“These People Have No Idea What Struggle Is”: Twitter Mocks Article Explaining The Struggles Of Those Earning $400k Annually
The use of the word “rich” really boils down to perspective. A poor person may see someone from the middle class as rich, though that same middle class someone might not see it the same way and consider the upper class rich.
However, there’s also a threshold—a very objective one—whereby you can’t but say “yeah, (s)he’s rich.” Many would without a doubt say that an annual salary of, let’s say, $400,000 is definitely one that would define a rich person or household.
Well, turns out, for some, that amount of money isn’t all that much, and Twitter disagrees with such a statement wholeheartedly.
More Info: Twitter
This Twitter user recently pointed out an online article that claims $400k isn’t “exactly living large”
Image credits: rasmansa
In particular, how a family of four living in a metropolitan city wouldn’t really have that much money left over after all of their taxes and expenses
Image credits: CNBC
A CNBC article from October 2020 has recently resurfaced online. The article discusses Biden’s definition of wealth, in particular progressively taxing those with a $400,000 annual salary. However, it considers it from a different perspective—one where $400k isn’t actually deemed “rich.”
It argues that, if you’re someone who has a spouse, two kids, and lives in a major city, $400k isn’t “exactly living large,” especially considering all of the taxes and possible expenses based on FinancialSamurai.com’s calculations.
The article based its arguments on Financial Samurai’s calculations found below
Image credits: Financial Samurai
According to them, monthly net income for someone earning $400,000 is almost $22,000. Deduct the expenses—everything from daycare, preschool, mortgages, and insurance to food, gas, car payments, savings, and other necessities—and you’re left with $3. So, does that really mean someone’s rich?
Well, computer scientist and politics enthusiast Dr. Mansa Keita brought up the $400k isn’t rich statement on his Twitter, saying “I’m convinced these people have no idea what struggle is like,” leading tweeters to start debating the issue.
Well, Twitter reacted by calling it ridiculous and arguing that $400k actually is the definition of rich
Image credits: sextoyspolitics
Image credits: MJRosenbergDad
Image credits: Mutant187
Image credits: JustSteph85
Image credits: 1CourtneyGannon
While opinions and perspectives differed, many of them did agree that it’s ridiculous to say that $400,000 is not rich. Some argued that this kind of wealth still entails that though, at the end of the day, you don’t have much money left, you still end up buying nice things, like 2-million-dollar houses and brand new cars.
Others pointed out that some of the calculations do include overspending, like the $2,000 monthly food budget. Yet others say that there are expenses that can be eliminated, like less shopping or less charity. And think of all the money you’ll save once kids leave daycare and preschool.
Image credits: TracerSpoof
Image credits: NJ_SoulBrother1
Image credits: shawnwillden
Image credits: benhuskinson
Image credits: de2theJay
Also, driving a Toyota as a family of 4 seems more sensible than driving a Lamborghini. Sure, it would be cool, but highly impractical when picking up kids from school.
Though there were some who confirmed that, for example, it is quite realistic for a family of 6 to spend as much as the table claims a family of 4 spends on food, making it quite plausible in their opinion.
Image credits: WinProgressive
Image credits: louisca39211584
Image credits: GoldenCurlze
Image credits: ibumichele
Image credits: emulvey2001
Others said that the mentioned $2M home could quite likely end up being just a 1,500-square-foot affair on a tiny lot with no yard and originally built five decades ago—nothing rich about it. But, the overall consensus is that it could have been mitigated by simply being smarter with the money.
The tweet ended up garnering nearly 40,000 likes with thousands of retweets. It also made some headlines on the internet.
Image credits: EthanObama
Image credits: CarynLonz
You can read more replies by checking out the tweet replies. But before you go, tell us what you think about this in the comment section below!
This is ridiculous. The problem with people like this is that they're already living beyond their means, and unwilling to budget a reduction in their luxurious lifestyle to pay taxes. (1) You don't need a car in a metro area, never mind a gas guzzling, high end SUV. Use public transportation. (2) Your savings plan clearly includes 16 years of private schooling for two children. Send your kids to public school. (3) If you're spending $65/day on food, cut back on restaurant meals and takeout. (4) Don't buy a $2M house, then bitch that you can't afford it. (5) No one needs a 20G/month data plan unless they're streaming porn all day long. (6) If you're taking three vacations a year, STFU. You ain't poor. (7) If you can afford to give $3G to charity, GTFO of here with your whining about money.
Also, I have four kids who are now teens and adults and have never ever spent anywhere close to $200 per month for clothes even for the entire family and even when they were constantly growing out of everything. That's just nuts.
Load More Replies...
I find it interesting that whenever there's an article about young/lower income people, and how they spend their money, it's always focused on how they need to be better about budgeting, and prioritizing what's important...needs over wants. You know, less avocado toast, and Starbucks, more cook at home, and save, save, save, but you NEVER see that in reports like this. They want to criticize those making $40,000 a year for eating out once a week, but not the people making 10 times that, who seem to be eating out everyday?!?! And if you're pulling in 400k a year, then I'm guessing you have a job with good benefits, and retirement package, those of us on the lower end probably don't have either, so an illness has the potential to bankrupt us, or cost our jobs for missing work to deal with it. And don't get me started on the vast improvements to ones mental health there are, when you don't have to worry about putting food on the table everyday. I realize $400,000 is different, depending on where you live, but this idea that they're struggling too, is absolute nonsense. Just eat out less, vacation closer to home, and downsize subscription services, if it's the supposed "cure all" for our money woes, it can work for them too. God, this reeks of the "rich people are just like you" propaganda bs we see pop up when they don't want to pay their fair share, and I for one am tired of it.
