What is a 'high income"?

[Stinky The Clown]

The measure is household income. A household is a couple or an individual.

[rfranklin]

1. Depends on where you live and how many kids you have...

and is this household income?

[Stinky The Clown]

3. I just added a clarifier

It would be household income. A household is a couple or an individual.

[PWRinNY]

66. It absolutely depends on where you live

What I make, where I live, is a pittance. But what I make, just 4 hours upstate - same state, mind you - would be considered solidly middle class. I think that where a person or family lives should always be taken into consideration.

[Selatius]

2. 1,000,000 separates the small fries from the big players

Everybody else is just pretending to be the elite.

I'm talking about payroll income. If you're making that much or more a year in payroll income, chances are you have stock options worth several times if not several dozen times that amount.

[Stinky The Clown]

4. I understand the qualifier

My original intent was all income from any source.

[sandnsea]

28. $100,000 is top 10%

In the US, and the US has some of the highest incomes in the world. $100,000 is high income and it's also income that allows for investment and the accumulation of wealth. Even though a million dollars isn't much compared to 30-40 years ago, it's still an amount of money very few ever attain.

[anewdeal]

5. nearly every American is high income

if you are above the poverty line you are doing better than most of the rest of the world

[gaspee]

6. Huh?

Yes, you make more than most people in the world, but you need a hell of a lot more money to put a roof over your head than you do anywhere else in the world. Add paying utilies, transportation and food and good luck living at the poverty level. Now try to factor in clothing, basic supplies, heat in the winter, and a diet above ramen noodles, mac and cheese and hot dogs. Have you ever tried to survive at the poverty level?

I can't believe you just said that! It's either complete ignorance or... or... well, I don't what else. Ignorance or malice... I wonder.

I guess all the Americans out there faced with homelessness when their rent goes up, or loss of jobs because they can't afford the gas to get to work should just be thankful they don't live somewhere they would make 1.00 a day and shut up already, shouldn't they!

[anewdeal]

7. fact is

most people don't even have utilities to pay. Most people don't get mac and cheese. Most people don't get much clothing. Most people don't even have a heater much less even close enough money to pay for heating bills.

[zanne]

8. Could you try again in English?

I have no idea what you just said.

[anewdeal]

11. in English

all the stuff you have if you are poor in America, is way way more than what most people in the world have.

[zanne]

13. That's mighty Christian of you, anewdeal.

Are you lost? The internets can be a confusing place. Do you know what "Google" is? If not, find a liberal to explain it to you.

[Zhade]

102. You're not getting it.

The poster is pointing out, rightly, that even poor Americans live better than millions of people worldwide who would be considered 'well off' in their respective countries.

[Nederland]

57. Good point

I think Americans forget how lucky we are.

[trogdor]

20. That comes from Jimmy Carter's standard speech.

The one he gives when he's asked to speak. It rings true. Yes, I know that $100,000 in Utica, New York is not the same as $100,000 in San Diego. Still, lots and lots of people on Planet Earth would love to be able to reliably subsist on ramen noodles, mac and cheese and hot dogs. The plain truth is, billions of people do not enjoy that level of comfort and security.

We have some pretty basic problems with housing in some areas because nobody wants to build low-cost housing. There's no money in it. As a result, you have people who work at Pizza Hut in Seattle (for example) who have to commute from where the buses don't run in a rusting wreck of a car (held together by duct tape and a few Hail Marys) because they can't afford to live near where they work.

That wasn't the question, though. The question was, what is considered a "high" income, which I would define as an amount that would enable someone to live in any neighborhood they wanted, drive any new car they wanted, buy any big TV set they wanted without having to finance it, and go out to eat at a restaurant tony enough to require a jacket and tie whenever they wanted. In other words, what would finance the "Sex and the City" lifestyle? I figure Carrie Bradshaw must make about a quarter million a year, Samantha Jones about double that. Miranda probably makes around $100K-$150K, and had to move out of Manhattan because her rent is too high. Not-Samantha is pretty much old money.

[onehandle]

10. Nice try. nt

[fishwax]

25. welcome to DU anewdeal!

:hi:

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Llewlladdwr]

108. You've not traveled much outside the States, have you?

N/T

[BigYawn]

89. You are correct sir! I grew up in a poor country and I know at first hand

what REAL poverty is. 50% of people in my country of birth do not
have a car, a telephone, a refrigerator, a bed frame, TV, more than
2 outfits of clothing, more than 1 worn out pair of shoes. Daily
food consists of 2 slices of bread, 1 small bowl of rice and diluted
peas soup. No meat, no milk, no fruits. They live in a shack made up
of cardboard and metal sheets.

The so called middle class has less material comforts there than people
on welfare in the USA.

[anewdeal]

90. its really all about perspective

if you are watching tv and you see all these celebrities living in mansions with 10 cars then that is what "high income" means to you.

if you don't even have a tv and finding something to eat is a challenge, then those who eat food three times a day are "high income"

[Mass]

9. What do you call high income?

[hyphenate]

12. Anyone making double

what I make. Which essentially means, anything over $30,000. Of course I know that's not really true, as I made that much at one time, and it really wasn't quite enough.

I suppose the clearest indication of what is "high" is as follows: If you can walk into a store, any store, and can look at anything in that store with little to no regard to prices or worry about the cost of anything, you are making a "high" income.

[anewdeal]

111. then all it takes is a credit card and a care free attitude.

[MelliMel]

14. Other. Again, just like the "rich" poll, it depends on where you live.

High income where some of my cousins live (way upstate NY) is nothing close to high income where I live (California).

[MercutioATC]

15. $100k "high" income??? Hardly.

The mythical land of six figures isn't all it's cracked up to be.

I'd say $500k+

[Xenotime]

16. That's easy for you to say...

You are prolly better off.

[MercutioATC]

17. I'm just saying that $100k really isn't "high"...

...yes, it's higher than many, but I'd consider a "high" income to be one that makes the earner wealthy. $100k doesn't do that.

