Being satisfied with incomes under 100k

Page 2 of 2<12
November 16th, 2015 at 9:50:22 PM permalink
Pacomartin
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 1068
Posts: 12569
Quote: kenarman
there are lots of nice homes in Atlanta for rent for $2000/month and less. It doesn't take $40K a year to keep a roof over your head in Atlanta. Maybe it does in the neighborhood he wants to live in but that is a lifestyle choice.


I am sure he could rent for less. But he spent years in a cheaper home rental which despite seeming expensive by small town standards, he said had terrible problems. I guess that to arbitrarily draw the line at 100k doesn't make a lot of sense in some areas.

Quote: kenarman
I am not trying to pick on your brother and am sorry that he his business fell so far.


His biggest clients was Michael Bloomberg who was way too powerful to try and tie up with non-hiring clauses in the contract. When Bloomberg went into politics, his staff hired away all of my brother's employees with large pay increases.

Most of the rest of his business dried up as the economy tanked. Corporations almost always cut consultants over full time staff when money dries up.

The "unkindest cut" was when one of his VPs took another 6 of his employees and formed his own competing business and stole several of his clients because he had access to all the data. He sued for violation of priveleged information, of course, but I have yet to hear of one of these lawsuits that didn't simply make money for lawyers. His former VP lost the suit, then promptly died of a heart attack before paying any reparations.
November 17th, 2015 at 7:29:37 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 14
Posts: 4470
Quote: Pacomartin
I guess that to arbitrarily draw the line at 100k doesn't make a lot of sense in some areas.


100k is double the average wage in the USA so I don't think that many who make that should be considered poor. I expect that Manhattan is one of the most expensive places to live. Most people that work there would make well under the 100k line. When we think of the area we think of all the financial employees that make high salaries. Don't forget about all the waiters, chambermaids, cab drivers etc. that make it possible to work and visit there. My point has been do we consider these people disenfranchised because they can't make what a stock broker does?
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin
November 17th, 2015 at 9:30:21 AM permalink
DRich
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 51
Posts: 4943
Quote: kenarman
100k is double the average wage in the USA so I don't think that many who make that should be considered poor. I expect that Manhattan is one of the most expensive places to live. Most people that work there would make well under the 100k line. When we think of the area we think of all the financial employees that make high salaries. Don't forget about all the waiters, chambermaids, cab drivers etc. that make it possible to work and visit there. My point has been do we consider these people disenfranchised because they can't make what a stock broker does?


I would be interested in what percentage of people that work in Manhattan actually live there.

Obviously the $100k number is relative to where you choose to live and work. If a family had two working members each making $100k that would probably put them in the upper 2%. That is one of the few times when being married might be a benefit.
At my age a Life In Prison sentence is not much of a detrrent.
Page 2 of 2<12