Washingtonians say $3 million = "wealthy", $720K = comfortable"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is why heartland America is so enraged with DC. A lot of these people are on the government payroll, if not directly then as "contractors."

No, it's not the money. It's the "everything in the rest of the country is a shithole" attitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, people are staying in DC because of the Arts, restaurants and public transportation?!?!? I can see education and jobs but the others are lacking.

DC has the largest theater district outside of NYC. The Smithsonian museums are on par with much of what NYC has to offer (many in NYC are actually whatever you want to donate if you are comparing admission prices). Public transport is inferior though, but better than most US cities asides from NYC.

http://www.dbknews.com/archives/article_3b8ec4ee-5246-11e3-ab79-001a4bcf6878.html

Quantity doesn't equal quality... And also theater is just one many art forms. I know many acts that specifically skip DC.

The Smithsonian is great but its mainly for tourists and is not a substitution for an art scene.

Restaurant scene is okay on the high end but mid range it sucks.

The metro system is not better than most US cities. It is too small and that actually makes it look better in some ways.

Some of these things are on the right trajectory but to say they are the reason people are staying here is ridiculous.

All museums are mainly for tourists. You have made such idiotic statements that it really doesn't deserve a full-throated response. If you don't like the DC suburbs (I doubt that you live in DC proper), just move to another part of the country. Some other bedroom community eagerly awaits your arrival.

Of course all museums are for tourists. That's the whole point. No one is living in DC because of the museums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, people are staying in DC because of the Arts, restaurants and public transportation?!?!? I can see education and jobs but the others are lacking.

DC has the largest theater district outside of NYC. The Smithsonian museums are on par with much of what NYC has to offer (many in NYC are actually whatever you want to donate if you are comparing admission prices). Public transport is inferior though, but better than most US cities asides from NYC.

http://www.dbknews.com/archives/article_3b8ec4ee-5246-11e3-ab79-001a4bcf6878.html

Quantity doesn't equal quality... And also theater is just one many art forms. I know many acts that specifically skip DC.

The Smithsonian is great but its mainly for tourists and is not a substitution for an art scene.

Restaurant scene is okay on the high end but mid range it sucks.

The metro system is not better than most US cities. It is too small and that actually makes it look better in some ways.

Some of these things are on the right trajectory but to say they are the reason people are staying here is ridiculous.

This is an idiotic post, but I do agree that people mainly stay here for jobs. You can get a good education anywhere nowadays if you send your kids to private, and I don't see the other reasons as compelling enough to stay in such a HCOL for most families

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in a few years, when I retire, I can take my 2 mil in 401K + 500K home equity, and move elsewhere and be rich?

I mean, I think you're being tongue in cheek here... but, yes. Of course you could be rich with $2.5M NW in many many parts of the world.

Our net worth is about $4.5 million, yet my spouse and I still work full time. Yes we are wealthy but that doesn't mean we can retire now, in our late 40s, so who cares what demographers call us?

Actually you could retire now, in your late 40s and have a quality of life better than 95% of Americans.

Maybe but why would we retire now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in a few years, when I retire, I can take my 2 mil in 401K + 500K home equity, and move elsewhere and be rich?

I mean, I think you're being tongue in cheek here... but, yes. Of course you could be rich with $2.5M NW in many many parts of the world.

Our net worth is about $4.5 million, yet my spouse and I still work full time. Yes we are wealthy but that doesn't mean we can retire now, in our late 40s, so who cares what demographers call us?

Actually you could retire now, in your late 40s and have a quality of life better than 95% of Americans.

Assuming you were returning 7-10% on your 4.5 million, you are talking about 315-450K per year which would fund one heck of a retirement. Even a conservative 3% is 135k. Assuming a paid of mortgage that is an excellent retirement as well.

About $3 million of it is liquid and yes our mortgage is paid off. We feel very fortunate and know we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, people are staying in DC because of the Arts, restaurants and public transportation?!?!? I can see education and jobs but the others are lacking.

DC has the largest theater district outside of NYC. The Smithsonian museums are on par with much of what NYC has to offer (many in NYC are actually whatever you want to donate if you are comparing admission prices). Public transport is inferior though, but better than most US cities asides from NYC.

http://www.dbknews.com/archives/article_3b8ec4ee-5246-11e3-ab79-001a4bcf6878.html

Quantity doesn't equal quality... And also theater is just one many art forms. I know many acts that specifically skip DC.

