3 ms·
> Taxes on $200k are gonna be less than $25k. No, no they're not. I make less than $200k, and I paid an effective tax of ~25% last year. (CA's state income tax
by deathanatos 7y ago
> Taxes on $200k are gonna be less than $25k.
No, no they're not. I make less than $200k, and I paid an effective tax of ~25% last year. (CA's state income taxes are pretty high.) Extrapolating to $200k, I'd pay ~$50k in tax.
> food might be as high as $1000
Way too low. Finding lunch in SF is easily $10/meal, especially with the extra surcharges a lot of restaurants (and I mean that in the "fast lunch eatery" sense, not the "host-seats-you-at-nice-table" type, though those too) are now charging. I'm doing ~$4k/yr on food for two, and we rarely eat out.
I think your point is sound, but I think you're going to have closer to $60-$65k/yr. You also need to account for PMI & taxes on any home purchase. (The PMI will likely depend on how much you've got. Most people who are looking to buy homes probably won't have enough as they're too young, IMO, but then, they're also probably not experienced enough to pull $200k, unless maybe they're in a nice spot at a FAANG, but not everyone is.) You do mention this, but 401(k) savings is going to further reduce that, you probably want to put some in an investment too, and I think you'll find that $60k disappears rather quickly.
- PhasmaFelis 7y agoYeah, I may have missed some things and lowballed some others. Let's add an extra 50 grand to the yearly expenses to cover anything I may have missed. I would still say that $40k/year free and clear after all bills and major expenses are paid is not "lower class" by any reasonable definition, as thatfrenchguy implied.