Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sorry, but what the heck are you talking about?
With the radical cuts to teacher pay here in GA, we are now living on $39k for a family of 4. I can't even find a teaching job, as all areas here are cutting between 60-1,000 jobs this fall. Our pay could decline another 15%. Yes, that's 15%.
Back in FL, 2 teacher incomes would give you around $76,800 (9 years experience). Then you're looking at several hundred per month for health insurance out of that pay.
$80-100k is comfortable in the south, or you don't know how to budget. Get off the cell phone. Change your own oil. Mow your own yard. Clean your own house. Turn the heat down/ AC up. Only buy fresh, whole foods (no sugar/prepackaged). Don't have pets. Stay at Motel 6 on trips. Get used cars and pay them off. Carry the min. insurance. Get your hair cut at the local beauty school ($4.99 here). Walk around the neighborhood instead of joining the gym. Only buy used furniture on Craigslist. Eliminate all meals out.
Yep, these are what we face now and it does suck, but I could live like a king on $80-100 after these years.
You misunderstood the point of my post and I think it has to do with the starting assumptions we do not spell out when talking about these matters. The question is "what are we trying to accomplish by working?"
My take on your budget is that you're so consumed with your "frugality for the sake of itself" you don't even remember what you started [proverbially or literally] toiling 60 hrs a week for in the first place. If the point of your life is subsistence, knock yourself out; mine is living, which encompasses a heck of a lot more than merely existing month to month. If you care to read my post again you'll notice that nowhere in the post I stated I lived paycheck-to-paycheck. The point of my post was to illustrate that 80K is "either/OR" money, meaning it's enough to subsist on, but not near enough to successfully raise your replacements AND self-actualize (the point of breathing, unless breathing self-actualizes you, at which point good for you) at the same time. I recognize that for a lot of couples, children are their self-actualization, that's fair enough. I don't happen to fall in that category nor do I agree with the practice, but I respect that choice. Outside that, it takes a lot more than 80K to cover living expenses for a family of four, save enough for a retirement of 75% of your peak working purchase power, and afford the travel/hobby/personal investment/etc that constitute the final and fundamental reason some of us decided to contribute to society instead of sitting on our thumbs and going on the dole. "either/or" wasn't it.
The funny thing about your cost cutting measures is that I largely do all those things already, the irony being that at the perceived value 80K around these boards, I shouldn't have to do that!
Change my own oil? Check. Mow the lawn? Check. Live in the ghetto and pay jack for a mortgage? Check. Cell phone? 50/mo and don't have a land line. Check. Gym? On-base (free). Check. Paid off 10 yo cars? Check. Pets? Got two indoor cats, sue me. Food? Yep, I take my wife to olive garden every two weekends so that she won't outright divorce me for not being able to "splurge" on big box restaurant $30 meal on 80K/yr combined. (sarcasm about the part of divorcing). Look, the point I'm making is that you won't nickle and dime your way into prosperity when the point of your toil is to do something a little more valuable than breathing and covering the mortgage on the 27th. Nickle and dime will get you to the point where you can afford the 27th of the month on a heck of a lot less than 80K (which seems to be the point of your post) , but for those of us who do not live to work we cannot simply pawn off the fulfillment of our lives during the de facto imposed working hours of the day and merely cover the expenses when we get home and call it success (the point of mine). Doing without a 25 dollar meal at applebees or a 20 dollar outing at the movies is not going to appreciably afford you the things we're breaking our backs for.
I already save $1000/mo, but I cannot do jack with it because the second I do the 10 year old car will invariably split in half and all y'all frugal gestapo will automatically begrudge me for "living beyond my means" on the spot. On 80K. And that's the same kitty where a supposed retirement is supposed to come from? Gimme a break.