The Smithsonian is great but its mainly for tourists and is not a substitution for an art scene.

Restaurant scene is okay on the high end but mid range it sucks.

The metro system is not better than most US cities. It is too small and that actually makes it look better in some ways.

Some of these things are on the right trajectory but to say they are the reason people are staying here is ridiculous.

This is an idiotic post, but I do agree that people mainly stay here for jobs. You can get a good education anywhere nowadays if you send your kids to private, and I don't see the other reasons as compelling enough to stay in such a HCOL for most families

Jobs, very well educated friends and neighbors and excellent PUBLIC schools. That's why we are here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, people are staying in DC because of the Arts, restaurants and public transportation?!?!? I can see education and jobs but the others are lacking.

DC has the largest theater district outside of NYC. The Smithsonian museums are on par with much of what NYC has to offer (many in NYC are actually whatever you want to donate if you are comparing admission prices). Public transport is inferior though, but better than most US cities asides from NYC.

http://www.dbknews.com/archives/article_3b8ec4ee-5246-11e3-ab79-001a4bcf6878.html

Quantity doesn't equal quality... And also theater is just one many art forms. I know many acts that specifically skip DC.

The Smithsonian is great but its mainly for tourists and is not a substitution for an art scene.

Restaurant scene is okay on the high end but mid range it sucks.

The metro system is not better than most US cities. It is too small and that actually makes it look better in some ways.

Some of these things are on the right trajectory but to say they are the reason people are staying here is ridiculous.

This is an idiotic post, but I do agree that people mainly stay here for jobs. You can get a good education anywhere nowadays if you send your kids to private, and I don't see the other reasons as compelling enough to stay in such a HCOL for most families

Why is it idiotic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in a few years, when I retire, I can take my 2 mil in 401K + 500K home equity, and move elsewhere and be rich?

I mean, I think you're being tongue in cheek here... but, yes. Of course you could be rich with $2.5M NW in many many parts of the world.

Our net worth is about $4.5 million, yet my spouse and I still work full time. Yes we are wealthy but that doesn't mean we can retire now, in our late 40s, so who cares what demographers call us?

Actually you could retire now, in your late 40s and have a quality of life better than 95% of Americans.

Assuming you were returning 7-10% on your 4.5 million, you are talking about 315-450K per year which would fund one heck of a retirement. Even a conservative 3% is 135k. Assuming a paid of mortgage that is an excellent retirement as well.

About $3 million of it is liquid and yes our mortgage is paid off. We feel very fortunate and know we are.

May I ask how you got to 3 million and a paid off mortgage?

[Anonymous]

Articles like these are just "clickbait." All publications are in financial distress and so editors push "journalists" to write stuff to get under people's skin. If you feel comfortable, then you are comfortable, end of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Articles like these are just "clickbait." All publications are in financial distress and so editors push "journalists" to write stuff to get under people's skin. If you feel comfortable, then you are comfortable, end of story.

+1.

Journalism is dead. Even the NYT these days is part entertainment, part propaganda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in a few years, when I retire, I can take my 2 mil in 401K + 500K home equity, and move elsewhere and be rich?

I mean, I think you're being tongue in cheek here... but, yes. Of course you could be rich with $2.5M NW in many many parts of the world.

Our net worth is about $4.5 million, yet my spouse and I still work full time. Yes we are wealthy but that doesn't mean we can retire now, in our late 40s, so who cares what demographers call us?

Actually you could retire now, in your late 40s and have a quality of life better than 95% of Americans.

Assuming you were returning 7-10% on your 4.5 million, you are talking about 315-450K per year which would fund one heck of a retirement. Even a conservative 3% is 135k. Assuming a paid of mortgage that is an excellent retirement as well.

About $3 million of it is liquid and yes our mortgage is paid off. We feel very fortunate and know we are.

May I ask how you got to 3 million and a paid off mortgage?

You may Two lawyers, now in our early 50s, both of us continued to work full time once we had kids. One government, one in house. We have lived in the same house for 17 years (paid it off 12 years after purchase); never traded up. We drive a Honda and a Toyota, both made in the past decade. I saved 50% of my income when I was single. Now that the childcare paying years are over, we are back up to saving 40% of our net income. Investments are in index and target date funds.