[BostonBMW]

This might seem like a simple question, so please bear with me:

How are you making 6+ Figures? Is it worth it?

Assuming that you are single, young (20s-30s), living in America. I asking this question because I have a potentially lucrative opportunity, however I am concerned about a few factors:

- What will be the take home pay? The tax man takes a larger cut.
- How many hours will this entail? I feel comfortable in the 40-55 hour sweet spot.
- How will this impact my game? I like to use pure game when I am out and about..however I have ended up in mostly high end venues to meet decent women. Will having more $ translate into more bangs?

I know that these questions are really subjective and dependent on my preference/tolerance, however it would be good to get a high level overview from those in the 6 to 7 figure income bracket. Note, I said income NOT wealth (yes, I am aware of the difference).

So far, my frame of reference is based on single guys who are doing 60-80 hours a week, crap weekends (only Friday nights), getting a monster amount taken out for taxes and don't look too happy.

So I am thinking whether this is the right deal for me. On a practical end, it might be nice to have to worry about money and having more flexibility to invest on stocks, RE and the like.

Please share.

[thegmanifesto]

BostonBMW,

These are some tough questions.

"What will be the take home pay?" - generally speaking, expect 40%. I always use 50% in my head, and then get pleasantly surprised. Welcome to the working world.

"How many hours will this entail?" - totally depends on the gig. 100k with minimal hours and stress is smooth. 100k with 70 hour work weeks is hell on earth (and I am not talking about Mobb Deep's album either).

"How will this impact my game?" - I think I have said it before on here, Money does one thing and one thing only: It give you more options in life.

ie more cocktails, more nights out, more traveling, more platinum digger girls (lets face it, they all are these days), nicer hotels, better access to higher quality gigs, Custom Suits, better meals.

How you exploit those options is Up to You.

[BostonBMW]

(07-04-2010 04:35 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

BostonBMW,

These are some tough questions.

"What will be the take home pay?" - generally speaking, expect 40%. I always use 50% in my head, and then get pleasantly surprised. Welcome to the working world.

"How many hours will this entail?" - totally depends on the gig. 100k with minimal hours and stress is smooth. 100k with 70 hour work weeks is hell on earth (and I am not talking about Mobb Deep's album either).

"How will this impact my game?" - I think I have said it before on here, Money does one thing and one thing only: It give you more options in life.

ie more cocktails, more nights out, more traveling, more platinum digger girls (lets face it, they all are these days), nicer hotels, better access to higher quality gigs, Custom Suits, better meals.

How you exploit those options is Up to You.

G, much respect for the insights.

1. So basically the high roller is splitting with the Govt. Even with an aggressive tax minimization strategy the best would be a 60/40 split. That's sad.

2. I think my opportunity would definitely mean 60+ hours of work. The other option would be to do a straight 40 gig (make in the $70s) and do something on the side (commodities, Real Estate) to bridge the gap. Unfortunately to make some decent dineros on the side (early) requires another 15-20 hr/ week commitment. So it pretty much evens out.

3. Well said. I like the custom suits, the nice meals but wouldn't want the plat diggers just yet. The goal would be investing so money makes more money. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't enjoy life - the nightlife, vacations, learning new skills etc - just that I'll have less free time to do it.

[OGNorCal707]

I guess I'm pretty lucky, over the past 3 years I've cracked 6 figures, got paid mostly in cash, and probably haven't worked more than an average of 20 hours a week.

[kingkong]

Most people pulling 100 to 200 have pretty normal work weeks, with crunch weeks. Much over 200 and you're often talking hazard/burnout pay for expected short careers.

[thegmanifesto]

OGNorCal,

" I guess I'm pretty lucky, over the past 3 years I've cracked 6 figures, got paid mostly in cash, and probably haven't worked more than an average of 20 hours a week. "

I would say 100k + on 20 hours a week is pretty much killing it. (well not "killing it", but doing pretty damn well in a down economy, especially with the "got paid mostly in cash" part).

Good work.

[hydrogonian]

(07-04-2010 05:07 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

I guess I'm pretty lucky, over the past 3 years I've cracked 6 figures, got paid mostly in cash, and probably haven't worked more than an average of 20 hours a week.

So, your a politician?

[BostonBMW]

(07-04-2010 05:07 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

I guess I'm pretty lucky, over the past 3 years I've cracked 6 figures, got paid mostly in cash, and probably haven't worked more than an average of 20 hours a week.

