Terrified and depressed due to downward mobility

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/

For perspective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did not start rich but we feel pretty well off.
1) Paid off student debt in 2 yrs after living on Ramen and Beans.
2) Cooked at home from scratch. Ate a lot of vegetarian meals.
3) Bought a lovely new SFH in an average neighborhood that we could live forever if needed.
4) Send kids to public school. Taught them at home so that they could get into magnet STEM programs.
5) Had only one cheap car (Corolla) and we kept it till it died. Bought a second car only when we had our first kid.
6) Kids went to state flagships to study STEM on scholarships.
7) Only had 2 kids. Delayed having kids because we were too poor. Never had pets because it is a cost and responsibility.
8) Did not take expensive vacations. Only started to go abroad in recent years in our 50s.
9) In our late 50s, we are able to have a secure retirement, pay for our kids college, give them both new cars that they can keep for 10 yrs or so, have told our kids to live with us to save on rent and other costs. Will pay for their weddings. Have offered to babysit if they live close by to us. Maybe give them some seed money.

My kids will have to work and live frugally. But, we already are able to give them more than what we were given. We also have told them to not expect to match our current lifestyle at late 50s, when they are in their 20s and 30s. They are starting out and they will have to be frugal and creative, just like we were.

OP, you have a lot of money. If you cannot grow wealthy on this amount of money then you are really not very smart. There is a lot of entitlement in your post.

Honestly, you are as annoying as the OP.
I say this as someone who lives a much easier life than I might have thanks to my family. No college debt, a small inheritance in my 20s kept me afloat for a PhD. Now I actually make bank as a tech entrepreneur on the side and a professor, and my family is doing great.

But I worked 60+ hours a week even with a baby. I had no maternity leave. My child is SN and I can't "teach him at home" to get into STEM magnetic schools (Though he is in one, but also requires a ton of therapy and expensive services). I was able to throw money at problems (like getting a baby nurse) and get good child care. These things were crucial to get where I am. Eating beans wouldn't have been enough. Is that what we are coming to?

A UMC life isn't just being able to afford a Tesla and a Volvo. It is the security of knowing that you will not be poor in your old age and that your children will not be poor or at a clear disadvantage to a majority of the population. Downward mobility is seeing your family headed in that direction even if right now you are doing "fine". Yes, many people experience that experience, but it was once the promise of America that *on average*, you would go the other way. The reality is that now *on average* we are going the other way. And not because we are lazy or stupid. Telling the OP she is that misses the point. The threshold of "good enough to not be downwardly mobile" has changed. And not because others are becoming more upwardly mobile. People are working longer hours, housing and college and health care and food cost more. Yes, our parents didn't have cell phones, but then again their bosses didn't expect them to answer those cell phones at 9 pm or when they were on vacation. I don't buy that argument at all.

It is frustrating to realize even as someone who as "made it" by most standards to worry that my kids may lead a hard life, because the world is insanely competitive and, wait for it, downwardly mobile. I'm working to save them a little money but it's hard to fight the law of averages without being the rare exception.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have highly educated, kind and hard working friends who can barely pay their rent.
You need a reality check and you should count your blessings.

x100000

get a roommate! Geez people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did not start rich but we feel pretty well off.
1) Paid off student debt in 2 yrs after living on Ramen and Beans.
2) Cooked at home from scratch. Ate a lot of vegetarian meals.
3) Bought a lovely new SFH in an average neighborhood that we could live forever if needed.
4) Send kids to public school. Taught them at home so that they could get into magnet STEM programs.
5) Had only one cheap car (Corolla) and we kept it till it died. Bought a second car only when we had our first kid.
6) Kids went to state flagships to study STEM on scholarships.
7) Only had 2 kids. Delayed having kids because we were too poor. Never had pets because it is a cost and responsibility.
8) Did not take expensive vacations. Only started to go abroad in recent years in our 50s.
9) In our late 50s, we are able to have a secure retirement, pay for our kids college, give them both new cars that they can keep for 10 yrs or so, have told our kids to live with us to save on rent and other costs. Will pay for their weddings. Have offered to babysit if they live close by to us. Maybe give them some seed money.

My kids will have to work and live frugally. But, we already are able to give them more than what we were given. We also have told them to not expect to match our current lifestyle at late 50s, when they are in their 20s and 30s. They are starting out and they will have to be frugal and creative, just like we were.

OP, you have a lot of money. If you cannot grow wealthy on this amount of money then you are really not very smart. There is a lot of entitlement in your post.

Honestly, you are as annoying as the OP.
I say this as someone who lives a much easier life than I might have thanks to my family. No college debt, a small inheritance in my 20s kept me afloat for a PhD. Now I actually make bank as a tech entrepreneur on the side and a professor, and my family is doing great.

