Anonymous
09/27/2013 11:46
Subject: Top 5%
Look here for percentages by metro area. In the DC metro it takes $278k to be in the top 5%. Any HH that falls in that band shouldn't apply the qualifier 'middle' to anything related to their income, consumption, or lifestyle.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/15/business/one-percent-map.html
Anonymous
09/17/2013 21:52
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's all relative. $232,000 is comfortable in DC, but it's really rich in Sioux Falls.
No, it's the top 5% of the worlds income levels. How you spend it and live it is relative.
+20000000
People fail to realize that because you CHOOSE to live somewhere expensive does not automatically make you 'less rich'
The fact that you have the OPTION to live somewhere expensive speaks volumes... good golly people
But you fail to realize that people with $200k income aren't free to live anywhere they want. Making that money requires you to live in a high expense area. That's why the income is so high in the first place. You are being paid 4x cost of living (or whatever) just like a Sioux Falls person making $100k (or whatever). You have to burn a lot more money for the same quality of life.
No, can live in Winchester and commute 1.5 hours. Or live in a tiny apartment on H street. You
Don't buy to SFH in Bethesda. It's still relative.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 21:50
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:I didn't know Niles Crane posted here. I apologize.
Lol!
Anonymous
09/17/2013 21:47
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's all relative. $232,000 is comfortable in DC, but it's really rich in Sioux Falls.
No, it's the top 5% of the worlds income levels. How you spend it and live it is relative.
+20000000
People fail to realize that because you CHOOSE to live somewhere expensive does not automatically make you 'less rich'
The fact that you have the OPTION to live somewhere expensive speaks volumes... good golly people
But you fail to realize that people with $200k income aren't free to live anywhere they want. Making that money requires you to live in a high expense area. That's why the income is so high in the first place. You are being paid 4x cost of living (or whatever) just like a Sioux Falls person making $100k (or whatever). You have to burn a lot more money for the same quality of life.
Not ANYWHERE, but way more options than someone making $45,000.
Geez the double minded folk who don't want to be near poor folk but will fight tooth and nail not to be considered rich cause they are not Bill and Melinda.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 21:09
Subject: Re:Top 5%
On NBC news tonight they said that the top 5% is $191,000 as did the NYT.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 21:01
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It's all relative. $232,000 is comfortable in DC, but it's really rich in Sioux Falls.
No, it's the top 5% of the worlds income levels. How you spend it and live it is relative.
+20000000
People fail to realize that because you CHOOSE to live somewhere expensive does not automatically make you 'less rich'
The fact that you have the OPTION to live somewhere expensive speaks volumes... good golly people
But you fail to realize that people with $200k income aren't free to live anywhere they want. Making that money requires you to live in a high expense area. That's why the income is so high in the first place. You are being paid 4x cost of living (or whatever) just like a Sioux Falls person making $100k (or whatever). You have to burn a lot more money for the same quality of life.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 20:41
Subject: Top 5%
It's *assorted* Money Goblins that really wins the prize.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 19:50
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:It all depends to whom one compares oneself.
Frankly, and no offense, but I do not consider the assorted drunkards, drug addicts, bar-tenders, grease-monkeys, shop-walkers, cheroot-vendors, mail-men, iron-mongers, pit-masters, squirrel-eaters, security-guards, street-walkers, phone-wankers, IT helpdeskers, low-ranking bureaucrats, time-servers, ex-cons, and margerine saleswomen who make up the bulk of this country and this city's population to be my peers, so their income is quite irrelevant.
I instead attempt to place myself amongst persons of more distinction, to whit: commercial lawyers, international diplomats, independently-wealthy heads of Third World NGOs, magazine editors (though only the classier ones - no cheap titillation), Internet Pioneers, SES bureaucrats, Hedge Fund Managers (and their Lady wives), Modern Dancers, Industrialists, Underwear Titans, and assorted Money Goblins.
Judged against this, more illustrious, crowd, I certainly cannot consider myself in the top 5 percent.
But one day, I hope to be.
Aspirational? Yes, but it was aspirationalism that seized this country out of the embrace of the native Americans, and by God I will never apologize for it.
Money Goblins FTW.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 15:59
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:It is pretty amazing that what's the top 5% seems quite normal here. Two top-grade GS-13s gets you there. Although it is fair to point out that all American households aren't in the same class. For instance, a young couple just starting out isn't going to have the heft of two income-earners at the peak of their potential. So top 5% isn't as draw-dropping in that context. Still, something to be thankful for.
"jaw," not "draw"
Anonymous
09/17/2013 15:58
Subject: Top 5%
It is pretty amazing that what's the top 5% seems quite normal here. Two top-grade GS-13s gets you there. Although it is fair to point out that all American households aren't in the same class. For instance, a young couple just starting out isn't going to have the heft of two income-earners at the peak of their potential. So top 5% isn't as draw-dropping in that context. Still, something to be thankful for.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 15:36
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:I didn't know Niles Crane posted here. I apologize.
LOL - I just snorted coffee!
Anonymous
09/17/2013 15:32
Subject: Top 5%
I didn't know Niles Crane posted here. I apologize.
Anonymous
09/17/2013 15:30
Subject: Top 5%
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It all depends to whom one compares oneself.
Frankly, and no offense, but I do not consider the assorted drunkards, drug addicts, bar-tenders, grease-monkeys, shop-walkers, cheroot-vendors, mail-men, iron-mongers, pit-masters, squirrel-eaters, security-guards, street-walkers, phone-wankers, IT helpdeskers, low-ranking bureaucrats, time-servers, ex-cons, and margerine saleswomen who make up the bulk of this country and this city's population to be my peers, so their income is quite irrelevant.
Is this a joke post?
They certainly aren't your peers. I'm imagine most of them are much more pleasant and much less of a boor than you.
Then your imagination would lead you astray. I am a delightful conversationalist, and have been identified as such in Leading Publications.
Lol...
