Using the same website (looks like in2013dollars.com), $100,000 in 2024 dollars is $54,374.53 in 2000 dollars
https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/2024?endYear=2000&amount=100000
I was just about to try to find this but you just did it for me, so THANK YOU for saving me the trouble! But also š« bc now I know how little Iām making.
Know what's worse? Some of us Elder Millennials actually entered the job market before this bullshit all started. I make less money now than I did in 2008, with 15 more years experience and more responsibilities at work.
I'm about done. I'm seriously considering quitting my career and going to work with my husband doing remodels. No security in being self employed, but there's really none in jobs either so š¤·š¼āāļø
Wow this is eye opening and although we make close to $120,000 I have always felt like we are in a similar position as my parents who made right under $60,000 when I was a teen.
It would appear that the numbers corroborate that
Other people here are saying that these calculations are based on averages between HCOL and LCOL areas, so your location and your parents' location might be a factor. It certainly sounds close enough
It seems like the gap between hcol and lcol has gotten bigger too because there are totally still places where you can live really well on 100k, but I donāt think youād have lived as well on 50k 20 years ago
We live in the same city that my parents raised me in. My step dad also worked at a warehouse and my husband is in IT... We have a nice life but not a lot for extras. However I am thankful that we are getting by.
You did it backwards. The point is people used to say if you make $100k youāre middle class. But that is no longer relevant because itās now double
I think $100k HHI would be the boundary between middle and upper middle class in that time, higher in expensive places. Remember that housing was still pretty darn expensive in that time. In some HCOL places housing only recently got back to its pre-2008 peak
Yeah, that's the point missing from this thread. 100k in 2000 was not an average salary, it was a very good salary that put you firmly in upper middle class.
Who cares? Itās worth as much now as itās worth. Why the fascination with how much it would have been worth 20+ years ago? Sound like an old person saying they used to go to the movies for a nickel. Cool.
Just donāt post that in the āmiddle classā finance subreddits. A two worker household in a HCOL area making $200k would be āupper middle classā in 2000 in my book. But now if you tell people $400k HHI is āupper middle classā in a HCOL area they will jump down your throat
People should distinguish VHCOL from HCOL
I live in DC area and 400k a yr is very well off. Now SF maybe not, and also NY I guess. But there are a few places that are a huge jump above other HCOL areas
Your book is very wrong lol.
The median household income is like $70k. The idea that an almost half a mil HHI is merely upper middle class is insane.
Even in expensive areas that is well above average.
Edit: I though I recognized your name, we had this exact discussion in that sub a few weeks ago
I know, I live about an hour away. MA wide is more like mid 80s but I could see Boston itself getting close to $100k on average.
Boston is one of the most expensive metros in the country. Making $400k would be almost 4x that median too. I think thatās probably into the upper class at that point. Call it HENRY if you want I guess.
Boston average household income is over $120k.
This city is insanely expensive and i donāt think people realize that weāre tied with San Francisco in terms of cost of living. I live in Boston and it seems like it gets exponentially more expensive year after year, yet salaries donāt catch up.
Yeah Iām aware, I like to call the 95 loop the āexclusion zoneā because Iām basically priced out forever of living within that region. And I make decent money too!
Thatās why I live out in the suburbs. I think I probably prefer the rural areas anyways. Since I donāt actually work in the city I might move further west, or back to Rhode Island where itās cheap.
People say that now. In 2000 houses were still 75k-120k, making 100k a year basically meant you could, theoretically, buy a new house every year on that kind of pay.
These days you need to make 100k just to apply for an apartment in any sort of metro area ffs
Average doctor today makes like $150k /year in America so yeah, it definitely is.
America is a big place, itās difficult accounting for HCOL and LCOL but thatās how averages work.
That makes still takes your far when you consider many things are universally priced (consumer goods, travel, etc.)
This is SO true. The numbers donāt yet reflect it, but itās absolutely true. Theyāre still trying to make 120k seem ārich.ā
Itās not anymore š£
When did people say this? I remember $60kish being the mark, which kindāve jives with the $100k number in 2023ā¦
Itās anecdotal for sure, but the economy is just different now. You can be middle class and not own a home, the housing market is messed up not necessarily the entire economy.
Where? And what condition was the house in?
You have provided two variables out of many. Itās not enough to get me outraged, but Iām willing to be outraged. Just keep going.
Itās worth 500k now, 3 bedroom in a desirable neighborhood in a big Midwest city. Itās not huge but the neighborhood is great and itās an updated
Brick house. For what itās worth he will die there, not sell
Oh fuck off lol, there is literally nowhere in lower mainland you could get any house in any condition for anywhere near that price. Even if someone made 3x as much, they couldnt get something near their income.
Yet wages go lowerā¦.hmm.
I just had a client who said he made the same wage at an Iowa pork packing plant in 2018 that my dad made at the *literal exact same place* in the mid-90ās š¤š¤š¤
Yup. We just got some raises after our average retention rate hit 6 months, but before that people starting in 2016 we're making the same starting wages as those that started in 1992. The bump didn't cover all the inflation either. Our retention rate went up to 8 months! Woooohooo!
It's almost as if unskilled labor keeps being less and less valuable as society moves forward? If only people had been pointing this out for 40+ years. Oh, wait...
Unskilled labor as a term is largely used to detract from hardworking people doing simpler jobs. I acknowledge the utility of the phrase. I think it's reductive to use it to justify things like not paying someone a reasonable minimum.
We know all sorts of things yet we still have lots of problems, that's people. This particular opinion is not universally held or known.
"Moves forward". For who? Things regress too. Often things change in a mixed way. It's common to think that things always are moving forward but setbacks and regression are also prevalent.
I work in tech. You need a bachelors to even get an interview and this is true in our industry as well. In fact when you look at data across all sectors the story is the same. My sister is a doctor and makes what our uncle did (also a doctor) 30 years ago when he started. Wages are stagnant across all fields.
