tkihshbt wrote:

I dunno, I know some people living in south county who are in that salary range and they are doing decent. Not jetsetting across the world or anything, but not living paycheck to paycheck either.

And while I am reminiscing, I'll mention that in that same time period I recall a one paycheck blue collar family with two kids buying a house in U. City, a bit north and west of the high school, and a professor (probably making about 100k) buying a home in Ladeux (sp?).  So, I am of the opinion that parts of the metro area are still quite affordable, and even the premier suburbs and neighborhoods--Ladeux, Parkview, etc.--were well within the price range of Wash. U. profs.  I know one of the profs had a house which is sort of kitty corner to the home owned by the owner of Blueberry Hill, and several had homes in Parkview.

Max wrote:

tkihshbt wrote:

I dunno, I know some people living in south county who are in that salary range and they are doing decent. Not jetsetting across the world or anything, but not living paycheck to paycheck either.

And while I am reminiscing, I'll mention that in that same time period I recall a one paycheck blue collar family with two kids buying a house in U. City, a bit north and west of the high school, and a professor (probably making about 100k) buying a home in Ladeux (sp?).  So, I am of the opinion that parts of the metro area are still quite affordable, and even the premier suburbs and neighborhoods--Ladeux, Parkview, etc.--were well within the price range of Wash. U. profs.  I know one of the profs had a house which is sort of kitty corner to the home owned by the owner of Blueberry Hill, and several had homes in Parkview.

Not sure what the professors are making, but here's a current home listing in Parkview.

http://www.homes.com/listing/120807992/6335_Pershing_Ave_UNIVERSITY_CITY_MO_63130


and here's one just a couple of blocks from the high school (which is located at 7401 Balson)

http://www.homes.com/listing/94575217/7611_Balson_Avenue_UNIVERSITY_CITY_MO_63130

"Rather, it is perhaps the case that any of the people who write for the various websites and blogs, (VEB), might look enviously at the salary a guy like Strauss earns, and might think, "I could do that."

I think we need to find out what Strauss earns.

forsberg_us wrote:

In case you're curious Max, here are the listings for Ladue

http://www.homes.com/For-Sale/63124/orderby=price%20desc

Indeed.  And this is probably the kind of thing he was looking at on his salary.  He was trading up from something in U. City:

http://www.homes.com/For-Sale/63124/10/orderby=price%20desc

forsberg_us wrote:

Not sure what the professors are making, but here's a current home listing in Parkview.

http://www.homes.com/listing/120807992/6335_Pershing_Ave_UNIVERSITY_CITY_MO_63130


and here's one just a couple of blocks from the high school (which is located at 7401 Balson)

http://www.homes.com/listing/94575217/7611_Balson_Avenue_UNIVERSITY_CITY_MO_63130

I know of three homes in Parkview that were for sure owned by profs when I was there, although there were probably many more.  That said, academia is a weird gig, and the job is not conducive to families or other typical American demographics.  So one of the homes was a two income, no kids, full professor family with a combined income probably around $250k.  The other two were owned by unmarried profs, of the variety that were never likely going to marry.

artie_fufkin wrote:

"Rather, it is perhaps the case that any of the people who write for the various websites and blogs, (VEB), might look enviously at the salary a guy like Strauss earns, and might think, "I could do that."

I think we need to find out what Strauss earns.

I would second that motion, except for the invasion of his privacy.  But realistically, if your wife would agree, you'd take his job and salary wouldn't you?  As for the others, IDK, would Matt Leach want his job?  Would he, or someone else be willing to slur Strauss's name as a means t try to pry open that position at P-D?  it is comforting to think that we live in a society that shares a sense of values and decency, and I will publicly proclaim that to be that case if any of you have trouble sleeping after reading a debate that implies otherwise.  But I have my opinions on the matter.

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

"Rather, it is perhaps the case that any of the people who write for the various websites and blogs, (VEB), might look enviously at the salary a guy like Strauss earns, and might think, "I could do that."

I think we need to find out what Strauss earns.

I would second that motion, except for the invasion of his privacy.  But realistically, if your wife would agree, you'd take his job and salary wouldn't you?  As for the others, IDK, would Matt Leach want his job?  Would he, or someone else be willing to slur Strauss's name as a means t try to pry open that position at P-D?  it is comforting to think that we live in a society that shares a sense of values and decency, and I will publicly proclaim that to be that case if any of you have trouble sleeping after reading a debate that implies otherwise.  But I have my opinions on the matter.

