Map Show States Where Highest, Lowest Salary Needed for Comfortable Life
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Americans living in the South and the Midwest generally need to earn less than those living in the East and the West to live comfortably, that is, more than just making it to the end of the month, according to a new study by SmartAsset.
Higher Costs Across the Board, Across the Country
Over the past five years, home prices have surged by nearly 40 percent across the United States, according to Redfin data, while other housing costs—including property taxes, homeowner association (HOA) fees and property taxes—have also gone up, together with the cost of groceries, gas and other essential goods.
While wages have also increased over the past five years, the high rates of inflation in 2022 meant that Americans' personal finances took a significant hit, with many experiencing a worsening of their financial situation. For most Americans, higher costs today mean struggling just a little bit more to pay for all their essential needs, like housing and food, not to mention those extra little things that make life sweeter, like hobbies and vacations.
What Does It Mean to Live Comfortably?
Experts believe that households with a healthy financial situation should adhere to the 50/30/20 budget rule, allocating 50 percent of their income to necessities, 30 percent to discretionary spending, and 20 percent to long-term goals, such as retirement savings or debt repayment.
Based on this formula, SmartAsset calculated that a single U.S. adult needs to earn about $5,844 more this year to have a comfortable, sustainable budget compared to last year, while a working family would need an additional $9,360.
However, this ideal amount varies from state to state, as some are significantly more affordable than others, allowing residents to live as well as those in more expensive parts of the country for less.
Where Do Residents Need to Earn More to Live Comfortably—And Where Less?
These are the top ten states where the salary needed for a single U.S. adult to live comfortably is highest:
Hawaii ($124,467) Massachusetts ($120,141) California ($119,475) New York ($114,691) Washington ($109,658) New Jersey ($108,992) Maryland ($108,867) Virginia ($106,704) Colorado ($105,955) Connecticut ($105,165)
And these are the top ten states where the salary needed for a single U.S. adult to live comfortably is lowest:
West Virginia ($80,829) Arkansas ($81,078) South Dakota ($82,160) North Dakota ($82,285) Kentucky ($83,574) Oklahoma ($84,282) Ohio ($84,781) Alabama ($85,280) Louisiana ($85,322) Mississippi ($86,320)
SmartAsset's study utilized the MIT Living Wage Calculator to determine the basic cost of living for a single U.S. adult and a family of four in every state across the country. Their estimates take into consideration the cost of housing, food, transportation, income taxes and others.
The data used is updated to February 10, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
an hour ago
- Business Insider
Trump wants to cut federal housing funds in half, and even Republicans are questioning it
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Scott Turner kept repeating the same phrases to Congress in defense of President Donald Trump's proposal to cut the agency's budget by 51%. "It's time for a paradigm shift." "We have to refocus." "We want to be efficient and effective, not bloated and bureaucratic." Democrats on House and Senate appropriations subcommittees were outraged — and even some Republicans were skeptical. Turner was tasked with explaining what Trump's proposed $45 billion cut to HUD's funding would look like in practice. The agency would be among the hardest hit parts of the federal government under Trump's plan to eliminate $163 billion in federal spending. But the secretary offered little detail on plans for how his agency would continue serving millions of older, disabled, and low-income Americans, people struggling to recover from disasters like hurricanes and wildfires, and those experiencing homelessness. "The goal here is not to serve less Americans. The goal here is to serve Americans better," Turner said during his testimony before the House subcommittee on Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development on June 10. While Democratic lawmakers were particularly critical of Turner's approach and Trump's massive budget cut request, some Republicans also probed Turner for more detailed explanations he didn't provide. The hearings highlighted how the nation's major housing affordability challenges have become a bipartisan concern. "The federal government doesn't have all the answers, and the budget empowers collaboration with states and localities," HUD spokesperson Kasey Lovett told Business Insider. Few details, lots of frustration During the House hearing, Republican Rep. David Joyce asked Turner how HUD plans to continue helping victims of disasters, like flooding and fires, if the agency slashes funding for the Community Development Block Grant — Disaster Recovery program, as the budget proposes. The agency has long helped FEMA rebuild homes destroyed in natural disasters that lack sufficient insurance, as well as repair roads and bridges. In response, Turner insisted that HUD "will not allow disaster recovery and those that need assistance in disaster recovery to be lost on us" and that HUD is simply pursuing a "different way of distributing these funds." Joyce, who represents Northeast Ohio, wasn't satisfied. "Thank you, sir, that was a great answer, but it didn't demonstrate a plan. Do you have a plan?" the congressman responded. Turner ultimately conceded that the plan for supporting disaster victims "is forthcoming." Joyce ended the exchange by warning that the agency has a