I mean, to be fair the article is pretty clear that they asked people what they would consider an ideal (but not totally unrealistic) income. If asked for your ideal, would you say the median? The headline and reactions in these comments are very click-baity in that they're responding to an answer to an "in your ideal world..." sort of question as if the people were answering "what is the bare minimum".
Want to second this. These articles normally take from surveys where they show the % answered or number but not the question.
>"What is the income you would want for a dating potential partner with the serious intent of marriage and possibly children?"
Hits very different from
>"What is the minimum cutoff you'll need to consider dating someone?"
But we only get the results without the context, re-packaged as an article, and then spiced up to a hottake headline (because it triggers/gaslights folks enough for clicks/engagement/adrevs).
I’ve always held that these sorts of articles are just there to create engagement by inciting incel rage.
If you’re single and think your income is the reason why then here’s a wake up call - it’s not. There’s an absolute dime out there with a fantastic personality in your neighborhood working all day so she can co-sign her boyfriend’s car loan so he can do door dash without borrowing her ride.
But single dudes will read these types of articles and go on blaming women cuz they just expect too much. Get real lol.
Yep, exactly. It's ideally formulated to hook into the "hypergamy" ragebait of the podcast world while not actually lying. They're relying on people not paying attention to the "ideal" part and know that they'll start reacting like this comment section, loving the opportunity to scoff at how unrealistic all these other people are for thinking the bare minimum is 160k.
Obviously women don’t require men to make $160,000 dollars a year to date them. But women do generally expect their date to make more money than them. So acting like women don’t care about income is flat out wrong.
I think it relies on the fact that people are too tired to think everything they come across out and just distill everything down to the simplest concepts because they eat so much information. It's why headlines are so misleading and used for misinformation, everyone stops there and doesn't read the articles. This one specifically relies on the readers just generalising everyone is like this without taking time to think how it could just be a short sampling of opinions
If you look at statistics, most women date and marry men who make more money than them. So the idea that women don’t care about a potential date’s income is obviously wrong. You seem to be making comments based on what you want to be true rather than what is true.
Statistically men make more than women, so law of large numbers dictates that any sample of men and women of sufficient size will have this condition, therefore so do couples. That’s not indicative of preference, it’s statistically impossible for anything else to be true so long as income disparities hold.
The implication isn’t “money doesn’t matter”. It’s that your income isn’t preventing you from finding a spouse. If you’re blaming it on that, you’re lying to yourself.
No doubt, I know an extremely attractive friend of mine in college who’s taste in men was absolute shit. Up until maybe last year, her husband had a real job where he could contribute to their family with a daughter, literally kicked him out of the house one time because he wouldn’t get back from golf.
Some of these women and men will put up with anything if they find them attractive both of the dudes I remember her shacking up with before her husband were both over 6’1” including hubby so that’s a factor in it to some women and men will give leeway if they are their “type” and attractive. Which makes sense, I wish more people were honest about it though.
They should have followed up with what % of earners do you think that is. Then maybe let them know the actual % and that is for adults of all ages and sex.
Eh, ponies are super impractical though. Maybe this is more like a luxury car. If asked “what is your ideal car?” wouldn’t it be reasonable to say something nice?
For the sake of argument, let’s say you name a BMW as your ideal car. Yeah, sure, the average person doesn’t drive a BMW. But they’re not unattainable. There are lots of BMWs on the road, particularly in higher-income areas. And a person who would consider a BMW to be their ideal car might still be happy enough to drive a used Kia (and certainly wouldn’t choose to walk or take the bus rather than driving the Kia).
My ideal car is a Honda Odyssey and I've been lucky enough to own one for many years, although I've been a little disappointed by the jank Honda did with their vmc engines. I'm not a flashy car person and big on practicality to have that preference. If I had a smaller family I'd probably prefer a Prius.
My ideal car is a tank, and I will never own one. I could technically save up enough money and get one eventually, but its waaaaaay to much work for an ideal
Armored car my man. You can get into a nice Ferret or a armoured Land Rover for less than 40k and they'll park in most garages. Drive train is all commercial parts. Road legal and with enough get up and go to tool around town no problem.
There's a reason these people are still single. Someone put out a video once where they went around asking a bunch of hot chicks what they were looking for in a guy. It was all stereotypical stuff. Above 6 feet tall, in shape, making like 150k +. I think there was other stuff but honestly those are the only three I remember.
The guy then says that statistically the dude they're looking for made up like less than 1% of the US population lol. That's not even factoring in the number of them that are married or in a relationship already.
My wife has a friend that's in her mid 30s and still a virgin. She DESPERATELY wants to meet someone as her friends all get married and start having kids. There's already 2 kids with more coming within the next 1-2 years. She's completely delusional in what she's looking for. She actually used to be one of my favorite people out of my wife's friends to talk to. I can't anymore. She's insufferable. She's literally ended up crying the last two times I talked to her because she will not stop bitching about how she's being "left behind" and I'm getting more blunt every time she brings it up.
You know there’s a huge pool of essentially serfs bringing down the median big time who no one involved in the article even thinks exists, let alone considering dating
There are going to be a ton of hopelessly single people out there. Jobs that pay anywhere close to that aren’t exactly thick on the ground, despite what some people may claim.
Trying to date in my 30s even my 8-5 pisses women the fuck off. I have girls get mad that I'm at work and didn't text back until 12 lol imagine being a lawyer in a court room where phones are banned all day. I'm supposed to make 6 figures and somehow have the availability for them that a guy with no job does.
At least in my jurisdiction--and I've yet to be in a jurisdiction that holds otherwise--attorneys can bring our phones into the courts. Doesn't mean we can always look at them. Unless you're docketed for 8:30 and the judge doesn't take the bench until 11.
Mine allows them in for an attorney but wants them off unless your away from the Courtroom - I don't want to risk a ringing phone aggravating a judge, so I have it with me but off so I can use it briefly if absolutely needed. But its effectively having no phone.
I actually do work 40 to 60 hours a week and run 3 to 10 miles a day, but I also have no social life outside of it while im training. I do meet lots of women in these clubs but a LOT of them are realtors. They have a super flexible schedule and at least 3 that I met make twice or more than what I make and I make about 114 a year.
See with a 2026 girl texting back is entirely one way she can text back whenever she wants even weeks later a 6 figure 6 inch man better text back in under a minute though.
Especially if you own the 49s. Billionaires trying to fuck trailer park hookers and strip mall massage parlor sex workers isn’t a deal breaker for them.
Oh sorrryyy, I've got to work all day to afford these goddamn shark cards, meanwhile You're off galavanting on submarine and sasquatch missions with dicknipplechaffer69.
That literally happened to me when I got a full time office job, my unemployed (former) buddy started getting impatient and doing heists without me after I used my scarce free time to set them up with him.
I’m tired of it too! I work in healthcare so you’re either getting a text at 7 AM or if I remember while charting through my 2 PM lunch. And “YOU PRIORITIZE IF ITS IMPORTANT” ideologies can kick rocks. I continuously have families calling my desk, insurance calling my ascom, nurses waiting to tell me patient requests me at bedside, an MD consult that patient needs a new house, and an email that I need to complete my CEUs. But I gotta prioritize texting YOU back.
Yeah dealt with this when I was single and dating. 2 women specifically would get upset that I wasn’t texting within 10 minutes while I was working and felt I wasn’t that into them.
They want the romance novel version of a rich man/man with a high paying job. You can give them a lavish lifestyle, but also seemingly can give them attention whenever they want it lol
Seeing as your username has Texas in it, the archiac court rules make sense. I'm where phones are allowed, as long as they are on silent and they don't interfere with the job. The courts are too busy with cases stacked on top of each other to not allow phones.
The absolute female fantasy is the unemployed European dude who works with his hands and does something like make shitty clay bowls but somehow has trillions of dollars in his bank account so he can ride around on his moped and say bullshit like “dolce far niente.”
So like the average guy on those shows where they’re buying a home where they’re like “I am an online massage therapist, and I’m an entrepreneur on Etsy where I sell my ceramics, and our budget is $12 million”?
Yeah, I have been doing 70 hours weeks for 6 months to complete a project, zero days off in the last 6 weeks. Barely have time to do laundry.
I’m not a lawyer but our clients are and they expect you to work like they do.
Can confirm. I am on call 24/7 :(. I hate it but it lets me sock away as much as I can so I can maybe retire one day. I have thought about dating more in earnest but I struggle to make the logistics work, especially being almost 40 at this point.
yup. Last year I made 190k, most I ever earned. Year before 172. But I wa working 7 days a week for the most part, 10-12 hours day 5 days a week, 6 or 8 on weekend. When you work as an electrician and there is a plant in need of quick chang over, hours are unlimited. Some guys do 16 because they hate their family. I had a gf, she would nag all the time but then when I get her a fricken prado purse, it kept her quiet.
Pretty much this. I make around the range that this article calls ‘ideal’, but I work at a chaotic high stress startup, putting in 50-60hrs a week regularly.
> Single U.S. adults were asked in a new survey how much they ideally would like potential partners to earn—and were given the caveat that the expectations had to be “realistic.”
I think given the constraints of "ideal, but not unrealistic" the answers kind of nailed the sweet spot of that. Correctly recognizing that 160k is good top-few-percentile money without straining credulity and saying "Powerball winner" or something.
101k is usually within like the 70th percentile for prime age workers in most metro areas. It’s really not that high. Common? Depends on if you think 3 in 10 is common, but definitely not crazy rare or anything.
Most people in these threads are early 20s and don’t yet have a good grasp on what a normalized prime earnings age (30s to late 50s) career looks like.
If I hear one more person on Reddit that act's like $100K salary is basically poverty wages anywhere in this country I am going to flip a table.
20% of US salaries are over $100K! So every single person is expecting to date the top 20% of earners in the country?! Give me a break, I know inflation sucks but people REALLY need to get a grip on what a good salary is and stop just using the benchmark of "Can I offord a $3K a month mortgage? No? Then I am poor" when houses are literally the most expensive they have ever been.
We don't need salaries to be raised 30-50% to catch up, we need the housing bubble to collapse so houses return to real value.
Real (adjusted for overall inflation) home values were around $90-100K from the 70s to 2000s....meaning their value stayed fairly constant. At the peak before the 2008 crash they climbed to $155K. They are now sitting at around $175K. Meaning that in real terms homes are about twice what they SHOULD historically be worth. If that isn't a bubble I don't know what is. The cause is irrelevant whether its lack of supply or induced demand. Homes as an asset are inflated above their historical average.
Saying "homes used to cost around $100k in real terms, now they cost $175k, therefore they're worth $75k too much isn't really how this works. You're assuming the old price was the correct equilibrium and everything above it is a bubble.
Do you understand what happens to your historical averages if home prices stay elevated over the next 50 years? Eventually you end up with 125 years of historical averages that includes 50 years where you thought the numbers were inflated.
A historical average can tell you that something changed.
A historical average can't tell you what the price should be.
What happened in 2008 has no similarities whatsoever as to what is going on now. Right now people are stuck in affordable homes due to the idiocy of lower rates during COVID, causing prices to skyrocket and price people out of rebuying. They are simple worth what they are worth. People are buying and people are selling still. There’s nothing to be “popped” in the housing market, outside of maybe single family homes that were airbnbs.
That will never happen when rich boomer NIMBY's hold on to the wealth they have with all of their might. And governments bow to them because they vote.
The housing bubble will collapse when people rip power from NIMBYs preventing housing from being built or that generation dies off and supply will finally outstrip demand.
Its more like a lot of people are content being single, that they will only consider dating someone if they are 100% perfect, and being in the top 20% income seems to be a reasonable thing to expect.
Find a college that does class d wastewater licenses. Or find a department of labor sponsored industrial maintenance 2 year. certification. I make 6 figures with a 4 day work week. Union
Thanks for the advice. I’ll look into that right away. I never see those programs advertised as the state schools, but maybe I just need to dig into technical schools more.
>Wastewater treatment plant mechanic ... i have no issue dating
No fucking wa..
>I shower before I leave work everyday
That explains it. I used to do IT field support for a municipality and had all the wastewater plants on my route. Just stepping into some of the buildings for 5 minutes would leave you reeking all day. I had to carry several changes of clothes and garbage bags for when I had to visit those sites.
I *could* make that much, if I went back into nuclear. But, I kind of like having a stress free job. I'd rather be single and comfortable than married with no free time and constantly stressed out. Even in that job, it would take mandatory overtime to start hitting $160k with any regularity.
If wages kept up with inflation and efficiency gains, that's an easy 60k. if people are used to paying $30 for a single meal at McDonald's, then it makes total sense.
So they really want someone who makes 100k.
Not bad. People just don't understand that companies don't pay.
Yup, only 8% of the US makes that. It’s significantly lower in other countries. That’s 1 in 13 people. Then factor in half those people are a sex you may not be interested in and the numbers are even worse.
The government wants more kids. Guess all the old geezers running things have not seen this article. Those who can actually afford them might not have the time or desire to start families.
I could get a job that pays that much, except I'd be working like 18 hours a day for like 5 years, minimum, before I could get promoted into a job that merely disrespects the concept of work-life balance rather than actively despises it
Hot take: People (mostly women?) aren’t unaware of how rare these salaries are; the delusion is the number of people (mostly women?) believing they deserve someone earning that much.
Seems like the issue is in the wording. They asked what the ideal number would be that would also be “realistic.” Well anyone is going to choose the highest realistic salary they know of to respond right? Otherwise they’d just say a billion dollars or something. A better question would have been what is the minimum salary of a potential partner.
Yeah this pops up from time to time and like, yeah if we're talking ideal, I'd love to have a decently high earning partner, if not an heir to a fortune with a tolerable family.
The authors very intentionally picked their words. It’s click bait. They’re trying to be dramatic.
The study (link below) is by northwest mutual, a life insurance company. They did an online poll of ~4,500 people and ~20% of those people had liquid assets over $1m. Out of all households in the US only around 5% have $1m+ in liquid assets.