[Romberry]

18. Over time, a 100k+ annual income does make you wealthy

If you're earning 100k+ on an annual basis, you're earning more than 95 percent of the country and with anything like reasonable effort to save have the tools needed to be truly wealthy over time. I don't think that 100k/yr puts you in the realm of the rich, at least not initially, but it certainly opens the path.

[Stinky The Clown]

24. I heard on the radio, just this afternoon, that in this area the median

income is just a few cents over $74,000. This is the Baltimore/Washington SMA. At that rate, the pverty levl must be about $30,000, although the news story didn't address that, as the statistic cited was part of the failed 'death tax' newz story.

[Virginian]

81. Was that individual or household income? n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

92. Urban America? Blueland?

Where rent or mortgage is something like $2-3,000/month? That is around 25,000/yr which at 25% of income would translate to requiring $100,000/yr to be truly affordable.

To get back to the dollar values I grew up with I just lop a zero off the end of everything. Somebody with a salary of 500,000 has the lifestyle of a person making 50,000 in the 60's. A decent car was 3,000 now it is 30,000. College was 2-4,000 now its 20-40,000. Gas was 0.30-0.50 now its 3.00.

[Blue_Tires]

42. 100 grand per year would easily set me up for life

but then again i only have to worry about myself, and my cost of living/living demands are not that high

[On the Road]

43. $500K -- My Thought Exactly

If you can't afford a house, it's hard to think of yourself as "high income."

[hyphenate]

119. Remember

I'm looking at it from the perspective of someone making a little over $13,000 a year.

[Romberry]

19. 100k+ is more than double the median household income

I'd have to say that 100k+ is the breakpoint at which you go from upper middle class and just begin to enter the realm of high income. That's 2 grand a week. Anyone with a household income of 100k today has at least the possibility with a little economizing of fully funding their IRA's, finding a way to afford a reasonable home (in most areas), own a reasonable reliable late model car and still build wealth. You can't eat out every night at the most expensive restaurants or wear the most expensive designer labels but you can live comfortably and still have money left to save/invest for the future. With any luck, at retirement you can replace your 100k income entirely.

The breakpoint for super high income? I'd set that at around 250k in today's economy. 250k is twenty thousand+ in a single month and more than the median household income in America every three months.

[maxsolomon]

21. i have a 100k household income

and 2 10 year old cars. woo hoo, i'm living the good life.

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. You should be living the good life

Your household brings in twice what the average family does.

FWIW, yours makes three times that of my family of five. Don't misunderstand - I've chosen the right lifestyle for me. I'm not complaining and I'm not feeling any kind of envy, but please don't pretend that you're not fortunate. It's unbecoming.

[Sapere aude]

26. "please don't pretend that you're not fortunate. It's unbecoming"

That's the kind of shit statement on DU that makes me so damned mad. You are attacking someone and not what they are saying. Use facts to support your opinion and not personal attacks. It's done all the time to people here on DU that somehow don't fit the politically correct profile. You can be a liberal and not poor and there is nothing to be ashamed of if you are.

You can be a liberal and drive a SUV, make over $100,000, own a gun, vote for DLC candidates and many more not politically correct things.

[lumberjack_jeff]

30. Non sequitur much?

He's suggesting that $100k/year is an inadequate income to secure "the good life". I disagree with that wholeheartedly, largely because I'm okay at math and his claim is demonstrably at odds with family income statistics.

Who suggested he should be ashamed of his high income? All I'm suggesting is that he should stop pretending that he's unfortunate. This widespread belief that $100k/year and up is "middle income" is largely what has fueled tax policy intended to help the rich marketed to middle income folks.

The estate tax repeal debate is exclusively meant to benefit only 3 out of every 1000 people, but still it is marketed as meant to help reg'lar people - hard working business owners, farmers and the like. And it works because Americans, whether they make 20k, 50k, 100k or 400k/year always need more money. If we only have more, then everything will be okay.

"middle income" is $50,000/year. Help them.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[formernaderite]

115. it's all relative isn't it?

people who begin to earn more, tend to move to places where the rent or houses are higher, which means they again have less spendable income, so they strive to earn more and the cycle continues. I know people who earn about half of what I do, but buy alot more stuff. They happen to be happy in their apartment, where they started off. As their incomes went up they just spend more. I on the other hand live frugally, but pay more for the privacy of living on more land. We make choices. I have relatives who live in semi-rural North Carolina who live comfortable middle class lives on income under $50,000 per year. They happen to live in a very small, but neat and tidy cottage, two bedrooms one bath....I don't think their mortgage has ever been more than $350 per month. And they do one other thing that most Americans no longer have the discipline for...they save money.

[maxsolomon]

27. my point is not that i'm unfortunate

it is that living expenses in this city are such that we can't do much with the money we make besides make ends meet. i am baffled how anyone could support 5 on 30k. they don't live here.

we are the picture of middle class in seattle. i drink $10 bottles of wine like you.

[sandnsea]

29. Oh please

I am so sick of this. Your income is $8,000 a month and you want to pretend you're just making ends meet? Your basic monthly bills shouldn't be over $3000 so please explain to me how you're having such a hard time "making ends meet" on the other $2-3000 a month.

[maxsolomon]

33. i don't really feel like letting you inside our finances

but my monthly bills are over $3000, & i have no car payments. no one whose combined gross is 8k takes home 8k.

i'm not having a 'hard time'. but i'm not taking baths in champagne. 2 adults working 40-50/wk., both with masters degrees? we'd BETTER be making 100k combined to live on the west coast.

[sandnsea]

41. I live on the west coast

And unless you have medical bills or legal bills or something, there's no way your monthly bills should be over $3,000 a month. I considered your taxes which is why I gave you $2-3000 to "make ends meet" with. That calculates in $2-3000 in taxes because last I checked, Washington has no personal income tax. I didn't say you were taking baths in champagne, but you sure aren't having a hard time making ends meet and it's insulting to the other 90% of the population to suggest you are.

