Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   In today's most relatable personal finance story, here's how a pair of married ballet dancers making $178k/year get by in Chicago   (cnbc.com) divider line
    More: Weird  
•       •       •

3043 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Oct 2020 at 1:20 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2020-10-29 1:04:44 PM  
48 votes:
First of all, they're not married, they're engaged.

Second of all, they're making (under 10-month contracts), $77,000 and $66,000, respectively. This is working as full-time dancers who are, from how they're described, at the very top of their game. The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that. But while both of those salaries certainly put them comfortably in the middle class on any scale, they're certainly not exorbitant. I doubt either of them would have been able to afford an apartment in Chicago on their own -- it's only by combining their incomes that they can.

The rest of their income (beyond the $143,000 they bring in together, which presumably is before taxes) is earned through what are essentially side hustles. And, apparently, they also draw on some unemployment during their two months of down time each year when they're not being paid from their contracts. Some people may take issue with that, but, as with the apparent gender gap, that's a side issue.

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.
 
2020-10-29 1:14:23 PM  
27 votes:

Pocket Ninja: So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.


Also, as the article points out, they are essentially professional athletes and at 30ish years old, far closer to the end of their careers than the beginning.  From that POV, their financial position is actually rather terrifying - in 5 years or so, they are going to go from $180K to ????
 
2020-10-29 1:27:37 PM  
19 votes:
Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?
 
2020-10-29 1:25:29 PM  
13 votes:
Dancer that earns > $80k USD annually = ~ .05% of all professional dancers world wide.

So this is an article about how some people do win lotto tickets sometimes.

Go eat turds for this kind of bs POV on American economic opportunity.
 
2020-10-29 1:37:59 PM  
12 votes:

Pocket Ninja: So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.


Their food budget is more than my take-home pay. How the fark am I supposed to relate to that?
 
2020-10-29 1:24:00 PM  
12 votes:
If they're "mak[ing]up for lost income through extra projects in the dance community," they're fraudulently claiming funemploymemt.
 
2020-10-29 1:31:35 PM  
11 votes:

Pocket Ninja: The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that.


I would guess is that a top ranked male ballet dancer is rarer than a top ranked female so gets paid more.
 
2020-10-29 1:41:38 PM  
9 votes:
They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.
 
2020-10-29 2:47:30 PM  
7 votes:

italie: Pocket Ninja: First of all, they're not married, they're engaged.

Second of all, they're making (under 10-month contracts), $77,000 and $66,000, respectively. This is working as full-time dancers who are, from how they're described, at the very top of their game. The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that. But while both of those salaries certainly put them comfortably in the middle class on any scale, they're certainly not exorbitant. I doubt either of them would have been able to afford an apartment in Chicago on their own -- it's only by combining their incomes that they can.

The rest of their income (beyond the $143,000 they bring in together, which presumably is before taxes) is earned through what are essentially side hustles. And, apparently, they also draw on some unemployment during their two months of down time each year when they're not being paid from their contracts. Some people may take issue with that, but, as with the apparent gender gap, that's a side issue.

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

$143k plus side hustle and they are collecting unemployment at any time in that year?

fark that. That isn't relatable, it's systemic abuse.


No it's not. They pay into the unemployment fund, they get to collect when they are unemployed. Doesn't matter how much they make. I happily collected covid unemployment this summer when I laid myself off due to covid and having have to take care of kids. Paid into for 23 years without ever collecting. Screw your line of reasoning.
 
2020-10-29 1:41:34 PM  
7 votes:

jaytkay: baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

Probably a lot more than theirs, too. "Housing: $1,953 " almost certainly includes an escrow account to pay their property taxes.

$2,885 is a stupid amount for food. They say theyr're saving, but put $0 into savings that month.


They likely get take out once or twice a day, and shop at Whole Foods.

Also regular grocery stores in Chicago (the city, not burbs) are obscenely expensive.  Prices are fairly high and the quality is worse, making Whole Foods a decent deal.