In other words the study asked a significantly disproportionate amount of rich people how rich they want their partner to be, and they likely said they want them to be rich too, which brings up the average.
The study is likely designed to be a marketing tool, not an attempt to get accurate readings on the American population
Holy schnikes! 160k? My wife and I got together when we both made nearly zero as students. +3 decades later I'm glad she didn't pull a credit report and income statement on me at the time. We still tease each other that we married each other for the other's "vast family fortune". So far, we've inherited a towel set and two wooden statues - but we remain hopeful.
I have my father’s nice hand painted china set. It’s been sitting in a cabinet for a couple years. Not even a glass display cabinet - just a regular kitchen cabinet.
My wife and I were the same, both 18 year old broke freshmen in college when we met and started dating and that was 30 years ago next January. But I do think it’s different vs meeting somebody as an adult.
If met somebody and we were 30 I’d expect some indications that she’s self sufficient, smart and decent with money. You’re really just looking for that potential in somebody when you’re younger.
Congrats to both of you on 30 years in advance. I agree that your perspective changes somewhat as we age, but I'd take that 10,000 watt smile of hers and the way she makes me laugh any day over earning potential. Sometimes the heart trumps economics - and even good sense. Seems we were both lucky.
Yeah, this makes me glad I'm not on the dating scene anymore if true. This was definitely not too common of a thing before 2020 when I was. And I live in a city that's unaffordable and expensive too. I'm not sure what's caused people to have these demands, I guess social media and the fact they are drowning in their own lives too and insecure.
I dream of having a partner worth hundreds of billions. its a perfectly reasonable ideal to hold out for.
I bring a few hundred grand of student loan debt and crushing mental illness. You bring Billions of net worth.
These articles are hilarious rage bait. Of course people prefer having more money than less. Of course they want partners that are fit, smart, young, funny, charismatic etc etc etc.
Is that realistic? Who knows. I'm sure the comments will have lots of very helpful commentary about how unreasonable expectations are.
And I mean the flip side, imagine you're a stable and cool $160. A lot of potential partners would do anything -- anything -- to land that type of security for themselves. You're going to have to wade through more liars, frauds, and sociopaths than the average dater.
Headline: 999/1000 people surveyed prefer wealthier partners, on average. That 1/1000 person accidentally selected the wrong answer on the survey and there’s no back button.
This is your weekly reminder that 18% of Americans earn six figures, and people earning 160k or more is more in the 8% range. If you think most people earn six figures, get the fuck off tiktok and stop letting dipshit influencers and their fake flossing shape your view of how things are...
And the majority of the 8-18% are people who are near the tail end of their career, who have been in the work force for 20-30 years.
Sure, some of them might be divorcees back in the dating pool, but they're not fresh out of college 28 year olds looking for another person in their age range to start a family with.
Well, I guess that explains why they are single.
Wonder what people in relationship’s expectations are?
Don’t really need to say more comment filter hit me earlier.
The expectation is housing. In a lot of areas, you need two earners making over six figures to afford a single family home. In my area you need a HHI of like $200k to get on the housing ladder.
Then consider things like how expensive child care is. Starting a family is expensive. That will impact who you pick to start a family.
So it was produced from an online survey for The 2026 Planning & Progress Study. Online only sampling gets my attennae up. Does anyone have experience with how things are skewed when it comes to online samplingn only? This also seems like the median response per group would cut through high COL areas and bring them down a bit.
Surprised I had to scroll this far to see this. Methodology is everything. You can make any survey produce any outcome you want by changing methodology.
Seems like most single Millenials are going to stay that way if this is the bar they want to set. That’s ridiculous. My questions is what are these people bringing to the table if they want someone earning that much since the vast majority are not themselves.
The problem with this comment section is that the article clearly says people were asked what their partner would ideally make, and it's being responded to, as you did, as if they said this is the minimum bar.
If someone asks me what my partner's ideal but not totally unrealistic income would be, I'd probably also say something like 160k, but that in no way implies that I would refuse to date someone who didn't achieve my ultimate ideal. I've dated plenty of people, and none of them had that "ideal" income.
That's like asking what color would your ideal partner's eyes be, hearing "blue", and then going "wowwww so you would just refuse to date anyone with brown eyes??"...like it's literally not even the question...
As a single Millennial, my preference is a woman making either six figures or willing to make $0. What's hard is finding someone who's reached 30, still on the dating scene, and doesn't already have kids.
>However, there’s a silver lining for single people who neither earn nor want to earn six figures: 59% of singles don’t believe a potential partner’s income is important.
So most people don't even care about salary. They kind of buried the lede here in their rush to get an inflammatory headline out
Also the fact that the question was what is the ideal income for your partner, not the minimum income. Whose "ideal" dream income is gonna be 60k or something? It's clickbait through and through.
According to the study, American women are asking for $172,000 and American men $101,000. I understand times are tough people but that doesn’t seem realistic at all considering even people on the very low end of that are outliers and represent a small percentage of the population.
you should understand that $172,000 is just one of many criteria. It's like a ticket to enter the is he worth it contest. There are 5-10 more steps you need to pass
Middle aged western guys going to 3rd world countries to find a partner has been a thing since WW2.
A lot of these guys get duped but a lot end up meeting partners who they would have 0 chance with in the west. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a new wave of this amongst millennial men in their 40s.
My personal experience is that of the men in my family who have moved to the us, none have married American women, they found someone back home and brought them. All stable relationships.
That's what I did. I have no debt, 800 credit scores across the board, make six figures, etc. I took advice on Reddit and changed the type of women I had been attempting to date, and still attracted financially irresponsible losers with baggage. I married someone from Viet Nam and she's normal.
This is not actually true. The number is closer to 35-40%, and that's without accounting for the fact that a big portion of those divorces are second or even third divorces, so far fewer people than you actually think are actually going to experience divorce.
That's my plan. I make $180k and am in great shape. Unfortunately, due to height, I'm not allowed in the US dating pool, so off to Asia I go. I spent enough time working over there to know what I'm missing.
Edit: Downvotes undoubtedly from the "it's all in your head" or "It must be your personality" clubs or the anti-passport club. Height filters exist on every single dating platform, so it's pretty objectively a disadvantage.
I also decided not to find anyone in the US. I am saving money so I can go back to my country, I’ll figure out the whole relationship thing when I get there.
I wonder why more people in this thread aren’t mentioning this. The article mentioned that the pay gap could be the reason for this expectation difference. Make of that what you will
Who are these people that think everybody makes over $100,000? The median income for a single American is more like $60,000. I get how some people may come to this conclusion if they are in an insulated bubble of high earners, but that is not the reality for most people.
For years on Reddit, I've seen people act insane about what they think a normal income is, and I've just written it off as reddit being weird or out of touch. It's rather disheartening to see real world studies say the same thing.
In many major urban areas $100k is not that high. If you have a college degree, 5-10 years experience in your field, and live in one of top 20 metro areas in the country, there's a sold chance you're making that or more.
This seems more like a desire for economic/financial stability as a part of partner acquisition because it's something people aren't finding in their careers (aka we're all broke bitches and the job market is ass so we want to date someone who isn't currently broke. Doesn't mean I'm not also dating people who make basically no money. Aka this is silly)
This. I’ve just given up on ever feeling financially stable (or dating, for that matter), but I know many people who genuinely seem to see marriage as their only realistic path to a comfortable life.
I'm like you be happy with my daily bread and somehow I end up with more great. Honestly I know a lot of rich women and I can't think of one that was rescued by a rich man they all were with him when he wasn't rich. This dream a lot of them have is a delusion. Usually they are rich because she supported him while he went to med school or started the business or whatever.
I feel like people write off the advantage of having a stay at home spouse in building wealth. My mom had a good career, but gave it up to fully support my dad while he massively scaled his career.
He would always be at work 14 hours a day while she handled all the fine budgeting, side hustles, cooking, cleaning, errands, insurance, and home maintenance for dad and us 3 kids.
I’m really happy now that my parents are retired; my dad has proved himself an equal contributor and splits all the cooking and cleaning.
I think people love to villainize stay at home moms (sometimes dads), but each of my parents lives looked equally terrible even though they came out the other side pretty well off.
Before we make this into a new front on the gender war, I don't think this is scientific. Also the article says:
> However, there’s a silver lining for single people who neither earn nor want to earn six figures: 59% of singles don’t believe a potential partner’s income is important.
Of course everyone WANTS a partner making tons of income, but the majority of people think it's not a big deal
Gonna really suck for poor women, as college-educated women have started picking off the blue-collar working men with stable jobs. It's gonna be the bottom of the barrel, economically, for those ladies.
These rage baity articles are serving a disingenuous agenda. More internet slop pitting men and women against each other over vanity and money. Don’t fall for this stuff people
Yeah, millennials are closer to 40 now. Maybe that person makes $60k but they got their house in 2016 and have $500k equity in it. 40 year olds should be savvy to this.
i wouldn't necessarily say someone with $60k yearly income with 500k equity in their house is living a grand life. They really need to watch their finance.
That's not the life style someone demanding $160k is looking for.
Lmao. I make just north of that and I can tell you there’s not that many people making that much money. Unless they own a very successful business or have a doctorate/ law degree. I believe the average house hold income is $85K
It depends where you live. I’m in the NYC metro, and a good chunk of my social circle clears that in earnings with 5-10 years of experience. I imagine it’s much harder to reach that in Indiana or Tennessee.
I hate to break it to everyone. I make that much and have 3 teens in/entering college and I am barely keeping my head above water. And I budget every penny. Granted I am paying all my bills and loans and saving some for retirement and the kids are going to college. But I would say $160k is bare min for the picket fence and kids suburban American dream. I worry about money all the time. And we have a smaller 60s house, older car, and zero extravagant vacations. It is brutal out there.
I'm fine with it too. It's what I can afford in my cost of living area. Yeah the education part is tough. Dept of Ed changed the rules right as I started with no grace period which was BS. But hey you adjust and figure it out. I'm not complaining I'm glad I make enough to pay for everything. But I live a far from the extravagant lifestyle people might think at my salary. If anything the women in the title aren't looking for enough money. That is the irony. But really it says there is something really wrong with society. This is what inflation and printing money does. 160k is the old 100k. I am a spreadsheet budgeter and I get 3 to 4 percent raises every year and for about the last 10 years my buying power has steadily eroded. It's just a fact.
I mean.. want and expect are two different things. I'd want a partner worth 6 figures, with curves like Lombard Street, and an infinite level of patience for my weird dumbass but that doesn't mean I expect it or are worthy of it, lol.
Way to set the standards low. When I was single I wanted a woman worth 50 million or making no less than 2 million a year. I did not get this, but it was the dream.
What is wrong with the literacy of this comments section? Nothing is being said about the bar for partners, this isn’t claiming expectations are 6 figs or bust, they’re asked for ideal circumstances and with realistic being a hedge against them all asking for millionaires.
Most of you are moralizing about this but it’s the equivalent of an article saying “yes I’d like steak dinner over McDonalds” and y’all thinking this means we’re doomed to starve.
this is a bad-faith news article meant to make millenials sound entitled, what else is new.
The study was done by Northwestern Mutual and absolutely zero data is given about respondent location. The actual salary number itself doesn't matter. If you asked everyone in Los Angeles, a number of 160k is probably lower middle class, right? cuz I live in Seattle suburbs and I make 130k, and I live in the shittiest apartment complex of a decent neighborhood. But in northern Minnesota 160k is a cushy salary, and most everyone in your town wont make that much.
the salary relative to the cost of living and average salary for that area is what matters. Besides, boomers wanted nearly the same salary level.
To each his own. Me and my wife’s first date we talked about the importance of finances and how much money we wanted to make. My wife grew up poor and wanted to make good money and she wanted her partner too. I came from middle class where both of my parents made good money, so we were looking for the same thing. We understood that without that financial foundation things can be 10 times harder. It might take a while to find someone on the same page, but it’s better than being on the struggle bus in my opinion.
Almost everyone starts out broke and hopefully builds assets as a team. Find someone with shared values and prepare to stick together through some bad shit because life is full of it.
Good luck guys it's not actually easy to make that much money. The easiest way to be married to someone making that much money is marrying someone with ambition that will support you and you support them in being successful.
I assume this is ideal, not “only”- most people don’t make that much and never will. IMO in a married high earner and my preference would also be a high earner if I was single, but MOST people statistically marry within their class and it’s less obtainable for them. If you don’t have social circles with money or don’t work at a high earnings job, this is pretty unrealistic unless you are really hot.
Exactly this- I have lots of friends with crazy income discrepancies with their partner but the same social class. For example, one is a gay fashion photographer making $50k married to a VP in private equity making 700k.
They both grew up upper middle class and had the same taste, values, friends, and went to the same college (both are bougie af).
Neither is particularly hot, but they match each other’s profiles culturally, intellectually, and socially despite the 14x income discrepancy.
More like: "Millennials are deeply underpaid for the current cost of living compared to our parents and grandparents" or "Billionaires have sucked every last dime out of the economy for the lower and middle class workers". I'm tired of seeing these articles acting like workers are the problem here while we've been bent over a barrel our entire lives and there's no end in sight.
I mean that is basically what it takes to buy a home, raise two kids, and save enough that you won't have to work into your 70's if you live in any major metro area. In order to afford the median priced home and keep housing costs at 33% of take home pay you need an income of about $150k. And that's the national median priced home. In many cities there simply are no homes in good school districts below $500k. Then you save 20% so you can retire. You're left with like $4500 a month for food, car payments, healthcare, childcare, etc.
i really want to know where single people are getting these numbers because you would have to be a moron to think that. you could just check any job posting board to realize 100k is an outlier. i would be suprised if more than 15% of americans even came close to breaking 100k
Its so odd to me -- my partner and I have been together for 10 years and I didn't once really care much about how much she made as long as she took care of her business. I knew I made significantly more than her, but we talked openly about finances before we moved in together, and a couple times I helped with bills or unexpected expenses as I had the means to do so.
