5 ms·

"larger house and nicer car and poof it's gone." I guess you could spend your money that way. $200k is considered affluent, at least around Texas. I imagine

"larger house and nicer car and poof it's gone." I guess you could spend your money that way. $200k is considered affluent, at least around Texas. I imagine it's not really a lot if you live out on the west coast.

iplaw 10y ago
$200k is far from affluent in Texas, unless you're in a small town in BFE. $200k is solidly middle class in Dallas.
- dlp211 10y ago
  $200k/year is well above solidly middle class anywhere in the world including Vancouver, London, NYC, San Francisco, or any other place you could dream up. $200k/year being middle class is so incredibly out of touch of what it means to be solidly middle class. This does not mean that you are jet setting around the world either or that you can quit your job tomorrow, but you are well on your way to Financial Independence/Retire Early, and probably a fat one at that.
  - iplaw 10y ago
    I think that you grossly overestimate what a $200k income actually gets you in terms of ability to aggregate wealth. If you're hoping to work until you're 65 and live off of a meager 401(k), then sure. Have at it. If you want an early and fat retirement, you'll need at least $300k salary. Large annual bonuses ($100k-$250k range) with a $200k salary would also be sufficient. $200k salary alone is solidly middle class.
    - dlp211 10y ago
      This is absolutely nuts to me. At 200k you should be able to put away 80k+/yr if you are even semi-serious about FIRE. At that rate with a 7 percent return, adjusted for inflation, after 20 years you'd have 3.5MM in assets which would provide a safe withdraw rate of 140k/yr. This assumes that you make not a single dollar more adjusted for inflation than that 200k. 140k/yr is nearly 3x median income in America. This is solidly upper middle class and I would say quite affluent. For posterity, if you did this for 30 years you'd have over $8MM and a SWR of over $320k/yr.
      - IdontRememberIt 10y ago
        A 7 percent return is impossible without investing in crazy ultra risky financial products. The only vehicule where everybody (especially people close to retirement or retired) is investing is real estate (which is also ultra risky). Please thanks the FED for that.
        gizmo 10y ago
        How much the market returns varies wildly between decades, but 7% is what you will get on average through passive investing. You don't need to take big risks -- plain index funds will do. Millenials are unlikely to see the stock market drop by more than 40% during their lifetime.
        throwaway2016a 10y ago
        I get 7% on several "robo-advisors" (financial advisors that use algorithms instead of people. It's not unheard of... not even uncommon. As another posted mentioned, if you invest it is widely considered what you should have as a target for your average (some years better, some years worse)
        dlp211 10y ago
        I challenge you to find a 20-year period that the S&P 500 did not return 7+% annualized returns AFI. There are some, but not many. I further challenge you to find a 30-year period where the S&P 500 did not return 7+% annualized returns AFI, there are even fewer. And the few that you will find are almost all between 6-7%.
      - iplaw 10y ago
        So let me get this right. This hypothetical includes a $200k salary. Once you consider Federal income tax, FICA, and State income tax, you're sitting $130k in CA and NY, $135k in OK, etc. You want to "put away" $80k/year. Haha.
        dlp211 10y ago
        That is literally if you do nothing to shield yourself from taxes AND you are single. Do you plan on being single your entire life? and never investing in any tax advantage accounts?, never tax loss harvesting?, never being semi-serious about FIRE? You are so out of touch it is beyond unreal. There are people that live and work in every single one of those locales on 1/3rd and less just fine.

iplaw 10y ago

$200k is far from affluent in Texas, unless you're in a small town in BFE. $200k is solidly middle class in Dallas.

dlp211 10y ago
$200k/year is well above solidly middle class anywhere in the world including Vancouver, London, NYC, San Francisco, or any other place you could dream up. $200k/year being middle class is so incredibly out of touch of what it means to be solidly middle class. This does not mean that you are jet setting around the world either or that you can quit your job tomorrow, but you are well on your way to Financial Independence/Retire Early, and probably a fat one at that.
- iplaw 10y ago
  I think that you grossly overestimate what a $200k income actually gets you in terms of ability to aggregate wealth. If you're hoping to work until you're 65 and live off of a meager 401(k), then sure. Have at it. If you want an early and fat retirement, you'll need at least $300k salary. Large annual bonuses ($100k-$250k range) with a $200k salary would also be sufficient. $200k salary alone is solidly middle class.
  - dlp211 10y ago
    This is absolutely nuts to me. At 200k you should be able to put away 80k+/yr if you are even semi-serious about FIRE. At that rate with a 7 percent return, adjusted for inflation, after 20 years you'd have 3.5MM in assets which would provide a safe withdraw rate of 140k/yr. This assumes that you make not a single dollar more adjusted for inflation than that 200k. 140k/yr is nearly 3x median income in America. This is solidly upper middle class and I would say quite affluent. For posterity, if you did this for 30 years you'd have over $8MM and a SWR of over $320k/yr.
    - IdontRememberIt 10y ago
      A 7 percent return is impossible without investing in crazy ultra risky financial products. The only vehicule where everybody (especially people close to retirement or retired) is investing is real estate (which is also ultra risky). Please thanks the FED for that.
      - gizmo 10y ago
        How much the market returns varies wildly between decades, but 7% is what you will get on average through passive investing. You don't need to take big risks -- plain index funds will do. Millenials are unlikely to see the stock market drop by more than 40% during their lifetime.
      - throwaway2016a 10y ago
        I get 7% on several "robo-advisors" (financial advisors that use algorithms instead of people. It's not unheard of... not even uncommon. As another posted mentioned, if you invest it is widely considered what you should have as a target for your average (some years better, some years worse)
      - dlp211 10y ago
        I challenge you to find a 20-year period that the S&P 500 did not return 7+% annualized returns AFI. There are some, but not many. I further challenge you to find a 30-year period where the S&P 500 did not return 7+% annualized returns AFI, there are even fewer. And the few that you will find are almost all between 6-7%.
    - iplaw 10y ago
      So let me get this right. This hypothetical includes a $200k salary. Once you consider Federal income tax, FICA, and State income tax, you're sitting $130k in CA and NY, $135k in OK, etc. You want to "put away" $80k/year. Haha.
      - dlp211 10y ago
        That is literally if you do nothing to shield yourself from taxes AND you are single. Do you plan on being single your entire life? and never investing in any tax advantage accounts?, never tax loss harvesting?, never being semi-serious about FIRE? You are so out of touch it is beyond unreal. There are people that live and work in every single one of those locales on 1/3rd and less just fine.