Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 321 posts

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#181

Post by throwaway981211 »

tjr225 wrote: post #60
Tehchops wrote: post #10

There's very few places where there is an overlap of "jobs that pay $100k" and "homes that can be afforded at $100k salary".

> "homes that can be afforded at $100k salary" There are many places throughout the south, midwest and northeast with decent job markets and dirt cheap housing. The mortgage on my 1800 sq foot house is nearly a third of the cost of my tiny one bedroom back in Seattle. The cost of the entire house is a tenth of a house in the Bay Area. I am fortunate to work remotely but when deciding where to live I wanted to be able…

How does your total comp fare relative to Seattle? I’m living in downtown Seattle now working for Amazon. I’ve been here almost 8 years. My TC is north of $300K, but the mental strain this fucking company has had on me has me constantly on the edge. I’m thinking about leaving to join another FANG company or drop out of big tech all together.

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#183

Post by rhombocombus »

brixon wrote: post #143
rwmurrayVT wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You certainly don't need to be drowning in student loan debt to reach that. You could go to a state school and get an excellent job. That's just poor financial decision making. Where I live you could go to UVa, VT, or maybe VCU.

You also have to factor consumerism and entitlement into the issue. I make white collar money, but live in a blue collar neighborhood. This makes housing more affordable and there is no temptation for "Keeping up with the Joneses".

It's easy to finger wag at supposed entitlement and consumerism when you completely ignore all the other factors that lead someone to decide where to live and work. As the breadwinner in my family I made the decision to live closer to where I work and pay a larger share of my income towards housing so I can spend more time with my kids and less in my car. There are plenty of other considerations far beyond your cynical take that would lead a family to live in an expensive ares: schools, services, healthcare, ability/desire to drive, child care, the list goes on. It is difficult to avoid getting rankled at this kind of imperious mindset, particularly because if you actually took the time to meet any of these so called materialists you would likely find that they just want to have a nice life with their families like everyone else. Calling it consumerism or entitlement is a cheap shot, reductionist, and in most cases doesn't reflect reality.

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#184

Post by throwaway981211 »

dragontamer wrote: post #17
Tehchops wrote: post #10

There's very few places where there is an overlap of "jobs that pay $100k" and "homes that can be afforded at $100k salary".

Small town America will have $500 / month for a 2-bedroom apartment, while paying medical-doctors $200k+ / year. But you may be the only doctor around for 10s of miles. Which is why you'd be so valuable. I'm sure there are other $100k to $200k jobs that small towns need. No, you won't get high-tech or programming in small-town America. But there's more to life than just the tech-field. Its easy to forget because we'r…

In the grand scheme of things, even $200K is not a lot of money. I made record this year (~$320K), but I end up saving it all. Can I afford to buy a home? Absolutely. Will I buy a home? Absolutely not. Let’s say I purchase an $650K home outside Seattle and commute to work. I still have a huge mortgage weighing on my shoulders and I could get wiped out if my employer let me go. Just not worth the risk.

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#185

Post by uwuhn »

wil421 wrote: post #170
filoleg wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends a lot on the school you went to and what kind of financial aid you were able to get. Back when I was picking a college for my CS undergrad, the choice boiled down to (numbers are rough estimates, because I don't remember the exact ones, but they are close enough and should relay the point I am trying to make): * UCLA out of state: some financial aid for the first year, bringing the costs down to around $25…

Just to add you could’ve done TAG (Transfer Admission Guarantee) to both GaTech and UGA from Georgia Perimeter (community college) and saved a bunch on tuition or get in via transferring to a difficult school. I went to KSU to be with my wife (girlfriend at the time) and did Information Systems. Had I known I would love software engineering I might have done CS elsewhere. Are you still in Atlanta? If so what kind of…

I did TAG too (in California).

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#186

Post by throwaway981211 »

bwooceli wrote: post #160

120 range in KS, 15 year mortgage on a 2,600ft^2 house is $2k on the nose. Commute is 15 minutes. KS isn't all that bad folks :)

I lived in Little Rock for high school and Norman, OK for college. How does KS compare? Shit you could not pay me enough to go back to Oklahoma or Arkansas.

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#187

Post by davidjnelson »

justinzollars wrote: post #9

$100,000 still a lot of money. You can buy a beer in Vietnam for 20 cents. The problem in the Bay Area, where I live, is we artificially limit the amount of housing. So prices move to infinity.

It’s a lot compared to 10k/year, but not when trying to buy a decent pad in the Bay Area.

Income is extremely relative. Age, health, dependents, quality of life, location, expectations, etc etc. I had a fantastic quality of life on 10k/year many moons ago, for instance. But everything is always changing. I learned recently that the atoms that make up our bodies change in large quantities from moment to moment :-o

The “happiest man on earth” according to fmri studies led by the Dalai Lama at the Mind And Life Institute lives on $50/mo and donated all his money from book sales to helping the poor. Source: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000SEUSXW/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?...

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#189

Post by fredophile »

aetherson wrote: post #105
ed312 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Struggling with rent vs buy right now for this very reason. I know financially it would be better to buy, but then you lose the flexibility to go after a great opportunity in even another part of a major city.

You know that you can sell houses before you pay off your mortgage, right? If you aren't in an area with very high housing costs (which, obviously, very many readers of this site are), it's not even that big a deal to sell your house when you need to. If your house constitutes 40% of your net worth, and you take a 5% hit on your sale price, then your net worth has declined... 2%. A good job is worth that. Admittedly,…

Selling isn't free. Where I live you can expect to pay 6% just to the realtors. You also have other costs like lawyers, etc.

You're also ignoring leverage. If the house is 40% of my net worth, I take a 5% hit on the sale price, and I've only paid 20% of the house then I've lost 10% of my net worth not 2%.

Re: $100k/year still might not be enough to buy a home

#190

Post by toomuchtodo »

taborj wrote: post #150
claudiulodro wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And then just work for that company forever? What's the end-game?

Enjoy life outside of work? Look, I enjoy my work and it's pretty meaningful work that affects people in real ways. But I work to live, not live to work. My job is a means to an end, that end being to have a fulfilling life that doesn't revolve around what I do for a living. Because of that, I find the quest to climb the corporate ladder has lost it's appeal. I'm cool staying at my current, well-paying, work from hom…

I love this comment.
Post reply on HN