The average price of eggs — a frequent stand-in for inflation during the campaign — had declined from its peak in the spring and is back below last November’s prices. Average orange juice prices are up 29% and ground beef prices are up nearly 14% from where the two were a year ago.
So we’ll see how long that lasts.
Green tested out his $140,000 theory, by looking at national average data on key costs — and calculated $32,773 for childcare, $23,267 for housing, $14,717 for food, $14,828 for transportation, $10,567 for healthcare and $21,857 for what he said were other essentials. Add in federal, state and FICA taxes, and it gets to a gross income of $136,500.
These costs can (and often are) mitigated through communal living and shared household capital. Just anecdotally, I can tell you that my mother-in-law has been pivotal in providing childcare for my toddler son. Daycare can cost north of $2000/mo. And if I don’t want to burn a vacation day staying home to care for him when he’s sick, I’m going out $200+/day for a nanny. But grandma can take over for the cost of lunch. And that’s for someone with kids. You don’t need childcare if you’re childless.
Similarly, wrt transportation, I’m close enough to work that I can bike to work. If any coworkers lived nearby, we could carpool. Every household carrying its own car, maintenance, gas, insurance, etc is more a consequence of our atomized lifestyle than a requirement for survival. We absorb the cost as a luxury. And my home town of Houston builds our city to incentivize consumption of these luxuries.
So I do question $140k as “poverty level” in a material sense. These aren’t survival costs, they’re overpriced amenities.
Another point he makes is that the safety net does catch people at the very bottom, but traps anyone who climbs out. For instance, at $45,000, they lose Medicaid eligibility; at $65,000, childcare subsidies vanish.
This has been historically described as the Welfare Trap or Benefits Cliff. Our policy of means testing public services results in certain cohorts being incentivized to downplay their income for the purpose of maximizing state benefits. This pushes people into cash-businesses, the gig economy, and other gray market channels for labor which are often unregulated or quasi-criminal in function. From there, you get a rising price of policing benefits as a share of their cost (leading to skyrocketing IRS audits of poor black residents concentrated in the Gulf Coast) on the one end and increasingly unreliable labor data used to calibrate optimal domestic labor policies on the other.
It is - curiously - a problem that liberals love to keep reinventing. The ACA, the COVID Stimulus, and the Biden plan for student debt relief all contained cut-offs and trade-offs that shoved people out of the traditional labor pool.
What the article fails to address is the question “What happens to people operating below the poverty line?” The original Orshansky definition carries with it some real material consequences - malnutrition, exposure to the elements, significantly higher rates of treatable diseases. Do we see that for household residents below $140k/year relative to the $83k/year average? The article doesn’t say.
I can tell you that my mother-in-law has been pivotal in providing childcare for my toddler son. Daycare can cost north of $2000/mo. And if I don’t want to burn a vacation day staying home to care for him when he’s sick, I’m going out $200+/day for a nanny. But grandma can take over for the cost of lunch. And that’s for someone with kids. You don’t need childcare if you’re childless.
This kind sounds like the $33k is about right then, it’s just that the value is provided by family (which is great don’t get me wrong). You can’t make these calculations on the assumption of these factors. What if you suddenly didn’t have free childcare? Would you be unable to then make rent?
And what if your work moved somewhere where you had to then drive?
How close are you to financial collapse if something bad happened?
There should probably be a different number for a single person, but then there’s less sharing in other ways as well.
it’s just that the value is provided by family (which is great don’t get me wrong)
The value provided by grandparents, plus the overhead of real estate and administration and profit. If you’ve ever actually talked with a daycare worker, you might be surprised to note that they can care for anywhere from four to twelve kids each. However, they aren’t seeing anything close to the $100/day each child yields in revenue. The primary cost of operating a daycare is typically the cost of the location - either explicit rents by the building owner or interest on debt borrowed to purchase the property.
And what if your work moved somewhere where you had to then drive?
What’s kinda ironic about Houston is that we’ve got these big commercial bus services positioned all through the suburban neighborhoods. I live to close in to take advantage of any of them. One of my bigger regrets in living where I do is that I didn’t get to take advantage of the two rail lines the city operates. We’ve been promised bus rapid transit or rail extension for over a decade, but it has never materialized. The bike trail is actually the closest thing to urban transit I’ve seen built since I moved in back in 2014.
How close are you to financial collapse if something bad happened?
