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.
Vacations yeah spend probably 20K a year, but traveling is what we like to do so we do it.
there are lots of people out there that are pretty frugal when it comes to a lot of things but they still seem to struggle. i always say that there is something that they are blowing their money on. vacations seems to be one of your things, but there is probably some other place.
ill take a stab, how much are you spending on clothing? that was one of my wife's issues when she was working.
there are lots of people out there that are pretty frugal when it comes to a lot of things but they still seem to struggle. i always say that there is something that they are blowing their money on. vacations seems to be one of your things, but there is probably some other place.
ill take a stab, how much are you spending on clothing? that was one of my wife's issues when she was working.
yeah. i mean, i don't know specific COLs in the midwest, and i'm sure it depends on the city, but if I made $200k (combined) in many other places other than NJ, i'd have a lot more disposable income. i have quite a bit now in NJ that I save, so it's a bit shocking to me that someone living in an area that I assume is lower COL than NJ would be struggling. but, maybe COL is higher than I assume.
i'm interested in the property tax comment for sure though
Here in the midwest we make almost 200k between myself and my husband. Believe me it doesnt g that far.
I live in a nice house 2200 sf in nice neighborhood of executive homes, but not that nice.
Dont really care about the latest gadget. I use an old blackberry. Computers are few years old. I upgrade when they dont work not until.
Vacations yeah spend probably 20K a year, but traveling is what we like to do so we do it. New cars well they are paid for. 2 are 2008s and 1 in a 2011. They arent really that luxurious. Dodge truck, toyota, and one mercedes convertible. Dont plan to get anymore new ones until we really need to or our needs change.
Okay this is just funny.... You have a blackberry, computers, spend $20k on vacations, 3 cars one of which is rather expensive...and you're pretending as if your income doesn't go far? Ha!
Okay this is just funny.... You have a blackberry, computers, spend $20k on vacations, 3 cars one of which is rather expensive...and you're pretending as if your income doesn't go far? Ha!
you forgot the 2200 sq ft house. i guess this is now the "avg", but i'm in a 1700 sq ft house and that's plenty big for us right now. plus, costs a pretty penny in NJ.
stats the define middle class. as i said, they aren't perfect, since they cannot account for COL in different parts of the country..
What stats?! The census data doesn't "define middle-class", instead you have people that try to use it to define "middle-class". Of course, this just begs the question....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp
i think it's pretty easy for people to come up with "needs" vs "wants", so i don't think it's as subjective as it appears to be.
Umm...huh? Yeah, its easy for people to create a concept of "need" vs "want" in their head. For example some people think they need an iphone..... Defining "middle-class" in this fashion would result in as many definitions as there are people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp
i think buying a new car or leasing one every 3-5 years is not necessarily a big deal, but it isn't something i'd consider normal for a majority of the "middle class". it's something one would see more in upper-middle class. and that seems to be the prevailing opinion on here.
Using length of ownership makes little sense, leasing is not dramatically more expensive than owning. Continuously leasing < $20k cars is going to be cheaper than buying a premium car (e.g., Mercedes) and keeping it 7~8 years. Yet, the former is "upper-class" and the latter is not? Its about the type of cars, not the length of ownership.
Spending $200~$250/month on a car lease isn't exactly difficult to manage for most middle and working-class folks...
I contend that McMansions are built and marketed towards older middle-class folks, that is their target market. The upper-middle class buy either "super McMansions" or older homes in historic neighborhoods, etc.
What stats?! The census data doesn't "define middle-class", instead you have people that try to use it to define "middle-class". Of course, this just begs the question....
Umm...huh? Yeah, its easy for people to create a concept of "need" vs "want" in their head. For example some people think they need an iphone..... Defining "middle-class" in this fashion would result in as many definitions as there are people.
Using length of ownership makes little sense, leasing is not dramatically more expensive than owning. Continuously leasing < $20k cars is going to be cheaper than buying a premium car (e.g., Mercedes) and keeping it 7~8 years. Yet, the former is "upper-class" and the latter is not? Its about the type of cars, not the length of ownership.
Spending $200~$250/month on a car lease isn't exactly difficult to manage for most middle and working-class folks...
I contend that McMansions are built and marketed towards older middle-class folks, that is their target market. The upper-middle class buy either "super McMansions" or older homes in historic neighborhoods, etc.
yes, it's not official US stat. you're right. here's some info though: FactCheck.org: Is there a standard, accepted definition of what constitutes the "middle class"? (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_there_a_standard_accepted_definition_of.html - broken link) Social class in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
as for needs...sure, people can define an iphone as a need, but economically speaking, they'd be wrong. needs vs wants is something we learned about in grade school. Want vs. Need: Basic Economics Part 1
basically, needs are pretty simple. food, water, shelter. cable TV is not a need. cell phone service is not a need. internet is not a need. you don't need these things to survive. they've become a huge part of our lives, so some may feel they are a need, but they are not.
