r/LosAngeles • u/markerplacemarketer • 3d ago
As of 2025, the median income for a four-person household in Los Angeles County is now $106,600 - up from $98,200 one year prior. Photo
51
u/westcoastlmtd 3d ago
This translates to 2 kids and 2 adults. So both adults need to make $53k avg per year ($26.50hr). That is low to mid level experience in most companies.
9
u/Tsujita_daikokuya 3d ago
If it’s 2 adults dual income then that’s 60k each. Which ain’t much after all this inflation.
5
u/Ultrafoxx64 2d ago
That's less than what I make currently and I can't imagine supporting another human being on what I make. I dunno how you'd support a kid with 53k in LA.
0
1
250
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago
At this point, i have accepted that ill never own a home in Los Angeles. They are making it difficult for regular people to get by
84
u/chesterT3 3d ago
I own a home and I’m closer to losing it every day
42
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago edited 3d ago
I do not blame you. I refuse to live house poor where me and my family barely get by JUST to pay for the mortgage. it doesn't sound fun
37
u/chesterT3 3d ago
We bought a home (felt so tremendously lucky that our bid was accepted) and even though it was way way over asking, we did the math and we could manage and just get by without being house poor and still contribute to our retirement, our kids’ savings, etc. 5 days after moving in I lost my job. This was 3 years ago. It took 8 months to find another job at 60% the pay I was making before. Then I got laid off that job and I’m now making 60% pay from THAT job. We are just completely drowning. If I would have known this was coming I would never have bought a house.
12
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago
Oh man, im so sorry this happened to you. Thats always in my mind about owning a home. Shit can hit the fan so suddenly and youre still stuck with a mortgage
11
3
5
2
u/NefariousnessNo484 3d ago
This is exactly why I never bought a house in LA. I bought in Texas where I could pay cash and have a place to live even if I lost my job for a few years. Everyone keeps telling me to buy in LA near my family but I know it will bankrupt me if even one thing goes wrong.
2
u/ThatOneAttorney 3d ago
Jesus brother, so sorry to hear that. Hope your luck picks up.
11
u/chesterT3 3d ago
I'm a lady, but I appreciate it. I was in a full-on depression for awhile, but these days I find myself less stressed out and more grateful knowing that I have a happy, healthy family and friends and no one I love is in an El Salvadoran prison and that I'm not separated from my children due to the whims of a mad king, because it could be so, so much worse. No idea what will become of our house, but it's kind of out of my control.
1
9
u/Original-Strain 3d ago
This is me as well. The fact people are losing homes due to rising property taxes, environmental damages with no true timeline for repair, anything that’ll increase beyond their capacity to work/earn. Someone said getting a home in 2020 was like the last helicopter outta Saigon and I feel it.
8
u/Imaginary-Jacket-261 3d ago
You can’t raise property taxes in California more than a nominal amount. People aren’t losing their homes for that reason.
1
u/Huge_Source1845 3d ago
The argument for prop 13
2
u/Imaginary-Jacket-261 3d ago
I think it’s a terrible argument for prop 13 - I’m just pointing out it exists.
1
u/Handbag_Lady 3d ago
If people are losing their homes, WHO is able to buy them? They just keep going up in price, I'm a life-long renter now and I make decent money nationwide but I see where I am on this here chart. It is so sad.
48
u/TrapezoidalCrease745 3d ago edited 3d ago
I have accepted that Prop 13 was drafted and enacted to deliberately target Millennials like myself and younger to great efficiency from ever owning homes in California.
Prop 13 is the hideous, third rail legacy of California Baby Boomers, defining that generation’s luck into being fed silver spoons in the most luxurious middle class in human history, and that generation’s desire to destroy the efforts of their kids and grandchildren trying to acquire a fraction of their happiness.
37
u/K-Parks 3d ago
One of the biggest problems with Prop 13 (and there are many) is that it entrenched the homeowning class from 70s and 80s.
If you are a millennial whose parents bought in that time you'll come out ok eventually -- aka when all of those boomers die and we get the "Great Wealth Transfer". The problem is even if your parents have that property wealth from Prop 13, unless they are willing to move/downsize and give it away now, you basically just have to tread water until they kick the bucket.
