> Spending 80% of your income on housing is just poor budgeting no matter how you look at it.
77% of take-home pay is closer to 40% of income. It's only a little higher than sustainable levels. When housing costs grow 5-10% per year and PhD programs last 3 years longer than they need to, anyone who had a reasonable budget at the beginning could end up with an unreasonable budget by the end.
I’m not sure how you budget, and whatever works for you works for you, but 77% of the money that hits your bank account every month going to housing when you’re a grad student is insanity, not “a little higher than sustainable levels”. Especially when there’s a kid in the picture.
According to the US government's definition[0, 1], affordable housing is less than 30% of income. Which type of income it is is up for debate but it seems the general consensus is gross income, though I can't find an authoritative source on that. If it is gross income, then it stands to reason that 77% of net income may actually be fairly close to 40% gross income. And, while 33% above the affordability limit (30% of gross income), it's not terribly outside "a little higher than sustainable levels" -- though that's a very subjective phrase.
Yeah, for a take home income of 2,200 per month in santa cruz, your before tax income would be about 2,666. 1,700 of that is 77% pretax and 64% after tax.
77% of take-home pay is closer to 40% of income. It's only a little higher than sustainable levels. When housing costs grow 5-10% per year and PhD programs last 3 years longer than they need to, anyone who had a reasonable budget at the beginning could end up with an unreasonable budget by the end.