role to play. "The one thing I know is, you're right. Disasters come. All over the country, disasters come. And you need to be ready for them." Rep. Rutherford, a Florida Republican, pressed Turner on how states will help support homeownership in low-income communities when the president's budget proposes eliminating HUD's Self-Help Homeownership Opportunity Program (SHOP), a competitive grant program that Rutherford said has been successful in his district. "Everywhere that homeownership went up, violent crime went down," said Rutherford, a former sheriff. "How are we going to address this issue if we're doing away with SHOP?" Turner replied by saying that states can support homeownership programs if they see fit going forward, but didn't clarify where that funding would come from. Spokespeople for Rutherford and Joyce didn't immediately return BI's requests for comment. 'People will die' Democratic lawmakers expressed more direct frustration about the program cuts and lack of detail the secretary presented. "People will die," Rep. Mike Quigley, an Illinois Democrat, told Turner of HUD's proposed cuts to homelessness services, including the elimination of the Housing for Persons with AIDS program. "If you just want to say we've got to cut these things because that's our plan, I'd respect you a lot more than telling us that you care about people as you put them on the street." Turner replied that the agency isn't just cutting funding but is "going to be more effective and more efficient." "How?" Quigley asked. "It's a new paradigm. It's a new way to do things," Turner replied. During Turner's testimony before the Senate on June 11, Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz, who's made housing a key priority, urged Turner to reinstate a bipartisan program Schatz championed that incentivizes states and localities to cut red tape that hampers housing construction. "It's the most significant pro-housing deregulatory mechanism that we've passed," Schatz said. Turner didn't answer Schatz's question on the eliminated program, and simply said he's encouraging local leaders to find ways to cut regulations. But the president's budget isn't law. Government funding is set to run out in September, and Congress has the final say on what the federal budget looks like. The House hearing concluded with the chairwoman, Republican Rep. Stephanie Bice, suggesting that Turner hasn't had enough time in the few months he's been in office to nail down more specifics about where HUD funding will go and how programs will be reformed. "Is it safe to say that you have a framework for a plan that you want to move forward, but maybe not all of the nuts and bolts that you need to be able to present those details?" Bice asked Turner. "Yes, ma'am," Turner replied.
Miami Herald
7 hours ago
- Miami Herald
SNAP user's testimony causes backlash, cruel feedback
After President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed the House, it introduced new fears for millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to survive. The bill proposed an estimated $300 billion in cuts to SNAP over the next decade. If that portion of the bill passes the Senate as it is currently written, it would leave 12.6% of Americans potentially unable to afford shelter and food. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter The way it currently works is that states would begin to pay at least 5% of food benefit costs, and up to 25% if they have higher error rates, forcing states to choose between raising taxes, cutting other programs, or limiting SNAP access, per the Food Research & Access Center. Related: Scott Galloway sends bold statement on Social Security, US economy Republican senators pushed back hard on the cuts, leading to June 10 reports that the SNAP changes were being scaled down. The reworked plan cuts the state penalty for error from 25% to 15%, but Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) told Politico that they are "still negotiating." Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota took to social media on June 11 to share a video she surely thought would be of help to advocate for keeping SNAP intact. But her efforts have backfired. The video Klobuchar shared is of a SNAP recipient named Felecia talking about her experience as a mother of four living on SNAP benefits. Klobuchar said, "Today, we heard from Felecia, a single mom of four who works up to three jobs at a time to make ends meet. She counts on SNAP to help put food on the table. This is who Republicans in Congress are trying to take food away from. Listen to her story." In the video, Felecia says, "I would like to tell you my story on how SNAP benefit has helped me," becoming visibly emotional. "When I had my oldest daughter 21 years ago, I was working three jobs," Felecia said. "One job alone, I had to pay childcare. Another one to pay food, which wasn't enough. And one to pay the bills, and I still struggled alive." Related: Social Security income tax deduction hits major roadblock Felecia went on to say that she now has a full-time job as a bus monitor, but she only gets paid once a month, which is why she still needs SNAP. "By the time I get my bills paid, I have nothing left to pay for food and other basic needs. If it wasn't for SNAP benefits, I wouldn't be able to feed my children," she said. The comments on the video exploded, causing it to rake in 75,000 views and make the terms "SNAP" and "Felecia" go viral on X. But instead of garnering empathy, it achieved the opposite effect. People in the thread savagely attacked the mother of four, mostly with comments about her weight. "I'm not saying take her SNAP benefits, but what I'm saying is she doesn't need as much as she's getting," X user currermell said. "Either she's eating it all and her kids are already going hungry, or the handouts meant to sustain her life are having the opposite effect." Related: Walmart issues urgent message about the alarming cost of food "Do you know how many calories it takes to look like her? She's doing fine," X user Rafester said. Some opted to attack Felecia's relationship choices instead of her weight, saying, "Why does she have 4 children and no husband? Life choices matter. Sorry but 4 unplanned pregnancies and no partner present is absolute nonsense," X user fictitiousfruit said. A few rare voices in the thread abstained from insults. "Not a single person wants SNAP taken away from Felecia. Every single person wants SNAP revoked for people who aren't trying or aren't contributing to the country they take advantage of," user Zac DiSalvo said. The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Miami Herald