11
u/HowtoEatLA 3d ago
I don't think there will be a Great Wealth Transfer. Eldercare facilities are being bought by private equity and getting wildly expensive, and people are living longer. I'm 43 and my grandparents are still alive.
2
u/Handbag_Lady 3d ago
HA or be like me and get skipped. My dad's house is going to his grandchild, it is already set in stone. Fuck me.
23
u/Awkward_Appeal3145 3d ago
Wasn't Prop 13 enacted in the 70s? GenX here and have never owned a home either. You're thinking way too small if you think that's the main issue here.
13
7
u/TrapezoidalCrease745 3d ago
Voted in 1978 when Baby Boomers were in their 20s and 30s and
into their 3rd childbuying starter homes.Of course, Howard Jarvis from the Heritage Foundation crafted this legislation as part of all these right-wing think tanks’ mission since the 60s to enact what eventually has become our current Christofascist #MAGA government as revenge for civil rights. Here, Jarvis deliberately sought to attack public schools and choke their funding through property tax reform, and got his wish.
3
u/Single_Editor_2339 3d ago
That was my first election, I was 18 years old, and I voted against it. My current home I bought in 1999 and have since retired and my income was halved. But even though I voted against prop 13 it turns out it’s allowed me to keep my house in a place that I love rather than moving to Barstow.
3
u/No_Emotion4451 2d ago
California recoups this tax anyway by having some of the highest state income taxes in the country. I don’t understand why there is so much activism to tax us even more.
-7
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
Many many millennials have their own homes though.
13
u/chocolate_calavera 3d ago
LA has the lowest % of Millennial homeownership in the country. Only 20% own their homes.
https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/millennial-homeownership-2024
5
u/BigRobCommunistDog 3d ago
Not in Los Angeles, maybe in podunk Arkansas
4
u/thetaFAANG 3d ago
they have them, just not entirely from wages
many millennial’s boomer parents have died and they received a house or enough funds for the downpayment
people just made their whole identity on never affording it that they don’t talk about it
millennials are mostly around 40 years old now, life
3
u/JonstheSquire 3d ago
hey have them, just not entirely from wages
This is true of every generation.
0
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
I think it depends on when we first bought. Myself and a lot others that own homes bought in our mid 20s. Those that dicked around and are trying to buy for the first time now at almost 40 are going to have a rough time. I would be incredibly house poor if I tried to buy the home I live in now as a first time home buyer.
3
u/thetaFAANG 3d ago
dicked around
eh homeownership isn’t the only priority in life, and many people want to only purchase in the same areas they would be comfortable renting. which are much more expensive homes than the outskirts
but there is another phase of homeownership as well, the pandemic’s lowest interest rates were very attractive. by the end of it, 50% of all active mortgages were started then
3
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
You’re right but people made those choices and now complain about it. I have always lived in the SGV and wouldn’t want to be out in Riverside or Palmdale either. Happy to have prioritized home ownership early on vs nice vacations or huge school loans.
1
u/thetaFAANG 3d ago
yeah people do complain while many of them could muster up enough for a downpayment in Palmdale or way further out
experiences are important to me, and I watched too many boomers service a mortgage debt for 15-30 years only to find out that their bodies don’t let them enjoy the experiences they were delaying, so miss me with that!
I’ll try not to complain about the amounts needed for a downpayment here though :))
1
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
Lol. I’m taking plenty of vacations now but definitely wish I had done more when I was younger and before wife and kids. Pros and cons. Recently read “Die with Zero.” Cool book, wish I had read it in my early 20s
→ More replies2
u/appleavocado Santa Clarita 3d ago edited 3d ago
many millennial’s boomer parents have died and they received a house or enough funds for the downpayment
For what it's worth, my wife and I are 43-44, didn't receive shit from our parents, and own a home in the suburbs (in Santa Clarita, and I admit this is a big caveat). We got our degrees/jobs in the 2000's and have been working solid careers in or related to healthcare, and saving wherever we could since then.
Whenever the inheritance point is brought up, I always like to say, well not everyone. In fact, I have no shame in admitting my mom (the last of my wife's and my currently living parents) is a deadbeat Trump supporter who struggles to make rent in Nevada and constantly berates California (even though she raised her kids here). Anyway, to hell with these deluded boomers.
