Can someone live OK on 35-45K in the Washington DC area? (rent, house)

[saganista]

Originally Posted by livefreeordie

Well, you need some productive members of society or parasites like yourself don't have anyone to feed off.

Uh-huh. I suppose I should call you out for insulting our brave troops fighting in Iraq to protect our freedoms by calling them parasites like that, but instead, just tell me, if your particular job were to be nationalized tonight, and while nothing else changed at all, starting tomorrow morning you were to be overseen by oh, say someone like me, would you still consider yourself to be a productive individual, or would you, now officially a government employee and all, have suddenly turned into a parasite...

[claremarie]

J-Man,
If you can view your time in Washington as consumption rather than investment (though it might prove to be the latter), then go for it. This is a GREAT place to live, and the employment opportunities far exceed anything in Erie, as you well know. (I grew up in Pittsburgh, and we used to drive up to Lake Erie in the summer...) You may never get this chance again, as family obligations may limit your ability to pick up and move in the future. Ask yourself -- what is the WORST thing that could happen if I move to DC?

You don't want to be pushing 50 and wondering about might have been. You can always move back to PA if things don't work out or you just don't like big city living.

[Yac]

Remember to be civil, please.
Yac.

[J-Man]

Originally Posted by livefreeordie

And why one earth does the federal govt need MBAs???? Is it B for Bureaucrat?

It's a pretty sad thing to aspire to -- a career in the federal government. Stay in PA and do something productive with your life instead of aspiring to come to DC and stick your nose in the trough.

But I guess this is the indictment of this warped economic system. The only expanding sectors are those that benefit from reckless growth in government spending and the associated growth in the money supply. Obviously, your best bet is in finance before the thing blows up. Head north, young man, to Wall Street.

Hopefully the cycle will turn and federal spending will be curtailed. I am not sure how it will. Maybe a moderate Democrat president and a republican congress, but I don't see it happening. At least the Democrats might curtail the military waste, but the horror of them controlling the executive and congress in unfathomable.

The people who have earn better around here work for defense contractors like SAIC, Lockheed Martin, etc. Or the likes of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Just ask Frankie Ranies about how lucrative that is and being a GSE protects you from going BK like their bretheren in New Century. Not filing your 10-k for umpteen years? Billions in fictious earnings? Delisting from the NYSE? Not a problem. But that's probably even more repugnant than working for the Leviathan directly.

I don't necessarily think that wanting a career or a job with the federal government has to be a bad thing. Doesn't it depend on the person, their motives, their daily performance, etc? I'm not just thinking about government work simply because I want to take ANY job with government. No, what I'm most interested in, are jobs having to do with antiterrorism and national security.

These types jobs have been one of the few real "growth" sectors in government in the post-September 11th period. There has been lots of hiring for these kinds of positions. These jobs appeal to me because I think I'd be doing something WORTH DOING in terms of making a worthwhile contribution to the country I've been lucky enough to live in. I sure wouldn't aspire to go work in DC just to take "any" job down there.

So I'm not just "aspiring" as much to a career in the federal government. I'm searching for an opportunity to do meaningful work (that I'm interested in), but which at the same time has more job security attached to it than many of the opportunities in Pennsylvania.

I do believe that even those working for the government can be doing something "productive" with their lives. There has always been that stereotype though of government workers as lazy, inefficient,
non-productive, etc. But doesn't that depend on the person? In my own case, I've always busted my ass at whatever job I've been in. That wouldn't change if my employer became the federal government, state government, etc. Internal work ethic really depends on the individual and what they bring to the job everyday. You can find "non-productive" workers in all areas of employment (private sector and in government).

One thing I do wonder about though is how the jobs climate in the area I'm interested in will change after the 2008 elections. Let's say, for instance, that we are out of Iraq by that point and that a Democrat has been elected to the White House.

Will that mean that much of the government money currently funding
anti-terrorism jobs will simply "dry up" or be sharply reduced as the government looks towards other spending priorities?

The United States is spending an awful lot of money right now on
anti-terrorism. I can't imagine that will go on forever.

