s/o college costs: Middle Class

[Trilliums]

What total household income range do you all consider middle class?

 

 

Seems as though many middle class families are finding EFC (expected family contribution) for college costs are much higher than the family actually expected. So I am wondering where middle class falls. Online figures vary widely.

 

ETA: Darn I need a poll!

[KristinaBreece]

When they're talking about "easing the tax burden of the middle class" by raising taxes on the "rich," don't they talk about the dividing line between "middle class" and "rich" as being 250K?

 

I can't imagine life with that kind of income-- lol!

 

My parents combined made ~60K and I got need-based financial aid for college. I always felt thoroughly middle class growing up. Maybe my expectations were lower than the average.

[bettyandbob]

I think this is really hard to determine. Some jobs require living in high cost areas. What do think a middle class home looks like? Is it a two bedroom apartment. Is it a 3 bedroom town home in the cheapest neighborhood that is not dangerous (some places this can cost 350K).

[Trilliums]

I think this is really hard to determine. Some jobs require living in high cost areas. What do think a middle class home looks like? Is it a two bedroom apartment. Is it a 3 bedroom town home in the cheapest neighborhood that is not dangerous (some places this can cost 350K).

 

I agree. Poster self describe themselves as *solidly middle class* sometimes and I wonder what that means. I guess it cannot just be determined by an income number. BUT, I do think need based aid for universities is mostly determined by that income figure.

[Mama Geek]

When you work for somebody in a private industry $250000 is tough to make. This is probably more typical of owners of businesses, government employees (no, not nearly all, but a lot) and those in upper management in private industries. I don't know what numbers I would use for the middle class and I think that it would vary based on where you are talking about. I think it would be tough to live a middle class lifestyle on $30000 a year. I would say anyone whose income is over $1,000,000 a year would be upper class.

[mommymilkies]

I will check the NYT article. I considered us lower middle class. My dh has a fairly professional job and we own a used 2007 Honda Odyssey and a decent, though small and older, house. BUT we barely make our bills each month, scrimp & save, I sell old books or whatnot to buy new ones, we buy used clothes almost exclusively, cloth diaper, grow some of our food, have zero savings. Literally. And are barely scraping by in general. We do get a tax refund. So I guess that puts us in "middle/upper lower class"?

[Ohdanigirl]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

The NYTimes has a special report on class titled "Class Matters" that shows what class you fall in, determined, by education, income and occupation that's sort of fun to play with.

 

Do you have a link? This sounds very interesting.

 

Danielle

[Trilliums]

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

 

I think the income is per worker though, not household.

 

Over 70K puts a person in the top 1/5th of earners.

[mommymilkies]

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

 

It says income wise, we are middle class. I think that's very dependent on area and family size, though. They don't take that into consideration. We'd be living well if that was income for one person!

[Carrie12345]

Technically, I consider the middle quintile for household income "middle class". My "class", according to quintile, does NOT correlate with US cultural views of my quintile. :tongue_smilie:

[kokotg]

Our income probably wouldn't qualify us for middle classedness (DH is a high school teacher; last I checked we would still qualify for WIC, based on income), but I feel middle class because of our educational/socio-economic backgrounds and because we have financially secure extended family that gives us a safety net a lot of people don't have.

 

I also kind of feel like a socio-economic mutt sometimes, though...both because of the whole highly educated yet poorly paid thing, and because I've got grandparents from very different socio-economic backgrounds.

 

So I guess I think of middle class as too complicated to define solely with income. Although I guess it's not so much for the purposes of qualifying for financial aid/paying for college.

[TranquilMind]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

The NYTimes has a special report on class titled "Class Matters" that shows what class you fall in, determined, by education, income and occupation that's sort of fun to play with.

Yeah, that's a pretty good definition.

[Trilliums]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

 

We don't get a full refund and we do itemize...I am wondering if we can afford to send both kids to our local University even. Sigh.

[Sneezyone]

I think middle class is the 60% of households in the middle of the income distribution (with 20% at the top and 20% at the bottom). Of course, we know that the top is heavily skewed. If you use a national median household income of approx 55K, middle class would be in the 30,000-100,000/yr. range.

Edited April 21, 2012 by Sneezyone

[jennynd]

I will think middle class is 50k-100k household income. mybe 100-150k upper middle class??

[justamouse]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

The NYTimes has a special report on class titled "Class Matters" that shows what class you fall in, determined, by education, income and occupation that's sort of fun to play with.

