[morgante]

> I don't know about NYC, but I'm from the bay and $200k can definitely go pretty far with decent money management skills.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply they'd be scrimping. On $200k you can certainly live a comfortable lifestyle in NY or SF, but it's not nearly as luxurious as some of my rural friends assume it would be. $200k is comfortable in NY/SF, but it's not rich.

[axlprose]

True, though nothing short of hitting the lottery (either in the traditional sense or through a large startup exit) would really produce that kind of 'rich'.

Then again, my family comes from a pretty modest background, so anything in the 6-figure range would be considered reasonably rich to me, but nobody's expecting you to be Donald Trump wealthy either. So in coming from that background, it still rubs me the wrong way when even reasonably well-off people downplay their success and potential freedom.

[morgante]

> True, though nothing short of hitting the lottery (either in the traditional sense or through a large startup exit) would really produce that kind of 'rich'.

I wouldn't go that far. A doctor in most parts of the country probably meets that kind of "rich."

I make 6 figures, but I'd never even think about being able to afford a luxury car or any of the things which people usually equate with a 6-figure salary.

Especially when you factor in taxes, the picture looks a lot less rosy. On $150,000 your take-home is really only $75,000. Factor in $5,000/m for expenses in SF or NY and that's only $15,000 of savings a year—at that rate, it takes many years to even save up a good emergency fund.

Don't get me wrong: my family also comes from a very modest background, so I feel incredibly lucky to have the excess income to do things like help my dad buy his first house (in a cheap, low-cost area).