That is solid. I hope that the income stream continues, couldn't ask for anything more than that.

[BostonBMW]

(07-04-2010 07:37 PM)kingkong Wrote:  

Most people pulling 100 to 200 have pretty normal work weeks, with crunch weeks. Much over 200 and you're often talking hazard/burnout pay for expected short careers.

KK, when you say normal, do you mean 40-50 hours?

I would think of $100K+ as a jump off point towards more entrepreneurial activities. Having the income simply give you the opportunity to save up a seed fund for a venture. For an employer to pay $200K+ you must be bringing value 2X to 3X that amount, why not do something on your own?

[kingkong]

Yes, 40-50. If working hours is your concern, starting a company is a horrible idea. That's usually 60+ hours and zero vacation or sick time for a couple years, at least.

Quote:

you must be bringing value 2X to 3X that amount, why not do something on your own?

Because usually their cut of your bill rate is a fair reflection of company overhead. Even if the company has massive profits, you'd typically do better to buy a piece of the company than try to compete. Also, most career skill sets aren't really that directly applicable to entrepreneurship. If your marketable skill is mine engineering or trading, that says nothing about your ability to go start a mine engineering company or trading desk. You let other people run the business for you in the spirit of division of labor.

Most people worth high wages are valued by their organizations and enjoy their coworkers and their work. They're not generally thinking about quitting and starting their own company. The Office Space misery thing is for people making much less and stuck as cogs in the corporate machine without any autonomy.

[oldnemesis]

(07-04-2010 03:18 PM)BostonBMW Wrote:  

How are you making 6+ Figures? Is it worth it?

100K in Bay Area it is generally a starting salary for an experienced software developer. And it is not a lot of money either. Ceiling is around 160K, which translates to 320K household income, but it is hard to reach.

Quote:

Assuming that you are single, young (20s-30s), living in America. I asking this question because I have a potentially lucrative opportunity, however I am concerned about a few factors:
- What will be the take home pay? The tax man takes a larger cut.

Your home pay would be 60-65% depending on where you live (here in CA we have almost 10% state income tax). It will be a little less if you're self-employed, but you're generally paid a little more so it matches. Figure out federal and state income taxes and FICA. There is an upper limit for Social Security taxes (I believe around 120K), so you do not pay Social Security when you go over it, only Medicare. Note that the more you make, the less tax deductions or lucrative options like Roth IRA are available to you as most of deductions have the income limits. You may also want to put aside some retirement savings (especially if you are an employee and your company matches them - free money for you), and get the health insurance from your employer (which is subsidized and pre-tax). Hence the figure.

Quote:

- How many hours will this entail? I feel comfortable in the 40-55 hour sweet spot.

This depends on the company. Generally the smaller the company, the more you have to work, and the better is the pay (which often includes stock options and such). In a large company it is typically a 35-45 hour workweek

Remember when you're talking job offers that the vacation time is also negotiable. And I would suggest pushing for extra vacation time (like 3 weeks for the first year and four weeks afterwards) during negotiations than asking for extra 10K in salary. If the company likes your performance, you can always get a raise later - but it is very unlikely they'd give you more vacation time.

Quote:

- How will this impact my game? I like to use pure game when I am out and about..however I have ended up in mostly high end venues to meet decent women. Will having more $ translate into more bangs?

Depending on where you are now. If you're making 70K already, making 100K won't probably have any effect on you. If you're making 70K and start making 500K, you'd likely to see some major improvements.

[BostonBMW]

(07-05-2010 12:41 AM)kingkong Wrote:  

Yes, 40-50. If working hours is your concern, starting a company is a horrible idea. That's usually 60+ hours and zero vacation or sick time for a couple years, at least.

Quote:

you must be bringing value 2X to 3X that amount, why not do something on your own?

Because usually their cut of your bill rate is a fair reflection of company overhead. Even if the company has massive profits, you'd typically do better to buy a piece of the company than try to compete. Also, most career skill sets aren't really that directly applicable to entrepreneurship. If your marketable skill is mine engineering or trading, that says nothing about your ability to go start a mine engineering company or trading desk. You let other people run the business for you in the spirit of division of labor.

Most people worth high wages are valued by their organizations and enjoy their coworkers and their work. They're not generally thinking about quitting and starting their own company. The Office Space misery thing is for people making much less and stuck as cogs in the corporate machine without any autonomy.

Good points. To clarify, I would not jump into entrepreneurial activities right off the bat (5+ years later, maybe). I think that having additional income allows you to save, invest at an accelerated pace.

