That doesn’t keep you from also doing something way way wrong. This thread is filled with why a high income doesn’t go as far as you think it will.
And rich parents are often a big part of the issue when the topic is tying yourself to someone irresponsible. My sister married a guy who’s father was a Ford VP. He graduated with an engineering degree and made good money, but he just never thought about buying socks at Target. Or buying a jacket that didn’t say Columbia across it. Or vacationing somewhere other than Vail.
Maybe you should clarify what you mean by “most places.” Because there are plenty of places where $300k will buy you a whole hell of a lot. Many of these places are prosperous and pleasant places to live.
In a thread about whether our society has a skewed view of wealth and income, I think your original assertion is germane to that. If a historic 4 bedroom in the Midwest or a 700sq ft. 1-bedroom in a slightly unfashionable neighborhood in the the most culturally significant and populous city in the country is “nothing special,” I’d like to know what your definition of “special” is.
That’s the exact value of my house in northern NJ. It’s an okay house. It dates from the 1920’s and has some nice features. We have a front yard and a backyard. We have three bedrooms upstairs and then a living room, dining room, kitchen, extra bedroom and office space downstairs and two and a half bathrooms. But the entire house needs an update including new siding and a new kitchen and we pay about 5k in property taxes.
I would love to move to your pretty Victorian but my husband works in NYC. He has a good job with nice benefits and a lot of time off.
By that logic, how are affairs any different? People who go on to have extramarital sex often showed signs of moral weakness before marriage, but their partners ignored them, or missed them, or didn’t understand the implications of them. The later affair is still a betrayal of trust. Well, the financial stability of the household is also a betrayal: you aren’t cherishing someone if you are putting their long term security and independence at risk. It’s not a matter of “You blew money on Vegas so now I can’t go to my school reunion”, it’s “You blow all of our money so now our kids will not be provided for and we will spend our retirement eating catfood until we get moved into a terrible nursing home where we will be left to fester in our own waste until the bedsores consume us”.
In Toronto, the other day someone was attempting to sell a converted garage around 10 feet by 20, which lacked any plumbing, as a “house”. They got something like $200K.
An average 3 story unrenovated house, no major problems, with a 30 by 120 lot in a nice neighbourhood could cost $800K to $1 million.
Therein lies the problem: people who live in certain major cities are used to prices like that. They often have no idea how comparatively cheap real estate is elsewhere, even in most places. A “million dollar home” in Toronto would be nice but nothing special.
If you look at real estate value, I suspect it highly correlates to population density. So yeah, in most places you can get a lot of real estate for reasonable amounts of money - but those places don’t have a lot of people. If you look where the people are, you can’t get a lot of real estate for even moderate amounts of money. So “most places” does not equal “most people.”
My sisters live in the middle of nowhere North Dakoka. Both of them live in beautiful Victorians bought for a song (and in terrible shape when bought, they spent two songs fixing them up, but back then even construction help was reasonable). Now, they are close enough to the oil boom to make it commutable on weekends, and the people moving out to Williston are moving their families to affordable parts of North Dakota (cause Williston is not affordable). And housing prices have responded. Plus, good luck finding someone to redo your kitchen for cheap - that guy is off doing construction for the oil boom.
It is, in fact, special, because it is situated in a major city. I’m pretty sure there are people working in Toronto and who can’t afford a million dollars home. Presumably, they aren’t all homeless. They probably have a long commute, or live in a crappy apartment, or something.
A million dollar home is always going to be special and luxurious, regardless of where it is situated. It might because it’s very large here, and because it’s in a major city there, but it’s still a luxury. That’s why it’s worth one million dollar.
If I buy a $ 10 000 watch, it doesn’t matter whether it’s worth that much because it’s a rollex or because it’s a cheaply made but rare collectible. It’s still special and a luxury.
People with regular incomes can’t afford to live in a very large house in the middle of nowhere nor in an ordinary house in an expensive area. Being able to afford either is definitely something special. Arguing otherwise is either being disingeneous or or burying one’s head in the sand.
I wish people with high income would admit (or realize, maybe) that they really have it better instead of clinging to all sort of arguments to the contrary.
I’m shocked by rent under $2000/month (even for a studio) because I live in NY. It’s easy to forget how much easier it is to get by elsewhere.
That said, I’d rather be poor (with adequate food and shelter) in Manhattan than rich in Hoboken. I’d rather be dead in New York than alive in New Jersey, I often say–and hear others say–but of course I’m joking.
I’ve heard that before but it always seemed like a false choice. My wife and I just took a quick trip to Manhattan for kicks a year ago and kept an eye out for housing prices. There were tons of really affordable houses and rental properties in Greenpoint (a quiet, nice little community) which is an 8 minute subway ride on the L. If I ever moved to New York that’d be the first place I’d look.
