[throwaway287391]

Why is it that when you go from 2 parents + 1 child -> 2 parents + 2 children, the cost goes up 6K, but when you go from 2 children -> 3 children, the cost goes up 18K? If anything it seems like per-child costs should diminish as you have more children?

Also I think all these analyses that assume a BART employee is going to be a single income-earner for a family are a bit strange - surely there are some BART employees who fall under this but I'd imagine not many? It seems like a luxury in this day and age to have a parent staying at home full time. And honestly I find myself having trouble sympathizing with people who have a lot of kids without secure high-income employment - I don't think it's the employer's responsibility to raise wages for employees that make a very expensive lifestyle choice. I do feel bad for their kids, but I think the responsibility for making sure they're taken care of should be the government's.

[ceras]

> Why is it that when you go from 2 parents + 1 child -> 2 parents + 2 children, the cost goes up 6K, but when you go from 2 children -> 3 children, the cost goes up 18K? If anything it seems like per-child costs should diminish as you have more children?

If you look at the cost breakdown below, it's because rent does not change going from 1 child to 2 children, but it does from 2 children to 3 children, presumably because 3 kids won't share one bedroom. It'd be nice if they gave more info about what type of home is referenced (number of bedrooms and sq. ft).

> Also I think all these analyses that assume a BART employee is going to be a single income-earner for a family are a bit strange

Worse yet, this chart is misleading because it implies a single-income household, but the cost breakdown includes childcare. This is not a real situation for any 2-parent, single-income household: the non-working parent takes care of the kids.

> And honestly I find myself having trouble sympathizing with people who have a lot of kids without secure high-income employment

I do sympathize with these people because the cost of living in the Bay Area is really just unreal and entirely preventable. Having two kids shouldn't break the bank for people. If we raise salaries across the board, the stagnant housing supply will guarantee that prices will go up in accordance with more people affording higher rents. Higher wages for already-high income workers is the wrong political debate: more housing is what we need. The real difficulty here, which sadly seems less politically likely than higher BART wages, is convincing enough Bay Area cities to allow more or taller apartment complexes.

[sxywu]

I took the cost of living from Economic Policy Institute's Family Budget Calculator, and their documentation [1] is particularly interesting to sift through.

In particular, the child care costs are apparently broken down like this: One parent, one child = cost of 4-year-old care One parent, two children = cost of 4-year-old care + cost of one school-age child One parent, three children = cost of 4-year-old care + cost of two school-age children Two parents, one child = cost of 4-year-old care Two parents, two children = cost of 4-year-old care + cost of one school-age child Two parents, three children = cost of 4-year-old care + cost of two school-age children

And they assume the school-age children to require both before-school and after-school care.

As for comparing a cost of living for a two-parent household with the income of a single worker, I could only make that assumption because...how would I be able to extrapolate the household income of a two-parent family from BART salaries? As imperfect a solution as it is, I still hope that it will give insight, since my hope was not to shove any particular opinions on anyone, but rather just a tool for exploration.

[1] http://www.epi.org/publication/wp297-2013-family-budget-calc...

[ceras]

For two adults, >0 children, I think childcare should really be excluded from costs. It's not accurate for most any family in that position.

Though I understand figuring out the second parent's income is difficult, I think it's more dangerous to entirely exclude it. To me it comes off as misinformation (especially when combined with the childcare costs).

You can consider a hideable layer that allows the user to put the second parent's income, and default it to the average Bay Area income. I'm guessing that even if you defaulted it to 20-percentile for income, cost of living would no longer exceed household income, which is extremely important information in this discussion.

[sxywu]

I love it. I was just wondering how I could possibly include a second income in the graph, and your suggestion is just perfect - thank you!

As for the costs, they're actually customizable - you can choose it from the dropdown. I will also work to make that more explicit.

[ceras]

Glad I could help -- I look forward to the change!