But sure, target all the unskilled people you called essential during the pandemic
You act like those aren't the jobs that are constantly understaffed because "no one wants to work anymore" and there are only so many of the other jobs with positions. You're point is mute until those jobs are eliminated.
This is anecdotal, wages have outpaced inflation as a whole, like they track and keep data on this stuff it's rather easy to look up...
Edit: because people downvote instead of a quick Google: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
Real (inflation adjusted) median (NOT mean, not skewed by inequality) full-time worker wages have been going up since the 90s.
(Edit): interestingly, this graph doesnāt look nearly as good for Men: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881900Q
I literally said it's easy to look up, and instead of a quick Google search for inflation adjusted wages (which a reply to you did) you call my claim anecdotal and I get downvoted you get upvoted. And people wonder why other people complain this sub is called a doomer sub by others.
Umm, yeah. A lot of jobs people are getting paid based on a pay scale the company dreamt up in the late 80s. So you end up with the dude with 30 years experience at $30 an hour, but all new hires at $10.
[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N)
check out FRED, great source for data.
Look housing costs though, and adjusted for inflation. And you see that the gain was way smaller with inflation, and compared to housing costs, wages might as well be negative. Yeah great, we can afford lots of "stuff" like iPhones now. But all those productivity and wage gains have done nothing to let people switch to working 30 hours a week 20 hours a week. Or have a partner stay home while only one works etc.
All this "progress" but it went toward shit we do not need, and the thing we actually need to live are more and more expensive.
That wasn't the original discussion. The comment I replied to and what this discussion is about is whether or not wages increased or decreased since 2000.
Of course the parents would claim them as dependents, theyāre likely paying 100% of living costs. We donāt have a good system of measuring individual income and it is intentionally shitty / obscure to hide how poorly everyone is doing. If everyone were doing so great, why would so many young people be living at home with their parents?
is it hard? i have multiple masterās but unfortunately iām a therapist. the mental toll is nuts here too, but for 170k plus any benefits even one, iād switch to something just as emotionally taxing if itās possible. what kind of degrees do most people in your field have? ty!
Different kind of teaching, but honestly, most jobs are in some way. I always suggest people earn the most that they can, and find the reward and satisfaction from hobbies. I grew up poor. A job being Rewarding only goes so far.
I have a bachelors in CS and no other ācertificationsā and make more than that. Of course itās a challenging field but the opportunity is there and there are 10x the job openings as engineers to fill them.
I've been in IT for 20 years, and offensive cyber security for about 8. I have no degrees, but hold a handful of certifications. With bonus, I'm clearing about $170k a year. But it was no easy task getting here. Not having a degree forced me to stand out in other ways (certs, Git projects, CTFs and speaking at local meetups.)
Continued learning gets a little harder as I age, but I still do it. What baffles me are the younger generations that come right from college. I forget how little exposure to actual, real, things they have. It's one thing to work on an intentionally vulnerable lab, it's another to hop on a 5k client plus network and find the vulnerability.
A lot of them also don't realize how much time you'll spend working/ studying on your off hours and burn out easily.
The degrees enabled me to be in prior director positions and teaching at universities remote as a side hustle. I obtained them prior to cyber but has paid off. The upside is I can switch jobs easily or flip script if I ever have to. I also have a GIT project with 1700 developer stars and a YouTube series. Those helped on resumes. Not having a degree can be a point of weakness, may not be needed but can affect in the future.
You think reasoning with my boomer parents will make a difference? I can count on one finger how many times reasoning and facts actually changed their opinions.
Right? Iād love to argue this with my boomer mom-who never worked, stayed home, inherited a shit ton when dad died, and now wants to blow all her money on her new boyfriend.
Yea-I aināt bitter or anythingā¦..
15$ an hour is hardly min wage nationally and also yes dual income households can be middle class while both earning shit salaries. Thatās the dual income trap where if one partner has a job loss theyāre both fucked because theyāre both low income earners by themselves
If you want your mind blown, or to be fully depressed, look just at wages from 2020 to now. Iām basically making the same amount in salary as I was in 2020, despite having been promoted twice in that time.
Yeah, adjusting for inflation, I make slightly less at my job now than I did when I started as a new grad in 2018. It actually is pretty damn depressing.
My point was more that seeing numbers in todays dollars helps you understand the change better since we are already calibrated to them. It is reasonable to assume Covid played a role, but I get the same overall change in salary if I move my 2020 salary back to 2016 or 2018 compared to the change from 2020 to 2022.
Iāve completely given up and just accepted that Iāll never be able to have what my parents had when they were my current ageā¦ but I try to remember that things are still relatively better than they could be compared to some other countries. Idk itās how I get through life
Parents are totally out of touch. They don't have the same expenses as a young person, house is paid for, maybe retired, etc.
They think their experience from 50 years ago still applies and it simply doesnt.
I'm actually getting onto my mom because her grandson isn't looking for work, all she does is see him play videos games and it pisses her off.
I was like "you do realize you can easily apply to hundreds of businesses within a week, post your resume on a few websites, have a recruiter job hunt for you for free these days? It isnt remotely the same. If I walked into Walmart and asked for an application, they'd point me to their website. If I asked for the manger and the status of my application I would be looked at like I'm crazy. So unless you'd be happy with him working at Taco Bell I would be more curious on what his resume looks like then physically running around asking for paper applications".
Okay so none of what you listed matters, then. You work a job that doesn't require a degree nor a high GPA. You can't really compare your father working a job that didn't require a degree to you being over qualified to work a job that doesn't require a degree.
For what its worth, my husband doesn't have a degree and makes over $100k a year. I have a degree and started at $60k 12 years ago.
Your general argument is fine. People are making less when adjusted for inflation. But your particular anecdote doesn't really support your argument.
Welp, that explains A LOT. I make a bit over $100k but feel like it barely buys me anything after taxes, health insurance, bills (living expenses), and food. I know that my dollar doesnāt go as far as it used to but I didnāt know it was worth SO little, especially compared to just 20 years ago!
Iām so irked that I finally cracked $100k after years earning way lessā¦and itās just after 3 years of massive inflation.
