That can easily be true, but it’s so ludicrously far from what normal people mean when they say that they “can’t afford McDonald’s for breakfast” that I think it drives the point home pretty well.

You aren’t poor because you already spent your allowance.

The fact that people in the upper echelons of the global upper echelons of financial resources don’t “feel rich” because we have to make “financial decisions” only when we’ve already spent all of the rest of our money is exactly the problem.

This isn’t, like, an upper-class character flaw. There’s some kind of normal human scale insensitivity that makes it really hard to understand how much a dollar is worth to someone else.

But it seems like if you do the math, you should acknowledge that you genuinely are one of the people getting paid off by the pyramid scheme. If you still feel constrained in your options, it’s because everyone at every level feels that way, because the whole system is lubricated from top to bottom by a pervasive sense of personal insufficiency. And actual poverty is still a lot worse.

If that's true and you're making over $400k per year, you're doing something wrong.

As I said in my comment, non-negotiable expenses are high.

You're going to have to go into a lot more detail if you want anybody to believe expenses that high are possible.

I'm currently an educator in a high income area, teaching students of significant wealth. I make about 450k a year.

We are required to live within a specific radius of the campus, which significantly limits my housing choices to high income, low space options. I'm around the middle of housing costs among my peers, and I'm paying 5k a month for 600 sq/ft.

We are expected to provide all resources for our courses, as is fairly normal in the primary/secondary teaching profession. Resource costs are around 200k a year, and this is fairly common among the staff. We are expected to bear it based on the idea that we're "over compensated" for our position, and that this "gives us flexibility to provide tailored education experiences". Nonsense, but I do love the job.

Taxes and health insurance take a bit over 100k a year.

That puts me around 90k gross for a family of 4 (which I have). "Very low income" level for a family of for in my area us 58k. That puts me at 55% above the VLI line. My original estimate was 75%.

I have a significant medical issue that puts a financial burden on us in monthly prescription copays, plus 4 three month specialist checkups, plus the cost of 2 children.

I am NOT saying this is normal by any means. My single healthy peers live fairly well.

I also expect most people to think, "Just get a new job!", which is understandable. However if I were to move back to my previous southern US appointment, doing the exact same job, Id have less net income and not be working in such a cool place.

> Resource costs are around 200k a year, and this is fairly common among the staff.

That certainly explains everything. I'm curious where that money goes? If you're teaching a class of 30 students, you could buy each one a laptop and go on a two-week field trip with individual hotel rooms and still have 100k left from that budget.

We pay for trips, electronics, "lab kits", license fees, PPE, raw materials, rental fees for heavy equipment and due to the nature of the content we pay probably more than we should due to inflated costs related to the specialized nature of the topic and school contracts.

AND we pay sales tax on all of it, which isnt insignificant on already ridiculous costs.

I don't believe that is an ethical choice, even if the students are already extremely privileged.

I do struggle with this every few months though, it is a difficult concept to grapple with, but I always side with trying to provide the best educational experience that I can.

And FWIW, among the other instructors, my costs aren't even particularly high.

I dont want to discuss my medical costs directly, but the uninsured cash cost for my monthly medications is about 5.5k month. Insurance does help significantly, but the final cost is still greater than 10% of cash price.

If you're unable to manage your money it's your fault, but you're not working class

Here's the difference between rich and wealthy. Shaq, is rich, the white guy that signs his check is wealthy.

Rich is something you can lose over the summer in Vegas with a drug habit.

Im not sure why it's difficult to grasp that the difference between gross and net income can be large for some job in some areas, but that is the case for a small number of individuals.

If your after-tax income is $250k and you're spending $130k on loans and medical expenses, it would be foolish to sign up for a mortgage that costs $120k per year.

No they aren't! You can be working class but a millionaire, and you can be upper class but destitute.

What should be the focus is on the total wealth. Who controls the resources eating up all that income? And how much of that controls is concentrated into a few individuals?