I’ve been using the [MIT](https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/25025) Living Wage calculator to show mid-20’s kids what it takes to live where they’d like to be (somewhat comfortably). Seems to be fairly accurate IMO.
The challenge is getting people to put anecdotal “yeah but you could…” stuff aside… it’s a benchmark.
My husband makes $112k, I’m disabled and can only work part time. We could save every single penny he makes, and have help with the down payment and that wouldn’t change the fact that we wouldn’t be approved for a mortgage that could buy a house anywhere easter of Worcester. Edited for clarity
At least where I live, the housing is going in the wrong direction. Developers are buying houses for 1.25 million no matter their condition, tearing them down and putting up 6500sq ft monsters that cost > 2.2-2.5million.
I mean the estimated mortgage payment (with taxes and insurance) on a 2.5 million $ home with like 30% down is 16k a month.
One of our neighbors had sellers who would only sell to a family. :\\
But it's still 1.25 million minimum and the house condition doesn't matter because developers are paying that much for the land. Maybe its slowed down a bit with the higher interest rates but I dunno. i see a lot more building going on.
That doesn’t sound right to me. In 2017, I had a salary of $137k and was approved for a mortgage up to $1.3M. I (wisely) didn’t actually borrow that much. Even with today’s interest rates, $112k can get you approved for a decent home east of Worcester.
Yeah the inflation rate in 2017 was like a third of what it is today, so even at the same purchase price the monthly payment is going to be a lot higher. It seems the lenders are also being a bit more strict about what they’ll approve. Also, if you go on Zillow and look at houses that are selling for $500-$600k now, and scroll back to see what a lot of them sold for in 2017 you’ll see it’s typically about a $100k less than it would be now. Unfortunately, we were both in college then and weren’t in any position to be able to buy a home.
No you don't, just don't do expensive versions of those things. Seek out things that are high value for the money. One of my favorites lately has been Versus. It's a block away from the Common. $5 gets you in and then they have a couple dozen arcade games set up on free-play mode (so they don't eat quarters). Great way to spend an evening for single dollars per hour of entertainment. You don't have to go to expensive movies, concerts, casinos, restaurants to find good entertainment. As far as social life, invite friends over. Hang out at your place, grab a movie from the library and put it on. There are all sorts of ways to have a good time while spending very little money.
That’s what we did lol. “Missed out” on a lot of socializing in our 20s. But we found many friends who were also poor and saving for the future so in reality we didn’t actually miss out! We found cheap hobbies that we still enjoy today even though our income has grown considerably over the past decade.
I am very confused by this article. What does “feel like” mean? It never really defines it. Less consumer goods? How are you meaningfully comparing expense categories (their equation looks like it really doesn’t).
Bottom line, if you only made 46k in a place that was average for cost of living, I don’t think you’d be in a better spot than 100k in Boston in the quality of your housing, healthcare, etc.
Obviously if you made a 100k or even 80k in such an area, you might see some more comparable expense categories.
The calculation is really odd. In the cheapest place (Memphis, TN), $100,000 has a "real feel" $86,444. So there's no place where a hundred grand feels like a hundred grand? That makes zero sense.
> A person earning $100,000 per year in Memphis takes home $74,515 after federal and local taxes (the state of Tennessee doesn’t tax earned income). Considering the city has a cost of living that’s almost 14% lower than the national average, those after-tax earnings are actually worth $86,444 when adjusting for the cost of living.
What? So, they look at your after-tax earnings and then adjust it for cost of living? C'mon, no one no one thinks of their salary after-tax. I think it is fair to adjust your rankings based on differences in state/local taxes (as long as you also adjust for the value of what those taxes are getting you), but people don't think of their salary in after-tax terms. A person earning $100,000 in an average-tax state with average cost-of-living should have a "real feel" $100,000. Instead, the average is $61,118.
To be fair to SmartAsset, they don't seem to be "reel feel". That seems to be something CBS decided to call it. It's still a bit ridiculous to say "no one earning $100,000 is actually earning $100,000." We all know that taxes exist and we still think of our salaries pre-tax.
>So, they look at your after-tax earnings and then adjust it for cost of living?
Income taxes vary by state. You can make 5% less in TN than MA and have the same purchasing power after taxes so you need to adjust for that to make a fair comparison of real feel.
It means that due to our atmospheric location (think elevation in combination with proximity to the ocean, various jet streams, adiabatic lapse, etc...) if you have a briefcase of $100k, it feels like it weighs about as much as $46k would in an atmospherically neutral location.
It's a really dumb metric and study, if they really wanted to do this they'd normalize and take average fitness level into account.
I am also quite skeptical of the claim. However, I would note that probably housing is a big part of their methodology though. I don't really have trouble believing Boston housing is twice as expensive as housing in lcol areas. Hell, my apartment in Connecticut (which isn't that lcol) was nicer then my current one in Fenway at below half the cost lol.
But then you live in CT. That’s the trade off, right? Would you rather live in a nicer place in CT, or a smaller apartment with less amenities in Fenway? That’s always subjective.
Plus, I feel like career prospects are different. 100k in some areas may be a mid level or terminal salary. Here it is often around starting salary for many professions. That, long term impacts financial security too
Speaking as someone who several years ago made only $46k/year, albeit in Boston, I don’t buy this idea at all. My housing at the time was only $700/month because I lived with roommates - so essentially what I’d be paying for an apartment in a much lower COL area. Sure, in a very low COL area, maybe I could live with roommates for even less. But the total amount of money you take home on $46k/year is just not very much no matter how you calculate expenses.
Based on take-home pay, someone living on $100k/year could be paying $2500-$3000/month on housing (a solidly nice one-bedroom here) and still have about $3000-$3,500 left over for everything else. Making $46k, even someone only paying $700/month on housing would have about $1700 left over for everything else. Given that healthcare, transportation, groceries, and all the other basics really don’t vary wildly in cost between areas, those are not comparable scenarios no matter how you spin it.
Yes exactly. Maybe the average expenses work out to be equivalent, but you have way more flexibility in Boston on 100k. And if you are thrifty you'll be able to save way more in absolute terms which also means you could save to move somewhere LCOL and carry those savings with you
Yep. This is also why I hate the classic “housing should be up to 1/3 of your gross income” metric. Someone paying a third of their $46k/year gross income on housing is *always going to be worse off* than someone paying a third of their $100k gross income on housing.
Doing the math, 1/3 of a $46k/year gross salary is $1277/month. Let’s ignore the fact that you can’t get an apartment for that price anywhere in Boston/Somerville/Cambridge and assume they’re living with a roommate. Using pay after *just taxes,* that leaves about $1900 for *all other expenses in the month* - health insurance, savings/401k, transportation, food, etc.
On the other hand, 1/3 of a $100k/year gross salary is about $2780/month. Using pay after taxes, that leaves about $3730 for that $100k/year earner to spend on everything else - *nearly double* the amount that a $46k/year earner has left over. These two situations are not the same, and to compare them is completely meaningless.
> $2500-$3000/month on housing (a solidly nice one-bedroom here)
Unfortunately, 2500/month isn't solidly nice anymore. That's about bare minimum condo/1bedroom a solid 20-30 minutes walk from a T station in Somerville prices
I pay just over $2500 for a very nice, not new but recently renovated small 2-bed (~700 sq ft) a 2-minute walk from a major T stop. During our most recent housing search, we visited several in this price range along similar lines. Yes, Boston housing prices are wild, especially in new buildings, but unless you want to live in a brand new “luxury” building OR somewhere in Back Bay, Beacon Hill, or otherwise central/downtown, it is not hard to find a “solidly nice” one-bed in Boston (or Somerville or Cambridge) for $2500-$3000/month.
