How do I adjust to a new social class?
Beware of keeping up with the Joneses. Many of your free-spending neighbors are broke. Basically, the prices of things like what you're noticing will rise as incomes in the area rise. A great example of this can be found in state capitals and college towns, where battalions of government workers or students all make just about the same amount of money and drive prices accordingly. For example, a college town tends to have a tight rental market. The prices reflect what the market will bear.  People have more money, things will likely cost more.  Think of it in terms of percentages and you can start to justify the higher housing costs. My father likes to tell me that his first mortgage cost him $75 a month, and he had no idea how he was going to pay it each month.  He also earned $3/hr at his job.  So his housing costs were 15% of his gross income.  My dear father almost passed out when he learned that my mortgage was $1000 a month, but since I earn $4000/month gross, I am really only paying 25% of my salary.  (Numbers made up) So if he complains I pay 10% more, so be it, but complaining I pay $925 more isn't worrying to me because of my increased salary. So if your complaint is the amounts, you must take ratios, percentages and relative comparisons.  However if you are baffled by people having money and wasting it on silly or foolish purchases, I am with you.  I still don't understand why people will use the closest ATM and just pay the $2 fee. Do right by yourself and don't mind what others are up to. Under what conditions did you move? My favourite method of judging prices objectively comes from concepts written in Your Money or Your Life by Joe Dominguez. Essentially it normalizes money spent by making you figure out how much an item costs with respect to the number of hours you needed to work to afford it. I prefer that method versus comparing with others since it is objective for yourself and looks beyond just the bare prices. I live in one of the highest cost of living areas in my country.  For the cost of less than half the down payment my spouse and I have saved up for a house we could easily buy a home in most of the lower cost of living areas (and several homes in, say, Detroit). As for the rest of your question, though, we've chosen not to live that way.  Because, like all high cost of living areas, ours is near a city there are more free and inexpensive things to do than you would think at first.  While others in our area think a great time is pre-gaming drinks at a nice bar, an expensive restaurant, then some more drinks we've taught ourselves how to make great meals from scratch using sale and inexpensive ingredients from the grocery store and often do that on weekends, topped off by a movie from the redbox that we promptly return the next day.  We have chosen friends who will hang out with us over potluck dinners and board games instead of out on the town.  On weekend days we visit free museums, do hikes, wander around revitalized downtown strips, or play at the local parks.  Our groceries, as I mentioned, are sale items or use coupons and we go for less expensive meats and produce.  We visit our local farmer's market for fun, not to buy the expensive produce.  We might find ourselves wandering through the mall to window shop, but when it comes time to actually buy clothing or goods for the apartment we shop around for up to months to find a good deal. Plenty of our friends have money enough to spend, and the most debt they are usually wallowing in is a big car payment, no consumer debt.  At the same time I have trouble imagining some of them buying a house any time soon, because they simply can't be saving all that much (since I know their incomes).  They may eventually be able to afford a condo and ride rising housing prices to a townhome and then a house - it's what lots of people do around here, loosing buckets money in realtor fees and closing costs along the way.  Even with these choices, it's hard to view my friends as selfish knowing that most of them give around 10% of their income to charity. There are probably plenty of people around here swimming in debt (somebody recently asked in a Q&A with the local paper editors how she could stop going to the city's most expensive restaurants and start living within her means when she only liked expensive places), but lots of folks can stretch themselves and afford to get by while wasting a lot of money.  It's not what my spouse and I have chosen to do, because we want to be able to live very responsibly and plan for a rainy day, but the longer you live with and around the money that tends to permeate high cost of living areas, the more it will seem normal to you. Also, if it's really $1000/mo for a 2 br. apartment, your cost of living is still lower than mine is. If I were you I wouldn't try to acclimate myself to the spendy habits of your surroundings.  Instead I'd find friends who are frugal and work on maintaining your good financial habits.  