Seriously. These people put almost my annual income into a 401K every year, so cry me a river. I know they aren't the same level as wealthy as people like Bezos and Bezos should be taxed even more, but they are still well-off and it's factually wrong to act like they only have $34 left to pay for miscellaneous expenses. Let's be generous and say they need the mortgage and need the pricey daycare. They still spend a lot of money on variable expenses like recreation, vacation, and oh yeah AVOCADO TOAST or take-out. (Also, I'm not sure why the daycare and pre-school have overlapping times unless it's the price for one of the kids to be in daycare and the other one to be in pre-school.) I wasn't aware that nearly $4K on zoo trips and Netflix was an essential expense. Not to mention, when it comes to younger people, the complaints are that we do too much take-out or Starbucks but that we're bad for killing Applebee's or other chain restaurants. Like pick one.
Load More Replies...
To pick up on the food bill. The chart states a family of 4 spends $2000 on food, including regular deliveries. For comparison, the average UK family of 4 spends (at current exchange rate) $861. That includes what is defined as "food prepared outside the house". Either the US is massively ripped off when it comes to food prices, or this family of 4 is massively, and unnecessarily, spending on food/groceries. This spreadsheet reads as someone who is *very bad with money*! It makes my budgeting brain itch.
This has really bothered me. So I checked the details of a program called Rich House Poor House. (not exactly a reliable source, but the numbers involved are still revealing, even if I'm blowing my credibility!) The families involved are in the economic top and bottom 10%. One of the latest episodes had the Rich family (of 4 - so still comparable) spending $1,785 a month on groceries. That's at a farm shop, not a supermarket (even a high-end one). And for reference, nearly all of the top 10% families who feature on the show are millionaires. If they spend less than what a family on half their income "budgets" for on food - I know why they're millionaires! This spreadsheet is a work of fiction worthy of Hemingway!
Load More Replies...
This is ridiculous. The problem with people like this is that they're already living beyond their means, and unwilling to budget a reduction in their luxurious lifestyle to pay taxes. (1) You don't need a car in a metro area, never mind a gas guzzling, high end SUV. Use public transportation. (2) Your savings plan clearly includes 16 years of private schooling for two children. Send your kids to public school. (3) If you're spending $65/day on food, cut back on restaurant meals and takeout. (4) Don't buy a $2M house, then bitch that you can't afford it. (5) No one needs a 20G/month data plan unless they're streaming porn all day long. (6) If you're taking three vacations a year, STFU. You ain't poor. (7) If you can afford to give $3G to charity, GTFO of here with your whining about money.
Also, I have four kids who are now teens and adults and have never ever spent anywhere close to $200 per month for clothes even for the entire family and even when they were constantly growing out of everything. That's just nuts.
Load More Replies... I find it interesting that whenever there's an article about young/lower income people, and how they spend their money, it's always focused on how they need to be better about budgeting, and prioritizing what's important...needs over wants. You know, less avocado toast, and Starbucks, more cook at home, and save, save, save, but you NEVER see that in reports like this. They want to criticize those making $40,000 a year for eating out once a week, but not the people making 10 times that, who seem to be eating out everyday?!?! And if you're pulling in 400k a year, then I'm guessing you have a job with good benefits, and retirement package, those of us on the lower end probably don't have either, so an illness has the potential to bankrupt us, or cost our jobs for missing work to deal with it. And don't get me started on the vast improvements to ones mental health there are, when you don't have to worry about putting food on the table everyday. I realize $400,000 is different, depending on where you live, but this idea that they're struggling too, is absolute nonsense. Just eat out less, vacation closer to home, and downsize subscription services, if it's the supposed "cure all" for our money woes, it can work for them too. God, this reeks of the "rich people are just like you" propaganda bs we see pop up when they don't want to pay their fair share, and I for one am tired of it.
Seriously. These people put almost my annual income into a 401K every year, so cry me a river. I know they aren't the same level as wealthy as people like Bezos and Bezos should be taxed even more, but they are still well-off and it's factually wrong to act like they only have $34 left to pay for miscellaneous expenses. Let's be generous and say they need the mortgage and need the pricey daycare. They still spend a lot of money on variable expenses like recreation, vacation, and oh yeah AVOCADO TOAST or take-out. (Also, I'm not sure why the daycare and pre-school have overlapping times unless it's the price for one of the kids to be in daycare and the other one to be in pre-school.) I wasn't aware that nearly $4K on zoo trips and Netflix was an essential expense. Not to mention, when it comes to younger people, the complaints are that we do too much take-out or Starbucks but that we're bad for killing Applebee's or other chain restaurants. Like pick one.
Load More Replies... To pick up on the food bill. The chart states a family of 4 spends $2000 on food, including regular deliveries. For comparison, the average UK family of 4 spends (at current exchange rate) $861. That includes what is defined as "food prepared outside the house". Either the US is massively ripped off when it comes to food prices, or this family of 4 is massively, and unnecessarily, spending on food/groceries. This spreadsheet reads as someone who is *very bad with money*! It makes my budgeting brain itch.
This has really bothered me. So I checked the details of a program called Rich House Poor House. (not exactly a reliable source, but the numbers involved are still revealing, even if I'm blowing my credibility!) The families involved are in the economic top and bottom 10%. One of the latest episodes had the Rich family (of 4 - so still comparable) spending $1,785 a month on groceries. That's at a farm shop, not a supermarket (even a high-end one). And for reference, nearly all of the top 10% families who feature on the show are millionaires. If they spend less than what a family on half their income "budgets" for on food - I know why they're millionaires! This spreadsheet is a work of fiction worthy of Hemingway!
Load More Replies...
145
147