4 ms·

Yes it's a lot of money, but it also leaves them with a lot of money left every month. I don't know exactly what your net income in CA on 200k is (and if they f

Yes it's a lot of money, but it also leaves them with a lot of money left every month. I don't know exactly what your net income in CA on 200k is (and if they filed jointly, etc), but they should take home at least 10k a month. They still have 7k a month to live on. I don't see the problem.

poppysan 18y ago
I live in CA and am struggling at just under 6 figures. Childcare and Mortgage on an (average 500K) home is the majority of my salary. Here is the problem. With over 80% of my net going to living expenses, there is no extra 2800 to go to school loans. Thank heavens I have no loans, just have to pay my wife's off....
- acgourley 18y ago
  Wouldn't you say that a large part of a mortgage payment is actually an investment? If you were faced with large student loan payments, you could just decide to rent rather than take on a huge investment. Again, I don't see the problem.
  - tptacek 18y ago
    I'm wondering if you had a straight face on when you said "a large part of the mortgage payment is an investment". Either way: if they want to build a family, the rent vs. mortgage decision isn't going to change the equation much. Again, assume they have a kid. They have to factor in: * Commute distance, which will determine how often they actually see their children. * Lease security; it is extremely traumatic to move a school-age child to a new school district, or even just a new school. * School quality: the places with the best rental stock are not necessarily places with acceptable public school, or accessible child care. Again: the article's claim isn't that a couple can't survive on 200k. It's that they couldn't stay married. I can see reasons why.
tptacek 18y ago
Assume they're living in a house and they have one child. Then: $2800 for loans. $3500 for mortage and escrow. $1300 for child care (both work). $1000 for food and day-to-day living expenses. $1000 for utilities, Internet, services and recurring expenses --- parking, commute, health care copay and (with most employers) dependent coverage, etc. I get $9600. Survivable? Of course. You can clearly survive in America with a $2800/mo student loan burden offset by a $200k/yr income. But: * It's not "comfortable"; for instance, they aren't putting away money to put their kid in college. * It's not resilient; they're fucked as soon as one of them loses their job. * It's not flexible; for instance, they might literally not be able to afford to have a second kid. Now, they don't have kids, I get that. But the moral of the story was, their student loan debt load was so high they couldn't stay married. They're smart enough to make 200k/yr, they're smart enough to do this math.
- acgourley 18y ago
  I appreciate your breakdown, and your post below about how its harder to rent with a family. I still think it's ridiculous. I'm not going to go into a point by point rundown because it would take a lot of space and fork the argument several times, but basically I feel that if you ran these numbers by most Americans they would first laugh out loud, then get a little angry. You seem to think access to top schools and a luxurious lifestyle are prerequisites for a marriage. Empirically, this is false. That's looking at this situation WITH children. Once you take the children out, as was true with the original case, it gets even more ridiculous. They no longer have such a case for a mortgage and even if they do keep it, they can put away about 1500 a month by not feeding and babysitting a kid.
  - tptacek 18y ago
    Let's you and I be clear: I agree with you that 2.8k/mo is not a dealbreaking debt load for a couple with a joint income of 200k. I'm just suggesting that, on the story's own terms, it clearly could be: their marriage could have easily broken up because that (large) amount of debt was incompatible with their life plan.
    - 18y ago

poppysan 18y ago

I live in CA and am struggling at just under 6 figures. Childcare and Mortgage on an (average 500K) home is the majority of my salary. Here is the problem. With over 80% of my net going to living expenses, there is no extra 2800 to go to school loans. Thank heavens I have no loans, just have to pay my wife's off....

acgourley 18y ago
Wouldn't you say that a large part of a mortgage payment is actually an investment? If you were faced with large student loan payments, you could just decide to rent rather than take on a huge investment. Again, I don't see the problem.
- tptacek 18y ago
  I'm wondering if you had a straight face on when you said "a large part of the mortgage payment is an investment". Either way: if they want to build a family, the rent vs. mortgage decision isn't going to change the equation much. Again, assume they have a kid. They have to factor in: * Commute distance, which will determine how often they actually see their children. * Lease security; it is extremely traumatic to move a school-age child to a new school district, or even just a new school. * School quality: the places with the best rental stock are not necessarily places with acceptable public school, or accessible child care. Again: the article's claim isn't that a couple can't survive on 200k. It's that they couldn't stay married. I can see reasons why.

tptacek 18y ago

Assume they're living in a house and they have one child. Then: $2800 for loans. $3500 for mortage and escrow. $1300 for child care (both work). $1000 for food and day-to-day living expenses. $1000 for utilities, Internet, services and recurring expenses --- parking, commute, health care copay and (with most employers) dependent coverage, etc. I get $9600. Survivable? Of course. You can clearly survive in America with a $2800/mo student loan burden offset by a $200k/yr income. But: * It's not "comfortable"; for instance, they aren't putting away money to put their kid in college. * It's not resilient; they're fucked as soon as one of them loses their job. * It's not flexible; for instance, they might literally not be able to afford to have a second kid. Now, they don't have kids, I get that. But the moral of the story was, their student loan debt load was so high they couldn't stay married. They're smart enough to make 200k/yr, they're smart enough to do this math.

acgourley 18y ago
I appreciate your breakdown, and your post below about how its harder to rent with a family. I still think it's ridiculous. I'm not going to go into a point by point rundown because it would take a lot of space and fork the argument several times, but basically I feel that if you ran these numbers by most Americans they would first laugh out loud, then get a little angry. You seem to think access to top schools and a luxurious lifestyle are prerequisites for a marriage. Empirically, this is false. That's looking at this situation WITH children. Once you take the children out, as was true with the original case, it gets even more ridiculous. They no longer have such a case for a mortgage and even if they do keep it, they can put away about 1500 a month by not feeding and babysitting a kid.
- tptacek 18y ago
  Let's you and I be clear: I agree with you that 2.8k/mo is not a dealbreaking debt load for a couple with a joint income of 200k. I'm just suggesting that, on the story's own terms, it clearly could be: their marriage could have easily broken up because that (large) amount of debt was incompatible with their life plan.
  - 18y ago