the sunday times has so much fun stuff to read. the times magazine. the style section. weekend arts section, among other sections. including the real estate section. every once in a while i like reading about houses or apartments i cannot fathom being able to afford in the next decade. then i see an article about two 25-year old girls (read: younger than ME) and how they live in a 2-br west village apartment and pay $3,800 a month. doesn't sound unreasonable. they could easily work in finance or be trust fund babies.

well, according to this article, these two particular girls, are NOT:
I always wanted to live in the Village,” said Ms. Daitch, who was equally smitten with the apartment, and agreed to submit an application with her friend. By September, their names were on the lease.

The rent, which is $3,800 a month, is a bit of a stretch for them. “We cover it ourselves now,” Ms. Spehar said, “which is something we’re pretty proud of. But my mom sometimes helps with the groceries.”

Ms. Daitch was already familiar with the satisfaction of financial independence. “There was something very fulfilling about knowing that my parents had cut me off,” she said, remembering when she first earned her share of the rent for a previous apartment.

the ONLY way these girls can afford this apartment is that they spend almost every penny of their entry-level salary on their rent. one of them even has a second job as a babysitter after her day job. not to mention the fact that their parents pay for their groceries. that can't be a good sign. i mean, i often wish my room was bigger than the 10 x10 tiny space that it is, but i'm not going to work to live. (link to story via gawker)

Labels: real estate, sunday times