EXCLUSIVE: Brian O’Kelley says he’s capped his wealth to $100 million. The tech founder tells Fortune, billionaires are wasteful, out of touch, and “othered” from real life.
Since we can assume he’s fully retired and not working, he wouldn’t be paying FICA so that would be $514 more in his pocket a money, but that still means only $4,906 in his pocket afterward from this calculation. In truth, he’d be taxed slighly lower because he’d be paying capital gains taxes instead of income taxes, but that’s perhaps a 6% difference from the example calculation shown here. However, we’re really working with your other metric that being “anybody”. Lets call it $5,000/month to make it easy.
So a person needs to house themselves. Lets look at NYC rents. Here’s median prices:
And here’s some specifics from a few places in the city:
So looking at the cheapest of the 3 listed here, the small 1 br 1 bath place in the East Village will set you back about $3100/month. Of our $5,000, we now have just $1900/month for every other living necessities including food, transportation, clothing, and the big budget killer we haven’t talked about yet…health insurance/healthcare. All of this also assumes a person would be single. If they have children a 1br apartment isn’t going to cut it, and the costs for raising children are also a large increase in monthly money burn.
$160k/year is way low for: “That much per person would give any household a very comfortable lifestyle even in a HCOL area.”
First, thank you for pointing out I made a mistake. I didn’t see the calculator broke it into twice a month paychecks.
Take home for one month for $160k/year would be: $8,784
I’ll correct my post, but $160k/year is still way too low to meet your “That much per person would give any household a very comfortable lifestyle even in a HCOL area.”
I thought $40k was more than enough when I was a kid. But that was when you could buy a house for $30k to $50k. By the time I hit my 20s, inflation already had homes at closer to $100k, and the cost of everything much higher than when I was a kid.
When I was growing up I didn’t know anyone making more than $50k, most made less, and they were doing fine, owning homes, etc. $160k was wealthy.
Again, that’s separate from living expenses. In my personal example, I am maxing out my retirement accounts, but those amounts are not counted as part of my family’s annual cost of living.
$160k/year is way low to live a “very comfortable lifestyle”, even more so especially in a HCOL area.
Lets use NYC as an example of a HCOL area. Here’s what that looks like for take-home pay:
source
Since we can assume he’s fully retired and not working, he wouldn’t be paying FICA so that would be $514 more in his pocket a money, but that still means only $4,906 in his pocket afterward from this calculation. In truth, he’d be taxed slighly lower because he’d be paying capital gains taxes instead of income taxes, but that’s perhaps a 6% difference from the example calculation shown here. However, we’re really working with your other metric that being “anybody”. Lets call it $5,000/month to make it easy.
So a person needs to house themselves. Lets look at NYC rents. Here’s median prices:
And here’s some specifics from a few places in the city:
source
So looking at the cheapest of the 3 listed here, the small 1 br 1 bath place in the East Village will set you back about $3100/month. Of our $5,000, we now have just $1900/month for every other living necessities including food, transportation, clothing, and the big budget killer we haven’t talked about yet…health insurance/healthcare. All of this also assumes a person would be single. If they have children a 1br apartment isn’t going to cut it, and the costs for raising children are also a large increase in monthly money burn.
$160k/year is way low for: “That much per person would give any household a very comfortable lifestyle even in a HCOL area.”
$160k / 12mo. ≈ $13k / mo.
You threw away $100k annually, chum.
First, thank you for pointing out I made a mistake. I didn’t see the calculator broke it into twice a month paychecks.
Take home for one month for $160k/year would be: $8,784
I’ll correct my post, but $160k/year is still way too low to meet your “That much per person would give any household a very comfortable lifestyle even in a HCOL area.”
You’re taking out too much tax. Closer to $9,300.
A household of two adults would have $320k gross annually, so twice that.
Also, I’m comfortably supporting two adults in a HCOL area, with a mortgage and high medical bills, for under $125k annually.
[Citation needed]
I cited my source for the taxation in my post above as well as the rate. Feel free to cite yours for discussion.
Max out a 401k and IRA and lmk how much is left
(less than 8k/mo)
What does that have to do with living costs?
I’m just thinking about the “take home” figure! 160k doesn’t stretch as far as I thought it did when I was a kid
I thought $40k was more than enough when I was a kid. But that was when you could buy a house for $30k to $50k. By the time I hit my 20s, inflation already had homes at closer to $100k, and the cost of everything much higher than when I was a kid.
When I was growing up I didn’t know anyone making more than $50k, most made less, and they were doing fine, owning homes, etc. $160k was wealthy.
Because you can’t work forever. Burnout, aging, illness, etc. Life happens. Or do you plan to live paycheck to paycheck into your 70s?
Again, that’s separate from living expenses. In my personal example, I am maxing out my retirement accounts, but those amounts are not counted as part of my family’s annual cost of living.
You don’t think that’s moving the goalpost just a bit by doubling the number of earners?
I’d be interested to hear how you’re accomplishing that. At a minimum, can I ask what your housing costs are?
I changed nothing about my original comment. I said per person, not household.
Mortgage payment is currently $5,500 / mo. Note that this is not an income of $125k annually, but net expenses as recorded over the past few years.
*Single people need not apply