Reply to Rich v Affluent

Forum Index » Money and Finances

Reply to "Rich v Affluent"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Can any of you who want us to believe $300K is not affluent tell me why you persist in arguing that you are "middle class"?  I've asked this before on DCUM -- why are you so deeply ashamed of what you have?

Is it because you know you only have it for reasons that have nothing to do with your merit?[/quote]

I'm one who thinks 300k hhi is middle class. It's been clearly explained multiple times on multiple threads why people think 300k is not affluent/rich/whatever. If you want to remain willfully ignorant on why we feel the way we do, that's on you. If you want to believe you're rich on your 100 or 300k income, go ahead. I guarantee most people in this area don't agree with you.[/quote]

Your problem is that you're "thinking" something that is contrary to actual fact. The distribution of income is a mathematical reality. Regardless of how you "feel" about your affluence, you are affluent/rich if your annual HHI is $300K. That figure puts you firmly in the upper echelon in every corner of America, including DC.

I'm guessing you don't "feel" rich because you choose to spend your wealth on things that the vast majority of people who earn much less (including the vast majority of people who live in this area) either (1) pay a lot less for or (2) don't buy at all. That's your choice, but it doesn't make you any less rich.

And you still didn't answer my question: [b]Why are you so determined to avoid being branded wealthy? What is it about your success that shames you? [/b][/quote]

Yes, I find this so interesting.  Regardless of how one 'feels' about their income, someone who makes more than 95% of the people in the area is clearly, from a mathematical point of view, affluent.  What does it gain you by insisting that you are not?[/quote]

Because there is no COL adjustment for tax brackets, it matters a lot. My husband and I are both GS 15 and make about $300K together. A 3 bedroom cape in Arlington, purchased in 2004, cost $600K with a mortgage of $2500. The same size/quality of housing in other parts of the country is half that. Other costs are also much higher. Yet because the number is "mathematically" the same everywhere, we are consider affluent and taxed as such, even though the amount we have to contribute to retirement, college savings, etc. is less after paying for housing, food, insurance etc. due to COL (and consequently our disposable income is MUCH less) than in other parts of the country. Around here, two government wage earners should be taxed as if we are middle class, with the middle class tax breaks. [/quote]

OK, I'll go half-way with you here - the taxes hurt more when your COL is higher. However, [b]when you live a stone's throw from a major US city, a detached home + a yard is actually a bigger luxury than it is when you live in Indiana or Montana[/b]. Buying a townhome in a major urban area is probably a better rough approximation for what it "means" to own a cape in a rural area. [/quote]

People always make this comparison, but it's the wrong comparison. Households making $300K in Indiana or Montana don't live in 3-bedroom cape cods on 1/6 of an acre and drive Hyundais. My in-laws live in Oklahoma, in probably the richest/most educated town in the state, and paid $165K for a 3,000 square foot house with a pool and a 3-car garage in which they store their two Lexuses. My sister lives in Kentucky, she and her husband make about $200K, and they bought a house twice the size of mine down the street from Senator McConnell and can still afford to send their kids to private school. I have a small house and a small yard and old cards and public (albeit good) schools and high local taxes. And am considered "rich," while lots of people I know with slightly lower incomes who have much nicer lifestyles, more disposable income, and more room to save are considered middle class because they live in lower COL states.  
[/quote]

That was kinda my point. In a densely packed urban area, it is always a bigger luxury to have more land, than it is to have that same land in a more rural location. The typical home can be on acre, when there are plenty of acres. The minute you are packing people into a city or within commuting distance, the "average man's" dwelling gets smaller. Bigger lots are scarcer and a mark of relative wealth.

COL is also high around here, with somewhat higher incomes to boot. You can buy so much more on 300k in Indiana that it is crazy - for example, in the town where I used to live, you could get a really nice house for 100k. A budget house was half that much. However, almost nobody made 300k.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics