Does this base itself on the metric started in 1963, that was eseentially a big guess that 3x starvation level was well off? because we have better numbers now. Avg us salary is 60k, but to take car of the needs of a family of 4, not in starvation range is ~$160k/year

How can you need that much money to not starve?

According to Wikipedia[1] median household income in the US and Norway is only about a quarter of your 160 kUSD.

I'm pretty sure that most of the people living near me in Norway are not high earners but I don't see any signs of starvation either.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_income

Norway has many wonderful things American voters are terrified of giving people less they use them.

USA site. USA metrics. USA Comment. I vote to get the same things you all have, but your assumption is that Norway matters in this context is foolish

> not in starvation range is ~$160k/year

That highly depends on your definition of "need" and where you live. If you're in a city with ludicrous cost of living, like San Fransisco, then sure. But, that's also why people commute, or just choose to go somewhere cheaper. It's somewhat shocking seeing how much higher the standard of living is, with much less income, outside the big cities.

In the U.S., a family of four technically doesn't need any money "not to starve," because SNAP covers the cost of groceries if providers are unable.

Put in an area and see for yourself. In general, yes this calculator is closer to what you're describing. For example, Skamania County, a pretty rural county of Washington state with a very low population of 12,000 people, still has a "required living wage" for 1 breadwinner + 1 homemaker + 3 children of $104,292 per year: https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/53059

That feels pretty close to accurate.

Yeah Dallas county Texas, where I live, for family of 4 and 2 working adults is around $105k/year. That seems close, there’s nothing secure about that long term (no room for savings or retirement) but it’s livable.