Also not all entrepreneurs work a crazy amount of hours, sure there is a greater sense of ownership. I think several folks posting here are living that lifestyle.

[BostonBMW]

(07-05-2010 09:21 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(07-04-2010 03:18 PM)BostonBMW Wrote:  

How are you making 6+ Figures? Is it worth it?

100K in Bay Area it is generally a starting salary for an experienced software developer. And it is not a lot of money either. Ceiling is around 160K, which translates to 320K household income, but it is hard to reach.

Quote:

Assuming that you are single, young (20s-30s), living in America. I asking this question because I have a potentially lucrative opportunity, however I am concerned about a few factors:
- What will be the take home pay? The tax man takes a larger cut.

Your home pay would be 60-65% depending on where you live (here in CA we have almost 10% state income tax). It will be a little less if you're self-employed, but you're generally paid a little more so it matches. Figure out federal and state income taxes and FICA. There is an upper limit for Social Security taxes (I believe around 120K), so you do not pay Social Security when you go over it, only Medicare. Note that the more you make, the less tax deductions or lucrative options like Roth IRA are available to you as most of deductions have the income limits. You may also want to put aside some retirement savings (especially if you are an employee and your company matches them - free money for you), and get the health insurance from your employer (which is subsidized and pre-tax). Hence the figure.

Quote:

- How many hours will this entail? I feel comfortable in the 40-55 hour sweet spot.

This depends on the company. Generally the smaller the company, the more you have to work, and the better is the pay (which often includes stock options and such). In a large company it is typically a 35-45 hour workweek

Remember when you're talking job offers that the vacation time is also negotiable. And I would suggest pushing for extra vacation time (like 3 weeks for the first year and four weeks afterwards) during negotiations than asking for extra 10K in salary. If the company likes your performance, you can always get a raise later - but it is very unlikely they'd give you more vacation time.

Quote:

- How will this impact my game? I like to use pure game when I am out and about..however I have ended up in mostly high end venues to meet decent women. Will having more $ translate into more bangs?

Depending on where you are now. If you're making 70K already, making 100K won't probably have any effect on you. If you're making 70K and start making 500K, you'd likely to see some major improvements.

Thanks for responding. The vacation time, retirement accounts ideas are solid pieces of advice.

You have really helped in figuring out the Time vs. Money conundrum.

[oldnemesis]

(07-04-2010 08:27 PM)BostonBMW Wrote:  

For an employer to pay $200K+ you must be bringing value 2X to 3X that amount, why not do something on your own?

Your cost to employer is typically 2x of your salary counting office space, equipment, support (IT, accounting, legal, HR, security), and perks (vacations, day-offs, sick days, 401k match, insurance and so on). So generally you must be bringing much more value, like 5x. This, however, does not directly translate into revenue.

[thegmanifesto]

(07-06-2010 10:54 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(07-04-2010 08:27 PM)BostonBMW Wrote:  

For an employer to pay $200K+ you must be bringing value 2X to 3X that amount, why not do something on your own?

Your cost to employer is typically 2x of your salary counting office space, equipment, support (IT, accounting, legal, HR, security), and perks (vacations, day-offs, sick days, 401k match, insurance and so on). So generally you must be bringing much more value, like 5x. This, however, does not directly translate into revenue.

Or more.

Think of a sales guy that brings in a mill.

15% of that is 150,000.

Depending on the product, that would be a pretty solid sales gig.

[playa_with_a_passport]

I don't know about the rest of the country but in NY i know several people making 100k and don't have high level white collar work, work long hours or work for Golden Sachs. Uniformed civil service workers like garbagemen, police, firefighters, teachers, correction officers make around 85k base pay without Overtime and fringe benefits. If you one of the lucky few who can get a Govt job in the suburbs you can make even more money. The best part of Govt work is their Pension plans which allow them to retire after 20 years of work at half their last year retirement. So, If you are a firefighter and make 200k in your last year, you'll retire with a 100k. A year Pension until the day you die. Union trade workers like electrician, plumbers, boilermakers, etc also make around the same amount of money. If you can deal with blood and hospitals, you can go to a community college and get a register nurse degree in a little under two years and basically print money. All of above jobs with the exception of teachers require no to very little college. I heard in CA govt workers do very well also.