But I worked 60+ hours a week even with a baby. I had no maternity leave. My child is SN and I can't "teach him at home" to get into STEM magnetic schools (Though he is in one, but also requires a ton of therapy and expensive services). I was able to throw money at problems (like getting a baby nurse) and get good child care. These things were crucial to get where I am. Eating beans wouldn't have been enough. Is that what we are coming to?

A UMC life isn't just being able to afford a Tesla and a Volvo. It is the security of knowing that you will not be poor in your old age and that your children will not be poor or at a clear disadvantage to a majority of the population. Downward mobility is seeing your family headed in that direction even if right now you are doing "fine". Yes, many people experience that experience, but it was once the promise of America that *on average*, you would go the other way. The reality is that now *on average* we are going the other way. And not because we are lazy or stupid. Telling the OP she is that misses the point. The threshold of "good enough to not be downwardly mobile" has changed. And not because others are becoming more upwardly mobile. People are working longer hours, housing and college and health care and food cost more. Yes, our parents didn't have cell phones, but then again their bosses didn't expect them to answer those cell phones at 9 pm or when they were on vacation. I don't buy that argument at all.

It is frustrating to realize even as someone who as "made it" by most standards to worry that my kids may lead a hard life, because the world is insanely competitive and, wait for it, downwardly mobile. I'm working to save them a little money but it's hard to fight the law of averages without being the rare exception.

.


Not the poster you are responding to.

What you term a hard life is a joke. Your kids will probably have better financial sense and not determine their self worth is based on what home they live in. You probably want your kids to be able to afford a nice sfh on one salary and to be able to send their kids to privates and to afford sending their kids to one of hyp.

Again you are ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/

For perspective

I put OP + her husband’s income in the calculator along with Pimmit Hills zip code and got:
For a household of 2 in the D.C. metro area, your income is too high to be middle class by any of those definitions.

OP needs to stop whining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I literally never talk about this kind of stuff with friends, ever, but last the other night I told a good friend of mine (I had too many drinks in me) that I was very proud of my 30-something son-in-law who had recently overcome some pretty significant obstacles in landing a new job where he and my daughter are now earning a combined $300k plus. They have one toddler and hope to have another and they live in the DMV. My friends insisted that that made them no higher than lower middle or middle middle class for this area. I pushed back, then they suggested that their perspective may be skewed because they associate with a lot of Biglaw attorneys. Of course, I shouldn’t have opened my big mouth at all and really wasn’t doing it to brag. I was just proud of and impressed by the guy, who has a compelling life story.

In any event, you’re not gonna convince me that a middle middle class family in the DMV brings in $300k plus.

FWIW, my husband and I make just over $300k, live in Arlington, have one kid, and our financial planner (who works with people all across the income spectrum) said we were "solidly middle class" for the DC area.

A 310k HHI is the 96th percentile. He probably means you’re solidly in the middle of his top-10% clientele.

I suspect the financial planner will ensure they are middle class eventually. What's his commission for selling his company's securities?

[Anonymous]

Everybody here's lifestyle has been slashed with the cost of housing and food costing 3-4x what it was 30 years ago. We lived in MoCo in a new build colonial home development with retired cops, teachers, feds for neighbors. Not happening in 2023. Life is so much more expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I literally never talk about this kind of stuff with friends, ever, but last the other night I told a good friend of mine (I had too many drinks in me) that I was very proud of my 30-something son-in-law who had recently overcome some pretty significant obstacles in landing a new job where he and my daughter are now earning a combined $300k plus. They have one toddler and hope to have another and they live in the DMV. My friends insisted that that made them no higher than lower middle or middle middle class for this area. I pushed back, then they suggested that their perspective may be skewed because they associate with a lot of Biglaw attorneys. Of course, I shouldn’t have opened my big mouth at all and really wasn’t doing it to brag. I was just proud of and impressed by the guy, who has a compelling life story.

In any event, you’re not gonna convince me that a middle middle class family in the DMV brings in $300k plus.

FWIW, my husband and I make just over $300k, live in Arlington, have one kid, and our financial planner (who works with people all across the income spectrum) said we were "solidly middle class" for the DC area.

And how old are the two of you and your kid?

Again, a couple in their early 30s with a toddler and an income of over $300k. Sorry, they’re not Rockefellers and I know that - but middle middle class? No way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I literally never talk about this kind of stuff with friends, ever, but last the other night I told a good friend of mine (I had too many drinks in me) that I was very proud of my 30-something son-in-law who had recently overcome some pretty significant obstacles in landing a new job where he and my daughter are now earning a combined $300k plus. They have one toddler and hope to have another and they live in the DMV. My friends insisted that that made them no higher than lower middle or middle middle class for this area. I pushed back, then they suggested that their perspective may be skewed because they associate with a lot of Biglaw attorneys. Of course, I shouldn’t have opened my big mouth at all and really wasn’t doing it to brag. I was just proud of and impressed by the guy, who has a compelling life story.