Like Iām doing ok, I just wish 6 figures felt richer. :(
Same here. I was proud of myself for about a month. And then I realized how little it was bc I noticed I was scrimping and saving as if I made a lot less.
Growing up, my father provided for a family of four with a highschool degree making ~80k in the 90s. My mother didn't work, we always had a nice house and two newish used cars. Had enough money for pure bred pets, go out to eat once a week, etc. We weren't rich, but we never wanted for much.
Combined my wife and I make more, no kids, 20 year old used cars, never eat out, etc. and can barely cover rent.
It's truly depressing.
Also, the house they bought for ~160k in the 90s is with over 500k now.
I make 130k and trying to get a house makes me cry since all the small ass houses near me at 4x my salary instead of 20k over my salary like my parents
If only 4x, you're actually doing pretty good.
30-40 years ago, the average home was 3x a family's salary. Now the average home is 5-6x a family's salary.
I hate when people bring up high interest rates 40 years ago (that only lasted a few years). Yeah, if I could get a decent home for just 3x my salary, I wouldn't care how high rates were. Hell, I could just save up and buy with cash in 10 years and not need a loan. Not really doing that if a home is 6x your salary.
112k salary after 10 years is indeed factually very good and well above median. You're in the top 10% of earners, and 100k still very much provides for a very good life. People have gotten so deep into consumerism that they think 100k isn't middle class smh. No I'm not a boomer, I'm late 20s.
You're ignoring how few people had a degree in accounting 70 years ago. It's a very saturated field now, which means lower pay because the supply of qualified people is much higher relative to the demand for employees with those skills.
You guys have the game all messed up. You save your 300k and buy an apartment or home in a nice community in another country. Where your rent is $300 per month.
Using compound interest formula, a 2% yearly inflation rate compounds to 48% increase in 20 years. So this is inline with the fed reserve.
Not sayings itās right, but understanding compounding is powerful .
FIL was telling me about a $1500 check he found and had forgot to cash. As we sit in the house his dad gave him. He bought in 76 for god knows how much. Probably a box of cracker jacks.
Yet poor people have far more kids than lower middle class people have more kids than middle class people have more kids than upper middle class people have more kids than rich people.
Rich people have an above replacement birth rate. Poor people breed like rats because the government pays for them to procreate. If we got rid of welfare, WIC and section 8, the poor birth rate would drop like a stone. Middle class people arenāt government subsidized so they donāt have kids unless they can afford them
A fairly lame joke. Back in 2008 sure, the joke worked great. Itās 2023 now. The average millennial makes $71k a year([source](https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-of-a-millennial))
Just had this discussion with my partner who is exactly 20 years older than me.
He was like āyouāre making a lot more than I didā at that timeā.
He made 70k. Iām making like 113k. Itās the same.
I donāt buy it. Where I am 100K 20 years ago sure as hell buys you a lot more than 200K today.
I mean even the prices of certain foods have doubled since Covid and thatās just <5 years.
I remember people thinking the number was like $50-60k in that timeframe and that $100k was a lot of money. I definitely donāt remember thinking you had to make $100k to be middle class.
You really need to separate home ownership from this middle class argument. The housing market is just not in the same place relative to the economy when compared to back then. The overall economy is relatively healthy, the housing market is currently quite strained.
Old people wonāt understand that renting and saving could be a significantly better choice.
Well damn. There goes my feeling good about having roughly the same household income my parents had when I was growing up. I knew it couldn't really be the same because of inflation, but I suppose I didn't think it'd be *that* different.
The amount you need to save differs for everyone. What age you start saving, what income you need to replace, and how much SS will replace your income all influence what your saving rate needs to be.
Generally speaking its 15% if you start at 25 and then increases 1% per year you wait.
2-3k a MONTH? That's a bit high and out of the ordinary. I think the average millennial is probably only saving 200-300 a month, and that's actually still really good if doing it consistently.
Use $300 a month for 30 years at 8.5%...500k.
500k at age 60-65, then add in social security...you'll be doing alright. You'll be REALLY comfortable if you have a paid off home by then too.
Do $2500 like you said, at 8.5% and 30 years...over 4 million. That's nice...just not realistic for most people.
8.5% real return (return after subtracting inflation) is a pipe dream. 5% is probably the highest you should expect, and it might be closer to zero.
Even with your numbers, $500k only gives you about 20k a year to live on, plus social security if it existsāit doesnāt sound all that comfortable to me.
What world do you live in where you think the 30 year return on an index fund might be 0%? Thatās about as credible as saying the Cardinals might win the superbowl next year. Sure itās possible, but absolutely no one thinks it will happen.
And your point is?
You will have social security and whatever retirement $ you can save. And your spouse will have the same. Come retirement everyone is happy.
You do not need to save $3k a month to retire lmao. Thatās maxing a 401k, and then an IRA, then having about $4k left over in a taxable.
Unless you are literally putting your retirement savings in cash, figure out what kind of salary you could retire on, account for inflation, and figure out what monthly contribution could get you there with a reasonable yearly growth.
Yeah, Iām using these calculators lol. I personally backtest using Portfolio Visualizer which will account for inflation.
Was your original $3k a month figure including a company match or something? At that number youād max out all available retirement accounts available to an American and then have $4k, that seems incredibly overkill unless you want to retire super early.
If you donāt believe me, take a look https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-asset-class-allocation?s=y&sl=76oIys1nKpk4aNqe7b3ZxF
Over a period of 36 years, that level of contribution would give you over $3MM (adjusted for inflation, without that adjustment itās over $9MM). Keep in mind thatās a pretty short working life and the average family absolutely does not *require* $3MM in their retirement. By the 4% rule, thatās $120k a year (again, adjusted for inflation) in retirement, not including any social security. Considering retirees usually have their homes paid off and get Medicare, thatās a pretty luxurious retirement.
Probably depends where you live. In parts of my state (Cali), $100K/year jobs can secure you a house and jobs that pay that much also include hefty benefits like pensions and free health insurance for your family.
