wealth from being an associate

[Bildungsroman]

this algorithm has a lot of value in it.

1) attach a wi-fi add-on to your cable box, connects to home network
2) download and install software given by cable provider, which does exactly what big-brother Google does to you (spies on your shit)
3) Comcast sells this information to a third party for a fafillion dollars to American corporations who want to use this info to replace the common-ads you get alongwith your neighbor - with tailormade ads for your personalized interests that the Comcast box uploads from its software over the Wifi network.
4) people who willingly+knowingly download+install this software get a sizeable subscription fee discount.


This is a whole system that I'm working on from my basement, and I'm going to make a LOT of money one day. This is not a patentable invention, you're combining existing technology in an obvious way to those skilled in the art. This shit likely exists in some form or another.

The smart-ad shit hasn't taken off on television because TV doesn't interact with the customer. I'm going to make TV interact with the customer indirectly by backdooring info using this Comcast-software.

I don't care about detailing my idea on this web-site because everybody on here is real angsty to get on the hamster-wheel that is biglaw, where the hamster gets more treats based on how long he runs on the wheel.

This sounds like a great idea. I too am into brainstorming business ideas. My bladder system for oil tankers would have ended maritime oil spills! The gulf accident has shifted attention to the actual drills, though, so now I'm thinking about going with the make your own pizza shop. Whatdya think?

I lol'd

[Sauer Grapes]

I actually think OPs TV idea is pretty good. I think his other posts are a bit off. I was able to save more while making less, but really don't expect to save more than double OPs calculation unless you are VERY frugal and think you can stay that way when you start making money.

[Ty Webb]

The entitled, whiny bitch attitude of our generation is staggering.

QFT.

UVA's dean made me think of this the other day. Said something to the effect of, "Our graduates are still doing well in the job market, but they're having to work much harder to do it now than ever before."

Cry me a fucking river.

Try being like my pops, who has a business degree (from back when going to college was still relatively valuable), took over the family jewelry business at 23, attended White House small business dinners, and even changed with the times. Went from a small town store owner to a business owner in 2 malls in a decent-sized city to a wholesaler working out of his shop in the backyard. Tried to get on board with a website, upgraded his engraving machines to some fancy $10k version, has bought gold from individuals for resale.

Now imagine being screwed over by two different business partners who have held you over the coals because of your lack of financial leverage, imagine being chased down by corporate law types of copyright infringement that you're not guilty of, and try being snubbed out by a failed economy. Now you're 60 and still scraping by, trying to make it work after the economy pulled an entire industry out from under you. You have no health insurance, because it costs too much. Luckily, you're healthy as shit, so you haven't needed it (yet).

This is reality even for smart, innovative, hard working folks. Since when does going to law school at UVA make you entitled to an easy rise to financial stardom?

[Anonymous User]

OP should have condensed all this bullshit to come back towards his principal proposal--that you won't (necessarily) be accruing bank rolls and flippin straight cash homey while blowing coke off blonde strippers in your estranged wife's Escalade. If one was willing to take it easy and live on the light side (and why not, you'll be working all the time anyways) so one could pay off loans/invest some paper, the numbers OP proposed might seem to be a little gloom-i-fied. If you act like a f*cking moron with your money, you will not be a baller. If you are a baller with your money, you won't act like a f*cking moron. It's pretty damn hard to fuck up your finances when you are getting paid space money. lower the pretentious expectations for a few years, drag out college life a little longer-shits more fun than getting some Bro-pad on your own where you can (almost) bring cute girls back but then theyll ask why you have a heart shaped bed and then they leave and you are left thinking,...."BECAUSE ITS SEXY".

I shed no tears for your hypothetical sad story. Manage a college budget for 3-5 yrs. You'd be out of debt, and up the ranks on the partner chain. Also, we are all fucking hamsters running in balls, don't try to make that a distinction solely for Big Law

To be out of debt in five years, you must have had scholarships, big ones, throughout your academic career. Otw you're going to have to pay like $3-$3.5k a month in student loans on a four or five year plan, which is impossible given that you'll make $7k after taxes. I'm not sure what your "housing" situation is, if you go this route - you'll have $0 savings by the age of 30, which is not a bright idea. You don't want to be in a rush to pay off your student loan debt and be worth very little at the age of 30 - you want to have a relatively decent nest egg to compound over 25 years from ages 30-55, if you try to live like a peasant with the goal of ridding student loan debt, without accumulating some kinda nest egg, you'll forfeit compound interest, your only friend in the wealth-accumulation process. And trust me - in this "income" profession, NOT "wealth" profession that is the legal profession - the ONLY friend you'll have in most scenarios in your professional career is compound interest, and the corollary element there - time. I'm far from gloom and doom with my estimate that you'll only spend $1k a month on "lifestyle" outside of your home expenses and student loans.

