A proposed fix for Cost of Living at higher TLs

[Michael Thayne]

The rules for cost of living at high TLs are, to put it mildly, not very realistic, especially given how they interact with the jobs rules. The rules have the average person at TL8 spending less than 25% of their income on food, housing clothes, and car payments (e.g. only $600 per month out of a $2600 monthly income). Plus, the rules ignore taxes. But what's reasonable? While this can be very complicated, it would be nice to have a simple rule. I'd say being able to spend about 40% of your gross pay on non-necessities is, if not typical, at least attainable. At TL8 an Average / Status 0 job pays $2600 per month. 40% of that is $1040, which rounds to $1000. That's 5% of starting wealth, where the $2600 appears to be based on the formula $600 + 10% of starting wealth. What if we increased cost of living (which now includes taxes) to $600 + 5% of starting wealth?

It's obviously not 100% realistic, but I think it's pretty good for a rule that simple, at least in 2018. I confess to not really knowing how much discretionary income, say, a parish priest ought to have circa 1800.

[Phantasm]

As far as taxes go, I always treat the monthly income as "takehome after taxes, adjusted for 1986 USD". Also the whole thing is meant to be a playable approximation, not a reality simulator.

That said, the higher TLs - TL10 and up - make it hard if not impossible to live in abject poverty with a Wealth level above Dead Broke.

In another similar thread, I proposed a Very Poor [-20] wealth level, giving ×1/20 starting wealth and income, but even that fails to drop anyone below Status 0 at TL 11 and 12.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

But what's reasonable? While this can be very complicated, it would be nice to have a simple rule.

Depends on what you think cost of living represents. Most real people aren't going to save more than 20% of their income for the type of expenses adventurers are likely to incur, but people who's job is 'adventuring' can easily spend a lot more.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

As far as taxes go, I always treat the monthly income as "takehome after taxes, adjusted for 1986 USD". Also the whole thing is meant to be a playable approximation, not a reality simulator.

That said, the higher TLs - TL10 and up - make it hard if not impossible to live in abject poverty with a Wealth level above Dead Broke.

In another similar thread, I proposed a Very Poor [-20] wealth level, giving ×1/20 starting wealth and income, but even that fails to drop anyone below Status 0 at TL 11 and 12.

Have the "starting wealth" numbers really not been adjusted since 1986? What was TL7's "average" starting wealth in 1986? I know many prices have not been updated since 3e, but I think the policy is to use 2004 prices when writing new material.

I did the math on this, and the numbers in the jobs rules don't look unreasonable for 2004. An "Average" job pays $31,200 per year. Adjust that for inflation, and it's about $41,000 per year today. That's only a bit under the median income for full-time workers as reported by the BLS, and in most places it's enough to make mortgage and car payments (which GURPS says is typical of Status 0). $41,000 per year is less than the median household income, but many households have two adults working, so it works out.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Depends on what you think cost of living represents. Most real people aren't going to save more than 20% of their income for the type of expenses adventurers are likely to incur, but people who's job is 'adventuring' can easily spend a lot more.

If "adventurer" is how you make money, those costs aren't discretionary spending, they're business expenses. If adventuring is an unprofitable sideline, on the other hand, you probably aren't spending 75% of your gross income, or even your after-tax income, on it unless you are very rich.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Have the "starting wealth" numbers really not been adjusted since 1986? What was TL7's "average" starting wealth in 1986?

It was $15,000 for TL7 same as now. It's just the boundaries of tL7 that have changed.

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

It was $15,000 for TL7 same as now. It's just the boundaries of tL7 that have changed.

What I originally meant was: the GURPS $ was first calculated back in '86 and has remained constant through all four editions even with consistent real world inflation.

That said, I'm not sure about the TL8+ starting wealth levels, since that's where GURPS recalculated a lot going from 3e to 4e. I just know that it's impossible with the current wealth levels and costs of living to have to live at a Status -1 with TL10+ Poor incomes (and at TL11 and 12, Poor income permits you to live at a Status 1 CoL, which to us would be a luxury condo!). (You can still choose to live at a lower CoL, but honestly who chooses to live in the slums when they can afford somewhere nicer?)

[Michael Thayne]

Honestly, my big motivation for raising CoL is that the official CoL rules make it easy to live at one Status higher than you're "supposed" to be able to live at even at TL7.

[Stormcrow]

Forget trying to link US dollars to GURPS $. It's irrelevant. Look at whether the system is internally consistent.

The fixed value for the cost of living is the way it is to represent how societies with greater technology levels have more leisure time and a generally higher standard of living. Cost of living is the minimum you need to spend to maintain your lifestyle. A TL8 person at Status 0 is paying for a mortgaged house or a large apartment, and a car. The Average job pays $2,600, so the TL8 person has $2,000 leftover in discretionary spending. They go to movies, restaurants, buy extra clothes, take vacations, and generally find ways to spend that extra cash. A TL0 person at Status 0 is paying to maintain a small tent or cave, and maybe some useful animals. The Average job (let's suppose there's currency in this TL0 society) pays $625/month, leaving only $25 leftover for discretionary spending. Maybe they'll splurge on a new stone knife, and that's it.

It all works just fine. It's internally consistent, and it yields results that we want: higher TLs allow more discretionary spending. It doesn't need to be "realistic" in the sense of "yielding the same dollar amounts as in the real world."

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Honestly, my big motivation for raising CoL is that the official CoL rules make it easy to live at one Status higher than you're "supposed" to be able to live at even at TL7.

Sure, but then you don't have so much leftover for discretionary spending. If your buddy has the same income as you, but you're spending your extra income for extra Status, well, he's spending it on adventuring gear he can use. You get the reaction bonus for Status; he gets the benefits of gear.

It all works out.