← Back to context

Comment by wat10000

6 hours ago

I’m extremely skeptical that well over half of NYC households are in such dire straits.

But even if that’s the case, it doesn’t say “to live alone” or “to live without government assistance.” It just says “to live.”

I don’t think having roommates or a rent-controlled apartment is so terrible that it wouldn’t qualify as “living.” It doesn’t have to be completely literal. If it meant not being homeless, I could work with that. But a number that’s more than 50% higher than the median? I don’t know what the heck it means “to live” in that case. It clearly means something well beyond what the average New Yorker actually has, but I don’t know what and I don’t know why you’d call that “living.”

It's literally in the first sentence of the article:

"New York families need six-figure incomes to live without government assistance in all five boroughs of New York City, according to two new reports."