At what income level do you consider someone is rich?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: JD50
I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. I was making $50k as a cop after about 3 years, my wife was making roughly the same. We had a household income of right at $100k, and you're going to tell me that we are rich? Insane.

So now according to you, cops, teachers, etc... are now considered rich and part of the upper class? Ridiculous.
If combined you made more than $100k, then your household made more than 85% of all households in one of the richest countries on Earth. You made more than 99% of housholds on Earth and possibly more than 99.5% of them. With that in mind, how can you NOT call that in the upper regions?

The fact is, at $50k a pop, you each made more than the entire household combined for most families in the US. Teachers and cops like to complain that they have a low income. It just isn't true.

:thumbsup: for rational posts.

:confused:

Are you agreeing with him that a teacher and a cop are not part of the middle class?

For pointing out that MOST people in the US don't make 50k a year, and that's still many times what MOST people make in the rest of the world. If you're not living like a king at 100k a year then you're either in the most expensive area of the free world, or you have an IQ of 5.

You have a pretty low view of what it means to live like a king. In a lot of the US, 100K a year buys a small house, not the palace you seem to be imagining.

Define a lot. The continental US is 2,959,064 sq mi. What percentage of that is metropolis with it's inflated prices do you think? Well, all the cities with population greater than 50,000 (about 600 overall) occupy a total of 31,000 sq mi...so about 1% of the land has the potential for inflated prices (since much of the costs are due to population density). No where near most of those place actually are actually expensive mind you, I'm just providing it as a fairly reasonable arbitrary line. So you should have no problem finding a cheap place to live, if you choose to.

Moreover, we know that only 5% of Americans earn 100k or more a year, while 60% earn under 40k a year. If you drive through an average American city you're going to see that a LOT more than 5% of the homes are extremely nice places, more than 5% of the cars on the road are luxury, more than 5% vacation frequently, etc. Is that a somewhat lowball view of 'living like a king'? Yeah, ok, maybe it is. But compared to the quality of life enjoyed by most people on the planet it's subjectively accurate.

In other words, MOST of the country lives VERY well making less than 100k. If you choose not to, then you have an IQ of 5, as I originally said.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
96,908
16,174
126
Originally posted by: DomS
Originally posted by: moshquerade
I have heard $250,000 and higher makes you not in the middle class anymore.
So what income do you think puts you in the "rich" category?

as an individual? More than 70k. You still have problems at that level but it's more like 'where do we park the 3rd car...we only have a 2 car garage'

err, what year was this? Maybe 20 years ago you can live like that with 70k.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
I think the main problem is many of the above I think are either still living at home or still living with roomates.

Just simple math of what you are left after a modest home in the $150k-200k range should paint a fair picture. However, most expect only to live paycheck to paycheck and not bank on saving anything so they feel their dollar goes farther.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.

And there's the bullshit again. Complete and utter 100% lies or ignorance. People live in 3000sq' homes on acreage with every conceivable convenience at 30-50k all over America. It's only in the VERY few super expensive areas that you need to make more to live like that. 10-15k? Yeah, that's your double-wide scenario...but it's still better than most of the rest of the world.

Most of the families (ie 3+ people) I know are living on 20-35k, living in nice places, in nice areas, with new cars, entertainment, amenities, etc. They do this by not indulging in debt, and not choosing to live in the most expensive areas imaginable. That's all it takes to be a king at 100k.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Define a lot. The continental US is 2,959,064 sq mi. What percentage of that is metropolis with it's inflated prices do you think? Well, all the cities with population greater than 50,000 (about 600 overall) occupy a total of 31,000 sq mi...so about 1% of the land has the potential for inflated prices (since much of the costs are due to population density). No where near most of those place actually are actually expensive mind you, I'm just providing it as a fairly reasonable arbitrary line. So you should have no problem finding a cheap place to live, if you choose to.

Moreover, we know that only 5% of Americans earn 100k or more a year, while 60% earn under 40k a year. If you drive through an average American city you're going to see that a LOT more than 5% of the homes are extremely nice places, more than 5% of the cars on the road are luxury, more than 5% vacation frequently, etc. Is that a somewhat lowball view of 'living like a king'? Yeah, ok, maybe it is. But compared to the quality of life enjoyed by most people on the planet it's subjectively accurate.