Trader Joe's is cheap for a city grocery store.

That said, I can feed 6 people on less than half that.
 
2020-10-29 1:35:34 PM  
6 votes:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?


That's around $50 a person a day. WTF indeed, I could barely manage that if I tried. Maybe eating out for steak every meal?
 
2020-10-29 1:28:13 PM  
6 votes:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?


I mean if I were a professional ballet dancer, I'd probably be eating pretty well too.
 
2020-10-29 1:26:23 PM  
6 votes:

SuperChuck: Pocket Ninja:

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

Look around you. Do you see a lot of people willing to work very hard? I know I'd rather not if I had a choice


Your choice, man. I know I don't always give 100% every day, but I do enjoy a job well done.
 
2020-10-29 1:42:48 PM  
5 votes:

jaytkay: MusicMakeMyHeadPound: They're both professional athletes, not desk jockeys. They actually need an unusually high amount of calories.

$2,885/month very likely includes fancy restaurants where "conspicuous consumption" means small portions.

If it were about nutrition they'd be making smoothies with protein powder, at a fraction of the cost.



Yeah, that's covered in the article too: 
While they often enjoy splurging on nice meals out at restaurants, they also see it as a way to build their relationships around Chicago.

baronbloodbath: Even so, my liquor budget has never exceeded $100 for a month.


Oh... I spend more than that on liquor a week 😓
 
2020-10-29 2:05:31 PM  
4 votes:
$14.95 for a salad + $5.99 for a smoothie + tax + tip = $27.  Times 2 people, twice a day, gets you to over $3k a month without a drop of booze.

I'm not saying that it's financially prudent to always eat out or get delivery from upscale places. I'm saying that if you do, you can easily get to their food budget in a big city without gold plated lobster.
 
2020-10-29 1:56:12 PM  
4 votes:
I have a family of four. On the weekend I cook large meals as leftovers for the rest of the week. I balk at a grocery bill that hits $150, but it does happen when I bulk up for cooking. Plus we do get take out maybe once or twice a week since the kids like their fast food and occasionally sushi for my daughter. When you add in various quick runs to the grocery store for incidentals and a bulk up of meats at Costco every other month, I'm maybe looking at roughly $1200 a month for food for a family of four, which includes a lot of over priced snack crap. I can't imagine spending over $2000 a month for two people. Unless you are eating out all the time and getting Starbucks twice a day ( which I know is what some people at work do, which seems like shoveling money into a fire pit ).
 
2020-10-29 1:50:51 PM  
4 votes:

jaytkay: $2,885 is a stupid amount for food.


that is my annual grocery budget, I live alone.
 
2020-10-29 1:46:32 PM  
4 votes:

baronbloodbath: Even so, my liquor budget has never exceeded $100 for a month


What are you, Mormon, Mr. Mormon McMormon?
 
2020-10-29 1:37:15 PM  
4 votes:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?


They're both professional athletes, not desk jockeys. They actually need an unusually high amount of calories.
 
2020-10-29 1:25:57 PM  
4 votes:
Unlike most millennials, they don't have decades of career advancement ahead of them - at least not as professional ballet dancers. Most dancers retire by 35 or 40, and with that in mind, the couple is diligently saving a big chunk of their $178,000 combined annual income in anticipation of their next act.

That.
 
2020-10-29 1:39:47 PM  
3 votes:

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: They're both professional athletes, not desk jockeys. They actually need an unusually high amount of calories.


$2,885/month very likely includes fancy restaurants where "conspicuous consumption" means small portions.

If it were about nutrition they'd be making smoothies with protein powder, at a fraction of the cost.
 
2020-10-29 1:38:02 PM  
3 votes:

OptionC: Also, as the article points out, they are essentially professional athletes and at 30ish years old, far closer to the end of their careers than the beginning.  From that POV, their financial position is actually rather terrifying - in 5 years or so, they are going to go from $180K to ????


