Income a family of four need to live comfortably by state in the U.S.

That is smart money. Most people don’t earn that much so they don’t have 30% discretionary spending nor do they save 20% of their income. The other 50% for living expenses comfortably.

Majority of USA borrows for living expenses or sometimes discretionary and has little no savings so lower incomes work for them until they don’t.

Absolutely agree with number in NH if that is goal.
 
Late 80's thru late 2000's
So in other words a different time where the price structure of more or less everything was different. Not knocking it, I just think it’s different this not directly comparable.

I think the biggest problem today that differs from when I bought my first house in 1982 is this: There are a lot of people today that feel things they can't afford should be handed to them on a silver platter free of charge. I'll have to end it with that not to break any rules, but look at what is being handed out today vs. then, and look what people are expecting to be handed to them now vs then. I worked hard for what I have, and when I borrowed money I paid it back, including my college loan.

I think much of this is true, though I don’t think it’s just the latest generation.

I remember reading financial literacy books in the early 2000s, and the same thing was being said. People are buying what it took their parents 30+ years to get.

My grandparents lived in a beautiful, large house in a relatively affluent suburb of NYC, just miles outside
Midtown, and they never had central air or many things that seemed to be the norm in the homes that my parents’ generation was building (not to mention the absurd space wasting concepts that were popular in the 90s), let alone cellphones or cable tv, or whatnot. Heck, they had a party line until the phone company wouldn’t allow it. They made good money and traveled a lot and whatnot. They weren’t paupers. But they did without a lot their whole life. It’s just the times.

So I think some of the “doing better” and having more was natural. It was tech. Yes, an iPhone and a streaming plan wasn’t anything they would ever have.

I don’t know that much is being “handed out” today. I think it’s fueled by debt. The marketing types learned about leveraging “keeping up with the Joneses” in the 60s (or before), and kicked the psychology into overdrive in the next decades. So again, who do we have to thank for foisting these schemes on the youngest, newest, and most vulnerable? Their parents were likely spoiled by it, and they are too. But hey, it increases earnings and thus our S&P fund, so the good and bad come linked.



265 seems high for Colorado. I heard recently that back in 2020 $101,000 would qualify someone for a home in the Denver metro area. it's now $175,000
“Qualify”. For a house of some value (average?) at some stupid debt to income ratio??

The question is what would it cost to get into your lifestyle today.

If I had to buy into my neighborhood and my vehicles today I could afford it, but I sure would not be happy about it. Pretty sure lots of my neighbors couldn't afford it outright.
That has kind of been my point. RE is still priced to the 3% mortgage level. Folks with such low mortgages aren’t going to let it go for the price that a buyer with a 7% loan will want to pay. Incomes haven’t gone up commensurate. So then the austerity that @Astro14 has mentioned starts to need to be a thing again. But many of the newest folks haven’t had to ever live with. Think about it. A kid that graduated college and is looking to get a start today was born after Y2K, and after the start of the .com bust. Their parents probably fueled their excesses on low cost mortgages and HELOCs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GON
Interesting chart. Of course it is in a MACRO basis. I wonder how state income and state/ local sales tax figure into the equationView attachment 218958.
Now compare those numbers to median household income. Some census numbers can be 1/4 to 1/5. Makes me wonder then what’s comfortably. Places like Winnetka IL and Greenwich CT meet those numbers on the chart—food for thought….those folks are more than comfortable. They have $400/HR SAT tutors and riding lessons for their kids.
 
Expectations are absolutely out of control, that's the bottom line. The chart is what most people THINK they need to get by comfortably. But, give everyone a raise to the dollar amount on the chart and it doesn't fix anything....expectations and lifestyle bloat with additional income. My wife and I got married and chose to stay in a one bedroom 600 sq. ft. apartment for over 3 years so that we could sock away 40% of our take-home into the house fund. Turns out that if you set savings goals and are actually willing to adjust your lifestyle for a season to meet them things become affordable.
This is so true.

I’ve said often, the “I deserve” mentality is a problem. No, you don’t deserve squat. And, frankly, many “must have” niceties really are excesses that then snowball into more and more.

But it’s easy to look at the concept of what folks buy and do today, and get to numbers not far off from OPs, which was my original point. Obviously, people can and do get by on less.
 
In NY here family of four, not close to NYC, but "commutable" distance - at least many including myself do. No where near $279K needed to be "comfortable".

At $279K, I would hope folks are saving more than 20%...
 
In NY here family of four, not close to NYC, but "commutable" distance - at least many including myself do. No where near $279K needed to be "comfortable".

