Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yea I do not understand people, this year it looks like we will hit about 800K (two incomes). Between us we will have put 47k into 401K before employer contribution and another 40K of after tax mega roth money. We then do direct deposit of 30% of our net income into our brokerage account at every pay cycle. Even after forking over ~222,000 each year to retirement and taxable investments, we still are left to blow 23,000/mo on life. The key for us is we do all of this out of payroll deductions so there is no lifestyle creep, we never see that money.. And yes, we do have a 2nd home and do drive expensive cars and do take ski trips out to the rockies. At this point our investments are like having 3rd full time wage earner in the house. Our growth last quarter was around 250K...not bad for 3 months of work! And yes at age 48 if we both lost our jobs we could get by on taking a low wage job just for the health insurance. We would not lose our home, our kids would still have college paid for and we still would live a good life.

If you make our income and are strapped and not reaching your short and long term financial goals you are a complete and total moron.

Curious, what’s your net worth? We are 44/43 and very similar financials.

Anonymous wrote:Yea I do not understand people, this year it looks like we will hit about 800K (two incomes). Between us we will have put 47k into 401K before employer contribution and another 40K of after tax mega roth money. We then do direct deposit of 30% of our net income into our brokerage account at every pay cycle. Even after forking over ~222,000 each year to retirement and taxable investments, we still are left to blow 23,000/mo on life. The key for us is we do all of this out of payroll deductions so there is no lifestyle creep, we never see that money.. And yes, we do have a 2nd home and do drive expensive cars and do take ski trips out to the rockies. At this point our investments are like having 3rd full time wage earner in the house. Our growth last quarter was around 250K...not bad for 3 months of work! And yes at age 48 if we both lost our jobs we could get by on taking a low wage job just for the health insurance. We would not lose our home, our kids would still have college paid for and we still would live a good life.

If you make our income and are strapped and not reaching your short and long term financial goals you are a complete and total moron.

Anonymous wrote:My gross HHI is $300k. 15% goes to retirement (pre-tax), 15% to savings, 5% to kids college savings. We have a mortgage on a home that cost $390k 15 years ago, now worth ~$750k with just a few more years until it is paid off. Our house is on the “lower end” of the price range for our neighborhood. Our cars are 5-10 years old, mid range (Chrysler Pacifica, Honda Pilot). We eat out frequently, have newer iPhones, but do not buy designer clothes. We take one large domestic vacation each summer.
Our neighbors, in homes that are worth $1.25M, have similar careers, take elaborate international vacations, have expensive cars and designer clothing… I always wonder if they are not saving any money, or if my husband and I are somehow doing something wrong since we are not risky in our investments. This article tells me they are likely not saving.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume at that income level they mean they aren't very liquid and therefore rely on each paycheck to pay their bills. They just don't want to sell off property or stock/bonds, but they could if they lost their income, so it's not really paycheck to paycheck like it would be for low-income families.

I assume the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:It’s hard to know what is accurate in this area. High end shops here seem filled with buyers. Are there that many wealthy people, or are people throwing money away that they can’t afford? I assume both.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of people in this bracket are the ones trying to keep up with the Joneses. So they have multiple car notes, possibly two mortgages if they want a second place, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The curious thing if you look at the graph of responses:

Most people earning $200-$300K did NOT state they were living paycheck to paycheck. The majority 56% said they were doing considerably better than that, and felt they were able to make significant progress on short and long term financial goals.

Yet as people moved up the income scale, that percentage dropped a lot! Only about 25% of pe3ople earning $300K+ felt that they were making significant progress on short and long term goals.

I'm wondering about the age of the respondents and whether theyhad kids?

$200,000 income (one parent) + 2 little kids with a Stay at Home Parent is probably doing better than $300,000 HHI where both parents earn $150,000 and you have to pay for daycare for 2 kids.

I wonder if it's just perception. Like if you make $200k and save $40k between retirement/college/short term savings, you're justifiably proud and feel closer to your goals (down payment, new car, college tuition). But if you make $500k and save $100k between retirement/college/investments, you don't feel like you're making much headway because your goals are extremely expensive (early retirement/financial independence) or you feel like paying cash for cars/college is not really a goal or achievement so much as an expectation at your HHI, the same way a person making $200k wouldn't feel accomplished for paying their light bill.

Anonymous wrote:The curious thing if you look at the graph of responses:

Most people earning $200-$300K did NOT state they were living paycheck to paycheck. The majority 56% said they were doing considerably better than that, and felt they were able to make significant progress on short and long term financial goals.

Yet as people moved up the income scale, that percentage dropped a lot! Only about 25% of pe3ople earning $300K+ felt that they were making significant progress on short and long term goals.

I'm wondering about the age of the respondents and whether theyhad kids?

$200,000 income (one parent) + 2 little kids with a Stay at Home Parent is probably doing better than $300,000 HHI where both parents earn $150,000 and you have to pay for daycare for 2 kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We make about $450k. We max out most deductions, have a $4,800 mortgage payment, no daycare or debt and we pay cash for cars and vacations, and I can not fathom paying for a nanny, dual private, country club, and cleaning. When college comes we have savings. No quarterly tax payments (we're regular employees).

Must be nice to have such a low mortgage

Anonymous wrote:The curious thing if you look at the graph of responses:

Most people earning $200-$300K did NOT state they were living paycheck to paycheck. The majority 56% said they were doing considerably better than that, and felt they were able to make significant progress on short and long term financial goals.

Yet as people moved up the income scale, that percentage dropped a lot! Only about 25% of pe3ople earning $300K+ felt that they were making significant progress on short and long term goals.

I'm wondering about the age of the respondents and whether theyhad kids?

$200,000 income (one parent) + 2 little kids with a Stay at Home Parent is probably doing better than $300,000 HHI where both parents earn $150,000 and you have to pay for daycare for 2 kids.

Anonymous wrote:We make about $450k. We max out most deductions, have a $4,800 mortgage payment, no daycare or debt and we pay cash for cars and vacations, and I can not fathom paying for a nanny, dual private, country club, and cleaning. When college comes we have savings. No quarterly tax payments (we're regular employees).

Anonymous wrote:I assume at that income level they mean they aren't very liquid and therefore rely on each paycheck to pay their bills. They just don't want to sell off property or stock/bonds, but they could if they lost their income, so it's not really paycheck to paycheck like it would be for low-income families.