[Bake]

49. How can you possibly know

what someone else's monthly bills "ought" to be?? You have no idea if there are children, or if so, how many, and their ages. You have no idea what other family obligations he/she has. You have no idea if there are student loans to pay in order to make that $100K. You have no idea where he/she lives and what the cost of living is there.

You simply don't know. $100K is enough to be middle class. It's not enough to accumulate a fortune. It's not Easy Street.

Bake

[sandnsea]

50. I'm 50 years old

They live in Seattle, I live in Oregon. I've raised 3 kids, I've paid student loans. I do know. I qualified it already with the possibility that they have medical bills or legal bills. Otherwise, people who make $100,000 have it easy and if they don't it's because they've chosen to load themselves up with debt. I am so sick of the very few who have the most in this society, and consequently the entire fucking world, pretending that they're on the verge of bankruptcy. They absolutely have the opportunity to invest and accumulate real wealth, something the real majority doesn't have at all. Their whining is flat out bullshit. They may be able to sell it to some naive 20 year old who thinks they're going to be able to join the two percenters, but not me.

[Bake]

52. I'm 50 myself. And I still think you're off-base.

But then, a lot of us like to decide what other people's business "ought to be."

There is also a big difference between two people earning $100K between them, and one person earning it. It costs money to make money; the second person working has to have transportation and its related costs, appropriate clothing, extra food expense, etc.

Bake

[sandnsea]

71. Nonsense

Costs are costs. For the most part, food, power, water, cable, essentials, cost close to the same everywhere. Housing can vary, but nobody in Seattle NEEDS more than $1500 a month for housing. They might CHOOSE more, but they don't need more. Especially since they've got the ability to make a sizeable down payment. That person already said they have 2 ten year old cars and isn't going to live an hour from their jobs to have cheaper housing. I am sorry, I'm not going to pretend anybody with a $100,000 a month income is "just making ends meet". Anybody deluding themselves into believing that is just ungrateful and ought to take the blinders off and realize they are in the teensy miniscule portion of the wealthy compared to the rest of the planet. I have a hard time paying my basic bills some months, and get pretty upset about not having health insurance and whatnot, but I even know that I've got it better than 75% of the planet. Don't think I'm going to feel sorry for someone living on $100,000 a year because I'm not.

[Bake]

99. Nobody said "feel sorry for" them.

The question was whether $100K a year (NOT A MONTH, as you said above) puts one on Easy Street.

It doesn't. It is, however, pretty solidly middle class. Even upper middle class.

Sounds like you've got your own axe to grind. Good luck with it.

Bake

[sandnsea]

121. "someone living on $100,000 a year"

The other was a typo which is clear from that post and the rest of my posts in this thread. The only axe I've got to grind is with people making that kind of money who are oblivious to the fact that they're in the top 10% of household incomes and aside from medical bills or some kind of emergency, should definitely be on Easy Street. It's incredible to me that anybody would even try to pretend that living on $100,000 a year is difficult.

[maxsolomon]

105. a MONTH?

WE have a cumulative income of just over 100k. PER YEAR.

AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL SORRY FOR ME.

[sandnsea]

124. See #121

But you already knew that. I don't feel sorry for you, you do more than enough of that.

[MelliMel]

54. Excuse me, but our monthly bills are over $3000.

It's called a mortgage, a car payment, kids, living expenses.

If you live on your own in a one bedroom apartment, I could see that it would be less.

[maxsolomon]

60. thank for the support

i will never participate in a thread like this again.

my SO & i made over 100k for the first time this year. i didn't know that i would then become the enemy of the working class on DU.

i certainly don't mean to assert that i am struggling, i treated myself to eye surgery this year, and i realize that is a luxury. i am just surprised that 100k doesn't go as far as i expected when i was 30.

[AllieB]

69. I don't blame you

No one should have to justify their living expenses to another person. My husband and I make over 100K per year, but we live in an area where a starter home is 400K. We help out my parents, who are retired on a fixed income, and his nephew, who is going to college on a partial scholarship. I have Lyme Disease, and most treatment is not covered by our insurance. So the posters who criticize you are way off base, since you never know where someone's money is going. I have plenty of colleagues at work who are supporting their elderly parents in retirement homes, and that isn't cheap.

[sandnsea]

73. Nobody said you were the enemy

But making statements like just "making ends meet" sounds a bit arrogant and I would think you would know that if you'd been living on $30,000 a year for most of your life. An awful lot of people who make over $100,000 a year honestly don't know that they are in an income bracket that most of the rest of the country never gets to and they should, that's all.

[MelliMel]

95. Well to be a "good" liberal to some

means you have to advocate everyone living on almost nothing. They can keep their poverty piety. I have 5 kids to take care of.

[FogerRox]

118. Please hang around... I make about 25k close to NY, in NJ

100k doesnt do what it used to. And you dont have to live in a city like NYC. A good portion of suburbia requires 75k to 100k family income .. just to keep the house.... So you want to send you kid to college.... or take a vacation.. you can swing it, just barely.

When I grew up in the 1960's My Mom didnt work, I am an only child and we lived in a house with 5 bedrooms, 3 which were used as a TV room, Moms Art Studio, DAds office. This used to be middle class... its not any more......... Thats what the Attack on America has done.

[sandnsea]

122. College? Vacations???

Jesus fucking christ. People truly are oblivious. What I wouldn't do for those kind of "hard times". Whaaa, I can't take a vacation this year. I haven't had a vacation in a decade. Well, I did take my family overnight to Portland at Christmas, we went to the ZooLights. So I guess I have to take that back.

This thread is just incredible.

[sandnsea]

72. $3,000 basic expenses

That's what I said. That poster already said they don't have a car payment. And even if they did, that's still a choice and should be easily met with the remaining $2-3000 a month that a person with an $8,000 a month income would have AFTER they paid their basic $3,000 a month bills. It is not remotely a "making ends meet" lifestyle and I can't even believe anybody would have the audacity to pretend it is.