Yeah, prices like that, even though I’m from a big city like Chicago, are just incomprehensible to me. You can certainly find a studio or one bedroom for under $1K around here, even usually in the hip neighborhoods.
I presume your remarks are not aimed at me, as upthread I’ve already “admitted” as much.
However, that noted, it is absurd to say that a shack is “really” a luxury house, just because the property they happen to be sitting on is worth the same. Don’t forget, many of the people living in these houses have owned them from before property values exploded. My parents, for example, bought their house - a 1960s bungalow - for $8,000. They then lived in it for 50 years. Now, it’s worth $800,000. It is still a crappy 1960s bungalow that hasn’t been renovated, and not a luxy house. Sure, in theory they could sell it in live in comparative luxury elsewhere … far away from their friends, family, and the home and neighbourhood they have lived in for 50 years.
Anyhow, as to the OP, for me, when I was single in Chicago (2003-2011), $24K was enough for me to be comfortable. I did a good bit better than most years, but $500/week is what I hoped for, and my first year back in Chicago, all I made was about $24K. Granted, my housing costs were low (about $500/month plus split utilities with my brother) and I mostly cooked for myself, but, only supporting myself, $24K was more than enough, and I was able to sock away money for retirement, too. And even buy a beater of a car for cash (1991 Nissan Stanza for $700. One of the best investments I ever made. )
More than a couple of homes have sold for $1,000,000 in my neighborhood. They are fairly big, 2900 - 3100 sq ft. But they are on relatively small lots. We are neither in a city or the middle of nowhere, but rather a nice moderate bedroom community. And we aren’t even in the area of the best high school in town. Luxury? I think not.
And I know plenty of school teachers in houses now worth $700K easy. They bought them when they were cheaper, just like I bought mine when it was cheaper.
They could move away - if they wanted a 50 minute commute each way in horrible traffic.
No, being rich doesn’t. I never said it does. I gave it as the alternative to doing something “Way, way right” so as to acknowledge the most likely reason you got that sort of credit that young.
It’s not like that at all. It’s akin to knowing one’s SO is cheating on them and then marrying the SO anyway. When one finds out that they are cheating on them during the marriage, can one really go “betrayal”? I think not. One either ignored or deluded oneself about the situation. Just suddenly waking up to the facts isn’t betrayal.
That is the same as “betrayal” by financial irresponsibility. One either ignored or deluded oneself as to their situation and considered the other person SO material for the long haul. When the SO continues being themselves after the marriage, it’s not betrayal. It’s “Standard Operating Procedure.”
When my wife and I got married, we had very little financial history to judge each other on. We had both just finished school and had never earned more than spending money in our part-time/summer jobs. She had never had a credit card before. I assumed what worked for me would work for her, too. I went over our budget with her and showed her how much we had to spend on various categories every month, and gave her the credit card. Each month, I’d review spending and show her where we went over or had extra.
It took me TWELVE YEARS to realize this system doesn’t work for her at all. She has NO IDEA how much she is spending day-to-day and week-to-week. It’s just not something she is capable of keeping track of. Even when I added a daily tracking system (through a smartphone app) where every expense is accounted for at the time of spending, it didn’t work for her. She “forgets” to track things, or moves money around, makes mistakes, and outright cheats the system.
She’s on a cash-only system now… or the next best thing, a debit card which can’t be overdrafted and isn’t tied to the main household bank account. There are still issues. :-/
Not specifically, no. I didn’t check what you had written previously. I was adressing what I read in this thread in general.
The thread is about income, so your parents’ $ 800 000 house bought 50 years ago isn’t really relevant.
However, if someone was buying your parents’ home now, with his current income, it would be. You’re stating that it’s a rather crappy bungalow. I’m unwilling to believe there’s no reason why it’s worth $ 800 000. I would tend to assume that it’s situated in a sought after neighborhood, for whatever reason.
That was one of my points. A lot of people do commute. Not having to is a luxury. Just one that many people here seem to take for granted. That makes a significant difference in their life, even if they’d rather think about the negative points (not a large house, small lot) to delude themselves into thinking they live a modest life with their $ 100 000/ year (or whatever).
I live in a crappy apartment in Paris. If I was making half as much, I’d have to commute, like plenty of people. I have it much better than them. Someone making twice as much would live in a nice, “nothing special” apartment. He has it much better than me, regardless of whether he’s willing to admit to it or not. I understand that his faucets aren’t solid gold, but his place is fine and he doesn’t waste one hour and a half each day in a car or train, while the norm is to both commute and live in a crappy place.
It doesn’t really matter whether you call it “luxury” or not. What irks me here is the unwillingness of posters to aknowledge that their $ 100 000/year-fueled lifestyle is much better than the lot of most people.
)