▲ | al_borland a day ago | ||||||||||||||||
Making that much, I wouldn’t want to put anymore than 25% of my take-home toward rent. That would mean making $312k take-home… after taxes, retirement, etc. Maybe I’m conservative, but being house poor while making $300k is insane. I’m thinking someone would need to be pushing $400-500k for household income. That would put them in the top 3%. I don’t get the supply and demand curve on it. Making that much, and renting. It’s an even smaller market than the full 3%. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | Marsymars a day ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> I’m thinking someone would need to be pushing $400-500k for household income. That would put them in the top 3%. I don’t get the supply and demand curve on it. Making that much, and renting. It’s an even smaller market than the full 3%. I know a couple in that range of HHI (doctor/lawyer) who sold their house and moved to a rental in that range. Their take is that their time is very valuable to them, and dealing with their house involved a bunch of time spent on management and administration that can’t be made to adequately go away without effectively hiring a house manager. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | ndriscoll a day ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I wouldn't want to purely out of the waste, but from a risk perspective, why not? Your other costs don't scale with housing or income, so if you're spending $70k on housing, you might be at $100k overall expenses. Add another $50k for income taxes and $50k for retirement savings and you're still at 50-100k left over for whatever you like (using 250-300 household income). 6k for a mortgage would be scary in case of job loss, but for rent, whatever, just move. | |||||||||||||||||
|