Forbes Discovers New York's Middle Class

"its fairly easy to live in this city making 30k a year. You just dont eat 50 dollar diners and buy jeans for 500 bucks a pair."

This is a fairly absurd statement.

Just because something is *possible* does not mean it is *easy*. Sometime in the last few years it became commonplace for people to say *easy* when they mean *possible with good discipline, planning, and some luck*. Drives me nuts.

Also, if you think what makes it difficult to live in this city on 30k is spending too much money on food and clothes, you don't get it.

A single person with sensible habits and roommate or two can live in some parts of this city on 30k, but unless this person has expectations of rapidly increasing their income or some other compelling reason to stay in NYC, I'd suggest they move and make a better life for themselves somewhere else.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 11:41 AM

Thinking of this in terms of buying real estate and using the very sensible formula that "your mortgage should not be more than 3x your annual income":

35K = 105k mortgage
50K = 150k mortgage
75K = 225k mortgage
100K = 300k mortgage
150K = 450k mortgage

Not a lot of options if you need a 2 bedroom space or more.

NYC has a long way to go before middle class families can be home owners again.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 11:51 AM

"then what makes living in this city difficult?"

Housing costs.

"wanting to have children and living here is the same as wanting everything from the Marc Jacob's catalog. If you dont make enough money then you should do it."

lol. I was young once. I remember what it was like to think like this.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 12:01 PM

"i hate the people that tell people who make between 25 and 50 k a year that they should move out of the city and make a better life for themselves somewhere else."

I wouldn't tell anyone to leave. I'd just suggest it. Big difference.

I made 23k with my first full time job in the city. I paid over 60% of my net income in rent. It sucked.

I wanted to stay in the city and I stayed and made it work, but only because I was able to get my salary up to the point where I only paid 40% of my net income as rent. If I didn't have any realistic hopes of increasing my salary, I could have done much better for myself elsewhere.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 12:10 PM

11217,

Yes, people at the top of that 35-150k range can afford a decent 2 bedroom in the city.

But if we define that range as the "middle class" than I think the point is only the top 10% or so of the range can realistic expect to buy a place and raise a family in the city.

Whether that is good or bad is another issue. Bloomberg et al. have seemed to like the idea of NYC being too expensive for people skimping by on 90k per year.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 12:13 PM

"housing costs are expensive if you want a doorman building with a gym and spa."

Oh be serious... go check the pricing on a 2 bedroom condo in a brownstone and tell me about the gym, spa, and doorman there.

"so you're entitled to have a kid? Just the same way as my gf thinks she is entitled to have her own bathroom?"

Entitled?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Would you like to set a salary limit on parents? That would be funny.

BTW, if your girlfriend leaves you over the bathroom, you would then end up with your own bathroom. Ironic huh?

Also, if she doesn't leave, you may find out that there is rather a big difference between having a kid and having a private bathroom.

I have the former but, sadly, not the latter.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 12:45 PM

"I'm not sure why that involved a eye roll."

I think you get eye rolls because you constantly shift between two incompatible world views:

1. I'm extraordinary.

2. Anyone can do what I've done and if they haven't then that is their decision.

And you seem very sincere about it, which seems odd.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 1:05 PM

"I don't see why those two things are incompatible."

I know, which is why so many of your thoughts seem so odd to me.

By definition, they are incompatible.

By definition, 49% of people are below average.

This is not a world where everyone is special and amazing like on a children's TV show.

Success requires a combination of several things, including hard work, skill, and opportunity to name the most obvious.

It is a common conceit among successful people to pretend that we are all talented, opportunities can be made at will, and that anyone who isn't successful fails because they don't work hard enough.

It would be a nicer world if this were true, but that is not the case.

Some people absolutely do lack the skills needed to succeed.

Some people really didn't have opportunities at a time in their life when they could have taken advantage of them. And others had the opportunities but lacked the skill to see them.

Many of the hardest working people in the world earn little, fail repeatedly, or spin their wheels on one unsuccessful project after another.

None of these things make these people bad people. In fact, many of them are some of the best beings walking this planet.

But they are not wealthy.

And telling them that they could be if only they would do X or had only done X when they were 25 is pointless and cruel.

And for 5 years these people have been priced out of NYC at a faster and faster rate.

Whether or not that is a good thing is, of course, another issue.

Posted by: northsloperenter at February 4, 2009 1:31 PM