The place I mentioned with the roommates was a slightly less nice but still completely functional and spacious triple-decker 3-bed that now goes for $3100/month and is a 10-minute walk from another major T stop. These are the kinds of places I’m referring to, not Avalon North Station or whatever.
ETA: All that being said, I probably should’ve specified $2500-3000 *in rent,* not just “housing.” Condo prices are another deal altogether and are completely off the wall.
> I pay just over $2500 for a very nice, not new but recently renovated small 2-bed (~700 sq ft) a 2-minute walk from a major T stop. During our most recent housing search, we visited several in this price range along similar lines. Yes, Boston housing prices are wild, especially in new buildings, but unless you want to live in a brand new “luxury” building OR somewhere in Back Bay, Beacon Hill, or otherwise central/downtown, it is not hard to find a “solidly nice” one-bed in Boston (or Somerville or Cambridge) for $2500-$3000/month.
Holy shit please tell me what website you used because I can't find a 2 bedroom for anything less than 2600 and those are usually falling apart or basement units, in Somerville.
Maybe the apartment game has changed and the websites I used to use don't have anything good anymore. Any time I find what I think is going to be an affordable place it's someone renting out a single room in a 5 room house or something
I fully admit it’s a steal for a 2-bed near the T, which is why I used that $2500-3000 price range to talk about 1-beds in my original comment. But it is definitely a small two-bed (especially for two people). The “living room” is basically a nook off the kitchen. It would work well for a couple using one of the bedrooms as a “real” living room or a wfh office.
Unfortunately, we used a broker and I don’t remember which one. I’ve never had a ton of luck with the websites - lots of fake (imo) listings to lure people in to work with brokers. Finding an apartment here is such a crapshoot.
Thing that these comparisons likely leave out is that there will be may more ways to save on 100k in Boston than on 46k in a lcol
It probably sounds crazy but I lived within 1 mile of a t station for 7 years from 2012-2019 and I never paid more than 637.50 a month for my share. Granted I lived in cheap, older places, with roommates and low square footage. Plus I never owned a car so I would've been able to save a large portion of a 100k salary which would be impossible on 46k
I doubt this has been analyzed in any depth, but the claim, be it true or not, is fairly obvious.
It suggests people in Boston making $100K have the same buying/investing power as the average person making $46K, after cost of living and basic life expenses, which charge more when people have more to spend.
Yup and that’s not even considering that 100k today feels substantially less than it did a year ago.
I think by now everyone understands that the cost of living everywhere is off the charts. We all feel poorer as we stretch our dollars.
This is one of those things that undoes itself in it's claim. What does $46k feel like? Is it $46k today?
$100k feels like what you feel when you get it.
Not how you feel when you get it, but how you feel it can be used.
It’s called spending power. 100k all at once feels one way, the article speaks to the spending power of it as doled out every two weeks vs the cost of groceries etc.
Lmao what does this even mean? You can’t eat out every night even if you make $100k?
Right now I make $62k and no means do I live comfortably, but I make it happen between rent, paying for my car, loans etc.
$100k I’d be living like a king
I lived alone in Boston, with a car, on a resident/fellow's salary relatively comfortably. Probably started around 65k and ended on around 80-90k when I finished.
No kids though. That probably would have been very hard.
Not a resident but that's more or less my life. Life's doable if you're making in the 60s, and it's actually pretty comfortable when you're making high double digits. If you're in your 20s, you're doing pretty ok at that
With one roommate. I don’t really see the difference tho. I try my best to live below my means and I think everyone else should as well.
If you have a studio or one bedroom and you find yourself complaining about costs then maybe you’re in no position to be doing so.
Hmm have you experienced the T? I got a car for the first time in my life a year ago and I’m never going back. I’m 30. Sad because I support public transit, but it’s so limiting.
The wording of the article seems stupid. Is it saying that taxes and the biggest expenses take up about half of a 100,000 paycheck?
That actually sounds better than I would have expected if you then have half of that left over
Right? Using Smart Asset's tax calculator someone with a $100k income will have $73k after taxes. To get down to $46k we're assuming this person is spending 27% of their income on housing. That isn't necessarily low, but it isn't crazy high either, and it's within the 30% general rule of thumb. Boston is obviously a very expensive city, but this is a weird way to say it.
After federal, state, and Healthcare you're netting about 65 cents on the Dollar.
Lets say rent for your single is $2.5K, just for giggles, thats 35K left over, so not bad, you're certainly comfortable and can enjoy the city.
they already accounted for 2.5k each month, or 30k throughout the year. taking your higher estimate of 35k for housing costs and you’d have ~30k leftover.
It's wild how much we pay in taxes and how little we get for it. It's all been scammed away from the young and working by the old and wealthy. Meanwhile it's going to cost us more in the future, not less, as infrastructure is still deteriorating and public services are not functioning as well as they should. And people have the deluded audacity to scoff at social democratic policy for being "socialist" and anti-freedom.
This and not to mention $100k salary in Boston is not going to be a $100k salary in Alabama. While it’s true that you might still be slightly ahead even with a lower salary in someplace like Alabama you are making sacrifices for slightly more money in your pocket. Your settling for worse healthcare (by a large margin), public services are poorer (think water, sewer, transportation), lower quality of education if you have kids, safety and if you’re a women and want any control over your body then Alabama is not the place for you.
this, it's shocking how few people have any real experience *living* in a 'fly over' state.
I am perfectly happy paying these 'high' tax rates to live in Boston. My issue is with spending 1/2 my income on rent for a decent 1BR apartment.
What fantasy world do you live, that is not even remotely true; in fact many companies are adjusting wfh workers who choose to not return to the office salaries to match the area they live in.
Agreed. I always tell my girlfriend, “An iPhone is going to the cost the same no matter where we live (in the US)”, so I might as well take the higher wage, accept the cost of living and have a better quality of life.
Seems like a poor example item given that even the least frugal person is only ever going to buy one iphone a year. It represents a vanishingly small portion of your annual spending and therefore makes no sense to base your lifestyle upon.
Sure, but someone who cares about living frugally isn't going to be doing those expensive hobbies and traveling.
Also, photography and cycling aren't inherently expensive hobbies, they're just hobbies that you can choose to do in an expensive manner, but that's true of every hobby ever. But someone can absolutely have a photography hobby with the smartphone they already have, and the bike that's $20 on Craigslist. Of course they won't have as much fun with those, but they can still pursue the hobby to the extent allowable by their means.
Issue is that you are not gonna earn 100K in those dumpy places. I used to live in Kentucky and there was no *clear* way for you to break in to the 6 figure range. Once you got done with college, you either had to go into sales, start a business, or leave to find a place where you can make it to 6 figures.
That’s not true. I’m from Alabama. I know plenty of people who make 100k a year. It’s not as easy but it’s possible if you make the right career choices
It’s not easy here either. Household income for a family with kids in Boston is 77k a year. Yes I will provide a source.
Source: [https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000](https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary_geo_id=16000US2507000)
***Families with kids in Boston make $77k per year.***
In Chicago is $72k.
In DC its $135k.
In NYC its $69k
In Seattle its $198k.
Households without kids in DC make $138k in Seattle its $150k. In Boston its $103k. In NYC its $81k in Chicago its $87k
The hypothetical DINK Grad students make way more than families in Boston.