I think its smart to be aligned on finances and how that plays a role in your future, but I can't imagine setting a bar for income when it comes to dating. Someone could make $200k and be massively in debt and wasteful while someone making $75k is smart with their money and invests wisely.
People need to be more realistic with their expectations -- while money and finances are important to living, they shouldn't be an inhibitor to a romantic partner in most scenarios.
The actual study that this article is referencing also says that almost 60% of respondents said that income amount was NOT a significant factor in evaluating a partner and that financial compatibility is a top priority in finding a partner. So everyone cool your jets a bit.
It also notes that the average ideal amount folks answered was above $123k across ALL generations so it’s also not just a millennial thing.
In short: everybody ideally wants a relationship with high earnings, but ultimately just wants a relationship where they won’t be fighting about money.
In other news: there is sand on the beach and water in the ocean.
The ideal bar is so far beyond reality that they're going to stay single. The median single income is $64K. If you go by age groups, then the highest single median income is in the 55-64 age bracket, and that median is $78K.
Less than 10% of the population makes $160K or more. Even if you're talking about just $100K, you're still talking about less than 18% of the population. And the vast majority of people who are earning that kind of paycheck are going to be pushing 60.
The "ideal" at 160k is just sad. Ideal means the perfect partner. Have more ambition! My ideal when I was single was generational wealth where neither of us would have to work a day in our lives
Hi. No we don’t. What shallow people do they find for these studies? I swear to god. At my current income, I could date someone in the 50k range and be fine.
I dunno, in my VHCOL area I’d wager most if not all of my single friends expect a serious partner to make six figures, especially the women who date men.
Heck, I know some who exclusively target *millionaires* (which can be experienced doctors, lawyers, and hedge funders in a VHCOL area).
You have a shallow friend group I guess. I live in the Pacific Northwest and as long as their partner can hold their own, most of my friends and connections don’t see people this way.
Calling it "shallow" is juvenile. Money is a real factor in relationships and in life. Just like people have to agree on kids, they should agree on financial goals. Maybe people agree that money isn't important to them, but it still needs to be a shared value.
I got married on this years ago. Was actually good money based on the cost of living. And I was super early in my career so it was expected to go up. I paid 1200 rent for a one bedroom at the time.
I have this feeling that on top of this they will want someone who's over certain height or under certain weight, and college educated, and certain eye colors, and certain race, and certain XYZ. Then they'll wonder why they can never find a partner.
Curious how the Eleanor Pringle looked at the gender divide —
“However, these expectations vary significantly by gender: women hope their partner earns $172,000, which is 70% higher than men’s expectations of $101,000.” — from the study
— and blamed the discrepancy on the gender wage gap, which has been debunked abundantly as a real measure.
Surely an award winning journalist is aware that the adjusted wage gap shows only a 1-5% discrepancy (https://salary.com/resources/hr-glossary/what-is-controlled-gender-pay-gap-definitions. https://pave.com/blog-posts/gender-pay-gap-normalized-vs-adjusted). Surely a real journalist knows that men work higher paying jobs (and are compensated for their higher mortality at such jobs), are more flexible with their schedules, and work more overtime (www.ilr.cornell.edu/institute-for-compensation-studies/insights-and-research/pay-remains-stubbornly-attuned-gender-what-do).
Whatever the cause, it’s pretty unlikely that women expect a 170% higher income from potential spouses (vs. men) due to a 1-5% adjusted wage gap.
Given that the highest median income by age group is ~$72k, all singles are suffering from wishful thinking. But one group is clearly more money hungry than the other…
So what is the difference with a dowry?
Isn’t it what certain folks in Western societies described as “uncivilized”.
This is just another version of it…just a bit more hypocritical.
Jesus! I'm GenX, super successful professional science career, making $95k. I take international vacations every year, have a killer fucking house and awesome, fully-funded old guy hobbies like bass guitar. Guess I'm a fucking loser.
It depends on whether you have a PHD or not. I know several scientists making 150+. Just like every career, the more education you get, the more money. But yeah the average scientist with a bachelor degree is not going to be making even 80k.
I don’t think anybody was literally ‘pricing’ a relationship. I’m guessing it’s more along the lines of: if it’s a hypothetical question of finding a much-better-than-average potential partner, starting from zero; then intentionally accepting immediate financial hardship is probably not high on the list of factors I would want to include in that. So, I do a SWAG of how much might clearly remove that particular concern from the hypothetical, and just put that down as an answer.
Millenial here....where did this 160k bar come from? You're not making that unless youre a doctor/surgeon, lawyer, successful business owner, or upper management.
I don't care how much someone makes just for dating purposes.
However, if you want to get married that's different. I'm not going to consider marrying someone who makes significantly less than what I do. It's got to be in the same ballpark. I don't think that's asking a lot.
My nieces earn six figure but work long hours at the lab and rarely home. Those people work a lot of nights and weekends and won’t be the ones helping clean the house or chores.
Honestly, now that I’m older I think the best partner is a tradesperson. They can fix things around the house.
I feel like this is just another manifestation of everyone thinking that they are above average. And not knowing things, but being so confident that they do.
My ex made more than that, and honestly it was a fucking hassle. She didn't want me to be dependent on her so we split all our expenses evenly. But functionally that meant I was always getting pushed into buying things I couldn't really afford while she felt like she was always getting held back by my inability to get a better job. Built resentment on both sides.
If they're ok with old dudes, their chances rise considerably, but they want someone similarly aged, no kids, and $160K. Add in 6' or taller, and you're looking at a fraction of a percent.
The average millennial is currently 37. At 37, earning $160,000 puts you in the top 10% of earners. But that's nationwide. $160k is a fantastic income in Kansas, where the median $/sqft for a home is $163. In NYC, where the median $/sqft is $900, it's not quite as impressive. But furthermore, if earning is the most important thing, why would someone earning in the 90th percentile be mixing with someone in the 50th ($60k)?
Why don't we go back to finding people at like and feel compatible with, and go from there, rather than believing that an arbitrarily salary amount will make us happy or like our partner more.
I mean, Ill make that much.....when Im 45 and have been married for 15 years, people thinking theyll find this in there 20s/30s are delusional. Plus real relationships are the ones where you grow with the person.
This is so silly. Nothing wrong with being single but for a bunch of people who don’t want to be single, this is crazy. Good luck being single forever or settling for what’s left when it’s too late.
That’s such a huge gap. The level of expectations in today’s dating seen must be abysmal. We’ve already identified a big problem with loneliness (with men specifically) this has to be contributing. I can’t imagine what it’s like to sit across from a date and have them reject you because you’re not in the top 5% of incomes.
It's a survey. By Fortune magazine. And they are only including the respondents who said that money was important to them in a partner. For all we know, this is 5% of respondents, who are already slanted toward upper income folks and social climbers if they're readers of Fortune.
>The Harris Poll conducted a total of 4,375 online interviews among the general U.S. adult (18+) population between January 5th and January 21st, 2026. Included in this overall total is a sample of 816 High-Net-Worth individuals (those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property, greater than $1,000,000).
Its exactly what I expected as I dug two levels deep https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026
>However, these expectations vary significantly by gender: women hope their partner earns $172,000, which is 70% higher than men’s expectations of $101,000
Its just another example of ridiculous expectations from women
We dont invest in education enough for young boys. We dont empower them at all. We spend all our time and energy as a culture for decades now lifting women up, and have completely screwed multiple generations of men. Women go to college more than men now, make more than men now, and have higher expectations than them. We are going to have an increasing number of disenfranchised, miserable, lonely men; things need to change, or they are going to get much worse.
I make more than 160k a year. I also have zero free time, often not even enough time to get 5 solid hours of sleep. For me to actively be with a single person that requires time, attention, emotions, they would have to bring something pretty serious to the table. I don't know anyone making $160k+ a year that isn't working at least 70+ hours a week. I know they exist but not in my circles.
Which sounds better? A one and done hook up that requires no further attention and can be done in what little free time I have or having to feel bad because your partner is upset you work so much and want to spend what little free time you have just shutting your brain off.
I'm gonna go with the 24 year old blonde sex worker
I don’t get it, I’m like a zombie if I get only 6 hours 2 nights in a row. If you got proper sleep, couldn’t you be a lot more effective, maybe put in fewer hours?
My job doesn't work like that. I have to physically be present during certain time periods on top of my actual job. They pay me for it though. Paychecks are fat and I genuinely haven't bought toilet paper in 3 months because I only seem to poop at work. My bathroom is so clean.
As s married millennial who makes a large income and is married to another who makes very little, I dont blame them. It's frustrating as hell seeing my coworkers who married at their pay level or higher live the good life. I'm still budgeting to provide my family with nice things but my coworkers pulling a combined $300k are like "Just paid off our vacation house, celebrating by taking the kids on a 3rd trip to Disney this year before going on a couples trip to Hawaii."
As someone who is making upper 300s single, with no kids, those people have a lot of debt, zero retirement savings, and kids who are SOL for college funds.
I exaggerated a bit in my example, but no, these people are Dave Ramsey followers and are debt free in their 30s. Given what I'm accomplishing at $150k in my LCOL area, I could easily afford that exaggerated example if I had double my income. After taxes that would be like $100k of free money to piss away on anything I wanted.
Yea that’s great and all if you could find someone with the same compatibility but more money. But if there’s any trade off to be had, this is one area of life where I’d say forget the fucking finances of it.
I know it's unrealistic and well above the median, but at same time that's kinda how much you need to have something resembling a middle-class lifestyle in a HCOL area.
Is this not more of a sign how fucked we are as a generation financially? Don't have access to the article but that's how I am reading the headline. Things have spiraled out of control so much that we feel we need an SO making more than double the avg salary to live comfortably
I make that much and wouldn’t want to date anyone below that. This country is too expensive to date a broke person. And I’m not trying to work harder to support a grown adult. If they have enough to offer to snag somebody rich, then more power to them but that’s a tough sell.
I’m with them. I’m a successful GenX. Finally pursuing my BS and then my MS. I already have 4 children (3 of which are adults), and a grandbaby.
Why in the world would I take on another 200lb baby? Not worth it. Never pays off. I’d only choose someone who blends seamlessly into my life, matches my values, and morals.
I had a partner that made 6 figures (like 200+)and guess what? It took more than that to be happy. I think my goal is for ME to make 80-100,000 and them to make 70,000-100000. We learn to invest, live under our means, and enjoy small moments
And word of advice to ladies. In my experience helping a man build his way to that lands them with a new wife and you behind in you’re own career
I mean, I get it, that would be ideal for a comfortable lifestyle. The cost of living is high and only increasing. And millennials are older now, so more likely to be in the age range of people making six figures. But it’s still statistically a small percentage of the workforce.
I mean money is important but you don't need to make 6 figures. Just have a pretty stable job and make at least 60 or may be 50k with extra budgeting you can make it work.
There's an over exposed/very visible group making $150k to $500k a year that everybody thinks just kind of exist.
We all focus on those.
In my own experience, co-workers have been focused on the guys they know exceed $100k or $200k a year at the very top of the food chain and ignore that those are like half a dozen guys out of the 100 or 200 who make between $40k and $90k, etc.
I think this is basically on par with regular folks talking about how over or under paid particular athletes are because they make $35M a season when they're really only worth $28M a season or they took a team friendly deal only making $18M a year when they could have made $25M a year etc. It's all relative, but it comes from the same aspirational place.
I buy a powerball ticket every couple of weeks. Figure that’s just about as likely as a shut in minority in a not minority town who works overnights with all men finding a date that doesn’t have country music or Christian in their profile.
It is absolutely more reasonable to say I want a partner that combined with my income raises us to a total of 100000 to 120000 dollars a year. 160000 solo is not normal or average and is pie in the sky expectations.
I hate to say it but yeah it kind of makes sense. I know two people who earn in that price range and they're the only ones who could afford the type of lifestyle our parents had. Everyone else we're either completely giving up on luxuries to save for the future (kids future tuition, retirement) or barely scrimping by.
The only reason why I make that much working remote is because a friend referred me and I’ve been in the industry for 10 years. My mortgage is 1300 a month. I play the finals all day mostly.
Here I was just following my erection around like a dowsing rod searching for water. I should've been checking their tax returns, what a fool I've been
This is a very strong signal that an entire generation has been stifled economically. That figure is much more than most companies are willing to pay and more than most people are able to earn.
TBradley | 8 hours ago
US national median wage is $65,000. New York City $82,000; Los Angeles $73,000; San Fransisco $116,000.
This is “I want a pony.” for the average adult.
photoengineer | 7 hours ago
Ponies are nice and all. But I’d love a unicorn.
drtbg | 7 hours ago
I’ll never understand why people love unicorns.
It’s just a horse with an extra seat on its head.
artbystorms | 6 hours ago
Extra seat
Holup.....
nine_inch_quails | 3 hours ago
More Up hole, really.
Derpese_Simplex | 7 hours ago
If you are jousting then both you and the unicorn get to try to attack your opponent
Top-Door8075 | an hour ago
Who even jousts in this day and age?
ski_town | 6 hours ago
Aka a rhino
suspicious_hyperlink | 5 hours ago
A rhino is basically a M1 Abrams unicorn
MeatEaterDruid | 5 hours ago
My man...
ReverendHambone | an hour ago
“Unicorns are gay”
- a narwhal, probably
ThePantsParty | 7 hours ago
I mean, to be fair the article is pretty clear that they asked people what they would consider an ideal (but not totally unrealistic) income. If asked for your ideal, would you say the median? The headline and reactions in these comments are very click-baity in that they're responding to an answer to an "in your ideal world..." sort of question as if the people were answering "what is the bare minimum".
zxc123zxc123 | 6 hours ago
Want to second this. These articles normally take from surveys where they show the % answered or number but not the question.
