3 ms·

The atlas incorporates information from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Living Wage Calculator [0], which estimates living wages by county based on

by adolph 4y ago

The atlas incorporates information from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Living Wage Calculator [0], which estimates living wages by county based on household size and local costs including food, housing, transportation, childcare, medical care and taxes. For example, the estimated living wage for a single adult with one child in New York County (Manhattan) is $43.18, compared with $33.75 in Onondaga County, which includes Syracuse. That data is paired with individual-level data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample [1], which includes self-reported wages. The researchers matched individuals with their estimated living wage based on their locations, occupations and household characteristics, adjusting all wages for inflation to 2022 dollars. 0. https://livingwage.mit.edu/ https://livingwage.mit.edu/ 1. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/microdata.html https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/microdata.html

lotsofpulp 4y ago
Notably, the MIT living wage incorporates zero savings or cushions. It is a “minimum subsistence wage”, as written below. I would not want to have kids or dependants at the MIT living wage. https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide-Technical-Documentation-2022-05-10.pdf https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide... > The living wage model is a ‘step up’ from poverty as measured by the poverty thresholds but it is a small ‘step up’, one that accounts for only the basic needs of a family. The living wage model does not allow for what many consider the basic necessities enjoyed by many Americans. It does not budget funds for pre-prepared meals or those eaten in restaurants. It does not include money for unpaid vacations or holidays. Nor does it provide money income to cover unexpected expenses such as a sudden illness, a major car repair, or the purchase of a household appliance such as a refrigerator. Lastly, it does not provide a financial means for planning for the future through savings and investment or for the purchase of capital assets (e.g. provisions for retirement or home purchases). The living wage is the basic income standard that, if met, draws a very fine line between the financial independence of the working poor and the need to seek out public assistance or suffer consistent and severe housing and food insecurity. In light of this fact, the living wage is perhaps better defined as a minimum subsistence wage for persons living in the United States.
engineer_22 4y ago
I work in Onondaga County. The MHI here is very low, according to the Fed it's $65,500 [1]. But that's household income, which includes families with two earners. So the median income in this county is lower than the livable wage MIT calculates for an individual ($33.75 x 2080 = $70,200). These two things don't seem to line up. We should expect MHI to be greater than living wage - or else we are expecting the median household to be falling behind. Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MHINY36067A052NCEN https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MHINY36067A052NCEN
- runako 4y ago
  > that's household income, which includes families with two earners If you have a "very low" median income that includes families with two earners, then likely there are many single-earner households in that county that are doing far worse. Many will fall below the living wage threshold. > Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? Also, yes.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  >Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? I thought this was the structural change undergirding the changes in US society for many decades now.
- ctoth 4y ago
  Rather than asking, why not do the math yourself? Since you want to talk about medians, what is the median take-home pay? What is the median rent? What percent of pay should rent be? What is it actually?
geraldwhen 4y ago
These numbers are nonsense. No one who isn’t upper middle class is paying $12,000 a year for child care where I live per child. A parent would stop working to remove that cost, which would also potentially reduce housing and food costs by way of a dedicated house cook and maintenance person. We have many family friends via the kids where the wife stays home largely to reduce costs and handle the house and kids.
- dionidium 4y ago
  Yes, of course what's really happening is that people are relying on off-the-books childcare via informal networks that don't get included in these numbers. We spent $14,782 on child care for one child in 2022, but it's hard not to notice that the parking lot during pickup is full of Audis and BMWs. Wherever poor people are sending their kids, it's not there.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  > A parent would stop working to remove that cost, which would also potentially reduce housing and food costs by way of a dedicated house cook and maintenance person. What? I know of no homeowner in the US, even earning multiple hundred thousands per year, with a dedicated maintenance person or a house cook. Even working two jobs, most couples can manage to cook meals and take care of the house.
  - geraldwhen 4y ago
    The stay at home parent fills that role.
adolph 4y ago
The living wage calculator is pretty interesting. For example: 1 adult, 0 kids: $22.71 1 adult, 3 kids: $72.20 2 adults, 1 working, 0 kids: $32.13 2 adults, 1 working, 3 kids: $48.98 2 adults, 2 working, 0 kids: $15.53 2 adults, 2 working, 3 kids: $36.47 Considering that the gross wages of two working adults are 2x base wage, or $72.94. This values stay at home at $23.96, the difference between 2a2w3k of $72.94 and 2a1w3k of $48.98. This suggests an efficiency to performing as an home parent of $12.51 or 34% over wages of $36.47! That is a significant cost in order to obtain the benefits of two income such as income source diversity.
- notch656c 4y ago
  A minimum living wage should assume roomates with maybe 300 square feet per person. I lived on a fishing vessel with far less than that and we survived fine.
  - adolph 4y ago
    The advantage of multiperson abodes is that some amount of that min 300 sqft can be shared since a single body can occupy a maximum of lets say 2x6=12sqft at any point in time. If one assumes 100 sqft of storage for coverings, foodstock and books and another 100 for wet waste and cleaning activities, then that leaves 300-100-100-12=88sqft of sharable space. If two people can share the wet activity space then they effectively get 50sqft back and another 6 if they use differential shifts for laying down or have a relationship where one may lay on top of the other. On the whole I think it is important to understand the height dimension of space required for a person. This also would address the amount of various gasses needed in circulation since not all 300sqft can be occupied with books--the human would not be able to breathe in order to continue reading.

