What It Costs to Live Well - Northeast

Forbes ^

[Selkie]

It's a question that plagues the successful and the aspiring: How much does a family need to net each year to lead a comfortable affluent life?

We are not talking about great riches; there are millions of Americans who work hard to be able to afford the best for their families--and themselves--but who don't entertain notions of owning private jets, sprawling country estates or closets full of the latest fashions. Their goals are more grounded: a good education for their children, a nice house, a weekend place, the occasional trip, a night out once a week and a little money in the bank.

We attempted to tally what it would take for a family of four to live well in different parts of the country, starting with every state in the Northeast. We looked at one city in each state and factored in a range of costs, including housing, cars, education, dining and health care.

So what does it cost to live well? We have the answer--or at least some ballpark figures. And it isn't cheap.

Our totals ranged from about $215,000 (for Portland, Me.) to a whopping half-a-million dollars (for, not surprisingly, New York City). And that's the net of local, state and federal taxes, and includes very little savings. Less-urban upper New England tended to be the least expensive place to live well, while medium-sized cities such as Baltimore and Philadelphia ranked in the middle, and the big metropolises and surrounding areas, such as New York, Boston and Greenwich, Conn., were tops when it came to costs.

[nopardons]

I was stating a fact and you were being "noxious", by being "cutesy"; if that's actually what you were being, instead of uninformed/attempting to self aggrandize..

[nopardons]

You were under the wrong impression. That might cut it in some places, but not in the N.Y./N.J./Conn. area, nor in Chicago, or in many other areas of this country.

[Selkie]

I was stating a fact and you were being "noxious", by being "cutesy"; if that's actually what you were being, instead of uninformed/attempting to self aggrandize..>>>>>

I was being noxious by being cute ?

Only in your view. LOL

Uninformed ?

Again the phrase "old money" is well known to peoples of all walks of life.

Self aggrandize ?

Because I state my unearned family heritage ?

You were being nasty and you were wrong to do so.

[Paul Atreides]

We also don't eat out more than three times a month, including fast food. I like to cook, and don't mind doing.

You're much better off. I got my fill of restaurant food while in college. There is nothing like home cooking.

[Clemenza]

Lets see. I traded NYC for a place where there is zero income tax and where the cost of housing is slightly lower. To eat out costs the same as NYC but the food isn't as good. I have ZERO family, extended or otherwise, in this part of the country and I really don't enjoy my job (although I am well payed). I just wish I didn't choose the aviation industry, as there aren't many jobs in aviation in the NY/NJ area.

In some ways, I lived better as a "starving" student in my prewar in Bay Ridge than I do now as a "professional" in the hellhole that is Seattle.

Meanwhile, my sister lives in "low cost" South Carolina, which is good if you want to raise a family, but s-cks if you are a confirmed batchelor.

[Selkie]

We also don't eat out more than three times a month, including fast food. I like to cook, and don't mind doing. Besides, except for a couple of places that we like, I don't care much for restaurant food anyway! >>>>

I eat out constantly, at some great NYC places, but I still like home cooking best !

It just tastes better.

[nopardons]

Look, this is the second thread I have seen you posting about how much money you have/come from. That's self aggrandizing/braggadocio and yes, noxious.

Just admit it...you weren't being "cutesy" at all, you either couldn't remember the correct term, or you didn't know it.

I stated facts. I wasn't "nasty"; unless I hit you too close to the bone.

You claim to live in N.Y.C., come from money, but consider the Forbes article to be off base for an upper middle class family of 4. That just jive.

And whilst we're on the subject of "nasty", calling a fictional family ( which IS what the Forbes thing is ), nouveau riche and worse, was nasty of you.

What people are failing to take into consideration, is that the article is about the upper middle class. It's also rather hypothetical and generalized. Taking it personally, which you and others have done, is silly; especially for you, who are unmarried and childless.

[Selkie]

Charleston isn't so bad for confirmed batchelors is it ?

My uncle is one and loves it there.

[Clemenza]

Last time I was in Charleston, it was filled with seasoned citizens. Maybe if I were 40 years older.

Besides, my sister lives in Simpsonville, on the other side of the state. My jaw dropped when I saw how much housing costs out there.

[nopardons]

That just doesn't jive.

[Selkie]

Look, this is the second thread I have seen you posting about how much money you have/come from.

That's self aggrandizing/braggadocio and yes, noxious. Just admit it...you weren't being "cutesy" at all, you either couldn't remember the correct term, or you didn't know it.

