Why are DCUM salaries so much higher than in "real life"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok this is just bullshit. Plenty of financial advisors recommend the 30 over the 15. paying 0.5-1% more to retain financial flexibility (even if you could pay) seems like a fair tradeoff. Plus if you believe in any decent expected returns, you want to minimize home payments. We take our savings from our 2.5% 30-year re-fi and buy I-bonds and equities. We could've done a 15 year at 2%, but that would have be a silly move.

No doubt it would have been a silly move. You would have been struggling every month to make ends meet with a 15 year mortgage.

Your argument is just the proving that 15 year mortgages are the way to go for the financially responsible. The only financial advisors that recommend 30 over 15 are dealing with exceptionally immature and greedy customers that insist on buying a home outside their price range with a 15. The financial flexibility you reference is just as possible with a 15 year mortgage, no? With a 15 year I can easily make extra principal payments whenever I choose. Moreover, if you find it necessary to stretch to a 30 year so you can afford to invest more into the stock market, then you can’t possibly be appropriately diversified.

I have a 15 year mortgage and it constitutes 20% of my take home pay. This leaves 80% for all other expenses, with tons of financial flexibility. And, considering that I’m already putting 20% of my gross pay into the stock market, I can easily throw another 20% into 529 and taxable brokerage accounts to bring it up significantly more. For every dollar I invest in my home, I am still investing almost 5 in the stock market. Why would I feel it necessary to push even more into stocks?

Clearly, the only way you can afford to invest in stocks is by leveraging your so-called financial flexibility from a 30 year mortgage. Pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dh earns $2m+. We live in an affluent area and country club members. I’m pretty sure most/all families we know have a HHI of 400k+.

Two feds are probably the lowest earners we know and even they will have a HHI of $200k.

Because the people who provide services don’t count, right? Like the people who work at your club?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh earns $2m+. We live in an affluent area and country club members. I’m pretty sure most/all families we know have a HHI of 400k+.

Two feds are probably the lowest earners we know and even they will have a HHI of $200k.

Because the people who provide services don’t count, right? Like the people who work at your club?

Seriously. You don't "know them" because they'e not even human in your mind. You are truly disgusting. And you're not even making the money in your family.

[Anonymous]

Because apparently in “real” life the people you are around and associate with are not high earners. Everyone seems to live in their own bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This area just has a lot of rich people. I just attended my sister's wedding where the best man was the son of a billionaire.

Everyone we know is in tech sales, defense contracting, real estate, business owners, or law. Everyone makes 300k+ starting early thirties.

An yes the people contributing the most to society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh earns $2m+. We live in an affluent area and country club members. I’m pretty sure most/all families we know have a HHI of 400k+.

Two feds are probably the lowest earners we know and even they will have a HHI of $200k.

Because the people who provide services don’t count, right? Like the people who work at your club?

Seriously. You don't "know them" because they'e not even human in your mind. You are truly disgusting. And you're not even making the money in your family.

This is just like when a relative sneered two years ago that everyone should have been ordering groceries and UberEats so we could "nip this thing in the bud" but people were selfishly buying groceries and takeout in person for a "change of scenery". What about the humans DELIVERING the food? He said "there's only a few of them."

[Anonymous]

I don’t care that people make boatloads of money. The jarring thing about DCUM is the cluelessness about the HHI of most families. They take for granted that no everyone can afford certain things. It’s not even contempt for middle class and the poor. It’s like anyone below a certain income is invisible.

[Anonymous]

This is the only place I can talk about our net worth and HHI. I don't lie, there is no reason. My husband makes 650kish and I make 60kish. Out net worth is 3.5million. We live in a modest house, but so send our kids to private school. I feel
Like our life is actually pretty normal amongst high educated urban professionals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe a little 3, but mostly 1 and 2.

Most families I know with two working parents make at least $400k. Plus there are TONS of lawyers. Some entrepreneurs and executives.

Are you kidding?
Most families I know with two working parents have one who is part time or in a lower paying field. Most aren’t making 400k! Wow!

Guess we know different families.

We aren't lawyers so we feel poor at <$1M HHI.

Oh STFU Jen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dh earns $2m+. We live in an affluent area and country club members. I’m pretty sure most/all families we know have a HHI of 400k+.

Two feds are probably the lowest earners we know and even they will have a HHI of $200k.

Because the people who provide services don’t count, right? Like the people who work at your club?

+1. New low for this forum which is saying something

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the only place I can talk about our net worth and HHI. I don't lie, there is no reason. My husband makes 650kish and I make 60kish. Out net worth is 3.5million. We live in a modest house, but so send our kids to private school. I feel
Like our life is actually pretty normal amongst high educated urban professionals.