In a more normal scenario, where you pay off loans in 10 years, You're going to make $5k a month after tax and student loans in big law. You can do the $1k a month rental, $1k a month in all other expenses, and somehow max out on $3k a month savings for a $36k a year savings, that's living like a bum for a long, long, time.

I'll applaud your ability to do that if you can for a long time while you're making money. I'm just informing you that there's a ginormous prospect that you'll either 1) get married by the time you're a 5th year associate, or 2) get a child or two, and all your savings plans will be derailed, alongwith your plans to "live like you're in college."

You could alternatively plan to be single and without kids until your mid 30s, you'll still not save enough for whatever the hell you want to do in the face of inflation.

Frankly, lawyer salaries are going to have to keep up with inflation, I just don't see how an overinflated asset can keep up with inflation over the medium term. The overinflated asset is the legal wages, and inflation hasn't even set in yet, all I'll say is g'luck to you guys entering law - save up, and keep your job - and do well in school I guess. I cannot imagine a scenario where you can make it out there without big law. Mid law/small law seems like a fatal scenario in the face of $150-200k student loans, and mid-law/small-law is exactly what 30% of the entire pool of t14 students face, probably more.

[eddietx12]

um, not sure why i hit anonymous - above response is by me.

[leron]

i knew it was you even though it was anonymous. i don't know what you're good at, but it's not financial planning. no offense.

[eddietx12]

i knew it was you even though it was anonymous. i don't know what you're good at, but it's not financial planning. no offense.

hmm I'm -310k in debt, i'm pretty sure i suck at "financial planning". im serious tho, these are thoughts i actually believe and rattle around in my empty skull - its very hard to make money because of the student loan 10 year tax that is basically a mortgage on law students lives, its not just a minor thing on the side that they have to deal with - its a major income sucker. Losing 150-200k in your ages 26-36 is not a very good thing to happen to a human being with a lifespan of around 75-80. That money is worth $2.5-4m when you retire, its no joke.

160k -->tax --> 80k --> student loans --> 55k --> house/utilities/car/insurance/etc.--> 20k --> misc. expenses --> 10k (savings)

This is not an unrealistic vision of how shit unrolls, hell you'll be a lucky sucker if you can contain your misc. expenses to 20k a year = $1.6k a month, and if you can figure out a way to contain basic expenses to less than $2.5k a month. You could live in a $200k home, but you won't - you'll buy a $350-500k home, maybe even bigger.

What about my stats is flawed?!?!?!

[leron]

you're so bad at this, i'm leaving the thread after this because you're hopeless, but let me show you a few things first:

You don't want to be in a rush to pay off your student loan debt and be worth very little at the age of 30 - you want to have a relatively decent nest egg to compound over 25 years from ages 30-55, if you try to live like a peasant with the goal of ridding student loan debt, without accumulating some kinda nest egg, you'll forfeit compound interest, your only friend in the wealth-accumulation process.

um, yeah, but compound interest works both ways. compound interest is working on your student loans too. what you actually want to do is compare your student loan interest rate with your rate of return on any investment less any taxes (you won't get any tax benefit from student loan interest deductions at 160k salary level). you'll be better off [financially] if you pay off student loan interest before saving money if the student loan interest rate is higher than the other rate.

also, it's not necessarily true that just because you took on all this debt you are worse off. you should calculate the present value of all future cash flows to find out. the values will necessarily depend on your earnings without law school and earnings with law school, anticipated raises and the debt you accumulate for law school.

based on your retardedness, i estimate that i made quite a bit more than you did before law school. even in my situation, i calculated that it is worth it even though it will take 10 years to put me on equal footing. but after that decade, it's all benefits.

160k -->tax --> 80k --> student loans --> 55k --> house/utilities/car/insurance/etc.--> 20k --> misc. expenses --> 10k (savings)

i already told you that these numbers are wrong. they are more like 160k --> tax --> 92k (with 16.5k going to 401k).

the amount you pay towards student loans is up to you, of course. admittedly, you are 310k in the hole so you are in a bad position. most, however, are 100k-200k in the hole, if even that. at that amount, paying 4k per month (reasonable when you take home 7k/mo and want to get out of debt fast so you can start benefitting from compound interest instead of being hurt by it), you will pay off your student loans in 3-4 years. run the numbers, if you know how. you'll see that it's true.

