Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Should the poverty line be $100,000 a year? $140K? Odell Beckham describes his own struggles to live on $20 million . . .



Photo above - Odell Beckham Jr poses with his Rolls Royce and other cars in his $9 million collection, while explaining why it's impossible to live on $20 million a year ("That's only $12 million after taxes")

I was caught off guard earlier this year when clickbait articles appeared, claiming an income less than $100,000 a year was “poverty”. (Mine is below that). I had always assumed that somewhere between minimum wage ($15-ish) and $30 was poverty. $100,000? That would mean every teacher and police officer in America is below the poverty line. So this claim is complete BS.

Then Investopedia (link below) saw that ante, and raised the bet to $140K. WTH!! That’s $70 an hour. All the Baristas who are on struje at Starbucks will have their heads explode. Okay, we have too many Starbucks in America anyway. If people want to pull themselves out of poverty they should make coffee at home, instead of popping out for a $7.50 (plus tip) Grande every morning. (Disclaimer - actual prices may be higher in LA, NY, etc.)

This is the problem with national poverty lines that cover all 50 states. And national minimum wages. People in high tax/high housing states will always feel poor. And their jobs will keep migrating to the flyover states, where anyone making $70 an hour is a big shot. Or those coastal big city jobs will be replaced by robots, and soon AI. If everyone insists on $140,000 a year, then robots and AI will replace everyone, and there will be nobody left to tax. Don’t say “tax the corporations”. We (consumers) pay those taxes at the cash register, as Donald Trump so ably reminded us this year.

Why is Odell Beckham Jr in the headline at top, though? He has a $100 million, 5 year NFL contract. And he worries if he can make those paychecks last the rest of his life, once he retires for good, or suffers a career ending injury. I imagine that if you live in Los Angeles mansion, the future does look bleak when you realize your highest earning years are behind you.

Don’t tell Odell to save more and spend less. He’s already tried that, just like you and me. It often seems impossible to curtail your clothing purchases, clubbing habits, new additions to your car collection, and of course the Starbucks fix. In Odell’s case we can assume he picks up the Starbucks tab for his entire entourage.

I’m not making fun of Odell. Even if he is a clueless dropout who played for 4 different teams in the past 4 seasons and was recently suspended for violating the league’s PED (performance enhancing drug) rules. Odell DID try to get a college degree from LSU, but he dropped out in 2014 at the NFL’s suggestion to sign with NY Giants. For $2.6 million. Odell has struggled to make ends meet ever since.

In yesterday’s column I covered some smart aleck money manager from Edward Jones, whos advice for everyone is “don’t put your money in an IRA. Just start your own business.” I doubt it even someone as rich as Odell will try that. He’s painfully aware of his own limited business skills. Odell's future may involve Nike and Pfizer TV ads (like Dak Prescott, Travis Kelse, and Russell Wilson). Odell had better figure out how to make THOSE paychecks last, because they’re certainly not going to amount to $20 million a year.

I’m just sayin’ . . .



Is the Real 'Poverty Line' $140,000 a Year?

NFL star Odell Beckham Jr. reveals struggle of living on $100M contract and breaks down how $20M/year goes fast after taxes. Could you make it last?
Top | New | Old
beckyromero · 36-40, F
As a society we need to acknowledge that the basic necessities for housing, medical care, food, transportation, clothing and basic household items needed should constitute the lower edge of the "poverty level" in the United States.

The official "poverty level" for a family of four in 2025 (FPL) in the 48 contiguous states and D.C. $32,150

Let's take Chicago. And let's assume a family of four.

The average rent for a two-bedroom apartment is going to be around $3,000/mo.

So, housing costs alone exceed the poverty level.

That's before medical insurance/care, food, transporation, clothing, household items, school-related costs, internet and/or cellphone (try applying for a job today without a cell phone or the internet). electricity, home heating, water, etc., etc., etc.

Furthermore, guidelines for who qualifies for federal assistance is based on multipliers of the poverty level. If the poverty level is set too low, fewer people are going to qualify.

A two-bedroom apartment in Brimingham, Alabama is going to be around $1,100/mo.

That's a big difference compared to Chicago. But so is the state minimum wage. In Illinois it is $15/hr. In Alabama? It's the federal level of $7.25/hr.

So, even with two full-time minimum wage earners:
$62,400 yearly income in Illinois
$30,160 yearly income in Alabama

Of course, that's before taxes, tax credits, health insurance co-premiums. Also before child care expenses (if two adults are going to be working).

How about food. The USDA's Thrifty Food Plan (the lowest cost) as of May 2025 was around $993 per month. That's about $12,000/year for a family of four.