by adolph 4y ago

lotsofpulp 4y ago

Notably, the MIT living wage incorporates zero savings or cushions. It is a “minimum subsistence wage”, as written below. I would not want to have kids or dependants at the MIT living wage. https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide-Technical-Documentation-2022-05-10.pdf https://livingwage.mit.edu/resources/Living-Wage-Users-Guide... > The living wage model is a ‘step up’ from poverty as measured by the poverty thresholds but it is a small ‘step up’, one that accounts for only the basic needs of a family. The living wage model does not allow for what many consider the basic necessities enjoyed by many Americans. It does not budget funds for pre-prepared meals or those eaten in restaurants. It does not include money for unpaid vacations or holidays. Nor does it provide money income to cover unexpected expenses such as a sudden illness, a major car repair, or the purchase of a household appliance such as a refrigerator. Lastly, it does not provide a financial means for planning for the future through savings and investment or for the purchase of capital assets (e.g. provisions for retirement or home purchases). The living wage is the basic income standard that, if met, draws a very fine line between the financial independence of the working poor and the need to seek out public assistance or suffer consistent and severe housing and food insecurity. In light of this fact, the living wage is perhaps better defined as a minimum subsistence wage for persons living in the United States.

engineer_22 4y ago

I work in Onondaga County. The MHI here is very low, according to the Fed it's $65,500 [1]. But that's household income, which includes families with two earners. So the median income in this county is lower than the livable wage MIT calculates for an individual ($33.75 x 2080 = $70,200). These two things don't seem to line up. We should expect MHI to be greater than living wage - or else we are expecting the median household to be falling behind. Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MHINY36067A052NCEN https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MHINY36067A052NCEN

runako 4y ago
> that's household income, which includes families with two earners If you have a "very low" median income that includes families with two earners, then likely there are many single-earner households in that county that are doing far worse. Many will fall below the living wage threshold. > Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? Also, yes.
lotsofpulp 4y ago
>Should we conclude that median households are falling behind? I thought this was the structural change undergirding the changes in US society for many decades now.
ctoth 4y ago
Rather than asking, why not do the math yourself? Since you want to talk about medians, what is the median take-home pay? What is the median rent? What percent of pay should rent be? What is it actually?

geraldwhen 4y ago

These numbers are nonsense. No one who isn’t upper middle class is paying $12,000 a year for child care where I live per child. A parent would stop working to remove that cost, which would also potentially reduce housing and food costs by way of a dedicated house cook and maintenance person. We have many family friends via the kids where the wife stays home largely to reduce costs and handle the house and kids.

dionidium 4y ago
Yes, of course what's really happening is that people are relying on off-the-books childcare via informal networks that don't get included in these numbers. We spent $14,782 on child care for one child in 2022, but it's hard not to notice that the parking lot during pickup is full of Audis and BMWs. Wherever poor people are sending their kids, it's not there.
lotsofpulp 4y ago
> A parent would stop working to remove that cost, which would also potentially reduce housing and food costs by way of a dedicated house cook and maintenance person. What? I know of no homeowner in the US, even earning multiple hundred thousands per year, with a dedicated maintenance person or a house cook. Even working two jobs, most couples can manage to cook meals and take care of the house.
- geraldwhen 4y ago
  The stay at home parent fills that role.

adolph 4y ago

The living wage calculator is pretty interesting. For example: 1 adult, 0 kids: $22.71 1 adult, 3 kids: $72.20 2 adults, 1 working, 0 kids: $32.13 2 adults, 1 working, 3 kids: $48.98 2 adults, 2 working, 0 kids: $15.53 2 adults, 2 working, 3 kids: $36.47 Considering that the gross wages of two working adults are 2x base wage, or $72.94. This values stay at home at $23.96, the difference between 2a2w3k of $72.94 and 2a1w3k of $48.98. This suggests an efficiency to performing as an home parent of $12.51 or 34% over wages of $36.47! That is a significant cost in order to obtain the benefits of two income such as income source diversity.

notch656c 4y ago
A minimum living wage should assume roomates with maybe 300 square feet per person. I lived on a fishing vessel with far less than that and we survived fine.
- adolph 4y ago
  The advantage of multiperson abodes is that some amount of that min 300 sqft can be shared since a single body can occupy a maximum of lets say 2x6=12sqft at any point in time. If one assumes 100 sqft of storage for coverings, foodstock and books and another 100 for wet waste and cleaning activities, then that leaves 300-100-100-12=88sqft of sharable space. If two people can share the wet activity space then they effectively get 50sqft back and another 6 if they use differential shifts for laying down or have a relationship where one may lay on top of the other. On the whole I think it is important to understand the height dimension of space required for a person. This also would address the amount of various gasses needed in circulation since not all 300sqft can be occupied with books--the human would not be able to breathe in order to continue reading.