5 ms·

You can't reasonably claim that an engineer paying 50% of their income after tax for rent is similar to someone making minimum wage and paying 50% of their inco

by foota 10y ago

You can't reasonably claim that an engineer paying 50% of their income after tax for rent is similar to someone making minimum wage and paying 50% of their income to rent.

ceejayoz 10y ago
High cost of living rarely limits itself to just housing. They're surely better-off than a minimum wage earner, but I'm not sure that's a particularly important or useful point.
- serge2k 10y ago
  Isn't it though? Affordability has a different meaning for different people, and everyone has to make tradeoffs. Is $3800 for one bedroom absurd? Yes, but I'm not going to feel sorry for the guy making 160k a year who can afford the apartment and a nice lifestyle. Especially when someone making less got forced out of the city because of the ridiculous rent.
falcolas 10y ago
It's not the same, but fiscally they're not really in that much of a better place. Too much going to rent, and not enough towards other living expenses, savings, and entertainment. In either case, when the job is lost, they are both going to run out of money at about the same time. Our local HRDC will flat out decline any form of housing assistance to anyone attempting to rent an apartment for over 30% their income.
- foota 10y ago
  The problem is that the other things shouldn't be measured as a percentage. If someone makes 150k and spends 70k of that on housing, they still have 80k left for other expenses. If someone is making 30k and puts 15k towards housing they only have 15k left for other expenses. So the person making 150k has 5 times as much left for other expenses.
  - falcolas 10y ago
    If we make the assumption that they follow the generally accepted best practice for managing money, and put aside 20% of their income for a year, both people are homeless after 2 months. Spending 50% of your income on a house is simply financially irresponsible, no matter your income. That's at a minimum 20% of your income that is going into a black hole that could be going into savings or investments.
    - foota 10y ago
      How do you figure they'd be homeless in 2 months? That doesn't seem to follow.

by foota 10y ago

You can't reasonably claim that an engineer paying 50% of their income after tax for rent is similar to someone making minimum wage and paying 50% of their income to rent.

ceejayoz 10y ago

High cost of living rarely limits itself to just housing. They're surely better-off than a minimum wage earner, but I'm not sure that's a particularly important or useful point.

serge2k 10y ago
Isn't it though? Affordability has a different meaning for different people, and everyone has to make tradeoffs. Is $3800 for one bedroom absurd? Yes, but I'm not going to feel sorry for the guy making 160k a year who can afford the apartment and a nice lifestyle. Especially when someone making less got forced out of the city because of the ridiculous rent.

falcolas 10y ago

It's not the same, but fiscally they're not really in that much of a better place. Too much going to rent, and not enough towards other living expenses, savings, and entertainment. In either case, when the job is lost, they are both going to run out of money at about the same time. Our local HRDC will flat out decline any form of housing assistance to anyone attempting to rent an apartment for over 30% their income.

foota 10y ago
The problem is that the other things shouldn't be measured as a percentage. If someone makes 150k and spends 70k of that on housing, they still have 80k left for other expenses. If someone is making 30k and puts 15k towards housing they only have 15k left for other expenses. So the person making 150k has 5 times as much left for other expenses.
- falcolas 10y ago
  If we make the assumption that they follow the generally accepted best practice for managing money, and put aside 20% of their income for a year, both people are homeless after 2 months. Spending 50% of your income on a house is simply financially irresponsible, no matter your income. That's at a minimum 20% of your income that is going into a black hole that could be going into savings or investments.
  - foota 10y ago
    How do you figure they'd be homeless in 2 months? That doesn't seem to follow.