[toolfan]

i knew it was you even though it was anonymous. i don't know what you're good at, but it's not financial planning. no offense.

hmm I'm -310k in debt, i'm pretty sure i suck at "financial planning". im serious tho, these are thoughts i actually believe and rattle around in my empty skull - its very hard to make money because of the student loan 10 year tax that is basically a mortgage on law students lives, its not just a minor thing on the side that they have to deal with - its a major income sucker. Losing 150-200k in your ages 26-36 is not a very good thing to happen to a human being with a lifespan of around 75-80. That money is worth $2.5-4m when you retire, its no joke.

160k -->tax --> 80k --> student loans --> 55k --> house/utilities/car/insurance/etc.--> 20k --> misc. expenses --> 10k (savings)

This is not an unrealistic vision of how shit unrolls, hell you'll be a lucky sucker if you can contain your misc. expenses to 20k a year = $1.6k a month, and if you can figure out a way to contain basic expenses to less than $2.5k a month. You could live in a $200k home, but you won't - you'll buy a $350-500k home, maybe even bigger.

What about my stats is flawed?!?!?!

I'm no financial expert, but 50% income tax seems harsh - though I'm really clueless in this field. But assuming that's true, I can't imagine anyone smiling at the thought of their take home being cut in half. It's a tough pill to swallow. But that's the nature of the beast. Paying student loans and mortgages doesn't sound too bad at 160k, but it is a completely different story at 80k. Maybe people don't consider take home pay? I do. Sure building a 401k is important and financially necessary, but it won't necessarily help you pay back Sallie Mae any quicker (or will it? - again, not the sharpest economist). I'm sure there are ways to optimize potential savings, but i don't plan on actually saving much until my loans are paid back.

[AngryAvocado]

What about bonuses? I can handle living off a meager 5k a month if I get to occasionally have a 30k hookers-and-blow marathon.

[romothesavior]

So OP, what about people who have 50-100k in undergrad debt and start out at 40k jobs and still manage to buy houses and live comfortable despite their mortages and student loan repayments? Are they swimming in consumer debt? Please do enlighten us.

And seriously, I stand by what I said about our generation being pathetic. Or maybe it is just the people on this forum. Does everyone on TLS just come from a sheltered, entitled, rich family lifestyle or what? My parents started with nothing and they still found a way to buy their own home, start a family, take us on vactions, help pay for my school, plan for retirement, etc. We certainly were never wealthy, but we were able to afford a comfortable American lifestyle while I was growing up, and I'm pretty sure neither of my parents makes more than six figures even today. I think if my dad saw 20-somethings complaining in this thread about starting at 160,000 a year he would throw up.

Even after loan repayments, associates at biglaw firms are still making way more than the average American. Obviously it is still important to manage your finances and be smart, but to say that someone pulling in 160k STARTING salary is struggling to make ends meet is absurd. Hell, a biglaw bonus is like half of what most of your peers are making straight out of college. Sure loans and taxes will take their toll, but your takehome salary is still considerably more than most people at ~25.

If you want to argue that law school is a bad investment, fine. If you want to say making ends meet at a 40k salary is tough, fine. If you want to argue that people shouldn't go into LS assuming biglaw, fine. But don't try to argue that those fortunate enough to land big starting salaries are struggling.

[TheTopBloke]

Say you're an associate for 7 years, earning 160-170-180-190-200-210-220 = 1.33 million
Uncle Sam takes 50%, so you end up with $665,000 USD in nominal wealth. That's about 90k a year nominal income.

Say you invested everything in a 3% secured instrument, if you can find one, you get like $700k or so at the end of 7 years, post tax, saved up at 3% a year.

This is the MAXIMUM you can save theoretically, assuming no expenses, no tax evasion or funky business or more than 3% returns.

Expenses (student loans, mortgage scam, wife, etc., = 90%), marginal rate of saving = 0.10
An average national savings rate is considered to be 10%

So your net worth will thus be only $70k when all is said and done by the time you make partner, congratulations.

Don't pay taxes, problem solved.

[imchuckbass58]

Seriously, what's up with the 50% income tax rate???

This is high, but not ridiculously high. Federal tax brackets are 28% from $80,000 to $160,000, and average about 20% below that (actually 10%, 15% and 25%, but it averages to 20%). Call it 24% average effective.

Add in social security (6%), medicare (1.5% employee share) to get 31.5%.