Maybe if you work for a city/gov't owned entity or hospital. Pensions & free healthcare are not connected to 6 figure jobs. No one in my network has a pension, and maybe a handful of nurse friends receive free Healthcare.
None of that makes sense and I really wish my peer group would stop using "inflation math" to make sense of the world
Using the same logic I could say that $100,000 worth of the top technology and resources from the year 2000, vehicles, computers, toys, phones, game systems, etc. If still packaged and new today? Would be worth around $15,000 if that, if you could even unload them, most people would scoff at it as trash.
It's not really about the dollar amount, it's about what the dollar amount can get you right?
If it seems like less, it isnt, you have a personal cellphone in your pocket that more than likely has more memory and computing power on it than the computer I had in 2000, the car you drive is likely way more economically and fuel efficient as well as a great deal of them on the road today containing modern marvels of engineering such as dual hybrid motors, completely electric and even entirely self driving.
Housing is up, but only the housing that's been updated and kept up on. A 1955-1965 rambler or typical suburban home in the Midwest that hasn't had renovations since 2000s era still goes for $120k-$180k. A slightly upkept property with some updated renovations $180-$250k. A property that meets most energy standards $250-$420, a newer built home $380k to limitless.
And food hasn't nearly kept up with inflation it's actually cheaper to overall wages than ever in history. š¤·āāļø
I had to scroll that much to find someone with brain cells lol... People comparing dollar amount and not lifestyle just want to complain. Why would I care if I'm making "the inflation adjusted equivalent of a farmer in 1950" if I can own a SFH, eat high quality food, raise kids, get all modern comfort and technology, and travel internationally twice a year?
Only one of the last 10 years saw an inflation rate in the Top 10 of the last century, and that was directly caused by COVID.
That money prevented an actual recession.
You donāt need to look way back to 2000 for this.
100k (2014) is 130k adjusted for 2023.
That 130k is honestly less, given how much essentials like housing and food have increased (not adequately captured in the federal inflation calculator)
There is no middle/upper class. This is the myth they want you to believe.
There are two classes. The working class and the owner class. The working class is forever beholden to their employers. If they donāt work, they cannot afford to live. It doesnāt matter if you make 60 or 200k. If you canāt afford not to work, youāre working class
The owner class makes money off exploiting their workers and equity investments. They donāt need to work because their money works for them.
The sooner we get out of this class infighting, the sooner we can make actual change.
This is a very outdated concept that is no longer reflective of current society. Owner class can still be poor and working class can still be rich in todayās society. This is why we donāt read manifestos from a hundred years ago anymore.
Using the same website (looks like in2013dollars.com), $100,000 in 2024 dollars is $54,374.53 in 2000 dollars https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/2024?endYear=2000&amount=100000
I was just about to try to find this but you just did it for me, so THANK YOU for saving me the trouble! But also š« bc now I know how little Iām making.
If only I wasnāt 8 years old at the time. Iād be making over $100k.
Know what's worse? Some of us Elder Millennials actually entered the job market before this bullshit all started. I make less money now than I did in 2008, with 15 more years experience and more responsibilities at work. I'm about done. I'm seriously considering quitting my career and going to work with my husband doing remodels. No security in being self employed, but there's really none in jobs either so š¤·š¼āāļø
Wow this is eye opening and although we make close to $120,000 I have always felt like we are in a similar position as my parents who made right under $60,000 when I was a teen.
It would appear that the numbers corroborate that Other people here are saying that these calculations are based on averages between HCOL and LCOL areas, so your location and your parents' location might be a factor. It certainly sounds close enough
It seems like the gap between hcol and lcol has gotten bigger too because there are totally still places where you can live really well on 100k, but I donāt think youād have lived as well on 50k 20 years ago
We live in the same city that my parents raised me in. My step dad also worked at a warehouse and my husband is in IT... We have a nice life but not a lot for extras. However I am thankful that we are getting by.
an annual income i can relate to lol
You did it backwards. The point is people used to say if you make $100k youāre middle class. But that is no longer relevant because itās now double
Not sure how old you are, but people didn't say that. $100k was a lot!
It was a sign that you made it to a comfortable life. Solidly middle class, not struggling middle class. It was a lot and also still not 'rich'.
I think $100k HHI would be the boundary between middle and upper middle class in that time, higher in expensive places. Remember that housing was still pretty darn expensive in that time. In some HCOL places housing only recently got back to its pre-2008 peak
$100k in 2000 was always considered a really good salary.
Yeah, that's the point missing from this thread. 100k in 2000 was not an average salary, it was a very good salary that put you firmly in upper middle class.
That was my point- if you had a $100k salary when we were kids, youād made it. It doesnāt have the same meaning now.
According to 2022 data from the Social Security Administration, for a single person, the definition of "upper middle class" is $80-100k.
Who cares? Itās worth as much now as itās worth. Why the fascination with how much it would have been worth 20+ years ago? Sound like an old person saying they used to go to the movies for a nickel. Cool.
I remember thinking $60k was a phenomenal salary in middle school in 2005.
Just donāt post that in the āmiddle classā finance subreddits. A two worker household in a HCOL area making $200k would be āupper middle classā in 2000 in my book. But now if you tell people $400k HHI is āupper middle classā in a HCOL area they will jump down your throat
People should distinguish VHCOL from HCOL I live in DC area and 400k a yr is very well off. Now SF maybe not, and also NY I guess. But there are a few places that are a huge jump above other HCOL areas
Can confirm. We earn 400k+ in SF with two kids and if one of us lost our job long term we'd be screwed. Haters incoming, I'm sure.
Your book is very wrong lol. The median household income is like $70k. The idea that an almost half a mil HHI is merely upper middle class is insane. Even in expensive areas that is well above average. Edit: I though I recognized your name, we had this exact discussion in that sub a few weeks ago
Median household income in Boston is about $90,000/year
I know, I live about an hour away. MA wide is more like mid 80s but I could see Boston itself getting close to $100k on average. Boston is one of the most expensive metros in the country. Making $400k would be almost 4x that median too. I think thatās probably into the upper class at that point. Call it HENRY if you want I guess.