[MelliMel]

94. Basic expenses?

Like mortgage, food, utilities. Do you have any idea how much apartment rentals and/or mortgages run in SoCal? Unless you want to live in a place run by gangs, it eats up most of that 3000$.

[sandnsea]

98. She doesn't live in SoCal

She lives in Seattle. There are very few places in the country that have housing costs as high as California and frankly it's been a bafflement to me how anybody at all manages to live there.

[TankLV]

79. I own 2 homes - one in Honolulu, one in Vegas, plus 2 cars,

and I "only" make about 70 thou.

For TWO of us! My other half has an additional TWO cars, too!

And I am doing just fine, thank you.

Last time I checked, Honolulu & Vegas were the MOST EXPENSIVE places to live!

Don't peddle that BULLSHIT "barely making a living" crap to us!

AND you have 30 grand MORE a year!

If you can't survive on 100 grand, you're doing something WRONG - AND LIVING WAY BEYOND YOPUR MEANS!

Boo friggin' hoo.

[Warren Stupidity]

93. I find that difficult to believe.

Median home price in Hawaii
April, 2006 332 $ 615,000
http://www.hicentral.com/press/pr042006.htm

Median home price in Las Vegas
Average Home Price $181,162

Lets say that a mortgage costs 600 per 100,000 per month. If you bought the median homes in these areas today you would have to come up with around 4800/month or about 58,000/yr. Not exactly affordable on a 70,000 annual income. Obviously you bought these homes some time ago. At the 1/4 of net income rule you would need an income of $230,000 to float that boat.

Four cars too. Hmmm... lets say that the annual cost of a car is $3,000 - thats another $12,000. Flying back and forth between hawaii and nevada can't be exactly cheap either.

Do you eat too? Buy clothes? Pay utilities?

[ariellyn]

117. "Own" or mortgage is the question. And were these inherited?

I, too, find this extremely hard to believe.

[REP]

114. Funniest Post EVER

I live in the SF Bay. Living on less than 3K a month here is living very, very modestly. Living on 3K a month here isn't that big a step up into the high life. Rents for 1BR apartments start around $1,200.00; add utilities, insurance, groceries, car payment, credit card payments ... yeah, 3K/mo is living the hedonisitic life I tell ya.

[sandnsea]

123. $8,000 a month

$3,000 a month is what I allocated just to pay the basic bills. Apparently some people have so friggin' much money that they don't know the difference between the basic power bill and the not basic car payment or vacation to Cabo. An $8,000 a month income leaves a lot more to spend than $3,000 a month. It even leaves you a whopping 2-3 months to save up for a $5-6,000 car so you don't HAVE to have a car payment unless you WANT one. Some people don't have that choice. I really didn't think Democrats would be just as oblivious to what it's really like to live on a low-income as Republicans are. Whining about $8,000 a month. Just incomprehensible.

[lumberjack_jeff]

32. I live about 70 miles from you.

I buy $7 boxes of wine. :)

Choosing to live in the place with the highest living expenses in the state has its drawbacks. I guarantee that I can find a house within $15/day commute radius that you can buy with 10% of your income. That leaves you $90k/year discretionary.

[maxsolomon]

34. $15/day commute?

i ain't driving an hour+ each way to work. and if you mean living in puyallup, under mt. rainier, along the sounder line, you're fucking nuts. i don't want to die in a lahar.

and explain to me how 100k - 10% - taxes = 90k. am i missing some part of the IRS code where i get everything back?

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. Choice is cool

But they're your choices.

You *do* know that you live over an earthquake fault, don't you?
http://www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/top10/fault.html

Save 15,000 into your 401k (and if your wife works, she could do the same - that's $30,000). $10,000 mortgage interest (in some icky mixed-income neighborhood which lacks gates) plus another $5000 in deductions should get you in the ballpark of a $6500 total income tax.

My math indicates that you'd have about $4,000/month discretionary with which to buy newer cars to flee the tsunami. Or the glacier. Or the meteor.

[maxsolomon]

38. now i'm the whipping boy for GATED COMMUNTIES?

i'm done. bye.

[lumberjack_jeff]

39. The Joneses surrender.

Upholding living standards for the purpose of social status is a no-win situation.

I got off the high(ish) earn/spend merry-go-round precisely because of the distorted sense of "enough" that it provided.

I highly recommend the book "your money or your life". You may not like being the whipping boy for gated communities, but if you're choosing to live in the highest rent district you can find, you're making clear choices based on non-economic factors.

[maxsolomon]

46. SOCIAL STATUS? the JONESES?

you really DON'T know me.

every assumption you made about me is incorrect.

[lumberjack_jeff]

51. Okay, which of these is incorrect

1) you have an income twice that of the median family
2) it isn't enough to sustain your preferred standard of living
3) you live in Seattle because a person would be "fucking crazy" to live in Puyallup, ostensibly because Mt Rainier is in imminent danger of eruption. A danger that is at best overblown because the likelihood of a Seattle earthquake is much greater, as is the risk of Tsunami.
4) you don't want to commute 1 hour, but don't appear to have considered getting a job in an area with a less expensive cost of living. The cost to commute 1 hour each day is about $240/month, or the difference between a $300,000 house and a $270,000 house.

I regret that this subthread has become about you. It wasn't meant to be. It was meant to be illustrative of two things:
a) absent large unavoidable expenses (ie chronic illness) person with a high income who has a hard time making ends meet suffers from poor choices, not insufficient income.
b) middle income is the middle two quintiles of income (between $30,000 to about $85,000). If your family income is $100,000, 80% of americans make less than you. There are people out there who want for basic necessities, but because people at your income level and above consider themselves middle income, and frequently feel that their financial situation is untenable, tax and social policy is tailored to their "needs", to the detriment of families who truly are middle income or below.