New York State income tax is 6%. New York City income tax is 3.5%.

So you are at a 41% effective tax rate. If you add in other withholdings (medical, dental, vision) you can easily get up around 45%.

California is similar. Yes, I know not everyone wants to live in NY or CA, but guess what, this is where most of the biglaw jobs are.

Edit: As a side note, this thread shows why it is a really good financial move to get married. Not only do your tax rates go down (or rather, the threshholds for the various brackets go up), but your expenses don't increase that much. You might bank almost all of your spouse's post-tax salary.

[eddietx12]

What about bonuses? I can handle living off a meager 5k a month if I get to occasionally have a 30k hookers-and-blow marathon.

Yeah, bonuses are probably something that should go entirely toward giving that mortgage and student loan a huge haircut - unfortunately, this is a theoretical plus, people tend to adjust their expenses - rather than their savings - prior to, rather than after - receipt of a bonus, also - its not a good idea to financially plan anything with a bonus on the same probabilistic footing as a salary, you should probably discount it by 50% or something. (firm could be going through a tough time, you could not be doing a stellar job, etc.)

[nealric]

Taxes are going to be more like 40% in most places- 35% in Texas (no state income tax).

[eddietx12]

So OP, what about people who have 50-100k in undergrad debt and start out at 40k jobs and still manage to buy houses and live comfortable despite their mortages and student loan repayments? Are they swimming in consumer debt? Please do enlighten us.

And seriously, I stand by what I said about our generation being pathetic. Or maybe it is just the people on this forum. Does everyone on TLS just come from a sheltered, entitled, rich family lifestyle or what? My parents started with nothing and they still found a way to buy their own home, start a family, take us on vactions, help pay for my school, plan for retirement, etc. We certainly were never wealthy, but we were able to afford a comfortable American lifestyle while I was growing up, and I'm pretty sure neither of my parents makes more than six figures even today. I think if my dad saw 20-somethings complaining in this thread about starting at 160,000 a year he would throw up.

Even after loan repayments, associates at biglaw firms are still making way more than the average American. Obviously it is still important to manage your finances and be smart, but to say that someone pulling in 160k STARTING salary is struggling to make ends meet is absurd. Hell, a biglaw bonus is like half of what most of your peers are making straight out of college. Sure loans and taxes will take their toll, but your takehome salary is still considerably more than most people at ~25.

If you want to argue that law school is a bad investment, fine. If you want to say making ends meet at a 40k salary is tough, fine. If you want to argue that people shouldn't go into LS assuming biglaw, fine. But don't try to argue that those fortunate enough to land big starting salaries are struggling.

I'm not arguing that law school is a bad investment - I think one should go to law school if one has a serious passion for it, and one of two things are happening (t6 median, t14 with good grades (top 30%), t15-20 with great grades (top 15%), t21+ with a full ride). If you have a serious passion for "applying law to fact" and you're smart enough to earn acceptance - I think the hard work just flows as a natural result and you'll most likely break median.

My argument is that law school, and the legal profession, is just an income profession - it allows for upper middle class "living" if everything goes right but not the gathering of wealth. A high level of wealth is inaccessible until you're around retirement age. So the fact that if EVERYTHING goes right just guarantees you an upper middle class living contingent upon continued employment, that results in the sad fact that in most instances of the legal profession, you're stuck in the middle class but have to put in ridiculous hours.

If practice of the law is something you gain enormous personal utility out of, then please disregard my thread entirely - go do your thing and the hell with the money, academics and artists do this all the time and live on a pittance, but they likely have more fulfilling lives than a lawyer or a doctor - but if you're not "passionate" about the practice of law - other opportunities exist that make more economical sense.

This whole "I'm going to enjoy greater wealth in my 40's as a lawyer" is a weird argument based on more assumptions than you can currently identify. Making partner means close to little in terms of job security. You have to be pretty damn good at what you do, and sustain a workaholic lifestyle without much room for a family life, a lot of people quit big law a few years down the road after they pay down their student loan debts. This weird "I'm going to rake it in as a partner" assumption is a scary one, you should probably take those blinders off and see it for what it is.

[TheTopBloke]

So OP, what about people who have 50-100k in undergrad debt and start out at 40k jobs and still manage to buy houses and live comfortable despite their mortages and student loan repayments? Are they swimming in consumer debt? Please do enlighten us.