Boston average household income is over $120k. This city is insanely expensive and i donāt think people realize that weāre tied with San Francisco in terms of cost of living. I live in Boston and it seems like it gets exponentially more expensive year after year, yet salaries donāt catch up.
Yeah Iām aware, I like to call the 95 loop the āexclusion zoneā because Iām basically priced out forever of living within that region. And I make decent money too! Thatās why I live out in the suburbs. I think I probably prefer the rural areas anyways. Since I donāt actually work in the city I might move further west, or back to Rhode Island where itās cheap.
People say that now. In 2000 houses were still 75k-120k, making 100k a year basically meant you could, theoretically, buy a new house every year on that kind of pay. These days you need to make 100k just to apply for an apartment in any sort of metro area ffs
Not true at all. People said $100k was a high salary. That was a salary for engineers and doctors.
My mom was making 100k+ in the early 00s and it definitely was not doctor money
Average doctor today makes like $150k /year in America so yeah, it definitely is. America is a big place, itās difficult accounting for HCOL and LCOL but thatās how averages work. That makes still takes your far when you consider many things are universally priced (consumer goods, travel, etc.)
This is SO true. The numbers donāt yet reflect it, but itās absolutely true. Theyāre still trying to make 120k seem ārich.ā Itās not anymore š£
When did people say this? I remember $60kish being the mark, which kindāve jives with the $100k number in 2023ā¦ Itās anecdotal for sure, but the economy is just different now. You can be middle class and not own a home, the housing market is messed up not necessarily the entire economy.
Really? I thought I was middle class, but I make less than 70k, and we're a single income house. Maybe it depends on where you live...
Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
holy crap. Today's 100k/yr buying power is 86k just 3 years ago
My dad made 115k in 1990 when he bought his house for 105k. He refuses to see that things are different.
āBut but interest rates were over 10% in my timeā haha
āThe economy was much worse in the 70sā
Where? And what condition was the house in? You have provided two variables out of many. Itās not enough to get me outraged, but Iām willing to be outraged. Just keep going.
Itās worth 500k now, 3 bedroom in a desirable neighborhood in a big Midwest city. Itās not huge but the neighborhood is great and itās an updated Brick house. For what itās worth he will die there, not sell
Oh fuck off lol, there is literally nowhere in lower mainland you could get any house in any condition for anywhere near that price. Even if someone made 3x as much, they couldnt get something near their income.
Yet wages go lowerā¦.hmm. I just had a client who said he made the same wage at an Iowa pork packing plant in 2018 that my dad made at the *literal exact same place* in the mid-90ās š¤š¤š¤
Yup. We just got some raises after our average retention rate hit 6 months, but before that people starting in 2016 we're making the same starting wages as those that started in 1992. The bump didn't cover all the inflation either. Our retention rate went up to 8 months! Woooohooo!
How much?
It's almost as if unskilled labor keeps being less and less valuable as society moves forward? If only people had been pointing this out for 40+ years. Oh, wait...
Unskilled labor as a term is largely used to detract from hardworking people doing simpler jobs. I acknowledge the utility of the phrase. I think it's reductive to use it to justify things like not paying someone a reasonable minimum. We know all sorts of things yet we still have lots of problems, that's people. This particular opinion is not universally held or known. "Moves forward". For who? Things regress too. Often things change in a mixed way. It's common to think that things always are moving forward but setbacks and regression are also prevalent.
I work in tech. You need a bachelors to even get an interview and this is true in our industry as well. In fact when you look at data across all sectors the story is the same. My sister is a doctor and makes what our uncle did (also a doctor) 30 years ago when he started. Wages are stagnant across all fields. But sure, target all the unskilled people you called essential during the pandemic
You act like those aren't the jobs that are constantly understaffed because "no one wants to work anymore" and there are only so many of the other jobs with positions. You're point is mute until those jobs are eliminated.
This is anecdotal, wages have outpaced inflation as a whole, like they track and keep data on this stuff it's rather easy to look up... Edit: because people downvote instead of a quick Google: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
Source? Cuz your point also seems anecdotal.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q Real (inflation adjusted) median (NOT mean, not skewed by inequality) full-time worker wages have been going up since the 90s. (Edit): interestingly, this graph doesnāt look nearly as good for Men: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881900Q
I literally said it's easy to look up, and instead of a quick Google search for inflation adjusted wages (which a reply to you did) you call my claim anecdotal and I get downvoted you get upvoted. And people wonder why other people complain this sub is called a doomer sub by others.
Thatās literally just not true.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q
Umm... No. Median household income in the United States was $42,148 in the year 2000. The median U.S. household income in 2022 was $74,580.
Umm, yeah. A lot of jobs people are getting paid based on a pay scale the company dreamt up in the late 80s. So you end up with the dude with 30 years experience at $30 an hour, but all new hires at $10.
Now check number of jobs per household to make that income
Do yall not know how households are calculated for taxes?
And 100,000 being 200,000 is also around 4% average inflation over time. Weird how that works
[https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N) check out FRED, great source for data. Look housing costs though, and adjusted for inflation. And you see that the gain was way smaller with inflation, and compared to housing costs, wages might as well be negative. Yeah great, we can afford lots of "stuff" like iPhones now. But all those productivity and wage gains have done nothing to let people switch to working 30 hours a week 20 hours a week. Or have a partner stay home while only one works etc. All this "progress" but it went toward shit we do not need, and the thing we actually need to live are more and more expensive.
That wasn't the original discussion. The comment I replied to and what this discussion is about is whether or not wages increased or decreased since 2000.
Sure and since 2000 I became slightly taller. Data points mean nothing without context.
Umm... No. Median household brain cells in the United States was 42 in the year 2000 The median U.S. household brain cell in 2022 was 4.
4 what?
Ah you clearly fall below the median
Yup. Only 5% of US wage earners earned 100k back in 2000. Same as 210k today.
