3 ms·
I do find it odd that this writer and many think you have to have 200k incomes to be rich. That is a lie. If you are in the high eighties, let alone over one hu
by Shivetya 9y ago
I do find it odd that this writer and many think you have to have 200k incomes to be rich. That is a lie. If you are in the high eighties, let alone over one hundred thousand, you are doing damn well and rich by most accounts.
Gated communities evolved out of limited access high rises. there is no real difference other than one has a lawn. it is the same idea. zoning laws are just horrid in most cities and they tend to be disguised with well meaning names to keep people from challenging them; first trying protecting of historical interest, then trying the environment foil, and finally insufficient infrastructure purposefully kept that way.
For the majority of us here we are rich. Politicians are the real one percent, did any party have someone running for President who wasn't very well off? Actually that would have been two of the Republican candidates had 100k or lower, even the left's favorite is worth near a million and has three homes.
- bryanlarsen 9y agoYup, 80-100K is double the median, and 4X poor. It sure doesn't feel like very much when you're struggling to pay bills, imagine trying to live on half or a quarter of that...
- vacri 9y agoThe author didn't pluck a number out of the air as a cutoff point. $200k was mentioned only in passing, as it's the average wage of the top quintile.
- justin66 9y ago> I do find it odd that this writer and many think you have to have 200k incomes to be rich. That is a lie. If you are in the high eighties, let alone over one hundred thousand, you are doing damn well and rich by most accounts. If you're in the high eighties, your quality of life will vary tremendously depending on where you live (and the concomitant cost of living variations) and how much you paid your education.