At $279K, I would hope folks are saving more than 20%...
I bash my employer among close friends (I have on-call duties 24/7/365 and salaried). But I give credit where due. Since starting 8/10, I’ve maxed out the 401k to the IRS maximum, nearly 14 years (higher once I hit that catch up age). This means they pay me enough for me to have done so. There was one year that was scary. I was told I’d need to do deferred comp cuz the plan was lopsided…forced savings works for me. I truly don’t miss it….I admit I didn’t save 20% in my early days but I probably could have.

Food for thought again. If I want a $92k Tahoe, should my gross income be $450k? In the old days I’d say yes. Today maybe not…
 
That's kind of a blanket statement and difficult to sum up in a few sentences. . Kind of like on Bob's the oil guy where the guy with the $80,000 vehicle is put on a high approval list and the guy with the 10 year old well kept car and several hundred thousand dollars in the bank or assets is looked down upon. I guess to sum it up one needs to handle their own resources accordingly.
What that is referring to is ranchers/ farmers.

Ranchers/ farmers are often wealthy, having numerous assets in livestocks/grain/land/equipment. But often farmers/ ranchers are short on liquid assets such as cash.
 
265 seems high for Colorado. I heard recently that back in 2020 $101,000 would qualify someone for a home in the Denver metro area. it's now $175,000
In some statistics, Colorado is now the second highest single family home cost in the USA, only Hawaii is higher. Our Daughter has a nice comfortable home built a few years ago in the Denver suburbs, the home is valued at over $1 million. It is a 2x4 construction, two car garage, and a driveway that can park up to two cars.

Most of my daughter's neighbors are from California- they have told me how affordable their suburb is in Colorado compared to what they had in California. All goes to show, just like the chart, everything is relative- one may not be able to look at their own experience to sum up the MACRO experience of state.

Why I find charts like this potentially helpful- it is one of numerous tools to look at to see where living costs on a MACRO basis is more favorable than other areas.
 
There is no way that you'd need $209K annual income to live comfortably in Ohio.
That would put one in the top 10% of the income distribution for the state.
This remains a fairly inexpensive state in which to live.
 
There is no way that you'd need $209K annual income to live comfortably in Ohio.
That would put one in the top 10% of the income distribution for the state.
This remains a fairly inexpensive state in which to live.
What is the definition of comfortably?

Life insurance policy that sets the spouse of for life?

Ability to lose job and be able to live the same lifestyle without worry for 18 months?

Braces for both kids, paid for in cash?

Cash in the bank to pay for both kids private college to include books, room, and board?

New roof, windows, and siding every 20 years?

New mattresses every seven years?

New living room furniture every five years?

Four new I phone every time a new model comes out?

Nice car for each kid?

Starbucks every morning?

Kitchen remodel every ten years?

Bathroom remodel every ten years?

Two late model vehicles?

Two 2-week vacations per year?

I suspect many on BITOG are frugal, innovative, thrifty, DIYer- and the chart may not relate to BITOGERs on a MICRO basis.
 
Last edited:
What is the definition of comfortably?

Life insurance policy that sets the spouse of for life?

Ability to lose job and be able to live the same lifestyle without worry for 18 months?

Braces for both kids, paid for in cash?

Kitchen remodel every ten years?

Bathroom remodel every ten years?

Two late model vehicles?

Two 2-week vacations per year?

I suspect many on BITOG are frugal, innovative, thrifty, DIYer- and the chart may not relate to BITOGERs on a MICRO basis.
Was thinking the same thing. Maybe similar age?

When I was young (24) there was a guy in the office Matt, who got a V8 Jaguar. I said Matt, your car has HIDs (not common back then). He goes I dunno I just always wanted one (he was about 40). I thought it interesting how he knew all the best supermarket buys, and wondered why he bothered he has a Jag. Today, I know exactly why. Earlier this AM I splurged and bought 3 steaks for $8.99/lb, knowing I overpaid vs a good sale which is $6.99/lb (have a rain check in my wallet but the store never has t-bones). Imho frugal is a strategy…that does pay off over time
 
Was thinking the same thing. Maybe similar age?

When I was young (24) there was a guy in the office Matt, who got a V8 Jaguar. I said Matt, your car has HIDs (not common back then). He goes I dunno I just always wanted one (he was about 40). I thought it interesting how he knew all the best supermarket buys, and wondered why he bothered he has a Jag. Today, I know exactly why. Earlier this AM I splurged and bought 3 steaks for $8.99/lb, knowing I overpaid vs a good sale which is $6.99/lb (have a rain check in my wallet but the store never has t-bones). Imho frugal is a strategy…that does pay off over time
I can check most of those boxes and I can state that you don't need $209K a year in Ohio to get there.
Frugality? Sure enough. When the cars need oil changes, I'm the one underneath. When the grass needs cutting, I'm the one pushing the mower. Clogged drains and other minor plumbing and electrical problems are resolved by the handyman, me. When I'll need gas within a couple of days you can be sure I'm looking at pricing along my planned route of travel and we do plan meals for the week based upon what's on special. Booking a vacation I'm more than willing to spend twenty or thirty minutes online searching airfares as well as pricing on nice hotels. One of the best things about the internet is that information on pricing of all goods and services is so easily available.
I guess that a little personal effort does save substantial money over time versus just ponying up for the first thing offered.
 
