no_vaseline_IHB
New member
movingaround said:
Now you're getting it.
Feds Set to Screw the Middle Class Again!
- Thread starter HB Bear Too_IHB
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Now you're getting it.
how could $125k, nevermind $250k, be the middle class for OC when the median family income in newport beach is right about that number. i think if people really think they're middle class, then they should go to salary.com and look up what the median salary for their job is around here. if you're below median, then go talk to your boss because you have legitimate cause for a raise.
i just took a quick look and found the 90th percentile in 92660 for the following experienced/managerial jobs (before bonus and benefits):
software engineering manager 160k
accounting manager 118k
financial analyst IV 109k
business systems analyst IV 115k
psychologist 110k
attorney III
real estate attorney 168k
dentist 202k
also, the median income for a orthopedic surgeon is apparently only upper-middle class by the criteria here.
exactly... so in other words there are opportunities in CA that aren't available elsewhere. it's not fair call moving to CA a sacrifice when, for the most part, people are getting paid more to come here. there's too much emphasis on cost of living, but we forget the other half of the equation.
there seems to be two debates going here. one is about the high cost of living. and the other is about how $125/250k in OC is middle and upper-middle class, respectively. if we're going to accept that the latter is true, then we really have no right to complain about the former.
I'm not sure what your point is now. If you are looking for someone who moved here or anywhere for one, and only one, reason, I don't think you will find it. No one does ANYTHING for only one reason. That is a pointless argument. I was addressing what I thought your point was, but now I don't know what that is. What is it?
I am in the middle stage of my life. No, I would not make all those sacrifices you list to live here. I'm not sure why you are asking.
Yes, much of the OC (but not all of it), is more expensive than most of the country. Is that your point? I don't think anyone would argue that. However, if you are making $160k, you are still rich. Because of your wealth, you can afford to live here. If you were poor, you would not have that option. Wealth gives you options. So, you may not feel rich, but you are. Pretend you only make $35k. Now, what are your choices? Where do you live? By living in the nice areas of OC, you are living a rich lifestyle. You are choosing to spend your money to live here rather than to live in St. Louis where you could spend less on housing and more on other toys. Maybe then you would feel rich. I feel rich every day I walk out of my apartment, feel the breeze coming off the ocean, and look at Balboa Island as I drive to work in my Mazda.
Acpme,
Thanks. I totally agree that there is a lot on that list that is optional... I'm fortunate to have my kids and family, and a roof over our heads. However, living within our means is the ONLY way we can get by with what we have and what we have left over we try to help our aging parents. For us we spend our money where our priorities are 1) Our kids and 2) our family and everything on that list is there to help support 1 & 2. I do consider myself middle class, I don't classify myself as uber-rich as we still watch what we spend, use costco coupons, and eat out on tuesdays when kids eat free at certain restaurants
.
I gotta agree.
Put another way, the upper class are financially independent while the middle class are still very dependent on regular income. The difference as a another poster points out is assets, the wealthy/upper class have assets to sustain them while those in the middle class may be just a few pay checks away from financial ruin.
ok, that's mind-boggling.
but anyway, going back to a point made earlier...
the job and family argument doesn't jive with me. very few ppl are forced to live here. the wife loves OC, therefore i have to live here. i grew up in OC, therefore i have to live here. i got a pay raise and promotion to come here, therefore i have to live here. i only want my kids to be in the absolutely best public schools, therefore i have to live here. to me, those are still choices, albeit very good choices to make. we demand the very best so we come to a place like OC -- and unsurprisingly, there are costs involved.
bigger mortgages? bigger debts if things go bad? more risks? sure, but it goes with the territory. and just because one doesn't have enough wealth to completely avoid disaster doesn't make that person middle class. even a plastic surgeon who makes $500k/yr living newport coast still needs to work to pay the bills. maybe he needs to make that much just to support living in the community he works in. office space at newport center isn't cheap. labor isn't cheap because apparently he has to pay his middle class employees six-figures!
so in many ways that makes him no diff than the avg joe. but he's still not middle class.
think of it this way: your job isn't going to pay you any more because you live in irvine and your coworker lives in corona. but living in irvine you will suffer from higher costs of living. is that unfair? i don't think so... but i hear that all the time.
irvine's so expensive but i have to live in irvine because of my job.
no you don't. you can live in the IE and commute.
but i don't want to commute.
how about tustin?
but irvine is nicer and more to do.
and so on and so on... no matter what your reasons for being here, it's really still your choice.
