Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Again, not the point. The point is that 75k is NOT poverty.
Just for the record:
I
do
not
consider
my
situation
ideal.
Slow enough?
For the record, I never said that 75k is poverty, so I'm not sure why you're seeing ghosts. But don't paint the picture that 75k will get you an awesome lifestyle here. The fact is you will have roommates and live pay check to pay check on that amount if you want to be in the city. This is not relevant to you making $14/hour and living with your dad.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,067,341 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayFleur
Sure, you can survive with roomies
It is the normal way that people live (not just survive) around here, if they make less than the median income. It is the equivilent to making 50k in Kansas and having a house. Around here, if you make 75k, you have roommates. It is not "surviving", it is "the normal way that people live if they make that salary in the Bay Area".
Quote:
Is that 75 take home? First consider what is left after federal and state tax plus benefits and retirement savings. If you're paying debts and other obligations those will also decrease your take home. So $75k is now somewhere in the mid-low 40s being generous. You'll lose nearly half of that take home renting just a room in SF, though you won't save much more anywhere else in the Bay.
50% of your income is way too much to spend on housing. It is supposed to be 33% (1/3).
So if the take home is 46k, that gives them a housing budget of 1285/month (approximately). 46k is based on this:
So like I said, you aren't going to buy a condo or SFH on that, but you could rent a great room and you would still have 2548 left over every month. Definitely not poverty. There's lots of choices:
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,067,341 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commonproject
For the record, I never said that 75k is poverty, so I'm not sure why you're seeing ghosts. But don't paint the picture that 75k will get you an awesome lifestyle here.
Others said it is poverty. I disagree that 75k will not get someone an awesome lifestyle. You can have a great life without being able to own a SFH etc. That salary would change my life. You know nothing of "just barely scraping by" if you think that's what 75k is.
Quote:
The fact is you will have roommates and live pay check to pay check
Roommates, yes. Paycheck to paycheck, not even remotely true. You can afford this on 1/3 of your net take home pay if you make 75k:
Not paycheck to paycheck at all. 75k is not remotely "poverty", "poor", "just barely scraping by", or "living paycheck to paycheck", trust me. Not even close. Live on my budget, and you'll know something about that. 75k isn't like that at all.
If your housing is only 1/3 of your budget and you don't have debt (the OP said he has no debt) and no kids and are single, 75k is a great income. Not great compared to say 150k, but I would have a great life on 75k. But then, I can manage a budget. I'm not living paycheck to paycheck -- I have savings each month -- and I make far less than 75k.
btw I often get positive feedback from my posts in the feeedback comments that others cannot see. Someone commented there that it is already been demonstrated that someone could rent a one bedroom apartment on that salary in Fremont. In SF, you would probably have roommates.
But living with roommates is NORMAL in the Bay Area and other desirable places if you don't make the median salary. Look at the London craigslist, it is about the same:
(966/month is the equivalent in pounds sterling of 1185/month). Their median income is 70k and their median home price is 700k, so the situation is the same. The middle class lives in "flats", and people who make less than the median have their own room in a shared flat. It's NORMAL.
It is the normal way that people live (not just survive) around here, if they make less than the median income. It is the equivilent to making 50k in Kansas and having a house. Around here, if you make 75k, you have roommates. It is not "surviving", it is "the normal way that people live if they make that salary in the Bay Area".
50% of your income is way too much to spend on housing. It is supposed to be 33% (1/3).
So if the take home is 46k, that gives them a housing budget of 1285/month (approximately). 46k is based on this:
So like I said, you aren't going to buy a condo or SFH on that, but you could rent a great room and you would still have 2548 left over every month. Definitely not poverty. There's lots of choices:
[sarcasm]What? How can they tolerate that? Mature adults don't have roommates! [/sarcasm]
Oh hello neutrino. I've been lurking your posts and they're quite entertaining! Lol
I agree 50% is too much but not outside the realm of possibility depending on district/neighborhood. Just depends on what goings-on the OP can tolerate in his neighborhood.
Out here even 1/3 rent of your take home is too much though. Food, gas, clothing and outside entertainment (depending on what OP enjoys in his free time) is more expensive. Plus OP says he enjoys eating out.
I have no beef with Xers rooming. Its darn near a necessity for the single person of any generation moving here these days.
Others said it is poverty. I disagree that 75k will not get someone an awesome lifestyle. You can have a great life without being able to own a SFH etc. That salary would change my life. You know nothing of "just barely scraping by" if you think that's what 75k is.
Roommates, yes. Paycheck to paycheck, not even remotely true. You can afford this on 1/3 of your net take home pay if you make 75k:
Not paycheck to paycheck at all. 75k is not remotely "poverty", "poor", "just barely scraping by", or "living paycheck to paycheck", trust me. Not even close. Live on my budget, and you'll know something about that. 75k isn't like that at all.
If your housing is only 1/3 of your budget and you don't have debt (the OP said he has no debt) and no kids and are single, 75k is a great income. Not great compared to say 150k, but I would have a great life on 75k. But then, I can manage a budget. I'm not living paycheck to paycheck -- I have savings each month -- and I make far less than 75k.
btw I often get positive feedback from my posts in the feeedback comments that others cannot see. Someone commented there that it is already been demonstrated that someone could rent a one bedroom apartment on that salary in Fremont. In SF, you would probably have roommates.
