Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
Sorry I meant 350k, to add we were hit with more taxes so our take home definitely didn't double
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:DC is not the only expensive spot in the country, you idiots.
No kidding. DC is one of the most prosperous and vibrant metro areas in the country. And it's not as if $300,000 a year goes further in Manhattan or Westchester County, Chicago's North Shore, the Bay Area, L.A.'s West Side, etc.
So what if it "goes further" in Omaha, Dallas or Phoenix? These cities lack DC's opportunities and cultural amenities and DC's high price is largely because affluent people disproportionately live in it. And either way, in no region in the country is $300,000 not a very high income.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
Sorry I meant 350k, to add we were hit with more taxes so our take home definitely didn't double
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
Sounds like a silly choice to me but YMMV
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
Sounds like a silly choice to me but YMMV
Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
you mad?Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The only difference between someone making 100k and 300k in the DC area is the size of their house. Everything else is pretty much the same middle class lifestyle.
How can someone so stupid even earn 300K??
Anonymous wrote:We went from 150k to 450k, the only thing that changed was a larger new house, our disposable income is the same.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The difficulty here is that most people look to the people a bit above them in income as our reference point and thus feel we are't that well off because we aren't as well off as "them". We don't spend much time looking at the lives of people who are below us in income and thus appreciating what we have that they don't. I'd classify most of my ILs as more working class and all it takes is a weekend visit to them to realize how affluent/upper-whatever-you-want-to-call-it my home (an improved, 2200 sq ft Arlington cape cod) and lifestyle really is. It's all in your perspective.
That's not a correct characterization of the sentiments expressed in this thread. We are not saying "look at those making $400k to $500k, they are are so much better off!". We are saying "don't label us as rich or upper class, because our life style is only marginally better than someone making $100k-$200k".
Anonymous wrote:The only difference between someone making 100k and 300k in the DC area is the size of their house. Everything else is pretty much the same middle class lifestyle.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The only difference between someone making 100k and 300k in the DC area is the size of their house. Everything else is pretty much the same middle class lifestyle.
No it's not. Do you have any common sense at all? I'm done even trying to explain it to you, total waste of time.
Anonymous wrote:The difficulty here is that most people look to the people a bit above them in income as our reference point and thus feel we are't that well off because we aren't as well off as "them". We don't spend much time looking at the lives of people who are below us in income and thus appreciating what we have that they don't. I'd classify most of my ILs as more working class and all it takes is a weekend visit to them to realize how affluent/upper-whatever-you-want-to-call-it my home (an improved, 2200 sq ft Arlington cape cod) and lifestyle really is. It's all in your perspective.