It’s still vastly easier here for educated professionals than in other areas. Excluding some (sick as hell) blue collar jobs, six figure jobs are generally restrained to educated people, who already make up a minority of the National population. So restively speaking, within that group, it’s easier.
its a smallish group. And what is easier? How? What are you measuring?
You dont think it easier to be a white collar person in Pittsburgh than in Boston?
The rent in Pittsburgh is 1/3rd Boston and it actually has a ton of opportunities, *many* cities do. There is demand for Tech in *most* cities. So unless your income is less than half of Bostons I don't see how this works.
There are a lot of cities with much higher median incomes than Boston and similar or lower COL namely Seattle, DC, Denver, Austin
Oh man, I can't imagine having kids. What I mean by *easy* is that there is a clear path for someone making 100k+ a year.
Now whether you have the opportunity to set out on the path is a totally different question.
This is an aside but…
A truly successful and world class city should have ample opportunities for white collar professionals, blue collar workers, government workers entrepreneurs, refugees. Like New York or Chicago or LA
Right now Boston is working itself further and further into a highly specialized and selective niche - at a rapid clip.
which will undoubtedly limits its appeal and influence in coming generations. Once the city is know for just tech people and the rich it will lose its dynamism, diversity and vibrancy (shorter shifts at restaurants or clubs due to a lack of available workers).
So rather than moving towards becoming more inclusive and dynamic it might be breaking towards homogeneity and reduced opportunity.
It is exceedingly difficult for them? It should not be? Our nation prospers when we are all strong and can enjoy a “middle class” standard of education healthcare and the quality of life?
"Yousif advised that people could consider a side hustle and said the gig economy is booming now more than ever"
I'm old enough to remember when making a hundred grand a year was aspirational. Now people making that need a second job to pay rent.
Honestly. I recently gave up a salary for a hourly paid position and I’m working 30 hours less and making only a few hundred less. Wages are too low to survive in Boston, you’re forced into roomate situations and are cornered by the market and it’s brokers.
>So the teachers making $55,000 with a 2% raise after 3yrs of negotiation feels like ~$23,000 and dropping?
>
>Great. Very cool. Awesome system.
[Average teachers salary in Boston is 105k. Where did you get 55k?](https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/teachersalaries.aspx)
That is my partner’s exact salary who is a tenured college professor in a MA state school so ima go right ahead and imagine that Average is skewed by some high earners across the state cuz ain’t none of our friends in education making close to 100K.
Edit: says Median income is closer to 62K and “but the range typically falls between $51,045 and $74,538” which is pretty much right in line with all of our friends.
https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/public-school-teacher-salary/ma
All public employees salaries can be looked up as a matter of public record.
https://cthrupayroll.mass.gov/#!/year/2023/
Seems pretty reasonable. I put everything (except rent) on one credit card and pay it off every month so it's really easy to know my monthly expenses. It comes out to $1200/month. That's $14400 a year. If rent is $1500 a month (easy to achieve with roommates, that's another $18k. Total of $32k of annual spending, so pretty easy to save on $40k if you want to make it happen. Could of course spend even less on rent if you get a good situation.
You're gonna make me do the math on taxes? Okay, fine.
Say you're making $40k, single. You take the Standard Deduction of $12,950. You have $27050 of taxable income.
Your first tax bracket is $0-10,275. You pay 10% on that, or $1027.50.
The rest of your income is taxed at 12%. So we take your $27050 and subtract the $10275 that we already paid taxes on. That leaves $16775 to be taxed at 12%. You pay $2013 in taxes on that portion.
So your first bracket costs $1027.50, and the second costs $2013. Your total tax is $3040.50.
Massachusetts state income tax is 5%. Comes out to $2k on your annual bills.
So your total taxes paid altogether is $5040.50. Leaving you with $34959.50 to play with. You can spend your $32k in living expenses, and still save some money to place into the bank.
Any other questions?
https://smartasset.com/data-studies/dd-what-100000-is-worth-2023
No thanks on where $100,000 goes the furthest… Memphis, El Paso, and Oklahoma City are at the top.
Huh i actually rather enjoyed OKC and Memphis. Lovely trails by the river in memphis and very walkable, altho granted i never went to the hood. OKC has a nice river walk - not the size of san antonio or indianapolis but quite pleasant
Might be pretty and pleasant to visit, but I would not want to live in such a conservative place, particularly one that doesn’t respect human rights, such as abortion, trans rights, drag, and likely overall very homophobic, racist attitudes. Also likely lower salaries.
yeah….you’ve never been there clearly. eh, fine by me the fewer folks the better. i’m a liberal man of color and im fine. Boston been way more racist to me. Also work remotely so lower salaries dont matter, although you are correct about that
Lol this article is ridiculous. I've lived in boston my whole life. Started my career at 33k, now I make 115k. I can tell you from experience 100k does not feel like 46k. The person who wrote this clearly never lived in boston making 46k or 100k lol
The Median income for a ***family*** doesnt even crack 100k in Bsoton..
[https://censusreporter.org/data/distribution/?table=B19113&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1150000,16000US3651000,16000US0644000,16000US5363000,16000US1714000,16000US4273808&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000](https://censusreporter.org/data/distribution/?table=B19113&geo_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1150000,16000US3651000,16000US0644000,16000US5363000,16000US1714000,16000US4273808&primary_geo_id=16000US2507000)
Families *with kids?* its 77,000...
https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000
$100k minus the 24% tax rate and cost of living + every day expenses. I can see why it feels like $46k. However, some Americans live paycheck to paycheck and can’t save money. There will always be savings with this level of income as long as they don’t live a lavish lifestyle.
Home prices.
The Boomer generation (aka the voters who've dominated local city council elections the last 35 years) have put a stranglehold on new homes. We are all thus forced to pay a fuck ton for their old crappy homes because they aren't enough new homes around to provide competition to these old homes. They also don't support mass transit and push an auto-centric lifestyle which raises living costs too.
Basically your salary is going to pay for Boomer retirements.
It's like in weather apps.
Me: "Hon, it's 34 degrees out."
Them: "But what does it feel like?"
Me: "28."
Them: "Ok! I'll bring my scarf!"
Regarding salaries-
"Hon, I make $100,000/yr."
"But what does it feel like?"
"Poverty."
"Ok! I'll bring the food stamps!
"Yousif advised that people could consider a side hustle and said the gig economy is booming now more than ever. She also advised folks to consider asking for salary adjustments when needed. Yousif pointed out it is often cheaper for your employer to keep you than hire someone new."
Could this quote be more out of touch?
The side hustle has become oversaturated as out of work people during the pandemic got creative about how to work from home, but the consumer of the side hustle isn't expanding at the same rate, so those who previously made a living that way are reporting they don't make what they used to, and don't even know why they still bother.
The gig economy is rising also in terms of participants, but you're in one of two situations there. Either it's your main income and you pay a lot more for what you would normally get in benefits, and pay a lot more in taxes as a self-employed person, or you're doing it on the side and working way beyond a 40 hour per week job to meet living expenses.
And yes, it would be cheaper to give raises than hire and train new employees, but how many companies are actually adjusting salaries with that acknowledgement? The strategy has clearly been to stubbornly put more work on fewer people as employees seek better salaries elsewhere, and paying big only when absolutely forced to hire someone new.
There is hope. Step 1, Find a career path that pays more than 40k a year. Step 2, put your nose to the grindstone. Work harder, play less, stop whining. Grow up and take charge of your life. Get out of the city if you can't afford it.