>"What is the income you would want for a dating potential partner with the serious intent of marriage and possibly children?"
Hits very different from
>"What is the minimum cutoff you'll need to consider dating someone?"
But we only get the results without the context, re-packaged as an article, and then spiced up to a hottake headline (because it triggers/gaslights folks enough for clicks/engagement/adrevs).
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 7 hours ago
I’ve always held that these sorts of articles are just there to create engagement by inciting incel rage.
If you’re single and think your income is the reason why then here’s a wake up call - it’s not. There’s an absolute dime out there with a fantastic personality in your neighborhood working all day so she can co-sign her boyfriend’s car loan so he can do door dash without borrowing her ride.
But single dudes will read these types of articles and go on blaming women cuz they just expect too much. Get real lol.
ThePantsParty | 6 hours ago
Yep, exactly. It's ideally formulated to hook into the "hypergamy" ragebait of the podcast world while not actually lying. They're relying on people not paying attention to the "ideal" part and know that they'll start reacting like this comment section, loving the opportunity to scoff at how unrealistic all these other people are for thinking the bare minimum is 160k.
Rollingforest757 | 4 hours ago
Obviously women don’t require men to make $160,000 dollars a year to date them. But women do generally expect their date to make more money than them. So acting like women don’t care about income is flat out wrong.
DifferentSpread782 | 4 hours ago
I think it relies on the fact that people are too tired to think everything they come across out and just distill everything down to the simplest concepts because they eat so much information. It's why headlines are so misleading and used for misinformation, everyone stops there and doesn't read the articles. This one specifically relies on the readers just generalising everyone is like this without taking time to think how it could just be a short sampling of opinions
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 6 hours ago
Joe Rogan listeners I'm sure lmao
Rollingforest757 | 4 hours ago
If you look at statistics, most women date and marry men who make more money than them. So the idea that women don’t care about a potential date’s income is obviously wrong. You seem to be making comments based on what you want to be true rather than what is true.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 3 hours ago
Statistically men make more than women, so law of large numbers dictates that any sample of men and women of sufficient size will have this condition, therefore so do couples. That’s not indicative of preference, it’s statistically impossible for anything else to be true so long as income disparities hold.
The implication isn’t “money doesn’t matter”. It’s that your income isn’t preventing you from finding a spouse. If you’re blaming it on that, you’re lying to yourself.
Blacksad9999 | 4 hours ago
Same with constantly hitting the gym thinking that will be a game changer.
The top two traits women covet in men are: Intelligence and Empathy. Regardless of background or demographic.
HeftySnow3920 | 6 hours ago
No doubt, I know an extremely attractive friend of mine in college who’s taste in men was absolute shit. Up until maybe last year, her husband had a real job where he could contribute to their family with a daughter, literally kicked him out of the house one time because he wouldn’t get back from golf.
Some of these women and men will put up with anything if they find them attractive both of the dudes I remember her shacking up with before her husband were both over 6’1” including hubby so that’s a factor in it to some women and men will give leeway if they are their “type” and attractive. Which makes sense, I wish more people were honest about it though.
brownieandSparky23 | 3 hours ago
/s
StrangrDangerRanger | 2 hours ago
Come on. While that situation does exist, it isn’t the statistical average. Weird to see some dude make this argument.
Are you a white knight or just underinformed about statistics? Idk.
You are right that article is meant for rage bait though. Both can be true.
TBradley | 7 hours ago
They should have followed up with what % of earners do you think that is. Then maybe let them know the actual % and that is for adults of all ages and sex.
the_blastomatic | 6 hours ago
You are expecting a segment of people who consider a speed limit to be a minimum to understand the nuance of what ideal means?
Runefaust_Invader | 3 hours ago
That also depends heavily on if the questions were answered according to what was asked and not misunderstood.
thebalancewithin | 7 hours ago
For individual or household?
TBradley | 7 hours ago
Individual, national median household income is about $83,000 this year.
SquirrelNormal | 8 minutes ago
A pony for every individual.
At least that's what Vermin Supreme promised me.
Real-Artichoke-1780 | 7 hours ago
Eh, ponies are super impractical though. Maybe this is more like a luxury car. If asked “what is your ideal car?” wouldn’t it be reasonable to say something nice?
For the sake of argument, let’s say you name a BMW as your ideal car. Yeah, sure, the average person doesn’t drive a BMW. But they’re not unattainable. There are lots of BMWs on the road, particularly in higher-income areas. And a person who would consider a BMW to be their ideal car might still be happy enough to drive a used Kia (and certainly wouldn’t choose to walk or take the bus rather than driving the Kia).
SelectKaleidoscope0 | 4 hours ago
My ideal car is a Honda Odyssey and I've been lucky enough to own one for many years, although I've been a little disappointed by the jank Honda did with their vmc engines. I'm not a flashy car person and big on practicality to have that preference. If I had a smaller family I'd probably prefer a Prius.
zephalephadingong | 3 hours ago
My ideal car is a tank, and I will never own one. I could technically save up enough money and get one eventually, but its waaaaaay to much work for an ideal
SquirrelNormal | 6 minutes ago
Armored car my man. You can get into a nice Ferret or a armoured Land Rover for less than 40k and they'll park in most garages. Drive train is all commercial parts. Road legal and with enough get up and go to tool around town no problem.
Carbon-Base | 7 hours ago
"With saddlebags filled with money!"
zxc123zxc123 | 6 hours ago
Dang. Median is $73K in LA? I'm not even close to that.
Singlehood here I stay, I guess.
dyangu | 6 hours ago
Don’t forget, the guy should also be at least 6’ tall.
dioramic_life | 5 hours ago
Athletic
dioramic_life | an hour ago
Passport-ready, travel bags packed.
dioramic_life | an hour ago
Owns a boat.
littlep2000 | 6 hours ago
The same as women want a man to be over 6 feet tall. It's an ideal but based on reality you will have to settle somehow.
RevenueStimulant | 5 hours ago
Sup. I’m a pony.
Richandler | 4 hours ago
That is marginally above low income in SF. https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/under-100k-low-income-san-francisco-18168899.php
magic_crouton | 4 hours ago
I'd like my partner making 160k to also be my pony.
tupacsnoducket | 3 hours ago
Maybe the "i bought a pony" but not not "I maintained a pony i bought" money
Runefaust_Invader | 3 hours ago
As someone who jumped from 60K to 85K....honestly not a huge diff. If I made double.... After taxes I doubt I would feel significantly more "wealthy".
Guess girls need to aim higher?
The_Wee | 3 hours ago
Now look at rent prices around NYC for decent units. Then imagine saving for a down payment.
LimeDry7124 | 3 hours ago
"Average adult woman" FIFY
Ok_Detective_9418 | 3 hours ago
What does median wage have to do with what it takes to thrive and save? If you are making 80k in NYC that’s poor.
BigTimeTimmyTime | 2 hours ago
Wild, considering six figures is fucking nothing compared to what it was 30 years ago.
Robot_Dinosaur_2000 | 2 hours ago
I make $120,000 in Michigan. I can't imagine how people are living on $116,000 in San Francisco or New York.
unethicalpigeon | an hour ago
There's a reason these people are still single. Someone put out a video once where they went around asking a bunch of hot chicks what they were looking for in a guy. It was all stereotypical stuff. Above 6 feet tall, in shape, making like 150k +. I think there was other stuff but honestly those are the only three I remember.
The guy then says that statistically the dude they're looking for made up like less than 1% of the US population lol. That's not even factoring in the number of them that are married or in a relationship already.
My wife has a friend that's in her mid 30s and still a virgin. She DESPERATELY wants to meet someone as her friends all get married and start having kids. There's already 2 kids with more coming within the next 1-2 years. She's completely delusional in what she's looking for. She actually used to be one of my favorite people out of my wife's friends to talk to. I can't anymore. She's insufferable. She's literally ended up crying the last two times I talked to her because she will not stop bitching about how she's being "left behind" and I'm getting more blunt every time she brings it up.
RicardoFrontenac | 56 minutes ago
You know there’s a huge pool of essentially serfs bringing down the median big time who no one involved in the article even thinks exists, let alone considering dating
Typical-Meringue-890 | 8 hours ago
There are going to be a ton of hopelessly single people out there. Jobs that pay anywhere close to that aren’t exactly thick on the ground, despite what some people may claim.
InsignificantOcelot | 8 hours ago
And a lot of the jobs that do, don’t leave time to actually maintain a relationship.
esmoji | 7 hours ago
Yup can confirm. Spouse earns 3x my income and she works late nights, sleeps all day Saturday and works on Sunday to keep up.
Besides Friday night, it’s like living alone.
escaped_prisoner | 6 hours ago
Attorney?
esmoji | 6 hours ago
You already know lol
PlatformVarious8941 | 4 hours ago
I’m the attorney, she’s the doctor.
I’m the one with the light schedule. « It do be like that »
roofpuck | 4 hours ago
I’m a nurse and seeing what the doctors go through is rough. But that’s their choice.
BenjaminTW1 | 6 hours ago
My thought, too. Not an investment banker or else they'd be working Saturday.
dmillson | 4 hours ago
If you don’t work on Saturday, don’t bother showing up on Sunday
escaped_prisoner | 3 hours ago
Been there. Worked every day for about 3-4 months once. No amount of money is worth it. People get wrapped up in the culture and forget the why
corporaterebel | 7 hours ago
Yes, usually women that I dated either made and 3x or 1/3x of what I made....$120k-$130k back at the turn of the century.
On the 3x ones I was essentially a late night personal service provider and a corporate event escort. Which was great...free food or quickies.
The ones that made 1/3 were a bit clingy.
LessInThought | 3 hours ago
You could've been a kept man! A gym dad! A playstation hubby!
PeopleWhoAnnoyYou9 | 5 hours ago
Let's get you to bed grampa you are talking nonsense again
bakedNebraska | 5 hours ago
What about that was nonsensical?
Runfasterbitch | 4 hours ago
Stay at home dad?
erodari | 2 hours ago
Sounds like my old life as a McKinsey husband.
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
Trying to date in my 30s even my 8-5 pisses women the fuck off. I have girls get mad that I'm at work and didn't text back until 12 lol imagine being a lawyer in a court room where phones are banned all day. I'm supposed to make 6 figures and somehow have the availability for them that a guy with no job does.
Thugosaurus_Rex | 8 hours ago
At least in my jurisdiction--and I've yet to be in a jurisdiction that holds otherwise--attorneys can bring our phones into the courts. Doesn't mean we can always look at them. Unless you're docketed for 8:30 and the judge doesn't take the bench until 11.
SikatSikat | 7 hours ago
Mine allows them in for an attorney but wants them off unless your away from the Courtroom - I don't want to risk a ringing phone aggravating a judge, so I have it with me but off so I can use it briefly if absolutely needed. But its effectively having no phone.
yyrkoon1776 | 6 hours ago
In my experience they are more focused on your phone going off and making a sound/notification than you looking at it.
Granted I was only on court 10-15 tomes as an affiant for some B's real estate issue.
thewimsey | 6 hours ago
It's a county by county thing, but there are some counties in my state that require phones to be completely turned off.
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
If I were you I wouldn't tell a woman that.
Thugosaurus_Rex | 7 hours ago
I plead the 5th.
vbullinger | 6 hours ago
Any exceptions become the norm, for women. So I can't tell them about them.
nochinzilch | 8 hours ago
What are these women doing all day? Don’t they work?
Adding words to appease the overlords. I hope this was enough.
jay10033 | 7 hours ago
Working jobs where they can text all day
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 7 hours ago
Marketing and HR
spoonipsum | 6 hours ago
police officer
PossibilityGrouchy74 | 4 hours ago
I'm in marketing and I would always wait until lunch or noon 😭 I can't speak of HR tho...
Ooofy_Doofy_ | 6 hours ago
I realized this when I joined a run club and I was wondering how these people could all work and run 5 miles a day
Darkpriest667 | 5 hours ago
I actually do work 40 to 60 hours a week and run 3 to 10 miles a day, but I also have no social life outside of it while im training. I do meet lots of women in these clubs but a LOT of them are realtors. They have a super flexible schedule and at least 3 that I met make twice or more than what I make and I make about 114 a year.
Working_Cucumber_437 | 6 hours ago
Fitting an hour long workout in is totally doable for most jobs though. Before or after work.
Bot_Marvin | 6 hours ago
Running 5 miles takes like 40 minutes. Add the shower/stretch and it’s about an hour of obligation.
Most jobs you can spare an hour of your day at some point before or after.
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
See with a 2026 girl texting back is entirely one way she can text back whenever she wants even weeks later a 6 figure 6 inch man better text back in under a minute though.
Call_Me_Hurr1cane | 6 hours ago
You teach people how to treat you.
I can’t imagine ever accepting that kind of attitude from a partner. Same goes for location tracking, password sharing, phone access, etc.
I’d have (married now) the discussion one time. If I had to have it repeatedly, it’s an easy ‘next!’
mrjackspade | 5 hours ago
The gender war sexism bullshit is tired as fuck.
RisaUrsa | 7 hours ago
You're dating jerks my guy, reasonable adult folks don't act like this.
wysteriacos | 7 hours ago
Meanwhile my bf works 6 to 6 at a nursing home, and I’m just glad to see him at all.
Ok-Disaster-551 | 8 hours ago
"I'm supposed to make 6 figures"
You'd be exempt if you made 7 figures. /s
texas_County850 | 7 hours ago
especially if you play for the 49ers
ggtffhhhjhg | 6 hours ago
Especially if you own the 49s. Billionaires trying to fuck trailer park hookers and strip mall massage parlor sex workers isn’t a deal breaker for them.
Slumunistmanifisto | 8 hours ago
Thats how I felt about gta online....
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
you need to start taking these heists more seriously or we will find someone that does.