I bash my employer among close friends (I have on-call duties 24/7/365 and salaried). But I give credit where due. Since starting 8/10, I’ve maxed out the 401k to the IRS maximum, nearly 14 years (higher once I hit that catch up age). This means they pay me enough for me to have done so. There was one year that was scary. I was told I’d need to do deferred comp cuz the plan was lopsided…forced savings works for me. I truly don’t miss it….I admit I didn’t save 20% in my early days but I probably could have.

Food for thought again. If I want a $92k Tahoe, should my gross income be $450k? In the old days I’d say yes. Today maybe not…
My plan allows for contribution up to the the 415(c) limits (and allows for all employee contributions to be Roth/After Tax (with Roth conversion) or pre-tax) then switches to deferred comp. $279K there's a lot of ways to save those $$$s.

I do get that my definition of living comfortably is different than others lol.
 
Was thinking the same thing. Maybe similar age?

When I was young (24) there was a guy in the office Matt, who got a V8 Jaguar. I said Matt, your car has HIDs (not common back then). He goes I dunno I just always wanted one (he was about 40). I thought it interesting how he knew all the best supermarket buys, and wondered why he bothered he has a Jag. Today, I know exactly why. Earlier this AM I splurged and bought 3 steaks for $8.99/lb, knowing I overpaid vs a good sale which is $6.99/lb (have a rain check in my wallet but the store never has t-bones). Imho frugal is a strategy…that does pay off over time
Yes, frugal is often disparaged that it doesn’t make a big enough difference, isn’t worth the time, etc.

I’ve found it makes money go much further, and allows us to pursue opportunities and activities that we wouldn’t otherwise.

It is a long term benefit.
 
There are at least 50% of Americans that are making do on under 100,000 a year. My wife and I are still well under 100,000 a year. When most people retire they will be living on far less then that.
 
Guess that makes me at poverty level, just living on Social Security and not touching my retirement funds. (yet)

But I had a little saved up. My checking account seems to go down about $5000 per year.
 
Guess that makes me at poverty level, just living on Social Security and not touching my retirement funds. (yet)

But I had a little saved up. My checking account seems to go down about $5000 per year.
Maybe..it all depends on what your expectations are for retirement. You are not going to travel the world living on Social Security only...,that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
I think my point, put differently, is that it takes about the same percentage of income to buy a house today as it did for me back then, but you get so much more.
This is not quite true. Mortgage payments are slightly higher now than they were in the past.

Also, consider the fact that the current situation with higher house prices and lower rates requires 41% larger down payments to avoid mortgage insurance, despite inflation-adjusted wages only going up 19%.

Because of this, buyers are forced to either save for longer or accept even higher mortgage payments.

Finally, a buyer in 1994 could take advantage of falling rates for over the next decade, and could continually refi. This is not the case for buyers in 2024. Rates are going to stay put for at least the next 5+ years.

So, no, it’s not the same. It may not be as radically different as some claim, but it is indeed worse now than in the past.

1994, adj. for inflation:
Median income: $63,000/yr, $5,250/mo
Median home price: $280,000
Average rate: 8%
20% down payment: $56,000
Monthly payment with 20% down: $1,644
Down payment/yearly income: 89%
Payment/income: 31%

2024:
Median income: $75,000/yr, $6,230/mo
Median home price: $395,000
Average rate: 7.1%
20% down payment: $79,000
Monthly payment with 20% down: $2,050
Down payment/yearly income: 105%
Payment/income: 33%

Houses are bigger and more luxurious. Cars are bigger, faster, more efficient, with far more luxuries and amenities.
Not median homes. In many cases they are the same buildings. In cases where it is a newer house, any advancements in technology are offset by degradations in build and materials quality.

Everyone who is starting out today, is starting out with so much more built in to their expectations than we had.
Not out of proportion to the technology advances since. The boomers expected to have central heating. Their grandparents… not so much.

Example - We had broadcast TV over the air. Free, but zero selection. Now every one is used to streaming everything on demand. Our Sony Trinitron tube TV cost the equivalent of $1,000 today, but was 480 broadcast over the air resolution. Today, that much money gets you a really nice 8K UHD.

We live in an age of incredible luxury and convenience that everyone takes for granted. Yes, living is expensive.

But the standard of living is so much higher than it was 32 years ago.
Yes, but this is not relevant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom