this post was submitted on 19 May 2026
615 points (98.4% liked)

me_irl

7707 readers
2258 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago (5 children)

The "no worries line" is sitting somewhere around 100k salary right now. Before the pandemic I'd have said 70k, but I see this as the point where you have enough money to pay somebody else to think about it for you be that an investor, fiduciary, advisor w.e.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I wouldn't say that's anywhere even close to rich.

[–] homes@piefed.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)
[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not sure, but $100k/year isn't even close. That's you can finally afford a humble home money. That should be the standard for just a decent life.

[–] homes@piefed.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

It should be, but it isn’t. As I’ve said in another comment, I know several people who make around $100,000 a year, and they are struggling to make mortgage payments, pay for groceries to feed their families, etc..

$100,000 a year used to be more than enough to sustain a family, but, today? It’s not.

[–] Pieisawesome@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Just using a number is a bad metric since CoL can make such a huge difference.

100k in rural low CoL areas would set you up pretty well.

In SF or NYC, 100k is consider to be “poor”

[–] homes@piefed.world 2 points 20 hours ago

$100k - now - is considered "poor" in a lot of places :(

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I agree with the person responding to you and would just add that "rich" shouldn't be defined as "this is how much everyone should have". Rich is more like "could afford to not work for decades if not forever" or something along those lines.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know. By that definition people who have saved and barely afford retirement are "rich".

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

I thought it was clear that this loose definition would not include retirement age people.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

I don't think you intended it to, but it does. Defining things can be hard.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.org 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

$100k, damn, in central europe the median income is more like $30k and that's already a juicy salary. CoL does a lot.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago

A social safety net (like free/cheap healthcare) does a lot too. 100k USD is great until something catastrophic (e.g. cancer, car accident) happens. And don't get me started on unemployment support.

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago

Rich is when you don’t have to obey laws and you can buy politicians.

[–] greenbit@lemmy.zip 1 points 18 hours ago

Rich don't work for living. Probably have wealth for multiple lifetimes

[–] KoboldCoterie@pawb.social 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There's different kinds of "no worries lines". My family is above 100k, and we're not in the "If we miss a paycheck we won't be able to eat this week" range, but we're certainly in the "An unexpected medical bill or necessary home repair could wipe us out" range.

The true no worries line - where unexpected expenses aren't an issue and you expect to be able to comfortably retire some day - is considerably higher, at least where I live.

[–] aim_at_me@lemmy.nz 3 points 9 hours ago

Yeah same. We’re comfortably a 200k house hold when both of us are working. We've got enough. But rich to me would be being able to take some time off and spend time with my kids and not worry about setting my retirement back meaningfully.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 4 points 23 hours ago

Me and my partner got close to that amount in a low cost area and it wasn't even close to no worries. We lived pretty modestly too. Driving paid off shitboxes, rarely eating out, lived in a relatively small home etc. We still had to really think about things and it didn't take a lot to throw off our balance. An er visit here or an unplanned vet visit was all it took.

Maybe if we made that amount several years in a row it would have been different. Definitely not close to that amount anymore.

That being said we did get to do fun stuff and were certainly comfortable, but it wasn't remotely close to not having to think about it.

I'd say 150 to 200k gets you to the no worries and no thoughts range. That's the range where you can enjoy life, save to retire, and still handle the emergencies while maintaining a modest lifestyle.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 2 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

I believe that really depends on where you live. Also did you mean net or gross?

Some napkin math I did now, if your gross is 100k....

After tax 75k

  • housing 4500
  • food: 250
  • Internet 100
  • phone: 40
  • health: 200
  • transit: 100
  • utilities: 200

Edit: I fucked up and did 4500 for housing not 2500. Cheaper housing gives a lot more room!

~~That leaves you with like $860/mo for fun or any other thing.~~

Of course that's a lot of assumptions that can change it. But I'd say 200k gross is the start of "don't have to think too hard about money"

[–] LwL@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

4500 a month for housing is insane, is rent actually that bad in the US? I could rent a villa for that.

You are also missing private retirement funds though (and if car dependent 100/month seems very low for transit costs)

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

No, even $2500/month is a lot in some places in the US. In the Midwest that would get you a really nice place, but in New York City that gets you a studio apartment. The US is huge with a wide range of cost of living.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

that's a cheap mortgage where i live. it would pay for a 100 year old falling apart shack.

the average mortgage here is like 6K a month now.

the average studio in my city rents for 3.2K a month... you want a 2bed? that will be over 4K

it costs that much because people are willing to pay it and they have the money to pay it. it's that simple.

USA has lots and lots of very rich people, who are willing to pay lots of money for these things.

[–] jtrek@startrek.website 1 points 21 hours ago

$4500 was in my head because that was the projected mortgage+taxes+fees for a 2BR apartment in brooklyn I saw the other day.

There are some apartments in NYC that are that expensive to rent. Average here is $3,650, but that's skewed by a lot of stupid expensive places. Median is a little lower.

Other parts of the country can be much cheaper, but sometimes you get what you pay for.

You are also missing private retirement funds

Good call.

(and if car dependent 100/month seems very low for transit costs)

That's a good point. I rely on mass transit, which is much cheaper.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

No. I am above the 100K line, so is everyone I know.

They are worried all the time, and telling me how stupid I am for not being as upset as they are. all the time

The worries they have are different, and rich people I meet with argue with me that their worries are MORE important than the worries of poor people.

[–] homes@piefed.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Having enough money that I don’t have to worry about my expenses

America doesn’t have a middle class and hasn’t for some time. The Republicans worked for decades to destroy it, and they succeeded. You’re either poor or you’re rich.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's not how that works at all. The middle class is nearly extinct but somewhere around $100k you can attain that not worrying about money status, even buy a humble home. But you're not even close to rich.

[–] homes@piefed.world -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I don’t need to be told I’m not rich. I can’t afford my groceries every week. And I’m single, and I certainly don’t make $100,000 a year or anything close to it.

I also don’t need to be told “how it works“. Because I’m living in a system that’s beating me to death every week when I can’t afford to live.

And I know plenty of people who make around $100,000 a year and still can barely afford to pay their mortgage, afford to feed their families, etc. So don’t tell me “how it works” when you clearly don’t understand it yourself. And you sure as fuck don’t know a goddamn thing about my life.

The arrogance of some random Internet stranger, trying to tell me how my own life works… Wow

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 0 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I didn't say anything about your life. Where did you get that idea? Frankly, I don't care about your life. I didn't call you poor. I didn't call your friends poor, etc... All I said is that depending on where you live, $100k can be a comfortable life but it's no where near rich. I don't know why you got so defensive.

[–] homes@piefed.world 0 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

If you’re gonna make a strawman argument, don’t be so transparent about it.

And if you’re gonna so brazenly lie and claim, I said a bunch of things I didn’t, don’t do it when anyone can just go back and see what I wrote.

Why am I so defensive? That’s why.

Wow, again

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Again, what are you talking about? What strawman? What specifically did I claim? You're reading things I didn't write apparently. And you prove it with your last sentence. I said I didn't care about your life, not that I didn't care about you or even that I didn't care that you apparently have atrocious reading comprehension. Point out a specific strawman or lie.

[–] homes@piefed.world 1 points 10 hours ago

at this point, you're obviously just trolling, and the only rational thing to do is to block you.