I remember seeing something about Cirque de Soleil and how most performers were forced to retire in their late 30's. So once they hit 30, the forward-thinking ones started jockeying for non-performance positions (marketing, operations, choreography, etc.). But many didn't think about the future until it was too late.
 
2020-10-29 1:30:06 PM  
3 votes:

halifaxdatageek: Unlike most millennials, they don't have decades of career advancement ahead of them - at least not as professional ballet dancers. Most dancers retire by 35 or 40, and with that in mind, the couple is diligently saving a big chunk of their $178,000 combined annual income in anticipation of their next act.

That.


That was supposed to read "exactly like most millennials, they don't have decades of career advancement ahead of them."
 
2020-10-29 1:19:29 PM  
3 votes:

OptionC: Pocket Ninja: So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

Also, as the article points out, they are essentially professional athletes and at 30ish years old, far closer to the end of their careers than the beginning.  From that POV, their financial position is actually rather terrifying - in 5 years or so, they are going to go from $180K to ????


Similar to professional athletes, they are also probably among the best at what they do. With the supporting cast/chorus/whatever you call it in ballet probably getting a hell of a lot less with a whole lot less job security.
 
2020-10-29 2:49:12 PM  
2 votes:
iamskibibitz:

Then you see that Cirque went bankrupt about five months ago.  I seem to recall it was yardsale bankruptcy rather than here's our new plan
 
2020-10-29 2:40:57 PM  
2 votes:
I imagine it's a far more difficult field to break into with making far less than the usual careers.   And as the article mentioned, with a window of opportunity where you're physically done in a couple decades, or much sooner due to injuries.

I can't relate because I don't have an iota of dancing talent in my body or any other talent for the arts or sports. Good for them on their financial planning.
 
2020-10-29 2:40:46 PM  
2 votes:

Pocket Ninja: First of all, they're not married, they're engaged.

Second of all, they're making (under 10-month contracts), $77,000 and $66,000, respectively. This is working as full-time dancers who are, from how they're described, at the very top of their game. The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that. But while both of those salaries certainly put them comfortably in the middle class on any scale, they're certainly not exorbitant. I doubt either of them would have been able to afford an apartment in Chicago on their own -- it's only by combining their incomes that they can.

The rest of their income (beyond the $143,000 they bring in together, which presumably is before taxes) is earned through what are essentially side hustles. And, apparently, they also draw on some unemployment during their two months of down time each year when they're not being paid from their contracts. Some people may take issue with that, but, as with the apparent gender gap, that's a side issue.

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.


$143k plus side hustle and they are collecting unemployment at any time in that year?

fark that. That isn't relatable, it's systemic abuse.
 
2020-10-29 2:03:36 PM  
2 votes:

Lochsteppe: halifaxdatageek: Unlike most millennials, they don't have decades of career advancement ahead of them - at least not as professional ballet dancers. Most dancers retire by 35 or 40, and with that in mind, the couple is diligently saving a big chunk of their $178,000 combined annual income in anticipation of their next act.

That.

That was supposed to read "exactly like most millennials, they don't have decades of career advancement ahead of them."


Why do you think that?  GenX is the smallest generation, so you'll have more opportunities to move up in management.  Additionally, COVID is doing you a favor in some sense in that it's killing off a lot of old people.

Your biggest threats are automation and economic stagnation.  One's a training/career choice issue and the other is largely a political issue.
 
2020-10-29 1:46:43 PM  
2 votes:
Most of the dancers who make big bucks are paid in dollar bills...
 
2020-10-29 1:38:34 PM  
2 votes:

GBmanNC: baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?

That's around $50 a person a day. WTF indeed, I could barely manage that if I tried. Maybe eating out for steak every meal?


My guess is they are also counting alcohol as food.

Even so, my liquor budget has never exceeded $100 for a month. They must be eating at top tier restaurants like Olive Garden.
 
2020-10-29 1:37:15 PM  
2 votes:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.


Probably a lot more than theirs, too. "Housing: $1,953 " almost certainly includes an escrow account to pay their property taxes.