Arguably my wife could do a better job of frugally consuming her 40K income, but as with real life, these sanitized budget examples do not tackle the presence of her student loans used to get the training to be able to afford the "luxury" of attaining that 40K job without health insurance or retirement, et al. So if we normalize for her shopping habit and call it the equivalent of one child's worth of expenses, then we're still in the same boat. Could we raise a household of 4? Sure. It'd be tight, she'd have to stop shopping for herself outright, and you can forget about me saving that 1000/mo. Now we're living paycheck to paycheck. Swell.
So in conclusion, let me reiterate that it's not that you're incorrect in asserting one could attain subsistence comfortably on 80K, I just think you're incorrect in asserting one could LIVE comfortably on 80K and replicate the effort for 4. Castigate me if you must, but I do not find the former motivation enough to get out of bed in the morning and smile my way into wage slavery. The latter would justify the effort.
As I also said before, this is all largely academic, most people don't philosophically deprive themselves like I do. Most people recognize what I'm saying and just go into debt for it, as they value time over money. And as we know it's a vicious cycle. But the idea that we should all be happy to have the ability to hypertoil just to barely eek out the subsistence standard of a working poor (former middle class definition) is the true societal shift that has occured in this country in the last 20 years, and is unfortunately a sign that the party IS over and increasingly living in America will no longer hold a competitive advantage towards affording the median the economic opportunity to realize their self-actualization. And judging by my own budget I KNOW 80K is not enough to attain that outcome for a family of 4 in the south.
Last edited by hindsight2020; 03-14-2010 at 10:03 AM..
I already save $1000/mo, but I cannot do jack with it because the second I do the 10 year old car will invariably split in half and all y'all frugal gestapo will automatically begrudge me for "living beyond my means" on the spot. On 80K. And that's the same kitty where a supposed retirement is supposed to come from? Gimme a break.
You should be able to save well over $1000/month on a $80k income if your budget is bare bones. In Los Angeles a couple could easily save $3,000/month if their budget was bare bones, in the South you should be able to save even more.
There is obviously something bleeding you financially that you are not talking about. Extensive student loan debt, an unaffordable mortgage, etc. What you're saying does not add up, I darn you to state your monthly budget.
You misunderstood the point of my post and I think it has to do with the starting assumptions we do not spell out when talking about these matters. The question is "what are we trying to accomplish by working?"
My take on your budget is that you're so consumed with your "frugality for the sake of itself" you don't even remember what you started [proverbially or literally] toiling 60 hrs a week for in the first place. If the point of your life is subsistence, knock yourself out; mine is living, which encompasses a heck of a lot more than merely existing month to month. If you care to read my post again you'll notice that nowhere in the post I stated I lived paycheck-to-paycheck. The point of my post was to illustrate that 80K is "either/OR" money, meaning it's enough to subsist on, but not near enough to successfully raise your replacements AND self-actualize (the point of breathing, unless breathing self-actualizes you, at which point good for you) at the same time. I recognize that for a lot of couples, children are their self-actualization, that's fair enough. I don't happen to fall in that category nor do I agree with the practice, but I respect that choice. Outside that, it takes a lot more than 80K to cover living expenses for a family of four, save enough for a retirement of 75% of your peak working purchase power, and afford the travel/hobby/personal investment/etc that constitute the final and fundamental reason some of us decided to contribute to society instead of sitting on our thumbs and going on the dole. "either/or" wasn't it.
The funny thing about your cost cutting measures is that I largely do all those things already, the irony being that at the perceived value 80K around these boards, I shouldn't have to do that!
Change my own oil? Check. Mow the lawn? Check. Live in the ghetto and pay jack for a mortgage? Check. Cell phone? 50/mo and don't have a land line. Check. Gym? On-base (free). Check. Paid off 10 yo cars? Check. Pets? Got two indoor cats, sue me. Food? Yep, I take my wife to olive garden every two weekends so that she won't outright divorce me for not being able to "splurge" on big box restaurant $30 meal on 80K/yr combined. (sarcasm about the part of divorcing). Look, the point I'm making is that you won't nickle and dime your way into prosperity when the point of your toil is to do something a little more valuable than breathing and covering the mortgage on the 27th. Nickle and dime will get you to the point where you can afford the 27th of the month on a heck of a lot less than 80K (which seems to be the point of your post) , but for those of us who do not live to work we cannot simply pawn off the fulfillment of our lives during the de facto imposed working hours of the day and merely cover the expenses when we get home and call it success (the point of mine). Doing without a 25 dollar meal at applebees or a 20 dollar outing at the movies is not going to appreciably afford you the things we're breaking our backs for.