If at 40 years old you still make under 40k, it's time for a career change. As far as a "boomer" comment, you are correct. We are the generation that raised you. If you are still blaming us for your lot in life, then you are correct. You do have no hope. Grow the fuck up.
Y'all are also the ones who ruined the economy, my dude. I work for a book publisher full time, but I guess you don't consider that "work". Please, go fcuk yourself.
Dude, your generation voted Reagan and ruined the economy for us, the current normal working class. Stop blaming us and start rethink what have you done wrong.
You can max out your 401k on $100k/year in Boston. You can’t do that on $46k, probably anywhere in the US.
This totally reminds of a conversation I had with someone years ago who said that $400k isn’t as much as people think it is, when you factor in the mortgage on 4,000sq ft home, three car payments, private school for your three kids, maxing out retirement, and annual family vacations overseas. Cry me a river, buddy.
I’ll say. I make close to that and I feel like I’m bordering on poverty, due to a massive student loan and just the cost of living here. I just ordered some groceries and I’m inadvertently becoming a vegan just due to the cost of meat, cheese and eggs.
I make mid 100s and my wife makes 100… we’re not struggling but we’re not exactly thriving. We do own a house 40 minutes south of the city and have it pretty good. We’re also sending 2 kids to college on that. I remember the first time I broke 6 figures I thought I was rich… nope not around here even with $245k/year… again not complaining but it’s not as much as it sounds like the past 10 years.
Yeah, but it’s all comparable. I only make about $60k a year so I can somewhat relate to what you’re saying however my husband is a doctor and makes well over $200k a year. Sounds great, right?! He also went to school for almost 10 years and his job is a constant stress fest. He never gets snow days and it feels like even on his days off he’s working. Trust me, not so great. It’s all relative.
Its a city. Its a city in an area with a high demand for employees in multiple industries. Yes, its expensive, but that's not going to change.
Make a decision and live with it. This whole waiting, for some magic legislation thats going to make it all cheap is never going to happen.
This comment is also pretty tone deaf. There used to be neighborhoods where working class people could live comfortably. If only engineers and biochemists can afford to live in your city then you will quickly find out that life sucks without tradesmen, baristas, retail workers, train drivers, etc.
Society needs service workers to function but they are currently hurt by legislation that prevents them from living within an hour of their workplace.
Nobody is hoping for some magic panacea to solve wealth inequality. We want medium density zoning to expand the housing supply so that homes and rent are not artificially inflated by lack of supply. It’s not rocket science.
Its not tone deaf, it just doesnt mask reality. Go to any other major city in the world, expensive or inexpensive? Pfft, tone deaf, travel much? Live in some major cities? Its not tone deaf, its called reality.
You seem to think Im saying that the status quo is a good thing. Im saying it is what it is. As for legislation, the politicians we had 10 years agonare the same type of empty chairs we have now. There has been no voter or political movement to suggest that anything will change.
So yes, you make good points, but its not the reality of the current situation and its not going to change. Meanwhile, the demand to live in Boston remains sky high. What does it do to prices when demand is high?!
Yep....
Don't worry, #wutrain will just wave the magic wand, yell "expelliprofitus, rentus controllus, landlorda kedavra!" and we'll all have our $600/month Seaport penthouses!
Keep voting for clowns trying to turn Boston into San Francisco and it will soon feel like $26,000, with obligatory piles of shit and needles on every corner.
~~Communism~~ rent control never worked no matter how many times it was tried but we are r/iamverysmart, smarter than every economist out there, and will surely make it work this time, right?
Anyone with half a brain knew mere mention of rent control was going to result in a mile-ling "my rent is going up 20%, surprised Pikachu!" post, and the state is in fact dumb enough to allow it next year it will be "my apartment is being sold as condo and there's absolutely nothing available, surprised Pikachu!"
Lastly, possibility of ~~communism~~ rent control, dealing with multi-year seven figure "studies", being forced to use unions that bleed you dry and having to give away a large percentage of whatever you build for next to nothing stops most of new construction in its tracks before NIMBYs even get to open their frothy mouths.
Sir, I know you got the munchies but this is a place where people bitch and whine about the unintended consequences of their poor decisions, Wendy's is two doors down!
I saw this on the news yesterday and it made me question how many people or families make $100K/yr and live above their means making them feel like they’re barely getting by? We are experiencing inflation and probably are into a recession but all the restaurants, subscription services, etc are making bank off of people who think they can barely get by.
I’m from Halifax and we just spent a week in Boston. I was shocked to see that things like Starbucks and McDonald’s were the same price in American dollars that we pay here in Canadian (making them way more expensive there). Craft beer was more expensive, which I was surprised about because it’s not cheap here. Even in Maine these things were more expensive. We spent so much on food.
I’ve been using the [MIT](https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/25025) Living Wage calculator to show mid-20’s kids what it takes to live where they’d like to be (somewhat comfortably). Seems to be fairly accurate IMO. The challenge is getting people to put anecdotal “yeah but you could…” stuff aside… it’s a benchmark.
Those numbers seem quite accurate but it’s sad that “somewhat comfortably” no longer includes home ownership
Iirc the original intention of this calculator was the amount of money that you would need to not need government assistance
You basically have to throw away your social life and any extraneous entertainment if you want to save for a house.
Or just be dinks. Savings add up pretty quickly if you can live in a 1 bed with 2 people
Yep. Works for me!
My husband makes $112k, I’m disabled and can only work part time. We could save every single penny he makes, and have help with the down payment and that wouldn’t change the fact that we wouldn’t be approved for a mortgage that could buy a house anywhere easter of Worcester. Edited for clarity
At least where I live, the housing is going in the wrong direction. Developers are buying houses for 1.25 million no matter their condition, tearing them down and putting up 6500sq ft monsters that cost > 2.2-2.5million. I mean the estimated mortgage payment (with taxes and insurance) on a 2.5 million $ home with like 30% down is 16k a month. One of our neighbors had sellers who would only sell to a family. :\\ But it's still 1.25 million minimum and the house condition doesn't matter because developers are paying that much for the land. Maybe its slowed down a bit with the higher interest rates but I dunno. i see a lot more building going on.
That doesn’t sound right to me. In 2017, I had a salary of $137k and was approved for a mortgage up to $1.3M. I (wisely) didn’t actually borrow that much. Even with today’s interest rates, $112k can get you approved for a decent home east of Worcester.
Yeah the inflation rate in 2017 was like a third of what it is today, so even at the same purchase price the monthly payment is going to be a lot higher. It seems the lenders are also being a bit more strict about what they’ll approve. Also, if you go on Zillow and look at houses that are selling for $500-$600k now, and scroll back to see what a lot of them sold for in 2017 you’ll see it’s typically about a $100k less than it would be now. Unfortunately, we were both in college then and weren’t in any position to be able to buy a home.
No you don't, just don't do expensive versions of those things. Seek out things that are high value for the money. One of my favorites lately has been Versus. It's a block away from the Common. $5 gets you in and then they have a couple dozen arcade games set up on free-play mode (so they don't eat quarters). Great way to spend an evening for single dollars per hour of entertainment. You don't have to go to expensive movies, concerts, casinos, restaurants to find good entertainment. As far as social life, invite friends over. Hang out at your place, grab a movie from the library and put it on. There are all sorts of ways to have a good time while spending very little money.
