister got married at 19. Guess what she got no help either as having the kids young her parents and inlaws still worked full time.

This is true that people in urban areas tend to wait longer to get married. I’m not sure of your point though, marry early or marry late and the grandparents are either still working or too old and frail to help with childcare?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree atrongly with the above. The median HHi in the US is $65K and the median retirement balance is disgustingly low (like less than $200K for people in their 60s)

The difference between relatively wealthy DCUM’ers (myself included) who make great money but don’t live a “rich person” type of lifestyle is that for the most part those who don’t feel rich are saving much more than the rest of America which is just plain poor and undrrsaved for retirement. DCUMers are saving for their kids college. Many Americans buy a degree of little real value and it sends them into lots of debt.

Fully funding college and retirement feel like “necessities” but are actually luxuries that few people do. The value of making $300K isn’t to drive a new Benz, it’s the fact that with 401k, match, and mortgage amortization most are saving more in a year than the masses save in a decade. You don’t really feel the benefit of that now (other than the joy of watching the balances go higher).

Avoidance of disaster and decrepitude is rich in a US and global context, both today and historically. If you’re throwing $38K in the 401k getting $20K of match, servicing an $800K low interest mortgage, and have dough left over to save beyond that l, you’re going to be better off than almost everyone in the world and the US.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thestreet.com/amp/retirement/average-retirement-savings-14881067

This points to one of the key issues, people feel like only maxing out 401k and setting aside money for kids college while also paying the mortgage puts them in the middle class range. Doing all of those things adds up significantly over time and will leave you well off in retirement.

Setting aside 38k in retirement savings and 12k 529 savings is simply not attainable at the average middle class income of 75k.

So true. Around here, it seems like a 300k-350k HHI is about where people (without significant family money) have the ability to start maxing out 401ks and saving aggressively for college. It certainly doesn't feel like lavish living, but a secure retirement and a debt-free education is pretty luxurious these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

Frank Flyover has had the same quality of life as the $350k earner for the BULK of his life, and will likely continue a similar lifestyle into retirement. He will not need to uproot himself at 66 to a different locale, away from family and friends, to afford to retire comfortably. His children will be eligible for merit aid in college. He himself will be eligible for subsidies, starting with healthcare.

Nope. Frank flyover will have a smaller retirement portfolio and less money considering that many expenses in retirement (food, healthcare, travel) are the same regardless of where you live.

Also no one should count on merit aid!

He will have enough to continue the same lifestyle and as I said likely be eligible for a subsidy on one of the highest expenses, healthcare. Frank Flyover can also be “rich” in retirement if he moves to a low cost country.

And I misspoke when I said merit aid, meant to say need based aid.

I'm confused. Why would a retiree need subsidies for healthcare? Most just keep working until 65 at least when they are then eligible for Medicare.

You know what a lot of "need based aid" is? LOANS. And when it doesn't cover everything, some parents take on these things called "Parent Plus Loans." Bad idea. But many do it.

If you think earning the national median income (~$60k) in flyover country is so cushy, go ahead and give it a whirl and report back to us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, let's say it takes you to age 30 to get to $0 net worth (loans education etc) and then 35 to be both maxing out and getting a $20K bonus, and you work 30 years. At 3% real (lower than historical stock market return), you'll accumulate $2.7 million of retirement account. Let's say you buy and maintain a $1mm house at 40 and pay that off over 20 years; it makes a 0% real return.

Guess what? that'll put you in the top 5% of households by wealth in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. https://dqydj.com/retiree-net-worth-retiree-wealth-america/

the 95th percentile has $3.5 million at 65+

You can then move to a nice fully paid for place in a less expensive locale for like $400K, and then have a $3.3 million nut off which you take $130K of incom supplemented by your $40-$70K of social security income, maybe some pension. You won't be a burden to your children for long term care, maybe even pay for your grandchildren's private school/college, give a lot to charity, travel the world a bit, whatever.

The struggle to get there may be harder than Frank Flyover, who may have the same house and car, but the end result is likely to be significantly better. And the advantage over frank flyover and your offspring's advantage over his offspring's will compound over time.

This this this this this.

Frank Flyover has had the same quality of life as the $350k earner for the BULK of his life, and will likely continue a similar lifestyle into retirement. He will not need to uproot himself at 66 to a different locale, away from family and friends, to afford to retire comfortably. His children will be eligible for merit aid in college. He himself will be eligible for subsidies, starting with healthcare.

Nope. Frank flyover will have a smaller retirement portfolio and less money considering that many expenses in retirement (food, healthcare, travel) are the same regardless of where you live.

Also no one should count on merit aid!

He will have enough to continue the same lifestyle and as I said likely be eligible for a subsidy on one of the highest expenses, healthcare. Frank Flyover can also be “rich” in retirement if he moves to a low cost country.

And I misspoke when I said merit aid, meant to say need based aid.

I'm confused. Why would a retiree need subsidies for healthcare? Most just keep working until 65 at least when they are then eligible for Medicare.

You know what a lot of "need based aid" is? LOANS. And when it doesn't cover everything, some parents take on these things called "Parent Plus Loans." Bad idea. But many do it.

If you think earning the national median income (~$60k) in flyover country is so cushy, go ahead and give it a whirl and report back to us.

Plenty people are forced to retire before being Medicare eligible.

Re LOANS, students with average academics take out loans to go to private colleges that they can't afford. Most State Universities would offer same students grant and need based scholarship packages. In some states like NY, state schools are basically free for anyone with HHI under $150K.

I have a sibling in flyover. He has a really cushy lifestyle, because as an MD he has the coastal salary without the expenses. But many of his friends and neighbors make $120-$180 and they have a) short commutes b) newer spacious houses c) inexpensive childcare and d) cheaper services costs from lawncare to activities for their kids. I observed that their lifestyles were better than of those making $300K here.

[Anonymous]

Almost all of you are still missing the fact that 95% of the country doesn’t have the luxury of maxing out their 401k, saving for kids’ college, living in one of the most desirable cities to live in, paying for premium childcare and/or private schools for DCs, and on top of that still being able to afford relatively new cars and vacations. (Because today those ARE major luxuries) in no country except maybe Luxembourg is your HHI “middle-class”.

But go ahead and keep keep whining about how you’re middle-class on a 300k HHI, then when you’re surprised when people keep getting elected who want to “drain the swamp” that you live in/off of. or one the other end of the spectrum someone who wants to tax the poo-poo out of you; come back and read about how you think you’re the same as people in fly-over country who are making the ACTUAL median wage.