On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 13:08:18 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Friday, September 15, 2017 at 3:53:36 PM UTC-4, Bruce wrote:
>> On Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:40:38 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>>
>> >Bruce wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I think that's wrong. If it was a full-time job, you should have been
>> >> able to live modestly of it at least. Full-time means you give all
>> >> your working hours. I think that should mean you can live off it.
>> >
>> >If you are uneducated and unskilled and accept a minimum wage
>> >job, you can live fine but you have to adapt to the situation.
>> >Live with roommates to split monthly costs, etc.
>>
>> No, not roommates! A little 1 bedroom apartment in an affordable part
>> of town.
>
>Would that be an affordable part of Manhattan, or an
>affordable part of Peoria? I think "no roommates" is unrealistic
>in many urban areas.
>
>A studio apartment in Manhattan is $2500 per month, or $30,000 per
>year. As an example of a low-paying job, let say a dishwasher in
>a restaurant. What restaurant could afford to pay a dishwasher
>enough that, after taxes, he could pay that much rent plus all
>other living expenses?
>
>You are simply not being realistic.

Clearly, Manhattan isn't an affordable part of town then. I also
woudln't try to live as a dishwasher in Paris or London. Unless I'd
accept a very long commute.