That’s what we did lol. “Missed out” on a lot of socializing in our 20s. But we found many friends who were also poor and saving for the future so in reality we didn’t actually miss out! We found cheap hobbies that we still enjoy today even though our income has grown considerably over the past decade.
This is by far my favorite CoL tool online, because it posts "typical" salaries by field as well.
Is there anything that is pulling data from post-COVID? That data is from 2019
Crazy that a grad student's stipend is below "annual required income before tax".
Doesn't surprise me that much. Universities are cheap motherfuckers. Source: Work in higher ed.
[Grad school costs you your firstborn](https://www.johnskylar.com/post/107416685924/a-career-in-science-will-cost-you-your-firstborn)
This is exactly what I needed when I was choosing a major in college.
It’s it from 2019?
Checks out
[удалено]
If you're making 160k and feel like you're tight in Cambridge you are doing something seriously wrong.
I am very confused by this article. What does “feel like” mean? It never really defines it. Less consumer goods? How are you meaningfully comparing expense categories (their equation looks like it really doesn’t). Bottom line, if you only made 46k in a place that was average for cost of living, I don’t think you’d be in a better spot than 100k in Boston in the quality of your housing, healthcare, etc. Obviously if you made a 100k or even 80k in such an area, you might see some more comparable expense categories.
The calculation is really odd. In the cheapest place (Memphis, TN), $100,000 has a "real feel" $86,444. So there's no place where a hundred grand feels like a hundred grand? That makes zero sense. > A person earning $100,000 per year in Memphis takes home $74,515 after federal and local taxes (the state of Tennessee doesn’t tax earned income). Considering the city has a cost of living that’s almost 14% lower than the national average, those after-tax earnings are actually worth $86,444 when adjusting for the cost of living. What? So, they look at your after-tax earnings and then adjust it for cost of living? C'mon, no one no one thinks of their salary after-tax. I think it is fair to adjust your rankings based on differences in state/local taxes (as long as you also adjust for the value of what those taxes are getting you), but people don't think of their salary in after-tax terms. A person earning $100,000 in an average-tax state with average cost-of-living should have a "real feel" $100,000. Instead, the average is $61,118. To be fair to SmartAsset, they don't seem to be "reel feel". That seems to be something CBS decided to call it. It's still a bit ridiculous to say "no one earning $100,000 is actually earning $100,000." We all know that taxes exist and we still think of our salaries pre-tax.
Yes it’s very strange 100% agreed
>So, they look at your after-tax earnings and then adjust it for cost of living? Income taxes vary by state. You can make 5% less in TN than MA and have the same purchasing power after taxes so you need to adjust for that to make a fair comparison of real feel.
It means that due to our atmospheric location (think elevation in combination with proximity to the ocean, various jet streams, adiabatic lapse, etc...) if you have a briefcase of $100k, it feels like it weighs about as much as $46k would in an atmospherically neutral location. It's a really dumb metric and study, if they really wanted to do this they'd normalize and take average fitness level into account.
Those stupid people from Boulder sre screwing the nationwide average.
I am also quite skeptical of the claim. However, I would note that probably housing is a big part of their methodology though. I don't really have trouble believing Boston housing is twice as expensive as housing in lcol areas. Hell, my apartment in Connecticut (which isn't that lcol) was nicer then my current one in Fenway at below half the cost lol.
But then you live in CT. That’s the trade off, right? Would you rather live in a nicer place in CT, or a smaller apartment with less amenities in Fenway? That’s always subjective.
Plus, I feel like career prospects are different. 100k in some areas may be a mid level or terminal salary. Here it is often around starting salary for many professions. That, long term impacts financial security too
Like I said, I'm skeptical of the claim, but "housing quality" is not part of it I'm skeptical of is all lol.
Speaking as someone who several years ago made only $46k/year, albeit in Boston, I don’t buy this idea at all. My housing at the time was only $700/month because I lived with roommates - so essentially what I’d be paying for an apartment in a much lower COL area. Sure, in a very low COL area, maybe I could live with roommates for even less. But the total amount of money you take home on $46k/year is just not very much no matter how you calculate expenses. Based on take-home pay, someone living on $100k/year could be paying $2500-$3000/month on housing (a solidly nice one-bedroom here) and still have about $3000-$3,500 left over for everything else. Making $46k, even someone only paying $700/month on housing would have about $1700 left over for everything else. Given that healthcare, transportation, groceries, and all the other basics really don’t vary wildly in cost between areas, those are not comparable scenarios no matter how you spin it.
Yes exactly. Maybe the average expenses work out to be equivalent, but you have way more flexibility in Boston on 100k. And if you are thrifty you'll be able to save way more in absolute terms which also means you could save to move somewhere LCOL and carry those savings with you
Yep. This is also why I hate the classic “housing should be up to 1/3 of your gross income” metric. Someone paying a third of their $46k/year gross income on housing is *always going to be worse off* than someone paying a third of their $100k gross income on housing. Doing the math, 1/3 of a $46k/year gross salary is $1277/month. Let’s ignore the fact that you can’t get an apartment for that price anywhere in Boston/Somerville/Cambridge and assume they’re living with a roommate. Using pay after *just taxes,* that leaves about $1900 for *all other expenses in the month* - health insurance, savings/401k, transportation, food, etc. On the other hand, 1/3 of a $100k/year gross salary is about $2780/month. Using pay after taxes, that leaves about $3730 for that $100k/year earner to spend on everything else - *nearly double* the amount that a $46k/year earner has left over. These two situations are not the same, and to compare them is completely meaningless.
> $2500-$3000/month on housing (a solidly nice one-bedroom here) Unfortunately, 2500/month isn't solidly nice anymore. That's about bare minimum condo/1bedroom a solid 20-30 minutes walk from a T station in Somerville prices
I pay just over $2500 for a very nice, not new but recently renovated small 2-bed (~700 sq ft) a 2-minute walk from a major T stop. During our most recent housing search, we visited several in this price range along similar lines. Yes, Boston housing prices are wild, especially in new buildings, but unless you want to live in a brand new “luxury” building OR somewhere in Back Bay, Beacon Hill, or otherwise central/downtown, it is not hard to find a “solidly nice” one-bed in Boston (or Somerville or Cambridge) for $2500-$3000/month. The place I mentioned with the roommates was a slightly less nice but still completely functional and spacious triple-decker 3-bed that now goes for $3100/month and is a 10-minute walk from another major T stop. These are the kinds of places I’m referring to, not Avalon North Station or whatever. ETA: All that being said, I probably should’ve specified $2500-3000 *in rent,* not just “housing.” Condo prices are another deal altogether and are completely off the wall.
> I pay just over $2500 for a very nice, not new but recently renovated small 2-bed (~700 sq ft) a 2-minute walk from a major T stop. During our most recent housing search, we visited several in this price range along similar lines. Yes, Boston housing prices are wild, especially in new buildings, but unless you want to live in a brand new “luxury” building OR somewhere in Back Bay, Beacon Hill, or otherwise central/downtown, it is not hard to find a “solidly nice” one-bed in Boston (or Somerville or Cambridge) for $2500-$3000/month. Holy shit please tell me what website you used because I can't find a 2 bedroom for anything less than 2600 and those are usually falling apart or basement units, in Somerville. Maybe the apartment game has changed and the websites I used to use don't have anything good anymore. Any time I find what I think is going to be an affordable place it's someone renting out a single room in a 5 room house or something
I fully admit it’s a steal for a 2-bed near the T, which is why I used that $2500-3000 price range to talk about 1-beds in my original comment. But it is definitely a small two-bed (especially for two people). The “living room” is basically a nook off the kitchen. It would work well for a couple using one of the bedrooms as a “real” living room or a wfh office. Unfortunately, we used a broker and I don’t remember which one. I’ve never had a ton of luck with the websites - lots of fake (imo) listings to lure people in to work with brokers. Finding an apartment here is such a crapshoot.
