I make less than that now with 2 little ones AND a mortgage. My assumption is if you decide on addt expenses you should have another source of income (usually SO).
Also buying a house ain’t stupid if you ain’t stupid
Hell I had 2 kids on 38 a year with my wife making 14ish in college. I get I’m in a fairly low CoL area, but people really are just stupid about their bills.
If I can make 52 support 4 people without govt assistance, anyone smart enough to land a 70k role sure as shit shouldn’t be struggling so much.
Oh how I wish that were true. When I was selling investments I came across a surgeon making $250k+/year with over $350k in credit card debt.
I was actually flat out astounded how bad finance/accounting people are with money. They manage finances for a living and make terrible decision in their own personal lives. @anon50325502 can probably back me up here.
I think there should be a mandatory personal finance class taught in every public/private school. But I don’t see that being a priority for school boards.
You can teach this, doesn’t mean kids’ll learn. This is something that needs to be experienced where the consequences and rewards are felt for the lesson(s) to really sink in.
I took a personal finance section in high school and I can tell you, for me, those lessons didn’t sink in until I was 25 and broke…
If they’re taught, then however the curriculum is developed there has to be some sort of skin in the game … otherwise its just monopoly money dude.
Cost of living differences between parts of the US are actually bigger than I think most cost of living calculators account for. Mainly this is due to the tradeoff between paying more for a house and having a more comfortable commute. That is, people in more expensive cities naturally have longer commutes because they move further from their work to find affordable housing. If you want apples to apples, you have to compare how expensive your house would be at the same commute distance.
Right now I have a ten minute commute and a fairly nice 2200 square foot house. If my job was in NYC, I would have to pay 3-5 times for the house that I own and my commute would still be an hour plus each way. You would literally have to offer me 5 times my present salary before I would give a job offer in NYC a second look. Maybe I am an oddity in that regard.
I’m just not sure why Amazon thought NYC and DC were the best choices for broadening their appeal to a wider array of tech workers (if that was really the point of HQ2). For 70k (or especially 150K), I think you could find a fair bit of talent that would like Atlanta or Dallas. To get someone to move to NYC, I think that salary number needs to be a lot higher.
Finance/Accounting people can definitely be terrible with money. Do as I say not as I do…
According to the wife (personal financial planner), doctors are the worst, though.
100%. College too.
You have to take other things into consideration then too, though. For example, I know 4 or 5 people born and raised in various parts of NYC that didn’t own a car (or a license) until they left (in this case for the military). I don’t know how much it costs to ride the subway to work every day, but even a cheap car is $18K+ maybe less if you get a used beater. You also have to subtract gas and maintenance.
There are trade-offs with everything.
I don’t think their goal is to have people move to NYC to take their jobs. I fully expect them to poach talent from other companies within NYC and the surrounding area.
And, for the record, I think NYC and northern VA are stupid places for their new HQ’s, but it seems like a lot of people unhappy with their choices are unhappy because of the downsides (more congestion, cost of living, etc…). Amazon doesn’t give a fuck about these things, why would they?
There’s an enormous talent pool from NY to Virginia they can poach from.
what makes you think they want to “broaden their appeal”? They’re looking for yuppies man … young urban professionals who are blinded by the veneer of working for Amazon … it’s a status thing - bragging rights.
I don’t think this is a fair way to look at it. Obviously, a lot of Amazon’s workers are hourly warehouse laborers that make $15ish an hour ($30k/year), which skews the average pay numbers.
My understanding is the HQ2 is not a distribution center and won’t have entry level warehouse labor. There’s almost no way they can hire many people at $30k and make their $150k average. The math just doesn’t work.
Correct. The vast vast majority are. Not saying this will be the case with hq2. Just that if he knows an Amazon worker, the only real bet I would consider making is ‘this guy probably makes sub 70k.’
Throw a dart at a list of Amazon employees. I’ll bet any amount of money I have it’ll hit a sub 70k employee. They’re soooooo bottom heavy.
Agreed, but still to note, it’s 150k average after allowing 10 years of wage inflation to happen.
Lol as evidence by the back and forth above where it was mentioned a dozen times
I believe the people you know make north of 70k. I just also know that’s not even close to reflective of the average/median worker with Amazon. Not by a country mile
Oh for sure the majority are paid less, because the majority are not the office workers. HQ2 is for office workers.
Distribution centers do not need to be near a HQ, they need to be near where they are distributing to, so why are those salaries in the discussion about how much HQ2 employees will be paid?