I already save $1000/mo, but I cannot do jack with it because the second I do the 10 year old car will invariably split in half and all y'all frugal gestapo will automatically begrudge me for "living beyond my means" on the spot. On 80K. And that's the same kitty where a supposed retirement is supposed to come from? Gimme a break.
Arguably my wife could do a better job of frugally consuming her 40K income, but as with real life, these sanitized budget examples do not tackle the presence of her student loans used to get the training to be able to afford the "luxury" of attaining that 40K job without health insurance or retirement, et al. So if we normalize for her shopping habit and call it the equivalent of one child's worth of expenses, then we're still in the same boat. Could we raise a household of 4? Sure. It'd be tight, she'd have to stop shopping for herself outright, and you can forget about me saving that 1000/mo. Now we're living paycheck to paycheck. Swell.
So in conclusion, let me reiterate that it's not that you're incorrect in asserting one could attain subsistence comfortably on 80K, I just think you're incorrect in asserting one could LIVE comfortably on 80K and replicate the effort for 4. Castigate me if you must, but I do not find the former motivation enough to get out of bed in the morning and smile my way into wage slavery. The latter would justify the effort.
As I also said before, this is all largely academic, most people don't philosophically deprive themselves like I do. Most people recognize what I'm saying and just go into debt for it, as they value time over money. And as we know it's a vicious cycle. But the idea that we should all be happy to have the ability to hypertoil just to barely eek out the subsistence standard of a working poor (former middle class definition) is the true societal shift that has occured in this country in the last 20 years, and is unfortunately a sign that the party IS over and increasingly living in America will no longer hold a competitive advantage towards affording the median the economic opportunity to realize their self-actualization. And judging by my own budget I KNOW 80K is not enough to attain that outcome for a family of 4 in the south.
Not at all to "flame" you, just pointing out this does not add up - the expenses you describe here should leave you plenty left over to save & invest with with an 80K income, particularly if you are married (taxes).
If you are "treading water" it has to be due to expenses you are not listing here.
You don't need to find them and list them here, but you need to figure out where your money is going as a first step to getting a handle on things.
Not at all to "flame" you, just pointing out this does not add up - the expenses you describe here should leave you plenty left over to save & invest with with an 80K income, particularly if you are married (taxes).
If you are "treading water" it has to be due to expenses you are not listing here.
You don't need to find them and list them here, but you need to figure out where your money is going as a first step to getting a handle on things.
You know what folks. That's actually fair enough. I went back and did some number crunching and realized my wife has to be smoking through her income like it's going out of style. Her cc debt and student loans probably take up a good 25-30% of her take home, but the rest never shows up in the monthly budget. I'm basically holding down the fort on my 48K.
Her take-home is about $2500/mo. Figure about 250-500 for cc debt (she waffles on the amount month to month), 300/mo on student loans, 250 for gas, 120 for insurance, 50 for the gym (even though as a dependent she could use my free on-base facility) and 300 for food I don't provide (I support the bulk of the food budget). That leaves around 1000/mo that should be going into savings. I don't see a nickle of that money obviously. That's one hell of a spending habit.
I can be straight enough to admit when I've been mistaken and in this case you all are right, my household doesn't really see 80K's worth of income to support the household when it's all said and done. Lucy's got some esplainin' to do
I do find it a sour bit of irony that even in my own household there are people who recognize the philosophical deprivation I speak of and choose to live for the moment. I struggle with this in that I don't expect most people (even my own wife) to be able to exhibit the fortitude required to do without, and I am clearly not content with my condition so why would I expect her to, but boy is it lonely down here in frugal city ....
