Help Me Understand Cost of Living Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi all. Here is my situation. Right now, I'm a 2yr district court clerk, and after my clerkship, I'll be going back to my NYC firm. With the bonus and as a third-year, I believe I am looking at about $300,000. Sometimes when I talk to close friends and family (who ask), I get comments like "that is only like $100,000 here" or "you'll just be middle class."

I just cannot get myself to believe those things. My thought is that I plan to save a lot of my take-home pay, which will be more than what I make in a low COL area. And I do plan on living as far out from the city as I can. Finally, I ultimately plan to return to a low COL area, so a lot of my money that I saved will be spent in a low COL area.

Anyone want to share their experience? Maybe I am just totally wrong, and I don't want to make a bad financial decision. The reason I ask, I think, is that I really don't even have a desire to live in NYC, it just seems like way too much money to turn down. TIA!

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

Baseline living cost out of your paycheck doesn't need to be higher than $5,000 or $6,000 a month if you're cheap. Budget $3,000 for decent housing in Queens, Jersey, or non-prime Brooklyn. Budget $2,000 or $3,000 a month for a modest, but not super awful, daily life.

[Anonymous User]

If you don't really want to live in NYC then you'll do fine saving in NYC. The problem is it's really easy to blow a bunch of $$$ in NYC on daily living stuff (restaurants, grocery stores, apartments, etc. are all way more expensive). And NYC has the city tax which bites. That's COL for you.

But it's all relative. You'll almost surely save more (or at least have a higher QOL) making $270 in Nashville than $300k in NYC (city taxes even those out off the bat, right?). So it's hard to make a real comparison without knowing what the low COL city is and how much you'd make there. But if you're fine having a way worse apartment than you would in your low COL city and assuming you can't make near to $300k, as Res points out you can save just fine in NYC.

That said, NYC isn't the only place you can make biglaw market. There are slightly less expensive cities like DC/BOS, etc. that all pay the same, and then there's a tier of even lower costs cities like CHI/TX (and apparently Denver now?) where you could save even more on biglaw salary. Have you thought about any of those? Big Q is would they feed you back into the smaller market you want to go to.

[Anonymous User]

Hi all. Here is my situation. Right now, I'm a 2yr district court clerk, and after my clerkship, I'll be going back to my NYC firm. With the bonus and as a third-year, I believe I am looking at about $300,000. Sometimes when I talk to close friends and family (who ask), I get comments like "that is only like $100,000 here" or "you'll just be middle class."

I just cannot get myself to believe those things. My thought is that I plan to save a lot of my take-home pay, which will be more than what I make in a low COL area. And I do plan on living as far out from the city as I can. Finally, I ultimately plan to return to a low COL area, so a lot of my money that I saved will be spent in a low COL area.

Anyone want to share their experience? Maybe I am just totally wrong, and I don't want to make a bad financial decision. The reason I ask, I think, is that I really don't even have a desire to live in NYC, it just seems like way too much money to turn down. TIA!

If you really don't want to be in NYC, then you should try to land biglaw in a secondary market with lower COL. To maximize savings, target places like TX, Atlanta, Cleveland/Columbus, or Philly. There are plenty of biglaw firms with strong litigation practices in those markets. NYC crushes you on taxes and rent, but I personally saved a lot when I lived in NYC without too much effort because I lived with a roommate and my idea of fun is going to a sports bar with a few people and having a burger and some beers.

[Anonymous User]

The only way 300K would make you "middle class" even in NYC is if you were married with multiple kids and your spouse was either not working or barely working, and even then it's debatable. Obviously, this is anecdotal but the only big law associates (who were single) and complained to me about 200 or 300K not being enough were terrible with managing their money, had no impulse control, and an inability to understand the basic concept of budgeting. If you're planning on dropping a couple hundred every day to eat out instead of buy groceries to cook from home and if every clothes item you buy will be from YSL or LV then yea it's going to be tight, but if you have money management sense you can and will pay your expenses, live comfortably, and save some as well.

[Anonymous User]

If you're thrifty, $100,000 should be more than enough.