In other words, MOST of the country lives VERY well making less than 100k. If you choose not to, then you have an IQ of 5, as I originally said.

All of those nice homes and new cars are heavily financed, and we're about to see the result of most of America living beyond their means. I maintain that 100K is really not very much, when you only spend what you have rather than using that 100K to finance a 200K lifestyle.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.

And there's the bullshit again. Complete and utter 100% lies or ignorance. People live in 3000sq' homes on acreage with every conceivable convenience at 30-50k all over America. It's only in the VERY few super expensive areas that you need to make more to live like that. 10-15k? Yeah, that's your double-wide scenario...but it's still better than most of the rest of the world.

Most of the families (ie 3+ people) I know are living on 20-35k, living in nice places, in nice areas, with new cars, entertainment, amenities, etc. They do this by not indulging in debt, and not choosing to live in the most expensive areas imaginable. That's all it takes to be a king at 100k.

I find it amusing that you think most people have access to 3000sqft homes at 30-50K/yr. In the Minneapolis area where I live, 3000sqft will run you $300K+. People who choose to live in the boonies so they can have a cheaper home then pay out the ass for transportation.

Fact is, most Americans live in those "few" high cost of living areas. Why are you doing something as stupid as looking at the area of the whole country? Ever heard of the concept of population density? If 80% of people live in 1% of the area, who the fuck cares what the minority living in that 99% of the country pay for their homes, and how does that affect the majority?
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.

And there's the bullshit again. Complete and utter 100% lies or ignorance. People live in 3000sq' homes on acreage with every conceivable convenience at 30-50k all over America. It's only in the VERY few super expensive areas that you need to make more to live like that. 10-15k? Yeah, that's your double-wide scenario...but it's still better than most of the rest of the world.

Most of the families (ie 3+ people) I know are living on 20-35k, living in nice places, in nice areas, with new cars, entertainment, amenities, etc. They do this by not indulging in debt, and not choosing to live in the most expensive areas imaginable. That's all it takes to be a king at 100k.

I find it amusing that you think most people have access to 3000sqft homes at 30-50K/yr. In the Minneapolis area where I live, 3000sqft will run you $300K+. People who choose to live in the boonies so they can have a cheaper home then pay out the ass for transportation.

Fact is, most Americans live in those "few" high cost of living areas. Why are you doing something as stupid as looking at the area of the whole country? Ever heard of the concept of population density? If 80% of people live in 1% of the area, who the fuck cares what the minority living in that 99% of the country pay for their homes, and how does that affect the majority?

He is going off of 'story telling'. People like to talk about 'oh back home in Idaho I could have had a 6,000 sq ft home on a lake with 5 acres for the same price as this 2000 sq ft home in Palm Beach county (~$300k-400k)....

They can never show you a listing for anything remotely close to that.

Still anyone owning just a 3000 sq ft home and an acre <> financially secure nor wealthy. Even with out any mortgage $70k-100k is not going to have anyone living like a king if they are assuming saving some of that.

You are not broke by any means, but a FAR cry from wealthy.

For one the guy claiming to know what someone makes is sort of suspicious. However, 3+ people COULD NOT live well on only $30k a year esp with newer homes, newer cars, etc.
These people are probably flipping drugs or buying stolen goods to support their lifestyle.

Like I said...take the mortgage out of the picture. Outside of that cars, groceries, etc don't change too much from city to city. Your money is not going far at under $100k, definitely you are not living like a King.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
He's not insane, you're out of touch. 30k a year can do everything you named, EASILY. The VAST percentage of people in America earn that or less.

You are confusing that this VAST PERCENTAGE is solvent. Many are struggling paycheck to paycheck with no debts.

I'd like to see your math on how $20-35k can support 3+ people with a nice place, new cars and the like
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Originally posted by: LtPage1
at least 500k/year.

I would say individual income at about 500K+ and even that depends on where one lives...

I might even say 1 million plus.

But 250K/year in my book is not rich by any strech
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Define a lot. The continental US is 2,959,064 sq mi. What percentage of that is metropolis with it's inflated prices do you think? Well, all the cities with population greater than 50,000 (about 600 overall) occupy a total of 31,000 sq mi...so about 1% of the land has the potential for inflated prices (since much of the costs are due to population density). No where near most of those place actually are actually expensive mind you, I'm just providing it as a fairly reasonable arbitrary line. So you should have no problem finding a cheap place to live, if you choose to.