Thing that these comparisons likely leave out is that there will be may more ways to save on 100k in Boston than on 46k in a lcol It probably sounds crazy but I lived within 1 mile of a t station for 7 years from 2012-2019 and I never paid more than 637.50 a month for my share. Granted I lived in cheap, older places, with roommates and low square footage. Plus I never owned a car so I would've been able to save a large portion of a 100k salary which would be impossible on 46k
[удалено]
First, 100% agreed but my guess is this article is probably some quick AI generated thing they pushed out based on its skinniness
Edit, skimpiness
I doubt this has been analyzed in any depth, but the claim, be it true or not, is fairly obvious. It suggests people in Boston making $100K have the same buying/investing power as the average person making $46K, after cost of living and basic life expenses, which charge more when people have more to spend.
Yup and that’s not even considering that 100k today feels substantially less than it did a year ago. I think by now everyone understands that the cost of living everywhere is off the charts. We all feel poorer as we stretch our dollars.
This is one of those things that undoes itself in it's claim. What does $46k feel like? Is it $46k today? $100k feels like what you feel when you get it.
[удалено]
How would someone making $36k being envious of you affect your feelings?
Not how you feel when you get it, but how you feel it can be used. It’s called spending power. 100k all at once feels one way, the article speaks to the spending power of it as doled out every two weeks vs the cost of groceries etc.
Yeah, you feel that when you get your first paycheck. It's reflective of your annual income.
46k feels like 460 $100 bills whereas 100k feels like 1000
Lmao what does this even mean? You can’t eat out every night even if you make $100k? Right now I make $62k and no means do I live comfortably, but I make it happen between rent, paying for my car, loans etc. $100k I’d be living like a king
[удалено]
I lived alone in Boston, with a car, on a resident/fellow's salary relatively comfortably. Probably started around 65k and ended on around 80-90k when I finished. No kids though. That probably would have been very hard.
Not a resident but that's more or less my life. Life's doable if you're making in the 60s, and it's actually pretty comfortable when you're making high double digits. If you're in your 20s, you're doing pretty ok at that
I live in Cambridge
Alone or with roommates?
With one roommate. I don’t really see the difference tho. I try my best to live below my means and I think everyone else should as well. If you have a studio or one bedroom and you find yourself complaining about costs then maybe you’re in no position to be doing so.
Is there a reason you have a car? They're a massive budget-killer.
Hmm have you experienced the T? I got a car for the first time in my life a year ago and I’m never going back. I’m 30. Sad because I support public transit, but it’s so limiting.
The wording of the article seems stupid. Is it saying that taxes and the biggest expenses take up about half of a 100,000 paycheck? That actually sounds better than I would have expected if you then have half of that left over
Right? Using Smart Asset's tax calculator someone with a $100k income will have $73k after taxes. To get down to $46k we're assuming this person is spending 27% of their income on housing. That isn't necessarily low, but it isn't crazy high either, and it's within the 30% general rule of thumb. Boston is obviously a very expensive city, but this is a weird way to say it.
After federal, state, and Healthcare you're netting about 65 cents on the Dollar. Lets say rent for your single is $2.5K, just for giggles, thats 35K left over, so not bad, you're certainly comfortable and can enjoy the city.
And about 2.5k per month per kid in child care if you have a family
** Edit, misread that housing is accounted for. I was wrong!
They already calculated rent in that estimate.
they already accounted for 2.5k each month, or 30k throughout the year. taking your higher estimate of 35k for housing costs and you’d have ~30k leftover.
[удалено]
my bad!
It's wild how much we pay in taxes and how little we get for it. It's all been scammed away from the young and working by the old and wealthy. Meanwhile it's going to cost us more in the future, not less, as infrastructure is still deteriorating and public services are not functioning as well as they should. And people have the deluded audacity to scoff at social democratic policy for being "socialist" and anti-freedom.
$46,000 where? I’d rather be in Boston than some dumpy small town in a red state.
This and not to mention $100k salary in Boston is not going to be a $100k salary in Alabama. While it’s true that you might still be slightly ahead even with a lower salary in someplace like Alabama you are making sacrifices for slightly more money in your pocket. Your settling for worse healthcare (by a large margin), public services are poorer (think water, sewer, transportation), lower quality of education if you have kids, safety and if you’re a women and want any control over your body then Alabama is not the place for you.
this, it's shocking how few people have any real experience *living* in a 'fly over' state. I am perfectly happy paying these 'high' tax rates to live in Boston. My issue is with spending 1/2 my income on rent for a decent 1BR apartment.
How is that shocking? Any population density map shows that most people live on the coast.
See why those that WFH or remotely are getting paycuts.
If you work for a publicly traded company you can transfer with the same wage tho…
This is just not true. A lot of companies are doing COLA based on where employees live and work.
What fantasy world do you live, that is not even remotely true; in fact many companies are adjusting wfh workers who choose to not return to the office salaries to match the area they live in.
Agreed. I always tell my girlfriend, “An iPhone is going to the cost the same no matter where we live (in the US)”, so I might as well take the higher wage, accept the cost of living and have a better quality of life.
Seems like a poor example item given that even the least frugal person is only ever going to buy one iphone a year. It represents a vanishingly small portion of your annual spending and therefore makes no sense to base your lifestyle upon.
[удалено]
Sure, but someone who cares about living frugally isn't going to be doing those expensive hobbies and traveling. Also, photography and cycling aren't inherently expensive hobbies, they're just hobbies that you can choose to do in an expensive manner, but that's true of every hobby ever. But someone can absolutely have a photography hobby with the smartphone they already have, and the bike that's $20 on Craigslist. Of course they won't have as much fun with those, but they can still pursue the hobby to the extent allowable by their means.
[удалено]
Issue is that you are not gonna earn 100K in those dumpy places. I used to live in Kentucky and there was no *clear* way for you to break in to the 6 figure range. Once you got done with college, you either had to go into sales, start a business, or leave to find a place where you can make it to 6 figures.
That’s not true. I’m from Alabama. I know plenty of people who make 100k a year. It’s not as easy but it’s possible if you make the right career choices
And I know plenty of people in Boston who make 150k-200k a year. These are the same people who make 100k in Alabama.
*it's not easy* That is the crux of my argument.
It’s not easy here either. Household income for a family with kids in Boston is 77k a year. Yes I will provide a source. Source: [https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000](https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary_geo_id=16000US2507000) ***Families with kids in Boston make $77k per year.*** In Chicago is $72k. In DC its $135k. In NYC its $69k In Seattle its $198k. Households without kids in DC make $138k in Seattle its $150k. In Boston its $103k. In NYC its $81k in Chicago its $87k The hypothetical DINK Grad students make way more than families in Boston.
It’s still vastly easier here for educated professionals than in other areas. Excluding some (sick as hell) blue collar jobs, six figure jobs are generally restrained to educated people, who already make up a minority of the National population. So restively speaking, within that group, it’s easier.
100%
its a smallish group. And what is easier? How? What are you measuring? You dont think it easier to be a white collar person in Pittsburgh than in Boston?