If you intend to eat avocado toast three times a day, you're in trouble.

I can't even imagine how I would spend $100,000.

[Anonymous User]

If you're thrifty, $100,000 should be more than enough.

If you intend to eat avocado toast three times a day, you're in trouble.

I can't even imagine how I would spend $100,000.

If you want to live the NYC lifestyle, the monthly spending to get to $100k ($8333/mo, assuming we're not including savings, taxes, insurance, etc.) isn't that outlandish. I don't mean to say you should spend all this - I don't even come close. But lots of my NYC biglaw friends do and then wonder why they aren't saving as much:
- $4k rent for reasonable studio/1br near work
- $500 international vacation (1-2wk/year, amortized)
- $500 fancy meals with friends 1x/week (double if you pay for an SO)
- $400 groceries
- $400 cleaning service
- $300 therapy
- $300 shopping for yourself (clothes, electronics, Amazon)
- $300 dry cleaning/laundry
- $200 lunches out for workdays
- $200 gifts for loved ones (amortized)
- $200 alcohol (probably low ball for some people I know)
- $200 Ubers
- $150 tickets to a show
- $150 good coffee/breakfast for workdays
- $150 cable/internet/streaming/news
- $100 utilities
- $100 phone/wireless
- $100 gym membership
- $50 personal care products

On the flip side, my budget in a non-NYC market at biglaw cut the rent in half (even with a 15 minute commute), and I dropped or significantly reduced the vacation, therapy, cleaning service, dinners/lunches/coffee, shows, gym (my firm has one). That let me pocket nearly an extra $50k a year. To be clear, I could have probably spent close to the above in my non-NYC market. But that goes to show you have to watch out for the little expenses. Before I went to law school I went into shock every time I had to shell out $100. Now it's easy to not think twice.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Yeah, I mean, if you live in a 2BR in NJ, and you don't have any loans or kids, you can probably save $100k/year.

Doesn't really disprove any notion that you won't be able to live in a rich lifestyle in NYC for a sustained period of time, though.

[Anonymous User]

Hi all. Here is my situation. Right now, I'm a 2yr district court clerk, and after my clerkship, I'll be going back to my NYC firm. With the bonus and as a third-year, I believe I am looking at about $300,000. Sometimes when I talk to close friends and family (who ask), I get comments like "that is only like $100,000 here" or "you'll just be middle class."

I just cannot get myself to believe those things. My thought is that I plan to save a lot of my take-home pay, which will be more than what I make in a low COL area. And I do plan on living as far out from the city as I can. Finally, I ultimately plan to return to a low COL area, so a lot of my money that I saved will be spent in a low COL area.

Anyone want to share their experience? Maybe I am just totally wrong, and I don't want to make a bad financial decision. The reason I ask, I think, is that I really don't even have a desire to live in NYC, it just seems like way too much money to turn down. TIA!

I'm a 4th year in NYC, so I made about $300k last year. I saved $100k last year, but I had a couple of things going for me that might not be the case for you (I'm married and my wife and I share rent bringing my share of rent down to just under $3k).

Nonetheless, I think you can expect to save a good chunk of money and live very comfortably.

Here's an illustration that doesn't get you to $100k, but I think it's very realistic, and easy enough to adjust based on your personal situation:

Gross Pay = $300K
Net pay = ~160K after taxes, 401K contribution, health/dental/vision coverage

Let me stop right here. What many posters forget is that contributing $20k/year to 401K is savings. We take it for granted, but you'll already have saved $20k for the year before you even really touch your money.

Rent: $50k/year

(est. at a bit above $4k. Personally, this is more than I would pay in rent, and I've never paid above $3k. I've kept costs down by living with roommates, living in "not cool" areas like Murray Hill and being willing to walk 10 minutes to the nearest subway. However, a bit above $4k/month is enough to get you a very decent place in Manhattan as single lawyer living alone. No, it will not get you a 1bedroom apartment in west village right above the subway, but I'm going for middle of the road here.)