Moreover, we know that only 5% of Americans earn 100k or more a year, while 60% earn under 40k a year. If you drive through an average American city you're going to see that a LOT more than 5% of the homes are extremely nice places, more than 5% of the cars on the road are luxury, more than 5% vacation frequently, etc. Is that a somewhat lowball view of 'living like a king'? Yeah, ok, maybe it is. But compared to the quality of life enjoyed by most people on the planet it's subjectively accurate.

In other words, MOST of the country lives VERY well making less than 100k. If you choose not to, then you have an IQ of 5, as I originally said.

All of those nice homes and new cars are heavily financed, and we're about to see the result of most of America living beyond their means. I maintain that 100K is really not very much, when you only spend what you have rather than using that 100K to finance a 200K lifestyle.

Again, most people I know live on those numbers, and don't 'heavily finance' as you put it. I myself have never made 30k in a year, yet raised a family, had decent cars, etc...all mostly without financing.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.

And there's the bullshit again. Complete and utter 100% lies or ignorance. People live in 3000sq' homes on acreage with every conceivable convenience at 30-50k all over America. It's only in the VERY few super expensive areas that you need to make more to live like that. 10-15k? Yeah, that's your double-wide scenario...but it's still better than most of the rest of the world.

Most of the families (ie 3+ people) I know are living on 20-35k, living in nice places, in nice areas, with new cars, entertainment, amenities, etc. They do this by not indulging in debt, and not choosing to live in the most expensive areas imaginable. That's all it takes to be a king at 100k.

I find it amusing that you think most people have access to 3000sqft homes at 30-50K/yr. In the Minneapolis area where I live, 3000sqft will run you $300K+. People who choose to live in the boonies so they can have a cheaper home then pay out the ass for transportation.

Fact is, most Americans live in those "few" high cost of living areas. Why are you doing something as stupid as looking at the area of the whole country? Ever heard of the concept of population density? If 80% of people live in 1% of the area, who the fuck cares what the minority living in that 99% of the country pay for their homes, and how does that affect the majority?

Around here a 3000sq' home can be had for about 125k. I can find you many (nearly limitless) locations where it's the same and sometimes even cheaper.

You are actually incorrect. No more than 1/3 (actually closer to 30%) of people live in a city with more than 50k people, which occupies only 1% of the livable area in the continental US. Most people live in small towns, and most people make under 50k a year, yet live in nice houses, drive good cars, etc. In other words, you're wrong.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Regardless, you seem to be trying to defend that you must be a KING because you make so little money here, but it's a goldmine in the rest of the world.

NO WHERE in the USA will less than $100k per year give you anywhere close to being a baller unless owning the nicest double-wide in the middle of a former nuclear testsite somewhere in deserttown, USA.

No doubt you can survive just fine, but so do people on food stamps.

And there's the bullshit again. Complete and utter 100% lies or ignorance. People live in 3000sq' homes on acreage with every conceivable convenience at 30-50k all over America. It's only in the VERY few super expensive areas that you need to make more to live like that. 10-15k? Yeah, that's your double-wide scenario...but it's still better than most of the rest of the world.

Most of the families (ie 3+ people) I know are living on 20-35k, living in nice places, in nice areas, with new cars, entertainment, amenities, etc. They do this by not indulging in debt, and not choosing to live in the most expensive areas imaginable. That's all it takes to be a king at 100k.

I find it amusing that you think most people have access to 3000sqft homes at 30-50K/yr. In the Minneapolis area where I live, 3000sqft will run you $300K+. People who choose to live in the boonies so they can have a cheaper home then pay out the ass for transportation.

Fact is, most Americans live in those "few" high cost of living areas. Why are you doing something as stupid as looking at the area of the whole country? Ever heard of the concept of population density? If 80% of people live in 1% of the area, who the fuck cares what the minority living in that 99% of the country pay for their homes, and how does that affect the majority?

He is going off of 'story telling'. People like to talk about 'oh back home in Idaho I could have had a 6,000 sq ft home on a lake with 5 acres for the same price as this 2000 sq ft home in Palm Beach county (~$300k-400k)....

They can never show you a listing for anything remotely close to that.

Still anyone owning just a 3000 sq ft home and an acre <> financially secure nor wealthy. Even with out any mortgage $70k-100k is not going to have anyone living like a king if they are assuming saving some of that.

