Re:The Mall of Shame
by b_tterc_p on Thursday January 03, 2019 @11:24AM
(#18816265)
That’s really just a semantic question over the definition of middle class. If it’s median income then sure, those brands are generally out of reach. However for many middle class might also refer to various tiers of purchasing power, in which middle class may represent something closer to the 70-90th percentile of incomes.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
What? The median income in the US this year was $60k which is plenty enough to shop at those stores. Lush's products are less than $15.
Do note that 60k is household income, not individual salary. I don’t know most of those brands well personally, but I think it’s fair to say that most $60k families might have shopped there for splurge purchases but do not do so regularly or casually. What was the statistic from the other day, 40% if families can’t produce $400 without debt or selling things? To your point (and mine), the purchasing power of money varies by context, nominal figures vary in usefulness
Re:The Mall of Shame
by crushcrashcrush on Thursday January 03, 2019 @12:39PM
(#18817072)
$60k after taxes is what, $48k take home? After rent, gas, groceries, insurance, a car payment, what’s left? You certainly shouldn’t be shopping at any of those stores on that salary.
Midwest prices my friend. When I made $60k I was able to put half my paycheck straight into savings and still have a few hundred bucks leftover for 'whatever' every month.
Depends a lot on where you live. I used to make less than that but lived quite well. If your rent and car payment are low, $4k/month could easily leave you > $1k/month to spend on "whatever".
If you live in Silicon Valley and take home $4k/month, not so much.
Right, but nobody NEEDS a bath bomb. It's like saying Voss water only costs $3 a bottle; anyone can afford that. Yes, literally, the homeless guy on the corner can AFFORD it, but that doesn't mean he's likely to make that choice.