While getting into the top 0.1% by income is mostly luck (e.g. I can name a single "lucky draw" that propelled me into my current line of employment), the top 1% got there through hard work, dedication and drive. So I am pretty sure I would still be making a good-enough living even if I was not in finance. If I was, however, in the top 20%, I would probably live elsewhere and, more importantly, think of how to make more money. There is always an opportunity to make a buck, even if it's not in trading but in something else. The reality is that, to quote John Gutfreund, "you never get rich in this business, you only attain new levels of relative poverty". Temptation of spending is always there and there always will be people that will cave in. E.g. a headhunter in the article - they guy is living off of placing people in one or another firm. Clearly, it's a contingency business and one would imagine he should have had enough insight to save up some cash for the lean times.
Commuting is a very difficult option if not an irresponsible solution, if you need to be at your desk at 8 AM and have a family (kids and working spouse). I share commuter trains sometimes with WS bankers during AM rush hours. I feel bad for them: snoring soundly in a nice but uncomfortable suit on the train, sandwiched b/w two ladies doing makeups, if he is lucky. Plenty of people cannot find a seat and have to stand for a hour. Think about a trader's commute - from bedroom to his office down the hall way. How much is that worth? njrookie
I commuted for years into NYC but this was 25 years ago. What's this "concern" about about "family" - even 25 years ago anyone who did not work 80+ hours per week in WS was shown the door. Has this changed? The commute was just time to rest or get some "downtime".
80 hours job + daily commute = quick burnout + no time with kids and wife. I need to be paid in 7 figures so I can talk my wife into quitting her job to take care of my kids / house full-time. Not feasible for everyone. If both parties work WS type job/hours, and you have kids/pets, NYC apt is the only solution almost.
Anyone living on the cost....s move to Minnesota and you will be a king in a castle. It aint all that bad u betcha .
I am curious: Why is almost everyone mentioned or associated with the article Jewish? Did the author only collect quotes from members of his country club, or are well-off WASPs and Catholics just too smart to complain about money? Anyway, $350k in Manhattan is just middle class. And yeah, if you're white and have middle class values, you either have to live in the zone for P.S. 6, or your kid is going to get a lousy education while looking like a juicy target for the kids who "keep it real." Here's another reality of Manhattan private schools... you pays $30-$40k in tuition per child, and then they hit you up for several tens of thousands more in fundraisers and giving campaigns, and they let you know before you send your kid to the school that you will be expected to participate with annual giving. As for Schiff's brother complaining, that's just part of their campaign to keep the Bush tax cuts in place as they are set to expire this year. There is a method to their madness... even if they are ineffective. As for moving to Dubuque, Iowa and living like a king: Nice idea, but it ain't gonna happen. There's a reason why skilled people in NYC can make $300k... very few cities in the world offer a critical mass of capital and talent and infrastructure and culture to support industries that generate the returns to pay highly skilled people that kind of money. Those same factors also drive up the cost of living in those few cities. That's just reality.