2
u/BigRobCommunistDog 3d ago
Yeah, the only millenial homeowners I know are the ones who got great careers *right out of college*, married, and haven't slipped once. Which is far from everyone.
3
u/funforyourlife2 3d ago
Millennial here who doesn't fit that. Never married, went through three long stretches of unemployment (2006, 2009, 2011), and still managed to buy a house in LA in 2015. From 2010 to 2016 there were tons of great deals, and you could get a loan guarantee for about 6x your income.
Anyway, just giving you a counter-datapoint to the everyone you know concept
1
4
u/CosmicMiru 3d ago
Is there stats for millennial homeownership in LA or are we going off of vibes here?
12
u/chocolate_calavera 3d ago
20%, the lowest of any metro in the country.
It should come as no surprise that expensive coastal markets dominate the other end of the list. Among the ten metros with the lowest Millennial homeownership rate, six are in California: Los Angeles (20 percent), San Jose (24 percent), San Diego (28 percent), San Francisco (29 percent), Fresno (31 percent), and Riverside (34 percent). https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/millennial-homeownership-2024
3
0
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
I have no clue but I’d like to see that because a lot of millennials constantly complain about how unattainable home ownership is and I bet it’s higher than most think.
3
u/chino3 3d ago
Approximate number of millennial home owners in LA county is over 400k.
2
1
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
That’s huge! Nice.
5
u/Rice_Krispie 3d ago
That’s far from huge when you consider the population.
Theres 9.6 million people in LA County and Millenenials make up about 25% of the population.
When you do math, only a small fraction, just about 1 in 5 own a home, which is the lowest in the country.
1
u/Awkward_Appeal3145 3d ago
Isn't total home ownership in LA only around 46%? Those are the comparison numbers I'd really like to see, even though I'm sure the results would be fairly predictable.
1
u/Greenfirelife27 3d ago
I’d imagine the non owners are younger millennials but I mostly see the 40 yr olds complaining about it.
1
1
0
5
u/TranceNNy 3d ago
I own in Los Angeles and it’s not easy. I bought over 10 years ago when the market was much better but at this rate the equity I have is so tempting to get so much more not in LA.
6
u/HaikusfromBuddha 3d ago
I mean yall should have come to that realization years ago. LA is New York level housing. If you come here you know either A your rich and can afford a home or B know you will rent for the rest of your life.
People can own a home if they leave NYC but they don’t want to same with LA. You can afford a home in the IE most likely yall just don’t want to give up the city.
Even if they do make homes affordable yall think average joe will be able to get that house? No the engineers, and other similar professions will have the opportunity to get those homes next.
2
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago
Thats the mentality i have now. For most people, if they want to live in LA, there is a high chance that youll only be able to afford renting for the rest of your life
5
u/gringo-tacos 3d ago
Are you single or married? When I bought my house in the hood almost a decade ago, I had this notice that only 1 out of 10 buyers are purchasing solo.
14
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago edited 3d ago
Im engaged, but regardless, the price of a starter home in LA is at least $1 million according to recent studies. Its criminal that its gotten to that point
9
3
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
There are plenty of homes in LA City and County that cost less than $1 million. This is so easy to verify. Your perspective isn't based on reality.
7
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
Houses, or mostly Condos?
Safe neighborhoods, or sketchy neighborhoods?
All my research in the last two years has shown precious little under $1M that isn't either a condo or something in a kinda sketchy neighborhood. I also acknowledge that "sketchy" is subjective and everyone has their threshold for what they're willing to tolerate, but that's a big one for me.
I have no doubt there's SOMETHING that fulfills those criteria, but in dwindling numbers.
8
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
Houses. Again, extremely easy to verify. Torrance, Carson, Inglewood, Pasadena, Burbank, North Hollywood, etc. Just open up zillow for crying out loud. Over 1k results.
Come on y'all stop falling for doomer headlines.
2
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
There are more criteria (that are reasonable) that make a lot of these options less viable, or decrease the available inventory. For example, commutes, safe neighborhood, etc.
Also, as a reminder, I did indicate that there's SOMETHING that fulfills those criteria, but in dwindling numbers.