Living expenses: $48k/year

(I estimated this at $4000/month. Obviously, there's ways to blow past this, and I did when I was a junior associate by buying table service at clubs, going on a bunch of dates, etc. However, I think it's fairly easy to keep a budget of $4,000/month for essentials + fun.)

So, we're left at $160k-98k = $62k in savings.

$20K (401K) + $62K (savings) = $82K/year saved.

I think around $80/k year is a very realistic goal while still living the "good" life in NYC. (In quotes because nobody in biglaw is living the good life).

[Anonymous User]

Live in Jersey and find a significant other to split rent with. I have a shorter commute than my colleagues living in Brooklyn. I’m at an AmLaw200 firm, not on Cravath scale. I spend ~$2700 a month on expenses and save $7k a month on a $180k salary. That’ll change once loan payments restart, but right now I’m able to do it pretty easily without feeling like I’m pinching pennies. I’m a homebody, though, so it’s easy for me not to spend money. On a $300k salary you can save a crap ton of money if you’re diligent about budgeting.

[Anonymous User]

I moved from DC to LA. There's a noticeable difference in how far your money goes, how nice a house you can afford, and how long your commute needs to be to have similar living style. I'm an old guy with a kid, so I want a yard, a good school system, and a sports park nearby, and I don't want to spend a huge portion of my day commuting. If you're young and single then maybe none of that shit matters.

[Anonymous User]

I moved from DC to LA. There's a noticeable difference in how far your money goes, how nice a house you can afford, and how long your commute needs to be to have similar living style. I'm an old guy with a kid, so I want a yard, a good school system, and a sports park nearby, and I don't want to spend a huge portion of my day commuting. If you're young and single then maybe none of that shit matters.

Is D.C. that much more expensive than Los Angeles? Or are you talking Louisiana?

[nealric]

Comparing NYC living to other parts of the country is always an apples to oranges comparison.

People in the respective cities tend to spend their money differently, and the goods they buy may not be comparable. Housing is really the big variable. A $5 million apartment in NYC may be no bigger than a $300k house in the Midwest. But that doesn't mean someone living in the $5 Million apartment has a "middle class" lifestyle compared to someone likely to live in a $300k Midwestern house. The key is whether you value a large living space, or whether you are more focused on things like proximity to amenities.

Transportation is another difference. Most folks living in Manhattan aren't going to bother owning a car. That cuts out fuel/maintenance/insurance from your budget (in addition to the amortized cost of the vehicle itself). Stick to the subway only for basic transport (not an option in the suburban Midwest), and it's a lot cheaper than car ownership. But if you DID want to own a car in Manhattan it would cost a lot more due to high parking and insurance costs. So you are really comparing two different goods: driving a car in one location vs some mix of subway or taxi/uber rides and walking. Some people love driving, some people hate it. So the value will vary according to the individual.

Some costs are also fixed price no matter where you live. Your student loan balance doesn't change based on where you live. An iphone doesn't cost any more in New York. That means that consumer goods tend to be cheaper relative to your salary than they would be in a low cost of living area.

If you are willing to live below your means on housing, a HCOL area like NYC can be a good way to save money to put towards student loans an investing. But if have financial commitments like children and value a lot of living space, you may indeed feel barely "middle class" on $300k in NYC because you won't have a lot of room in your budget.

[nealric]

The only way 300K would make you "middle class" even in NYC is if you were married with multiple kids and your spouse was either not working or barely working, and even then it's debatable.

I think the problem with phrases like "middle class" is that "class" is wrapped up in a bunch of cultural perceptions and attitudes that have nothing to do with income or spending itself.

I think when people use phrases like "$300k just makes you middle class", what they mean is that they still feel like they are pinched for money even though they aren't engaging in what they would consider a lavish lifestyle. You also have the problem of comparison. In NYC, you are regularly around some of the wealthiest people in the entire world. $300k doesn't feel like a lot of money when you are surrounded by folks making seven figures (not to mention billionaires). $300k doesn't allow you to live in the nicest apartment in the best neighborhood- not even close. On the other hand, that same $300k would let you live in a huge house in the nicest neighborhood in a small city in the Midwest, so you might "feel" much richer.