[maxsolomon]

59. you win

i am soulless & selfish.

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Virginian]

84. Why are you being so mean?

He may not want to commute for an hour for the same reason I don't want to commute for an hour. Why waste two hours a day, ten hours a week, 40+ hours a month in your car. At some point, it becomes a quality of life issue. I found that after fighting traffic for an hour in the morning, I was not at my best when I finally got to the office. When I got home at night, I was exhausted. I had just enough time to fix and eat a light meal before going to bed so I could get up and do it all over again. Housework and laundry were saved up for the weekends. I had to either move closer to the office or get a job closer to home.

If he were to get a job in an area with a less expensive cost of living, he would probably make less, too. In fact, he might make exactly what you make if he lived in your town.

Households with an income over $100K are still not rich enough to become Republicans. Not in my neighborhood anyway. Starter townhouses are selling in the upper $400s, and I am in the 'burbs, about an hour commute from the city. In fact, with the traffic the way it is, the commute is probably more than an hour. This morning, it took my spouse an hour to go the 11 miles to his office and it isn't even half way to the city.

No, we aren't quite at the $100K point, but some day we will be and then you can be mean to me for making too much money.

[lumberjack_jeff]

97. I don't intend to be mean.

But if I'm honest with myself, I have to admit that someone who makes six figures faces an uphill battle to get sympathy from me for their money woes.

If a person can pull down that kind of rarified pay - power to them. If they can't live on it, they need a home ec class, not a masters degree. At a minimum, six figures is enough to rent a u-haul to move to more economical environs.

I live less than 2 hours drive from the poster. I'm well aware of the economic conditions prevailing in a 30 mile radius from his chosen home. Even areas as close to town as Mountlake Terrace are reasonably affordable on that kind of salary.

We (mom, dad, two teens and a first grader) live comfortably in the country on five acres on 35,000/year gross.

[maxsolomon]

106. ONCE AGAIN

1. I CANNOT PERFORM MY PROFESSION IN THE COUNTRY. I CANNOT BE IN THE SUBURBS AS I WILL KILL SOMEONE WITHIN A MONTH. I HAVE TO BE DOWNTOWN. I AM AN URBANITE. I LIKE CULTURE.

2. IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO WASTE ENERGY COMMUTING FROM THE HINTERLANDS. I AM NOT MOVING TO THE HINTERLANDS. I AM NOT WASTING MY LIFE SITTING IN TRAFFIC OR ON THE SOUNDER.

3. I DO NOT MAKE 100K. WE MAKE 100K. WE. I DO NOT SHARE MY BANK ACCOUNT WITH MY S.O. WE PROBABLY DON'T MANAGE OUR MONEY AS WELL AS YOU. I AM GLAD YOU ARE SO FRUGAL & COMFORTABLE IN THE COUNTRY. GOOD FOR YOU.

4. YOU ACCUSSED ME OF
A. LIVING IN A GATED COMMUNITY. I DON'T.
B. KEEPING UP WITH THE JONESES. I DON'T.
C. BEING CONCERNED WITH SOCIAL STATUS. I AM NOT.

IF YOU AREN'T TRYING TO BE MEAN, THEN YOU DID A REALLY GOOD IMPRESSION OF THE SORT OF LIBERAL THAT MAKES PEOPLE HATE LIBERALS; THE HAUGHTY LIFESTYLE HIPPY. PERHAPS YOU THOUGHT YOU'D CONVERT ME TO YOUR SIMPLE WAY OF LIFE & I WOULD PACK UP THE UHAUL, MOVE TO FORKS OR WATERVILLE & MAKE GOAT CHEESE OR BE A LUMBERJACK. DESPITE MY NATURAL MISANTHROPY, I WON'T.

[lumberjack_jeff]

127. You like culture by the truckload, apparently.

I don't begrudge you your lifestyle choices. Living in the city might be okay, not my cup of tea, but I'm sure some would consider it long-term fun.

What I do take exception to is the idea that you have trouble making ends meet 'because $100k is barely scraping by'. $100k is adequate to live in a fair amount of luxury, and will facilitate just about any lifestyle you could choose. Granted, as you have inadvertently pointed out, it may not be enough to support *every* conceivable lifestyle.

A lifestyle that requires $100k+ to support, regardless of how carefully you shop for organic produce or dolphin-safe tuna is still a highly consumptive lifestyle. Every dollar that circulates through the economy requires a commensurate of exploitation of the earth's resources.

In this sense, a dollar is a resource that is worth being conserved. The energy that you've conserved by not commuting long distances is more than offset by the other forms of environmental burden that this level of consumption implies.

I'll make a deal. I'll look up "misanthropy" if you look up "caps lock".

[sandnsea]

100. Interesting

Here's a lovely place in Virginia Beach for $265,000
http://www.atkinsonrealty.com/listings/listing.asp?id=680

Another in Virginia for $135,000
http://www.unitedcountry.com/ucforms/uconline/uconline/searchNS/Search_View_Selected_Property.asp?SID=28898863&Action=Edit&Item=582492&Page=19&Office='45007'

And yet another in Virginia for $199,000
http://www.unitedcountry.com/ucforms/uconline/uconline/searchNS/Search_View_Selected_Property.asp?SID=28898863&Action=Edit&Item=556575&Page=13&Office='45007'

There aren't homes at this low of a price anywhere in my area, starter homes here are around $229,000 but that's a true 1200 sq foot starter. But then again, a person making $100,000 a year can save and put down a sizeable down payment to bring the monthly payment down if they want to. They can move in with family to save up, or live in a one bedroom apt. Those are options half the country doesn't even have because they're already living that way just to keep from living in the street.

[Virginian]

120. We have something called ADU's in the area.

Affordable Dwelling Unit.

These smaller, no-frills townhouses are mixed in with the other housing and prices are controlled by the county. The people who get to live there are also selected by the county. When you get on the ADU list, the county tells you which house in which neighborhood you get. You don't get to choose one.