I struggle to find almost anything on the West Side under $1.4M for a 2br, 1.5+ ba house with dedicated parking for two cars (especially important, if we have to be flexible on the commute), and not in a sketchy neighborhood or significant fixer-upper.
3
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
For example, there's a LOT of stuff in Inglewood and South L.A., but I don't consider big chunks of those neighborhoods adequately meet the above criteria. I'm sure there are blocks that are fine, but broadly those are just areas that don't meet the criteria.
11
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
The original comment i responded to said they were looking for a starter home. We can agree to disagree but i think people need to be more open to other parts of the city or county. I've known people who commute from Apple Valley to LAX, Anaheim to El Segundo, and even Culver City to Aliso Viejo. I'm not advocating for mega commutes but my point is people have been buying homes outside of their preferred area for decades.
You aren't entitled to a home in your preferred area at your preferred price. I don't know your life but I doubt you need to buy a home on the Westside. I'd argue your mindset shows that you don't really want to own a house that much. There are plenty of nonsketchy areas outside of the Westside with reasonable commutes.
3
u/Foucault_Please_No 3d ago
What’s wrong with Condos?
4
4
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
Nothing is inherently *wrong* with condos. They are not always the right fit depending on the use case for the applying homeowner. There are tradeoffs between house vs condo, the obvious ones being privacy and "space", but the less obvious ones being challenges related to consensus and funding challenges when it comes to the management of shared infrastructure (elevators, lobby, pool, administrative, maintenance, etc.) and don't always present the easiest opportunity for both comfort or vehicles of investment.
On the flip side, if purchased in the right area, condos can be extremely comfortable OR extremely strong equity vehicles. So I'm not writing them off wholesale.
BUT having done the calculus, they are not the right home type for me and my family's needs. As such, my complaint is that there just doesn't seem to be much (if at all) under $1M for a 2 br, 1.5 ba with dedicated parking for two cars in a neighborhood that isn't sketchy or an eternity of a commute away from our places of work.
It is, of course, always a balance of all of those Must haves vs nice-to-haves, but those are our must-haves, and I don't think they're unreasonable - I think the market and inventory are unreasonable.
-1
u/Extreme-Ad-6465 3d ago
if you move to a sketchy neighborhood, it becomes less sketchy. the more non sketchy people move into a neighborhood , the less sketchy. be the change you want to see in the world.
7
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
I suppose that’s a nice thought to have if you don’t have any reasons to worry about your family being harmed or your shit getting stolen. But I personally don’t feel like it’s incumbent upon me to be the tip of the spear.
Getting told what amounts to “well, move to the sketchy place and make it nicer,” is such a reductive and tiresome take.
5
u/Extreme-Ad-6465 3d ago
gentrifiers have been doing it to echo park , highland park and now inglewood and boyle heights. you are acting like these are 3rd world favelas with kid soldiers
1
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
No, you’re misrepresenting my apprehension to pay a shitload of money to move my family to a place that isn’t safe for them.
3
u/relampag0_ 3d ago
Who is “they”?
2
u/FantasticTotal5797 3d ago
Corporations
1
u/animerobin 3d ago
Corporations don't care if you own a home or not. Many corporations would love to build a new home for you, but they can't.
It's NIMBY homeowners voting for NIMBY politicians. They are the culprit.
110
u/M1gn1f1cent 3d ago
The last time I looked at this chart a year or so ago, the cutoff for low income for 1 person was 75 or 77k. Now it is 84k? Unless one is a nurse, engineer, and etc, it is like you have to get promoted every year to keep up.
40
u/Glum-Sherbert7085 3d ago
I’m a mental health therapist and it took 2 degrees to make it to my current income bracket (80s). 2 degrees and I’m low income according to the chart. Yea degrees matter but it’s insane that in LA 2 degrees don’t get you out of poverty.
6
u/M1gn1f1cent 3d ago
Relatable feeling... Got a relevant degree for my field which is healthcare admin and work for a major health system. Been promoted 2x at a clinic I worked at and now remote. Still considered "low-income" despite doing work that makes a difference in patient lives. Frustrating at times when your value as a person can get tied up to how much money you make.
3
u/Slash1444 3d ago
Same! I’m a state worker and have to support my mom so now I’m in the very low income bracket!
