MORE AMERICANS ARE LIVING PAYCHECK-TO-PAYCHECK, EVEN THOSE EARNING MORE THAN $100,000.

[dora_da_destroyer]

Explain how making $100K is poverty in CA please

In San Francisco, households earning $117,000 qualify as ‘low income’

In the Bay Area, even making six figures often isn't enough.

www.cnbc.com

Low income is $82k for singles, $117k for a family of 4. $82k in many other areas is ballin

 

[dora_da_destroyer]

That's exactly how it works.

Again what would you suggest?

It’s not how it works, there is data, not your personal conjecture, as to how far salaries are behind the cost of living these days.

What I’d suggest is more mobilization to get more basic housing built, not luxury, government subsidies of the building to make it cheaper, and we need a big bump in wages, along with the social safety nets most developed countries have - free healthcare, childcare and paid daily leave - all three of those are things that contribute to living check to check at 100k

 

[Rawtid]

The capitalist in me is like, less competition for me

The flip side to that is I’m seeing so many of my people refuse to sacrifice a few months of their time now to set themselves up for life. Don’t know if it’s lack of motivation, lack of hustle… some people are just built differently I guess.

Another thing I see a lot of people do is compare themselves to the average. They have the mindset that as long as there are other people doing worse than them, they’re doing fine. Some of us are our own obstacles.

Keep your head down, keep your grind… Do what’s best for you.

Im just staying humble as I know this shyt could take a turn for the worst on a whim and there’s only so much you can do to negate that, but you do the best you can with the hand you’re dealt.

I'm not a capitalist, but I live in America and this is the game we are playing, so that's what I'm building my strategy around.

I think in some cases it's hopelessness that turns into a lack of motivation/laziness. If you're not around people that are doing well for themselves or if your elders are still struggling, I get the concept of "What's the point"? That's part of the reason why I want more. Plus I just like having money.

The bold is where I'm at and definitely staying humble because if I lost my job today, I'd be up shyts creek, but at the same time I recently earned my PMP cert, so I have confidence I wouldn't be down for long. I want to keep building marketable skills and use them to make money, where it's a job or some combination of side projects and a job.

 

[xXOGLEGENDXx]

Lmao this guy....so you just gonna ignore the whole COL thing huh? Post up a link of a decent apartment or house in a major cali city for $2k or less a month

Unless this is inaccurate, I found this in 2 minutes of Googling

 

[Ezekiel 25:17]

It’s not how it works, there is data, not your personal conjecture, as to how far salaries are behind the cost of living these days.

What I’d suggest is more mobilization to get more basic housing built, not luxury, government subsidies of the building to make it cheaper, and we need a big bump in wages, along with the social safety nets most developed countries have - free healthcare, childcare and paid daily leave - all three of those are things that contribute to living check to check at 100k

And how would you get a big bump in wages? Voting only does so much, what else are you doing?

 

[Sad Bunny]

See? It's about spending not salary. There is not a law that states all rent has to be at least $4K and nobody put a gun to his head and made him sign a lease for $4K. That was a choice. Just like your car payments, food, etc.. they are all choices.

If you value lifestyle, then you are going to pay more, simple as that. People can find places to live and cars to drive that cost significantly less, but we don't want to downgrade our lifestyles so we act as if there are no other options.

Taking home $70K and having $4K in rent sounds like an irresponsible spender. SO yeah if you make $100K and live paycheck to paycheck, it's not the economy, it's not the cost of living. It's a person who spends too much and isn't financially responsible

Agreed.

Get a roommate then or move to a cheaper city

 

[PrnzHakeem]

Some of these folks who make $100K+ might be 1st generation college grads with student loan debt or even subsidizing a whole nother household before you can even think about saving

 

[Rawtid]

It’s not how it works, there is data, not your personal conjecture, as to how far salaries are behind the cost of living these days.

What I’d suggest is more mobilization to get more basic housing built, not luxury, government subsidies of the building to make it cheaper, and we need a big bump in wages, along with the social safety nets most developed countries have - free healthcare, childcare and paid daily leave - all three of those are things that contribute to living check to check at 100k

That all sounds great, but people are not in control of that. I'm not suggesting these things shouldn't happen, but the historical data also shows it probably won't. Not in big enough waves to make a difference.

