What if your job is in Manhattan where that means you are making negative income vs. your rent? And a good meal is ten times more than a beef soup shop in Taiwan? Or spending 2 hours every morning commuting into the city and back out on a bus to somewhere you can afford on $50k/yr? Is that still rich?
To handle questions like "And a good meal is ten times more than a beef soup shop in Taiwan?" we can use "Purchasing Power Parity". And adjusting for PPP we still see that an income of $100k is in the top few percent worldwide: http://jefftk.com/world-income-distribution.png
I've lived / worked in midtown Manhattan on both $35k/year and $90k/year (and between) within the past 3 years, and they are both doable. At 30k, I wasn't rich for sure, but I wasn't poor either. Still going out to eat mostly, and not missing out much with friends.
As it got closer to 90k, things got easier for sure. I'm not married, so no dual income, but my total monthly expenses come out around 2k (rent, good food (never eating at home), utilities, misc stuff) which leaves about 3k/mo left over. I would consider this materially wealthy, at least.
I'm not married
So having roommates was an option. And you didn't need another bedroom for the kids. Your housing costs were far below those of an average family. Which is sort of the point of all the comments about dual incomes being required.
Comments
What if your job is in Manhattan where that means you are making negative income vs. your rent? And a good meal is ten times more than a beef soup shop in Taiwan? Or spending 2 hours every morning commuting into the city and back out on a bus to somewhere you can afford on $50k/yr? Is that still rich?
To handle questions like "And a good meal is ten times more than a beef soup shop in Taiwan?" we can use "Purchasing Power Parity". And adjusting for PPP we still see that an income of $100k is in the top few percent worldwide: http://jefftk.com/world-income-distribution.png
Just because your job is in Manhattan, does not necessarily mean that you need to live in Manhattan (especially not in that $15k/month penthouse).
I've lived / worked in midtown Manhattan on both $35k/year and $90k/year (and between) within the past 3 years, and they are both doable. At 30k, I wasn't rich for sure, but I wasn't poor either. Still going out to eat mostly, and not missing out much with friends.
As it got closer to 90k, things got easier for sure. I'm not married, so no dual income, but my total monthly expenses come out around 2k (rent, good food (never eating at home), utilities, misc stuff) which leaves about 3k/mo left over. I would consider this materially wealthy, at least.
Living in Manhattan (or SF or whatever) is a "luxury" -- move to Atlanta where you can buy a 1 bedroom condo in the city w/ loan at $750 a month.
You do realize a 100k salary in Manhattan would likely be more around 55 - 60k in Atlanta, right?
I guess my point is you can buy a 1br condo in Atlanda w/ 55k, you can't buy anything w/ 100k in Manhattan.