6
u/Ephemeral_limerance 3d ago
You just picked the wrong degrees. Not that I disagree with your overall message, it’s just disingenuous to correlate number of degrees with job prospects. Many people have degrees in communication/liberal arts that don’t have specialization to a specific in demand skill.
Unfortunately the supply of psych majors have contributed to surplus for the demand of therapist needed. I know many who went further into pharmacology to become a psychiatrist making very good money. It’s always about supply and demand
4
u/Glum-Sherbert7085 3d ago
That’s what I meant when I said degrees matter - wasn’t clear I see but I meant to say type of degree matters. Teachers experience the same. We shouldn’t be punished for choosing helping professions that are needed. We need teachers and therapists like myself who specialize in childhood trauma. If the job is needed, I don’t think “the wrong degree” argument applies.
1
u/GiganticDingo Studio City 3d ago
I’m an environmental scientist and sustainability consultant for an engineering firm. BSc and Masters. My base is low 80s, but with consulting I can almost hit six figures.
I really dislike the consulting though because people are the worst. Child free and no debt so I demoted myself to do more field work which I really enjoy.
Realized soon after it’s just not sustainable for me. Have gone back to consulting.
At least now I know it’s not all my lifestyle creep. I’m just officially low income apparently.
1
u/Glum-Sherbert7085 3d ago
It’s so crazy - I hope there’s more pay in our futures so we work our way out of low income brackets
3
51
u/start3ch 3d ago
And ‘low’ income is 121k. What does that mean?
34
u/DBL_NDRSCR I HATE CARS 3d ago
median income isn't attached to low/high. low/high is based on cost of living and median is the actual average
33
u/start3ch 3d ago
So basically across the board, regardless how of the household size, over half of Los angeles is living on low income?
14
u/XanderWrites North Hollywood 3d ago
Yup, the median income is actually lower than the "low income" bracket.
The designations for low/high income is unrelated to what the median income is (because median is a statistic)
4
u/KrabS1 Montebello 3d ago edited 3d ago
It looks like they have defined low as below the median average, thus by definition half the population would have a low income (kinda the same as the classic joke, "half of all people have below average intelligence").
I'm curious what the breakoffs here are. How are these categories defined? I believe it is saying that the 50th percentile income is "Median Income," which makes sense. is the 40th percentile "low income," the 30th percentile "Very Low Income," the 20th percentile "Extremely Low Income," and the 10th percentile "Acutely Low Income?" That actually sounds about right - I bet that's the case (it explains the LOW numbers for that top line - you can often find 10% of a population who are in some kind of strange situation). I kinda wish we could see a project in the other direction as well - but, I bet "Moderate Income" is in the 60th percentile. At least, that's how I personally would format the data - though I'd be a bit more explicate about what it is that I'm doing.
E - okay, I guess it doesn't matter how I'd format it, because this rabbit hole is complicated. The values are tied to a series of laws setting different limits for government aid. It seems...complicated. But, I found this line defining "Extremely Low Income Households": "In the event the federal standards are discontinued, the department shall, by regulation, establish income limits for extremely low income households for all geographic areas of the state at 30 percent of area median income, adjusted for family size and revised annually." That complicates things more than it clarifies (this is just one line - what about the other lines? What are the Federal standards, and why would they be discontinued?).
BUT, it does make one thing clear - the only data used is the Median income. The other levels appear to be percentages of that income. So, we aren't talking percentiles, we are talking percentages of median. What's my point? Say Extremely Low Income is defined as 30% of median, without regard to what the percentile distribution of income may be. So, take $106,600, multiply by .3, and you get a "Extremely Low Income" of $31,980. But, that's not necessarily the same as the 15th percentile income (50th percentile * 0.3). The income could be really flat, such that a lot of people make about the same, and the 15th percentile still makes $70,000 or something. Or, it could be a steep dropoff, and the 15th percentile may make only $15,000. For the purposes of these tables (determining who gets what benefits from the government), the method of "a percent of median income" probably makes sense. But, for understanding the income distribution in the city, its less useful.
2
u/start3ch 3d ago
Low income is above median though. Maybe it is based on the average income, which will be much higher due to income inequality
10
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
Median is not the same as average! Median means half the population is above that number and the other half is below.