$2,885 is a stupid amount for food. They say theyr're saving, but put $0 into savings that month.
 
2020-10-29 1:33:56 PM  
2 votes:
frinkiac.comView Full Size
 
2020-10-29 1:23:22 PM  
2 votes:
Pocket Ninja:

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

Look around you. Do you see a lot of people willing to work very hard? I know I'd rather not if I had a choice
 
2020-10-29 8:31:29 PM  
1 vote:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?


Ummmm....I don't know about now, but I do know that back in the 70's - 80's ballet dancers did a LOT of blow & smoked to keep their weight low. Those things might be counted as "meals", possibly.
 
2020-10-29 7:05:35 PM  
1 vote:

italie: Do MLB players collect unemployment during the off-season?


The Federal Unemployment Tax Act stipulates that professional athletes cannot apply for funemployment benefits if they are in between seasons as long as they have reasonable certainty that they will be employed in the following season.
 
2020-10-29 5:07:12 PM  
1 vote:

mrmopar5287: astelmaszek: They pay into the unemployment fund, they get to collect when they are unemployed.

They aren't unemployed. They're making (unreported) scratch on side hustles.


They are "under" employed and the side gigs are not unreported.  This is legal.
 
2020-10-29 4:59:33 PM  
1 vote:

Geotpf: you are supposed to be looking for a job to get unemployment, and obviously neither the dancer nor the auto workers are for these brief, scheduled down times


There are exceptions. For some people that are furloughed, the requirement to search for work is waived because you have a job that might have a firm callback date, or even an indefinite callback date. The idea is that they don't want to fark around wasting people's time with auto workers filling out applications at McDonald's only to tell the shift manager at an interview "I'm only doing this for a week and then I go back to work at the plant." No one is going to hire them, it's a joke to make them search for work, and the people running funemployment recognize this and offer waivers for these circumstances.

Geotpf: it looks like they do Uber or something during the down time (side hustle), which means they aren't even unemployed during that time


This is where they are committing fraud. Illinois funemployment benefits is designed to replace 47% of your weekly base wage (calculated from work quarters prior) up to a maximum of $484 with no dependents, $577 with a dependent spouse, and $699 with a dependent child or children. If the two of them file, the absolute most they can take home is $968 a week (both getting $484 each).

However, Illinois offers partial funemployment for people who do some work while they qualify for benefits. It's replaced on a dollar-for-dollar basis. That means if someone goes out and earns $200 one week, their weekly funemployment benefit is only $284 (if they are drawing the maximum of $484). Illinois does this to "top up" people who work and you can do this right up to where you could make $483 one week and get $1 in benefits.

So, if this couple is working on side projects during their two months of off season, are they making more than $484 each week? If so, they don't qualify for any funemployment benefits.

QUOTE FROM ARTICLE: Last year, Gutierrez earned an additional $15,000 through work outside his Joffrey contract, while Mendoza brought in an extra $20,000.

How much of this work outside their contracts is/was done when they were "unemployed?" That's a huge question. Eight weeks of being unemployed means a maximum of $484 in funemployment, or $3,872 overall. Are they each pulling in $4,000 during their period of "unemployment?" How is that income spread out over the weeks where they are "unemployed?" The answers to those questions would be nice to know, and the assumptions point toward fraud.
 
2020-10-29 4:36:39 PM  
1 vote:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-29 4:13:44 PM  
1 vote:

baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?


Yup.  That was my issue here.  That's a daily food bill of just under $50 a person.  That's a lot of farking money just for food.  That's $34k a year.  Some couples live on $34k a year, total.
 
2020-10-29 3:18:54 PM  
1 vote:

astelmaszek: italie: Pocket Ninja: First of all, they're not married, they're engaged.

Second of all, they're making (under 10-month contracts), $77,000 and $66,000, respectively. This is working as full-time dancers who are, from how they're described, at the very top of their game. The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that. But while both of those salaries certainly put them comfortably in the middle class on any scale, they're certainly not exorbitant. I doubt either of them would have been able to afford an apartment in Chicago on their own -- it's only by combining their incomes that they can.