:iagree:

[LibraryLover]

When they're talking about "easing the tax burden of the middle class" by raising taxes on the "rich," don't they talk about the dividing line between "middle class" and "rich" as being 250K?

 

I can't imagine life with that kind of income-- lol!

 

My parents combined made ~60K and I got need-based financial aid for college. I always felt thoroughly middle class growing up. Maybe my expectations were lower than the average.

 

 

Harvard, for one, considers 60k low income. If you hit the lottery and your kids gets in, you get a free ride.

[LibraryLover]

http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/class/

 

It says income wise, we are middle class. I think that's very dependent on area and family size, though. They don't take that into consideration. We'd be living well if that was income for one person!

 

 

I thought that was a really good article

 

Middle income is income to live above poverty, in a safer neighborhod, with a car that isn't in the shop constantly. It means you don't get free lunch at school or WIC. It doesn't include music lessons, modest short vacations, gymnastics lessons, math tutors, SAT prep classes etc.

 

You're on your own there.

Edited April 21, 2012 by LibraryLover

[LisaKinVA]

When you work for somebody in a private industry $250000 is tough to make. This is probably more typical of owners of businesses, government employees (no, not nearly all, but a lot) and those in upper management in private industries. I don't know what numbers I would use for the middle class and I think that it would vary based on where you are talking about. I think it would be tough to live a middle class lifestyle on $30000 a year. I would say anyone whose income is over $1,000,000 a year would be upper class.

 

If I had been drinking something when I read this, I would have spit it all over my computer.

 

Owners of businesses (most) don't actually "make" $250,000 -- the business may gross over that, but their profits are usually far, far less. I work with about 4,000 independent business owners... even those whose businesses are making roughly 1 million in sales a year aren't taking home $250,000. Are there some? Yes...but they are in the minority, and usually have multiple stores (even a franchise operator for McDonald's or Chick-fil-A doesn't come close to those numbers *until* they have multiple stores).

 

And where are the numbers for Gov't employess you're quoting? The GS schedule (OPM.gov) and SES's (Executives) max out at $155,000/yr (that's a level 15, step 10). The SES's may make slightly more, but not enough for anyone I know to take on that kind of responsibility (they are on-call 24-7, have to move on a whim, transfer on a whim, and there is no additional pay for a ton of extra responsibility) Now, if you're talking two high level employees that are married to each other, sure...but there are no individual federal employees (I don't even think Congressmen and Senators make $250k), making that kind of money. The pay scales I'm using are for Houston, Silicon Valley, NYC, DC. They are capped at $155k.

Edited April 21, 2012 by LisaK in VA

[QueenCat]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

Hmmm... but if you plan your deductions correctly, even at middle class, you will not end up owing taxes in April. You may even get a refund if you've had some unexpected deductions, like state college tuition.

[KungFuPanda]

And where are the numbers for Gov't employess you're quoting? The GS schedule (OPM.gov) and SES's (Executives) max out at $155,000/yr (that's a level 15, step 10). The SES's may make slightly more, but not enough for anyone I know to take on that kind of responsibility (they are on-call 24-7, have to move on a whim, transfer on a whim, and there is no additional pay for a ton of extra responsibility) Now, if you're talking two high level employees that are married to each other, sure...but there are no individual federal employees (I don't even think Congressmen and Senators make $250k), making that kind of money. The pay scales I'm using are for Houston, Silicon Valley, NYC, DC. They are capped at $155k.

 

She may be thinking of government contractors. They are not limited by the govt pay scale.

[Elinor Everywhere]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

 

:iagree: Sigh.

[bethben]

Harvard, for one, considers 60k low income. If you hit the lottery and your kids gets in, you get a free ride.

 

Wow---maybe the funding of college is more within our reach. I don't feel low income but if someone wants to qualify us as that in order to help our children with future college expenses, I'll take it.

 

beth

[Mrs Mungo]

She may be thinking of government contractors. They are not limited by the govt pay scale.

 

:iagree: Most of that information isn't even public information. You know that X business received Y million/billion dollar contract, but you don't know how much the individual employees make. We now hire contractors to do things that regular government employees used to do. True, we don't have to house their families or provide insurance, but they make WAY more money. We know lots and lots and lots of people who retire from the military and go to work the next day doing the exact same job they were doing, but now they wear civilian clothes and make twice as much. One friend we have is an internet security consultant in DC. He's a government contractor and makes over $350k/year. But, we've made the military and government, "smaller" and smaller is better, right?