If you ever want one of those $4, $5, or $6K (plus!) houses, you're going to need them. Housing, eh? Housing costs are driven by salaries and land availability. Over in the Bay Area, $1500/mo for a nice 1-bedroom apartment is a good deal... but a decent software engineer with ~4 years' experience can get $120k, easily. The standard benchmark of affordability of housing is spending a third of your income on it a year: that guy can afford about $3,333/mo on housing. (If you don't fritter away the money and can keep your cost of living down and save money, you can really clean up, especially if you move elsewhere later.) So, to stop thinking about it in terms of dollar value, first try to think of it in terms of time: 33% of someone's salary or a third of their time at work going for housing is pretty nominal. Beyond that, think about it in terms of opportunity cost: If you saved that extra $20, what exactly would you use it for, and how much of that goal does it represent? "And specifically regarding prices of housing, what factors drive prices in that regard? I mean, the houses are roughly the same... but almost 3 times as expensive. Rent, like so many things, is tied to supply and demand. On the demand side, rent is tied to income. People tend to buy as much house as they can afford, given that mortgage interest is deductible and public schools, financed through property tax, performs better in valuable neighborhoods. Raise the minimum wage and economists expect rents to go up accordingly. When employers and pensions offer COLA adjustments, it feeds into a price loop. During the past ten years, there was also some ""animal spirits"" / irrational behavior present; people feared that if they didn't buy now, home prices would outpace their growth in income. So even though it didn't make sense at the time, they bought because it would make even less sense later (if you assume prices only go up). There's also the whole California has nicer weather angle to explain why people move to SF or LA. On the supply side, it's all about housing stock. In your old town, you could find vacant lots or farmland in less than 5 minute's drive from anywhere. There's far less room for growth in say, the SF Bay area or NYC. There's also building codes that restrict the growth in housing stock. I'm told Boulder, CO is one such place. You would think that high prices would discourage people from moving or working there, but between the university and the defense contractors triangle, they seem to have an iron grip on the market. (Have you ever seen a cartoon where a character gets a huge bill at a restaurant, and their eyes shoot out of their eye sockets and they faint? Yeah... that's how I felt looking at some of the places around here...) Remember, restaurants have to cover the same rent problem you do. And they have higher minimum wages, and taxes, etc. Moreover, food has to be imported from miles away to feed the city, likely even from out of state. In California, there's also food regulations that in effect raise the prices. If people are footing those higher bills, I wouldn't be surprised if they're racking up debt in the process, and dodging the collectors calling about their Lexus, or taking out home equity loans to cover their lifestyle."
"We had a ""civics"" class when I was a freshman in high school. This was in the Ann Arbor, MI public schools. It covered the very basics (how to balance your checkbook, what are stocks, how do income taxes work, what is interest, etc.) of money management along with an overview of politics and the legal system. It was a really light class, though, and didn't go deeply into personal finance and money management. I agree that such a class would be very valuable, as would cooking, nutrition, and basic home and car repair." "Low cost tuition or loan forgiveness is stealing in the same way the government steals from you to build roads, schools, police departments and other social services. That is why I used to term brainwashed because there is a massive propaganda effort that says paying taxes to allow our society to function is theft and immoral so the wealthy can skirt their tax obligations with the support of the lower class. Why don't you get your head of the the sand and look at how other countries do things. Things like single payer health care or low cost/free college are the norm in the developed world and they suffer far fewer societal problems and less inequality as a result. So keep spouting your ignorant ""taxes are theft"" rhetoric straight from Fox News. It doesn't seem like going to school has done much to enlighten your way of thinking" Yes, eligibility for contributing to a Roth IRA is determined by your Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) which is based on your Adjusted Gross Income (AGI). Now, AGI includes the net capital gains from your transactions and MAGI adds back in things that were subtracted off (e.g. tuition deductions, foreign earned income exclusion) in arriving at the AGI. There is a worksheet in Publication 590 that has the details. You are always entitled to contribute to a Traditional IRA. The MAGI affects how much of your contribution is tax-deductible on that year's tax return, but not your eligibility to contribute.  