3 ms·
Let's put those numbers in perspective: $100k is about $72k after tax[0]. Suppose I want to support a family in NYC. Average cost of living is about $9,000/mo
by cowpig 2y ago
Let's put those numbers in perspective:
$100k is about $72k after tax[0].
Suppose I want to support a family in NYC. Average cost of living is about $9,000/mo for a family of four[1].
That's $108,000 per year. Or about $36,000 above what I would need to support an average 2-kid family, living paycheck-to-paycheck.
So if I want to be able to support a family, 100k is not even close to enough.
edit: forgot to add the sources
[0] https://www.talent.com/tax-calculator?salary=100000&from=year®ion=New+York https://www.talent.com/tax-calculator?salary=100000&from=yea...
[1] https://livingcost.org/cost/united-states/ny/new-york https://livingcost.org/cost/united-states/ny/new-york
- greentxt 2y ago[flagged]
- cowpig 2y agoI guess we disagree on whether unions should fight for enough wages for their workers to support a family.
- IncreasePosts 2y agoShould people with families get paid more in order to support them? Why would a single person need to get paid as much as a person supporting another adult without a job and two children?
- cowpig 2y agoIMO single people should also make more. I just think "can they support a family of 4" is a decent heuristic for whether people are getting paid enough.
- drawkward 2y agoYes. So much of our economy is built on the idea that future people will be able to support and pay for today's economic choices.
- tsunamifury 2y agoThis has to be the most out of touch comment I have read ever here.
- caeril 2y ago100% out of touch, yes, but not wrong. Before kids I had the same exact sentiment, and now, with kids, I still do. Raising a family is a choice, and that choice should be made deliberately, considering all aspects, including financial impact. It is no more the responsibility of the employer to consider the family of the employee anymore than for them to consider if the employee is a gambling addict, or spends frivolously on OnlyFans subs or funko pop collecting.
- tsunamifury 2y agoThis is some Andrew Tate level logic
- gruez 2y agoMost families have more than one earner, though.
- gtaylor 2y agoMore than a few do not. You shouldn’t have to barely scrape by as a single parent in one of the most wealthy countries in the world.
- gruez 2y agoIt does when the biggest expenditure category is for a positional good (ie. rent). There's only so much land in new york and so many apartment units. Being in a wealthy country means your peers are also wealthy, which means a household with double income can easily outbid a household with a single income.
- bsimpson 2y agoIt'll be curious to see what the ramifications are of sending a kid to daycare basically straight away, vs rearing him at home until he's ~5. The costs in cities like NY and SF are so high that many kids end up in care as soon as parental leave expires. One of the big recent public policies in NYC is "3K," public schooling for kids starting at 3 years old.
- vel0city 2y agoA small sample size, but all of my kids which go to a pretty high-end daycare seem to have a bit leg up on peers who have stayed home in terms of social skills, language, reasoning, and reading. That's not just me acting like my kids are the best (of course they are), that's those other parents mentioning it to me. It's practically a college tuition per kid at age 0 though.
- bogwog 2y agoMost families don't have a strong union that can negotiate a decent wage.
- SilasX 2y ago