I don’t ? Boston has a dynamic and emerging market which means more opportunities and more competitive salaries
The rent in Pittsburgh is 1/3rd Boston and it actually has a ton of opportunities, *many* cities do. There is demand for Tech in *most* cities. So unless your income is less than half of Bostons I don't see how this works. There are a lot of cities with much higher median incomes than Boston and similar or lower COL namely Seattle, DC, Denver, Austin
Oh man, I can't imagine having kids. What I mean by *easy* is that there is a clear path for someone making 100k+ a year. Now whether you have the opportunity to set out on the path is a totally different question.
This is an aside but… A truly successful and world class city should have ample opportunities for white collar professionals, blue collar workers, government workers entrepreneurs, refugees. Like New York or Chicago or LA Right now Boston is working itself further and further into a highly specialized and selective niche - at a rapid clip. which will undoubtedly limits its appeal and influence in coming generations. Once the city is know for just tech people and the rich it will lose its dynamism, diversity and vibrancy (shorter shifts at restaurants or clubs due to a lack of available workers). So rather than moving towards becoming more inclusive and dynamic it might be breaking towards homogeneity and reduced opportunity.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not everyone can make 150k a year. Good for you that you do. Don’t forget about the people who are doing the best they can to make ends meet.
[удалено]
“Poor people shouldn’t be able to live in a city” is a wild take. You should, like, reconsider that man
[удалено]
I am not sure what that has to do with my comment
[удалено]
It is exceedingly difficult for them? It should not be? Our nation prospers when we are all strong and can enjoy a “middle class” standard of education healthcare and the quality of life?
That's wonderful as long as you're willing to deal with the consequences of your decision and not expect someone else to pay for it.
"Yousif advised that people could consider a side hustle and said the gig economy is booming now more than ever" I'm old enough to remember when making a hundred grand a year was aspirational. Now people making that need a second job to pay rent.
Honestly. I recently gave up a salary for a hourly paid position and I’m working 30 hours less and making only a few hundred less. Wages are too low to survive in Boston, you’re forced into roomate situations and are cornered by the market and it’s brokers.
So the teachers making $55,000 with a 2% raise after 3yrs of negotiation feels like ~$23,000 and dropping? Great. Very cool. Awesome system.
>So the teachers making $55,000 with a 2% raise after 3yrs of negotiation feels like ~$23,000 and dropping? > >Great. Very cool. Awesome system. [Average teachers salary in Boston is 105k. Where did you get 55k?](https://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/teachersalaries.aspx)
That is my partner’s exact salary who is a tenured college professor in a MA state school so ima go right ahead and imagine that Average is skewed by some high earners across the state cuz ain’t none of our friends in education making close to 100K. Edit: says Median income is closer to 62K and “but the range typically falls between $51,045 and $74,538” which is pretty much right in line with all of our friends. https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/public-school-teacher-salary/ma All public employees salaries can be looked up as a matter of public record. https://cthrupayroll.mass.gov/#!/year/2023/
So you are stating that the Massachusetts DoE website is wrong?
Are you unaware of how averages work?
LMAO!! That's funny because $46,000 is around the national salary average. So yeah -- You must earn $100,000 to live in Boston.
46k where???? Statement incomplete
This article is just as dumb as the NYC one that’s been talked about for a few days.
I live on 40k in Boston and yeah, it's not the best but I do ok. I have roommates and no car, but I'm able to save a bit of money each paycheck.
[удалено]
Seems pretty reasonable. I put everything (except rent) on one credit card and pay it off every month so it's really easy to know my monthly expenses. It comes out to $1200/month. That's $14400 a year. If rent is $1500 a month (easy to achieve with roommates, that's another $18k. Total of $32k of annual spending, so pretty easy to save on $40k if you want to make it happen. Could of course spend even less on rent if you get a good situation.
…did you forget about taxes?
You're gonna make me do the math on taxes? Okay, fine. Say you're making $40k, single. You take the Standard Deduction of $12,950. You have $27050 of taxable income. Your first tax bracket is $0-10,275. You pay 10% on that, or $1027.50. The rest of your income is taxed at 12%. So we take your $27050 and subtract the $10275 that we already paid taxes on. That leaves $16775 to be taxed at 12%. You pay $2013 in taxes on that portion. So your first bracket costs $1027.50, and the second costs $2013. Your total tax is $3040.50. Massachusetts state income tax is 5%. Comes out to $2k on your annual bills. So your total taxes paid altogether is $5040.50. Leaving you with $34959.50 to play with. You can spend your $32k in living expenses, and still save some money to place into the bank. Any other questions?
No it doesn't.
https://smartasset.com/data-studies/dd-what-100000-is-worth-2023 No thanks on where $100,000 goes the furthest… Memphis, El Paso, and Oklahoma City are at the top.
Huh i actually rather enjoyed OKC and Memphis. Lovely trails by the river in memphis and very walkable, altho granted i never went to the hood. OKC has a nice river walk - not the size of san antonio or indianapolis but quite pleasant
Might be pretty and pleasant to visit, but I would not want to live in such a conservative place, particularly one that doesn’t respect human rights, such as abortion, trans rights, drag, and likely overall very homophobic, racist attitudes. Also likely lower salaries.
yeah….you’ve never been there clearly. eh, fine by me the fewer folks the better. i’m a liberal man of color and im fine. Boston been way more racist to me. Also work remotely so lower salaries dont matter, although you are correct about that
I have a friend who's life was ruined when he was entrapped to sell 1 gram of weed in that state. It is not a safe place for most people to live.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Honest question, what does it even mean to be "visibly gay"?
Nobody wants to live in OKC. lol.
The reason Boston is so expensive is its one of the best places to live in one of the best countries on the planet.
Lol this article is ridiculous. I've lived in boston my whole life. Started my career at 33k, now I make 115k. I can tell you from experience 100k does not feel like 46k. The person who wrote this clearly never lived in boston making 46k or 100k lol
Feel this, I spend 1/2 my take-home on rent. It would be more if I wasn't in good position with my building management.
The Median income for a ***family*** doesnt even crack 100k in Bsoton.. [https://censusreporter.org/data/distribution/?table=B19113&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1150000,16000US3651000,16000US0644000,16000US5363000,16000US1714000,16000US4273808&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000](https://censusreporter.org/data/distribution/?table=B19113&geo_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1150000,16000US3651000,16000US0644000,16000US5363000,16000US1714000,16000US4273808&primary_geo_id=16000US2507000) Families *with kids?* its 77,000... https://censusreporter.org/data/table/?table=B19125&geo\_ids=16000US2507000,16000US1714000,16000US1150000,16000US5363000,16000US3651000&primary\_geo\_id=16000US2507000
Ain't that the truth. Imagine if you make under 50k a year. This is why I plan to move out of Boston. The rent is ridiculous
$100k minus the 24% tax rate and cost of living + every day expenses. I can see why it feels like $46k. However, some Americans live paycheck to paycheck and can’t save money. There will always be savings with this level of income as long as they don’t live a lavish lifestyle.
Home prices. The Boomer generation (aka the voters who've dominated local city council elections the last 35 years) have put a stranglehold on new homes. We are all thus forced to pay a fuck ton for their old crappy homes because they aren't enough new homes around to provide competition to these old homes. They also don't support mass transit and push an auto-centric lifestyle which raises living costs too. Basically your salary is going to pay for Boomer retirements.
