3 ms·
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 ad
by 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 agoA 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 agoThe 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.