Is this really going on in my own country?
Ugh, I'm watching news about all the death threats and racist/antigay epithets directed at members of Congress and their children and spouses. Horrifying. And worse that Republican politicians will not stop the incendiary speeches long enough to strongly condemn these actions. I feel an assassination attempt coming. I mean, if your politicians are telling you that the Democratic tactics are illegal, and you've got violence-prone people posting politicians' addresses online, how long is it going to be? As illegal as I felt Bush's administration's actions to be sometimes, there was nowhere near this level of hostile and threatening rhetoric against him. (People were talking about impeaching him, not killing him.) I wish conservative leaders would show some public solidarity with their opponents -- if there was ever a time to put aside bipartisanship, it's when people's lives are in danger.
Anyway, hoping against hope that I'm blowing this out of proportion in my mind. To take my mind off it, I decided to follow Thriftorama's example and compare my finances to the median numbers in today's Yahoo article. I've quoted the article in each section.
Income
"For the 50 percent of families in the middle of the scale, household income ranges from $51,000 to $123,000 for a typical four-person, two-parent family. The median is about $81,000. Those numbers are from 2008, and have probably fallen 5 to 7 percent since then, on account of the recession. Median income for a single-parent, two-child family is about $25,000."
With three incomes and as a three-parent, one-child family, we're not typical. But just counting our gross paychecks, our income falls on the high side of the scale, well within the range of the four-person family. Delete any one of our incomes and we'd still fall within the range, closer to the middle.
Housing Costs
"For two-parent families, the typical home is worth about $231,000, accounting for $17,600 in mortgage payments and other costs per year. Housing costs have risen by more than twice as much as income since 1990, a trend that may finally be reversing thanks to the housing bust."
The home we live in is probably now worth between $145,000 and $160,000, so way below average. Our housing costs including utilities run about $21,650 per year, so much higher than the median. Just our mortgage and property tax costs us $15,075 per year, a little below the average. Not sure what we're supposed to count here, since utilities are mentioned below. Ours are rolled into condo association dues so are fixed expenses and not reduceable or optional.
We do own another home in the UK worth up to $260,000, and its housing costs are covered by the rental, so you could say that our home worth is way above average.
Home Size
"The housing bubble was one factor that boosted housing costs, but the typical family also lives in a much bigger home. The median size of a new, single-family home jumped by 40 percent between 1979 and 2007, to about 2,300 square feet. That may now be declining, as families downsize and some get booted from homes they can't afford."
The home we live in is about 950 square feet, so well below average. If you threw in the square footage of the UK home just for the heck of it, probably about 600 square feet, we'd still be well below average.
Medical Expenses
"You've probably heard — healthcare costs are going through the roof. A study by the middle-class task force headed by Vice President Joe Biden says the median two-parent family spends $5,100 per year on health insurance and non-covered expenses—assuming an employer provides health insurance. Healthcare costs have risen far more than any other aspect of the family budget since 1990, with no end in sight."
This is pretty accurate for us, although we're a little below the median; fixed health care expenses for us run about $4,100, and could go higher than that, but probably will stay below $5,100.
Cars
"They provide mobility and represent freedom, one reason the typical family spends about $12,400 per year on two medium-sized sedans or the equivalent, with a new-car value of $45,000. The recession may have dampened our love of the road, however: Americans are driving less and car sales are off about 40 percent."
With no car, we're way below average on both the cost of transportation (about $1200 annually for bus passes) and asset value ($0). In addition, not having a car enables us to rent our parking space for $75 per month, which defrays much of our bus-pass costs. While we rent cars from time to time, we allocate that from travel or other discretionary spending; it's not a necessary cost.
College Savings
"The typical family puts aside $4,100 for college expenses for two kids, estimated to cover about 75 percent of expenses at a state university. Financial aid helps with the rest. But if possible, toss more into the college fund: As states face budget crunches, tuition and fees are going up."
Way below this, as we have not started a college fund. We probably won't put a significant amount aside for college unless we quickly catch up on debt and retirement; I consider those to be much higher priority. Note that the Yahoo article advises people to "toss more" into college savings. I'll tell you why I think this is significant in a little bit...
Vacations
"One week at the beach or another destination is standard, at a cost of $3,000 or so for four. More affluent families can afford two weeks, at a typical cost of $6,100."
We take 2 vacations per year, and we tend to spend considerably more than $3,000 per trip, up to $6,000. We've probably averaged $4,000-$5,000 per vacation over the past several years, so we're way above the national median. This is one of our big splurge areas.