Developers are now required to put in ADUs in the new construction homes. If they are good at planning for them, you can't tell an ADU from the other homes unless you know what to look for.

If you make $100K you are over qualified.

Virginia beach is about 4 1/2 hours away. Cute beach house, but not a reasonable commute.

I couldn't bring up the other two. Something about a syntax error after the /. Our computer is old and doesn't read everything these days.

[EdGy]

45. that's more than 90% of US households

whether you realize it or not, you make more than 90% of households in the US. I do think that qualifies as top income. And it should make you think about the fact that median income is about $45,000.

[maxsolomon]

61. IF you knew me, or anything about me

WHICH YOU DON'T, you'd realize that i know that. i know what the median income in king county is. i know what the median house in king county sells for.

i'm obviously getting defensive about this, and it makes me realize why people hate holier-than-thou liberals, which, strangely enough, i am accused of being by my bush voting parents.

[The Anti-Neo Con]

22. I said $75,000...

that may sound low to some of you, but I live VERY frugally, and I also live in the midwest where the cost of living is not too bad. I make around $32,000 a year and just get by, but I think if I was making $75,000, I'd never have to worry about bills and I'd be able to sock away a good amount of money in savings. Right now I'm only able to save like $50 a month.

[Jai4WKC08]

31. Poverty and "high income" are always relative

You can't assign a single dollar amount.

As others have pointed out, even the poor in this country have in almost all cases more "stuff" than most of the people in the developing world. But they are still poor compared to the average American, and that has the same effect on how they are viewed, how they view themselves, what opportunities they have and whether they recognize what opportunities they do have.

Fwiw, I selected $100K. But it was sort of arbitrary. My husband and I make just a few thousand more than that a year. We're not exactly wealthy, in that we have a lot of debt and not a lot of investments outside our home, one kid about to enter college who is thankfully paying for it himself, and another kid in high school and frankly I don't know how we'll pay to send her. But otoh, we do make over twice the median income, and live in the mid-west where expenses are relatively low, so how can we not be rich?

I had a professor who said, you're not rich if you work for your money; you're only rich if your money works for you. So all us working stiffs (well, I'm "retired") are really in the same boat in a way.

A question for you, H2S: Why are you asking? I was thinking when I first read your subject line that maybe you leading to something about the estate tax, which is being debated and voted on in Congress today.

[Stinky The Clown]

40. Yes, this and the sister poll on 'rich' was to try to get some perspective

on how people see the terms, regardless of the facts. And frankly, I'm apalled at the sanctimonium I've been seeing in the whole discussion.

[Norquist Nemesis]

35. I said $200,000+

Just on the simple math of a two income family. If two people are each making $50K, that's $100K but individually not "high income" where I live. One loses a job, $50K's not much at all. $75K each is getting closer, IMO. But $200K ($100K each) is quite comfortable.

[slackmaster]

36. Totally depends on where you live

A family of four living in coastal areas of most of California can't afford a to buy a median priced new home on less than about $150K.

[dasmarian]

44. Our household income is over 100K and we're 'wealthy' but

But let me put it in perspective and give a contrast. Really, it all comes down to where you live and kids, in my opinion, as to how wealthy you are, at any income level (unless you are mega rich then it doesn't matter).

Here is us: My wife and I make ~125k+/yr together, maybe a little more, each of us make maybe 65-ish. I feel very happy with my income as does my wife, for where we live and what we do. We live in Indiana, have no kids, and NO CC DEBT which is very important!

So here is our real monthly breakdown

Monthly before taxes and 401k's . . . ~ $10,500
401k's get 20% of our income.
After taxes and 401ks (net) . . . ~ $ 6,250

Mortage (on $150k original loan) $-1,250
2 nice cars, payment total ... $- 850
Utilities (cable, phones, etc) .. $- 500
Insurance for cars .... $- 120

That's all we *have* to pay for to live, and one would argue that the cars are very discretionary. Health insurance is part of work package, and isn't visible in our income but we have full, good coverage w/nominal $20 co-pays. We have no CC debt at all, and the rest of what is left over (about $3,500/mo) is completely discretionary to cover food, entertainment, membership to the health club, or save as we please (Keeping in mind 20% has already gone to 401Ks). Most of our savings is saving for trips, which gets maybe $7k/year for 2-3 weeks in a nice location. Our quality of life is really outstanding.

But put in perspective, everything being the same and assume we have 2 kids and live on the coast:

After taxes and 401ks (net) . . . ~ $ 6,250

Mortage (ouch!) on 500k ... $-3,000
2 nice used cars, payment total . $- 850
Utilities .... $- 500
Insurance for cars .... $- 120
Expenditures/saving for 2 kids $-1,000

This leaves ~$800 for food and other discretionary spending for a family of 4 (vs $3500 for our family of 2), which probably puts you into CC debt really quick because the car needed tires, the furnace broke, the kids want a PS2 for birthday, and there is no extra to pay for it. So maybe you get rid of the nice cars to lower the payment, and you lower your personal savings to have more monthly money. Maybe you could get by but it would be tough to do so comfortably, if you were trying to maintain a 'professional' image for the neighbors.

So there it is, you can't set an income level on wealthy because depending on circumstance it can vary widely, unless you are talking about the very wealthy who have no need for any sort of budget whatsoever. We feel that we are very wealthy in terms of quality of life, but in CA I bet you would need to double our incomes to live the same way at the very least.

[Karenina]

47. If you in any way, shape or form

depend on a SALARY, you are NOT "high-income."

[dasmarian]

48. I disagree

Even a surgeon or top end lawyer depends on a salary to meet living expenses. A business owner depends on a salary. Everyone has to make money unless they are independently wealthy, which has nothing to do with income.

[Karenina]

55. Your reply explains why

19% of America believes it belongs to the 1% top-"earners." Let me re-phrase... If you cannot live in the style to which you have become accustomed on your passive income, considering yourself "rich" is a fool's delusion.