[J-Man]

Originally Posted by saganista

Well, generous pay is not exactly something that the government is noted for, particularly at the upper and lower levels. In between isn't as bad, but federal pay consistently lags behind the private sector, at nearly every level and in nearly every type of position. The tradeoffs are the supposed satifaction of being involved in public service, and relative job security, the government not really being involved in such thigs as downsizings, buyouts, or takeovers, and unlikely to see dwindling market share or shrinking profitability force it to close its doors. Some steps have been taken with regard to salary-inequality, such as in authorizing recruitment or retention bonuses for particularly desirable individuals, but those remain rather rarely used tools, in part because you still have to find the money for them somewhere else in your budget. As noted earlier, experience can be used as a supplement to, or even as a replacement for, education. While not being a guaranty that you'll get it, a Masters in anything will at least make one eligible for a GS-9, but it would be specialized experience that one would need to have in order to get any higher up than that at entry. If you have had significant private sector experience that would be equivalent to what a GS-12 would do, you can start as a GS-13, but most agencies are able to fill the majority of those positions from within. All this applies to generally advertised, competitive positions, which is the majority of them. There are certainly some positons to be filled where the function is known, a pool of invividuals is known, and the position is then defined and advertised with respect to the particular individual that the agency has in mind. This could occur as low as the GS-14 or GS-15 level, but would be more likely with respect to a Senior Executuve Service position. These are primarily Agency and Office directors and a few of their immediate underlings. Above them come the so-called Schedule-C types. These are political appointees rather than career service positions, and would include probably all of the federal people you've ever heard of (Valerie Plame would be an exception, but you weren't supposed to have heard of her). Anyway, probably the best way to get yourself into one of those positions is to have worked somewhere reasonably high up on the campaigns of whoever is or becomes President.

Saganista, thanks very much for that additional information on the federal hiring process and pay levels. I'm wondering, you seem to know quite a bit about all of this. Are you a federal employee yourself?

[J-Man]

Originally Posted by saganista

Ah, that's different. But not in a good way, as far as DC prospects go. If you really would have to take a GS-7/GS-9 salary, and that would be it, it'll be hard to make ends meet here. Are you sure you don't have experience that would qualify you at a higher level?


Well, there isn't much you can do when a bad commute is because it's the best you can afford. It just pains me to see people who can't at all enjoy the nice place in which they have chosen to live because they spend 3-4 hours a day on the road, when there are very similar residential areas that would have required a 90-minute roundtrip commute at most. What a waste.


Not in the District, unless you're an upper-level agency official. No one wants to encourage people to drive to work. There are, however, subsidies of up to $110 per month for mass transit costs other than parking. Those are commonplace. The basic deal is you simply don't want to park downtown unless you absolutely have to.


Well, you've got Step-1 and Step-2 along the path to financial security covered then. Find your way to home ownership, and fund as much of your retirement as you can along the way. One day you'll be the envy of all the flashy big-spenders who thought they could stock-pick the way to their dreams. Whether a few years in DC will help with either of those is still an open question, though.


Well, they are trying. Decentralization is a significant factor in most new office planning, but it's very difficult when it comes to already existing facilities. You may have from many hundreds to many thousands of people tuned in to a particular situation. If you try to move them more than a block or two, you can expect to lose up to half of your staff. That's an awful lot of human capital cost to be willing to flush down the drain. Many decision-makers simply aren't willing to accept that cost, particualry in light of the fact that they may also face eternal bitterness and resentment from the half of the workforce that does remain.


In general, that's true, just as the so-called cost-of-living adjustments don't usually cover the actual increases in the cost of living. Every little bit helps, of course, but it's basically promotions from one grade-level to the next that keep people going. Most people who both work hard and hang around will eventually reach the GS-12 level. That range currently runs from $67K to $87K. You can live pretty well on that even here, especially if you happen to be one of two household wage-earners, as is very often the case. If you can handle some supervisory responsibility, a GS-13 starts at $79K and runs to $103K, and the string runs out when you are the recognized expert in your field, and then you'll be somewhere in the $110K to $143K range, which of course, is usually more than than enough to be quite comfortable. All that and the relative security of federal employment are what convince the GS-7's and GS-9's that it will all be worth it one day.

Saganista, in reference to your earlier question about whether I have experience that would qualify me for something above the GS-7 or GS-9 level, the answer to that is no.

So for the purposes of this discussion, the highest I'd probably be starting (if hired) would be at a GS-7, or possibly a GS-9.

[J-Man]

Livefreeordie wrote:

"Tell me, honestly. What's better for America. A young enterprising man who starts a business in central PA or bureaucrat zombies who shuffle paper in DC?"

