#liberal economics annoys me but i hate when conservatives pretend to be all high and mighty

[tinfoil-catholic]

No one said the saying didn't exist.

But it most certainly was coined by generations where getting a college education was extremely doable with minimum wage jobs. In a society where you didn't need a college education to support a family.

The problem is, those people use the "money can't buy happiness" as a reason why more money shouldn't be given in wage. Yet everything is more expensive.

I'm not in favor of making wages more. But it IS absolutely ridiculous to be working for 10/hr and I'm considered lucky because at least I'm making more than 7.25

But full time, 40 hours a week (usually more)? I'm making only barely more than 7.25 an hour after taxes. And I would have to have at least one roommate to survive on that. I wouldn't be able to afford a car to help me get to a better job. Which means it will take even longer to save up for a car and few months insurance. Which means it's more than a year before I can actually look for a better job.

That's me,right now, with no college debt, and that's only looking at ONE thing I would have to pay for. Doesn't include my share of the rent, which in my area for a two bed apartment would be 450/month at the cheapest (split two because of a roommate). It is about 50/month for my phone, because I need phone service so work can call me. For where I am currently living, it's 2.50 to get to work by bus. The closest apartment complex it would be closer to 3.50. So, 7/day [5 days week × 4 weeks × 7 is 140/month]. Those are just the most basic things, and doesn't include water and electric which usually isn't included in rent.

So we have 140+50+450 Just for the most basic things and cheapest possible options. That comes to 640/month.

I make, on average, about 1300/month after taxes.

Let's look at some basic economics of what your budget should look like:

I'm sure you've seen this. However, I would like to make some amendments to it based on what I was taught.

Life should be down to 10%, the other 15 goes to savings.

Now, I don't have debt, so we can split that 10% goes to housing and the other 5% goes to savings.

What we are at for a personal budget of someone just out of highschool with some college:

Housing: 45%

Life: 10%

Transportation: 15%

Savings: 30% this is split evenly between life savings and something like a retirement savings.

What would that percentage come out to for my 1300 budget?

Housing: 585

Life: 130

Transportation: 195

Savings: 390

So, for renting, 585-450=135. For electric (usually covers heating, not cooling), water, repairs, insurance, and taxes. Not really doable, since that 135 will probably be sucked up by utilities or insurance first. Which means any time I have to do something or fix something I have to tap into savings.

Life, eating and such, is actually very doable on 100 a month, but leaves no room for error and you don't really get a break. Ever.

Transportation. 195-140=55 the only reason I would be able to survive paying that little is if I took the absolute cheapest option other than walking or riding a bike. That means I could in no way afford a car, because with a loan for that and insurance, eould be much, much more than 195 a month. I believe insurance for a car is around 100/month for someone who has been driving for awhile? It will go up by at least 50 with your first car. Plus, again, loans. You can't make any dent paying 45 a month.

Savings. Most people say 30% is too much. However, this adds up quick, and if you lose your job, you don't just have two months of rent in savings. This allows you, should you get hurt or sick and subsequently lose your job, to survive. You no longer have that income, but you also don't have to spend anything for transportation. So your spending budget goes down from 910 to 715. 390×2= 780. Which means two months of work would pay for roughly one month of no work.

Of course, you still can't afford to live on that budgeting without almost completely eliminating the savings aspect. And that's assuming you dont have any debt. And you don't have a car. And you have a roommate that can actually help pay rent. And you get the cheapest possible apartment.

That also assumes that you actually are able to work 40/week.

So yes, the phrase was primarily coined and made extremely popular by the previous generation, whom 1300/month would have been more than plenty to live off of, while putting much more in savings.

You don't learn these things until you *actually* join the adult world.

Oh, and don't forget that "life" section also includes gifts to buy for people. And this budget doesn't even get into tithing or charity.

“Money can’t buy happiness” was coined by a generation used to cheap college tuition, livable wages, and affordable housing.