[TygrBright]

87. DingDingDingDingDing!!!...... We have a winner!!

Exactly. May I repeat? "If you depend on a SALARY, you are NOT "high-income."

Don't care how "big" the salary sounds. Those CEOs who get the obscene salaries? Nuh-uh. Look at the WHOLE package and you'll really puke. The $125 million salary is just walkin' around money to them. They're in it for the half-billion in stock options and assorted other hideable cash that comes with their compensation packages.

Yes, I know what the folks who are calling a $100K salary big money mean, but believe me, I've been there, and I've been scraping by on (in today's bucks) $15K, and I can honestly tell you, it ain't that different. Because no matter where you come down on the scale, you don't have what a TRULY high income (one derived from WEALTH-- assets, investments, etc.) buys:

Security.

THAT'S a "high income." People who depend on a salary ain't got it. My in-laws actually have quite a small income in cash, but they're "high income" in that they still have a defined BENEFIT retirement plan, a nice cushion of low-yield but easily liquidatable investments, a nice paid-for house, platinum retiree medical coverage, topnotch long-term care insurance, and loving kids who do alright financially and would never allow Mom & Dad to want. Yet my in-laws' cash income is way lower than ours.

I hope we can end up "high income" like THEM sometime.

wistfully,
Bright

[dysfunctional press]

130. i think "income" is the wrong word then-

what your in-laws have are "assets".
income is just what it says- money that's coming in...

[MsKandice01]

53. Where I live, $100,000 is by no means wealthy...

I live in California, specifically in the bay area. I live in the outskirts of San Jose in your typical middle-class neighborhood. The median home price is about $650,000...and that's for a 50 year old, 3br, 1250-1500 sq foot average house. You can't even find a condo in this area for less than $500,000. Even to qualify to buy a home in this area, you need to be making $160,000/yr or more, and that's with a 20% downpayment. If you want to rent for the rest of your life, then yes, $100,000 is just fabulous.

[scorpiogirl]

58. I'm in the tri valley and you are right...$100K is not wealthy here.

We are renting a totally 70's no frills house that's about 1,850sf. Our rent is $1,900. We make just over $100K and cannot afford to buy a house. Houses on our street/neighborhood go for $800-950,000. Unless the housing market crashes, we will be renting for quite some time.

[maxsolomon]

64. see the sub thread above where i am excoriated

for saying a household income of 100k makes me middle class in Seattle.

lucky you didn't post earlier in the thread.

[AllieB]

70. 100K isn't wealthy in the Bay Area, Manhattan, or the Boston area anymore

Rents are exhorbitant also, at least here in the Northeast.

[REP]

116. It's Getting By Okay in the Bay

No, it's not poverty - but it's not owning a house, or even living in a really decent apartment, either.

[Omaha Steve]

56. I can't remember how to start a poll

:-(

[TheDonkey]

62. Over 200K for an individual

100K is chump change in some locations in America.

[guidod]

65. I don't know if it's chump change,

I would say it's average middle class. At least it is here in So.Calif.

[Greyhound]

63. I find this thread absolutely fascinating...

the different perspectives and prejudices displayed here are, to me, a perfect example of just how brilliantly we've been brainwashed by the real Ruling Class® to bicker and fight over their table scraps.

When you're working your ass off for $25K, $100 seems like that is all you'd ever need to make and can't understand how somebody that already makes that much could have any complaints about money. Once you've "progressed" to the point where you too are making $100K, you find that things are quite different than you thought they would be. You seem to be putting in a lot of extra hours these days and that $100K job requires you to sell the 15 year old beater that served you so faithfully, and take on the payment for a new ride befitting your new status and the new insurance payment that goes along with it. Don't forget the new wardrobe that the job requires, it will set you back $10,000 - $15,000 right off the bat (women definitely get screwed the worst on this deal, the clothes cost a $LOT$, are made cheaply out of shitty material that will not hold up much longer than this season plus you have to spend several hundred more dollars for the accompanying accessories, which are also crappy and expensive). New expenses start to multiply and you never seen to have time anymore. God I need a vacation, but I really can't get away and I don't think I should spend that much $$ right now. Next year things will calm down and I should make some headway by then.

One day you realize you've got a $6,000 monthly nut to crack and the salary just ain't making it anymore, so now I need to figure out how I'm going to make a quarter next, 'cause after all, that should be enough to support my family. Well guess what, you soon find yourself in familiar territory again with even less time and greater expenses, and on and on and on...

No matter how much you get in amerika, it isn't enough, and those that don't have as much as you do just aren't as good as you are.

[ReadTomPaine]

67. Agreed..

Whether people consciously understand this or not, this is a very revealing, informative thread.

[WestSeattle2]

74. You nailed it.....

everything IS relative; there is never enough money; and many who have material wealth do think of themselves as "better" than those who choose\chose not to be materialistic.

I have noticed that the happiest people, the most fun people to hang with, do not have material wealth. Why is that?

Watching materialistic folk chase dollars is entertainment enough, but watching some of them go to prison for lying, cheating, and stealing to obtain dollars, is Tony-award winning entertainment. :popcorn:

Now in all fairness to our more materialistic friends and family, we are inundated starting at birth, with commercial propaganda. We are constantly told, overtly and covertly, how happy we'll be if we just buy "this" thing.

Learning how to be happy with what you have takes discipline, and most can't be bothered. Charge it!

What a country.

[lumberjack_jeff]

77. Well said.

I recommended the book "your money or your life" to a poster upthread. I doubt he'll read it, however.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

88. It's all relative, isn't it?

10 years ago I was in the military making 1/3 what I make now. I couldn't get a credit card. My savings was 0. Now I own a home and am slowly paying off the credit card debt I ran up trying to live a modicum of the American Dream. My savings is 0. Funny how it worked out that way. I bet I could poll every one of my neighbors and find out most of them are in the same boat.

