Lifestyle & Entertainment

21 US cities where making $100,000 a year isn’t enough to put you in the top 20% of earners

No keyword matched :)

Los Angeles Rodeo Drive

Filipe Frazao/Shutterstock

In Los Angeles, a household income of $100,000 only puts you in the top 25% of earners.

If you’re making $100,000 a year, you’re doing pretty well for yourself, especially considering that the median household income in the US is $53,889.

But if you live in the metro areas of Seattle, San Francisco, or Washington, DC, a low six-figure household income barely puts you among the top half of earners, let alone in the top 20%.

In Stamford, Connecticut, for example, you’d represent the top 48% with a $100,000 household income.

That’s according to an interactive tool from The New York Times which allows you to enter your household income and compare your earnings across 344 metro areas throughout the US.

Here, we’ve highlighted 21 US cities where a $100,000 annual household income isn’t enough to crack the top 20% of earners.

Kathleen Elkins contributed to a previous version of this article.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 22% of earners in Salt Lake City.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 24% of earners in Atlanta.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 25% of earners in Denver.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 25% of earners in Los Angeles.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 26% of earners in New York City.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 26% of earners in Dallas.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 26% of earners in New Haven, Connecticut.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 27% of earners in Chicago.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 27% of earners in Hartford, Connecticut.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 28% of earners in Minneapolis.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 28% of earners in Philadelphia.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 28% of earners in San Diego.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 28% of earners in Santa Barbara, California.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 30% of earners in Napa, California.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 31% of earners in Seattle.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 30% of earners in Baltimore.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 35% of earners in Boston.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 42% of earners in Washington, DC.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 40% of earners in San Francisco.

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 43% of earners in Danbury, Connecticut.

 

 

A household income of $100,000 puts you in the top 48% of earners in Stamford, Connecticut.


Tagged In

  • Bryan See

    That’s not all of these intended consequences, but there’s other negative things happening with tech and space as well, plus with organized crime and corruption that Donald Trump is likely to foster, given his clear admiration of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    For tech, Trump will spur very powerful social movements that’s anti-technology, anti-innovation, anti-modern, and anti-progress. These movements make use of violence, thugs, and criminals. Anyone who is pro-tech may be persecuted and subjected to abuse. Computers and the internet are to be weaned off, and Trump will use the Starkiller88 and Russavia episodes on Wikipedia (these two will likely be mentioned in his inauguration speech) to justify that. BatteryIncluded (and his friend Putin) will be happy to see tech progress ended by Trump, thus saving them from “disruptive people”. It is important to note that Putin cannot solve problems, he is the problem. So, Trump cannot solve problems, he is the problem.

    And for space, it will be very much worse. Failure rates will go higher up and we’ll never know. They will not learn anything. Just like we’ve seen in Russia’s space program, especially after the failure of the Russian Phobos-Grunt space mission, something that Trump may say I’m obsessed with since 2007 – a mocking of another disabled individual since last November’s against New York Times disabled reporter (I do not want someone that makes fun of, threatens or abuses me. I want someone who inspires me. And that’s not Trump, Putin, BatteryIncluded and Apokryltaros.), and one of the egregious examples of same technology-causing problems caused by immigrants. In addition, he could make US reliance on Russian rockets and space technology indefinitely.

    Taking all into fact, Trump, along with the third World War and anti-technology, will likely ruin SpaceX’s Mars mission, the Interplanetary Transport System (formerly the Mars Colonial Transporter), and, as well as Putin himself, are the ones that Elon Musk warned last December in his GQ interview.

    And, Trump will form the first part of Baba Vanga’s 1979 prophecy about Russia (the mafia state) emerging as the world’s only superpower under a man named Vladimir (who happens to be Putin himself, a godfather). Imagine the world ruled by the mafia.

    BTW, Trump is not a new Ronald Reagan, but rather the new JFK (or his darker Republican version at least); Putin is not a new Mikhail Gorbachev (who’s ashamed of Russia’s current leader), but rather an authoritarian version of Nikita Khruschnev.