[Anonymous User]

Comparing NYC living to other parts of the country is always an apples to oranges comparison.

People in the respective cities tend to spend their money differently, and the goods they buy may not be comparable. Housing is really the big variable. A $5 million apartment in NYC may be no bigger than a $300k house in the Midwest. But that doesn't mean someone living in the $5 Million apartment has a "middle class" lifestyle compared to someone likely to live in a $300k Midwestern house. The key is whether you value a large living space, or whether you are more focused on things like proximity to amenities.

Transportation is another difference. Most folks living in Manhattan aren't going to bother owning a car. That cuts out fuel/maintenance/insurance from your budget (in addition to the amortized cost of the vehicle itself). Stick to the subway only for basic transport (not an option in the suburban Midwest), and it's a lot cheaper than car ownership. But if you DID want to own a car in Manhattan it would cost a lot more due to high parking and insurance costs. So you are really comparing two different goods: driving a car in one location vs some mix of subway or taxi/uber rides and walking. Some people love driving, some people hate it. So the value will vary according to the individual.

Some costs are also fixed price no matter where you live. Your student loan balance doesn't change based on where you live. An iphone doesn't cost any more in New York. That means that consumer goods tend to be cheaper relative to your salary than they would be in a low cost of living area.

If you are willing to live below your means on housing, a HCOL area like NYC can be a good way to save money to put towards student loans an investing. But if have financial commitments like children and value a lot of living space, you may indeed feel barely "middle class" on $300k in NYC because you won't have a lot of room in your budget.

I think this is a great point. People who aren't from NYC equate having a good life with having a lot of land and a big house with a fancy car. Being from here - none of that really computes with me.

If you own a car at all, you're probably less well off and living in suburbs or outer boroughs. If you're well off in NYC, you have a modest sized apartment in a very nice part of the city that has great restaurants, bars, parks etc. Then, you have a nice big beach house/ski chalet/ etc. that you escape to for long weekends or whenever you feel cramped. The idea of having to maintain a big property or waste my Saturday mowing the lawn and picking out weeds (or finding someone to do that work for me) is just very unappealing.

[GFox345]

The only way 300K would make you "middle class" even in NYC is if you were married with multiple kids and your spouse was either not working or barely working, and even then it's debatable.

I think the problem with phrases like "middle class" is that "class" is wrapped up in a bunch of cultural perceptions and attitudes that have nothing to do with income or spending itself.

I think when people use phrases like "$300k just makes you middle class", what they mean is that they still feel like they are pinched for money even though they aren't engaging in what they would consider a lavish lifestyle. You also have the problem of comparison. In NYC, you are regularly around some of the wealthiest people in the entire world. $300k doesn't feel like a lot of money when you are surrounded by folks making seven figures (not to mention billionaires). $300k doesn't allow you to live in the nicest apartment in the best neighborhood- not even close. On the other hand, that same $300k would let you live in a huge house in the nicest neighborhood in a small city in the Midwest, so you might "feel" much richer.

There is definitely some truth to what you are saying, but I can't get on board with writing off the difference entirely as a "feeling." Rather, it's just objectively much easier to build wealth in smaller cities without living a restrictive lifestyle. Housing is the principal variable. For instance, I am a 4th year making biglaw market pay in a midsized city in a red state. Take home is about $15k/mo after max 401k, med insurance, and taxes.

I have a 15-year mortgage on a large town house with a two-car garage in what some would consider the "most desirable" neighborhood in the city. I am walking distance (<.5 mile) from great restaurants, bars, concerts, museums, a large water front, and MLB, NFL, and NBA sporting events. It's an easy walk (or drive) to my office. And I have easy access to any type of food I want on a particular day. My mortgage payment (all-in with insurance, property tax abatement, and utilities) is $2500/mo. I don't think I need to say much about the staggering disparity between my situation and what you'd get for the same amount of money (and less take-home pay given higher taxes) in NYC.

