Minimum-Wage Workers Outpriced for Rentals in All Major U.S. Cities

(Image courtesy of Luis Quintero/pexels.com)

Best Interest Financial, St. Clair, Mich., and Clever Real Estate, St. Louis, released a new study finding that a single minimum-wage worker would not be able to afford the rent for a one-bedroom unit in any of the country’s 50 largest metros.

This is based on the 30% rule, the study noted, which recommends that no more than 30% of gross monthly income should be spent on housing.

On average, to afford median rent in the 50 largest cities, a worker would need to work a clearly impossible 174 hours a week.

In terms of cities that come closest to hitting the 30% threshold, St. Louis ranks first for affordability. A single minimum-wage worker would need to spend 41% of their gross monthly income.

Next is another Missouri metro–Kansas City, where a worker would spend 50% of their gross monthly income. The only other city where a minimum-wage worker’s apartment would take up 50% or less of their paycheck is Fresno, Calif., also at 50%.

On the other hand, there are multiple metro areas where monthly rent would cost more than 100% of minimum-wage income.

Topping that list is Atlanta, where rent would be 143% of that worker’s income, followed by Dallas, at 142%, and Raleigh, N.C., at 138%.

Those aren’t necessarily cities with sky-high rents–rather they tend to be cities with modest rents but very low minimum wages. Georgia, Texas and North Carolina all have hourly minimum wage laws in line with federal minimums of $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage hasn’t increased since 2009.