 

I will also point out that most government pay tables don't calculate benefits like medical care, housing, allowances, etc. Many of those allowances and benefits are not taxable, which makes them an even bigger benefit. Right now (based on rank, family size and location), for example, we would receive around $20k/year for housing (we live on base, so we never see it; it counts as our rent). When we lived in Hawaii it was more than twice that. And that is a non-taxable allowance.

Edited April 21, 2012 by Mrs Mungo

[LisaKinVA]

She may be thinking of government contractors. They are not limited by the govt pay scale.

 

But government contractors are private companies, not government employees. There is a huge difference between those two worlds, and most of the people working for a company like Bollinger or Lockeed-Martin (for example) aren't making $250,000 a year, either.

 

In general, software engineers (for private companies) make around $150,000/yr. (in California, at least), some engineers (say in aerospace), who are at the top of their field can make that kind of money.

 

Now, Harbor Pilots can make that kind of money...but it's a very, very difficult profession to get into, and the jobs have a lot of responsibility. And, Harbor Pilots aren't government employees, either.

[LisaKinVA]

I will also point out that most government pay tables don't calculate benefits like medical care, housing, allowances, etc. Many of those allowances and benefits are not taxable, which makes them an even bigger benefit. Right now (based on rank, family size and location), for example, we would receive around $20k/year for housing (we live on base, so we never see it; it counts as our rent). When we lived in Hawaii it was more than twice that. And that is a non-taxable allowance.

 

That's because most government employees don't receive housing allowances (unless they are overseas), or other allowances. Locality pay is still capped. And, most private companies don't include health care or vacation benefits in their salary amounts, either.

 

The military is pretty unique in it's pay scale, and the benefits they receive for having to move every few years. But, it's also a hard life...filled with hazards, that most people don't have to deal with in their jobs.

 

I don't doubt that former nuclear engineers, etc. with 20 years of experience can get a contracting job making $350k -- but not everyone retiring from the military is making that kind of money. I know my fair share too -- it depends upon their training (SWOs don't usually get $350k jobs...nor do helicopter pilots...or communications officers). So, I think it's a gross overstatement to say even "many" do, let alone most.

 

As far as some of these contracts (saving the gov't money) go... I have some knowledge about those too. Ships that used to be run by the Navy (supply ships, refueling ships, oceanographic ships, surveillance ships) now cost less than half to operate (with better maintenance/performance records) than when the Navy did those jobs themselves. A $350 million dollar contract for one vessel covers *everything* for running that vessel (all the fuel, maintenance, dry-dock, manpower...etc.) And, if the fuel prices change dramatically during the operation, they have to come up with the money themselves. They don't get to go back to the gov't and say, "oops."

Edited April 21, 2012 by LisaK in VA

[Tarreymere]

Middle class is where you pay taxes instead of getting a full refund & you aren't eligible for need-based college aid but you don't make enough to pay for Princeton.

 

 

I love that definition!

 

We aren't middle class. Dh is a college grad professionally employed in a job that his degree is required to perform, but only makes around 37K annually. With two kids, we begin to be eligible for food stamps. I haven't applied because I think they would require me to look for work. Does this mean we could presumably send a child to Princeton? Probably........perks of poverty, I guess.

[LisaKinVA]

The whole college aid system is out of whack...a person with a 50K part time gov't salary w/medical in retirement as well as pension is deemed poor and the guy making $75K in private industry w/401K, no pension, no med in retirement is deemed middle class....

 

Let's look at the "50k part-time gov't salary" person.

 

First, there are no more gov't pensions. Those were gone in the 80's. They were replaced by a 401-k type system with a % match by the gov't. If the employee doesn't pay in, the gov't doesn't pay in. There is also an annuity, which is tied to your years of service, and what your pay-rate was at retirement, and part of the gov't retirement plan is social security.

 

The part-time employee gets a pro-rated deduction vs. full-time for every federal benefit.

 

For example:

 

Years Served: Full-Time Employee -20yrs = 20yrs credit An 80% Employee, 20 years = 16 years credit.

 

Health Care: Full-Time Employee - say 80% paid by employer, and 20% paid by employee. 80% Employee - 64% paid by employer and 36% paid by employee. (Plus, we still have co-pays, most things aren't 100% covered...and fwiw, the gov't pays less than 80% of our health care, and we have still spent in excess of $20,000 OOP for health care in the last 2 years, and will spend approximately $15,000 OOP this year.)

