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

201–210 of 321 posts

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

#201

Post by tdfx »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #113
notfromhere wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

home ownership, two kids, college education, and regular travel, all while being financially comfortable and saving for retirement are what the hallmarks of the american middle class dream used to be. A 100k household income doesn't afford you that anymore.

"Regular travel"? This is not a historically aware definition of "the American dream". Regular travel isn't even a goal of most people today .

> Regular travel isn't even a goal of most people today.

I see you've been boycotting Instagram for at least the last half a decade.

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

#202

Post by jhall1468 »

throwing838383 wrote: post #159
aledalgrande wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that is a problem in any place where it is desirable to live these days. Locations I've experienced first hand: London, Sydney, Bay area, Los Angeles, Vancouver... and I'm sure there are many more where you can't buy on that salary.

There are many examples where that's not true: places like the beautiful college town of madison, Houston, Chicago, etc. High living costs are a self imposed problem: housing regulation and zoning.

I agree, generally, but that's ignoring geographic boundaries which are huge for cities like Seattle and San Francisco. It's not the main issue (regulation and zoning are) but it's still a big piece of it.

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

#203

Post by jhall1468 »

throwaway981211 wrote: post #181
tjr225 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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.

Not who you asked, but it's almost guaranteed to be lower. It's extremely rare to be both remote and get paid at the prevailing salary of the company. That only works for companies that generally don't allow remote, as they don't have COL-adjusted salaries to worry about.

As an Amazonian that works remote, I have the same payscale as everyone else in Seattle.

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

#204

Post by davidjnelson »

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…

Amen. You could also consider starting a small business if you want to stay lower key.

Corporate ladder does seem a bit... sad? But maybe some people like it! More power to them!

Cool thing about a small business is you can create a long term sustainable lifestyle that suits you. I like the philosophy of TJ Holowaychuk with Apex (created expressjs and a million other amazing things), super cool. At one point it was referred to as a “non startup”. Love that dude :-D

Nothing wrong with building a company up to an ipo either, that could be a blast depending on the people and context.

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

#205

Post by dang »

hogFeast wrote: post #115
jriot wrote: post #98

I am 34 years old working remotely as data scientist, making $107k TC. My wife who I've been married to for 13 years is a stay-at-home mother as we have two children in grade school. Since they are in the school she is turning in our half-acre into a sustainable garden with chickens. We own our home, are financially comfortable while saving $1500 a month, and travel. We were planning a 2-month trip to Japan this upco…

Thanks for telling everyone how great your life is going. I came here, and I was worried that I wouldn't hear about you and how well your life is going...but I am relieved now that I have heard how great your life is going. Serious comment as the above will totally tilt the neckbeards who will miss the point: housing is a problem in aggregate, bad policies are a function of local/individual thinking. Every thread abo…

If you continue to break the site guidelines when posting here, we are going to have to ban you. Would you please review them and stick to them from now on? Specifically: no more snark, name-calling, flamebait, and ideological battle. Most importantly: be kind.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#206

Post by jhall1468 »

sjdb77 wrote: post #127
paxys wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you get very lucky with housing living off $40k/year is pretty difficult in San Francisco. Even if you manage I would definitely not call it comfortable.

I pay $2k in rent, so $24k. That leaves $1300/month for everything else. I'm easily below that most months. (No car, no drinking, cook during the week) I don't find SF to be any more expensive than any other "big" city outside of housing cost, especially when you factor in not needing a car to get around.

How much of that $1300/month goes to dental and medical insurance? Because with no family to support, I don't see how you aren't paying close to half that in insurance.

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

#207

Post by bwooceli »

non-entity wrote: post #199
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 :)

What part? I visited KC earlier this and frankly didn't find it too terrible, but idk if I'd live in like Topeka or Wichita

Olathe (Southern Suburbia). Yeah, Topeka and Wichita are off the menu for me, but I'd gladly be anywhere between Lawrence and Lees Summit (on the Missouri Side) South of I-70 and North of Gardner. And while Downtown KC isn't going to stack up to the non-stop adventure of a "Big City", there's still plenty to do, and the other quality of life bonuses add up.

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

#208

Post by bumby »

tachyonbeam wrote: post #47
dragontamer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Median household income in USA is $59,039. That's both the mother AND father working to bring home $59,039 on the average (before taxes and other costs). Its clear you live in a rich area where $100k isn't much. But that's also why a large chunk of Americans think that "city-folk" are disconnected from reality. $100k is a lot for many people. My sister lives in an area (in USA) where a 2-bedroom apartment is just $50…

Hmm, do most households have two people nowadays?

Somewhat tangential, but interestingly household size has started increasing for the first time in 160 years

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/01/the-number-...

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

#209

Post by autotune »

efa wrote: post #154
KoftaBob wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Austin and Chicago definitely fit in that overlap. On top of that, when you compare SF to say, Cleveland, sure the median salary in SF could be 2x as high, but the median home price is close to 10x as high. NIMBYism is going to absolutely choke the bay area over time, and newer generations of startups, VCs, and accelerators will wise up and broaden their horizons. The frequently parroted argument of "SF has the best…

Or San Antonio. A few less jobs and a little lower pay than Austin but housing is way cheaper.

Mid 20s guy here; I lived in San Antonio a few years back for a year and spent every other night driving up to Austin, because there is basically nothing to do in downtown SA unless your only interests are drinking and food trucks.

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

#210

Post by bwooceli »

throwaway981211 wrote: post #186
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.

I would say those are not comparable cities. Way more to do in KC (but not as much as like Chicago).
Post reply on HN