reply on: How much income do you need to raise a family of four at your place? \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

65 sats \ 14 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan \ on: How much income do you need to raise a family of four at your place? econ

I didn't look into the details of their metric, but I can tell you that it's silly. It doesn't make any sense for the "living wage for a family of four" to be way higher than the amount most families actually live on.

American families aren't dying of starvation or exposure. Someone just cooked up a dumb metric based on overly entitled expectations and is pretending that American families can't survive on realistic incomes.

33 sats \ 1 reply \ @Aardvark 23 Jan

"Living wage" just means how much I think the government should guarantee I make.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

Usually

42 sats \ 7 replies \ @SimpleStacker 23 Jan

I'm starting to very much dislike Visual Capitalist. They present these nice looking charts, but half the time they look made up or totally misrepresentative. And they don't seem too transparent about methodology; just citing a source does not count---this may be the subject of my next "Pleb Economist".

$188K for a family of 4 in California? I guess I must be living in poverty then, despite my two cars and house. And mind you, this number was given for the whole state.... and I live in Los Angeles.

These numbers don't make sense at all.

66 sats \ 1 reply \ @Bell_curve 23 Jan

They seem to have a collectivist agenda

44 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

Or they're just unthinkingly passing along what's available (which is often collectivist nonsense).

30 sats \ 4 replies \ @Coinsreporter OP 23 Jan

Don't dislike Visualcapitalist. They just copy and paste figures from other sources. The numbers given in the map have been taken from here.

https://www.gobankingrates.com/money/making-money/living-wage-family-of-four-needs-all-50-states/

73 sats \ 3 replies \ @SimpleStacker 23 Jan

I think it's worthy of dislike. Essentially, their reach surpasses their accuracy. Although, the charts are usually directionally correct, so maybe it's not such a net negative shrug

I am just very particular about data accuracy and interpretation. You could say it's a pet peeve of mine.

54 sats \ 2 replies \ @Coinsreporter OP 23 Jan

No, I also don't like it. Looked at it after a long time today and found it.

I also found something else from them which is same but contradicts to this.

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

I remember someone posting this one a while ago. At least this one says "to live comfortably". The reader knows there's a subjective standard at play.

I actually think these numbers are pretty reasonable, if comfortable means you can generally do whatever you want without worrying about money.

68 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter OP 23 Jan

Yes, I also remember. I didn't find it on SN but found something else.

#548756

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @Coinsreporter OP 23 Jan

Visualcapitalist mentioned Go bank. I don't know about it. May be you can look it up a bit and validate. https://www.gobankingrates.com/money/making-money/living-wage-family-of-four-needs-all-50-states/

20 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

No "Living wage" is a common leftie nonsense term that gets thrown around all the time. I don't need to know the specifics of each attempt at measuring it, because it's always nonsense.

32 sats \ 1 reply \ @Coinsreporter OP 23 Jan

Alright I understand your point. I didn't know that. I've just compared it out of my curiosity after seeing this map which actually felt unrealistic to me as well.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 23 Jan

If you cut all the state numbers in half, I think you'd have a decent point of reference.