7 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Scott Galloway bluntly predicts major change for Netflix
Scott Galloway, the podcaster and New York University professor, explained his view on June 13 that the last significant battle in the streaming industry was a showdown between Netflix and Hollywood - and Netflix emerged victorious. By expanding production globally, taking advantage of broadband technology, and capitalizing on inexpensive funding, Netflix (NFLX) was able to make large-scale investments similar to Amazon's strategy, Galloway explained, leaving competitors unable to keep pace. The outcome? A major shift in value from traditional studios and entertainment talent to Netflix's investors and subscribers. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Netflix's newest version operates as more than just a subscription-based platform - it now combines both subscriptions and advertising in its business model. And nearly 94 million people have chosen Netflix's ad-supported plan since it was introduced fewer than three years ago, according to Galloway. Netflix has proven itself to be a master of adaptation in the media landscape. It started as a mail-order DVD business, toppling the giant Blockbuster. Then it evolved into a streaming powerhouse, upending Hollywood's dominance. Related: Jean Chatzky sends strong message to Americans on Social Security Now, after a decade without major changes, Netflix is transforming once more, Galloway wrote. The company is introducing AI-driven content recommendations, mobile-friendly vertical videos, and a refreshed visual design to take on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. And once again, the streaming service faces a new challenge. Shutterstock Having won the last streaming war, Netflix now confronts a new threat, Galloway explained in his "No Mercy / No Malice" newsletter. In fact, this prominent challenger is in the ring with all streaming services. "The next streaming war?" Galloway wrote. "YouTube takes on the world." "This year, more people in the U.S. watched YouTube on TVs than on mobile devices - a first," he continued. "YouTube is now the No. 1 distributor of TV content, according to Nielsen. And for the past three months, YouTube registered the largest share of TV viewing (12%) among media companies; Netflix accounted for 7.5%." More on the U.S. economy: Jean Chatzky shares major statement about Social SecurityShark Tank's Kevin O'Leary has blunt words on 401(k) plansDave Ramsey strongly cautions U.S. workers on Social Security YouTube is essentially public access television scaled to the internet, but with vastly superior production quality, observed Galloway. His Markets podcast co-host Ed Elson notes that Gen Z sees YouTube - owned by Alphabet (GOOGL) - as an algorithm-driven force shifting influence away from established brands and toward individual creators. The biggest disruptor to Hollywood, Galloway argues, isn't Netflix chairman's Reed Hastings - it's MrBeast, the YouTube star who has perfected parasocial relationships. In 2023 alone, MrBeast amassed over a billion hours of watch time, surpassing the top Netflix shows. "But just as individual content creators disrupted Hollywood, AI may disrupt content creators," Galloway wrote. While Netflix is expected to invest around $18 billion in content this year, YouTube effectively operates with a content budget of zero, instead sharing ad revenue with its creators. MrBeast has revealed that producing a single video typically costs him $2.5 million. Yet in a striking shift, an AI-generated muzak channel recently surpassed him, becoming the fastest-growing channel on YouTube this month. Related: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary makes bold prediction on U.S. economy Galloway argues that the rise of Netflix, YouTube and the competition for streaming audiences has cost us something vital: a shared cultural experience. In 1983, the final episode of M.A.S.H. was a national event, drawing 106 million viewers - nearly half of America, he recalls. By contrast, last year's most-watched scripted TV finale, "Yellowstone," reached just 13 million people, a mere 4% of the country. The shift from scheduled programming to unlimited, on-demand content has fragmented American culture, Galloway suggests - and this fact reflects the loss of two key societal pillars: collective experiences and a shared identity. "Without shared stories, we don't laugh together, love/hate the same heroes/villains, or believe in the same facts when we argue," Galloway wrote. "We lose our empathy, our ability to see each other as human." "It's hard to demonize someone you watched 'Cheers' with every Thursday night; it's easy to hate someone whose cultural references are completely foreign to your feed." Related: Scott Galloway makes major prediction on world economy; 401(k) impact seen The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