 

It's not like a part-time employee is getting the same benefits as the full term employee, so that $50,000 doesn't go as far, giving them less spendable income. As far as medical benefits in retirement...it's MEDICARE. Yup. MEDICARE (unless you're military, then it's something different). My dad still works FT for the USFG, and was *required* to switch to MEDICARE for his primary insurance. SINCE he is still working, his other insurance kicks in AFTER Medicare. My dad is 67.

 

And temporary gov't employees have to pay the full amount for health care, and no retirement, but you do get credit towards retirement IF you get a permanent job.

 

I'm just getting a bit tired of the gov't employees being the scape-goat for bloated federal spending. Because pay-check for pay-check the people who are being paid MORE than their private sector counterparts are the support staff (secretaries), weird positions, like White House Chef, and just-out-of college grads. But no one talks about THAT.

 

Once you hit the a GS 11-or-12, the private sector counterparts (equivalent experience, responsibilities and training) begin to significantly out-earn government employees. And, really, there just aren't that many GS-13's, 14's and 15's to be had (kind of like the military, not *everyone* who enters the Navy is going to make Lt. Commander, Commander, Captain, or Admiral (it gets more, and more difficult each grade).

 

And relocation expenses are paid by private employers as well -- if they want you bad enough. Even in this economy, I was offered a full relocation package to move to No. VA to work for a company (they wanted me in headquarters). I had the skills and experience they wanted -- so they made relocation a part of it (give me fair-market value for my house, pay for the movers, and put me up in temporary housing for 6 months while we looked for a new place to live), but it wasn't worth it for me to move. I've been spoiled by telecommuting since 1997, and I don't want the day-in-day-out drudgery of putting on a power-suit and make-up every day.

Edited April 21, 2012 by LisaK in VA

[Sneezyone]

You are thinking federal. I'm thinking local, where there are very good pensions with medical to be had.

 

I've worked in state govt in three separate states and the pay is 60 to 80 percent of what the Feds make with no locality pay or COLA so the value of that retirement package is also lower.:glare:. States are moving their retires into Medicare like every other employer I know.

Edited April 21, 2012 by Sneezyone

[LisaKinVA]

You are thinking federal. I'm thinking local, where there are very good pensions with medical to be had.

 

I enjoyed your older citizen scenario. In our case, MIL, a gov't employee at age 70, hasn't touched medicare. Her gov't job is part time with full time benefits. There is no requirement that she use medicare before her employer provided health plan. She has another 10 years to go before she can consider retirement.

 

Well, I can't possibly know everything there is to know about 52 "local" governments (DC has one, too...although the fed may regulate it). ;) Although, I do think times are changing for state/local government employees as well....

[Mrs Mungo]

That's because most government employees don't receive housing allowances (unless they are overseas), or other allowances. Locality pay is still capped. And, most private companies don't include health care or vacation benefits in their salary amounts, either.

 

Yes, I know all of that. But, many people who serve as government contractors are retired military who are already drawing a retirement paycheck and receive medical insurance through the military (not that it's cheap).

 

The military is pretty unique in it's pay scale, and the benefits they receive for having to move every few years. But, it's also a hard life...filled with hazards, that most people don't have to deal with in their jobs.

 

You realize you are talking to a wife who had to hobble across a parking lot on a broken foot after her 16 year old with a permit drove her to the ER? I know how hard it is, lol.

 

I don't doubt that former nuclear engineers, etc. with 20 years of experience can get a contracting job making $350k -- but not everyone retiring from the military is making that kind of money.

 

The friend I referenced? Got out of the Air Force as an E-5. His salary (which includes bonuses that I did not mention) is not based on being a nuclear engineer or something crazy like that.

 

I know my fair share too -- it depends upon their training (SWOs don't usually get $350k jobs...nor do helicopter pilots...or communications officers). So, I think it's a gross overstatement to say even "many" do, let alone most.

 

NOWHERE does my post suggest that most contractors make that much money. Here is the post in full:

"Most of that information isn't even public information. You know that X business received Y million/billion dollar contract, but you don't know how much the individual employees make. We now hire contractors to do things that regular government employees used to do. True, we don't have to house their families or provide insurance, but they make WAY more money. We know lots and lots and lots of people who retire from the military and go to work the next day doing the exact same job they were doing, but now they wear civilian clothes and make twice as much. One friend we have is an internet security consultant in DC. He's a government contractor and makes over $350k/year. But, we've made the military and government, 'smaller' and smaller is better, right?