I see what you're saying, but in my case, I don't see those two alternatives in exactly the same way as you. For instance, I agree that it's a GREAT thing for someone to start a business in Pennsylvania. Believe me, that's one option I've thought of as well. I've also thought about finding a way to buy an existing business here. I like Pennsylvania, and even though it has drawbacks, I wouldn't mind staying here if the opportunities existed. But one problem with the business idea is that unfortunately, Pennsylvania is not exactly a "friendly" place for business in terms of the taxes, regulations, laws, etc. That's one reason why so many companies have left, and also a reason why so many residents have trouble starting "new" businesses.

And I'll be the first to say that I'd never want to be some "bureaucrat zombie who shuffles paper in DC". But although I'm sure there are people like that, isn't that also a stereotype about ALL government workers?

As I wrote in my earlier posting, I'm interested in jobs involving anti-terrorism and national security. If I work for the government, those are the areas I'd like to make a contribution in and work hard at.

I'd never want to simply "shuffle papers" in DC at some boring job. But that's not what I'm looking at doing if I go into the federal service.

[mlv311]

J-Man: Based on your posts, I would encourage you to try it out in DC. Even if you start as a GS-7 or GS-9 in a professional series and the job has promotion potential to a GS-12 or GS-13, you are likely to be promoted to the next grade every year if you are performing well. And yes, there are people who work in the federal government because they believe in public service. If you work hard and are self-motivated, you will be rewarded for your performance and people will think of you when opportunities open elsewhere. Not every agency is the same and some attract higher caliber staff than others...You keep at it and you'll find the right environment for you. The salary may be low initially, but you have very good benefits and opportunities for promotion.

Obviously, you'll need to live frugally initially. If you don't want roommates and the rents are high, you can always live in a studio or junior one bedroom near a metro. If you save money and want to buy a home (condo or TH), you may qualify for first-time home buyer loan. I know from personal experience it is doable. Good luck.

[J-Man]

Originally Posted by saganista

Uh-huh. I suppose I should call you out for insulting our brave troops fighting in Iraq to protect our freedoms by calling them parasites like that, but instead, just tell me, if your particular job were to be nationalized tonight, and while nothing else changed at all, starting tomorrow morning you were to be overseen by oh, say someone like me, would you still consider yourself to be a productive individual, or would you, now officially a government employee and all, have suddenly turned into a parasite...

I've always worked my butt off in whatever job I've had, and I've been told by many, many people that I have an oustanding work ethic. I just don't see how working for the government would all of a sudden make me change how I approached work.

I'd venture to say that many of the "lazy" government employees were probably that way before they worked for the government.

Like I said earlier, I think how you approach work and what you bring to the job everday is an INTERNAL thing.

As much as there may be "parasites" who aren't productive and who live off government taxes, there are also "parasites" who exist in the private sector and whose employment wastes the profit of the business.

The only difference (and hopefully this will change), is that it's harder to fire the bad employees that work for the government (federal, state, or local), than it is in the private sector.

[J-Man]

Originally Posted by claremarie

J-Man,
If you can view your time in Washington as consumption rather than investment (though it might prove to be the latter), then go for it. This is a GREAT place to live, and the employment opportunities far exceed anything in Erie, as you well know. (I grew up in Pittsburgh, and we used to drive up to Lake Erie in the summer...) You may never get this chance again, as family obligations may limit your ability to pick up and move in the future. Ask yourself -- what is the WORST thing that could happen if I move to DC?

You don't want to be pushing 50 and wondering about might have been. You can always move back to PA if things don't work out or you just don't like big city living.

Thanks for that advice, claremarie. I really appreciate it. It's of course a big decision with a lot of components. You're right of course that I don't want to be 50 years old and look back at what "might have been" in terms of an opportunity not taken.

But I also don't want to be 50 years old and have no house near the area I'm working, and little savings for retirement due to living in such an expensive area. So there are both positives and negatives with each option.

You're right in that I could always take a federal job and keep the option of moving back to PA on the back burner. Since I'll own a house in the town I'm from, I could always work in DC while always keeping abreast of any job or business opportunities back near the town I'm from (in case I don't like DC).

I like your question of "What's the worse thing that can happen If I move to DC?" That's a good way to look at it as well.

One question for you. Do you have a long commute to your job in the DC area?