In any event, you’re not gonna convince me that a middle middle class family in the DMV brings in $300k plus.

FWIW, my husband and I make just over $300k, live in Arlington, have one kid, and our financial planner (who works with people all across the income spectrum) said we were "solidly middle class" for the DC area.

And how old are the two of you and your kid?

Again, a couple in their early 30s with a toddler and an income of over $300k. Sorry, they’re not Rockefellers and I know that - but middle middle class? No way.

Yeah. All anyone has to do is click the WaPo link and see for themselves. There is perception, and then there is reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did not start rich but we feel pretty well off.
1) Paid off student debt in 2 yrs after living on Ramen and Beans.
2) Cooked at home from scratch. Ate a lot of vegetarian meals.
3) Bought a lovely new SFH in an average neighborhood that we could live forever if needed.
4) Send kids to public school. Taught them at home so that they could get into magnet STEM programs.
5) Had only one cheap car (Corolla) and we kept it till it died. Bought a second car only when we had our first kid.
6) Kids went to state flagships to study STEM on scholarships.
7) Only had 2 kids. Delayed having kids because we were too poor. Never had pets because it is a cost and responsibility.
8) Did not take expensive vacations. Only started to go abroad in recent years in our 50s.
9) In our late 50s, we are able to have a secure retirement, pay for our kids college, give them both new cars that they can keep for 10 yrs or so, have told our kids to live with us to save on rent and other costs. Will pay for their weddings. Have offered to babysit if they live close by to us. Maybe give them some seed money.

My kids will have to work and live frugally. But, we already are able to give them more than what we were given. We also have told them to not expect to match our current lifestyle at late 50s, when they are in their 20s and 30s. They are starting out and they will have to be frugal and creative, just like we were.

OP, you have a lot of money. If you cannot grow wealthy on this amount of money then you are really not very smart. There is a lot of entitlement in your post.

Honestly, you are as annoying as the OP.
I say this as someone who lives a much easier life than I might have thanks to my family. No college debt, a small inheritance in my 20s kept me afloat for a PhD. Now I actually make bank as a tech entrepreneur on the side and a professor, and my family is doing great.

But I worked 60+ hours a week even with a baby. I had no maternity leave. My child is SN and I can't "teach him at home" to get into STEM magnetic schools (Though he is in one, but also requires a ton of therapy and expensive services). I was able to throw money at problems (like getting a baby nurse) and get good child care. These things were crucial to get where I am. Eating beans wouldn't have been enough. Is that what we are coming to?

A UMC life isn't just being able to afford a Tesla and a Volvo. It is the security of knowing that you will not be poor in your old age and that your children will not be poor or at a clear disadvantage to a majority of the population. Downward mobility is seeing your family headed in that direction even if right now you are doing "fine". Yes, many people experience that experience, but it was once the promise of America that *on average*, you would go the other way. The reality is that now *on average* we are going the other way. And not because we are lazy or stupid. Telling the OP she is that misses the point. The threshold of "good enough to not be downwardly mobile" has changed. And not because others are becoming more upwardly mobile. People are working longer hours, housing and college and health care and food cost more. Yes, our parents didn't have cell phones, but then again their bosses didn't expect them to answer those cell phones at 9 pm or when they were on vacation. I don't buy that argument at all.

It is frustrating to realize even as someone who as "made it" by most standards to worry that my kids may lead a hard life, because the world is insanely competitive and, wait for it, downwardly mobile. I'm working to save them a little money but it's hard to fight the law of averages without being the rare exception.

How is this possible? Working 60 hours is day, 7 AM - 7 PM. This means you saw your baby for maybe 30 minutes a day. Seems irresponsible to have a baby and not ever spend time with the baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/

For perspective

Op here. That calculator says we are middle middle class for where we live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why don't you move? I don't get staying in the area if you can't affording housing, etc.

Not OP but in similar boat (less income, but with a kid) and we would very much like to move. Currently DH's job is tied to the area with now fully remote option. I have moved into a fully remote job over the last few years to prepare us for a move. But it's not like it's super easy to just relocate. We are in our 40s with a child, we have tons of connections to this area after going to school and then living here for over two decades. I'm still not convinced my DH won't get cold feet, and I have nerves myself. Our families are both very dysfunctional and live in extremely remote places, so the option of just moving closer to them isn't really on the table, though we are considering a city about 4 hours from his family. Figuring out how to move his job is going to be tricky and there's a strong chance he'll basically need to shift industries if we move, since what he does isn't really a thing in most LCOL areas.