Costs of Housing & Food
$48,000 for that family in Illinois
$25,200 for that family in Alabama

Now, of course if the government wants to declare that "poor" people are those without housing (and therefore without electricity, home heating, water, internet, transporation, clothing, school-related costs, etc.) those classified as poor would be able to eat in Alabama at a two-family income at the minimum wage. But that's about all. And that's assuming they could get a job without housing, a cellphone or the internet, and clothing.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@SusanInFlorida

In many cases, that's where they were born or they can't afford to move or that's where family is or that's where the jobs are.

It's also led to what is called urban sprawl, where people move further out for cheaper housing only to discover the jobs aren't there or the transportation isn't there to get them to where the jobs still are.

Let's face it. Government urban planners have done a horrible jobs over the decades.
@beckyromero says
... or that's where the jobs are.
And that's a key point. If you want to live in a low cost rural area and have access to a wide scope of jobs, you'll be spending about $1000/month on fuel, insurance, depreciation, and maintenance for car. Two workers in the household doubles the cost.
https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/breaking-down-the-cost-of-car-ownership

Cities with their mass transit networks make car ownership superfluous as well as offering far more job opportunities.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@ElwoodBlues

And the extra transit time, whether by car or public transportation (if that is even available) will increase the costs for child care.
“”If everyone insists on $140,000 a year, then robots and AI will replace everyone, and there will be nobody left to tax””

Untrue , they’ll just start paying more people 140k , not everyone, just more..
they need to keep the underclass believing that they have a chance! .. so they’ll create more high paying jobs!

It’s a balancing act for the elite, they need us (the underclass) WE provide them with labor to keep THEIR standard of living high!

AI may be cheaper but we’re here! In vast numbers, people who need jobs, who need to survive and believe in a better future that majority will never see..
WE support and maintain the infrastructure that creates the comfort and luxury of the elite..

They will never allow AI to replace low wage workers.. it’s counter productive.
They’ll find other uses for AI that support their lives.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Telcontar tell that to the mcdonalds workers who got laid off by mcdonalds, because of in-store ordering kiosks and on online app orders.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Its people like him who really destroy the next generation. I have a down on professional sports people from the start. Sport is good exercise, builds teamwork attitudes and supports community. It isnt how you make a $Million. Go do something useful. Build something. Grow something.. Do some good. Get a real job..
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Thinkerbell I have an aluminium baseball bat covered in shrinkwrap. We dont like guns here. And I dont ask the spiders what happens to the bodies. Plausible deniability. Just replace the shrinkwrap and its ready to go again. It may sound excessive. But asking a senior citizen to take on three teenagers unarmed is a bit much..😷
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
@whowasthatmaskedman

Ok, so you don't have a gun.

But surely the three teenagers will start yelling loudly when you hit them (one at a time, presumably) with the bat.

Won't the neighbors inquire about all the shouting at 2:00 a.m.? 🤔
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@Thinkerbell No.. I am sure your recall my wife was Scottish..Shes in care now. But they are used to the unholy row..My biggest worry is the damage to the front door..😷
No he definitely didnt try to spend less based on his life style and yes the corporations need to be taxed more
I have no problem paying taxes
Its about lifestyle, people do not live within there means
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@rocknroll
Its about lifestyle, people do not live within there means

In otherwords, "Let them eat cake!"
@beckyromero whatvthey can afford
exchrist · 36-40
Minimum wage federally is $7.25 per hour therefore at full time $7.25 times 40 hours a week is $290 a week. That translates to $15,080 per year before taxes that the federal government expects its citizens to live and have offspring surviving on $1160 a month before tax is aweful. The average monthly rent in the united states? $1,300 - $2,000+ according to zillow.com graphic pending.
Therefore id prefer
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@exchrist your map should surprise no one.

there is (has been) a debate in political circles about ending the worker portion of social security withholding for low income workers (retain the half that is employer paid).

the theory here is that this would lure more people to get off welfare and get a job.

i remain skeptical. all it would do is hasten the day the social security trust fund goes insolvent. on that day we either need to increase withholding again, or cut benefits, or both. neither workers nor retirees are likely to vote for politicians who sign up for that.
exchrist · 36-40
@SusanInFlorida it would need to be attempted to know what effect it would have. The population is very retiree heavy right now. Putting all of soscial security obligations on employers will reduce the number of employees the employer can support. Certainly a reduction in foreign war funding
weapon development and space exploration would make up the difference. Instead same old strategies same old personnel same politicians same results. No surprise
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@jshm2 let's hope he doesn't get snuffed in a drug deal gone bad a few years from now. that's happened more than once.
Honestly at the rate things are going this is actually pretty reasonable. Housing alone has skyrocketed since the 70s and yet purchasing power has been on a decline since that same period.