Slumunistmanifisto | 8 hours ago
Oh sorrryyy, I've got to work all day to afford these goddamn shark cards, meanwhile You're off galavanting on submarine and sasquatch missions with dicknipplechaffer69.
iaintevenmad884 | 8 hours ago
That literally happened to me when I got a full time office job, my unemployed (former) buddy started getting impatient and doing heists without me after I used my scarce free time to set them up with him.
Slumunistmanifisto | 6 hours ago
For the streets!
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 7 hours ago
I lost relationships because of my high demand career, I literally had to pivot within my field or else it would have never worked out
OohYeahOrADragon | 5 hours ago
I’m tired of it too! I work in healthcare so you’re either getting a text at 7 AM or if I remember while charting through my 2 PM lunch. And “YOU PRIORITIZE IF ITS IMPORTANT” ideologies can kick rocks. I continuously have families calling my desk, insurance calling my ascom, nurses waiting to tell me patient requests me at bedside, an MD consult that patient needs a new house, and an email that I need to complete my CEUs. But I gotta prioritize texting YOU back.
And I don’t even MAKE six figures.
JustMyThoughts2525 | 2 hours ago
Yeah dealt with this when I was single and dating. 2 women specifically would get upset that I wasn’t texting within 10 minutes while I was working and felt I wasn’t that into them.
PM_ME__YOUR_HOOTERS | 6 hours ago
They want the romance novel version of a rich man/man with a high paying job. You can give them a lavish lifestyle, but also seemingly can give them attention whenever they want it lol
Cheesefactory8669 | 8 hours ago
ok 🫡 not clingy, provides personal space but still connected, not to mention the job? literally perfect 👌
ZipGhost | 7 hours ago
Preach!!!
Celebratedmediocre | 7 hours ago
Where I work phones aren't allowed. So no one can easily reach me most of the day. They would love that
meddlin_kids | 4 hours ago
Seeing as your username has Texas in it, the archiac court rules make sense. I'm where phones are allowed, as long as they are on silent and they don't interfere with the job. The courts are too busy with cases stacked on top of each other to not allow phones.
sabedo | 3 hours ago
they want trust fund guys lol
Econmajorhere | 6 hours ago
The absolute female fantasy is the unemployed European dude who works with his hands and does something like make shitty clay bowls but somehow has trillions of dollars in his bank account so he can ride around on his moped and say bullshit like “dolce far niente.”
meatforsale | an hour ago
So like the average guy on those shows where they’re buying a home where they’re like “I am an online massage therapist, and I’m an entrepreneur on Etsy where I sell my ceramics, and our budget is $12 million”?
Ok_Marionberry8779 | 7 hours ago
“I really want an underwater welder who is gone 2/3 of the year. But they make over $200k so it’s worth it to me.”
GhostofAyabe | 7 hours ago
Yeah, I have been doing 70 hours weeks for 6 months to complete a project, zero days off in the last 6 weeks. Barely have time to do laundry.
I’m not a lawyer but our clients are and they expect you to work like they do.
squidkiosk | 8 hours ago
Millwright here, can confirm. I see my hubby like once a week.
Stack0verf10w | 7 hours ago
Can confirm. I am on call 24/7 :(. I hate it but it lets me sock away as much as I can so I can maybe retire one day. I have thought about dating more in earnest but I struggle to make the logistics work, especially being almost 40 at this point.
The-Golden-Hinde | 7 hours ago
Don’t be so defeatist, there are a ton of ways you can earn $160k a year and still have a life. Are you kidding me 😂
photon1701d | 6 hours ago
yup. Last year I made 190k, most I ever earned. Year before 172. But I wa working 7 days a week for the most part, 10-12 hours day 5 days a week, 6 or 8 on weekend. When you work as an electrician and there is a plant in need of quick chang over, hours are unlimited. Some guys do 16 because they hate their family. I had a gf, she would nag all the time but then when I get her a fricken prado purse, it kept her quiet.
ohanse | 5 hours ago
Also, why the fuck would we pick a broke ass pigeon to float
iRVKmNa8hTJsB7 | 3 hours ago
I do tech sales and my work life balance is great.
CleverBen | an hour ago
Pretty much this. I make around the range that this article calls ‘ideal’, but I work at a chaotic high stress startup, putting in 50-60hrs a week regularly.
Ok-Secretary455 | 8 hours ago
they asked ideal. my ideal is millionaire supermodel. Doesn't mean in going to get it. People that answered $160k don't understand ideal.
OrcOfDoom | 7 hours ago
I think you're going to get it. You've got like 50k karma.
keltron | 7 hours ago
50k is shopping mall beauty pageant runner up level. I think 200k gets you to the super model tier.
SushiGato | 7 hours ago
Oh shit, almost there. I should quit my job.
OrcOfDoom | 6 hours ago
Shopping mall beauty pageant runner up is pretty good though
VariousAir | 6 hours ago
I see you've met my wife
ThePantsParty | 6 hours ago
> Single U.S. adults were asked in a new survey how much they ideally would like potential partners to earn—and were given the caveat that the expectations had to be “realistic.”
I think given the constraints of "ideal, but not unrealistic" the answers kind of nailed the sweet spot of that. Correctly recognizing that 160k is good top-few-percentile money without straining credulity and saying "Powerball winner" or something.
zaccus | 6 hours ago
That's a boring ideal. Certainly not shared by everyone.
PolloConTeriyaki | 8 hours ago
There are already people that are complaining they'll be alone. They make 65k and they want to marry up.
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
This is how a couple dudes looking like oblivion characters scammed 26 women saying they were rich sports guys and swiss developers.
Anonybibbs | 7 hours ago
Oblivion characters that were created on Monster Factory.
AntonioH02 | 7 hours ago
I get $17/hour. I guess I’m gonna die alone💀
IvoryTowerResident | 5 hours ago
for me, i am 5'6. Probably likely die alone
WesternIron | 8 hours ago
Ha. Should see the disparity between genders.
in the study. Men: 101k Women: 172k.
Edit: Ahh such a heavily clickbaited title acutally. The line right under the chart says:
The silver lining for singles who don’t earn six-figure salaries: 59% of singles don’t believe a potential partner’s income is important.
Literally most people don't care LOL.
JustTechnology2263 | 7 hours ago
Damn, that's crazy. 101k is high but not unreasonable in big metros. 172k is a big ask.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 7 hours ago
101k is usually within like the 70th percentile for prime age workers in most metro areas. It’s really not that high. Common? Depends on if you think 3 in 10 is common, but definitely not crazy rare or anything.
Most people in these threads are early 20s and don’t yet have a good grasp on what a normalized prime earnings age (30s to late 50s) career looks like.
geshtar | 8 hours ago
The other 41% are the women who responded. Basing it off of singles is bad, need single women.
Scrandon | 6 hours ago
I’m sure there’s plenty of women in that 59%, they just lied.
OrcOfDoom | 7 hours ago
Millennials are at least 30 now. Realistically speaking, that's the age group that starts to be considered for those jobs.
artbystorms | 7 hours ago
If I hear one more person on Reddit that act's like $100K salary is basically poverty wages anywhere in this country I am going to flip a table.
20% of US salaries are over $100K! So every single person is expecting to date the top 20% of earners in the country?! Give me a break, I know inflation sucks but people REALLY need to get a grip on what a good salary is and stop just using the benchmark of "Can I offord a $3K a month mortgage? No? Then I am poor" when houses are literally the most expensive they have ever been.
We don't need salaries to be raised 30-50% to catch up, we need the housing bubble to collapse so houses return to real value.
logontoreddit | 4 hours ago
Also, what percentage of that 20% live in NY, San Fran, LA area? Where 100K is more like 70K.
EnvyHill | 6 hours ago
Curious what housing bubble is there that you think will be popped? I’d argue against there being a bubble at all.
artbystorms | 6 hours ago
Go google 'Real Case-Shiller US National Home Price Index' or click the link since I cant post pictures....see the BIG spike after 2021?
Real (adjusted for overall inflation) home values were around $90-100K from the 70s to 2000s....meaning their value stayed fairly constant. At the peak before the 2008 crash they climbed to $155K. They are now sitting at around $175K. Meaning that in real terms homes are about twice what they SHOULD historically be worth. If that isn't a bubble I don't know what is. The cause is irrelevant whether its lack of supply or induced demand. Homes as an asset are inflated above their historical average.
VariousAir | 4 hours ago
Saying "homes used to cost around $100k in real terms, now they cost $175k, therefore they're worth $75k too much isn't really how this works. You're assuming the old price was the correct equilibrium and everything above it is a bubble.
Do you understand what happens to your historical averages if home prices stay elevated over the next 50 years? Eventually you end up with 125 years of historical averages that includes 50 years where you thought the numbers were inflated.
A historical average can tell you that something changed.
A historical average can't tell you what the price should be.
EnvyHill | 5 hours ago
What happened in 2008 has no similarities whatsoever as to what is going on now. Right now people are stuck in affordable homes due to the idiocy of lower rates during COVID, causing prices to skyrocket and price people out of rebuying. They are simple worth what they are worth. People are buying and people are selling still. There’s nothing to be “popped” in the housing market, outside of maybe single family homes that were airbnbs.
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 6 hours ago
There is a lack of supply problem, the housing prices will never crash.
cpslcking | 4 hours ago
That will never happen when rich boomer NIMBY's hold on to the wealth they have with all of their might. And governments bow to them because they vote.
The housing bubble will collapse when people rip power from NIMBYs preventing housing from being built or that generation dies off and supply will finally outstrip demand.
mistressbitcoin | an hour ago
Its more like a lot of people are content being single, that they will only consider dating someone if they are 100% perfect, and being in the top 20% income seems to be a reasonable thing to expect.
FearlessPark4588 | 7 hours ago
good thing revealed preferences exist, people will accept a partner with less lol
resuwreckoning | 7 hours ago
Women want partners who earn 172,000 dollars a year?? That’s the baseline?
Holy f.
zaccus | 6 hours ago
"The bar is in hell"
resuwreckoning | 5 hours ago
lol indeed
NewPresWhoDis | 5 hours ago
The trade worker/Masters studies degree pairings are going to be fun.
SkiHistoryHikeGuy | 8 hours ago
Just learn to weld bro.
Mr_Industrial | 8 hours ago
Im also told gross jobs pay pretty well. the more disgusting the better the payout. Not exactly the thing that woos the opposite sex though.
eyehateeveryone666 | 8 hours ago
Wastewater treatment plant mechanic, I’m not 6 foot and i have no issue dating haha. It’s a job. I shower before I leave work everyday
Crimson_Inu | 8 hours ago
How’d you get into it? I’ve toured a plant before and it seems impenetrable in my state.
eyehateeveryone666 | 8 hours ago
Find a college that does class d wastewater licenses. Or find a department of labor sponsored industrial maintenance 2 year. certification. I make 6 figures with a 4 day work week. Union
Crimson_Inu | 8 hours ago
Union strong. 💪
Thanks for the advice. I’ll look into that right away. I never see those programs advertised as the state schools, but maybe I just need to dig into technical schools more.
Longshot726 | an hour ago
>Wastewater treatment plant mechanic ... i have no issue dating
No fucking wa..
>I shower before I leave work everyday
That explains it. I used to do IT field support for a municipality and had all the wastewater plants on my route. Just stepping into some of the buildings for 5 minutes would leave you reeking all day. I had to carry several changes of clothes and garbage bags for when I had to visit those sites.
drewbaccaAWD | 8 hours ago
I *could* make that much, if I went back into nuclear. But, I kind of like having a stress free job. I'd rather be single and comfortable than married with no free time and constantly stressed out. Even in that job, it would take mandatory overtime to start hitting $160k with any regularity.
Iggyhopper | 8 hours ago
If wages kept up with inflation and efficiency gains, that's an easy 60k. if people are used to paying $30 for a single meal at McDonald's, then it makes total sense.
So they really want someone who makes 100k.
Not bad. People just don't understand that companies don't pay.
SimpleVegetable5715 | 6 hours ago
Yes, wages for most people have not kept up at all.
Gold_Advisor_4758 | 6 hours ago
It’s asking and ideal, not a bare minimum for consideration. Life is expensive!!
DoomFingaz | 5 hours ago
Didn’t used to be like this. You were probably born around the 2000’s to have this take
Gold_Advisor_4758 | 5 hours ago
I was born in 1990
async2 | 6 hours ago
Just wait until inflation keeps up. Everybody can be a millionaire!
deathleech | 4 hours ago
Yup, only 8% of the US makes that. It’s significantly lower in other countries. That’s 1 in 13 people. Then factor in half those people are a sex you may not be interested in and the numbers are even worse.
two_hyun | 7 hours ago
Everyone wants a 10/10, but no one wants to put in the work to attract a 10/10.
LessAd8287 | 6 hours ago
Tell that to my ex who married a cardiologist
He is paying her vet school loans so she can be a trad wife
It happens
Sea-Ambition-451 | 6 hours ago
add me to the list!
livestrong2109 | 5 hours ago
There already are. It's not a going to be situation.
NutzNBoltz369 | 5 hours ago
The government wants more kids. Guess all the old geezers running things have not seen this article. Those who can actually afford them might not have the time or desire to start families.
3BlindMice1 | 2 hours ago
I could get a job that pays that much, except I'd be working like 18 hours a day for like 5 years, minimum, before I could get promoted into a job that merely disrespects the concept of work-life balance rather than actively despises it
DevSecTrashCan | 58 minutes ago
They’ll settle then think their partner is a loser and have shit relationships until they divorce
immaSandNi-woops | 35 minutes ago
Hot take: People (mostly women?) aren’t unaware of how rare these salaries are; the delusion is the number of people (mostly women?) believing they deserve someone earning that much.
Woodit | 8 hours ago
Seems like the issue is in the wording. They asked what the ideal number would be that would also be “realistic.” Well anyone is going to choose the highest realistic salary they know of to respond right? Otherwise they’d just say a billion dollars or something. A better question would have been what is the minimum salary of a potential partner.
fa1afel | 5 hours ago
Yeah this pops up from time to time and like, yeah if we're talking ideal, I'd love to have a decently high earning partner, if not an heir to a fortune with a tolerable family.