Really depends on how it manifests. O&G has historically been pretty recession proof. But there are exceptions. The 80s boom years were terrible for Houston, because they rode in on the back of cheap energy. The Enron Scandal of '01 hit smack into the center of downtown. And the COVID shock gave us -$43/bbl gasoline, which sent local businesses into a free fall.
There should probably be a different number for a single person, but then there’s less sharing in other ways as well.
Living with roommates / a spouse brings down cost of living in a whole host of ways, no doubt. Just on its face, you only need one kitchen per household and kitchens can get very expensive.
It’s hard to get by without driving in Houston. Even if you considered it safe to bike (which it isn’t, the dedicated bike lanes are pretty limited), it’s impossible to avoid the weather. Do you just carry a change of clothes?
I actually used to live in Houston too and had a half mile commute (either bike or run), but still had to drive fairly often. And I consider that a luxury for the city. Otherwise you’re living in the suburbs and commuting for two hours everyday.
I’ve known only a handful of people who’ve tried doing carless in Houston and only one of them long term. And he lived in a co-op so most needs were met in other ways.
Even if you considered it safe to bike (which it isn’t, the dedicated bike lanes are pretty limited), it’s impossible to avoid the weather.
The MKT gets you all the way from 610 to downtown with virtually no interaction with cars until you’re actually in the city proper.
I’ll spot you weather, but I’ve biked in the rain before. A poncho is all you really need shy of severe weather. And if I’m taking an Uber to and from work once or twice a month, that’s far cheaper than owning a car.
I’ve known only a handful of people who’ve tried doing carless in Houston and only one of them long term
I think “carless” is much more difficult. But “one car house” is very possible. You don’t need a vehicle for every member of the family.
Childless person here. My partner and I had no ability to count on our families for childcare, or more basic things. Our choice to not have children was more about our (tenuous) mental health and lack of emotional support from family, but economics played a part too.
You are lucky to have support from someone who has good health and the ability to watch your kids (they are retired? None of my family can afford that)
Children aren’t some sort of luxury. Our poverty line should allow for people to afford children.
I don’t agree with all of this guy’s numbers but you absolutely should include the cost of children in the poverty line.
Daycare is, though. What you’re really talking about with daycare is paying for servants to watch your kids while you work or otherwise spend your time elsewhere.
There’s a real economic benefit in socializing the cost of care and professionalizing child care as a profession. But daycare prior to Pre-K is primarily occupying the child’s time and energy until the parents return. It’s a hard trade off between your time and someone else’s.
I don’t agree with all of this guy’s numbers but you absolutely should include the cost of children in the poverty line.
I think the point he hits on is the bizarre math of denying public child care to middle class Americans specifically. And I’m all for citing it as bad policy.
But it’s a very separate thing from household poverty, precisely because being unemployed (or relying on someone who is) effectively solves your child care cost problem.
NBC News is tracking changes in the prices of eggs, bread, ground beef, chicken and other grocery items to monitor the impact on consumers’ food bills.
So we’ll see how long that lasts.
These costs can (and often are) mitigated through communal living and shared household capital. Just anecdotally, I can tell you that my mother-in-law has been pivotal in providing childcare for my toddler son. Daycare can cost north of $2000/mo. And if I don’t want to burn a vacation day staying home to care for him when he’s sick, I’m going out $200+/day for a nanny. But grandma can take over for the cost of lunch. And that’s for someone with kids. You don’t need childcare if you’re childless.
Similarly, wrt transportation, I’m close enough to work that I can bike to work. If any coworkers lived nearby, we could carpool. Every household carrying its own car, maintenance, gas, insurance, etc is more a consequence of our atomized lifestyle than a requirement for survival. We absorb the cost as a luxury. And my home town of Houston builds our city to incentivize consumption of these luxuries.
So I do question $140k as “poverty level” in a material sense. These aren’t survival costs, they’re overpriced amenities.
This has been historically described as the Welfare Trap or Benefits Cliff. Our policy of means testing public services results in certain cohorts being incentivized to downplay their income for the purpose of maximizing state benefits. This pushes people into cash-businesses, the gig economy, and other gray market channels for labor which are often unregulated or quasi-criminal in function. From there, you get a rising price of policing benefits as a share of their cost (leading to skyrocketing IRS audits of poor black residents concentrated in the Gulf Coast) on the one end and increasingly unreliable labor data used to calibrate optimal domestic labor policies on the other.