 

I will also point out that most government pay tables don't calculate benefits like medical care, housing, allowances, etc. Many of those allowances and benefits are not taxable, which makes them an even bigger benefit. Right now (based on rank, family size and location), for example, we would receive around $20k/year for housing (we live on base, so we never see it; it counts as our rent). When we lived in Hawaii it was more than twice that. And that is a non-taxable allowance."

 

The only place I used the word "most" was to say that these salaries are not public information. THAT is the main problem I have with it all.

 

As far as some of these contracts (saving the gov't money) go... I have some knowledge about those too. Ships that used to be run by the Navy (supply ships, refueling ships, oceanographic ships, surveillance ships) now cost less than half to operate (with better maintenance/performance records) than when the Navy did those jobs themselves. A $350 million dollar contract for one vessel covers *everything* for running that vessel (all the fuel, maintenance, dry-dock, manpower...etc.) And, if the fuel prices change dramatically during the operation, they have to come up with the money themselves. They don't get to go back to the gov't and say, "oops."

 

I have no idea what this has to do with salaries, but have you looked at the recent studies on contractors? It's from a bipartisan government commission, not a partisan group or website:

http://www.wartimecontracting.gov/

[LisaKinVA]

Where we live, the median household income is $75,000/yr. The average house costs $350,000, and the average salary is $55,000.

 

At our "lowest" point in 2003, with me not taking home a paycheck (I was pregnant with #3, and had two little kids, and helping my parents build the store, dh was making $30,000/yr), we made too much money to qualify for food stamps, health care, or any gov't assistance. We still weren't considered "poor." :glare:

 

So, I'm one of those people who really hate these "financial need" calculators that make assumptions that you can live the same lifestyle in DC on $100,000 a year as if you were in Poteau, OK!

 

My husband's career is pretty much limited to areas around Naval installations (Norfolk, San Diego, Seattle, somewhere in FL...) or shipyards (coastal, again). These areas aren't usually inexpensive, either.

[LisaKinVA]

Yes, I know all of that. But, many people who serve as government contractors are retired military who are already drawing a retirement paycheck and receive medical insurance through the military (not that it's cheap).

 

Well, that's the "double-dipping" scenario...I wasn't referencing that ;)

 

 

You realize you are talking to a wife who had to hobble across a parking lot on a broken foot after her 16 year old with a permit drove her to the ER? I know how hard it is, lol.

 

I remember that...

 

The friend I referenced? Got out of the Air Force as an E-5. His salary (which includes bonuses that I did not mention) is not based on being a nuclear engineer or something crazy like that.

 

There are always exceptions, but that isn't the general "rule." It's possible someone could look at me in 2-3 years and say "how did someone who graduated from Liberty, with degrees in communication and political science land a job making THAT much?" Considering the average person with my background usually tops out around $150,000, with the average closer to $80,000.

 

NOWHERE does my post suggest that most contractors make that much money. Here is the post in full:

"The only place I used the word "most" was to say that these salaries are not public information. THAT is the main problem I have with it all.

 

You didn't say that, but the person I originally addressed I believe did....sorry for the confusion.

 

I have no idea what this has to do with salaries, but have you looked at the recent studies on contractors? It's from a bipartisan government commission, not a partisan group or website:

http://www.wartimecontracting.gov/

 

Nothing to do with salaries, just regarding the "saving money part." All contracts are different, I was speaking from the knowledge I have with CivMars... No, I haven't looked at that, and I'm sure there can be HUGE problems with contracting as well -- just like government grants, government junkets and conferences, and many other things. Proper planning...I'm sure you know that saying well. It's just often NOT found in wartime contracting, then you add to that political greed, log-rolling, and paybacks (e.g. TSA, full-body scanners and how those got purchased).

[Mrs Mungo]

It's just often NOT found in wartime contracting, then you add to that political greed, log-rolling, and paybacks (e.g. TSA, full-body scanners and how those got purchased).

 

Profiteering is the word that comes to mind.:glare:

[Mama Geek]

If I had been drinking something when I read this, I would have spit it all over my computer.