[WestSeattle2]

107. Absolutely!

There was a commercial not long ago, featuring "Jeff". Jeff and his family had EVERYTHING the American middle class family could possibly want or need! Nice house in the boring burbs on a golf course, 2 nice cars, fantastic wardrobes, fabulous vacations, and of course Jeff's pride and joy, his riding lawn mower.

Then Jeff breaks down, and cries that he and his perfect family are DROWNING in debt.....how sad. I forget what the commercial was peddling, but I bet at least 50% of American "middle-class" families, are "Jeff".

It's really so pathetic on one hand, and on the other hand it's absolutely disgusting.

I'm not a financial planner, but really, most families should not carry any debt other than mortgages. If you make $75k, can you really afford a $40,000 car?! I see it everyday at work. They "don't make enough" to contribute to their deferred comp account, but by God they can find the dough to make their $550 per month car payment!!!!!!!

Plastic Americans.

[BootinUp]

112. interesting, but

don't you think having the nicer car clothes house etc is preferable?

[WestSeattle2]

125. Sure it's preferable....

but how "nice" things are obtained is the key. Did you actually earn them, or did you just charge it all to credit cards and a line of credit?

This question goes to the heart of this thread. What do you consider "rich"? Far too many Americans earning less than $100,000, wish to live like they earn $100,000+ per year.

Interest only mortgages? 40 year mortgages? Zero down ARMS? 72 month car loans? No payments for 12 months?

All of these financial marketing gimmicks are directly aimed at who I call plastic Americans. These folks just have a primal need to appear wealthier than they are, and they're willing to take on crushing debt to do it. That is just sad and pathetic.

My point is, if you want the nicer home, nice clothes, fabulous vacations, well then go to school, get a degree, and land a good paying job or start your own business that generates the cash flow needed to honestly support a grander lifestyle.

Living paycheck to paycheck and dreading the possibility of missing on a payment on something, is just not a healthy lifestyle, and is silly.

[Monk06]

68. $500,000 / yr to a Republican is a welfare check.

[TankLV]

75. Definitely at 100 thou.

Probably lower.

[SnohoDem]

82. It depends so much where you live...

If we were in Kansas we'd be richer than six feet up a bull's ass, but here near Seattle, if big fat geese were selling for a nickel, we couldn't kiss a hummingbird's ass. Housing, groceries, gasoline, taxes. Man, all that shit matters when it comes to deciding if you have a high income.

[Jersey Devil]

113. Yep, same here in the Northeast

Boated real estate values, huge mortgages, astronomical real estate taxes (mine are 5 figures+) and you need about $80k just to live in a modest home, keep a car for at least 5-10 years and pay the second mortgage for college costs.

[Clarkie1]

83. I depends on the region of the country, so I can't say. n/t

[Tsiyu]

85. I will feel very high income this week

if I can come up with $20 to take my kid to the lawnmower races at the fairgrounds on Saturday.


I'm series!!!!!!!!111111

But really, I do think in some areas 100K a year is not a high end life, though it may buy a substantially easier life than most. If say, you have three kids, high mortgage or rent for premium digs, private schools, money being socked away for college, music lessons, braces, car insurance for teenagers, groceries, groceries and more groceries. Blah, blah, blah.

Kids can eat up a lot of money. I would say $150,000 and rather than bashing anyone for making that much, I hope some day to earn as much.

Right now I'm in the "Poor as dirt" category, and I'm happy. 150 g's a year oughta leave me ecstatic :woohoo:

[Up2Late]

86. But it depends where you live, $50,000 is pretty good money here...

...in Georgia, but on the coasts, those are nearly Poverty wages if you have kids.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DianeK]

96. We are intentionally being duped

The real concern is that the middle class is disappearing...everyone seems to think that they are middle class so when the politicians talk about improving the lives of the middleclass they think they are talking about them!! People think the estate tax affects them! They think the tax cut will improve their lives!!

I heard on a Thom Hartmann program a while back that the government uses a ceiling of $1,000,000.00 to determine income in the United States. An absolutely unrealistic figure since it leaves out people making well over that. But supposing we use that figure...middle income would be 500,000.00. It is an absolute disgrace that we have so much poverty in this country where there is so much. It is obscene! In Norway there are no homeless. There are high taxes but the wealth is spread and the concern is people not corporations. Norway is a Socialist Democracy and we could learn much from them.

[Greyhound]

104. 100% agreement here. They want everybody to feel that they

are among the middle-class to blunt the outrage over the situation that you spoke of. Imagine how terrifying it would be for the <2% that actually make good $$, if the other 98% found out how badly they are being ripped off.

[AX10]

101. It depends on where you live.

In this economy, you need to work in an expensive area in
order to get a good paycheck.  You must also pay more to live
too.

[ScreamingWhisper]

103. Reading this thread,

just reminds me how subjective people's incomes are, and the opinions associated with that person. What right does anyone
have to tell me what my and my family's "comfort level" should be. It's my right, and my wife's right to provide for our child and ourselves in whatever manner brings us the security, and pride that we aspire too. No one else can stand, and wag their finger to criticize our way of life. Does making a comfortable wage somehow prevent someone from having the same empathetic outreach instilled within them?

[BootinUp]

109. Statistics aren't subjective though

If you are in the upper ten or 15 percent percent your income is certainly high. 15.7 % of households were making 100,000 or higher in 2004.

Go to page 31
http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-229.pdf

[Redstone]

128. Well-said. Indeed.

Redstone

[proud patriot]

110. 150,000 is what I chose

I do live in the SF bay area

[FogerRox]

126. 100 mill a year is hi income, I answered the poll with 500k

Which I now regret.

[psychopomp]

129. This is one of the themes of Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut"

Rich and well-off: what is it? In the film, the protagonist, "Dr. Bill" is living in a very comfortable upper Manhattan loft, but the far wealthier client he makes special out calls to sees him as a kind of paid servant. The client, in turn, is acquainted with the elite who live in massive mansions and wield power that is beyond the law.