Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to live on $432 a month in America

shagbark.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 764 posts

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#511

Post by oblio »

johnisgood wrote: post #484
npodbielski wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not angry. I am barely cementator here even. But I find this article radicoulous. For example author mentioned raising family at the beginning. And then mentions no car. How are you suppose to transport kids to school/preschool? 'You can take the bus' - yeah, drive with the bus to one place (kindergarten), then the second (school), then the third (job). In the winter, rain, storm or heat. Yes that is doable but…

What you described is what my parents have done with me. They took me to the kindergarden, on foot. But then again, I live in Europe and it is dense enough here, the kindergarden was about 3-5 km away. You can definitely take the bus, which many people do around here.

The article is about the US and in most places they can't do that.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#512

Post by oblio »

999900000999 wrote: post #340
bcraven wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just utterly astonishing to me. I've just checked a map and it's ~0.5 km between where I park at work and my office!

Your going to have to walk both ways, in the rain/snow, etc ? Like a lot of comments have already mentioned these towns don't even have sidewalks. You'll be walking on the side of the street risking an accident

Is there a lot of traffic in places with 10k residents?

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#513

Post by mattlondon »

Version467 wrote: post #499

This is one of those articles where the comments are really interesting to read through. I see a bunch of comments who don't agree with the exact math, which might be warranted, but it seems at least directionally correct to me. However there's also a bunch of people commenting that this lifestyle isn't viable for some reason or another, that mainly just boils down to a personal preference those commenters don't want…

I think a lot of the complaint I see is people want to have 100% of everything they want, within a 10 minute walk, with zero compromise. I.e. they have unreasonable expectations.

I see people come to London from other parts of the world and ask where they can live that is nice and a 5-10 minute walk from the office and I usually laugh in their faces. If you can afford to live that close in central London (even before you think about "nice"), then you don't need to work. Even single car parking spaces in central London cost more than family houses elsewhere in the UK.

When I got my first place it was on the outskirts of London, cost 20x the average UK salary (and for which I obviously took out a huge mortgage for that basically took 75-80% of my salary at the time to pay), and took over an hour on public transport (which was also not cheap - walking is free but probably about 4 hours each way) to get to central London. And this was just in the 2008-era - it's never been cheap (or even reasonable) to own nice property in the center of a large global metropolis like London where you are 10 minutes walk from your office AND transport AND entertainment AND everything else unless you are ultra wealthy.

People need to lower expectations about locality/proximity and affordability before things become viable. This isn't a new problem.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#514

Post by pastage »

troupo wrote: post #453
permo-w wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

also, if you have a social "thing" like tennis or climbing or drugs or whatever thing you like that tends to have an active and welcoming social community that you're willing to engage with, then the social issue can be dampened somewhat

> if you have a social "thing" like tennis or climbing Then you wouldn't be able to cut down expenses to "nothing"/month. Social thing assumes expenses. Hobbies assume expenses.

Social things are free! You just have to understand that being social is what you pay with.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#515

Post by hasbot »

dangus wrote: post #190
TrackerFF wrote: post #134

I looked through those numbers, and immediately thought to myself - hope you don't need to see a doctor for anything serious, or go to a dentist for that mater. FWIW, I grew up in rural nowhere (population 150, nearest town 45 miles away) - and I honestly don't know how anyone can live out in the boonies without a car. Taking the bus that goes 3 times a day is one thing, needing to move stuff is another thing. I mean…

I will say, at this income level you're on Medicaid. It would be more than nothing but very basic, and if you're using government assistance than you aren't really "escaping" modernity, you're actually living off of the economic surplus of all the people working hard in the rat race. (Don't misinterpret me as saying that social safety nets are bad, I am all for them, but I'm just saying - if the author of this articl…

I was on Medicaid for three or four years and had much better healthcare than when I was on an employer plan. Employer Plan w/ a shoulder injury: no MRI until three months of PT (physical therapy without knowing what the issue is????). Medicaid w/ a foot injury: MRI, physical therapy, option for surgery.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#516

Post by tonyedgecombe »