GroundbreakingRun186 | 3 hours ago
The authors very intentionally picked their words. It’s click bait. They’re trying to be dramatic.
The study (link below) is by northwest mutual, a life insurance company. They did an online poll of ~4,500 people and ~20% of those people had liquid assets over $1m. Out of all households in the US only around 5% have $1m+ in liquid assets.
In other words the study asked a significantly disproportionate amount of rich people how rich they want their partner to be, and they likely said they want them to be rich too, which brings up the average.
The study is likely designed to be a marketing tool, not an attempt to get accurate readings on the American population
https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026
https://filecache.mediaroom.com/mr5mr_nwmutual/179168/2026%20P%26P%20Wave%20I%20Data%20Deck%20The%20Financial%20States%20of%20America.pdf
strabosassistant | 8 hours ago
Holy schnikes! 160k? My wife and I got together when we both made nearly zero as students. +3 decades later I'm glad she didn't pull a credit report and income statement on me at the time. We still tease each other that we married each other for the other's "vast family fortune". So far, we've inherited a towel set and two wooden statues - but we remain hopeful.
WildDisappointment | 8 hours ago
Soon the cutlery will be yours!
Beastw1ck | 8 hours ago
God my wife keeps getting on me about taking “Aunt Tilly’s dishes.” Where will we keep these dishes? WHY would we keep these dishes?
dmillson | 4 hours ago
I have my father’s nice hand painted china set. It’s been sitting in a cabinet for a couple years. Not even a glass display cabinet - just a regular kitchen cabinet.
suckuma | 8 hours ago
I will throw hands if someone tries stealing my wetstone
IdaDuck | 8 hours ago
My wife and I were the same, both 18 year old broke freshmen in college when we met and started dating and that was 30 years ago next January. But I do think it’s different vs meeting somebody as an adult.
If met somebody and we were 30 I’d expect some indications that she’s self sufficient, smart and decent with money. You’re really just looking for that potential in somebody when you’re younger.
strabosassistant | 8 hours ago
Congrats to both of you on 30 years in advance. I agree that your perspective changes somewhat as we age, but I'd take that 10,000 watt smile of hers and the way she makes me laugh any day over earning potential. Sometimes the heart trumps economics - and even good sense. Seems we were both lucky.
IcyMaybe7594 | 7 hours ago
Yeah, this makes me glad I'm not on the dating scene anymore if true. This was definitely not too common of a thing before 2020 when I was. And I live in a city that's unaffordable and expensive too. I'm not sure what's caused people to have these demands, I guess social media and the fact they are drowning in their own lives too and insecure.
OrcOfDoom | 7 hours ago
Incoming plates you'll never use!
invisible_shrek | 7 hours ago
Same with my wife. We were broke college students. I make a lot more now. Can’t imagine trying to date at all at this stage.
iritchie001 | an hour ago
I got a broken campfire mandolin when my Grandpa died.
saml01 | an hour ago
My wife and I like to joke around the biggest mistake we made was not marrying for money instead chosing love like a couple suckers.
UncleIrohsPimpHand | 5 hours ago
You invested in potential, not a finished product.
DarthJDP | 8 hours ago
I dream of having a partner worth hundreds of billions. its a perfectly reasonable ideal to hold out for.
I bring a few hundred grand of student loan debt and crushing mental illness. You bring Billions of net worth.
These articles are hilarious rage bait. Of course people prefer having more money than less. Of course they want partners that are fit, smart, young, funny, charismatic etc etc etc.
Is that realistic? Who knows. I'm sure the comments will have lots of very helpful commentary about how unreasonable expectations are.
redditpowermod3 | 7 hours ago
I think people’s demonstrated preferences are actually far more forgiving than stated.
A $160K partner within reach of somebody outside of that class likely comes with other drawbacks.
friskerson | 6 hours ago
Crippling emotional unavailability, chronic stress, no time for fulfilling relationships outside of business ones? Sign me up.
Parlorshark | 2 hours ago
And I mean the flip side, imagine you're a stable and cool $160. A lot of potential partners would do anything -- anything -- to land that type of security for themselves. You're going to have to wade through more liars, frauds, and sociopaths than the average dater.
friskerson | 6 hours ago
Headline: 999/1000 people surveyed prefer wealthier partners, on average. That 1/1000 person accidentally selected the wrong answer on the survey and there’s no back button.
Phrainkee | 7 hours ago
Checks phone
~ (14) New voice mail from "Elon Musk"
anonareyouokay | 6 hours ago
"you had me at "crushing mental illness.""
PM-ME-UR-WHITECLAWS | 5 hours ago
Economists in shambles.
kingkeelay | 4 hours ago
I cant imagine anyone making minimum wage is taking this survery.
ItsRobbSmark | 7 hours ago
This is your weekly reminder that 18% of Americans earn six figures, and people earning 160k or more is more in the 8% range. If you think most people earn six figures, get the fuck off tiktok and stop letting dipshit influencers and their fake flossing shape your view of how things are...
katarh | 6 hours ago
And the majority of the 8-18% are people who are near the tail end of their career, who have been in the work force for 20-30 years.
Sure, some of them might be divorcees back in the dating pool, but they're not fresh out of college 28 year olds looking for another person in their age range to start a family with.
640k_Limited | 3 hours ago
Reddit falls into this same category. You'd swear 90% of people on here make $200K+
GoblinToHobgoblin | 20 minutes ago
Yea and what percent of that 8% is single and relatively young?
SugarvetFounder | 8 hours ago
I may be uniquely qualified to comment on this and the article, but clicking the link…
- Share your data with 513 partners…
- paywall.
- ads
- pocket sand
Never mind.
BarleyWineIsTheBest | 8 hours ago
Well, I guess that explains why they are single. Wonder what people in relationship’s expectations are? Don’t really need to say more comment filter hit me earlier.
Dangerous_Junket_773 | 8 hours ago
The expectation is housing. In a lot of areas, you need two earners making over six figures to afford a single family home. In my area you need a HHI of like $200k to get on the housing ladder.
Then consider things like how expensive child care is. Starting a family is expensive. That will impact who you pick to start a family.
BarleyWineIsTheBest | 8 hours ago
That's cool and all, but this is a population average of "wants", when the median earnings is less than half that headline number.
j-a-gandhi | 5 hours ago
In my area you need $250k to buy a condo. So yeah, seems pretty realistic if looking to own your own place.
gravteck | 8 hours ago
So it was produced from an online survey for The 2026 Planning & Progress Study. Online only sampling gets my attennae up. Does anyone have experience with how things are skewed when it comes to online samplingn only? This also seems like the median response per group would cut through high COL areas and bring them down a bit.
hutacars | 5 hours ago
Surprised I had to scroll this far to see this. Methodology is everything. You can make any survey produce any outcome you want by changing methodology.
Cantseetheline_Russ | 8 hours ago
Seems like most single Millenials are going to stay that way if this is the bar they want to set. That’s ridiculous. My questions is what are these people bringing to the table if they want someone earning that much since the vast majority are not themselves.
Ok_Eagle_3079 | 8 hours ago
The ability to spend a minimum of 160k a year.
VulfSki | 6 hours ago
Spend? Or make in total compensation?
ThePantsParty | 7 hours ago
The problem with this comment section is that the article clearly says people were asked what their partner would ideally make, and it's being responded to, as you did, as if they said this is the minimum bar.
If someone asks me what my partner's ideal but not totally unrealistic income would be, I'd probably also say something like 160k, but that in no way implies that I would refuse to date someone who didn't achieve my ultimate ideal. I've dated plenty of people, and none of them had that "ideal" income.
That's like asking what color would your ideal partner's eyes be, hearing "blue", and then going "wowwww so you would just refuse to date anyone with brown eyes??"...like it's literally not even the question...
apk | 7 hours ago
you really need context for income, in SF 110k is the cutoff for low income. 160k in a big city is vastly different than 160k in small towns
hutacars | 5 hours ago
As a single Millennial, my preference is a woman making either six figures or willing to make $0. What's hard is finding someone who's reached 30, still on the dating scene, and doesn't already have kids.
space_force_majeure | 8 hours ago
>However, there’s a silver lining for single people who neither earn nor want to earn six figures: 59% of singles don’t believe a potential partner’s income is important.
So most people don't even care about salary. They kind of buried the lede here in their rush to get an inflammatory headline out
flakemasterflake | 7 hours ago
It’s in the first paragraph that they asked people who only answered yes to if they cared about money in a relationship
ThePantsParty | 6 hours ago
Also the fact that the question was what is the ideal income for your partner, not the minimum income. Whose "ideal" dream income is gonna be 60k or something? It's clickbait through and through.
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 8 hours ago
According to the study, American women are asking for $172,000 and American men $101,000. I understand times are tough people but that doesn’t seem realistic at all considering even people on the very low end of that are outliers and represent a small percentage of the population.
fistoic | 7 hours ago
you should understand that $172,000 is just one of many criteria. It's like a ticket to enter the is he worth it contest. There are 5-10 more steps you need to pass
BetterCranberry7602 | 6 hours ago
Which makes it even more unrealistic
pacman2081 | 5 hours ago
<cough> <cough>
Open_Pollution_8038 | 7 hours ago
Have you seen the average woman? If I was back in the dating pool I’d go overseas lmao.
accountingbossman | 7 hours ago
Middle aged western guys going to 3rd world countries to find a partner has been a thing since WW2.
A lot of these guys get duped but a lot end up meeting partners who they would have 0 chance with in the west. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a new wave of this amongst millennial men in their 40s.
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 7 hours ago
My personal experience is that of the men in my family who have moved to the us, none have married American women, they found someone back home and brought them. All stable relationships.
ThanosSnapsSlimJims | 5 hours ago
That's what I did. I have no debt, 800 credit scores across the board, make six figures, etc. I took advice on Reddit and changed the type of women I had been attempting to date, and still attracted financially irresponsible losers with baggage. I married someone from Viet Nam and she's normal.
Open_Pollution_8038 | 7 hours ago
lol I’d take my chances
Half of marriages end in divorce
wittgenstein1312 | 6 hours ago
>Half of marriages end in divorce
This is not actually true. The number is closer to 35-40%, and that's without accounting for the fact that a big portion of those divorces are second or even third divorces, so far fewer people than you actually think are actually going to experience divorce.
zaccus | 6 hours ago
If 35-40% of cars fell apart in the middle of the interstate would you still buy one?
Open_Pollution_8038 | 6 hours ago
Fun fact the divorce rate for international marriages is lower over the long term.
It’s north of 40% for all marriages which is effectively half in layman’s terms. I’m not doing fractions lmao.
zaccus | 6 hours ago
I'm listening
dak4f2 | an hour ago
They're over at r/passportbros
Huh, it was banned. Google search passport bros.
BetterCranberry7602 | 7 hours ago
Especially if I make $172k.
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 7 hours ago
Yeah I don’t want to get into it but I agree with you
Possible_Ad_4094 | 7 hours ago
That's my plan. I make $180k and am in great shape. Unfortunately, due to height, I'm not allowed in the US dating pool, so off to Asia I go. I spent enough time working over there to know what I'm missing.
Edit: Downvotes undoubtedly from the "it's all in your head" or "It must be your personality" clubs or the anti-passport club. Height filters exist on every single dating platform, so it's pretty objectively a disadvantage.
fistoic | 4 hours ago
can't speak on other countries but Korean women will care about your height as much as Western ladies, so I guess it really depends
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 7 hours ago
I also decided not to find anyone in the US. I am saving money so I can go back to my country, I’ll figure out the whole relationship thing when I get there.
TheRealChizz | 5 hours ago
I wonder why more people in this thread aren’t mentioning this. The article mentioned that the pay gap could be the reason for this expectation difference. Make of that what you will
kummer5peck | 7 hours ago
Who are these people that think everybody makes over $100,000? The median income for a single American is more like $60,000. I get how some people may come to this conclusion if they are in an insulated bubble of high earners, but that is not the reality for most people.
Ok-Bug-5271 | 7 hours ago
For years on Reddit, I've seen people act insane about what they think a normal income is, and I've just written it off as reddit being weird or out of touch. It's rather disheartening to see real world studies say the same thing.
pacman2081 | 7 hours ago
Reddit is full of white collar plebs
GabagoolNoZiti | 6 hours ago
Reddit seems to think everyone is either destitute or a billionaire.
katarh | 6 hours ago
A lot of the Reddit "people" bragging about their income are bots, I've learned.
olrg | 7 hours ago
In many major urban areas $100k is not that high. If you have a college degree, 5-10 years experience in your field, and live in one of top 20 metro areas in the country, there's a sold chance you're making that or more.
katarh | 6 hours ago
If I moved to a larger metro area, I would definitely be able to command six figures with my experience and my skill set.
But I'd also immediately double my living expenses and halve my free time. I chose a smaller salary and better work life balance.
Due_Masterpiece_3601 | 6 hours ago
Median wage in nyc is about $79k
fistoic | 7 hours ago
> Who are these people
terminally online people
NewPresWhoDis | 5 hours ago
Shhhh, dating on the commune after the revolution is going to be the most lit reality series.
sectorboss88 | 5 hours ago
At least maybe then people will have to develop values, principles, and personalities beyond what capitalism conditions them into.
tollbearer | 4 hours ago
It's not so much abotu what people make, so much as how much I think is necessary to build a good life, especially one with kids in it.
Bitter_Spray_6880 | an hour ago
Um redditor?... my lifestyle is surviving by their standards... everyday eating out is a must, travel every year...