Both the above paragraphs assume that you have enough compensation (wages, salary, self-employment income) to contribute to an IRA: the contribution limit is $5500 or total compensation, whichever is smaller. (If you earned only $2K as wages, you can contribute all of it; not just your take-home pay which is what is left after Social Security and Medicare taxes, Federal taxes etc have been withheld from that $2K). If your entire income is from capital gains and stock dividends, you cannot contribute to any kind of IRA at all. "It's not well-defined, since the [term ""middle class""](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_class) has been used in *dramatically* different ways.  However:  &gt;The modern sociological usage of the term ""middle class"", however, dates to the 1911 UK Registrar-General's report, in which the statistician T.H.C. Stevenson identified the middle class as that falling between the upper class and the working class. Included as belonging to the middle class are professionals, managers, and senior civil servants. The chief defining characteristic of membership in the middle class is possession of significant human capital. &gt; &gt;Within capitalism, middle class initially referred to the bourgeoisie and petite bourgeoisie. However, with the immiserisation and proletarianisation of much of the petit bourgeois world, and the growth of finance capitalism, middle class came to refer to the combination of labour aristocracy, professionals and white collar workers. &gt; &gt;The size of the middle class depends on how it is defined, whether by education, wealth, environment of upbringing, social network, manners or values, etc. These are all related, though far from deterministically dependent. The following factors are often ascribed in modern usage to a ""middle class"":[by whom?] &gt; &gt;    Achievement of tertiary education. &gt; &gt;    Holding professional qualifications, including academics, lawyers, chartered engineers, politicians and doctors regardless of their leisure or wealth. &gt; &gt;* Belief in bourgeois values, such as high rates of house ownership and jobs which are perceived to be ""secure"". &gt; &gt;* Lifestyle. In the United Kingdom, social status has historically been linked less directly to wealth than in the United States,[4] and has also been judged by pointers such as accent, manners, place of education, occupation and the class of a person's family, circle of friends and acquaintances.[5][6] &gt; &gt;* Cultural identification. Often in the United States, the middle class are the most eager participants in pop culture whereas the reverse is true in Britain.[7]  The highest income professionals in the United States are IIRC neurosurgeons, which average ~$400k, so that's probably about as far as the middle class can extend.  Then there's the [upper class](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_class):  &gt;The main distinguishing feature of upper class is its ability to derive enormous incomes from wealth through techniques such as investment and money management, rather than engaging in wage-labor or salaried employment.[4][5][6] Successful entrepreneurs, CEOs, politicians, investment bankers, some lawyers and top flight physicians, heirs to fortunes, successful venture capitalists, stockbrokers as well as most celebrities are considered members of this class by contemporary sociologists, such as James Henslin or Dennis Gilbert.[4] There may be prestige differences between different upper-class households. An A-list actor, for example, might not be accorded as much prestige as a former U.S. President,[5] yet all members of this class are so influential and wealthy as to be considered members of the upper class.[4]  The [working class](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lower_class):  &gt;As with many terms describing social class, working class is defined and used in many different ways. When used non-academically, it typically refers to a section of society dependent on physical labor, especially when compensated with an hourly wage. Its use in academic discourse is contentious, especially following the decline of manual labor in postindustrial societies.  And the [underclass](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underclass) or poor:  &gt;The underclass is located by a collection of identifying characteristics, such as high levels of joblessness, out-of-wedlock births, female-headed households, crime, violence, substance abuse, and high school dropout rates. The underclass harbors these traits to a greater degree than the general population, and other classes more specifically.  Obviously, it's all a set of essentially arbitrary and artificial lines to draw; we don't have a true class system (as existed in the Middle Ages, where there were real legal distinctions between members of the clergy, the nobility, and the peasants, or as happened under India's caste system)." "I wasn't thinking in absolutes - that's specifically why I said ""barring unusual circumstances.""   Being 6'6'' is **literally** an unusual circumstance (in airline customer heights).   In your case, upgrading to a seat that you can sit in with a ""normal"" level of comfort is so obviously appropriate that I'm surprised that you thought my comment, in the context of this post (which is predominantly centered on creature comforts rather than actual needs) was even applicable to you.  