But living with roommates is NORMAL in the Bay Area and other desirable places if you don't make the median salary. Look at the London craigslist, it is about the same:
(966/month is the equivalent in pounds sterling of 1185/month). Their median income is 70k and their median home price is 700k, so the situation is the same. The middle class lives in "flats", and people who make less than the median have their own room in a shared flat. It's NORMAL.
Again with the "I". If you think living 30min outside of the city in a 150sqf room w/ roommates is an "awesome lifestyle" that's fine, but have enough self awareness to know that people from outside of SF don't hold the same perspective. I'm not saying you can't have your own views, but they are just misleading.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,067,341 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commonproject
Again with the "I". If you think living 30min outside of the city
I'm not sure what you're referring to. I think you're replying to my last post? If so, the link is for a room inside the city of San Francisco. Not 30 minutes away.
Perhaps you refer to the ability to rent a studio in Fremont on 1/3 of their net income. Well, that still is not what you said, as a studio is an apartment to oneself, not a room in a shared apartment. So, if that's what you meant, I'm still puzzled.
Not that living in a shared apartment is somehow "living in poverty". Rather, it is the normal way that people live in this area if they can't spend 3,000/month on rent/mortgage. A lot of people can spend that much, including most of those people whose jobs require a college degree -- which is why it is the median rental/mortgage price -- but those who cannot spend it share housing.
The choices are not (a) have a five bedroom house to yourself in 10/10 school district or (b) live in poverty. There are a lot of other positions along that spectrum from a to b. Sharing an apartment with other people is neither (a) nor (b). It is in between. You can live a great life, have some savings each month, easily pay your housing expenses, and still not be at option (a). It is not a requirement for a good life, especially in an area like ours, where such arrangements are very expensive.
Many people who make the median income still share apartments/condos because they're single and just want to save money. Why buy a house/condo if you're single? That's something a man does when he gets married and has kids. Back in Idaho where you came from, did people buy houses before they got married?!? If so, what did they do with all the extra space? Do they just enjoy owning empty rooms??
Quote:
in a 150sqf room w/ roommates is an "awesome lifestyle" that's fine, but have enough self awareness to know that people from outside of SF don't hold the same perspective.
Usually "self-awareness" does not reflect the opinions of others. Merriam-Webster (the US equivalent of the OED, first published 1806) defines it as " knowledge and awareness of your own personality or character". Self-awareness | Definition of Self-awareness by Merriam-Webster
So I am aware that I have a good personality and great character. I am aware of the opinions of others, and mine is different from theirs. They're free to have their own opinion just as I am free to have mine. I put myself at risk to defend that in the years 1999 through 2003.
I live outside of San Francisco myself, in one of the suburbs surrounding San Jose in Silicon Valley. So my perspective is, in fact, that of someone who lives outside of San Francisco.
Quote:
I'm not saying you can't have your own views, but they are just misleading.
Nope. What's misleading is the suggestion that 75k is somehow a poverty level salary. That's complete and utter nonsense. How much money do you make, that you see 75k as "poverty", "barely scraping by", "poor", or "living paycheck to paycheck"? I don't even live paycheck to paycheck and I make 16k. Do you make 300k?
At 75k, you can have an awesome room with great roommates in a good area, and this will be only 1/3 of your monthly paycheck. I am a big fan of David Ramsey -- I agree with him on most things regarding finance -- and he would go lower than one third, saying your housing budget should only be 28%.
I wouldn't necessarily go that low, but you can spend 28% of your 75k paycheck on housing and still have a great room with great roommates in a great area.
Lol I have to admit your posts are entertaining, but that's about all they're good for. I just hope some poor soul won't base a move on your posts in pursuit of an "awesome lifestyle". Best of luck in improving your own situation
Me: single, Gen-X, no kids, no debt, low-cost lifestyle although I have a fondness for eating out. Am used to living in "car" cities like Dallas or Austin where you drive everywhere. This move could be good for my career but not sure I can handle the culture shock--like standing in line, paperwork in hand, begging for any chance at an apartment or room. (Are these stories true?)
How realistic would it be to try and keep my car? I'm thinking I probably can't without great hassle and expense, but I really like having a car for weekend drives.
Don't do it. I'm a 35 year old single female (technically still a millennial) and I feel old, poor, and washed up in SF. The city is great, but sadly it is also pushing me out. It was awesome moving here over 7 years ago and I only made $77K. Now I make over 6 figures and I can no longer afford it. Unless you have lived here for years and have a cheap rent controlled place established or you are under 30 in a high paying tech field and don't mind having multiple roommates (I'm talking 2-4, not just 1) you will have a hard time fitting in and finding happiness in SF proper.
If you want to keep your car and live somewhere interesting, check out some place in the inner East Bay near BART such as Oakland/Berkeley. Take BART to work in the Mission and save your car for roadtrips, etc.
At that salary in that area you can probably get a place to yourself but won't save much. Or, you can live with roommates and save a lot.
There are many inexpensive, delicious ethnic restaurants (~$15 or under for a full meal) of many types. If you stick to those you can probably go out to eat almost every day and not break the bank. The trendy New American-type restaurants can get pricy though, especially when drinks are involved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I've been lurking your posts and they're quite entertaining! Lol