You are not broke by any means, but a FAR cry from wealthy.

For one the guy claiming to know what someone makes is sort of suspicious. However, 3+ people COULD NOT live well on only $30k a year esp with newer homes, newer cars, etc.
These people are probably flipping drugs or buying stolen goods to support their lifestyle.

Like I said...take the mortgage out of the picture. Outside of that cars, groceries, etc don't change too much from city to city. Your money is not going far at under $100k, definitely you are not living like a King.

Absolutely, totally, and completely incorrect. I've done it, most people I know do it, etc. We're just smart enough not to live in LA or New York, we don't use credit for purchases, we don't waste money on useless things, etc.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
He's not insane, you're out of touch. 30k a year can do everything you named, EASILY. The VAST percentage of people in America earn that or less.

You are confusing that this VAST PERCENTAGE is solvent. Many are struggling paycheck to paycheck with no debts.

I'd like to see your math on how $20-35k can support 3+ people with a nice place, new cars and the like

And yet, huge percentages of the country do it, and have always done it. I did it, my friends and family did it...it's just not that hard. You just have to avoid ever paying a percentage (so no credit purchases), make reasonable life choices (value shopping), stay out of spendy areas (live in the other 99% of the country), etc.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
He's not insane, you're out of touch. 30k a year can do everything you named, EASILY. The VAST percentage of people in America earn that or less.

You are confusing that this VAST PERCENTAGE is solvent. Many are struggling paycheck to paycheck with no debts.

I'd like to see your math on how $20-35k can support 3+ people with a nice place, new cars and the like

And yet, huge percentages of the country do it, and have always done it. I did it, my friends and family did it...it's just not that hard. You just have to avoid ever paying a percentage (so no credit purchases), make reasonable life choices (value shopping), stay out of spendy areas (live in the other 99% of the country), etc.

You have not answered the question.

Saying your family...what is that? Your parents 20 years ago?

Show us the math were even with living in a NICE house, 30k can support 3 people with new cars and ammenities and living a great life.

It's impossible.

Just because the average income is a certain amount in our country does not mean people are living well at it.

Please break it down for us.

 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,111
926
126
Rich is not all about the money. When I can afford to do what I want, when I want, and with whom I want, I would then feel financially rich. Happiness comes from much more than that. How you feel about yourself, whether you're happy, relational wealth, etc., all play a part in what my picture of wealth looks like.

Someone like Hugh Heffner may have had a pretty good grasp of this concept for a long time. :)
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: txrandom
Rich - McCain voters
Poor - Obama voters

The last poll from Eastern Kentucky = McCain 92%, Obama - 8%. That coming from one of the most "government check funded" (welfare, SSI, SS, foodstamps, medicaid, medicare, you name it - it's there) areas of the country that you could find. Cutting their nose off spite their face comes to mind.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
96,908
16,174
126
Originally posted by: txrandom
Rich - McCain voters
Poor - Obama voters

err, right... you seen the headlines about Obama's record breaking war chest?
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
It's stats like these that confuse people:
In the US the richest 10% earn $93,000/yr or more, which is the highest level in the OECD (a global ranking organization)...the poorest 10% earn $5800 which is 20% lower than the OECD average.

Taking the stats above, one could say the average OECD income was right over $7000...we must all be living like kings.

Or assuming that $93,000 is the threshhold to be 'rich'....the number grow very quickly, the top 1% of the US make around $400k....again hardly wealthy but not doing terrible by no means. Around the upper 25% is about $60k....
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
He's not insane, you're out of touch. 30k a year can do everything you named, EASILY. The VAST percentage of people in America earn that or less.

You are confusing that this VAST PERCENTAGE is solvent. Many are struggling paycheck to paycheck with no debts.

I'd like to see your math on how $20-35k can support 3+ people with a nice place, new cars and the like

And yet, huge percentages of the country do it, and have always done it. I did it, my friends and family did it...it's just not that hard. You just have to avoid ever paying a percentage (so no credit purchases), make reasonable life choices (value shopping), stay out of spendy areas (live in the other 99% of the country), etc.

You have not answered the question.

Saying your family...what is that? Your parents 20 years ago?

Show us the math were even with living in a NICE house, 30k can support 3 people with new cars and ammenities and living a great life.

It's impossible.

