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.
There is a commonly used acronym to describe this: HENRY = High Earnings Not Rich Yet.
Even in very low cost of living states, $343K is far, far from rich.
On $343K (even ten times that amount), you cannot afford this: [conspicuous consumption examples omitted].
First, stop using 343k. It is at least 50k higher than that, as has been noted in other posts.
Second, the fact that someone doesn't live like a literal King or Noble from decades past doesn't mean one is not rich. It's a not-too-subtle technique for acting like people making 400k a year aren't rich. Raise the bar to reflect the lifestyle of the Vanderbilts or George Hearst and then NOBODY is rich, right? But that is bunk. Of course they (the American 1% of earners) are rich unless it was a one-time earning from the sale of a business.
No offense, but this whole thing about not being able to afford X/Y/Z when you are making 400k is misdirection at its most laughable. In any city, including New York City, you can afford to save MOST of your after tax assets (say 125k out of 250k take home) and live in a safe area with good public schools (and the private/public distinction creates no better educational outcomes; it is the demographics and wealth of the children's families that correlates with test scores ONLY). And leaving your kids with no debt after undergrad can be accomplished on 50 or 60k per kid (or less) depending upon one's state schools.
If you can save more money than 90-plus percent of the population makes in a year and still live VERY comfortably, then you are rich. As I mentioned earlier, if you are frugal, you can save 200k per year in most localities. Indeed, outside of NYC and LA/Orange County and San Fran, where would 400k not be *obscenely* wealthy!?
Someone making 400k could save enough money to retire - at any age - in 10-15 years, perhaps 20 if they had an outlier amount of student loan debt. Assuming that comfort and security, rather than lavishness, is the standard they aspire to retire in.
And one more from the Wall Street Journal of a fire fighter with a 250k pension AND he has now been hired back at 176k as a consultant... so well over 400k
Then there are medical wages for prison and public hospital Doctors and even a few nurses...
Why do I even try!? I admitted there are rare abuses, but pointed out that the distribution of the wealthy in MOST state governments (California firefighters and police EXPLICITLY EXEMPTED) is literally ZERO, *and I specifically excepted* coaches of a few men's athletic teams at state universities and university administrators. The point was that public employees in the 1% are far less than 1% of the total public employees around the country.
So, what is the response? A few individual examples of California safety and firefighter public employees used to represent some widespread trend. And the other response? COACHES AND ADMINISTRATORS. It's like my post didn't even exist. I get it. Everyone who works for the government should grovel for inferior wages, and any one or ten or even 100 abuses out of the millions of public workers will prove that government workers are a serious issue. And even though very few public workers are even in the top 10%, much less 1%, it will allow for the faux-populist wagontrain of false equivalence between the public and private sector to persist.
It's cool. Availability bias and anecdotes masquerading as data will always be in style. Reading comprehension and logical reasoning will always be suspicious fringe activities.
Location: inside, where it is warm or cool depending on the season
117 posts, read 140,125 times
Reputation: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider
In another City-Data forum some kind person posted this Bankrate.com link which defines the income threshold needed to be part of the top 1% as $343K per year. Now that was based on the 2009 tax year, so the figure is admittedly a bit dated. Top 1 Percent: How Much Do They Earn? | Bankrate.com
However, I was amazed that the amount was that low. I would have guessed it to be several times higher than that. Apparently the 1% includes some folks at the lower end of that lofty range who are not really very rich at all. I don't know what to think about that datum.
Perhaps someone will come up with a more recent figure and/or other explanatory comments.
(And no, just to clarify, I am not anywhere close to being part of that lofty group).
How about the .1%? That's where the money and power is.
This thread is about the 1% so it naturally follows 99% will be excluded.
As mentioned... California, specifically the Bay Area, is not inexpensive.
I'm old enough to remember when public employees were known as civil servants.
Also old enough to know the Police Officer fathers of my school friends all worked second jobs to support their family until they made rank.
My Uncle died in the line of duty as a deputy sheriff... it was nothing like it is today. He had a 10k life insurance which he paid half the premium and the department the other half... other than having his name on a plaque in the lobby... that was it.
Anyone in the public sector has to know they work for the public...
Still interesting that there are public sector employees that make enough to best 99% of the rest of us.
Indeed, outside of NYC and LA/Orange County and San Fran, where would 400k not be *obscenely* wealthy!?
Someone making 400k could save enough money to retire - at any age - in 10-15 years, perhaps 20 if they had an outlier amount of student loan debt. Assuming that comfort and security, rather than lavishness, is the standard they aspire to retire in.
Moderator cut: personal - off topic
$400K annual salary is nowhere close to being "obscenely wealthy". Like I said, I know doctors who make around that in Ohio and they still worry about paying off $450K from med school loans, $1 million+ to pay off the mortgage on the house they just built, $500K-$1 million for the projected tuitions + living expenses at private elite universities their 3 kids might be attending, $400K for a luxury item like a summer home or small yacht, and of course $3-$4 million for a comfortable retirement fund. Let's not forget another $2-$3 million for building a new medical office, equipment purchases, and professional liability insurance for malpractice claims.
Add it all up and that so-called "obscenely wealthy" doctor who makes $400K/year doesn't look so rich anymore, and prolly won't be solvent until he's around 60 yrs. old, when he started working at 30.
Put this Ohio doctor in the wealthiest parts of Long Island or San Fran and he's probably going to live upper middle class at best. His neighbors will be plumbers and pizza shop owners, not movie stars and pro athletes.
$400K annual salary is nowhere close to being "obscenely wealthy". Like I said, I know doctors who make around that in Ohio and they still worry about paying off $450K from med school loans, $1 million+ to pay off the mortgage on the house they just built, $500K-$1 million for the projected tuitions + living expenses at private elite universities their 3 kids might be attending, $400K for a luxury item like a summer home or small yacht, and of course $3-$4 million for a comfortable retirement fund. Let's not forget another $2-$3 million for building a new medical office, equipment purchases, and professional liability insurance for malpractice claims.
Add it all up and that so-called "obscenely wealthy" doctor who makes $400K/year doesn't look so rich anymore, and prolly won't be solvent until he's around 60 yrs. old, when he started working at 30.
Put this Ohio doctor in the wealthiest parts of Long Island or San Fran and he's probably going to live upper middle class at best. His neighbors will be plumbers and pizza shop owners, not movie stars and pro athletes.
That's his own fault.
$400K is a rich man's salary. If someone making that salary doesn't "feel rich" they should stop sending so much money down the crapper. Stop trying to compete with the 0.1%. The biggest perception problem in this country is the envy the 1% has of the 0.1%. If you make 6 figures, you are rich. You just have to play your cards right and not be so careless.
Last edited by Marka; 06-30-2014 at 05:13 AM..
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.