AstroBen wrote: post #403
owenversteeg wrote: post #305

Like other people here, I have my quibbles with the exact math. But the general premise is true: yes, you can live in rural poverty for cheap. The problem is the vibes. A hundred years ago, you would have a community, a place in society, and all of your family and friends nearby. In 2025, the only actual local job the author of the piece can come up with is at a gas station. Top ten occupations, 1920: Farmers, farm l…

Not saying I agree with the premise of the article at all but making life decisions based on how much others will respect it is a terrible way to live

Yes, it seems the only thing the world around me respects is conspicuous consumption. It's better for your own wellbeing if you can avoid indulging that.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#517

Post by _dark_matter_ »

supermatt wrote: post #424
xp84 wrote: post #270

I've commented (probably too much) to argue with the harshest critics of this piece, but I am surprised to not have seen much this criticism which is my main one: Supposing I've made peace with the main gist of this: Cut living expenses to a point where you can work ¼ or so of the time most of us spend working by living somewhere cheap and not being so materialistic. The missing piece here is social connections. Fami…

This is an example of a place. There are likely many such places all over the USA within a few hours drive of where your friends and family live.

So now you have to have a car? So yes this post is still unrealistic

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#518

Post by esrauch »

999900000999 wrote: post #276
coolcase wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm going to guess that you're a really good shape that a 2 km walk isn't a big deal, but I don't think most Americans can do that. Shit that's horrifying. I have health issues and walking 2km a day to try to help fix. So I see 2km a day as basic. 6-10km run a day would be "fit" IMO. things as humans are designed to walk. Living in suburbia means I have to walk "for the sake of it" although I cam make it useful e.g…

77% percent of young Americans aren't fit for service. 2 km of walking in a day, even in great weather is exceptional for me. I probably average 1km or less. And I'm not a car owner. My family members will literally hop in a car and drive 30 minutes over walking .5 km to the grocery store. They like the other one more they say.

Are you sure you mean .5km? That's only 0.3 miles, 1500 feet. That is the distance if you drive to a Walmart supercenter and park in the center of the parking lot and walk to the door.

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#519

Post by bpicolo »

AStonesThrow wrote: post #472
troupo wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you have a social "thing" like tennis or climbing Then you wouldn't be able to cut down expenses to "nothing"/month. Social thing assumes expenses. Hobbies assume expenses.

> Social thing assumes expenses. Hobbies assume expenses. Entertainment is a line item in the budget: Library + Fishing = “Free” Libraries can be amazingly social, for eggheads. Lots of groups and events meet there in my town. It’s a full-fledged Third Space. [Neither the library access nor fishing gear is without cost, but at least they already account for taxes.] By the way, anyone who benefits from free stuff, for…

Fishing licenses aren't actually free but at least they're cheap

Re: How to live on $432 a month in America

#520

Post by api »

Version467 wrote: post #499

This is one of those articles where the comments are really interesting to read through. I see a bunch of comments who don't agree with the exact math, which might be warranted, but it seems at least directionally correct to me. However there's also a bunch of people commenting that this lifestyle isn't viable for some reason or another, that mainly just boils down to a personal preference those commenters don't want…

You can go to not quite as extreme levels. There are thousands of small towns all through Appalachia, the Midwest, and the Northeast with a bit of interesting local culture and a low cost of living. Not this low but they also have hospitals and often colleges and other things.

If you are a minority concerned about the culture of red America, the 2016 and 2024 elections both provide excellent county by county color coded maps for you.

Telework is what really unlocks this if you’re a developer.

The Midwest also has many medium sized cities. Not as cheap as small towns but not as expensive as the coastal real estate cost traps. I live in Cincinnati, which has three universities, four Fortune 500 companies, a small startup scene, and over a dozen small neighborhoods with walkable streets (overall you’d want a car but you could get away with not using it every day).

At some point the only economically rational decision is to leave very high cost of living cities. I tell people for cities like SF that it might be good to go there to launch your career but look at it like a college. If by 30 you are not making — for SF I’d say over $300k — then leave. You will never get above real estate in those places unless you are approaching mid six figures.

It also negatively impacts what you can do. Even if you can earn that, it might be with golden handcuffs to a FAANG. Think about that. If you want to start a startup, one that is not lavishly funded enough to pay that, then leave. If you just don’t want to be golden handcuffed to a monster mortgage, leave.

Post reply on HN