And seriously, I stand by what I said about our generation being pathetic. Or maybe it is just the people on this forum. Does everyone on TLS just come from a sheltered, entitled, rich family lifestyle or what? My parents started with nothing and they still found a way to buy their own home, start a family, take us on vactions, help pay for my school, plan for retirement, etc. We certainly were never wealthy, but we were able to afford a comfortable American lifestyle while I was growing up, and I'm pretty sure neither of my parents makes more than six figures even today. I think if my dad saw 20-somethings complaining in this thread about starting at 160,000 a year he would throw up.

Even after loan repayments, associates at biglaw firms are still making way more than the average American. Obviously it is still important to manage your finances and be smart, but to say that someone pulling in 160k STARTING salary is struggling to make ends meet is absurd. Hell, a biglaw bonus is like half of what most of your peers are making straight out of college. Sure loans and taxes will take their toll, but your takehome salary is still considerably more than most people at ~25.

If you want to argue that law school is a bad investment, fine. If you want to say making ends meet at a 40k salary is tough, fine. If you want to argue that people shouldn't go into LS assuming biglaw, fine. But don't try to argue that those fortunate enough to land big starting salaries are struggling.

I'm not arguing that law school is a bad investment - I think one should go to law school if one has a serious passion for it, and one of two things are happening (t6 median, t14 with good grades (top 30%), t15-20 with great grades (top 15%), t21+ with a full ride). If you have a serious passion for "applying law to fact" and you're smart enough to earn acceptance - I think the hard work just flows as a natural result and you'll most likely break median.

My argument is that law school, and the legal profession, is just an income profession - it allows for upper middle class "living" if everything goes right but not the gathering of wealth. A high level of wealth is inaccessible until you're around retirement age. So the fact that if EVERYTHING goes right just guarantees you an upper middle class living contingent upon continued employment, that results in the sad fact that in most instances of the legal profession, you're stuck in the middle class but have to put in ridiculous hours.

If practice of the law is something you gain enormous personal utility out of, then please disregard my thread entirely - go do your thing and the hell with the money, academics and artists do this all the time and live on a pittance, but they likely have more fulfilling lives than a lawyer or a doctor - but if you're not "passionate" about the practice of law - other opportunities exist that make more economical sense.

This whole "I'm going to enjoy greater wealth in my 40's as a lawyer" is a weird argument based on more assumptions than you can currently identify. Making partner means close to little in terms of job security. You have to be pretty damn good at what you do, and sustain a workaholic lifestyle without much room for a family life, a lot of people quit big law a few years down the road after they pay down their student loan debts. This weird "I'm going to rake it in as a partner" assumption is a scary one, you should probably take those blinders off and see it for what it is.

Are you just another bitter troll with a JD and no common sense?

[romothesavior]

I'm not arguing that law school is a bad investment - I think one should go to law school if one has a serious passion for it, and one of two things are happening (t6 median, t14 with good grades (top 30%), t15-20 with great grades (top 15%), t21+ with a full ride).

So I should pick my law school based on the grades that I will have a year from now? Okay....

My argument is that law school, and the legal profession, is just an income profession - it allows for upper middle class "living" if everything goes right but not the gathering of wealth. A high level of wealth is inaccessible until you're around retirement age. So the fact that if EVERYTHING goes right just guarantees you an upper middle class living contingent upon continued employment, that results in the sad fact that in most instances of the legal profession, you're stuck in the middle class but have to put in ridiculous hours.

This is among the stupidest things I've ever heard. Compare the ability of a 160k earner to accrue wealth to someone in the 50k range and then come talk to me.

If practice of the law is something you gain enormous personal utility out of, then please disregard my thread entirely - go do your thing and the hell with the money, academics and artists do this all the time and live on a pittance,

Academics live on a pittance? Really? You are comparing academics to ARTISTS?!?!? The undergrad profs I know are all doing just fine financially, and law school academics make great money and work awesome hours at a fascinating job.

This whole "I'm going to enjoy greater wealth in my 40's as a lawyer" is a weird argument based on more assumptions than you can currently identify.

I have never heard anyone on TLS talk about retiring at 40, so I really hope that's not what you are referring to.

[notroyal]

*

[motiontodismiss]

Taxes are going to be more like 40% in most places- 35% in Texas (no state income tax).

And in TN and WA. And even less if you pay mortgage interest (amount of interest*effective federal tax rate).

[Veyron]

Say you're an associate for 7 years, earning 160-170-180-190-200-210-220 = 1.33 million
Uncle Sam takes 50%, so you end up with $665,000 USD in nominal wealth. That's about 90k a year nominal income.

