$300,000/yr now what is needed for middle class existance (IRA, real estate, company)
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.
Typically, the reason for these eye-watering numbers, is that as one's income increases, there is concomitant increase in expenses... taxes, childcare and the like. That is to say, that of each additional $1 earning, perhaps only $0.30 is kept (a nominal guess - could be entirely wrong). This is why the actual discretionary funds available, may differ only slightly, between people who earn a moderate amount, and those who earn a very considerable one.
Also useful is to make distinction between a family with children, and a single person (or cohabiting couple) without children. We then dispense with the costs of raising children, the "need" to live in the premier school-districts and the like. By my reckoning, for this latter group, the real difference in cost-of-living between one or another locale, is in the taxes.
The hypothetical family can't possibly do everything the article says. This is like those articles that say poor people can make 50k a year through welfare... they never qualify for every program simultaneously.
The author has the parents going on weekly date nights, weekend getaways, take-out every day, an $8000 vacation every year, and somehow his "entertainment" costs $600 a month? Netflix costs $17. What, are they going to see the 49ers or Warriors every week? If so, when do they do their weekend getaways?
They're going to go on all these vacations, getaways, and events with a baby?
$500 a month on clothes?? What, do they wear out a business suit that needs replacing every month? I replace about 10-20% of my worn out work clothes every YEAR, and it costs maybe 500-1000, and that's when I splurge. Baby clothes are something like a few dollars per item at Wal-Mart. There is no reason to buy the baby nice clothes he or she will just spit up on.
He's counting the baby expenses as monthly when cribs, etc... should be one-time costs, unless they're planning on having a baby every year for many years.
$2100/mo on food, and that's on top of the date nights! At my house we do takeout about twice a week. Takeout is typically 10-15 per person. The baby is not eating takeout. Baby food is pretty cheap. Even getting takeout every single day does not add up to $2000, it's more like half that. So wtf?
They could have bought a 2015 Volvo for cash if they cut back their 401k contributions for a year.
The mortgage and car payment look reasonable for this family, but, with work and family, I don't think I could live the lifestyle this article suggests even given unlimited money. There is simply not the time to do all the sporting events, date nights, etc... How exhausting!
Seems high, I would say $200,000/yr would do it, anything lower than $200,000/yr and it would not be optimal in terms of raising kids, living in a good area with good schools, saving for retirement and taking the family on a vacation or two a year.
Ridiculous.. This article should be used in the bathroom as toilet paper. A joke.
Normal liberal gibberish. That means no country in the world has a middle class. Anywhere. Similar to the arbitrary "poverty level" calculation we hear about all the time.
Normal right wing partisan gibberish. Try to break down any talking point as liberal vs conservative.
The person behind this article probably came up with such an outlandish theory to get attention and notoriety.
It should have been titled "upper middle class." This isn't about middle class at all. It's also about families.
A lot of singles/couples/retirees live very well in the expensive cities on much less money, simply by some combination of less square footage, no car (or one car), etc.
Seattle doesn't belong anywhere near the Manhattan or San Francisco cost level (or the similar Vancouver level) despite being increasingly mentioned with them. Between buying/renting and various types of housing, I'd guess we're generally about 60% of the price of those three.
It should have been titled "upper middle class." This isn't about middle class at all. It's also about families.
A lot of singles/couples/retirees live very well in the expensive cities on much less money, simply by some combination of less square footage, no car (or one car), etc.
Seattle doesn't belong anywhere near the Manhattan or San Francisco cost level (or the similar Vancouver level) despite being increasingly mentioned with them. Between buying/renting and various types of housing, I'd guess we're generally about 60% of the price of those three.
$500 a month on clothes?? What, do they wear out a business suit that needs replacing every month? I replace about 10-20% of my worn out work clothes every YEAR, and it costs maybe 500-1000, and that's when I splurge. Baby clothes are something like a few dollars per item at Wal-Mart. There is no reason to buy the baby nice clothes he or she will just spit up on.
I imagine the people who believe they need 300K to be middle class would find shopping at Walmart beneath them.
That person's tax burden is bigger too (both in % and in $). Federal income tax alone would be bigger than most people's gross incomes.
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.