[eaenki]

I think this article represents a small segment of people that can’t manage their finances and/or strive for better living conditions .

Even at with the base rate of $100k/year - which is cheap, you can rent a beautiful $5k/m apartment and split it with a friend. Heck, you can even cook and eat organic only. Use Uber to move around. Even then, at “maximum living conditions” you should be able to save north of $50k/y. There’s countless beautiful Airbnbs at the same price in case you can only rent short-term. Also, you either choose a corporate job or something you love. You can’t work 15h/day on something you don’t love.

All in all, this article it’s halfway BS, halfway poor management of one’s own living conditions and financials

[dan-robertson]

This does not add up. At 100k pa in San Francisco you would get something like 67k after tax, minus 30k for rent, minus (let’s be generous) 15k for other expenses leaves 22k, not “north of 50k”

[enraged_camel]

Yeah, it is always deeply ironic when someone complains about people who can’t manage their finances well, then asserts that it is possible to save north of $50k with a salary of $100k in SF.

[eaenki]

I considered that amount to be net income. Obviously.

[eaenki]

I considered that amount to be net income. Obviously.