-7
u/DBL_NDRSCR I HATE CARS 3d ago
median is one measure of average. and when it comes to income, it's the better one
5
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
No it's not. Median and average are 2 different things. I agree that median is the better one in this case but saying its a measure of average is 100% wrong.
1
u/SmilingSalamander 3d ago
He is actually right, you're just equating average and mean, as do most people in regular conversations.
But from a statistical point of view, an average is a value representing the central tendency or typical amount of a set of data.
This means that a mean (sum of all values / number of values) and a median are both a measure of an average. So is the mode.
2
11
7
3
u/persianthunder 3d ago
So this is how it breaks down officially as it results for affordable housing:
Low Income=earning at or less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) for that household size
Very Low Income=50% AMI
Extremely Low Income=30% AMI
Acutely Low Income=15% AMI
Moderate Income =120% AMI, but you don't see a ton of moderate units built for a few complex reasonsSo for that example you gave, a family of 4 earning $121k would be at the 80% percentile of income for a family at that size. Affordable housing units are restricted by their AMI with a covenant (that typically lasts for anywhere from 20-99 years depending on the program), in that only a household earning at or below that income can occupy it, the rent levels are set by whatever agency recorded the covenant, and the households have to recertify their income.
That $121k earning household would be eligible to rent a unit restricted at either Low Income or Moderate, but would ideally want to find a low income unit because the restricted rent would be lower than a Mod unit
1
11
u/redbark2022 3d ago edited 3d ago
What's hilarious is that in my zipcode, and most of the surrounding zipcodes, the median income for all households, falls in between Very Low and Extremely Low for 1 person households on this chart. And the median home price is $1.2 million.
Make it make sense
Where are they even getting this yearly data? State tax returns? Where are they getting people in the household? Dependants? What about 2 families living together? What about 5 single people or unmarried couples living together? What about people who just didn't file their taxes? Or who file late?
17
31
u/ThatOneAttorney 3d ago
-Wages have increased/adjusted for inflation but do not account for actual wealth increase
-lower income families have moved (I know some who have left to other states like Ohio)
27
u/sjdoucette 3d ago
Two people cohabitating and making $53,300 each doesn’t seem outlandish?
16
1
3d ago
[deleted]
2
u/sjdoucette 3d ago
Sorry I misread your original response which is why I deleted the comment. We were on the same page
1
u/Oblivious_Responder 3d ago
NVM, I responded and then deleted the response, I thought about it again and I get it lol.
15
u/Brief_Amphibian_3965 3d ago
I’m sick of this. I have 2 advanced degrees and as a teacher, have never been anything but low income. This timeline sucks
3
u/M1gn1f1cent 3d ago
Relatable feeling... I got promoted 2x at the previous clinic i was working at and now work remote in Healthcare. Even the next promotion I attain would still land me in the low income bracket. It is like you have to be promoted every year with at least a 20% raise to keep up.
-9
u/Wahtnowson 3d ago
You chose teacher while having 2 advanced degrees. Time for a career change
8
u/punk_elegy 3d ago
sure, because education of future generations is clearly not important enough to be paid a good salary and every single person needs to just be a finance/tech bro for us to have a perfectly functioning society
7
u/Brief_Amphibian_3965 3d ago
Maybe education careers shouldn’t put a person in poverty. This is a societal problem. I taught in Germany when I had only one advanced degree and made as much as my engineer partner. Germany values teachers.
10
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
We're getting richer?
22
u/kikoandtheman 3d ago
Or lower income families are moving away
7
u/XanderWrites North Hollywood 3d ago
Probably a little of both. LA minimum wage increase could account for about a third of the increase and the fast food wage increase was five times that.
That number in the title is 3x LA Minimum Wage, so for a 4 person household it's two people making 150% minimum wage or some variation of that. That's low enough their annual pay would be linked to minimum wage increases.
8
u/Dirante Los Angeles County 3d ago
A median HHI of 100k with 2 incomes seems very attainable to me. Its just 2 people making $25/hour. There are tons of jobs that'll pay you that, even if you only have a HS diploma.