My only consolation at the moment is that I have completely separate financial a life from my wife. I house and feed her, outside that she has no control over the allocation of the income I earn (separate accounts, no co-cards or co-loans). After all, I subsidize her existence. Conversely, I cannot direct her expenditures. I do recognize that is a ticking time bomb waiting for the presence of children to set off. I am humbled.
Well, since I am apparently on a roll, maybe I can suggest you guys actually talk about working as a team money-wise. You don't need to do this confrontationally, for example if she likes the $50/month gym, how many guys would cheerfully fork over the $50 if the wife would go to the gym?! But someone needs to stress the benefits of deferred gratification with this gal.
Needless to say you need to start a family with this gal under the current regeime about like you need to snort a handful of anthrax spores. (Well I think this applies to any American Male, but that's off topic) Depending on what state you are in and how she responds, your best move, frankly and coldly, may be to split with her. She has a job, it's possible you might move on with minimal financial repercussions. That does not need to be "plan A" but it's got to be in the play book somewhere.
I am increadibly average and will tell you exactly what middle class looks like: couple, 1 kid. South texas. Income: $140k, home value: $330k, purchased in 2002 for $200k, put about $30k down, payments, including taxes are $1500/mo. One car pmt (on a 2yr loan only) $350/mo.. Generally pay cash for stuff. Don't splurge much, family have vacation homes so we do beach, snow and don't have to pay for hotels, so we vacation pretty cheap. Kid in private school. No student loans, though hubby went to very expensive private U, and I spent my entire 20s in college. (we were lucky enough to have parents and inheritances pay for college). We are very middle class, by my definition. I own a gucci and a prada; but my mom bought them for me lol! I could probably buy one, but why would it? I'm ok being middle class.
I'm comfortable with $100+ during this age. I most likely won't marry though.. at least I'll get a pay that will take care of my family without my wife working. I don't want to make the wife work, unless she wants to.
Last edited by schmidty223; 07-14-2011 at 10:52 PM..
I am increadibly average and will tell you exactly what middle class looks like: couple, 1 kid. South texas. Income: $140k, home value: $330k, purchased in 2002 for $200k, put about $30k down, payments, including taxes are $1500/mo. One car pmt (on a 2yr loan only) $350/mo.. Generally pay cash for stuff. Don't splurge much, family have vacation homes so we do beach, snow and don't have to pay for hotels, so we vacation pretty cheap. Kid in private school. No student loans, though hubby went to very expensive private U, and I spent my entire 20s in college. (we were lucky enough to have parents and inheritances pay for college). We are very middle class, by my definition. I own a gucci and a prada; but my mom bought them for me lol! I could probably buy one, but why would it? I'm ok being middle class.
LMFAO!!!!
Ummm, no:
Open CRS
Congressional Research Service Reports for the People
There is no consensus definition of "middle class," neither is there an official government definition. What constitutes the middle class is relative, subjective, and not easily defined. The mid-point in the distribution is the median, and in 2007 the median household income was $50,233. How far above and below that amount the middle stretches remains an open question. The U.S. Census Bureau has published figures for 2007 breaking the income distribution into quintiles, or fifths. The narrowest view of who might be considered middle class based on that presentation would include those in the middle quintile, which includes households with income between $39,100 and $62,000. A more generous definition might be based on the three middle quintiles, those households with income between $20,291 and $100,000. Surveys suggest that from 1% to just over 3% of the population consider themselves to be upper class. Comparing those figures with the income distribution would put the dividing line between middle and upper class close to, if not above, $250,000. Similarly, survey responses suggest that the lower end of the middle class might be close to $40,000. Much of the legislation considered by Congress is in the name of the so-called "middle class." But ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
....
I am humbled.