On top of that, dinners and drinks out are considerably less expensive. I lived in a large city for >5 years and was used to paying $18 for a cocktail (they're $10 where I live now), and a Friday night out with the boys very often ran me into the mid-hundreds of dollars. Here, my monthly expenses are comfortably under $2k without a concerted effort on my part to penny pinch. Doing the math, I'm saving $11k a month (plus 401k) while compromising essentially nothing in my standard of living.

As a foodie though, I am well aware that the restaurants I go to are by-and-large not Michelin Star quality, and not every musical artist or comedian I'd like to see comes to my city on tour (as they certainly would come to NYC). We don't have Coachella. The museums aren't MOMA, and the plays aren't Broadway.

You certainly do enjoy a higher standard of amenities in a place like NYC, and there is very real value to that. At the end of the day, you should live where you are the happiest. But just like it would be deluded for me to pretend that my mid-sized city's restaurants and museums hold a candle to NYC's, it is simiarly deluded not to acknowledge that NYC residents pay a HUGE premium (both in rent and in extra taxes) to live in NYC for which they see no tangible benefit.

[Anonymous User]

Comparing NYC living to other parts of the country is always an apples to oranges comparison.

People in the respective cities tend to spend their money differently, and the goods they buy may not be comparable. Housing is really the big variable. A $5 million apartment in NYC may be no bigger than a $300k house in the Midwest. But that doesn't mean someone living in the $5 Million apartment has a "middle class" lifestyle compared to someone likely to live in a $300k Midwestern house. The key is whether you value a large living space, or whether you are more focused on things like proximity to amenities.

Transportation is another difference. Most folks living in Manhattan aren't going to bother owning a car. That cuts out fuel/maintenance/insurance from your budget (in addition to the amortized cost of the vehicle itself). Stick to the subway only for basic transport (not an option in the suburban Midwest), and it's a lot cheaper than car ownership. But if you DID want to own a car in Manhattan it would cost a lot more due to high parking and insurance costs. So you are really comparing two different goods: driving a car in one location vs some mix of subway or taxi/uber rides and walking. Some people love driving, some people hate it. So the value will vary according to the individual.

Some costs are also fixed price no matter where you live. Your student loan balance doesn't change based on where you live. An iphone doesn't cost any more in New York. That means that consumer goods tend to be cheaper relative to your salary than they would be in a low cost of living area.

If you are willing to live below your means on housing, a HCOL area like NYC can be a good way to save money to put towards student loans an investing. But if have financial commitments like children and value a lot of living space, you may indeed feel barely "middle class" on $300k in NYC because you won't have a lot of room in your budget.

I think this is a great point. People who aren't from NYC equate having a good life with having a lot of land and a big house with a fancy car. Being from here - none of that really computes with me.

If you own a car at all, you're probably less well off and living in suburbs or outer boroughs. If you're well off in NYC, you have a modest sized apartment in a very nice part of the city that has great restaurants, bars, parks etc. Then, you have a nice big beach house/ski chalet/ etc. that you escape to for long weekends or whenever you feel cramped. The idea of having to maintain a big property or waste my Saturday mowing the lawn and picking out weeds (or finding someone to do that work for me) is just very unappealing.

One of the other unusual things about NYC relative to other places is it tends to force well off people and struggling people to endure some similar challenges. My spouse and I took the subway, with all the inconveniences that entails. We lived in apartments in Brooklyn smaller than the homes our siblings have in the midwest, which they could afford without going to college. We shopped at the same scruffy supermarkets and bodegas as everyone else in the neighborhood. Obviously we could afford nicer apartments and take taxies when the subway was messed up, so it's not the same as being a poor or working class person, but it creates the feeling of being a normal, unremarkable person, maybe "middle class" even. We relocated to a small town on biglaw-level salaries and it's impossible not to be aware that we inhabit a really different financial and material reality than most people. And we love NYC and miss it all the time, this isn't a knock against the place.

[Anonymous User]

The only way 300K would make you "middle class" even in NYC is if you were married with multiple kids and your spouse was either not working or barely working, and even then it's debatable.

I think the problem with phrases like "middle class" is that "class" is wrapped up in a bunch of cultural perceptions and attitudes that have nothing to do with income or spending itself.