It is no longer 1980 when 100k made you upper middle class.
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow 100k is upper middle class
I dont make a third of that.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow housing has skyrocketed only because we are building less than 50% of the new homes (nationally) to meet america's annual population growth.

the lack of homebuilding comes from higher mortgage rates (thank you federal reserve), land zoning restrictions, green set asides, and every other regulation that adds to the cost of building a new house.

why should every new home in a particular town be required to have an EV charger on day one? We're still trying to figure what kind of EV plugs will become the standard.
@SusanInFlorida That is not strictly true. A huge part of the housing problem is because it is a commodity. You have corporate investors buying properties and they even brag to their shareholders that they use software to a) determine how far people will pay to have a roof at all and B) deliberately keep homes and apartments vacant to create artificial scarcity to again drive up prices.

And for 50 years CEOs have been pocketing the wages and salaries of their workers.

In a system that incentiivizes profits the actual shortage will not be solved either because in this system luxury housing only 1% of the population can afford is the best ROI. Affordable housing is not economically viable.

And like it or not keeping the US infrastructure stuck in the 1800s forever is not a strategy.

And we also know from examples from other parts of the world companies trying to create monopolies through a "format war" can and only will be solved by legislation.

Part of why any of this is a problem in the US is because Americans insist on leaving it to the "market" to solve everything even if it is objectively the worst option for no other reason than ideology.
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
Been there, done that...

SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Thinkerbell is this the currency which toppled the german postwar government, and brought Hitler to power?

Why didn't their version of the Federal Reserve fight inflation with higher interest rates?
Thinkerbell · 41-45, F
@SusanInFlorida

No, the hyperinflation of 1923 didn't immediately topple the Weimar government, but it undoubtedly had a long-term effect in that direction. The cash savings of the middle class were wiped out, and the holders of German WW1 war bonds didn't appreciate being paid off in worthless paper.

A significant factor contributing to the hyperinflation was the French/Belgian military occupation of the Ruhr district when Germany defaulted on its war-reparation payments (in coal and timber) required by the Versailles treaty. German workers went on strike, refusing to work under the occupation, and of course they were no longer paid. The Weimar government paid relief money to hundreds of thousands of idle workers with money it didn't have, so it just printed bank notes.

The inflation was finally brought under control by early 1924 through the efforts of Hjalmar Schacht and Gustav Stresemann, the latter being the most skillful German politician since Bismarck. Stresemann negotiated a more reasonable schedule of war payments (getting a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts), leading to the 'golden years' (1926-1928) of the Weimar Republic.

What finally toppled Weimar was the Great Depression, where unemployment reached a high of 32% (worse than the 25% peak in the USA). First the middle class catastrophe in 1923, then the working class catastrophe in 1929 was just too much.

And no, Germany's economic/political problems were far too great to be fixed by Keynsian tweaking of interest rates, and of course they were vastly increasing the money supply, contributing to the runaway inflation. Some historians think this was deliberate, as it wiped out the domestic debt.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Thinkerbell upvoted. thanks for deep dive on this. it any case, it validates my core beliefs that both inflation and unemployment are bad.

it doesn't make me believe the federal reserve is doing anything except trying to support this or that politician in an election year.
JSul3 · 70-79
Saw an ad for new "affordable" homes in DFW area.....starting at $220k.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow upvoted - agreed. stop luring oil refineries, electric plants, and factories by giving up millions tax revenue.

corporations should make their decisions based on workforce reliability/cost/sobriety. not which city or state hands out the biggest bribe. those bribes simply trigger bragging rights in an election year: "Vot me me - I brought the Hyundai factory and it's 2000 jobs to Smallville"
@SusanInFlorida Nevermind those. Walmart and Home Depot typically will get about a decade tax free just to open up shop and they put local businesses out of business making every main street in North America look identical.
@SusanInFlorida And a couple years ago a bunch of American towns seemed willing to bankrupt themselves just to be in the running for an Amazon central office.
G7J2O · M
Well the poverty line in Zurich is about €45000. That’s their minimum wage.
beckyromero · 36-40, F
@G7J2O

At current poverty level currency exchange rates, the poverty level in Switzerland in 2023 comes out to US $5,039/mo (or US $60,468/yr). That's nearly twice the U.S. level.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@G7J2O i can't afford to live anywhere in switzerland. its the most expensive place in europe, except for monaco.

switzerland is a preferred desitinaton for middle east migrants, due to it's high spending public services and entitlements for low/no income residents.
G7J2O · M
@SusanInFlorida my cousin lives near Zurich. He lives not far from the crest of a hill, where the rent is affordable. Just over the hill the rent more that doubles because you can see the lake…
MasterLee · 56-60, M
Make it $1T
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@MasterLee read closely. it's already 100 BILLION
Odell Beckham is a very overrated player, completely out of touch with reality
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@OriginalNedKelly this applies to so many people though. Travis Kelce, Taylor Swift, keanu reeves, robert downey,
If you’re thinking everyone below the poverty line whatever that is, Ms Romero makes good points, to be fair shouldn’t everyone earning less than $1M/year receive that amount too or at least pay zero local state and federal taxes?

 
Post Comment