Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the naysayers need to understand that this is a really expensive area. Make 101k with household income for 220k. Live in a small rambler where schools are an 8, send kid to preschool, two old cars, no debt except mortgage. Max out retirements, eat out 2x/week, shop at whole foods/farmers markets and save a little on top of it. One vacation per year usually to the beach. Great, right? And I should be grateful. But now imagine if one of us loses a job or worse dies, we won't be able to afford even school, mortgage and retirement. That is the root of my financial insecurity.

My definition of being well-off is to make more so we can continue lifestyle on the lower income or alternately have an acceptable lifestyle on the lower income. At 100k, it is difficult.

First bold: You assume the "naysayers" don't live in this area. We do. We understand it is pricey, but 100-250K around here is MORE than enough. More.
Second bold: Yeah. Imagine if that happens to someone making 50,000 or 500,000. The same consequences apply for the most part. You live within your income, you lose one of the incomes, you're gonna suffer. Not really seeing your point here. All is hear i "waaah wahhha mo' money mo'problems."

This is where you are wrong. The consequences are the not the same when the remaining salary is 100K vs 300K. With 100K, you can't afford your kid or a 'shit-sack' in a good school district. At 300K or 500K, you could still do this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the naysayers need to understand that this is a really expensive area. Make 101k with household income for 220k. Live in a small rambler where schools are an 8, send kid to preschool, two old cars, no debt except mortgage. Max out retirements, eat out 2x/week, shop at whole foods/farmers markets and save a little on top of it. One vacation per year usually to the beach. Great, right? And I should be grateful. But now imagine if one of us loses a job or worse dies, we won't be able to afford even school, mortgage and retirement. That is the root of my financial insecurity.

My definition of being well-off is to make more so we can continue lifestyle on the lower income or alternately have an acceptable lifestyle on the lower income. At 100k, it is difficult.

First bold: You assume the "naysayers" don't live in this area. We do. We understand it is pricey, but 100-250K around here is MORE than enough. More.
Second bold: Yeah. Imagine if that happens to someone making 50,000 or 500,000. The same consequences apply for the most part. You live within your income, you lose one of the incomes, you're gonna suffer. Not really seeing your point here. All is hear i "waaah wahhha mo' money mo'problems."

Anonymous wrote:100k, or "hitting six figures", used to be a huge milestone for the college grads of the late 80s/early 90s.

Now, 100k is solidly middle class.

Is 300k the new bench mark for having "made it"?

If not 300, what is it?

This is so frequently raised that it is almost cliched, but I swear, it never ends. If you make $250K, you "need" $350K to be "really comfortable." If you have $100K in the bank, you just need $250K to be "free of worry." Everyone wants to hit $1M in their investment account (and then it will be $5M once you do). It's a psychological game that you can't easily escape, especially when surrounded by other wealthy people. I am not suggesting we should all run off into the woods and live in a tent, but once you have no debt (save a reasonable mortgage), a solid emergency fund, and are saving responsibly for retirement each month, you need to declare a win, realize how good you have it compared to even people of above-average means and luck, stop torturing yourself, and enjoy life. Someone will always have more (and many, many will have less).

Anonymous wrote:For the last time: you need HHI 320K to be ok here. Two 15-10s or bust. No shame in going to flyover country with less and buying a 3500 sq ft sfh on an acre for 360K.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd say $250 is the new $100.

+1 I really hate that I feel this way and am trying to take a very very critical view of our spending habits for our $230k household. I'm toying with the idea of direct depositing half of our take home pay to see if we can get by.

If you are struggling on $230, then you are doing something wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

once you have no debt (save a reasonable mortgage), a solid emergency fund, and are saving responsibly for retirement each month, you need to declare a win, realize how good you have it compared to even people of above-average means and luck, stop torturing yourself, and enjoy life. Someone will always have more (and many, many will have less).

1000 times YES !!

This forum suffers from affluenza.

The All-Consuming Epidemic defines it as "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety, and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more."

This.

+1. I think anytime you have intelligent people making good money, you'll get some affluenza as everyone thinks they need to make more. Yet this forum seems to be ridiculous. The constant -- this area is soooo expensive, no one can possibly raise a family here for under 400k -- is a bit ridiculous. And people here need a newsflash -- DC is not the most expensive city in America or in the world; nor does it have the worst commutes -- so all those excuses of -- you must be close-in are over the top and reek of people who have never had to commute in LA or London or from Long Island to Manhattan.

Seriously. DC is very manageable.

+1000
Many people on this forum have lost all touch with reality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

once you have no debt (save a reasonable mortgage), a solid emergency fund, and are saving responsibly for retirement each month, you need to declare a win, realize how good you have it compared to even people of above-average means and luck, stop torturing yourself, and enjoy life. Someone will always have more (and many, many will have less).

1000 times YES !!

This forum suffers from affluenza.

The All-Consuming Epidemic defines it as "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety, and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more."

This.

+1. I think anytime you have intelligent people making good money, you'll get some affluenza as everyone thinks they need to make more. Yet this forum seems to be ridiculous. The constant -- this area is soooo expensive, no one can possibly raise a family here for under 400k -- is a bit ridiculous. And people here need a newsflash -- DC is not the most expensive city in America or in the world; nor does it have the worst commutes -- so all those excuses of -- you must be close-in are over the top and reek of people who have never had to commute in LA or London or from Long Island to Manhattan.

Seriously. DC is very manageable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the last time: you need HHI 320K to be ok here. Two 15-10s or bust. No shame in going to flyover country with less and buying a 3500 sq ft sfh on an acre for 360K.

What a specific standard! What am I going to tell all my friends who don't earn that much, yet manage to live in DC?

Anonymous wrote:For the last time: you need HHI 320K to be ok here. Two 15-10s or bust. No shame in going to flyover country with less and buying a 3500 sq ft sfh on an acre for 360K.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

once you have no debt (save a reasonable mortgage), a solid emergency fund, and are saving responsibly for retirement each month, you need to declare a win, realize how good you have it compared to even people of above-average means and luck, stop torturing yourself, and enjoy life. Someone will always have more (and many, many will have less).

1000 times YES !!

This forum suffers from affluenza.

The All-Consuming Epidemic defines it as "a painful, contagious, socially transmitted condition of overload, debt, anxiety, and waste resulting from the dogged pursuit of more."

This.

+1. I think anytime you have intelligent people making good money, you'll get some affluenza as everyone thinks they need to make more. Yet this forum seems to be ridiculous. The constant -- this area is soooo expensive, no one can possibly raise a family here for under 400k -- is a bit ridiculous. And people here need a newsflash -- DC is not the most expensive city in America or in the world; nor does it have the worst commutes -- so all those excuses of -- you must be close-in are over the top and reek of people who have never had to commute in LA or London or from Long Island to Manhattan.

Anonymous wrote:$250k

Anonymous wrote:I think the naysayers need to understand that this is a really expensive area. Make 101k with household income for 220k. Live in a small rambler where schools are an 8, send kid to preschool, two old cars, no debt except mortgage. Max out retirements, eat out 2x/week, shop at whole foods/farmers markets and save a little on top of it. One vacation per year usually to the beach. Great, right? And I should be grateful. But now imagine if one of us loses a job or worse dies, we won't be able to afford even school, mortgage and retirement. That is the root of my financial insecurity.

My definition of being well-off is to make more so we can continue lifestyle on the lower income or alternately have an acceptable lifestyle on the lower income. At 100k, it is difficult.