Thick-Duck8925 | 8 hours ago
This seems more like a desire for economic/financial stability as a part of partner acquisition because it's something people aren't finding in their careers (aka we're all broke bitches and the job market is ass so we want to date someone who isn't currently broke. Doesn't mean I'm not also dating people who make basically no money. Aka this is silly)
commelejardin | 8 hours ago
This. I’ve just given up on ever feeling financially stable (or dating, for that matter), but I know many people who genuinely seem to see marriage as their only realistic path to a comfortable life.
texas_County850 | 8 hours ago
I'm like you be happy with my daily bread and somehow I end up with more great. Honestly I know a lot of rich women and I can't think of one that was rescued by a rich man they all were with him when he wasn't rich. This dream a lot of them have is a delusion. Usually they are rich because she supported him while he went to med school or started the business or whatever.
M1ssAnthr0py | 6 hours ago
I feel like people write off the advantage of having a stay at home spouse in building wealth. My mom had a good career, but gave it up to fully support my dad while he massively scaled his career.
He would always be at work 14 hours a day while she handled all the fine budgeting, side hustles, cooking, cleaning, errands, insurance, and home maintenance for dad and us 3 kids.
I’m really happy now that my parents are retired; my dad has proved himself an equal contributor and splits all the cooking and cleaning.
I think people love to villainize stay at home moms (sometimes dads), but each of my parents lives looked equally terrible even though they came out the other side pretty well off.
Mental_Mixture8306 | 8 hours ago
In any normal profession like engineering, law, accounting, etc you may get to that level but it may take 15 to 20 years and even then it's rare.
Wait until middle age?
anonareyouokay | 7 hours ago
Before we make this into a new front on the gender war, I don't think this is scientific. Also the article says:
> However, there’s a silver lining for single people who neither earn nor want to earn six figures: 59% of singles don’t believe a potential partner’s income is important.
Of course everyone WANTS a partner making tons of income, but the majority of people think it's not a big deal
Commercial-Honey-227 | 6 hours ago
Gonna really suck for poor women, as college-educated women have started picking off the blue-collar working men with stable jobs. It's gonna be the bottom of the barrel, economically, for those ladies.
https://www.reddit.com/r/psychologyofsex/comments/1vpzlb9/as_women_outpace_men_in_higher_education/
Edited to add: "economically", as poor men are just as worthwhile as anyone else.
DoomFingaz | 5 hours ago
These rage baity articles are serving a disingenuous agenda. More internet slop pitting men and women against each other over vanity and money. Don’t fall for this stuff people
solomons-mom | 8 hours ago
I am curious as to why the question was only about income and not net assets, which would be more important to the older cohorts of the the study.
Long9696 | 8 hours ago
Yeah, millennials are closer to 40 now. Maybe that person makes $60k but they got their house in 2016 and have $500k equity in it. 40 year olds should be savvy to this.
fistoic | 7 hours ago
i wouldn't necessarily say someone with $60k yearly income with 500k equity in their house is living a grand life. They really need to watch their finance.
That's not the life style someone demanding $160k is looking for.
Long9696 | 6 hours ago
No, but they're set up good and any reasonable person past their 20s can see that.
Clear-Inevitable-414 | 8 hours ago
I would rather someone with old money than anyone that has to work
Many-Sherbert | 7 hours ago
Lmao. I make just north of that and I can tell you there’s not that many people making that much money. Unless they own a very successful business or have a doctorate/ law degree. I believe the average house hold income is $85K
PurpleCandles | 5 hours ago
It depends where you live. I’m in the NYC metro, and a good chunk of my social circle clears that in earnings with 5-10 years of experience. I imagine it’s much harder to reach that in Indiana or Tennessee.
hutacars | 5 hours ago
It's fully dependent on social circle. I don't actually know anyone making under 6 figures (in the US).
humanhedgehog | 8 hours ago
Yes, ideally lots of people want lots of things, that doesn't mean they either truly expect to get them or consider them prerequisites.
This kind of thing crops up pretty frequently, but it doesn't mean anything.
BotherEconomy4413 | 7 hours ago
I hate to break it to everyone. I make that much and have 3 teens in/entering college and I am barely keeping my head above water. And I budget every penny. Granted I am paying all my bills and loans and saving some for retirement and the kids are going to college. But I would say $160k is bare min for the picket fence and kids suburban American dream. I worry about money all the time. And we have a smaller 60s house, older car, and zero extravagant vacations. It is brutal out there.
pacman2081 | 7 hours ago
I am fine with small 60s house, older car, and zero extravagant vacations. the education of kids is tricky part.
BotherEconomy4413 | 6 hours ago
I'm fine with it too. It's what I can afford in my cost of living area. Yeah the education part is tough. Dept of Ed changed the rules right as I started with no grace period which was BS. But hey you adjust and figure it out. I'm not complaining I'm glad I make enough to pay for everything. But I live a far from the extravagant lifestyle people might think at my salary. If anything the women in the title aren't looking for enough money. That is the irony. But really it says there is something really wrong with society. This is what inflation and printing money does. 160k is the old 100k. I am a spreadsheet budgeter and I get 3 to 4 percent raises every year and for about the last 10 years my buying power has steadily eroded. It's just a fact.
dealingwithhookers | 22 minutes ago
you have 3 college to pay for... have them go to community and transfer and finish in 1.5 years. it's the only way to do it
Blunts_N_Anime | 7 hours ago
I mean.. want and expect are two different things. I'd want a partner worth 6 figures, with curves like Lombard Street, and an infinite level of patience for my weird dumbass but that doesn't mean I expect it or are worthy of it, lol.
PossibleConclusion1 | 6 hours ago
Way to set the standards low. When I was single I wanted a woman worth 50 million or making no less than 2 million a year. I did not get this, but it was the dream.
_hephaestus | 6 hours ago
What is wrong with the literacy of this comments section? Nothing is being said about the bar for partners, this isn’t claiming expectations are 6 figs or bust, they’re asked for ideal circumstances and with realistic being a hedge against them all asking for millionaires.
Most of you are moralizing about this but it’s the equivalent of an article saying “yes I’d like steak dinner over McDonalds” and y’all thinking this means we’re doomed to starve.
Hasselback_Brotatoes | 6 hours ago
this is a bad-faith news article meant to make millenials sound entitled, what else is new.
The study was done by Northwestern Mutual and absolutely zero data is given about respondent location. The actual salary number itself doesn't matter. If you asked everyone in Los Angeles, a number of 160k is probably lower middle class, right? cuz I live in Seattle suburbs and I make 130k, and I live in the shittiest apartment complex of a decent neighborhood. But in northern Minnesota 160k is a cushy salary, and most everyone in your town wont make that much.
the salary relative to the cost of living and average salary for that area is what matters. Besides, boomers wanted nearly the same salary level.
brainrotbro | 7 hours ago
Only about 5% of people under 40 make $160k. 31% of adults under 40 are single. So you have a guaranteed less than 5% chance of getting that.
fistoic | 6 hours ago
I also have a feeling that out of those 5% making over $160k, the split is not going to be 69/31.
I'd wager that way more than 69% of them are married.
Big_Impact_5331 | 8 hours ago
To each his own. Me and my wife’s first date we talked about the importance of finances and how much money we wanted to make. My wife grew up poor and wanted to make good money and she wanted her partner too. I came from middle class where both of my parents made good money, so we were looking for the same thing. We understood that without that financial foundation things can be 10 times harder. It might take a while to find someone on the same page, but it’s better than being on the struggle bus in my opinion.
Adventurous-Depth984 | 7 hours ago
Everyone WANTS a 10. Just look at the stereotypical dating profiles: everyone is after 6 feet tall, visible abs, no kids, blah, blah, blah.
Almost everyone settles for far less than a 10.
theryano024 | 8 hours ago
A lot of people draw the line somewhere. They also move that line effortlessly for someone they like. I wouldn't read too far into this sort of thing.
ScapeyourownGoat | 7 hours ago
Almost everyone starts out broke and hopefully builds assets as a team. Find someone with shared values and prepare to stick together through some bad shit because life is full of it.
RedParaglider | 7 hours ago
Good luck guys it's not actually easy to make that much money. The easiest way to be married to someone making that much money is marrying someone with ambition that will support you and you support them in being successful.
imhereforthemeta | 6 hours ago
I assume this is ideal, not “only”- most people don’t make that much and never will. IMO in a married high earner and my preference would also be a high earner if I was single, but MOST people statistically marry within their class and it’s less obtainable for them. If you don’t have social circles with money or don’t work at a high earnings job, this is pretty unrealistic unless you are really hot.
M1ssAnthr0py | 6 hours ago
Exactly this- I have lots of friends with crazy income discrepancies with their partner but the same social class. For example, one is a gay fashion photographer making $50k married to a VP in private equity making 700k.
They both grew up upper middle class and had the same taste, values, friends, and went to the same college (both are bougie af).
Neither is particularly hot, but they match each other’s profiles culturally, intellectually, and socially despite the 14x income discrepancy.
Understanding-Fair | 6 hours ago
More like: "Millennials are deeply underpaid for the current cost of living compared to our parents and grandparents" or "Billionaires have sucked every last dime out of the economy for the lower and middle class workers". I'm tired of seeing these articles acting like workers are the problem here while we've been bent over a barrel our entire lives and there's no end in sight.
sectorboss88 | 5 hours ago
True.
ImaginaryHospital306 | 7 hours ago
I mean that is basically what it takes to buy a home, raise two kids, and save enough that you won't have to work into your 70's if you live in any major metro area. In order to afford the median priced home and keep housing costs at 33% of take home pay you need an income of about $150k. And that's the national median priced home. In many cities there simply are no homes in good school districts below $500k. Then you save 20% so you can retire. You're left with like $4500 a month for food, car payments, healthcare, childcare, etc.
suid | 7 hours ago
"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife with an even bigger fortune."
IdontreadanyPMs | 6 hours ago
i really want to know where single people are getting these numbers because you would have to be a moron to think that. you could just check any job posting board to realize 100k is an outlier. i would be suprised if more than 15% of americans even came close to breaking 100k
NicKaboom | 6 hours ago
Its so odd to me -- my partner and I have been together for 10 years and I didn't once really care much about how much she made as long as she took care of her business. I knew I made significantly more than her, but we talked openly about finances before we moved in together, and a couple times I helped with bills or unexpected expenses as I had the means to do so.
I think its smart to be aligned on finances and how that plays a role in your future, but I can't imagine setting a bar for income when it comes to dating. Someone could make $200k and be massively in debt and wasteful while someone making $75k is smart with their money and invests wisely.
People need to be more realistic with their expectations -- while money and finances are important to living, they shouldn't be an inhibitor to a romantic partner in most scenarios.
ratpH1nk | 6 hours ago
reminds me of that series where the person asks them their ideal/nonnegotiable partner then tells them what % of the population that represents.
Unfair_Ring_2746 | 4 hours ago
The actual study that this article is referencing also says that almost 60% of respondents said that income amount was NOT a significant factor in evaluating a partner and that financial compatibility is a top priority in finding a partner. So everyone cool your jets a bit.
It also notes that the average ideal amount folks answered was above $123k across ALL generations so it’s also not just a millennial thing.
In short: everybody ideally wants a relationship with high earnings, but ultimately just wants a relationship where they won’t be fighting about money.
In other news: there is sand on the beach and water in the ocean.
runner557 | 13 minutes ago
Yeah... Everyone says that. Everyone says they dont care about money. But then the first question on a first date is always... "So what do you do?"
Xyrus2000 | 4 hours ago
The ideal bar is so far beyond reality that they're going to stay single. The median single income is $64K. If you go by age groups, then the highest single median income is in the 55-64 age bracket, and that median is $78K.
Less than 10% of the population makes $160K or more. Even if you're talking about just $100K, you're still talking about less than 18% of the population. And the vast majority of people who are earning that kind of paycheck are going to be pushing 60.
zephalephadingong | 4 hours ago
The "ideal" at 160k is just sad. Ideal means the perfect partner. Have more ambition! My ideal when I was single was generational wealth where neither of us would have to work a day in our lives
idk_a_creative_user | 4 hours ago
I make around that and my dating life is shit. This is some BS from self reporting stuff. I know broke mfers who have a better dating life than me.
ragequitteroffureh | 3 hours ago
Not American.
How can people even earn that kind of money?
Wouldn't it be simpler for men and women who want a spouse who makes that much to simply resort to bigamy?
It would be a lot easier to find 4 or 5 wives/husbands who earn that much combined, rather than one who earns the equivalent of 4 or 5.
Also, it would be like buying stock. It's simpler to buy a few at a time, rather than all of them at once.
CormoranNeoTropical | 49 minutes ago
Index fund for spouses
Samurai-lugosi | 8 hours ago
Hi. No we don’t. What shallow people do they find for these studies? I swear to god. At my current income, I could date someone in the 50k range and be fine.
QuestioninglySecret | 7 hours ago
Shallow or honest? They're polled anonymously online and people are more likely to be brutally candid behind the veil of internet anonymity.
commelejardin | 8 hours ago
I dunno, in my VHCOL area I’d wager most if not all of my single friends expect a serious partner to make six figures, especially the women who date men.
Heck, I know some who exclusively target *millionaires* (which can be experienced doctors, lawyers, and hedge funders in a VHCOL area).
Samurai-lugosi | 8 hours ago
You have a shallow friend group I guess. I live in the Pacific Northwest and as long as their partner can hold their own, most of my friends and connections don’t see people this way.
kloakndaggers | 8 hours ago
life is hard. most people are just trying to make it easier. doesn't make it right but that's just the name of the game
curiiouscat | 8 hours ago
Calling it "shallow" is juvenile. Money is a real factor in relationships and in life. Just like people have to agree on kids, they should agree on financial goals. Maybe people agree that money isn't important to them, but it still needs to be a shared value.
curt_schilli | 8 hours ago
Man I don’t know anyone that would be okay with someone making $50k haha
Samurai-lugosi | 8 hours ago
I guess you are the people in studies then. Jeez.
Neither_Berry_100 | 7 hours ago
I got married on this years ago. Was actually good money based on the cost of living. And I was super early in my career so it was expected to go up. I paid 1200 rent for a one bedroom at the time.