It is - curiously - a problem that liberals love to keep reinventing. The ACA, the COVID Stimulus, and the Biden plan for student debt relief all contained cut-offs and trade-offs that shoved people out of the traditional labor pool.
What the article fails to address is the question “What happens to people operating below the poverty line?” The original Orshansky definition carries with it some real material consequences - malnutrition, exposure to the elements, significantly higher rates of treatable diseases. Do we see that for household residents below $140k/year relative to the $83k/year average? The article doesn’t say.
This kind sounds like the $33k is about right then, it’s just that the value is provided by family (which is great don’t get me wrong). You can’t make these calculations on the assumption of these factors. What if you suddenly didn’t have free childcare? Would you be unable to then make rent?
And what if your work moved somewhere where you had to then drive?
How close are you to financial collapse if something bad happened?
There should probably be a different number for a single person, but then there’s less sharing in other ways as well.
The value provided by grandparents, plus the overhead of real estate and administration and profit. If you’ve ever actually talked with a daycare worker, you might be surprised to note that they can care for anywhere from four to twelve kids each. However, they aren’t seeing anything close to the $100/day each child yields in revenue. The primary cost of operating a daycare is typically the cost of the location - either explicit rents by the building owner or interest on debt borrowed to purchase the property.
What’s kinda ironic about Houston is that we’ve got these big commercial bus services positioned all through the suburban neighborhoods. I live to close in to take advantage of any of them. One of my bigger regrets in living where I do is that I didn’t get to take advantage of the two rail lines the city operates. We’ve been promised bus rapid transit or rail extension for over a decade, but it has never materialized. The bike trail is actually the closest thing to urban transit I’ve seen built since I moved in back in 2014.
Really depends on how it manifests. O&G has historically been pretty recession proof. But there are exceptions. The 80s boom years were terrible for Houston, because they rode in on the back of cheap energy. The Enron Scandal of '01 hit smack into the center of downtown. And the COVID shock gave us -$43/bbl gasoline, which sent local businesses into a free fall.
Living with roommates / a spouse brings down cost of living in a whole host of ways, no doubt. Just on its face, you only need one kitchen per household and kitchens can get very expensive.
It’s hard to get by without driving in Houston. Even if you considered it safe to bike (which it isn’t, the dedicated bike lanes are pretty limited), it’s impossible to avoid the weather. Do you just carry a change of clothes?
I actually used to live in Houston too and had a half mile commute (either bike or run), but still had to drive fairly often. And I consider that a luxury for the city. Otherwise you’re living in the suburbs and commuting for two hours everyday.
I’ve known only a handful of people who’ve tried doing carless in Houston and only one of them long term. And he lived in a co-op so most needs were met in other ways.
The MKT gets you all the way from 610 to downtown with virtually no interaction with cars until you’re actually in the city proper.
I’ll spot you weather, but I’ve biked in the rain before. A poncho is all you really need shy of severe weather. And if I’m taking an Uber to and from work once or twice a month, that’s far cheaper than owning a car.
I think “carless” is much more difficult. But “one car house” is very possible. You don’t need a vehicle for every member of the family.
Childless person here. My partner and I had no ability to count on our families for childcare, or more basic things. Our choice to not have children was more about our (tenuous) mental health and lack of emotional support from family, but economics played a part too.
You are lucky to have support from someone who has good health and the ability to watch your kids (they are retired? None of my family can afford that)
Children aren’t some sort of luxury. Our poverty line should allow for people to afford children.
I don’t agree with all of this guy’s numbers but you absolutely should include the cost of children in the poverty line.
Daycare is, though. What you’re really talking about with daycare is paying for servants to watch your kids while you work or otherwise spend your time elsewhere.
There’s a real economic benefit in socializing the cost of care and professionalizing child care as a profession. But daycare prior to Pre-K is primarily occupying the child’s time and energy until the parents return. It’s a hard trade off between your time and someone else’s.
I think the point he hits on is the bizarre math of denying public child care to middle class Americans specifically. And I’m all for citing it as bad policy.
But it’s a very separate thing from household poverty, precisely because being unemployed (or relying on someone who is) effectively solves your child care cost problem.
We should factor child expenses in so that no one feels financially pressured out of having kids
There are probably parallels. Personally, I see some hazardously skip healthcare to avoid the cost.
So he’s estimating 140k for married with children? Whats the individual estimate?