Well, stealing another person's job is at the very least bad form, but as far as relocation is concerned, it's a conversation we've had. My wife is on record as saying she'd move if I could account for her salary as well as mine, which might have been a possibility when we first talked about it, but seeing as how the ground continues to shift on the entire industry, it ain't gonna happen now.
Practically, the primary obstacle for me at this point would be the travel. There's just too much going on at home for me right now that I don't want to miss. There are moments that happen every day, and if you miss them, you don't get them back.
I've told friends that if my wife really knew how much I would put up with to be a 24/7/365 dad, she could really be a shrew. Fortunately, she hasn't caught on.

forsberg_us wrote:

Going back to your earlier comments about the salaries paid to teachers, I learned through that site that my daughter's current teacher was making over $80K and my son's teacher was making over $70K.  I don't begrudge them the money, but that's pretty decent coin for a job that provides you with summers off, and a lot more than I thought they would have made.

That's why I qualified it for the first 10-20 years of service.  Public school teacher is a union job and they tend to reward service.  So, yeah, the salary gets up there after you've been on the job for 10+ years, and I'm guessing your daughter's teacher has been on the job for 15+ years, and might have an advanced degree,  to earn that kind of money.  If you can get a job in a good school system, teaching public school can be a decent gig.  Summers off has to be awesome, although I understand that few do it, at least until they have tenure.

artie_fufkin wrote:

Max wrote:

artie_fufkin wrote:

in the $60K-$70K range.

I consider that decent money.  You can raise a family, more or less, on that.

Not in a major city. Not if you want to send a kid to college or actually take a vacation that involves getting on an airplane. And that's the high end.
Besides the lousy pay, it's a wonderful profession. You're regarded somewhere in between a drug dealer and the fungus the grows between people's toes, considering every TV show and movie from Rugrats to Harry Potter portrays everyone in your profession as a self-absorbed scumbag intent on trampling everyone else to further your career.
Every time you make a typographical error, you get six phone calls or emails from people who are only too happy to call you a moron. And another call or two every day from cranky spoiled brats who think you have an "agenda" because what you write doesn't exactly match their particular point of view. Even your friends whisper when they're around you because they think their conversations about where they're planning to eat dinner might end up in the paper.
If I had it to do over again, I would have trained to become an archery target.

I think you are over reacting, Artie.  Given the chance most of us would like to be given a chance to do what they do.  In fact the do for a living what we all come here and do for free.

Max wrote:

[God forbid we ever again live in a country where a person could be a police officer or school teacher and have the effrontery to expect one income to be able to support children!].  Two incomes and you drive new-ish cars, take vacations on airplanes, etc.

Lets not forget how much we expect out of life.  Suddenly it isnt okay to drive ten year old cars and call a one day trip to ballpark a vacation.  When I was growing up (I know I still am) when my parnets took us to a fast food joint it was a treat.  Now for people it is an every day thing.  I have learned through some things that have happend to me over the past year that it takes alot less to live then you think if you can just cut out the uneeded stuff.  If I really wanted to cuts out the stuff we dont really need I could save $20 on out dish bill, drop our uneeded cell phones and the internet.  Instead I keep those things and that is why it cost more to live.  Sometime the only person to blame is ourselfs.

Last edited by APRTW (10/28/2010 7:34 pm)

APRTW wrote:

We have no debt and if I were a betting man I would guess I make less then all the poster here by a good bit.  It is all how you want to live your life.

Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.  It is a wonderful ideal of traditional American values.

Yes, our sense of entitlement has grown to thinking that the consumer culture is our right, and I am as guilty as the average guy.  I would be more OK with that if it weren't for the observation that for the past 30 years virtually all of the gains in US productivity have wound up in the pockets of the richest few, and all of the gains in material life enjoyed by the average American have come from working longer hours per household.  There are short, simple explanations that assert this is because the rich earned it and the rest did not, and longer more complicated explanations that the system is badly rigged toward the wealthiest few. 

Now, with the Supreme Court decision that apparently allows virtually unlimited anonymous donations from almost anywhere, it seems like our election is being bought more than it ever was, and we are at risk that the system will be rigged even further toward the uber-wealthy.

Last edited by Max (10/29/2010 9:09 am)

We have no debt and if I were a betting man I would guess I make less then all the poster here by a good bit.

I won't go into specifics, but I still live at home and I'm approaching my mid-20s. People ask if I'm tired of it, but it's what I have to deal with in exchange for having gone to an expensive private college. I'm still young and naive enough to believe that hard work pays off at some point in your life.

tkihshbt wrote:

We have no debt and if I were a betting man I would guess I make less then all the poster here by a good bit.

I won't go into specifics, but I still live at home and I'm approaching my mid-20s. People ask if I'm tired of it, but it's what I have to deal with in exchange for having gone to an expensive private college. I'm still young and naive enough to believe that hard work pays off at some point in your life.

I lived at home until I was 23.  I already had 2 years working at the police department when I left.  While I left in part because it was time to go, a big part of my reason was that I was working in the municipality in which I had grown up, and I didn't like the fact that some of the people I was arresting knew where I lived.