[nkurz]

> One 10hr shift is ~30% of what you need. So multiply that by 3.3 and... oh hey you're working nearly 40hrs a week to afford your impoverished lifestyle in the middle of nowhere.

Are you possibly confusing "per week" with "per month"?

[hyperpape]

Honestly, this is the weirdest way the author could've written that sentence.

He should've said either "one 10 hour shift per month will make 30% of what you need to live here" or even "one 10 hour shift per week will make more than what you need to live here."

[theendisney]

It doesn't seem to be caused by his lifestyle as the posters above also cant divide by $7 per hour. Its 62 hours or 11 shifts.

I think hé means one should do all kinds of small projects.

[dghlsakjg]

$17/hr is the rate

[theendisney]

That makes it even more funny. No wonder we cant find a cheap place to live.

$17 x 26 h = €442

One 10 h shift per week is to much apparently.

[trollbridge]

432/17 is 25 hours, or otherwise stated one 8 hour shift every week or two.

[hyperpape]

Right, which is why it's extremely confusing that the author wrote:

> In this case, you could work just one ten-hour shift per week, and in so doing, earn more than 30% of what you need to live well at this particular house with just four days of work per month.

What he probably did was write that one shift is more than 30% of what you need, then switched gears to write about four days of work per month, but forgot to remove the 30% number.

[nocoiner]

I read that sentence three times. Pretty sure he was trying to hide the ball, but still not sure where he was hiding it or what exactly the ball was, to be honest.

[trollbridge]

I mean we're talking about someone who thinks living on $432 a month with absolutely no government assistance and including housing is a reasonable claim to make. (In the comments, he reveals he goes to Mexico for medical care... I'm really curious how one travels round-trip to Mexico from New York on a $432 a month budget.)