21% of those making over $100k are living paycheck to paycheck

[jeffrey]

If you are counting the days until the next payday comes around, you’re not alone. And we're not talking Jane and Joe Six Pack here.

Some 21 percent of those with salaries of $100,000 or more say they are living paycheck to paycheck, according to a recent survey conducted by CareerBuilder.com.

While experts are quick to acknowledge that high gasoline prices, the slumping housing market and a generally weak economy are weighing on consumers' finances, they also agree that the general difficulty in making ends meet is also the result of persistently bad spending and saving habits that are now catching up with the spendthrift American...

Living Paycheck to Paycheck On $100,000 - Personal Finance * US * News * Story - CNBC.com

[jIM_Ohio]

21% does not seem high, and what exactly one family considers pay check to pay check and another family does is two different things.

My EF is nearly zero- does that mean I am living paycheck to paycheck?

[sweeps]

Jim, I thought you were going to say 82% of statistics are useless.

[jIM_Ohio]

It's 86.2% to be exact.

[disneysteve]

what exactly one family considers pay check to pay check and another family does is two different things.

True. We've discussed that here before. Some people don't count what is going into their 401k, for example. So if you are putting 15% of your gross income into your 401k and spending 100% of your take-home, some would call that living paycheck to paycheck. I would not.

However, I think it is important to point out that more money doesn't solve poor money management problems.

[momof1in150]

$100K in a rural area is different then $100K in a city or expensive suburb. We make over $100K but live in a very expensive area where most houses (that aren't a cottage or bungalow at 700 sq ft) cost well over $400K so you have to make over $100K to afford them.

[disneysteve]

$100K in a rural area is different then $100K in a city or expensive suburb. We make over $100K but live in a very expensive area where most houses (that aren't a cottage or bungalow at 700 sq ft) cost well over $400K so you have to make over $100K to afford them.

Someone who makes 100K probably shouldn't be buying a home that costs well over 400K. The problem is lots of people do. That's why some of them are living paycheck to paycheck. They are living lifestyles that they can't afford.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

I agree I feel like I'm living paycheck to paycheck. Honestly the money is gone before I see it in my grubby hands. So I feel the same as before! Except before I had no savings.

And we're NOT in a position to handle major unexpected medical bills or disability, etc. At least not long term.

[tripods68]

We have friends that make well over $100K a year; some over $200K, yet many of them are just getting by. SOme of them own several homes that bought during "haydays", but now housing value capitulated greatly. They are stuck while making two mortgage payments; don't collect enough rent to cover 2nd mortgage and continue to flash $$ in the toilet. They don't want to get out and ruin their credit, when most are simple handing their keys to the bank. On the other hand, we have friends in San Jose and throughout the Bay Area making so much more but are renters only because of HIGH COLA.

[ThriftoRama]

It's easier than you think to live paycheck to paycheck making $100k. First, taxes take a huge chunk out of that. And then throw in health insurance, 401k, and you might be left with like $50-60 k, or maybe a little over $4,000 a month. If you have kids and a mortgage, it can go quick.

[MiikeB]

If you have kids and a mortgage (tax benefits) and you are seeing half or 40% of your check go to taxes something is wrong.

[sweeps]

If you have kids and a mortgage (tax benefits) and you are seeing half or 40% of your check go to taxes something is wrong.

Federal income taxes, yes. But what about state income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on utilities and communications, highway tolls, etc., etc.

[noppenbd]

It's easier than you think to live paycheck to paycheck making $100k. First, taxes take a huge chunk out of that. And then throw in health insurance, 401k, and you might be left with like $50-60 k, or maybe a little over $4,000 a month. If you have kids and a mortgage, it can go quick.

We make around $120K gross and live in a fairly high tax state (MD). Married filing jointly with one child, and we pay about $9K in federal tax, $5500 in state and local, $8500 in Medicare and SS. That adds up to $23K in tax income and payroll tax (19%). Health/dental/vision is about $5K a year. I would not add in the 401k since that is going towards savings. A family making $100K (20K less than us) would likely have lower taxes, but even at what we pay they would still be bringing home $72K or so, nowhere near $50-60K. It is misleading to add in the 401k with taxes, since that is going towards saving. Someone who saves $12-22K a year I would hardly consider living "paycheck to paycheck" even if their checking balance goes to zero the day before they get paid.

[disneysteve]

Federal income taxes, yes. But what about state income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, taxes on utilities and communications, highway tolls, etc., etc.

True. Just our property taxes alone are nearly 6% of our income. They have more than doubled since we bought our house in 1994.

BTW, I wouldn't count highway tolls as a tax.

[sweeps]

BTW, I wouldn't count highway tolls as a tax.

Then what is it?