 

Owners of businesses (most) don't actually "make" $250,000 -- the business may gross over that, but their profits are usually far, far less. I work with about 4,000 independent business owners... even those whose businesses are making roughly 1 million in sales a year aren't taking home $250,000. Are there some? Yes...but they are in the minority, and usually have multiple stores (even a franchise operator for McDonald's or Chick-fil-A doesn't come close to those numbers *until* they have multiple stores)

 

You have to consider that small businesses often include Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, Engineers, Architects, Land Developers, Construction companies (although that industry isn't doing so hot these days.) These are just examples I can come up with off the top of my head that have real potential for making $250000.

 

And where are the numbers for Gov't employess you're quoting? The GS schedule (OPM.gov) and SES's (Executives) max out at $155,000/yr (that's a level 15, step 10). The SES's may make slightly more, but not enough for anyone I know to take on that kind of responsibility (they are on-call 24-7, have to move on a whim, transfer on a whim, and there is no additional pay for a ton of extra responsibility) Now, if you're talking two high level employees that are married to each other, sure...but there are no individual federal employees (I don't even think Congressmen and Senators make $250k), making that kind of money. The pay scales I'm using are for Houston, Silicon Valley, NYC, DC. They are capped at $155k.

 

An easy example to find online is to look at what some of the school superintendents make. I am staying in a town where last year the superintendent made almost $350,000, and no it isn't a large city. If you look further there are lots of other superintendents across the country that make more than $250,000. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_current_salary_of_the_cabinet_members_of_the_executive_branch Here are a list of federal officials that show several of them making $200,000 or more so most aren't quite making $250,000 in salary alone. None of these include benefits.

 

Not everyone in government receives high salaries, but there are a lot that do, but it includes county, city, state and federal jobs.

[LisaKinVA]

Not everyone in government receives high salaries, but there are a lot that do, but it includes county, city, state and federal jobs.

 

Most "executive branch jobs" are usually political appointees, which is a whole different animal -- and especially the cabinet. They aren't permanent, and they serve at the pleasure of the President. It's not like you can get those jobs by going to OPM and applying ;). They are political "thank you's" for getting the President elected. They get to keep their jobs as long as they don't screw up, or until a new President is elected. The vast majority of federal jobs (maybe not 99%, but pretty darn close) are not political appointees and either fall under the military pay scale (I don't think a 4 or 5 star Admiral makes $250k), nor do SES (executive service) or GS scale. The GS scale is capped (including locality pay) at $155,000...which is not "a lot" for NYC or San Francisco.

 

There is also no way to lump all local city, county, state jobs into one category. The sheriff in a town we once lived in made $60k. There are some, I know Broward County, FL pays it's School Board a tidy sum, and their administrators even more. Arkansas is also in the running for top-heavy administrative pay. But there are also places this has been changing. Just like you can't paint "federal jobs" with the brush from "executive branch cabinet-level" jobs, you can't paint every city, county, township and state with the the same brush.

[Mama Geek]

They are still government jobs, they are paid for with tax payer money. The examples I gave are just the easy ones that I came up with off the top of my head that I could do a quick search for salary information. There are lots more that fall into the $150,000 - $200,000 that I saw as I was googling. I realize most in the military do not get paid well.

[Deb in NZ]

Here in NZ the average household income is $48k. $48k is also the maximum (parental) household income for uni students to recieve the top student allowance (a gov't grant to help with living costs during tertiary study). Students with parental incomes of $48k-$80k will recieve a smaller % of student allowance. Incomes of $48k or less also qualify families for the commmunity service card to receive reduced medical costs & a few other benefits. Based of the above figures I would say that household incomes of less than $48k would be considered low income. Household incomes of $48k-$80k could be considered lower middle class as depending on the number of dependent children, these families recievemost if not all of their tax back through a "Working for Families" payment.

 

Our household income has never been higher than $48k, but I never really considered us to be poor. We own our own home, but only because dh worked overseas for 26 years & saved most of his income. If we were trying to pay off a mortgage & raise 3 kids on $48k, we would feel poor. As it is we are able to pay our bills, put food on the table, etc. with careful (& creative ;) ) budgeting, but we have nothing left at the end of the month. Our low income has been a blessing in disguise for our dd as she has only had to take out student loans for her tuition. Her living costs are covered from her student allowance + a small part-time job.

[Tap]

Family of 5, $60,000 income, some retirement.

 

Ds17's FAFSA says he does not qualify for aid, other than traditional student loans.