Frankly, I think that you should be automatically bumped up for free because economy seats are designed in a way that makes them physically unsuitable for very tall people - a deliberate choice by the airlines that imposes an additional burden on you through no fault of your own.   Though I'd be happiest if airlines would just design *all* seats to accommodate people 6'6"" tall. :)" "No hope for you, my friend. Your life is over. Smile. Not true at all. If there's anything America is all about it's redemption and starting over. In fact, starting over is our middle name: United Starting Over States of America. Ulysses Grant failed once as a farmer and twice as a businessman before he became, well, U.S. Grant, major hero and president. He also graduated near the bottom of his class at West Point -- as did Sen. John McCain from the Naval Academy. John F. Kennedy had basically a C+ average in high school and his daddy weaseled JFK's way into Harvard, and he didn't turn out too badly. Other than the assassination, I mean.   The idea that your grades or your former life have much to do with your later life seems logical. But it's also not very accurate. Grades predict very little. Many people who screwed up pretty badly, later became very successful.   So, stop even worrying about past grades or your silly DUI. If I were applying, in fact, I'd write my essay about redemption, mentioning the DUI as a life turning point and noting that you no longer drink because of it. Unlike some other college students, ahem ahem ahem. They may be relieved to hear from an older student who has reformed his life, a type of student colleges very much like as opposed to little 18 year old children who get drunk all the time of which they have quite enough, thank you very much.   I'd also attack the bad grades from a few years ago problem by enrolling in a local college in some way (perhaps they have an extension program or maybe you have a junior college nearby). Take a group of solidly academic courses (perhaps including business course) and do very well in them. I'd take two or three at a time, giving you time to focus on them deeply. Do what you need to do to do well -- talk to the professor early in the course about the course themes and goals (and so they know who you are), work well ahead of time on all papers and edit, edit, edit them. Study like crazy for every test. Use available review books. Get a tutor if you need one, preferably someone at the college who has taken the class. Talk to others who have taken the class before you for their advice. Also talk to the professor about how best to review for each test -- meet with them a week before the test to ""go over"" your questions. A good approach is for you to say that you think ""such and such"" are the main themes so you'll be studying them for the test. Few professors can risk correcting you if those are not the main themes. This can be immensely helpful to you in getting your focused on what you need to study (meaning what they plan to ask about on the test). As a former teacher, I always corrected students who misunderstood major course themes or were focusing on trivia rather than larger issues and problems. This also sends the message that you are a hard worker, likely giving you some benefit of the doubt (""89? Oh, heck, give him an A-"").   With a few tough courses with good grades behind you, you have a much stronger record to apply with. And this shows you are serious since you went out of your way to take these courses.   Broader your view of ""top tier"" schools as many schools that are not in the Top Ten silliness will offer programs that are just as good. Then research your ""top tier"" schools to find out what kind of student they're looking for. Do they want someone who has done something different? Someone who took some time off (like you!) to travel and work? Emphasize this in your application. Emphasize your extra effort to take courses, your job, your maturity and experience. Colleges love that. Whatever kind of application essay you write, make it about your life and how it's shaped you, your outlook and your efforts. And make sure it's carefully edited -- not mistakes, no bad grammar, no spelling mistakes, etc. Perfect. Get and English teacher or someone you trust to advise you on it.   No, of course you are not wasting your time. Just make every reasonable effort to make schools want to accept you, and every reasonable effort to prepare well for more college. That is, after all, all you can really do. Then whatever happens work hard and do your best." Yea be a little careful about starting too early as well, late fall early winter is probably appropriate.  Make sure to practice as many item sets as you can.  For L2 I actually did a 3hr online class with Schweser once a week which helped keep me on track. The economy will never be the same from the perspective of the lower and middle classes. Globalization is continuing to happen and no Presisdent can do anything about it. This means an increased pool of workers (china, India, Brazil, etc) competing for the same quality of life we have.    Only way to stay ahead is get as educated as possible.