Retirement Savings
"A median-income family that saved 3.2 percent of its income—roughly equivalent to the national saving rate—would sock away nearly $2,600 per year for retirement. Of course many families don't hit even that modest goal, and stock-market losses over the last several years have further shrunk the national nest egg."
Currently we save about 5% of our gross income for retirement, but I hope to up this once our year of reduced income is over. Over time I want to increase retirement savings a LOT, though we need to concentrate on debt repayment for another year or two at least.
This section is the reason I highlighted the article's urging to increase college savings: Why on earth wouldn't they strongly admonish people to save way more than $2,600 per year?? I mean, ideally I want to put nearly $3,000 per MONTH aside for retirement. If I can also help our kids pay for college, great, but if I can't, there are other ways to get through college--there's no other way to have a comfortable retirement except to save for it! It's unfathomable to me that this article would especially call out the college savings as not being adequate without saying anything about this really shockingly poor savings rate.
Everyday Spending
"Clothes, food, utilities, entertainment and other living expenses amount to $14,200 a year for a median-income family. Not surprisingly, this is one set expenses many families are trying to reduce, by buying more discount brands, using less or doing without."
Hmm...well, for us, food, entertainment and other discretionary spending (minus travel and condo association fees) is nearly $29,000 per year, so double the median. I guess we really indulge ourselves in this area!
Number of Earners
"In 76 percent of two-parent families, both parents work. The higher the household income, the more likely it is that both parents are contributing."
All three of us have full-time jobs. This gives us more financial leeway, which we wouldn't have otherwise since none of us is in a high-income-potential profession.
Hours Worked
"Few parents will be surprised to hear that Moms and Dads are working more than they used to. The total number of hours worked in a two-parent family is 3,747 per year, up 5 percent since 1990. The increased hours add up to more than four 40-hour weeks of additional work per family."
If I calculate about four weeks off per person per year (counting holidays, vacation and sick leave), we work 5,760 hours per year, or 1,920 per person. If I count only two of us, the figure is 3,840, so a bit more than the median.
Education
"The typical household head has a high school degree plus about two years of college education, up by more than a full year of college since 1990. Good thing—education is a key factor in lifetime earnings, and high school dropouts face a dim future by nearly every measure."
We're above average in this area, since all three of us have high school degrees, I have a BA, AS has a BA and a master's, and NT is in his second year of a BA.
Free Time
"What's your top priority? In a 2008 poll by the Pew Research Center, it wasn't healthy kids, a strong marriage or a great career; 68 percent of respondents said it was free time. (And just 12 percent said it was being wealthy.)"
Free time sure is important, but we have other priorities that are higher (NT's education, additional income-generating activities, childrearing, home cooking). I don't know what the list looks like, but unless it was worded as "what do you want to improve on," I can't imagine putting free time before "strong marriage" or "healthy kids"!
Household Net Worth
"The typical household has a net worth of about $84,000, according to the Federal Reserve. That's down 30 percent since 2007, thanks to losses in stock portfolios and home values."
I'm happy to say that our net worth is much higher than average, thanks to NT's early home purchase and retirement contributions, coupled with our really aggressive debt repay of the past couple years.
Debt
"About 18 percent of disposable income, on average, goes toward mortgage payments, auto loans, credit cards and other forms of household debt. That's a bit higher than it was in the '70s and '80s. But since debt payments peaked at the beginning of 2008, at 18.9 percent of income, they've been steadily falling."
Strange figure to calculate, but here goes. I guess "disposable" means "net" income? OK, our minimum debt payments (including US mortgage but not UK) are $22,500 per year, and our net income (just paychecks, not rental or random freelance income) is $47,400. So our debt payments are 47% of our income. Yikes, that's much higher!
So interesting experiment. We differ from the median in nearly every category, higher in some, lower than others. Not sure it really tells me anything, but it was a fun activity anyway. 
Loong post: OT rant and comparing our finances to the US median
March 25th, 2010 at 08:09 pm
March 25th, 2010 at 08:45 pm 1269549943
I share your dismay at the recent events. Our shock was bi-partisan: first the lovely Republican "baby-killer" comment was shocking. And then when Biden dropped the "f-bomb" to Obama. I don't care whether you think you will be heard or not, where is decorum and respect?
And yes, the whole gaffe with publishing the incorrect address of the politician and the cutting of the gas line. All very awful ...
Lack of respect is a very sad thing. We're trying to teach our children that while they don't have to agree or like everything that people say, we must treat one another with respect. Without that, we are no better than the animals.