We have to juggle jobs, schools, some connection to the community, making new friends and networks in our 40s. Our kid has a hobby that is important to them -- I have to make sure they can still do that in some capacity.

What people don't get is that as recently as 10-15 years ago, DC was considered a LCOL alternative to NY/LA/SF. Some of us chose it over NY or LA (I did) specifically because our money went further here and we could see building a family here after college or grad school in a way we couldn't see those other places. But then a couple poorly timed layoffs, some shifts in our industry, and Covid, and here we are living in a city that is honestly too pricy for us but at a stage in life where just picking up and moving somewhere else is much easier said than done.

"Just move" sounds obvious but if it were that easy, everyone would just do it.

We moved our family of four out of the DMV to a lower COL a couple years ago. To say you can't move with what appears to be your moveable job is not true. It is work, however, and it's scary. But, it's completely doable.

While DC may have been - or is - lower COL than NY/LA/SF, it certainly felt expensive 10-15 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2023/middle-class-income/

For perspective

Op here. That calculator says we are middle middle class for where we live.

So you have three kids in McLean? That’s the only way those numbers are remotely middle class. But I can see how living in an upper-class island could leave you feeling less well-off than you are.

It’s hard to have too much sympathy for someone who has more resources than almost anyone else currently alive in the world, and in fact throughout human history. You’re literally part of the global 1%. So am I. And I’m grateful every day.

Your greatest opportunity for happiness here is not by increasing your bank account, but by examining what’s going on between your ears.

[Anonymous]

Relocate people. There are companies in lower cost of living areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did not start rich but we feel pretty well off.
1) Paid off student debt in 2 yrs after living on Ramen and Beans.
2) Cooked at home from scratch. Ate a lot of vegetarian meals.
3) Bought a lovely new SFH in an average neighborhood that we could live forever if needed.
4) Send kids to public school. Taught them at home so that they could get into magnet STEM programs.
5) Had only one cheap car (Corolla) and we kept it till it died. Bought a second car only when we had our first kid.
6) Kids went to state flagships to study STEM on scholarships.
7) Only had 2 kids. Delayed having kids because we were too poor. Never had pets because it is a cost and responsibility.
8) Did not take expensive vacations. Only started to go abroad in recent years in our 50s.
9) In our late 50s, we are able to have a secure retirement, pay for our kids college, give them both new cars that they can keep for 10 yrs or so, have told our kids to live with us to save on rent and other costs. Will pay for their weddings. Have offered to babysit if they live close by to us. Maybe give them some seed money.

My kids will have to work and live frugally. But, we already are able to give them more than what we were given. We also have told them to not expect to match our current lifestyle at late 50s, when they are in their 20s and 30s. They are starting out and they will have to be frugal and creative, just like we were.

OP, you have a lot of money. If you cannot grow wealthy on this amount of money then you are really not very smart. There is a lot of entitlement in your post.

Honestly, you are as annoying as the OP.
I say this as someone who lives a much easier life than I might have thanks to my family. No college debt, a small inheritance in my 20s kept me afloat for a PhD. Now I actually make bank as a tech entrepreneur on the side and a professor, and my family is doing great.

But I worked 60+ hours a week even with a baby. I had no maternity leave. My child is SN and I can't "teach him at home" to get into STEM magnetic schools (Though he is in one, but also requires a ton of therapy and expensive services). I was able to throw money at problems (like getting a baby nurse) and get good child care. These things were crucial to get where I am. Eating beans wouldn't have been enough. Is that what we are coming to?

A UMC life isn't just being able to afford a Tesla and a Volvo. It is the security of knowing that you will not be poor in your old age and that your children will not be poor or at a clear disadvantage to a majority of the population. Downward mobility is seeing your family headed in that direction even if right now you are doing "fine". Yes, many people experience that experience, but it was once the promise of America that *on average*, you would go the other way. The reality is that now *on average* we are going the other way. And not because we are lazy or stupid. Telling the OP she is that misses the point. The threshold of "good enough to not be downwardly mobile" has changed. And not because others are becoming more upwardly mobile. People are working longer hours, housing and college and health care and food cost more. Yes, our parents didn't have cell phones, but then again their bosses didn't expect them to answer those cell phones at 9 pm or when they were on vacation. I don't buy that argument at all.

It is frustrating to realize even as someone who as "made it" by most standards to worry that my kids may lead a hard life, because the world is insanely competitive and, wait for it, downwardly mobile. I'm working to save them a little money but it's hard to fight the law of averages without being the rare exception.

How is this possible? Working 60 hours is day, 7 AM - 7 PM. This means you saw your baby for maybe 30 minutes a day. Seems irresponsible to have a baby and not ever spend time with the baby.

Probably worked on weekends (entrepreneur and professor).