The rest of their income (beyond the $143,000 they bring in together, which presumably is before taxes) is earned through what are essentially side hustles. And, apparently, they also draw on some unemployment during their two months of down time each year when they're not being paid from their contracts. Some people may take issue with that, but, as with the apparent gender gap, that's a side issue.

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

$143k plus side hustle and they are collecting unemployment at any time in that year?

fark that. That isn't relatable, it's systemic abuse.

No it's not. They pay into the unemployment fund, they get to collect when they are unemployed. Doesn't matter how much they make. I happily collected covid unemployment this summer when I laid myself off due to covid and having have to take care of kids. Paid into for 23 years without ever collecting. Screw your line of reasoning.


Abuse of the unemployment fund to take a vacation is one reason unemployment insurance is so high, thus causing companies to avoid hiring more workers, or moving to other places to hire.   But you got yours, so it's all good.
 
2020-10-29 3:04:23 PM  
1 vote:

Pocket Ninja: First of all, they're not married, they're engaged.

Second of all, they're making (under 10-month contracts), $77,000 and $66,000, respectively. This is working as full-time dancers who are, from how they're described, at the very top of their game. The bigger question I have is why he is earning $11,000 more than she is, but maybe there's a perfectly legitimate reason for that. But while both of those salaries certainly put them comfortably in the middle class on any scale, they're certainly not exorbitant. I doubt either of them would have been able to afford an apartment in Chicago on their own -- it's only by combining their incomes that they can.

The rest of their income (beyond the $143,000 they bring in together, which presumably is before taxes) is earned through what are essentially side hustles. And, apparently, they also draw on some unemployment during their two months of down time each year when they're not being paid from their contracts. Some people may take issue with that, but, as with the apparent gender gap, that's a side issue.

So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.


tldr; this is just a specific case of two people, both of whom are in very unique circumstances, and who are not representative of anything, regarding the other millions of people in this country, good or bad.
tldr2; this is a useless article and a waste of a click
 
2020-10-29 2:48:09 PM  
1 vote:

chitownmike: astelmaszek: baronbloodbath: GBmanNC: baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?

That's around $50 a person a day. WTF indeed, I could barely manage that if I tried. Maybe eating out for steak every meal?

My guess is they are also counting alcohol as food.

Even so, my liquor budget has never exceeded $100 for a month. They must be eating at top tier restaurants like Olive Garden.

[Fark user image image 425x318]Started this one Saturday night. Been working long days and late nights all week long. Going to need a refill. There goes another 100.

Maybe you should cut back


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-29 2:39:00 PM  
1 vote:
I have a cousin in law, great gal, and very good dancer. Not ballet but everything else. She's been in this and that and spent a lot of years performing with Andy Williams in Branson, MO. She gave it up eventually and became a nurse. She couldn't go her whole life basically making minimum wage. Most dancers aren't paid squat.
 
2020-10-29 2:19:45 PM  
1 vote:

Rev.K: They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.


Their pet had chemo treatments.  I can relate.  We spent more than the cost of a new economy car on cancer treatments for our dog to allow her to live to middle age.  Yeah, we should have gotten pet insurance, but that lesson was learned too late.
 
2020-10-29 2:15:40 PM  
1 vote:

mrmopar5287: funemploymemt


This could have been a nice intentional misspelling, "Funemployment" : When you've been laid off and spend your days getting high.

But instead you had to add an extra typo and now it's just the result of a howler monkey banging on the keyboard.
 
2020-10-29 2:02:50 PM  
1 vote:

GBmanNC: Rev.K: They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.

Are you suggesting they kill and eat their dog? Because it sounds like your suggesting they kill and eat their dog...