I think when people use phrases like "$300k just makes you middle class", what they mean is that they still feel like they are pinched for money even though they aren't engaging in what they would consider a lavish lifestyle. You also have the problem of comparison. In NYC, you are regularly around some of the wealthiest people in the entire world. $300k doesn't feel like a lot of money when you are surrounded by folks making seven figures (not to mention billionaires). $300k doesn't allow you to live in the nicest apartment in the best neighborhood- not even close. On the other hand, that same $300k would let you live in a huge house in the nicest neighborhood in a small city in the Midwest, so you might "feel" much richer.

There is definitely some truth to what you are saying, but I can't get on board with writing off the difference entirely as a "feeling." Rather, it's just objectively much easier to build wealth in smaller cities without living a restrictive lifestyle. Housing is the principal variable. For instance, I am a 4th year making biglaw market pay in a midsized city in a red state. Take home is about $15k/mo after max 401k, med insurance, and taxes.

I have a 15-year mortgage on a large town house with a two-car garage in what some would consider the "most desirable" neighborhood in the city. I am walking distance (<.5 mile) from great restaurants, bars, concerts, museums, a large water front, and MLB, NFL, and NBA sporting events. It's an easy walk (or drive) to my office. And I have easy access to any type of food I want on a particular day. My mortgage payment (all-in with insurance, property tax abatement, and utilities) is $2500/mo. I don't think I need to say much about the staggering disparity between my situation and what you'd get for the same amount of money (and less take-home pay given higher taxes) in NYC.

On top of that, dinners and drinks out are considerably less expensive. I lived in a large city for >5 years and was used to paying $18 for a cocktail (they're $10 where I live now), and a Friday night out with the boys very often ran me into the mid-hundreds of dollars. Here, my monthly expenses are comfortably under $2k without a concerted effort on my part to penny pinch. Doing the math, I'm saving $11k a month (plus 401k) while compromising essentially nothing in my standard of living.

As a foodie though, I am well aware that the restaurants I go to are by-and-large not Michelin Star quality, and not every musical artist or comedian I'd like to see comes to my city on tour (as they certainly would come to NYC). We don't have Coachella. The museums aren't MOMA, and the plays aren't Broadway.

You certainly do enjoy a higher standard of amenities in a place like NYC, and there is very real value to that. At the end of the day, you should live where you are the happiest. But just like it would be deluded for me to pretend that my mid-sized city's restaurants and museums hold a candle to NYC's, it is simiarly deluded not to acknowledge that NYC residents pay a HUGE premium (both in rent and in extra taxes) to live in NYC for which they see no tangible benefit.

I agree with all of this except with your last sentence that we're paying a huge premium for "no tangible benefit". You named the tangible benefit earlier. It's the world class restaurants, museums, art etc.

Living in NYC is a tradeoff - you're trading off a higher quality of independent, personal living for a higher quality of community living. There's no way I can afford a 2 garage townhouse in NYC (if one were even available) in a neighborhood I want to live in. But, on the flip-side, I like living next to some of the best comedians, musicians and artists in the world and getting to enjoy their works often for cheap too. Paying $20 to go to the comedy cellar and having Judd Apatow, or the someone from the cast of SNL come in and perform or work new material is what it's about.

That tradeoff isn't worth it for a lot of people. Probably most people, but there's enough people that are willing to take that tradeoff, at least for some amount of time, that makes NYC the most populous city in America.

[nealric]

l

Rather, it's just objectively much easier to build wealth in smaller cities without living a restrictive lifestyle. Housing is the principal variable.

But what is a "restrictive lifestyle" is subjective. For some people, living a 15 minute drive to fine dining is "restrictive" relative to being able to walk down the street to it. For someone else, living in anything less than a 3 bedroom 2,500sq ft house is "restrictive."

Of course, if you can get a high salary in a LCOL market, you can save a ton of money. But for many (if not most) career paths, HCOL areas offer much higher compensation opportunities. So they might save 10% of their income in either location, but that's 10% of a bigger pie in the HCOL area, meaning their nest egg will be bigger. They can then use geographic arbitrage to retire in a lower cost of living area.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. So is the consensus then that if all I care about is money, NYC is just as good as any other market with mid/biglaw?