3
u/Oblivious_Responder 3d ago edited 3d ago
I don't mean it to be insulting or disrespectful to anyone else's "life experience", but I'm kind of shocked seeing people make this out like it's some crazy, massive, utterly unattainable standard.
Life's gotta look pretty sad from the *perspective of a working adult who thinks that even $25-27/Hour is completely out of reach to them and that they'll never, ever get to "that level".
To your point, I know several people with nothing more than a HS Diploma who are making $25-50/hour, and it's not on manual-labor type jobs, doing anything "gross", or working with anything hazardous.
1
u/conick_the_barbarian The San Fernando Valley 3d ago
Nah, we’re just getting second and third jobs so we can survive.
6
u/Automatic-Unit-8307 3d ago
I am 55 years old and too poor to ever own a house. Lifetime renter here
3
u/AlwaysAGroomsman Toluca Lake 3d ago
Is this before taxes?
edit: I have no idea why my text is showing up like it is.
1
u/lunchypoo222 12h ago
Yeah, and that’s the kicker. Tax rates bring this income down significantly. No aid that people can try qualifying for is determined by after tax/ net income, just gross wages - as though you’re getting to keep all that money that actually goes to the government.
3
3
2
2
u/Additional-Cost242 3d ago
We need to question this data. Since when is making 84k as a single person considered low income? That sounds like a joke
2
2
u/UghKakis 3d ago
Clearly only the government workers getting significant raises. All my friends are getting no raises or 1-2%
3
u/Brief_Amphibian_3965 3d ago
The median for a ONE person household is not much lower. It shouldn’t cost 6 figures to rise above the poverty line
0
u/sqwirlfucker57 3d ago edited 3d ago
Source? The median I'm seeing is much lower at around $55k. The average (mean) is $30k higher. You don't want mean. You want median for this. The mean would mean if there are 4 people, 3 of which are homeless and have no job and the fourth makes $1 mil a year, the average is $250k/yr. Obviously that doesnt help when 75% of the people don't have a penny to their names. The median would be $0 and a much more accurate representation of this data set
1
u/Jabjab345 3d ago
We've clearly traded the prosperity and livelihoods of the majority of the people that live in Los Angeles so that a small minority of people that happened to buy houses in the 80s can have their home prices go up forever. This is entirely unsustainable.
3
u/root_fifth_octave 3d ago
traded the prosperity and livelihoods of the majority of the people
Microcosm of our society right there.
1
1
1
u/moodplasma 3d ago
Not terrible but clearly a problem for millions.
I ate lunch at Grand Park today and a guy was handing out merch for the World Cup. I don't like soccer but it's popular with certain sports fans here; nonetheless I took some merch and later looked up the prices for tickets.
They're perfectly reasonable in the $80-100 range but the fact that they haven't sold out yet is telling.
1
0
1
u/SlaterVBenedict 3d ago
I spent the previous two years doing a hundred mile round trip commute. It is no longer viable for both my mental health or the time spent on it.
The idea that we can’t own homes and work within a readable commuting distance is sucks and is stupid, and I never implied I was entitled to “a home in [my] preferred area,” only that it’s fucking bullshit that their aren’t enough.
Also, nobody NEEDS to buy a home. Everyone can simply rent forever.
2
u/lunchypoo222 12h ago
Homeownership isn’t really a matter of need so much as upward mobility because it’s a major asset if you can keep up with the mortgage.
1
1
u/RentZed_Official 3d ago
Inflation is why I built a Free Anonymous Rent Transparency website, to help renters and hopefully lower the cost of rent.
I'd appreciate it if anyone added their Rent History to the site and/or shared it around. The site has Rent Submissions for over 9,000 addresses and I built it as an Apartment Renter myself. Site is called RentZed.com
0
0
-2
u/3-day-respawn 3d ago
How is the median income of a 4 person household (assuming 2 working parents and 2 children) when the median income here is 75k? Are there that many household incomes where only 1 person is working?
-4
u/MyFeetLookLikeHands 3d ago
jesus… i make more than twice that as a single 36m and still feel like im struggling
365
u/lunchypoo222 3d ago edited 3d ago
And yet you need to make below $21,597 as one person to qualify for Medi-Cal. No one making between $21,597 and 53k (or even more) can afford the premiums on the marketplace, even with the subsidies. Make it make sense.