You Now Need a $100K Salary to Be Middle Class (And That’s the Best-Case Scenario)
Why are people struggling despite record household income? Because median stats hide modern reality. Here’s the truth behind the numbers.
Somewhere between the rise of artisanal coffee and the normalization of working Saturdays, something quietly broke. Life, once manageable on a single decent income, now feels like a subscription service you can’t cancel. You work full-time, maybe even two jobs, yet the dream of living alone with a door that locks and a fridge that doesn’t belong to four other adults has drifted out of reach.
Wages have stagnated. Meanwhile, asset prices, rent, and the cost of being a functioning human have sprinted ahead. And rather than meet this moment with serious structural change, governments and economists wave charts that say, “Look, the median household is doing fine,” as if you’re a household. You’re not. You’re one human.
We still pretend like needing $100K to live like your parents did on $40K is some kind of extravagance. It isn’t. It’s just the price of not drowning. Maybe the only wild thing left is pretending that’s fine.
The $100K Salary: Formerly a Symbol of Success, Now the Minimum Viable Adult
Once upon a time, six figures meant you were doing well. You had “made it.” You drove a car with working air conditioning, and you bought wine without squinting at the price tag.
Today? Earning $100K is just how you unlock the basic settings in the game of modern adulthood. You’re not rich, you’re just not in constant panic, which, in this economy, feels like a luxury. This is especially true if you’re single, urban, child-free, and attempting to live in a city where the rent is so high it should come with a warning label.
And no, you’re not mismanaging your finances. You’re just playing in a rigged system where housing is an investment vehicle, healthcare is unaffordable, and daycare costs more than a semester at Harvard. Forget savings. You’re trying not to bleed money for simply existing.
Meanwhile, wages continue their tiptoe upward at 1 to 2 percent per year. Occasionally, they leap when disaster strikes; not out of generosity, but because someone remembers that the economy needs living, breathing workers to function.
The result is absurd: people earning what used to be considered a lot now struggle to achieve what used to be considered normal. Buying a starter home? Hmmm. Only possible if you bought land in 2006 or inherited equity from someone who did.
So yeah, $100K used to be a milestone. Now it’s the starting line; just enough to afford rent, bills, and maybe therapy.
Median Household Income: The Statistical Equivalent of Gaslighting
Median household income is the economic version of “trust me, bro.” It’s the number waved around in decks and political speeches, usually accompanied by the phrase: “Households are earning more than ever!”
Which is technically true. Just like saying “the average temperature on Earth is fine” is technically true.
Median household income doesn’t reflect a single person’s financial reality. It reflects the combined earnings of anyone who happens to live under the same roof and share expenses. That could be:
A pair of high-earning professionals with no kids,
A young adult stuck at home because the rent has the personality of a luxury item,
Or four burnt-out friends who split bills.
All of those are called “households.” All of them are squashed into one number. And somehow, that number is supposed to tell us how you’re doing.
It’s a Trojan horse of optimism. The figure climbs, slowly but surely, while individuals struggle to climb out of overdraft. Because the number includes two incomes, side hustles, and maybe a pension, it looks healthy. But it’s disguising a deeper truth: that a single income, in many places, can’t buy independence, let alone security.
And still, economists tell us the “household” is fine.
If you want to understand what life actually costs, track one worker. One salary. No roommates, no inheritance, no subsidies from mom’s cooking and dad’s utility bill. That’s the reality most people are navigating.
And when you do look at that number? It’s not inspiring. It’s barely enough for rent, and groceries. It’s a salary, sure. Just not one you can live on.
Welcome to the Global Asset Pricing Game (You’re Not Invited)
Life didn’t get expensive because your lunch costs $2 more or because toothpaste is now behind a security case. Life got expensive because stability has been rebranded as a luxury asset. Land, housing, education, healthcare: none of these are just functional goods anymore. They are speculative, scarce, and often traded like by people who treat “affordability” as an academic concept.
Housing used to be something you bought to live in. Now it’s a hedge against inflation. Or a portfolio diversifier. Or an Airbnb. Real estate has become a playground for capital, not shelter. People don’t ask “Can I live here?” anymore, they ask “What’s the yield?”
This is happening everywhere.
In Singapore, starter condos require parental capital, elite jobs, and a small miracle.
Jakarta’s housing is priced for people earning in dollars, not rupiah.
In Bangkok, debt levels rival GDP just to afford a studio apartment.
In Ho Chi Minh City, the government had to intervene to remind developers that homes should be priced for locals.
The unspoken rule of the global housing market is simple: if you’re not already rich, you’re not the target audience. This isn’t a market designed for you. It’s a marketplace designed around you, where your needs are considered friction, not demand.
That’s why a $100K salary (or the local equivalent) has become the baseline requirement, not for luxury, but for access. You’re not trying to buy a mansion. You’re trying to not get priced out by someone who doesn’t even live in the country.
“Just Work Harder” and Other Hilarious Things Boomers Say
The eternal advice: just work harder. Spoken with confidence by people who bought houses before debit cards existed. You’ll hear it at dinner tables, in comment sections, and occasionally from elected officials who once bought beachfront property with leftover student loan change.
“Back in my day, we bought our first home at 25 on one salary!”
Sure. And back in your day, a home cost the same as a used Toyota, university tuition was payable in coins, and your employer gave you a pension, dental, and a going-away watch at retirement. You didn’t beat the system. You just lived in a version of it that wasn’t on nightmare mode.
Boomers lived through the single most favorable period for wage growth, homeownership, and wealth accumulation in recent history. They had union representation, government-subsidized education, and housing prices that weren’t being shaped by hedge funds.
Millennials and Gen Z aren’t lazy. They’re doing everything right: degrees, jobs, networking, internships, freelancing, all of it, and still staring down a life that feels out of reach. Their reward? Rent that consumes half their income, medical bills they can’t predict, and cities where the entry-level homes have already been bought by a trust fund.
When someone insists that raising everyone’s salary to $100K isn’t “realistic,” they’re missing the punchline. Because neither is building a life on $45K when every essential has been repriced like a luxury good.
So pick one: either raise wages, or admit we’ve built a world where stability is sold separately, and most people don’t even qualify for the demo version.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth tucked inside a joke that sounds a little too real: modern adulthood has been repriced like it’s a high-end subscription tier. The things that used to be standard, like owning a home, starting a family, and saving for the future, now come bundled with a premium cost tag, while the average income still operates on basic.
A single salary, even a decent one, no longer guarantees independence or long-term stability. It guarantees rent, stress, and maybe a weekend off if you’re lucky. The cost of basic dignity has crept into six-figure territory, and yet we still measure affordability with 1980s optimism and household income charts that assume everyone’s married, dual-income, and has zero student debt.
The result? Millions of people quietly internalizing failure, as if the problem is personal budgeting and not systemic design.
You’re not broken. The economy is.
And unless we either start paying people enough to meet the price of survival, or drastically reduce the price of survival to match what people actually earn, the disconnect will only widen. We need more $100K salaries (or the global equivalent) not because people are greedy, but because the floor has been raised and no one’s updated the pay scale.
Raise the floor. Or be honest that most people are just squatting on the ruins.
At StratEx - Indonesia Business Advisory partner with employers to build equitable, data-driven comp strategies. Contact us to bridge the wage gap with smarter workforce planning and market-calibrated insights.