$117,000 is "low income"

[Nucking Futs]

:wtf

https://www.abc15.com/news/national/117400-is-low-income-in-san-francisco-report-says

$117,000 is low income, and the average house is $1M in the Bay Area.

I'm here for another ten years, then I'm moving. I don't know where, but it won't be here! :teeth

 

[NorCalAthlete]

* for a family of 4. That means ~$60k / year for one person and $57k / year for the other.

That's about $30/hr for each adult in the household (assuming 2 parents, 2 kids). Not exactly difficult to obtain in the bay area with even a modicum of skills, but it's the "+2 kids noncontributing" that make it a kicker imo.

 

[Blankpage]

The bay area covers a large area of land. Are you sure the average house price is $1M?

 

[NorCalAthlete]

The bay area covers a large area of land. Are you sure the average house price is $1M?

It's actually worse than that if you look at median vs mean and break it down by city rather than region.

https://www.paragon-re.com/trend/what-costs-how-much-where-in-the-bay-area

 

[budman]

Damn...

That is crazy... looking a Palo Alto had my jaw dropping.

Guess my .75M crack house was a good deal back a few years ago.

 

[Reli]

Low income for who? A family of 4? That's definitely bigger than the average SF household.


Nice of them to use the most inflammatory statistics they can to make a good headline. :rolleyes

 

[wazzuFreddo]

RE bubble will pop again, it is just a matter of time

 

[Eldritch]

Well, one also needs to be clear that there are different levels of assistance. For Example, the $117,000 a year family would not qualify for Food Stamps or a Section 8 Voucher, but they probably would be in the sweet spot to buy a housing unit at a BMR Property, or receive a special low interest home loan as a first time home buyer.

 

[gnahc79]

* for a family of 4. That means ~$60k / year for one person and $57k / year for the other.

That's about $30/hr for each adult in the household (assuming 2 parents, 2 kids). Not exactly difficult to obtain in the bay area with even a modicum of skills, but it's the "+2 kids noncontributing" that make it a kicker imo.

If you're assuming both parents work you have to roll in childcare...which can be a wash for anyone earning in the $50-60k range depending on the age of the kids.

 

[NorCalAthlete]

Well yeah I figured all the additional costs of having 2 kids in the household was a given that didn't need to be broken down. Childcare, education, additional healthcare, food, etc.

 

[bruceflinch]

I feel lucky. Even though I’m still at the new poverty level, I’m better off than most

 

[ABC]

Hopefully my tenant buyout will give me the money I need for a downpayment!!!

 

[UDRider]

I feel lucky. Even though I’m still at the new poverty level, I’m better off than most

From your posts you are single with adult kid. So don't think you are at new poverty line.

 

[Archimedes]

Easy to believe. When I rough out an austerity budget for our family of four, cutting all our expenses substantially to the bone, even assuming the house is paid off, the pre-tax income needed just to break even is about $120k. Our healthcare costs alone are $25k. Property taxes and insurance are nutty. Food cost is crazy, utilities are nuts. Living in this state is ridiculously expensive.

 

[RS250 Chester]

If you're assuming both parents work you have to roll in childcare...which can be a wash for anyone earning in the $50-60k range depending on the age of the kids.

This, afterschool childcare is ridiculously expensive here in the bay. You can easily spend $1400-2000 month just on afterschool care if both parents are working normal day shifts. That usually only covers you to 5-6pm. So then you're battling traffic to pick them up; so some parents send their kids to offsite care (not on school grounds), which can even be more expensive.

When we were living on the central coast, we were spending only $300-500 in afterschool care at the school.

So that $50K that a spouse is making, all that can go straight to afterschool childcare if no relatives can watch the child after school.

 

[Toast]

Sad and not surprising. If you make $117,000 a year and own your home (especially if it wasn't bought during this boom or the last) then you're fine. A family of four making $117,000 and RENTING? Yea that's low income... The city may be astronomical but everywhere else in driving range isn't much better. You can still come close to spending half your take home income on a three bedroom apartment in the east bay with an hour plus commute.

 

[SFSV650]

Easy to believe. When I rough out an austerity budget for our family of four, cutting all our expenses substantially to the bone, even assuming the house is paid off, the pre-tax income needed just to break even is about $120k. Our healthcare costs alone are $25k. Property taxes and insurance are nutty. Food cost is crazy, utilities are nuts. Living in this state is ridiculously expensive.

$120k is an absurdly large amount of money.
I've lived in SF on less than $50k/year; even then I got a lot of 'stop complaining, live within your means' lectures. :rolleyes

 

[bruceflinch]

From your posts you are single with adult kid. So don't think you are at new poverty line.

True. My personal income is slightly lower the the new poverty income.
I’m fortunate to have a considerable lower cost of living, Having lived in my house 30 years and now with no dependents.
If I could only find a tax duction for all the dates I go on. :laughing

 

[Blankpage]

My max guideline for cost of housing is 1 weeks take home pay. Thats for owning. For renting I've tried to keep it at 4 days or less take home. That sometimes meant a roommate.

 

[Mike95060]

My max guideline for cost of housing is 1 weeks take home pay. Thats for owning. For renting I've tried to keep it at 4 days or less take home. That sometimes meant a roommate.

Can you do either of those now with your current income? Say you were going to buy or rent a new place tomorrow would you still be able to abide by that? If so where would you be living?