Median Household Income (low income, section 8, real estate)

[DAS]

You can live in Manhattan for $53,448 or less, if you have lived in a rent stabilized apt or owned a coop for some years, most have turned into coops over the years. If you really knew some of the rents and maintenance charges some people are paying you would understand how they can do it. Keep in mind that living in Manhattan was not considered a big deal, not too long ago. Living in Queens was probably a bigger deal, more prestigious, unless of course you were living on Park Ave. A lot of Manhattan was kind of dumpy and you could get good deals.

[Chelsa1075]

Fair enough, but all that aside, the average person doesn't have the rent stabilized apartment. And 53$ after taxes don't amount to nothin.

[Chelsa1075]

you made my point exactly.

[DAS]

Yes it is tough sometimes living in this city. Most of the residents are not wealthy. Just look up the Manhattan zip codes and you will see where the wealth is. You will also see how much of it is not wealthy.

[Chelsa1075]

No, I realize that most of manhattan is not wealthy, however, those places are lived in - LOL. I would love to live in Alphabet city, but to actually afford it, I would have to live in the Jacob Houses.

[bluedog2]

Originally Posted by DAS

You can live in Manhattan for $53,448 or less, if you have lived in a rent stabilized apt or owned a coop for some years, most have turned into coops over the years. If you really knew some of the rents and maintenance charges some people are paying you would understand how they can do it. Keep in mind that living in Manhattan was not considered a big deal, not too long ago. Living in Queens was probably a bigger deal, more prestigious, unless of course you were living on Park Ave. A lot of Manhattan was kind of dumpy and you could get good deals.

I think DAS is exactly right.I don't know exactly what the figures are but I am pretty sure that there are almost twice as many apts in the city that are rent controlled or stabilized(under 2,000/mo) as those rented at market rates.

There are still a lot of old ladies living by themselves in 6 room apartments in great neighborhoods and surviving on their social security checks and relatively small savings.

The statistics don't lie.. or suggest that anyone should move to Manhattan now making 50,000/yr.They simply state the fact that 1/2 of the people there already do.

I know a number of people who live in Manhattan on 50,000 to 70,00 and they all are either in rent controlled/stabilized buildings or bought their apartments in the 70's and 80's so their mortgage and maintenance is still way less than 1,000/mo..... if they have any mortgage left at all.

I could be one of them if I hadn't been so stupid 30 years ago and had a better grip on my priorities then.

[Moderate Guy]

Originally Posted by DAS

You can live in Manhattan for $53,448 or less, if you have lived in a rent stabilized apt or owned a coop for some years, most have turned into coops over the years. If you really knew some of the rents and maintenance charges some people are paying you would understand how they can do it. Keep in mind that living in Manhattan was not considered a big deal, not too long ago. Living in Queens was probably a bigger deal, more prestigious, unless of course you were living on Park Ave. A lot of Manhattan was kind of dumpy and you could get good deals.

Originally Posted by bluedog2

I think DAS is exactly right.I don't know exactly what the figures are but I am pretty sure that there are almost twice as many apts in the city that are rent controlled or stabilized(under 2,000/mo) as those rented at market rates.

There are still a lot of old ladies living by themselves in 6 room apartments in great neighborhoods and surviving on their social security checks and relatively small savings.

The statistics don't lie.. or suggest that anyone should move to Manhattan now making 50,000/yr.They simply state the fact that 1/2 of the people there already do.

I know a number of people who live in Manhattan on 50,000 to 70,00 and they all are either in rent controlled/stabilized buildings or bought their apartments in the 70's and 80's so their mortgage and maintenance is still way less than 1,000/mo..... if they have any mortgage left at all.

I could be one of them if I hadn't been so stupid 30 years ago and had a better grip on my priorities then.

I believe that both posts explain the situation well.

[bmwguydc]

The figures do include those who receive public assistance, which skews the data as those lower-incomes are not factored. Staten Island, in contrast, has more of a median population, neither the stratospheric salaries of some Manhattanites, and a proportionally lower percentage of lower wage earners that skew the data.

Just a quick glance at Census Data shows the following figures, some of which are out of date, but illustrative of the difference between the median and per capita:

Bronx: 28,173 / 13,959
Brooklyn: 32,339 / 16,775
Queens: 39,649 / 19,222
Staten Island: 56,519 / 23,905
Manhattan: 45,290 / 42,922
NYC (total): 45,343 / 23,389

C-D figures are more up-to-date with the median HHI (from 2007):
Bronx: 34,156
Brooklyn: 41,406
Queens: 53,171
Staten Island: 61,818
Manhattan: 54,217
NYC (total): 53,514

Just a few zip codes in Manhattan from C-D figures yields the following median HHI figures:

10002: 30,507
10006: 103,292
10013: 48,645
10021: 95,847
10023: 91,976
10026: 28,563
10028: 98,505
10034: 37,437
10035: 18,917

[DAS]

Originally Posted by bluedog2

I know a number of people who live in Manhattan on 50,000 to 70,00 and they all are either in rent controlled/stabilized buildings or bought their apartments in the 70's and 80's so their mortgage and maintenance is still way less than 1,000/mo..... if they have any mortgage left at all.

I could be one of them if I hadn't been so stupid 30 years ago and had a better grip on my priorities then.

I know what you posting about. I was too young when my cousin my bought her 2 bedroom duplex coop on the UWS for under $10K. The area wasn't so nice back then, but look at it now. She still works on Wall St in small private bank, and really brings in the bacon. But even if she has to retire because of the economic downturn she will be more than ok.

[Chelsa1075]

I'm glad to know that - they should just do working class and see where that median leaves you - I think it would be much higher and much more realistic.