Now you're getting it.
acpme_IHB
New member
wow... no offense, bubblegum, but there's a a lot more there that's discretionary than what you listed as optional. even mortage, prop tax, hoa, homeowners insr, and maintenance are optional because you don't have to own. but if you do own a home, and you've got money left over after expenses to put into 529, general savings, and supporting your parents, you're well ahead of the curve.
if anything i think you've underestimated your circumstances and you should be very proud of the situation you've got going on for yourself and your family!
if anything i think you've underestimated your circumstances and you should be very proud of the situation you've got going on for yourself and your family!
acpme_IHB
New member
how could $125k, nevermind $250k, be the middle class for OC when the median family income in newport beach is right about that number. i think if people really think they're middle class, then they should go to salary.com and look up what the median salary for their job is around here. if you're below median, then go talk to your boss because you have legitimate cause for a raise.
i just took a quick look and found the 90th percentile in 92660 for the following experienced/managerial jobs (before bonus and benefits):
software engineering manager 160k
accounting manager 118k
financial analyst IV 109k
business systems analyst IV 115k
psychologist 110k
attorney III
real estate attorney 168k
dentist 202k
also, the median income for a orthopedic surgeon is apparently only upper-middle class by the criteria here.
exactly... so in other words there are opportunities in CA that aren't available elsewhere. it's not fair call moving to CA a sacrifice when, for the most part, people are getting paid more to come here. there's too much emphasis on cost of living, but we forget the other half of the equation.
there seems to be two debates going here. one is about the high cost of living. and the other is about how $125/250k in OC is middle and upper-middle class, respectively. if we're going to accept that the latter is true, then we really have no right to complain about the former.
Adam_IHB
New member
Isn't what bubblegum describes the essence of "Keeping up with the Joneses" mentality? What is being perceived as "just middle-class" should actually be appreciated as living the good life--especially if the person is living within their means. The feeling of spinning your wheels comes when people live beyond their means and borrowing from their future. It is amazing how wealthy a person feels once they are debt free and begin to realize how much money they actually earn.
movingaround_IHB
New member
acpme - in my experience the raises given to come to CA are not enough to entirely make up for the cost of living change - much less actually give someone a 'raise' - which is why many people don't want to come work here. The real clincher is the house prices - once those fall enough then companies will be more likely to be able to get people to come here.
TimHume_IHB
New member
movingaround said:
I'm not sure what your point is now. If you are looking for someone who moved here or anywhere for one, and only one, reason, I don't think you will find it. No one does ANYTHING for only one reason. That is a pointless argument. I was addressing what I thought your point was, but now I don't know what that is. What is it?
I am in the middle stage of my life. No, I would not make all those sacrifices you list to live here. I'm not sure why you are asking.
Yes, much of the OC (but not all of it), is more expensive than most of the country. Is that your point? I don't think anyone would argue that. However, if you are making $160k, you are still rich. Because of your wealth, you can afford to live here. If you were poor, you would not have that option. Wealth gives you options. So, you may not feel rich, but you are. Pretend you only make $35k. Now, what are your choices? Where do you live? By living in the nice areas of OC, you are living a rich lifestyle. You are choosing to spend your money to live here rather than to live in St. Louis where you could spend less on housing and more on other toys. Maybe then you would feel rich. I feel rich every day I walk out of my apartment, feel the breeze coming off the ocean, and look at Balboa Island as I drive to work in my Mazda.
Bubblegum_IHB
New member
acpme said:
Acpme,
Thanks. I totally agree that there is a lot on that list that is optional... I'm fortunate to have my kids and family, and a roof over our heads. However, living within our means is the ONLY way we can get by with what we have and what we have left over we try to help our aging parents. For us we spend our money where our priorities are 1) Our kids and 2) our family and everything on that list is there to help support 1 & 2. I do consider myself middle class, I don't classify myself as uber-rich as we still watch what we spend, use costco coupons, and eat out on tuesdays when kids eat free at certain restaurants
.movingaround_IHB
New member
now you have me confused!