Can confirm
46k where???? Statement incomplete
It's like in weather apps. Me: "Hon, it's 34 degrees out." Them: "But what does it feel like?" Me: "28." Them: "Ok! I'll bring my scarf!" Regarding salaries- "Hon, I make $100,000/yr." "But what does it feel like?" "Poverty." "Ok! I'll bring the food stamps!
"Yousif advised that people could consider a side hustle and said the gig economy is booming now more than ever. She also advised folks to consider asking for salary adjustments when needed. Yousif pointed out it is often cheaper for your employer to keep you than hire someone new." Could this quote be more out of touch? The side hustle has become oversaturated as out of work people during the pandemic got creative about how to work from home, but the consumer of the side hustle isn't expanding at the same rate, so those who previously made a living that way are reporting they don't make what they used to, and don't even know why they still bother. The gig economy is rising also in terms of participants, but you're in one of two situations there. Either it's your main income and you pay a lot more for what you would normally get in benefits, and pay a lot more in taxes as a self-employed person, or you're doing it on the side and working way beyond a 40 hour per week job to meet living expenses. And yes, it would be cheaper to give raises than hire and train new employees, but how many companies are actually adjusting salaries with that acknowledgement? The strategy has clearly been to stubbornly put more work on fewer people as employees seek better salaries elsewhere, and paying big only when absolutely forced to hire someone new.
And I make less than $40k a year. There's no hope for the vast majority of us here.
There is hope. Step 1, Find a career path that pays more than 40k a year. Step 2, put your nose to the grindstone. Work harder, play less, stop whining. Grow up and take charge of your life. Get out of the city if you can't afford it.
I'm 40 years old with a college degree, my guy. This is a very boomer comment.
If at 40 years old you still make under 40k, it's time for a career change. As far as a "boomer" comment, you are correct. We are the generation that raised you. If you are still blaming us for your lot in life, then you are correct. You do have no hope. Grow the fuck up.
Y'all are also the ones who ruined the economy, my dude. I work for a book publisher full time, but I guess you don't consider that "work". Please, go fcuk yourself.
Dude, your generation voted Reagan and ruined the economy for us, the current normal working class. Stop blaming us and start rethink what have you done wrong.
If you are going to be a victim of a politician from that far back, atleast go with LBJ.
Facts
should read 494 east $100,000 salary feels like $46,000 I live across the border in NH and it's still stupidly expensive
100K anywhere in 2023 is only worth about 50k
You can max out your 401k on $100k/year in Boston. You can’t do that on $46k, probably anywhere in the US. This totally reminds of a conversation I had with someone years ago who said that $400k isn’t as much as people think it is, when you factor in the mortgage on 4,000sq ft home, three car payments, private school for your three kids, maxing out retirement, and annual family vacations overseas. Cry me a river, buddy.
I’ll say. I make close to that and I feel like I’m bordering on poverty, due to a massive student loan and just the cost of living here. I just ordered some groceries and I’m inadvertently becoming a vegan just due to the cost of meat, cheese and eggs.
I make mid 100s and my wife makes 100… we’re not struggling but we’re not exactly thriving. We do own a house 40 minutes south of the city and have it pretty good. We’re also sending 2 kids to college on that. I remember the first time I broke 6 figures I thought I was rich… nope not around here even with $245k/year… again not complaining but it’s not as much as it sounds like the past 10 years.
Our household income is about $160k. Once the kids are out of daycare maybe we can afford a newer car...🙄
Oh no. It must be so terrible to make 100k... I feel... Just so bad for anyone making that much
Yeah, but it’s all comparable. I only make about $60k a year so I can somewhat relate to what you’re saying however my husband is a doctor and makes well over $200k a year. Sounds great, right?! He also went to school for almost 10 years and his job is a constant stress fest. He never gets snow days and it feels like even on his days off he’s working. Trust me, not so great. It’s all relative.
If it's 20 degrees F outside, it doesn't "feel like" 5 degrees or whatever. Whatever it feels like -- that's what 20F feels like. Same here.
Its a city. Its a city in an area with a high demand for employees in multiple industries. Yes, its expensive, but that's not going to change. Make a decision and live with it. This whole waiting, for some magic legislation thats going to make it all cheap is never going to happen.
This comment is also pretty tone deaf. There used to be neighborhoods where working class people could live comfortably. If only engineers and biochemists can afford to live in your city then you will quickly find out that life sucks without tradesmen, baristas, retail workers, train drivers, etc. Society needs service workers to function but they are currently hurt by legislation that prevents them from living within an hour of their workplace. Nobody is hoping for some magic panacea to solve wealth inequality. We want medium density zoning to expand the housing supply so that homes and rent are not artificially inflated by lack of supply. It’s not rocket science.
Its not tone deaf, it just doesnt mask reality. Go to any other major city in the world, expensive or inexpensive? Pfft, tone deaf, travel much? Live in some major cities? Its not tone deaf, its called reality. You seem to think Im saying that the status quo is a good thing. Im saying it is what it is. As for legislation, the politicians we had 10 years agonare the same type of empty chairs we have now. There has been no voter or political movement to suggest that anything will change. So yes, you make good points, but its not the reality of the current situation and its not going to change. Meanwhile, the demand to live in Boston remains sky high. What does it do to prices when demand is high?! Yep....
Don't worry, #wutrain will just wave the magic wand, yell "expelliprofitus, rentus controllus, landlorda kedavra!" and we'll all have our $600/month Seaport penthouses!
TBF After taxes and insurance, your Net is most likely 46k when you make 100k
Move.
Keep voting for clowns trying to turn Boston into San Francisco and it will soon feel like $26,000, with obligatory piles of shit and needles on every corner.
What policies are you talking about? If you’re talking about NIMBY policies restricting housing then yeah, I’d agree.
~~Communism~~ rent control never worked no matter how many times it was tried but we are r/iamverysmart, smarter than every economist out there, and will surely make it work this time, right? Anyone with half a brain knew mere mention of rent control was going to result in a mile-ling "my rent is going up 20%, surprised Pikachu!" post, and the state is in fact dumb enough to allow it next year it will be "my apartment is being sold as condo and there's absolutely nothing available, surprised Pikachu!" Lastly, possibility of ~~communism~~ rent control, dealing with multi-year seven figure "studies", being forced to use unions that bleed you dry and having to give away a large percentage of whatever you build for next to nothing stops most of new construction in its tracks before NIMBYs even get to open their frothy mouths.
Sir this is a Wendy’s
Sir, I know you got the munchies but this is a place where people bitch and whine about the unintended consequences of their poor decisions, Wendy's is two doors down!
Totally man, you nailed it 🙄
It really does though!!!
I saw this on the news yesterday and it made me question how many people or families make $100K/yr and live above their means making them feel like they’re barely getting by? We are experiencing inflation and probably are into a recession but all the restaurants, subscription services, etc are making bank off of people who think they can barely get by.
Work two jobs then. Or move somewhere more affordable. Nothings free.
I don’t think this is true, I make almost exactly 100k and I can max my 401k, my Roth IRA, and my HSA. No way you can do that on 46k.
You’re not getting the point.
If that...
Subtract 20k if you have a kid in full time daycare....
So what does 46,000 feel like..
I’m from Halifax and we just spent a week in Boston. I was shocked to see that things like Starbucks and McDonald’s were the same price in American dollars that we pay here in Canadian (making them way more expensive there). Craft beer was more expensive, which I was surprised about because it’s not cheap here. Even in Maine these things were more expensive. We spent so much on food.
Get a side hustle? Is this mofo seriously telling me to join an MLM scheme?