<p>Sure, they could probably spend less on food per month, but that could take alot of planning and effort. Certainly worth it if you have the time. Once we were both unemployed, so I spent my time clipping coupons, going to multiple stores on triple coupon day, and getting free bags of groceries. What a pain, but worth the work when you’re broke.</p>
<p>Now I try to be sensible, but unless I was willing to go through alot of effort and forethought, I’m not really saving much money. Honestly, I’m sure we spend $500 on Starbucks and wine alone, and that’s when we’re not entertaining. I’m assuming that is considered to be in the food budget? Or maybe that’s in the necessities budget! My kids eat out often, at college and just being busy doing activities. Not pricey restaurants, but it sure can add up. I don’t even want to track what we spend on food, as it will make me unhappy.</p>
<p>But this is basically rice with a few ounces per person of other stuff mixed in. This recipe is, what, 3 or 4 shrimp per person?</p>
<p>If you want your primary source of calories to be ultra-low cost items like rice or beans, then sure you can eat very cheaply. I don’t think that is the standard diet for most people though. That’s not what I/we like to eat all the time.</p>
<p>OTOH, if I had 8 or 9 people living in my house, maybe I’d have a different opinion. :)</p>
<p>dstark, wow. $70 at our local farmer’s market during the summer will get you half a flat of strawberries, an enormous amount of stone fruit, a few baskets of raspberries and blueberries, plenty of grapes, pounds of tomatoes (some heritage), fresh corn, greens, broccoli…in short, enough produce to last six people a week, with fruit available and eaten with all three meals and snacks. Top quality stuff, much of it organic, picked the day before. Which just shows how much regional variation there is in the price of things.</p>
<p>I keep seeing this headline and thinking “I sure hope not!” </p>
<p>Here, $100K goes a long way. No sales tax. Lots of high-quality medium-price restaurants. Reasonably priced housing. Good public transportation and lots of bicycle paths/roads/etc. </p>
<p>I look at the estimated expenditures in post #8 and I see $2150/month in after-tax expenditures that are non-essential: the car expenses, the extra mortgage payment, and the $1000/month in retirement savings. The payment of $1250/month in college expenses may or may not be required. </p>
<p>If you’re talking about “minimum wage”, I think you have to clarify what is meant by minimum. <em>Minimum</em> to me means: healthy food, safe housing (whether owned or rented), transportation to work (by bus/train, bicycle, or maybe car), cell phone, clothing, health insurance. It does not include saving for retirement, paying for college, cable TV, a smart phone, or a gym membership.</p>
<p>That is exactly the point that many posters have been trying to make. $100,000 can go a long way in some places… in others, (sadly) not.so.much.</p>
<p>Romani(etc): I understand that most people consider a car an essential purchase. In vast swathes of the country, a car is an out-and-out luxury. I know many people who manage just fine without a car. They use bicycles, public transportation, zipcar, walking, etc. </p>
<p>Even if a car is actually necessary, there are ways to reduce the cost. Smaller cars cost less to operate–a $300/month car payment and $500/month gas says that both expenses could be reduced. Carpooling shares the costs.</p>
<p>dmd, in certain places (like Michigan) with jobs that are hard to come by and no public transportation, yes, it’s a necessity. Back home in SE Michigan, I don’t recall ever filling out a single application that didn’t ask me whether or not I had reliable transportation. A bike wouldn’t qualify. </p>
<p>I agree though that they’re paying too much. $300 for car payments and $500 for gas is WAYY too much.</p>
<p>The gist of the article, as I read it, was that an income $100,000 is not the jackpot that it used to be – ensuring a very comfortable lifestyle. Of course, a family can get by with that income. But, it just doesn’t mean that they are “rich” as it certainly used to mean.</p>
A $300 payment translates to a $13K car loan if done over 4 years. Not exactly extravagant.</p>
<p>$500 for gas = 130 gallons in my area, at 25 mpg for a family fleet average that’s about 3250 miles per month. That is not all that much if there are long commutes and kids driving to school every day.</p>
<p>Actually, $500 a month may not be that much for gas. If they have three cars and it costs about $50 to fill up and they fill up once a week, that’s close to 500. If both parents work, it may not be possible to share a car depending on work locations and schedules. I’m not sure if the college students share a car. It sounds like there is only one car payment. </p>
<p>I would consider the retirement savings a necessity, not a choice. The extra money towards the mortgage sounds like it may be keeping them from being upside down. Unfortunately they bought at the peak of the market.</p>
H drives a Silverado. That may seem extravagant, but with a full-time job and a lot of rental units to look after, it’s pretty much a necessity to have an adequate truck. (Picturing H dragging a bathroom vanity down the highway…:)).</p>
<p>We don’t feel “poor” on our income, but we don’t exactly feel “rich” either, at least compared to some of our actually rich friends. Compared to our actually poor friends, yeah. I guess that’s why they call it middle class.</p>
<p>The CC tuition is the one number that doesn’t make much sense.</p>
<p>I googled a CC in Tampa, they charge around $100/credit hour. Even with 2 kids taking a full 15 credit load each semester, that’s only $6K, not $15K.</p>
<p>People at every income level measured by the study answered this question identically. “How much more money would you need to feel comfortable?” All answered what amounted to: 10% more than current income. </p>
<hr>
<p>That was the thing that struck me working in financial aid … no matter how much money families earned, they always felt they didn’t have enough. </p>
<p>I will admit that I would so love to have more money. It would truly make life easier. But … I’m not poor. I told my boss about this thread after I read it at lunch, and he said to add his two cents … that he sure hopes $100k is not the new minimum wage!</p>
<p>And romani is correct. Unless you live and work in an area served by the bus … which is not reliable & doesn’t go everywhere … you NEED a car in metro Detroit and many, many other areas around the country. There are more areas not served by public transportation than are.</p>
<p>We didn’t grow up with much money, but my dad always insisted on having a lot of food in the house. He said it was the least of our expenses, and “whatever we ate we got to keep.”</p>
<p>We do spend 1200+/month for food. H shops and cooks, and he is an excellent cook, so we don’t often go out to eat except to try out some special restaurants. He would find the best olive oil, freshest fruit. He shops at Costco a lot , even in Mexico. When D1 was in college, we gave her $300/mon for food money because we wanted her to eat fresh food. If I was on a budget, I would rather buy the best food possible, cook at home, than to eat at some chain restaurant.</p>
<p>The whole topic of living on 100k is SOOOO subjective, it is ridiculous…as others pointed out, where you live is the most important fact in this conversation…100k in the middle of the country,you’re living La Vida Loca…100k in a major north east city,ramen noodles may be your food staple…</p>