It appears that we define living a 'rich' or comfortable or whatever one wants to call it differently. All those things I listed are the things that to me define a rich, or well-off lifestyle - I do not in any way define it as living in a place like Irvine, Newport, etc. (*except for maybe the safety aspect of living in Irvine - but there are many places in the country to be safe).
My point is that all those people here in CA who say 'everyone wants to live here' are, IMO, very wrong - I know many people who live here and would rather not live here but do so because of job and family - and I know many, many people who would never move here because even if they can realistically afford it they would see it as making them poorer instead of richer - both monetarily and in quality of life (of course those two are often intertwined.)
It appears that we define living a 'rich' or comfortable or whatever one wants to call it differently. All those things I listed are the things that to me define a rich, or well-off lifestyle - I do not in any way define it as living in a place like Irvine, Newport, etc. (*except for maybe the safety aspect of living in Irvine - but there are many places in the country to be safe).
My point is that all those people here in CA who say 'everyone wants to live here' are, IMO, very wrong - I know many people who live here and would rather not live here but do so because of job and family - and I know many, many people who would never move here because even if they can realistically afford it they would see it as making them poorer instead of richer - both monetarily and in quality of life (of course those two are often intertwined.)
freedomCM_IHB
New member
I just don't get it. How can you say it with a straight face?
The middle class includes the top 3% of households?
So
1%-30%=poor/lower/working class
30-97% = "middle class"
97%-99% = upper class/rich
99%+ = uber rich class
What kind of sense does that make?
The middle class includes the top 3% of households?
So
1%-30%=poor/lower/working class
30-97% = "middle class"
97%-99% = upper class/rich
99%+ = uber rich class
What kind of sense does that make?
movingaround_IHB
New member
and yet freedomcm - that is exactly how our society is playing itself out - the top few percent are so incredibly rich - millions and millions of dollars - and the rest of the people either aren't making it, barely making or - as I would describe those making between 100 and 200 thousand - are making it with some level of comfort which could be instantly destroyed by a terrible illness or layoff - that is what I would call middle class.
I am sorry to burst some of your bubbles but were you to suddenly tomorrow make enough to not get a stimulus check in the mail you would no doubt find that even with 160,000 - although you might be more comfortable than you are now - you would still be middle class in this country and especially in this state.
This fact just illustrates how bad things have become in our country and how hard it is for many people to get by financially. Making it out to be some kind of "keeping up with the jones'" or arrogance or whatever you want to call it - in my opinion - only does a disservice to people who are living in poverty in this country, without thier basic health and safety needs being met.
I am sorry to burst some of your bubbles but were you to suddenly tomorrow make enough to not get a stimulus check in the mail you would no doubt find that even with 160,000 - although you might be more comfortable than you are now - you would still be middle class in this country and especially in this state.
This fact just illustrates how bad things have become in our country and how hard it is for many people to get by financially. Making it out to be some kind of "keeping up with the jones'" or arrogance or whatever you want to call it - in my opinion - only does a disservice to people who are living in poverty in this country, without thier basic health and safety needs being met.
HB Bear Too_IHB
New member
movingaround said:
I gotta agree.
Put another way, the upper class are financially independent while the middle class are still very dependent on regular income. The difference as a another poster points out is assets, the wealthy/upper class have assets to sustain them while those in the middle class may be just a few pay checks away from financial ruin.
Adam_IHB
New member
People who are a few paychecks from financial ruin screwed themselves.
How could an average joe making a very middle class income possibly make financially prudent lifestyle choices that allow him to bank 64.3% of his after-tax income? I just do. It's a balancing act between comfort and sacrifice (needs and wants). Most people--especially here in the OC--walk past me on the street without giving me a second look even though my net worth is likely greater than theirs. I'll soon be your millionaire next door.
My case could be considered extreme and is likely the result of having been raised on welfare up until the state helped put me through college, but did I wave some magic wand to build wealth? No, I continue to learn as much about personal finance as I can to ensure I'll never be poor again. It is hard to imagine what America would look like if the majority of people put away half or a third as much as I do percentage wise. In today's society, saving money is considered un-American.
Why aren't we teaching children more about personal finance? Why does our society covet conspicuous consumption? Why, again, is the middle class living hand to mouth when they are earning so much more relative to the rest of the world? George Soros discusses how we are at the end of a "superboom of credit expansion" of the past 25 years. The American people have simply borrowed too far into the future and now like hamsters in a wheel, the middle class will be spinning their wheels for quite some time. People who aren't prepared to downshift their lifestyles will be shocked when the squeeze from simultaneously deflating credit and housing bubbles forces them to.
How could an average joe making a very middle class income possibly make financially prudent lifestyle choices that allow him to bank 64.3% of his after-tax income? I just do. It's a balancing act between comfort and sacrifice (needs and wants). Most people--especially here in the OC--walk past me on the street without giving me a second look even though my net worth is likely greater than theirs. I'll soon be your millionaire next door.
My case could be considered extreme and is likely the result of having been raised on welfare up until the state helped put me through college, but did I wave some magic wand to build wealth? No, I continue to learn as much about personal finance as I can to ensure I'll never be poor again. It is hard to imagine what America would look like if the majority of people put away half or a third as much as I do percentage wise. In today's society, saving money is considered un-American.
Why aren't we teaching children more about personal finance? Why does our society covet conspicuous consumption? Why, again, is the middle class living hand to mouth when they are earning so much more relative to the rest of the world? George Soros discusses how we are at the end of a "superboom of credit expansion" of the past 25 years. The American people have simply borrowed too far into the future and now like hamsters in a wheel, the middle class will be spinning their wheels for quite some time. People who aren't prepared to downshift their lifestyles will be shocked when the squeeze from simultaneously deflating credit and housing bubbles forces them to.
acpme_IHB
New member
masterofdamoney's comments from another thread:
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/1492/P1150/#52451
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/1492/P1150/#52451
acpme_IHB
New member
movingaround said:
ok, that's mind-boggling.
but anyway, going back to a point made earlier...
the job and family argument doesn't jive with me. very few ppl are forced to live here. the wife loves OC, therefore i have to live here. i grew up in OC, therefore i have to live here. i got a pay raise and promotion to come here, therefore i have to live here. i only want my kids to be in the absolutely best public schools, therefore i have to live here. to me, those are still choices, albeit very good choices to make. we demand the very best so we come to a place like OC -- and unsurprisingly, there are costs involved.
bigger mortgages? bigger debts if things go bad? more risks? sure, but it goes with the territory. and just because one doesn't have enough wealth to completely avoid disaster doesn't make that person middle class. even a plastic surgeon who makes $500k/yr living newport coast still needs to work to pay the bills. maybe he needs to make that much just to support living in the community he works in. office space at newport center isn't cheap. labor isn't cheap because apparently he has to pay his middle class employees six-figures!
so in many ways that makes him no diff than the avg joe. but he's still not middle class.think of it this way: your job isn't going to pay you any more because you live in irvine and your coworker lives in corona. but living in irvine you will suffer from higher costs of living. is that unfair? i don't think so... but i hear that all the time.
irvine's so expensive but i have to live in irvine because of my job.
no you don't. you can live in the IE and commute.
but i don't want to commute.
how about tustin?
but irvine is nicer and more to do.
and so on and so on... no matter what your reasons for being here, it's really still your choice.
momopi_IHB
New member
I'm going to refrain from quoting so people won't think that I'm trolling. ;p
I don't think there's anything wrong with people not being able to buy where they work. If you work in Laguna Beach and cannot afford to buy a beach front cottage, too bad.
I do think there's something wrong when people cannot afford to live within reasonable distance to their work. This is why I support well planned affordable housing for rent, catering to folks who work in the city. If you're a home owner and don't want subsidized housing near you, too bad. As far as I'm concerned, if you're good enough to bag my groceries, you're good enough to be my neighbor.
You don't have to buy to live near where you work. The government and the wealthy is not obligated to help you become home owners.
If I look across south OC, for 500k-600k range I can buy a decent town home or condo in Irvine. If I go to Lake Forest or Mission Viejo, I could get a lake front condo or a SFR for the same sum, which is about 5x-6x my annual income here.
If I moved back to Taipei, a comparable newish condo (in mid or high rise building) would cost at least $10 million NT, or 20 times my potential annual income there. So, in comparison, I don't feel that Irvine's housing prices is very expensive. If similar scale housing bubble exited here, the $600k town home in Irvine would be priced at $1.6 million+. Not even San Francisco is that expensive.
I've been through about half a dozen states and would prefer to live by coastal area of CA. I was offered a very generous relocation package to San Antonio TX but refused it. Had I moved there, I could have bought a new 4 bed house with cash and kept my paycheck for food and toys. Yet I'm willing to take a mortgage and stay in OC, because I like the weather here. So, the plan is to buy more income properties elsewhere, make positive cash flow, and use the profits to afford a better house here.
I don't think there's anything wrong with people not being able to buy where they work. If you work in Laguna Beach and cannot afford to buy a beach front cottage, too bad.
I do think there's something wrong when people cannot afford to live within reasonable distance to their work. This is why I support well planned affordable housing for rent, catering to folks who work in the city. If you're a home owner and don't want subsidized housing near you, too bad. As far as I'm concerned, if you're good enough to bag my groceries, you're good enough to be my neighbor.
You don't have to buy to live near where you work. The government and the wealthy is not obligated to help you become home owners.
If I look across south OC, for 500k-600k range I can buy a decent town home or condo in Irvine. If I go to Lake Forest or Mission Viejo, I could get a lake front condo or a SFR for the same sum, which is about 5x-6x my annual income here.
If I moved back to Taipei, a comparable newish condo (in mid or high rise building) would cost at least $10 million NT, or 20 times my potential annual income there. So, in comparison, I don't feel that Irvine's housing prices is very expensive. If similar scale housing bubble exited here, the $600k town home in Irvine would be priced at $1.6 million+. Not even San Francisco is that expensive.
I've been through about half a dozen states and would prefer to live by coastal area of CA. I was offered a very generous relocation package to San Antonio TX but refused it. Had I moved there, I could have bought a new 4 bed house with cash and kept my paycheck for food and toys. Yet I'm willing to take a mortgage and stay in OC, because I like the weather here. So, the plan is to buy more income properties elsewhere, make positive cash flow, and use the profits to afford a better house here.
acpme_IHB
New member
neither is upper class and the tax code has a remedy for it. not that i'm in love with the tax code (i actually like the fair tax concept), but you get any number of tax breaks for education, often below mkt rates on the debt, deductible interest expense, and the prospect of above avg earnings in the long term. where in the tax code should we insert an additional tax credit for newly-minted professionals in high cost areas? the doc with a pile of debt is no diff than a mcmansion buyer with a pile of mortgage. in either case they can itemize their AGI down to a much lower tax bracket, so the tax code isn't penalizing either one for where they live or what they do.
if the wealthy small business owner lived middle class all his life and saved a bundle, good for him. he should enjoy the fruits of his labor and modesty, and live off his interest while continuing to get taxed at middle class rates. after all, he built that wealth on after-tax savings. so why should we consider him wealthy now and penalize that accumulated wealth a second time?
in both cases, i don't see how the tax code was unfair to either party. i'm just focusing on the tax issue because this is how the entire discussion began. i'm not arguing that life is easy even for a household that makes above median income in irvine. what i do disagree with is the assertion that someone in OC with a six-figure income should be given additional consideration in the tax code because they have no choice in their circumstances here.
if the wealthy small business owner lived middle class all his life and saved a bundle, good for him. he should enjoy the fruits of his labor and modesty, and live off his interest while continuing to get taxed at middle class rates. after all, he built that wealth on after-tax savings. so why should we consider him wealthy now and penalize that accumulated wealth a second time?
in both cases, i don't see how the tax code was unfair to either party. i'm just focusing on the tax issue because this is how the entire discussion began. i'm not arguing that life is easy even for a household that makes above median income in irvine. what i do disagree with is the assertion that someone in OC with a six-figure income should be given additional consideration in the tax code because they have no choice in their circumstances here.
movingaround_IHB
New member
Are you considering the 'stimulus package' a tax break? If the stimulus package is supposed to get people to spend money they otherwise would not spend on consumer goods then what logical reason is there to exclude people making over 160,000? In fact, those making over 160,000 might actually be more likely to spend the money on a new TV than the person that has had to use credit cards just to eat or pay electricity over the past year and must use the stimulus money to pay those credit cards off. Obviously, I dont agree with the entire stimulus proposition in its entirety - just playing devils advocate about not giving the stimulus across the board.