March 25th, 2010 at 09:19 pm 1269551949
March 25th, 2010 at 09:33 pm 1269552820
It's just crazy that people can react this way to something like this.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:00 pm 1269554437
I totally agree with you. I'm just in denial that actions might follow these stupid words. It is just plain disrespect across the board. I think that angry people are just waiting for things to jusify their anger. I deem myself a reasonably prudent person, and have adopted a "let's wait and see" approach to this whole health care legislation. It's far too early to call this socialism, etc. It's far too early to get into a tizzy about what my taxes will increase to. And my lack of excitement and passivity about it actually causes people I know to become alarmed. It is as if I'm not responding with the correct degree of necessary outrage or support.
March 25th, 2010 at 10:35 pm 1269556517
March 25th, 2010 at 11:44 pm 1269560693
I haven't heard. Have there been riots?
March 25th, 2010 at 11:48 pm 1269560916
I heard that he used the term "baby killer" in reference to the bill, and not Stupak himself. While the second is far worse, he should have had better restraint than to behave like that. It is a sad day when representatives represent their constituencies in such a manner.
March 26th, 2010 at 01:34 am 1269567295
As for the "baby killer" remark, that man did later claim to be talking about the bill, but the damage was done. I heard some of the messages left on Stupak's voicemail, so I know several people took "baby killer" to mean Stupak himself, and the language they used to curse and threaten him was both disgusting and frightening.
March 26th, 2010 at 03:21 am 1269573679
I just had to add - does it really matter who was called a "baby killer?" The bill? The person? Puh-leez.
It's just a lot of hate and fear.
March 26th, 2010 at 03:46 am 1269575208
March 26th, 2010 at 02:44 pm 1269614681
March 26th, 2010 at 08:10 pm 1269634216
Several key Republicans have condemned the violence. Senator McCain condemned the violence. I think the reason people are so angry and have resorted to violence is because of the sneaky way that this whole bill was passed. It wasn't passed out in the open with the normal protocol for large pieces of legislature.
I hope that there isn't an assassination because that would only make a martyr out of Obama. I think if people can wait for his reelection, he will be voted out without a problem in the proper way.
By the way, what are you referring to as the racist or anti-gay comments? I haven't heard anything of that nature. Please elaborate.
March 26th, 2010 at 09:48 pm 1269640090
1. The bill doesn't change current federal law on abortion, which is you can only use federal funds if you're a victim of rape or incest or your own life is in danger because of pregnancy. http://mediamatters.org/blog/201003260026
2. The methods aren't sneaky. They are parliamentary procedure actually favored and used much more frequently by Republicans, when they had too narrow a majority to get their bills passed any other ways. They've used reconciliation AND deem and pass on several big bills, including big healthcare bills. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/03/dems-say-gop-crying-crocodile-tears-with-rules-complaints-republicans-set-records-for-same-process.php
3. Regarding racist/homophobic slurs: http://blog.newsok.com/politics/2010/03/22/protesters-aim/
March 27th, 2010 at 03:20 am 1269660039
They eventually didn't use deem and pass to pass this. And deem and pass has been used in the past before to combine two bills into one and then pass both of them for signature into law. What hasn't happened before is combine two bill together, "deem and pass", then split the bills up, one for the President to sign, the other for the Senate to consider. That is what they wanted to do here, and that is what was different.
I question the authenticity of the racial/homophobic slurs accusation. Usually when that happens, it is either on tape somewhere, or it gets out what the exact words were, and there has been no confirmation of any of that. Not saying it couldn't have happened, but there were cameras following the congressman when they were walking by the protesters, and there has been no tape. The "spitting" incident was caught on tape, and it was a protester cupping his hand around his mouth to make a megaphone, the protester yelled, and the phrase "say it don't spray it" comes to mind. No one hawked a loogie and spit it.
I did hear that a congressman had a bullet go through his front window at his district office.
March 27th, 2010 at 03:47 pm 1269704843
I know, they used reconciliation, which was used numerous times to pass major healthcare and other legislation by Republican congresses. But I know much was made of "deem and pass" so I wanted to mention it.
There is audible footage of Barney Frank being called "faggot." I cannot make any of the footage, but since multiple witnesses verified John Lewis's and the other congressmen's accounts, it's a credible account. I think in person you could probably make out more words than you can on the film, depending on where you were in relation to the shouter. But, this is just another case of wanting to deflect attention away from the actual disrespectful discourse by trying to cast aspersion on a civil-rights hero's account of events, so I really don't have a way to respond to these sorts of tactics.