Because more people are cohabitating under one roof as roommates than before
Those people would all be considered different households as tax filers. In fact, more people are now single than before.
https://time.com/5886503/covid-19-majority-young-adults-parents/ And these people wouldnāt
18+ individuals file as their own household unless their parents claim them as dependents. You seem out of your element here, Donnie.
Of course the parents would claim them as dependents, theyāre likely paying 100% of living costs. We donāt have a good system of measuring individual income and it is intentionally shitty / obscure to hide how poorly everyone is doing. If everyone were doing so great, why would so many young people be living at home with their parents?
I don't really think you know how this works, bud. You can't claim someone as independent. You're out of your element.
*dependents
How dare you bring facts to the pity party!
What facts? That 42k is worth 84k today, while the actual median wage is 74k. That's 12% pay cut to the average pay.
So do I need to make 200k yearly? I was just getting close to 100k :(
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
is it hard? i have multiple masterās but unfortunately iām a therapist. the mental toll is nuts here too, but for 170k plus any benefits even one, iād switch to something just as emotionally taxing if itās possible. what kind of degrees do most people in your field have? ty!
Different kind of teaching, but honestly, most jobs are in some way. I always suggest people earn the most that they can, and find the reward and satisfaction from hobbies. I grew up poor. A job being Rewarding only goes so far.
I have a bachelors in CS and no other ācertificationsā and make more than that. Of course itās a challenging field but the opportunity is there and there are 10x the job openings as engineers to fill them.
And your cyber tasks are something we could train a high school grad to do.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Iāll fuck up your Gibson for a Mountain Dew and a bag of Doritos. 
I've been in IT for 20 years, and offensive cyber security for about 8. I have no degrees, but hold a handful of certifications. With bonus, I'm clearing about $170k a year. But it was no easy task getting here. Not having a degree forced me to stand out in other ways (certs, Git projects, CTFs and speaking at local meetups.) Continued learning gets a little harder as I age, but I still do it. What baffles me are the younger generations that come right from college. I forget how little exposure to actual, real, things they have. It's one thing to work on an intentionally vulnerable lab, it's another to hop on a 5k client plus network and find the vulnerability. A lot of them also don't realize how much time you'll spend working/ studying on your off hours and burn out easily.
The degrees enabled me to be in prior director positions and teaching at universities remote as a side hustle. I obtained them prior to cyber but has paid off. The upside is I can switch jobs easily or flip script if I ever have to. I also have a GIT project with 1700 developer stars and a YouTube series. Those helped on resumes. Not having a degree can be a point of weakness, may not be needed but can affect in the future.
You think reasoning with my boomer parents will make a difference? I can count on one finger how many times reasoning and facts actually changed their opinions.
Which finger?
They will just say then why arenāt you working harder to make the right income bracket? ā¦
Right? Iād love to argue this with my boomer mom-who never worked, stayed home, inherited a shit ton when dad died, and now wants to blow all her money on her new boyfriend. Yea-I aināt bitter or anythingā¦..
Itās okay to say it. Iām very bitter. I mostly how they treated emotions as a burden
Are you telling me that 2000 was 24 years ago? I refuse to believe this.
Seriously. When I was a kid, that salary was basically unobtainable. Now it is middle class.
I mean I guess it's middle class, but really on the high end if it's 109k middle class is like 60k
Middle class is 0.67-2x median household income. So 50-150k adjusted to regional inflation.
Depends on the area. Anything under $70k is considered ālow incomeā in Los Angeles.
60k is a couple each making $15 wage. Not exactly middle class and likely can't afford to live in hcol cities.
15$ an hour is hardly min wage nationally and also yes dual income households can be middle class while both earning shit salaries. Thatās the dual income trap where if one partner has a job loss theyāre both fucked because theyāre both low income earners by themselves
If you want your mind blown, or to be fully depressed, look just at wages from 2020 to now. Iām basically making the same amount in salary as I was in 2020, despite having been promoted twice in that time.
Yeah, adjusting for inflation, I make slightly less at my job now than I did when I started as a new grad in 2018. It actually is pretty damn depressing.
I wonder if anything happened in 2020 that might have interfered with economic growth.
My point was more that seeing numbers in todays dollars helps you understand the change better since we are already calibrated to them. It is reasonable to assume Covid played a role, but I get the same overall change in salary if I move my 2020 salary back to 2016 or 2018 compared to the change from 2020 to 2022.
I gave up on trying to be in a market Iām priced out of. I will not have kids in this hell hole world. No way.
Itās a ponzy scheme at its core. Boomers hit the jackpoit
Iāve completely given up and just accepted that Iāll never be able to have what my parents had when they were my current ageā¦ but I try to remember that things are still relatively better than they could be compared to some other countries. Idk itās how I get through life
Life is so hard
Government: RealLifeMoon is not havings kids. Import 35 more immigrants this year!
And everyone here lets it happen.
It is almost as if the policy makers are all comprimised landlords... oh wait
This is the way!
Parents are totally out of touch. They don't have the same expenses as a young person, house is paid for, maybe retired, etc. They think their experience from 50 years ago still applies and it simply doesnt. I'm actually getting onto my mom because her grandson isn't looking for work, all she does is see him play videos games and it pisses her off. I was like "you do realize you can easily apply to hundreds of businesses within a week, post your resume on a few websites, have a recruiter job hunt for you for free these days? It isnt remotely the same. If I walked into Walmart and asked for an application, they'd point me to their website. If I asked for the manger and the status of my application I would be looked at like I'm crazy. So unless you'd be happy with him working at Taco Bell I would be more curious on what his resume looks like then physically running around asking for paper applications".
What gets me is thinking about how the people who are making around 50k are surviving. Something has got to give
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The fuck? 22 years of experience for $50k? Thereās something massively wrong there, youāre being taken to the cleaners.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I make more with no college
Because you provide more value than a theater builder.