i wouldn't use simply length of ownership. i would say buying a luxury car is typical of higher class than lower class, just as constantly getting a new car (even if it's not very expensive) is more luxury than not. leasing a brand new honda civic every 3 years means one would perpetually have a $200-$300 monthly payment. where if one purchased a honda civic and financed it over that 3 year period, they would pay slightly more per month, but then have no payment at the end of that term. leasing rarely makes financial sense, but rather is a tool for people to obtain more car than they could otherwise afford, or is a tool for someone to be able to get a brand new car every 3 years. in fact, where i grew up, few people i knew ever even purchased new cars. in my view, it only makes sense to get a new car if you're going to keep it for a very long time, or you got a great deal on the new car vs what the used model would cost. but, assuming one is open to driving ANY car, a new car never makes sense financially. if you have certain wants or requirements for a car though, a new car could make sense, within reason.
i'm not sure what a super-mcmansion is. but middle class people in NJ can't afford mcmansions (large houses on small lots). they are typically $750,000+ in areas where normal sized houses are $350,000-$550,000. that's what i saw at least when i was real estate shopping.
yes, it's not official US stat. you're right. here's some info though...
Yes...I know I'm right. But why are you now linking me to a wiki article about a topic I already know about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp
as for needs...sure, people can define an iphone as a need, but economically speaking, they'd be wrong. needs vs wants is something we learned about in grade school.
Economically speaking? Economics doesn't tell you about needs vs wants. I have no idea why you think this is clear-cut, all you need is food and water. So is that the standard then? If you can afford food and water with a bit left over to save for retirement you're middle-class?
Of course this is all rather silly....you're focused on "middle-class" as "not poor, not rich" instead of thinking of it in terms of social stratification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp
i'm not sure what a super-mcmansion is. but middle class people in NJ can't afford mcmansions (large houses on small lots). they are typically $750,000+ in areas where normal sized houses are $350,000-$550,000. that's what i saw at least when i was real estate shopping.
Of course they can, what at times they can't afford is the land under the home. I'm not sure why you're speaking as if all of NJ is expensive...its not. When you talk about real estate you're always talking about two things, land values and construction costs. McMansion are cheaply made junk and are affordable by the middle-class, its only when they are built in more "exclusive" communities that have higher land-values when they are not affordable.
In terms of "super-McMansions", the McMansions in the 3,000 sq ft range are typically marketed towards the middle-class, but builders also make larger McMansions with more upgrades (often on larger lots) to the upper-middle class. These are usually 4,000~5,000 sq, hence "super McMansion". A large McMansion community will usually have 80~90 of the homes built for the middle-class with the other 10~20 for the upper-middle class.
Yes...I know I'm right. But why are you now linking me to a wiki article about a topic I already know about?
Economically speaking? Economics doesn't tell you about needs vs wants. I have no idea why you think this is clear-cut, all you need is food and water. So is that the standard then? If you can afford food and water with a bit left over to save for retirement you're middle-class?
Of course this is all rather silly....you're focused on "middle-class" as "not poor, not rich" instead of thinking of it in terms of social stratification.
Of course they can, what at times they can't afford is the land under the home. I'm not sure why you're speaking as if all of NJ is expensive...its not. When you talk about real estate you're always talking about two things, land values and construction costs. McMansion are cheaply made junk and are affordable by the middle-class, its only when they are built in more "exclusive" communities that have higher land-values when they are not affordable.
In terms of "super-McMansions", the McMansions in the 3,000 sq ft range are typically marketed towards the middle-class, but builders also make larger McMansions with more upgrades (often on larger lots) to the upper-middle class. These are usually 4,000~5,000 sq, hence "super McMansion". A large McMansion community will usually have 80~90 of the homes built for the middle-class with the other 10~20 for the upper-middle class.
food and water are basic needs. but for the purpose of this discussion there are some other things that would fall into needs as well. i think a group of us could come to a reasonable conclusion on "needs" for this definition above to work. that's what my point was. i really don't think it's that difficult.
as for the mcmansions, i'd welcome you to come to NJ and find the low cost communities with mcmansions in them. i may have missed when they started popping up in camden and trenton, so i apologize.
i'm thinking the mcmansion/super mcmansion market out in cali might be a bit different than how it sprouted in NJ...that's all. it's entirely possible that what you describe is the case, but i don't see it that way in NJ. in NJ...a house built in the 30s/40s/50s within a 60-90 minute commute to NYC is going to run $300-$600k. the houses that are mcmansions are quite expensive.
food and water are basic needs. but for the purpose of this discussion there are some other things that would fall into needs as well. i think a group of us could come to a reasonable conclusion on "needs" for this definition above to work. that's what my point was. i really don't think it's that difficult.
Agreement on this topic is going to be highly relative to one's social class. Put 5 people from the working-class in a room and another 5 from the upper middle-class and they are going to come to different conclusions in terms of "needs" vs "wants".
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradykp
as for the mcmansions, i'd welcome you to come to NJ and find the low cost communities with mcmansions in them.
I'll pass on coming to NJ....been there once and will never go back. Regardless, states like NJ (i.e., states with slow growth the last 2-3 decades) don't have a lot of McMansion to begin with. McMansions shouldn't hold any special significance, a 3,000 upgraded home from the 1930's is comparable (most likely better) to a 3,000 McMansion built in the last 1-2 decades. My point was that not all of NJ is expensive...and its not. There are many areas where you could build a McMansion in the $300k range. Now if you say people are only building McMansions in more pricey communities...alright...no idea either way.
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.