Say you invested everything in a 3% secured instrument, if you can find one, you get like $700k or so at the end of 7 years, post tax, saved up at 3% a year.

This is the MAXIMUM you can save theoretically, assuming no expenses, no tax evasion or funky business or more than 3% returns.

Expenses (student loans, mortgage scam, wife, etc., = 90%), marginal rate of saving = 0.10
An average national savings rate is considered to be 10%

So your net worth will thus be only $70k when all is said and done by the time you make partner, congratulations.

You have failed to take into account home equity doooder.

[motiontodismiss]

Seriously, what's up with the 50% income tax rate???

This is high, but not ridiculously high. Federal tax brackets are 28% from $80,000 to $160,000, and average about 20% below that (actually 10%, 15% and 25%, but it averages to 20%). Call it 24% average effective.

Add in social security (6%), medicare (1.5% employee share) to get 31.5%.

New York State income tax is 6%. New York City income tax is 3.5%.

So you are at a 41% effective tax rate. If you add in other withholdings (medical, dental, vision) you can easily get up around 45%.

California is similar. Yes, I know not everyone wants to live in NY or CA, but guess what, this is where most of the biglaw jobs are.

Edit: As a side note, this thread shows why it is a really good financial move to get married. Not only do your tax rates go down (or rather, the threshholds for the various brackets go up), but your expenses don't increase that much. You might bank almost all of your spouse's post-tax salary.

Sounds about right but a couple things: FICA is capped at $108k. There's no FICA tax on marginal income above and beyond that. So more like 4% at $160k (~$6,600/$160k). Of course, CA and NY have some of the highest tax rates in the country. Tax in other states: NJ=1.4-6.37% (and no city), CT=3-5%, TX=0, IL=3%, MA=5.3%, DC=4-8.5%, MD=2-5.5% (top bracket of 6% doesn't apply until $1 mil), VA=2-5.75%, GA=1-6%, PA=3.07%. I believe I heard that Philly has a city tax but that's just a rumor.

Btw I'll qualify the last sidebar with a note that it makes good tax sense to get married if and only if your combined income increases by less than the percentage by which the tax brackets are increased (I believe it's 20-30%?). Above that, there's actually a marriage penalty. The best tax status is that of a head of household.

[nickwar]

How about a different approach.

Don't rack up $300k in student loans, don't marry a tramp (AND get a pre-nup, just in case), and don't invest your $$$ with shady people like Madoff.

Also don't count on big law. Your estimation might be quite accurate, actually, when you consider working for $60k for 5 years out of college.

[romothesavior]

Seriously, what's up with the 50% income tax rate???

This is high, but not ridiculously high. Federal tax brackets are 28% from $80,000 to $160,000, and average about 20% below that (actually 10%, 15% and 25%, but it averages to 20%). Call it 24% average effective.

Add in social security (6%), medicare (1.5% employee share) to get 31.5%.

New York State income tax is 6%. New York City income tax is 3.5%.

So you are at a 41% effective tax rate. If you add in other withholdings (medical, dental, vision) you can easily get up around 45%.

California is similar. Yes, I know not everyone wants to live in NY or CA, but guess what, this is where most of the biglaw jobs are.

Edit: As a side note, this thread shows why it is a really good financial move to get married. Not only do your tax rates go down (or rather, the threshholds for the various brackets go up), but your expenses don't increase that much. You might bank almost all of your spouse's post-tax salary.

Sounds about right but a couple things: FICA is capped at $108k. There's no FICA tax on marginal income above and beyond that. So more like 4% at $160k (~$6,600/$160k). Of course, CA and NY have some of the highest tax rates in the country. Tax in other states: NJ=1.4-6.37% (and no city), CT=3-5%, TX=0, IL=3%, MA=5.3%, DC=4-8.5%, MD=2-5.5% (top bracket of 6% doesn't apply until $1 mil), VA=2-5.75%, GA=1-6%, PA=3.07%. I believe I heard that Philly has a city tax but that's just a rumor.

Btw I'll qualify the last sidebar with a note that it makes good tax sense to get married if and only if your combined income increases by less than the percentage by which the tax brackets are increased (I believe it's 20-30%?). Above that, there's actually a marriage penalty. The best tax status is that of a head of household.

Even more reason to target a secondary market. 120k in STL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 160k in NYC. For a whole host of reasons.

(Now if I could just find one of these jobs... )

[nickwar]

The entitled, whiny bitch attitude of our generation is staggering.

Cry me a fucking river.

Try being like my pops, who took over the family jewelry business

Does not compute.