Just because the average income is a certain amount in our country does not mean people are living well at it.

Please break it down for us.

I'm in a different situation now, since I own my home outright. I'm 36, so that should give you an idea on time frame for reference.

Rent/mortgage for a nice place in a good neighborhood was about $700. It hasn't gone up much since I last paid (according to friends family who are still paying). Throw in property taxes, insurance, and such and you're at about $850.

Phone, internet, cable, water/sewer/garbage, & electricity are about $200/mo now, but they have increased substantially in a short time. Used to be barely half that.

Car insurance is about the same price as it was; say $50-75/mo. Gas is more expensive. We spend about $100-150/mo. That's about double what I used to pay.

Food is way more now than it was a few years ago, but we still eat for about $400/mo.

Other monthly stuff (clothes, housewares, etc) may run us $150 a month.

So there's everything you need for less than $2000/mo. If you save the rest (from a 30k/yr salary), you can buy a new car outright with no problem every 2-3 years. If you're good to your vehicles you can keep them 5-10 years in great condition, so that means vacations, entertainment, etc.

Things have gotten more expensive, definitely. I imagine if I were 20 right now doing it all over again it would be MUCH tighter living...might have to be in an apartment instead of a house, skip the extras, smaller vacations and Christmases, etc. However we'd still do it, as all of our friends and family do.

My own anecdotes are irrelevant however. Just go into any small (under 50k pop) town not a suburb of a major metropolis. Find a good area (clean, low crime, etc). Out of every 10 homes in that area, 7 are kept up by people with the income we're talking about (under 50k). And the funny thing is, most people live with credit, which SEVERELY hurts their lifestyle. If those same people would go cash only they'd have even better lifestyles than they do.
 

oddyager

Diamond Member
May 21, 2005
3,398
0
76
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: alkemyst
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
He's not insane, you're out of touch. 30k a year can do everything you named, EASILY. The VAST percentage of people in America earn that or less.

You are confusing that this VAST PERCENTAGE is solvent. Many are struggling paycheck to paycheck with no debts.

I'd like to see your math on how $20-35k can support 3+ people with a nice place, new cars and the like

And yet, huge percentages of the country do it, and have always done it. I did it, my friends and family did it...it's just not that hard. You just have to avoid ever paying a percentage (so no credit purchases), make reasonable life choices (value shopping), stay out of spendy areas (live in the other 99% of the country), etc.

You have not answered the question.

Saying your family...what is that? Your parents 20 years ago?

Show us the math were even with living in a NICE house, 30k can support 3 people with new cars and ammenities and living a great life.

It's impossible.

Just because the average income is a certain amount in our country does not mean people are living well at it.

Please break it down for us.

I'm in a different situation now, since I own my home outright. I'm 36, so that should give you an idea on time frame for reference.

Rent/mortgage for a nice place in a good neighborhood was about $700. It hasn't gone up much since I last paid (according to friends family who are still paying). Throw in property taxes, insurance, and such and you're at about $850.

Phone, internet, cable, water/sewer/garbage, & electricity are about $200/mo now, but they have increased substantially in a short time. Used to be barely half that.

Car insurance is about the same price as it was; say $50-75/mo. Gas is more expensive. We spend about $100-150/mo. That's about double what I used to pay.

Food is way more now than it was a few years ago, but we still eat for about $400/mo.

Other monthly stuff (clothes, housewares, etc) may run us $150 a month.

So there's everything you need for less than $2000/mo. If you save the rest (from a 30k/yr salary), you can buy a new car outright with no problem every 2-3 years. If you're good to your vehicles you can keep them 5-10 years in great condition, so that means vacations, entertainment, etc.

Things have gotten more expensive, definitely. I imagine if I were 20 right now doing it all over again it would be MUCH tighter living...might have to be in an apartment instead of a house, skip the extras, smaller vacations and Christmases, etc. However we'd still do it, as all of our friends and family do.

My own anecdotes are irrelevant however. Just go into any small (under 50k pop) town not a suburb of a major metropolis. Find a good area (clean, low crime, etc). Out of every 10 homes in that area, 7 are kept up by people with the income we're talking about (under 50k). And the funny thing is, most people live with credit, which SEVERELY hurts their lifestyle. If those same people would go cash only they'd have even better lifestyles than they do.


Utilities for under $200 per month? That's incredibly low.