I stated facts. I wasn't "nasty"; unless I hit you too close to the bone.

You claim to live in N.Y.C., come from money, but consider the Forbes article to be off base for an upper middle class family of 4. That just jive.

And whilst we're on the subject of "nasty", calling a fictional family ( which IS what the Forbes thing is ), nouveau riche and worse, was nasty of you.

What people are failing to take into consideration, is that the article is about the upper middle class. It's also rather hypothetical and generalized.

Taking it personally, which you and others have done, is silly; especially for you, who are unmarried and childless. >>>>>>>>

I was being cutesy, the correct term doesn't take a rocket scientist to remember.

I highly suggest you go read Paul Fussell's long standing classic on the Class system in America. Simply titled "Class".

Oh and I'm so sorry for calling a "fictional family" nouveau riche. Do you think the fictional family will fictionally sue me for slander ?

You're a tad bit scary too.

A wee bit too angry towards a perfect stranger on the internet

[GSlob]

Well, I used the following metrics: employed professional (50-100)- middle class; upper level professionals, middle managers and lower level executives - (120-250) - upper middle; higher level executives and top professionals, such as top level physicians and lawyers (250+) - upper class, with some correction as to the area (the incomes are area dependent, too). The upper class cannot be too small numerically, that's why I'd think that its lower boundary should be drawn reasonably low. This country has about 7 million millionaires by net worth (not by income), and I would think that 7 million is a good estimate for the size of the upper class.

[durasell]

You can't go back to the starving artists days. The best you can do is say, "damn that was fun!" and move on.

[nopardons]

Projection can easily be treated. WHY ARE YOU SO ANGRY, BUT CLAIMING THAT I AM? LOL

Oh goody...a book suggestion. I just LOVE book lists.

Since I read "CLASS", by Paul Fussell in 1983, your suggestion is useless. Just when did YOU find that book?

Here are a few books, that will help you and your wee charade....

"BOBOS IN PARADISE", by David Brooks, "THE PREPPY HANDBOOK", edited by Lisa Birnbach, "A SWARM OF WASPS", by Mrs. Falk Feeley, "THE WASP MYSTIQUE", by Richard C. Robertiello, M.D. and Diana Hoguet,"THE AVERAGE AMERICAN BOOK", by Barry Tarshis, and the one you most need, "THE COMPLETE UPMANSHIP", by Stephen Potter.

For someone who got her panties in knots about a fiction family, you certainly are carrying this all more than a wee bit far, n00b. :-)

[nopardons]

Billionaires are the upper class now. Oh, I guess that you can also throw in the highest end of the millionaires too, but remember, the highest class has always been the smallest.

The lower middle and the middle middle classes have always been the majority.

The upper middle class is neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat...to steal from Shakespeare a bit. They only seem "rich/wealthy" to those below them, but aren't, to the wealthy. And area matters a very great deal! The more expensive an area one lives in, the higher the salary is, for ALL levels. In N.Y.C., for example, a teacher married to a fireman, will have an income of around $100,000; sometimes more. That's hardly well off there.

[Selkie]

Wee charade ?

You're continuing to be nasty.

Very, very queer behavior.

I don't care what class of people any freepers might consider themselves to be.

And I certainly wouldn't jump down their throats if they called themselves old money, upper class or flithy rich bastards.

That's just crazy and rather strange to do.

Oh and I already have "Bobos in Paradise" and just finished Brooks' lastest book "On Paradise Drive"

I don't need suggestions, thank you very much.

[cyborg]

Wow I don't feel so bad anymore. Sometimes it's annoying living on Long Island. I don't know how some people make it in NYC.

[cyborg]

You are absolutely right about that.

[driftless]

According to the book "The Millionaire Next Door", most people would have a difficult time spotting the average millionaire (accumulated wealth, not income). Contrary to prevailing wisdom, most millionaires live very cheaply (or frugally) and don't make ostentatious displays of their wealth.

[driftless]

According to the book "The Millionaire Next Door", you sound like a candidate (or already may be) a millionaire (accumulated wealth, not income). What you describe as how you would live if you had a million is the way most average millionaires live: frugally and unostentatiously. The book showed how one didn't have to have a huge yearly income to become a millionaire. Wise investment and frugal/careful living are far more important than having a high income. In fact most millionaires in the book didn't have annual incomes exceeding one hundred thousand . Many made appreciably less than that. They just knew what to do with what they made.