While you're waiting to vote in the right people to produce these conditions, it's still beneficial to position your skillset/education above minimum wage and high school. I feel there are more opportunities for individuals to earn higher salaries than there will ever be candidates to vote for, that can make the changes you suggested.

 

[Knowledge]

Unless this is inaccurate, I found this in 2 minutes of Googling

Hahahahaha its 700sqft. So you think living in a 700 sqft apartment is not poverty status? How would you feel if you and your family had to stay in a 700 sqft apartment? I said find a decent apartment lmao

For comparison, my current house is 6k sqft

 

[dora_da_destroyer]

And how would you get a big bump in wages? Voting only does so much, what else are you doing?

It takes worker’s movements, and voting would work if we didn’t have a broken electorate.

You seem to lack the ability to contextualize this conversation to the masses, not the individual

 

[dora_da_destroyer]

That all sounds great, but people are not in control of that. I'm not suggesting these things shouldn't happen, but the historical data also shows it probably won't. Not in big enough waves to make a difference.

While you're waiting to vote in the right people to produce these conditions, it's still beneficial to position your skillset/education above minimum wage and high school. I feel there are more opportunities for individuals to earn higher salaries than there will ever be candidates to vote for, that can make the changes you suggested.

You’re doing the same, talking at the individual level. If every individual could successfully get all the money they need, we wouldn’t have study upon study about how far behind society is falling and how unaffordable the basics are. Yes, and individual can go make more, that doesn’t fix the outsized cost of living and reason people making 100k can still be living check to check.

 

[Cakebatter]

Hahahahaha its 700sqft. So you think living in a 700 sqft apartment is not poverty status? How would you feel if you and your family had to stay in a 700 sqft apartment? I said find a decent apartment lmao

For comparison, my current house is 6k sqft

700sq ft is typical for a 1 bedroom apt in a major city, and downright lavish for cities like NYC. That said, many apartment owners won't even rent a 1 bedroom to a family of 3. I'm not sure where in the US, except a few places in the south, where you can buy a 6K sqft house for less than $500k, so still struggling to see how that info was anything but a sneak flex.

 

[Knowledge]

700sq ft is typical for a 1 bedroom apt in a major city, and downright lavish for cities like NYC. That said, many apartment owners won't even rent a 1 bedroom to a family of 3. I'm not sure where in the US, except a few places in the south, where you can buy a 6K sqft house for less than $500k, so still struggling to see how that info was anything but a sneak flex.

Not a sneak flex. Living in ga on 100k > living in cali on 100k. My original comment was that 100k in cali is poverty status opposed to other places, and people disagreed.

Obvious point being the stronger your dollar is, the less broke you are in whatever area you in. And your dollar aint going very far in cali

 

[Rawtid]

You’re doing the same, talking at the individual level. If every individual could successfully get all the money they need, we wouldn’t have study upon study about how far behind society is falling and how unaffordable the basics are. Yes, and individual can go make more, that doesn’t fix the outsized cost of living and reason people making 100k can still be living check to check.

The individual level is important because strong individuals form strong/large communities and large communities/organizations are necessary to to push the type of change at the level you're speaking.

I'm not saying that everyone can/will/needs to make 6 figures, but you can't form communities with anyone waiting for an ideal set of conditions before they feel they can advance.

 

[Cakebatter]

Not a sneak flex. Living in ga on 100k > living in cali on 100k. My original comment was that 100k in cali is poverty status opposed to other places, and people disagreed.

Obvious point being the stronger your dollar is, the less broke you are in whatever area you in. And your dollar aint going very far in cali

As someone who lived in Chicago, Boston, and Detroit, I've personally witnessed the vast differences in wages and cost of living. The bigger problem is even if everyone lived in the ideal place for their field of work/cost of living/and wages, it still won't compensate for the fact that Americans are more productive, but are making less money than in the 70s, while the cost of living is at an all time high.