We have zero debt. I paid off our mortgage in about 5 years. I put money aside for my son’s education the day she told me she was pregnant. We’ve spent the last 10 years spending less than 40% of our combined income annually and now we’re reaping the rewards.
I am fortunate enough to not have to work at age 40, but I do need some kind of obligation to keep me content so I plan to have a remote web dev job by the end of the year.
I would be perfectly fine taking a lower wage due to my location. And that might make me more attractive to employers.
No way would I make that trade. My _PURCHASING POWER_ is probably vastly stronger than theirs. You say 40% but I could legitimately live off of 20% if I so chose. In fact, one of the problems I have is that I have absolutely no credit. As in, credit reports come back with zip, zilch, nada. And that can be problematic for people that don't trust seeing that.
If I'm being honest, it's a super power that I'm sad to see others are figuring out.
If you don’t have credit I would recommended getting a card and using it for everything.
Our situation is 100% by design. I live in a neighborhood filled with people making $100K+ plus per year who are all leveraged like crazy and probably have no significant savings.
But the husbands all drive $50K+ trucks to go to their office jobs and their wives have the latest and greatest SUV.
In contrast, my pick up truck never gets used unless I need it for a specific task. Other than that it sits parked. My one “nice thing” that I allow myself is my Land Cruiser.
It's just not my thing.
I don’t have an exact number in front of me, but I imagine that we receive at least $8k back annually in rewards from our various cards.
The only thing that doesn’t go on a card is the electric bill because they didn’t allow it until recently. But I believe they now do so my wife will change it soon.
In addition to the free money, it’s also safer. I would never use a debit card.
Nobody got wealthy by using credit cards. The “free money” is a cheap psychological trick. I don’t have the hubris to think I’m better at resisting unnecessary spending than the marketing department at Visa who wants every extra dollar in my wallet.
What many people find, after falling into the “but I fully pay my card each month” trap, is that turning off the card after this point is difficult with their current income, because they have effectively pushed their real wages a full month into the future. Depending how heavily you’re into credit it can take several months to build up a cushion to avoid dipping into emergency funds to cut the cards for good.
In addition, my debit card is attached to an account I use specifically for said card, and generally speaking I only keep enough money in it to cover what I plan on using it for, this limits the amount of damage someone can do by stealing my CC, and I don't have overdraft protection on it to further limit my exposure.
I don't think there's a lot of value to be found here.
At least in the US, things don't always look so unbalanced. Moving to <big west coast city>, New York, or Chicago has baggage attached to it. There's other costs an annoyances.
I would need a massive salary to consider even trying it. So how would it be unfair to expect more money depending on location? It really depends on the specifics, and seems to work out either way, depending on the situation.
Lots of people are leaving these high payed areas simply because they don't think it's worth it. Many might be retiring, but you're also seeing them take less glamorous jobs in small cities... I know many of them have already made their money, but it really looks like something else to me.
Or is this article backlash from salty SV employees that are now whining that they can't keep their SV salary, while they pay $300k cash for a $50k shack in Kentucky? Honestly, I would be a little pissed about that, since you didn't see them complaining about the decade they were able to make a half million dollars to move some GUI buttons around and attend meetings. Now they see dollar signs and are mad that they're being asked to make similar dollars to the rubes.
Anyway, what a rant, sorry, especially if that's not what the authors meant. If he's talking about US vs. eg. Mexico, India, China, ect. that's a really interesting question, though it technically has similar issues (eg. I know it's pride, but my Indian coworkers insist their quality of life is the same there, despite lower pay)
I doubt most rich people (ie. everyone in the US/EU) are really willing to deal with the realities of competing on a wider scale, with "fairer" pay.