Damn it
 
2020-10-29 2:01:18 PM  
1 vote:

snowshovel: I have a family of four. On the weekend I cook large meals as leftovers for the rest of the week. I balk at a grocery bill that hits $150, but it does happen when I bulk up for cooking. Plus we do get take out maybe once or twice a week since the kids like their fast food and occasionally sushi for my daughter. When you add in various quick runs to the grocery store for incidentals and a bulk up of meats at Costco every other month, I'm maybe looking at roughly $1200 a month for food for a family of four, which includes a lot of over priced snack crap. I can't imagine spending over $2000 a month for two people. Unless you are eating out all the time and getting Starbucks twice a day ( which I know is what some people at work do, which seems like shoveling money into a fire pit ).


Food wise, yes, I agree. Even with takeout here and there I'd say our budget is about the same for family of four and we eat really well and healthy. However, they include alcohol in their budget and that adds a up quickly. Easily another 150 to 300 a week in our house. Wife likes her a bottle of wine a night and I like my liquor while working late. We haven't been to a bar since March so that keeps it lower. Never been a fan of fancy restaurants on regular basis, but I can see that adding up quickly.
 
2020-10-29 2:00:35 PM  
1 vote:

cleek: Rev.K: They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.

they're dancers, not financial planners


Whole Foods, amirite?
 
2020-10-29 1:57:11 PM  
1 vote:

MusicMakeMyHeadPound: baronbloodbath: Food: $2,885 (groceries, eating out and takeout)

Holy shiat. That's my mortgage, tax, insurance, and all utilities combined.

The Fark are they eating? Gold plated gold?

They're both professional athletes, not desk jockeys. They actually need an unusually high amount of calories.


Lol.

Powerlifters aren't even hitting that amount of money spent on food.
 
2020-10-29 1:54:55 PM  
1 vote:

halifaxdatageek: I mean, they ARE unemployed, haha, and assumedly pay into whatever the American equivalent of EI is the rest of the year.


No, they are almost certainly making cash or 1099 income that they aren't reporting while collecting funemployment.
 
2020-10-29 1:54:27 PM  
1 vote:

OptionC: Pocket Ninja: So this is a story about two professionals who are apparently working very hard and very well in their chosen careers and the decisions they're making to build a life together. If that's not relatable, I'm not exactly sure what is.

Also, as the article points out, they are essentially professional athletes and at 30ish years old, far closer to the end of their careers than the beginning.  From that POV, their financial position is actually rather terrifying - in 5 years or so, they are going to go from $180K to ????


Porn. The answer is always porn.
 
2020-10-29 1:50:45 PM  
1 vote:

Rev.K: They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.


they're dancers, not financial planners
 
2020-10-29 1:48:04 PM  
1 vote:

OptionC: PvtStash: Dancer that earns > $80k USD annually = ~ .05% of all professional dancers world wide.

So this is an article about how some people do win lotto tickets sometimes.

Go eat turds for this kind of bs POV on American economic opportunity.

Most dancers who don't have that sort of potential are going to figure it out by their early 20s and pursue different primary careers (though they may keep dancing/instruction as a hobby or side-gig).

~


Said someone that I would suspect is not particularly familiar with the professorial ballet company scene and what the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps_d​e​_ballet is.

A larger group of dancers that will be comprised of young up and coming talent that may go on to be a principal dancer, as well as all the seasoned life long professional dancers that do not.

For every principal you can know of, there are likely to be a couple dozen  life long professional core dancers.


Like getting a PhD and pretending you will just of go on to have a tenure tract professorship anywhere.
When in fact the field is so tightly packed that of all who assume that, only a tiny fraction manage to actuality do that. While many of them may still wind up in field related jobs, but jobs a masters would have been plenty for. Or to the analogy here, core jobs are more common than principals. And people do make life long  careers of core jobs in all fields really.
 
2020-10-29 1:46:35 PM  
1 vote:

Rev.K: They are spending $3,941/mo on food and their pet.

If they can't solve this problem, there are very few problems they can be counted on to solve.


Are you suggesting they kill and eat their dog? Because it sounds like your suggesting they kill and eat their dog...
 
Displayed 54 of 54 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.