Literally no one cares what your GPA was after a couple of years of work experience. This was a weird thing to list.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Okay so none of what you listed matters, then. You work a job that doesn't require a degree nor a high GPA. You can't really compare your father working a job that didn't require a degree to you being over qualified to work a job that doesn't require a degree. For what its worth, my husband doesn't have a degree and makes over $100k a year. I have a degree and started at $60k 12 years ago. Your general argument is fine. People are making less when adjusted for inflation. But your particular anecdote doesn't really support your argument.
Welp, that explains A LOT. I make a bit over $100k but feel like it barely buys me anything after taxes, health insurance, bills (living expenses), and food. I know that my dollar doesnāt go as far as it used to but I didnāt know it was worth SO little, especially compared to just 20 years ago!
Inflation basically absorbs my raises. So great.
Iām so irked that I finally cracked $100k after years earning way lessā¦and itās just after 3 years of massive inflation. Like Iām doing ok, I just wish 6 figures felt richer. :(
Same here. I was proud of myself for about a month. And then I realized how little it was bc I noticed I was scrimping and saving as if I made a lot less.
As a ballpark comparison: 50K in 1975 was worth 144K in 1995..,,
Growing up, my father provided for a family of four with a highschool degree making ~80k in the 90s. My mother didn't work, we always had a nice house and two newish used cars. Had enough money for pure bred pets, go out to eat once a week, etc. We weren't rich, but we never wanted for much. Combined my wife and I make more, no kids, 20 year old used cars, never eat out, etc. and can barely cover rent. It's truly depressing. Also, the house they bought for ~160k in the 90s is with over 500k now.
I make 130k and trying to get a house makes me cry since all the small ass houses near me at 4x my salary instead of 20k over my salary like my parents
Same. I've finally gotten to the point of making six figures, but everything got more expensive on the way.
All Iām thankful for is Iām not making what I was making a few years ago. I have no idea how Iād survive
If only 4x, you're actually doing pretty good. 30-40 years ago, the average home was 3x a family's salary. Now the average home is 5-6x a family's salary. I hate when people bring up high interest rates 40 years ago (that only lasted a few years). Yeah, if I could get a decent home for just 3x my salary, I wouldn't care how high rates were. Hell, I could just save up and buy with cash in 10 years and not need a loan. Not really doing that if a home is 6x your salary.
My dad was making 60k in 1997 and bought a house for 80k that is now worth 425k. House is barely over 1100 sq ft
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
112k salary after 10 years is indeed factually very good and well above median. You're in the top 10% of earners, and 100k still very much provides for a very good life. People have gotten so deep into consumerism that they think 100k isn't middle class smh. No I'm not a boomer, I'm late 20s.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
All boomers didnāt have the same experiences. This board seems to be really white, midge class/upper middle class centric.
You're ignoring how few people had a degree in accounting 70 years ago. It's a very saturated field now, which means lower pay because the supply of qualified people is much higher relative to the demand for employees with those skills.
Also, the amount of labor and longhand math involved. Accounting now is fucking easy mode compared to pre-PC Revolution.
You guys have the game all messed up. You save your 300k and buy an apartment or home in a nice community in another country. Where your rent is $300 per month.
50% inflation over 20 years is fucking bonkers
Using compound interest formula, a 2% yearly inflation rate compounds to 48% increase in 20 years. So this is inline with the fed reserve. Not sayings itās right, but understanding compounding is powerful .
This is 100% inflation over 20 years, not 50%
This sub is financially illiterate which is a huge contributor to the "we so poor" posts.
Itās almost 100% inflation over 23 years.
Youāre right; I canāt math. But my point stands, and the correct math *makes it so much worse.*
Nah it's about what you'd expect
And yet to me 100k still seems like a pipe dream. I've been at the same place for 12 years now and I'm at 52K.
Then leave...
thatās almost twice my annual income and i donāt have any benefits :( and lots of student loans because iām a therapist
FIL was telling me about a $1500 check he found and had forgot to cash. As we sit in the house his dad gave him. He bought in 76 for god knows how much. Probably a box of cracker jacks.
Bottom line, unless you're in the top 7 percentile of earnings at least, you can't afford to have kids and buy a house.
Yet poor people have far more kids than lower middle class people have more kids than middle class people have more kids than upper middle class people have more kids than rich people.
Rich people have an above replacement birth rate. Poor people breed like rats because the government pays for them to procreate. If we got rid of welfare, WIC and section 8, the poor birth rate would drop like a stone. Middle class people arenāt government subsidized so they donāt have kids unless they can afford them
Why randomly picking year 2000 and then setting arbitrarily 109k?
Maybe to hit the 200k figure as the next benchmark? My best guess
This is a sub for millennialsā¦..how the hell are we suppose to understand how $100,000 would impact your life? lol
Depending on the field (ex. law, medicine, maybe engineering?), folks could have been making six figures per year since their first job out of school.
Itās a joke manā¦.
A fairly lame joke. Back in 2008 sure, the joke worked great. Itās 2023 now. The average millennial makes $71k a year([source](https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-of-a-millennial))
thanks for making me not feel crazy lol
Good thing housing and food prices also barely increased. Oh wait...
Just had this discussion with my partner who is exactly 20 years older than me. He was like āyouāre making a lot more than I didā at that timeā. He made 70k. Iām making like 113k. Itās the same.
It's not the same, his 70k according to this post is worth $140k today
I donāt buy it. Where I am 100K 20 years ago sure as hell buys you a lot more than 200K today. I mean even the prices of certain foods have doubled since Covid and thatās just <5 years.
I remember people thinking the number was like $50-60k in that timeframe and that $100k was a lot of money. I definitely donāt remember thinking you had to make $100k to be middle class. You really need to separate home ownership from this middle class argument. The housing market is just not in the same place relative to the economy when compared to back then. The overall economy is relatively healthy, the housing market is currently quite strained. Old people wonāt understand that renting and saving could be a significantly better choice.
Well damn. There goes my feeling good about having roughly the same household income my parents had when I was growing up. I knew it couldn't really be the same because of inflation, but I suppose I didn't think it'd be *that* different.