There are plenty of highly educated professionals who will never, ever make that kind of money.

[Anonymous]

I don’t lie on DCUM. There’s no point. I also have no idea what my friends and neighbors make. I think I have a general idea of what my colleagues make but I could be wrong. I’ll never know though because we don’t discuss it at work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok this is just bullshit. Plenty of financial advisors recommend the 30 over the 15. paying 0.5-1% more to retain financial flexibility (even if you could pay) seems like a fair tradeoff. Plus if you believe in any decent expected returns, you want to minimize home payments. We take our savings from our 2.5% 30-year re-fi and buy I-bonds and equities. We could've done a 15 year at 2%, but that would have be a silly move.

No doubt it would have been a silly move. You would have been struggling every month to make ends meet with a 15 year mortgage.

Your argument is just the proving that 15 year mortgages are the way to go for the financially responsible. The only financial advisors that recommend 30 over 15 are dealing with exceptionally immature and greedy customers that insist on buying a home outside their price range with a 15. The financial flexibility you reference is just as possible with a 15 year mortgage, no? With a 15 year I can easily make extra principal payments whenever I choose. Moreover, if you find it necessary to stretch to a 30 year so you can afford to invest more into the stock market, then you can’t possibly be appropriately diversified.

I have a 15 year mortgage and it constitutes 20% of my take home pay. This leaves 80% for all other expenses, with tons of financial flexibility. And, considering that I’m already putting 20% of my gross pay into the stock market, I can easily throw another 20% into 529 and taxable brokerage accounts to bring it up significantly more. For every dollar I invest in my home, I am still investing almost 5 in the stock market. Why would I feel it necessary to push even more into stocks?

Clearly, the only way you can afford to invest in stocks is by leveraging your so-called financial flexibility from a 30 year mortgage. Pathetic.

Yeah but you live in a shithole to afford those mortgage payments on a 15yr don’t you? You think your plan is so great but 20-30 years later, you and the people who got a nicer house with a 30 yr mortgage are going to have the house paid off and around the same net worth. And they would have lived much better than you, so no need to be smug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the only place I can talk about our net worth and HHI. I don't lie, there is no reason. My husband makes 650kish and I make 60kish. Out net worth is 3.5million. We live in a modest house, but so send our kids to private school. I feel
Like our life is actually pretty normal amongst high educated urban professionals.

There are plenty of highly educated professionals who will never, ever make that kind of money.

..and there are plenty of them who do. You are gatekeeping my participation in an anonymous forum because I'm in the minority?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok this is just bullshit. Plenty of financial advisors recommend the 30 over the 15. paying 0.5-1% more to retain financial flexibility (even if you could pay) seems like a fair tradeoff. Plus if you believe in any decent expected returns, you want to minimize home payments. We take our savings from our 2.5% 30-year re-fi and buy I-bonds and equities. We could've done a 15 year at 2%, but that would have be a silly move.

No doubt it would have been a silly move. You would have been struggling every month to make ends meet with a 15 year mortgage.

Your argument is just the proving that 15 year mortgages are the way to go for the financially responsible. The only financial advisors that recommend 30 over 15 are dealing with exceptionally immature and greedy customers that insist on buying a home outside their price range with a 15. The financial flexibility you reference is just as possible with a 15 year mortgage, no? With a 15 year I can easily make extra principal payments whenever I choose. Moreover, if you find it necessary to stretch to a 30 year so you can afford to invest more into the stock market, then you can’t possibly be appropriately diversified.

I have a 15 year mortgage and it constitutes 20% of my take home pay. This leaves 80% for all other expenses, with tons of financial flexibility. And, considering that I’m already putting 20% of my gross pay into the stock market, I can easily throw another 20% into 529 and taxable brokerage accounts to bring it up significantly more. For every dollar I invest in my home, I am still investing almost 5 in the stock market. Why would I feel it necessary to push even more into stocks?

Clearly, the only way you can afford to invest in stocks is by leveraging your so-called financial flexibility from a 30 year mortgage. Pathetic.

Yeah but you live in a shithole to afford those mortgage payments on a 15yr don’t you? You think your plan is so great but 20-30 years later, you and the people who got a nicer house with a 30 yr mortgage are going to have the house paid off and around the same net worth. And they would have lived much better than you, so no need to be smug.

There is some truth to this, I suppose. Because we went with a 15 year mortgage, we could only afford a $7.6M home in Wesley Heights. As you point out, we could have gotten more if we went with a 30 year. Not too many $12M+ properties were available, though. Instead, we’re building equity on our dump of a home and only have $25M invested in the stock market. Wonder what we’re missing out on?