NY is expensive but if you have a roommate and live in less gentrified areas I.e. The hood. You can save money like crazy and have pockets so fat people gonna think you have the mumps. It doesn't really matter how much money you make as much how much work do you do for that money. A garbageman who makes 90k a year with just a HS diploma who does only 4 hours or REAL work a day, trumps a 175K Yale first year associate who works 60+ hour a week.



As for taxes, if you don't own any property or have dependents you are going to get raped. There's no way around it.

[thegmanifesto]

"I heard in CA govt workers do very well also. "

Yeah, they kill it on benefits and retirement.

Which, despite what the media will tell you, is the reason CA is broke.

[thekiller]

(07-08-2010 08:22 AM)playa_with_a_passport Wrote:  

I don't know about the rest of the country but in NY i know several people making 100k and don't have high level white collar work, work long hours or work for Golden Sachs. Uniformed civil service workers like garbagemen, police, firefighters, teachers, correction officers make around 85k base pay without Overtime and fringe benefits. If you one of the lucky few who can get a Govt job in the suburbs you can make even more money. The best part of Govt work is their Pension plans which allow them to retire after 20 years of work at half their last year retirement. So, If you are a firefighter and make 200k in your last year, you'll retire with a 100k. A year Pension until the day you die. Union trade workers like electrician, plumbers, boilermakers, etc also make around the same amount of money. If you can deal with blood and hospitals, you can go to a community college and get a register nurse degree in a little under two years and basically print money. All of above jobs with the exception of teachers require no to very little college. I heard in CA govt workers do very well also.



NY is expensive but if you have a roommate and live in less gentrified areas I.e. The hood. You can save money like crazy and have pockets so fat people gonna think you have the mumps. It doesn't really matter how much money you make as much how much work do you do for that money. A garbageman who makes 90k a year with just a HS diploma who does only 4 hours or REAL work a day, trumps a 175K Yale first year associate who works 60+ hour a week.



As for taxes, if you don't own any property or have dependents you are going to get raped. There's no way around it.

The problem with Civil Service jobs and Government jobs are the benefits and pensions are not a sure thing. As G stated CA is going bankrupt in part because of that, and a lot of other Union Pensions are going to need bailouts or fold from what I've read.

Also I can tell you as a Civil Service Worker myself, my medical benefits are very excellent, but next year is a different ballgame. We just finished contract negotiations and were barely able to keep what we already have, Obama's Universal Healthcare is already driving the costs up and most of it isn't even in effect yet. We were told that next year we're either going to lose some benefits or have to pay significantly more than we do now. And this is in a job that grows during a bad economy!

I wouldn't count too much on Social Security when you retire either.

[oldnemesis]

(07-08-2010 11:14 AM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

Yeah, they kill it on benefits and retirement.
Which, despite what the media will tell you, is the reason CA is broke.

This also may change if Meg gets elected.

[playa_with_a_passport]

Quote:

The problem with Civil Service jobs and Government jobs are the benefits and pensions are not a sure thing. As G stated CA is going bankrupt in part because of that, and a lot of other Union Pensions are going to need bailouts or fold from what I've read.

At least in NY and i suspect this to be the case in other states as well the Govt can't unilaterally reduce pensions from civil service workers who are already retired. Also, new reduced benefit pension tiers can't be applied retroactively to current employees. Thus, if you get hired into a job that promises $X after X years of service, chances are you going to get that amount. In addition, you might not get a raise if the economy is tight but they can never cut your pay. The bottom line is the only thing worse than paying higher co pays is not having a job to pay those co pays from.

[thekiller]

(07-09-2010 09:54 AM)playa_with_a_passport Wrote:  

Quote:

The problem with Civil Service jobs and Government jobs are the benefits and pensions are not a sure thing. As G stated CA is going bankrupt in part because of that, and a lot of other Union Pensions are going to need bailouts or fold from what I've read.

At least in NY and i suspect this to be the case in other states as well the Govt can't unilaterally reduce pensions from civil service workers who are already retired. Also, new reduced benefit pension tiers can't be applied retroactively to current employees. Thus, if you get hired into a job that promises $X after X years of service, chances are you going to get that amount. In addition, you might not get a raise if the economy is tight but they can never cut your pay. The bottom line is the only thing worse than paying higher co pays is not having a job to pay those co pays from.

If the deficits keep spiraling something has to give. America's getting top heavy with retired people and the Baby Boomers are going to suck up services. I'm not saying don't get a Union or Civil Service job, I'm just saying don't count on the Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels to last forever. Always have resources and backup plan.