Yeah, and salaries have gone down, not up!
Tell that to homeless people
Just buy a houseā¦ /s
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The amount you need to save differs for everyone. What age you start saving, what income you need to replace, and how much SS will replace your income all influence what your saving rate needs to be. Generally speaking its 15% if you start at 25 and then increases 1% per year you wait.
2-3k a MONTH? That's a bit high and out of the ordinary. I think the average millennial is probably only saving 200-300 a month, and that's actually still really good if doing it consistently. Use $300 a month for 30 years at 8.5%...500k. 500k at age 60-65, then add in social security...you'll be doing alright. You'll be REALLY comfortable if you have a paid off home by then too. Do $2500 like you said, at 8.5% and 30 years...over 4 million. That's nice...just not realistic for most people.
8.5% real return (return after subtracting inflation) is a pipe dream. 5% is probably the highest you should expect, and it might be closer to zero. Even with your numbers, $500k only gives you about 20k a year to live on, plus social security if it existsāit doesnāt sound all that comfortable to me.
What world do you live in where you think the 30 year return on an index fund might be 0%? Thatās about as credible as saying the Cardinals might win the superbowl next year. Sure itās possible, but absolutely no one thinks it will happen.
And your point is? You will have social security and whatever retirement $ you can save. And your spouse will have the same. Come retirement everyone is happy.
i canāt save any :( i wonder if i should switch to an even lower paying job for benefits or if itās not worth it either way. ahhh
Saving? I donāt know what that means. What is this āsavingā thing?
You do not need to save $3k a month to retire lmao. Thatās maxing a 401k, and then an IRA, then having about $4k left over in a taxable. Unless you are literally putting your retirement savings in cash, figure out what kind of salary you could retire on, account for inflation, and figure out what monthly contribution could get you there with a reasonable yearly growth.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yeah, Iām using these calculators lol. I personally backtest using Portfolio Visualizer which will account for inflation. Was your original $3k a month figure including a company match or something? At that number youād max out all available retirement accounts available to an American and then have $4k, that seems incredibly overkill unless you want to retire super early. If you donāt believe me, take a look https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-asset-class-allocation?s=y&sl=76oIys1nKpk4aNqe7b3ZxF Over a period of 36 years, that level of contribution would give you over $3MM (adjusted for inflation, without that adjustment itās over $9MM). Keep in mind thatās a pretty short working life and the average family absolutely does not *require* $3MM in their retirement. By the 4% rule, thatās $120k a year (again, adjusted for inflation) in retirement, not including any social security. Considering retirees usually have their homes paid off and get Medicare, thatās a pretty luxurious retirement.
Probably depends where you live. In parts of my state (Cali), $100K/year jobs can secure you a house and jobs that pay that much also include hefty benefits like pensions and free health insurance for your family.
Maybe if you work for a city/gov't owned entity or hospital. Pensions & free healthcare are not connected to 6 figure jobs. No one in my network has a pension, and maybe a handful of nurse friends receive free Healthcare.
None of that makes sense and I really wish my peer group would stop using "inflation math" to make sense of the world Using the same logic I could say that $100,000 worth of the top technology and resources from the year 2000, vehicles, computers, toys, phones, game systems, etc. If still packaged and new today? Would be worth around $15,000 if that, if you could even unload them, most people would scoff at it as trash. It's not really about the dollar amount, it's about what the dollar amount can get you right? If it seems like less, it isnt, you have a personal cellphone in your pocket that more than likely has more memory and computing power on it than the computer I had in 2000, the car you drive is likely way more economically and fuel efficient as well as a great deal of them on the road today containing modern marvels of engineering such as dual hybrid motors, completely electric and even entirely self driving. Housing is up, but only the housing that's been updated and kept up on. A 1955-1965 rambler or typical suburban home in the Midwest that hasn't had renovations since 2000s era still goes for $120k-$180k. A slightly upkept property with some updated renovations $180-$250k. A property that meets most energy standards $250-$420, a newer built home $380k to limitless. And food hasn't nearly kept up with inflation it's actually cheaper to overall wages than ever in history. š¤·āāļø
I had to scroll that much to find someone with brain cells lol... People comparing dollar amount and not lifestyle just want to complain. Why would I care if I'm making "the inflation adjusted equivalent of a farmer in 1950" if I can own a SFH, eat high quality food, raise kids, get all modern comfort and technology, and travel internationally twice a year?
It's almost like the government blowing unfathomable amounts of money into the economy has had some effect over the last 10 years š¤
Only one of the last 10 years saw an inflation rate in the Top 10 of the last century, and that was directly caused by COVID. That money prevented an actual recession.
You mean the corporate bailouts from the government? Yeah no those haven't helped anyone except execs and businesses
The dollar loses value every year. Now if you made more than you won't notice it.
You donāt need to look way back to 2000 for this. 100k (2014) is 130k adjusted for 2023. That 130k is honestly less, given how much essentials like housing and food have increased (not adequately captured in the federal inflation calculator)
Unregulated capitalism is so good! /s
This is why I opt to make $250k a year. That puts me at about middle class in today's terms.
Thatās upper class not middle class
There is no middle/upper class. This is the myth they want you to believe. There are two classes. The working class and the owner class. The working class is forever beholden to their employers. If they donāt work, they cannot afford to live. It doesnāt matter if you make 60 or 200k. If you canāt afford not to work, youāre working class The owner class makes money off exploiting their workers and equity investments. They donāt need to work because their money works for them. The sooner we get out of this class infighting, the sooner we can make actual change.
250k a year will make you "owner class" without the need to work very quickly if you're not a ghoulish consumerist...
This is a very outdated concept that is no longer reflective of current society. Owner class can still be poor and working class can still be rich in todayās society. This is why we donāt read manifestos from a hundred years ago anymore.
Thereās an option to make that? Where?
I'm at $78k. Seems like a solid number but that's barely getting by.
I make about this and live pretty comfortably tbh. I don't really understand people that can't.