Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
NYC doesn't only include Manhattan you know. There are also suburban bedroom communities outside the city.
Westchester, Essex, Bergen and Nassau Counties have the highest property tax in the country
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
No Jersey City.
New Jersey has some of the highest property taxes in the nation, unless of course you would have them drive 1.5 hours to get to work because there's no PATH stations in their county![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
NYC doesn't only include Manhattan you know. There are also suburban bedroom communities outside the city.
Anonymous wrote:If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
Well the middle class friends that I know who own property live in Yonkers, Queens and Brooklyn. They commute because it's a darn expensive city to live in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
No Jersey City.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
If a person works in Manhattan, where should they live? Iowa? Idiot![]()
Anonymous wrote:Nothing ordinary about making north of $200K, which puts one in the top 5% of the country. How is that "middle"? And please don't say "250K doesn't get you very far in NW DC, Chevy Chase and Bethesda" - living in an expensive area is a choice. When I lived in NYC, I remember wealthy professionals in Manhattan saying these incomes are "barely getting by" - as if choosing to live in Manhattan isn't itself a luxury.
http://mic.com/articles/64095/what-we-get-wrong-when-we-define-the-middle-class
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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
Sounds ok to me, would it be better to buy a new car
Assuming that they were spending some money on housing before, their housing expenses are now more than 1/2 their take home pay. That seems like a very bad decision.
A good decision might be to increase the mortgage by a couple thousand a month, and use the rest for increased savings towards retirement, college etc . . . , and maybe treat oneself to something like a vacation once in a while. That's very possible on $350K.
Yeah PP is either lying or majorly house poor. I did some really rough calculations on those two incomes to see how take home pay might differ- granted actual taxes depend on many factors, this is just based on an online calculator tool for a married couple living in MD, doesn't include deductions for 401k, medical, etc.
$150k
- take home monthly pay: ~$9k
- max mortgage based on 30% rule: $2700
- income after mortgage: $6300
$350k
- take home monthly pay: ~18k
- so if their disposable income after mortgage is still $6300, that's a whopping $11700 mortgage, or perhaps less if she was factoring in the massive bills from heating/cooling such a big house.
Even if these numbers are off a bit, that is still nuts. Which is why I call BS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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
Sounds ok to me, would it be better to buy a new car
Assuming that they were spending some money on housing before, their housing expenses are now more than 1/2 their take home pay. That seems like a very bad decision.
A good decision might be to increase the mortgage by a couple thousand a month, and use the rest for increased savings towards retirement, college etc . . . , and maybe treat oneself to something like a vacation once in a while. That's very possible on $350K.
Yeah PP is either lying or majorly house poor. I did some really rough calculations on those two incomes to see how take home pay might differ- granted actual taxes depend on many factors, this is just based on an online calculator tool for a married couple living in MD, doesn't include deductions for 401k, medical, etc.
$150k
- take home monthly pay: ~$9k
- max mortgage based on 30% rule: $2700
- income after mortgage: $6300
$350k
- take home monthly pay: ~18k
- so if their disposable income after mortgage is still $6300, that's a whopping $11700 mortgage, or perhaps less if she was factoring in the massive bills from heating/cooling such a big house.
Even if these numbers are off a bit, that is still nuts. Which is why I call BS.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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
Sounds ok to me, would it be better to buy a new car
Assuming that they were spending some money on housing before, their housing expenses are now more than 1/2 their take home pay. That seems like a very bad decision.
A good decision might be to increase the mortgage by a couple thousand a month, and use the rest for increased savings towards retirement, college etc . . . , and maybe treat oneself to something like a vacation once in a while. That's very possible on $350K.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: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
Sounds ok to me, would it be better to buy a new car
Assuming that they were spending some money on housing before, their housing expenses are now more than 1/2 their take home pay. That seems like a very bad decision.
A good decision might be to increase the mortgage by a couple thousand a month, and use the rest for increased savings towards retirement, college etc . . . , and maybe treat oneself to something like a vacation once in a while. That's very possible on $350K.