rabbit_39. Much of your analysis is factually correct, but a lot of the income numbers are "can" and not "does".
Point taken, I am only taking references since I do not earn my money through social media and/or creative remote work.
For youtube, only the top 1% of producers get over 1,000,000 views per month. The monetization under that drops drastically. Most of the "influencers" have under 10,000 views. The travel youtubers that make real money don't usually stay only in one spot, they travel to many locations and hire production companies. They can afford to get the proper visa.
Absolutely, but that's also why a lot of social media influencers make money from merchandise, selling online courses, and selling e-books.
For the freelance digital work, it is far less money earned than that for most of the platforms. There is some analysis, but less than .001% of the producers make $100 a day.
I think that can be true if you take the number of people registered in the platforms and divide the earnings made through the platform by that total number. But we're really talking about a population of that total number of people registered in the platform who are willing to make the work through the platforms their full time job, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year (or more). When you consider the "full time" freelancers, I'm sure the percentage of those that make the equivalent of US$1500/day is much higher than 0.01%.
Roughly 25% of people in the US have a side hustle. The ones using this app make the most.
www.cnbc.com
The $1600 amount you estimated is freelance. That money is pretax, pre-expenses, no health care, no pension, no benefits. That is also part of the outrage in this case. Most Indonesians that make $1600 a month are supposed to pay taxes. (although Indonesia has a huge tax gap and one of the lowest GDP to tax collection in the world)
Absolutely, for many of the digital nomads, that's their preferred mode of income, correct? Or am I wrong? They're willing to trade security with comfort and perceived quality of life. They would rather live in Kuta (for example) and be able to party 5 nights a week.
Let's say they pay taxes, 20% of their earnings that leaves them with $1200/month. Expenses such as housing ($300/month?), food ($300/month?), transport ($200/month?). That leaves $400 for optional expenses such as partying, bintangs, etc. Or am I missing something? Health care, they can join BPJS (Indonesia's health care) for aobut $50/month? Pension/savings is part of the optional expenses, how much do they want to save? Benefits... like what else (optical, dental)?
Most of the digital nomads I met in person had a full time career in tech that simply allowed them to work remotely, not freelance gigsite work. They were more motivated by staying with a significant other than with the cost of living adjustment. The hours were brutal too because of the time difference between the U.S. and Asia.
That can be true, but that means they're earning more than $1500/month right? The hours are manageable. At least for me anyway
I agree with the analysis of Indonesian income. Last year the median individual salary in Indonesia was $183 per month. That means half of the population made less than that. It is harder to calculate median household income in Indonesia because households are usually larger and have more working adults in them.
I think mostly I was just trying to give context to what the digital nomads (including those making "only" $1500/month) are earning vs. what the locals are making. There is almost no reason (I'll make some exceptions to a few foreign immigrants in Indonesia who are struggling financially) for someone like the person that's the topic of this discussion to complain about how difficult life is in Indonesia. As a matter of fact Kristen Gray is the opposite, right? Making arguments that "life is easy" in Bali and for others to follow her footsteps by buying her e-book.
What is at on display in this case, is what is at play in many scenarios. It is the psychology of the "relative income". There have been many psychological and sociological studies that people are happier getting less money as long as they are getting more than the people around them and are less happy getting more money than if everyone else around them is getting more. Despite having less disposable income for most of these "influencers", they are happier because they are comparing themselves to the poorer Indonesians surrounding them. The Indonesians are less happy about this. One of the major problems is the selling point used by both Kristen Gray and many others: the income disparity. Many of these "lifestyle influence" peddlers flaunt wealth or the perception of it.
But she's correct though that life is relatively easy in Indonesia if you can make "just" $1500/month. Absolutely they're trading wealth with "happiness", if their definition of happiness is:
- able to live in a room/villa that cost them $400 whereas a small apartment in the US can be $1300
- able to live in a place where you can see blue skies, rice paddies, mountains, trees, beaches every morning
- LGBT friendly (at least toward them as foreigners)
- able to live around "nice people"
- have enough money to "party" when they want to
- etc
Foreigners are not the only ones to come to Indonesia because of the “relative income” psychology. I have known plenty of Indonesians return to Indonesia to have far less disposable income, but they no longer felt like the lower rung in society. Foreigners are just not legally entitled to it (although some behave like they are).
Hmmm... I'm not saying that your experiences are invalid, but that's not been my experience. many Indonesians who return to Indonesia that are within my circles are for the majority:
- have family businesses that are successful enough that even if they don't make the same amount of money in Indonesia, their relative wealth is "more" in Indonesia with their family businesses
- can not get a good long term jobs abroad
- family issues
As far as I know, foreigners are absolutely legally entitled to live in Indonesia within the existing legal provisions. Even including the digital nomads who make <$1500/month and those people who are paid by their employers to live in Indonesia.
Just that in the discussions among ourselves (whether in this forum, or outside), we just need to have the context of how the locals really live. Not just the ones we interact, but as a whole spectrum. I know people who are earning $200/month or less and they're raising a family of 4. For them $100 is a HUGE amount of money that allows them to have a living, not just for Bintangs for 3-4 nights. It's all about context.