1-Dollar-Doge-Coins | 6 hours ago
Obviously they're talking about $50K today, not years ago. $50K was a decent salary at one time (maybe 20 years ago).
olrg | 8 hours ago
People select partners based on income, education level, and personal values, there's nothing shallow about it.
Samurai-lugosi | 8 hours ago
There is wanting a partner who makes reasonable money, then there is only wanting a partner that makes in the top 10 percent of salaries exclusively.
That is shallow.
fistoic | 7 hours ago
I have this feeling that on top of this they will want someone who's over certain height or under certain weight, and college educated, and certain eye colors, and certain race, and certain XYZ. Then they'll wonder why they can never find a partner.
Only if they understood math
truthinessembargo | 6 hours ago
Here we go again.
Curious how the Eleanor Pringle looked at the gender divide —
“However, these expectations vary significantly by gender: women hope their partner earns $172,000, which is 70% higher than men’s expectations of $101,000.” — from the study
— and blamed the discrepancy on the gender wage gap, which has been debunked abundantly as a real measure.
Surely an award winning journalist is aware that the adjusted wage gap shows only a 1-5% discrepancy (https://salary.com/resources/hr-glossary/what-is-controlled-gender-pay-gap-definitions. https://pave.com/blog-posts/gender-pay-gap-normalized-vs-adjusted). Surely a real journalist knows that men work higher paying jobs (and are compensated for their higher mortality at such jobs), are more flexible with their schedules, and work more overtime (www.ilr.cornell.edu/institute-for-compensation-studies/insights-and-research/pay-remains-stubbornly-attuned-gender-what-do).
Whatever the cause, it’s pretty unlikely that women expect a 170% higher income from potential spouses (vs. men) due to a 1-5% adjusted wage gap.
Given that the highest median income by age group is ~$72k, all singles are suffering from wishful thinking. But one group is clearly more money hungry than the other…
Efficient_Resist_287 | 8 hours ago
So what is the difference with a dowry?
Isn’t it what certain folks in Western societies described as “uncivilized”.
This is just another version of it…just a bit more hypocritical.
fattsmann | 8 hours ago
Aka everyone is looking for a top 10-15% income earner, with most being likely around 45-54 years of age.
So that makes sense when a 25-30 year old woman is looking for an older man.
TransitJohn | 8 hours ago
Jesus! I'm GenX, super successful professional science career, making $95k. I take international vacations every year, have a killer fucking house and awesome, fully-funded old guy hobbies like bass guitar. Guess I'm a fucking loser.
fistoic | 7 hours ago
genuine question. What field of science with super successful career only pays $95k?
I feel like any one super successful no matter the field should be earning way more than that
katarh | 6 hours ago
Science careers don't pay a lot.
Super successful could mean, "I got my paper published on the cover of Science" but the day job may still be director of a university research lab.
endangeredorifice | 5 hours ago
It depends on whether you have a PHD or not. I know several scientists making 150+. Just like every career, the more education you get, the more money. But yeah the average scientist with a bachelor degree is not going to be making even 80k.
TransitJohn | 5 hours ago
Geology. Applied in government in a state regulatory role.
HectorDesJean | 7 hours ago
I don’t think anybody was literally ‘pricing’ a relationship. I’m guessing it’s more along the lines of: if it’s a hypothetical question of finding a much-better-than-average potential partner, starting from zero; then intentionally accepting immediate financial hardship is probably not high on the list of factors I would want to include in that. So, I do a SWAG of how much might clearly remove that particular concern from the hypothetical, and just put that down as an answer.
roamingroad174 | 7 hours ago
Millenial here....where did this 160k bar come from? You're not making that unless youre a doctor/surgeon, lawyer, successful business owner, or upper management.
zaccus | 6 hours ago
I don't care how much someone makes just for dating purposes.
However, if you want to get married that's different. I'm not going to consider marrying someone who makes significantly less than what I do. It's got to be in the same ballpark. I don't think that's asking a lot.
Tardislass | 5 hours ago
My nieces earn six figure but work long hours at the lab and rarely home. Those people work a lot of nights and weekends and won’t be the ones helping clean the house or chores.
Honestly, now that I’m older I think the best partner is a tradesperson. They can fix things around the house.
BarkerBarkhan | 5 hours ago
I feel like this is just another manifestation of everyone thinking that they are above average. And not knowing things, but being so confident that they do.
Used-Barnacle-9783 | 4 hours ago
My ex made more than that, and honestly it was a fucking hassle. She didn't want me to be dependent on her so we split all our expenses evenly. But functionally that meant I was always getting pushed into buying things I couldn't really afford while she felt like she was always getting held back by my inability to get a better job. Built resentment on both sides.
I'd rather be with someone in my tax bracket
Fozzz | 2 hours ago
Keeping tabs like that in a relationship sounds exhausting.
DocCEN007 | 3 hours ago
If they're ok with old dudes, their chances rise considerably, but they want someone similarly aged, no kids, and $160K. Add in 6' or taller, and you're looking at a fraction of a percent.
DoubleFamous5751 | 3 hours ago
LMAOOOOOOO! Sky high insane bars being set. Enjoy being alone forever never willing to “settle” for an actual human.
I don’t know if the character count is long enough lalallalalallala
The--scientist | 2 hours ago
The average millennial is currently 37. At 37, earning $160,000 puts you in the top 10% of earners. But that's nationwide. $160k is a fantastic income in Kansas, where the median $/sqft for a home is $163. In NYC, where the median $/sqft is $900, it's not quite as impressive. But furthermore, if earning is the most important thing, why would someone earning in the 90th percentile be mixing with someone in the 50th ($60k)?
Why don't we go back to finding people at like and feel compatible with, and go from there, rather than believing that an arbitrarily salary amount will make us happy or like our partner more.
Inevitable-Way-8535 | 2 hours ago
I mean, Ill make that much.....when Im 45 and have been married for 15 years, people thinking theyll find this in there 20s/30s are delusional. Plus real relationships are the ones where you grow with the person.
Haunting-Dinner479 | an hour ago
This is so silly. Nothing wrong with being single but for a bunch of people who don’t want to be single, this is crazy. Good luck being single forever or settling for what’s left when it’s too late.
TheeSusp3kt | 7 hours ago
This is such a dumb headline because its obviously going to change with location and cost of living.
If you are in San Francisco or LA, clearly the number will be higher, but Minnessota? Ohio? The cost of living is lower there.
People want stability first and foremost. There isn't a specific number.
jetsonian | 5 hours ago
Women want a partner $172k a year and men $103k.
That’s such a huge gap. The level of expectations in today’s dating seen must be abysmal. We’ve already identified a big problem with loneliness (with men specifically) this has to be contributing. I can’t imagine what it’s like to sit across from a date and have them reject you because you’re not in the top 5% of incomes.
ketingmiladengfodo | 7 hours ago
It's clickbait.
It's a survey. By Fortune magazine. And they are only including the respondents who said that money was important to them in a partner. For all we know, this is 5% of respondents, who are already slanted toward upper income folks and social climbers if they're readers of Fortune.
Fine-Froyo6219 | 7 hours ago
>The Harris Poll conducted a total of 4,375 online interviews among the general U.S. adult (18+) population between January 5th and January 21st, 2026. Included in this overall total is a sample of 816 High-Net-Worth individuals (those with total household investable assets, excluding pensions, retirement plans and property, greater than $1,000,000).
Study is useless
evangelism2 | 6 hours ago
Its exactly what I expected as I dug two levels deep
https://news.northwesternmutual.com/planning-and-progress-study-2026
>However, these expectations vary significantly by gender: women hope their partner earns $172,000, which is 70% higher than men’s expectations of $101,000
Its just another example of ridiculous expectations from women
We dont invest in education enough for young boys. We dont empower them at all. We spend all our time and energy as a culture for decades now lifting women up, and have completely screwed multiple generations of men. Women go to college more than men now, make more than men now, and have higher expectations than them. We are going to have an increasing number of disenfranchised, miserable, lonely men; things need to change, or they are going to get much worse.
MaxHeadroom1986 | 7 hours ago
I make more than 160k a year. I also have zero free time, often not even enough time to get 5 solid hours of sleep. For me to actively be with a single person that requires time, attention, emotions, they would have to bring something pretty serious to the table. I don't know anyone making $160k+ a year that isn't working at least 70+ hours a week. I know they exist but not in my circles.
Which sounds better? A one and done hook up that requires no further attention and can be done in what little free time I have or having to feel bad because your partner is upset you work so much and want to spend what little free time you have just shutting your brain off.
I'm gonna go with the 24 year old blonde sex worker
Scrandon | 6 hours ago
I don’t get it, I’m like a zombie if I get only 6 hours 2 nights in a row. If you got proper sleep, couldn’t you be a lot more effective, maybe put in fewer hours?
MaxHeadroom1986 | 6 hours ago
My job doesn't work like that. I have to physically be present during certain time periods on top of my actual job. They pay me for it though. Paychecks are fat and I genuinely haven't bought toilet paper in 3 months because I only seem to poop at work. My bathroom is so clean.
Datdawgydawg | 6 hours ago
As s married millennial who makes a large income and is married to another who makes very little, I dont blame them. It's frustrating as hell seeing my coworkers who married at their pay level or higher live the good life. I'm still budgeting to provide my family with nice things but my coworkers pulling a combined $300k are like "Just paid off our vacation house, celebrating by taking the kids on a 3rd trip to Disney this year before going on a couples trip to Hawaii."
dicta85 | 6 hours ago
As someone who is making upper 300s single, with no kids, those people have a lot of debt, zero retirement savings, and kids who are SOL for college funds.
Datdawgydawg | 6 hours ago
I exaggerated a bit in my example, but no, these people are Dave Ramsey followers and are debt free in their 30s. Given what I'm accomplishing at $150k in my LCOL area, I could easily afford that exaggerated example if I had double my income. After taxes that would be like $100k of free money to piss away on anything I wanted.
Scrandon | 5 hours ago
Yea that’s great and all if you could find someone with the same compatibility but more money. But if there’s any trade off to be had, this is one area of life where I’d say forget the fucking finances of it.
Jb174505 | an hour ago
Comparison is the thief of joy, bruv. There are literally tens of millions of people who would give anything to be in your position.
Reddit_Is_a_jokee | 49 minutes ago
Only people making 30K say shit like this.
Datdawgydawg | 44 minutes ago
User name checks out. 10/10, almost got me
DiscoVolante1965 | 7 hours ago
I know it's unrealistic and well above the median, but at same time that's kinda how much you need to have something resembling a middle-class lifestyle in a HCOL area.
Snapingbolts | 7 hours ago
Is this not more of a sign how fucked we are as a generation financially? Don't have access to the article but that's how I am reading the headline. Things have spiraled out of control so much that we feel we need an SO making more than double the avg salary to live comfortably
gthroway3483 | 6 hours ago
I make that much and wouldn’t want to date anyone below that. This country is too expensive to date a broke person. And I’m not trying to work harder to support a grown adult. If they have enough to offer to snag somebody rich, then more power to them but that’s a tough sell.
cymonium | 7 hours ago
I’m with them. I’m a successful GenX. Finally pursuing my BS and then my MS. I already have 4 children (3 of which are adults), and a grandbaby.
Why in the world would I take on another 200lb baby? Not worth it. Never pays off. I’d only choose someone who blends seamlessly into my life, matches my values, and morals.
NameLessTaken | 6 hours ago
I had a partner that made 6 figures (like 200+)and guess what? It took more than that to be happy. I think my goal is for ME to make 80-100,000 and them to make 70,000-100000. We learn to invest, live under our means, and enjoy small moments
And word of advice to ladies. In my experience helping a man build his way to that lands them with a new wife and you behind in you’re own career
PokerBear28 | 7 hours ago
I mean, I get it, that would be ideal for a comfortable lifestyle. The cost of living is high and only increasing. And millennials are older now, so more likely to be in the age range of people making six figures. But it’s still statistically a small percentage of the workforce.
beurhero7 | 6 hours ago
I mean money is important but you don't need to make 6 figures. Just have a pretty stable job and make at least 60 or may be 50k with extra budgeting you can make it work.
Appropriate_Formal64 | 6 hours ago
There's an over exposed/very visible group making $150k to $500k a year that everybody thinks just kind of exist.
We all focus on those.
In my own experience, co-workers have been focused on the guys they know exceed $100k or $200k a year at the very top of the food chain and ignore that those are like half a dozen guys out of the 100 or 200 who make between $40k and $90k, etc.
I think this is basically on par with regular folks talking about how over or under paid particular athletes are because they make $35M a season when they're really only worth $28M a season or they took a team friendly deal only making $18M a year when they could have made $25M a year etc. It's all relative, but it comes from the same aspirational place.
tcmisfit | 6 hours ago
I buy a powerball ticket every couple of weeks. Figure that’s just about as likely as a shut in minority in a not minority town who works overnights with all men finding a date that doesn’t have country music or Christian in their profile.
Fantastic_Stock_6819 | 6 hours ago
It is absolutely more reasonable to say I want a partner that combined with my income raises us to a total of 100000 to 120000 dollars a year. 160000 solo is not normal or average and is pie in the sky expectations.
plummyrosey | 5 hours ago
I hate to say it but yeah it kind of makes sense. I know two people who earn in that price range and they're the only ones who could afford the type of lifestyle our parents had. Everyone else we're either completely giving up on luxuries to save for the future (kids future tuition, retirement) or barely scrimping by.
soapbark | 5 hours ago
The only reason why I make that much working remote is because a friend referred me and I’ve been in the industry for 10 years. My mortgage is 1300 a month. I play the finals all day mostly.
authorHughMann | 4 hours ago
Here I was just following my erection around like a dowsing rod searching for water. I should've been checking their tax returns, what a fool I've been
RelationTurbulent963 | 4 hours ago
This is a very strong signal that an entire generation has been stifled economically. That figure is much more than most companies are willing to pay and more than most people are able to earn.