Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. Keep in mind median income is 37K, 50K in cities. If you think you can live a fulfilling life on that income then I’d be impressed.
>> Are you saying that for people making median level of income, the US is a horrible place to live compared to the rest of the world?
> Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying.
I just came back from Chad. I've also spent time in Mozambique, Madagascar, Ethiopia, and South Africa. I'm pretty sure that the quality of life for those at median income is quite a bit worse in all of those places than in the US. So perhaps it's a bit hyperbolic to make a statement such as that, comparing the US to the rest of the world.
This thread is a bit reminiscent of the old days when the East German government used to claim - with a straight face - that the Berlin Wall was there in order to keep the westerners from overrunning the Workers' Paradise of the east.
Revealed preference shows that way, way, way, more people are trying to move into the US for economic reasons than are trying to leave.
Of course people want to move to the US, there’s decades of propaganda that they believe in. If they knew what their life would be like they would want to go somewhere else though.
That's why Bill G, Larry E, Jeff B, Mark Z, and Warren B have all left, because the US is a shithole (your word) and they can afford to go anywhere they want.
For you, the question is theoretical. For me, I've lived it.
Before I transitioned into software, I had a very a fulfilling life being paid a mediocre salary as a graphic designer, supporting my family for years and investing plenty of time and money into my hobbies.
I don't know how to convince you of the very real experience I and many others here are having, and I don't really feel like it's a good use of my time. Feel free to keep holding onto your theories.
Every international median income ranking I've seen, which attempts to compare median income on an apples-to-apples basis, puts the US very near the top. Here's one example:
You are a member of a household, even if your household size is only 1. So yes, you are a household.
Imagine a household of two parents and one 17-year-old dependent. One parent works in this household and the 17-year-old has a part time job working 15 hours a week at $9/hr.
The parent who works has an income of $90,000. The 17-year-old makes ~$6,480 for working 48 weeks in the year. The other parent's income is $0. The median pre-tax personal income of this household is ~$6,480. Is this the right statistic to understand the wealth of this population?
Let's then add a household of one making $38k. Then another with one person making $22k and another making $110k. $0, $6.4k, $22k, $38k, $90k, $110k. So now our median personal income is $22k, but a median household income of $96.4k. Does the individual income really reflect the actual average purchasing power of the people in this community?
Going by the median personal income, you're including people who choose not to work or choose to only work few hours or a non-high-paying job potentially because they've got access to other forms of wealth. You're also including retirees who essentially just get by with a small pension or using their savings because they already own their home or live with family or whatever. Going by household income gives a much better understanding of wealth and purchasing power of inter-related people (even people not officially related).