[Res Ipsa Loquitter]

OP here. So is the consensus then that if all I care about is money, NYC is just as good as any other market with mid/biglaw?

NYC is better for making money because it has the most firms and most turnover. Other markets are harder to crack into and have lesser lateral prospects, although last time I said this somebody chimed in that Texas hires just as aggressively now (not sure if that's true but YMMV)

[GFox345]

OP here. So is the consensus then that if all I care about is money, NYC is just as good as any other market with mid/biglaw?

Making money and building wealth are not the same thing. If your goal is to build wealth, there’s no way NYC is your best option. That’s just nonsense.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. So is the consensus then that if all I care about is money, NYC is just as good as any other market with mid/biglaw?

Making money and building wealth are not the same thing. If your goal is to build wealth, there’s no way NYC is your best option. That’s just nonsense.

Can you elaborate?

[Anonymous User]

OP here. So is the consensus then that if all I care about is money, NYC is just as good as any other market with mid/biglaw?

Making money and building wealth are not the same thing. If your goal is to build wealth, there’s no way NYC is your best option. That’s just nonsense.

Can you elaborate?

I think it's been pretty clearly described in the thread already.

[Anonymous User]

I'll start by saying I'm not in BigLaw but instead work in a Big4 accounting form in NYC. I'm also single, no kids, no pets and no student loan debt. I had 0 savings when I started my job but had about 6k in credit card debt that covered emergencies etc through law school.

I think 300k is plenty enough to live in NYC and still save. I personally believe anyone who is making 300k in NYC as a single person with no kids and thinks it is not enough has fallen for life style inflation and drank the coolaid on how to "live" in NYC. Even with a kid I know people living in NYC making much less still living fine/ok.

I've been in NYC for 4/5 years now and when I first moved, I had a roommate because I had to pay off my 6k credit card debt and the additional 7k I accumulated when I moved. After a year, I started living alone, my salary was around 130k. After taxes, 401k, health insurance etc, I had about 5.9k

I chose to live in upper Manhattan in Harlem and my rent was around 2.5k for a 1b1b in a nice relatively new elevator building (no doorman but had a camera + buzzer to let people in etc), no W/D in my apartment but had one in building, two outdoor space, etc. utilities + internet averaged around $230ish.

This left me 3k to do whatever I wanted. I wasn't super focused on any savings outside by 401k tbh. So with that I spent about 1k of it on groceries, food delivery, and eating out with friends and saved the rest

I'm not one for clubbing or partying or alcohol but I love food so I tend to not really put a price on my dining experiences so to say but these were limited and I do like cooking and a lot of my close friends live outside NYC.

I now make almost 2k more after taxes & deductions but I still try to live the same way. My only increase is my rent as I moved into a "luxury" building in Queens with a friend and my rent + amenities fees is now around 3.1k. My utilities somehow stay the same (thanks Con Edison for the overpriced electricity) but its also cos my roommate pays for the parking while I cover utilities. Any extra money goes into my savings which I have finally decided to focus on.

Even while not being aggressive, I was still been able to save enough that I've been able to go on a 2 months leave (I got maybe 1/4th of my salary) and was still able to cover rent and everything with the money I saved. I've also had to go on medical leave. But I still have an emergency fund for up to 4 months now and I was able to go on a one month "luxury" trip this year. Obviously I'm not saving 60k or what someone with a big law salary can save but my point is if I can "manage" on my 130/160k salaries then 300k is a lot and you can def save half of your after tax + deductions paycheck and live just fine in NYC.

I've lived in many different places and realized its all about priorities/lifestyle. If you couldn't manage you money when it wasn't a lot then you won't suddenly know how to manage it even on a higher salary. What you blow it on just increases in price. Do I know people making more than me who complain they are struggling? Yes, but my roommate makes significantly less than I do but is living life just fine too in NYC and she's been here longer than I have.