CathInfo.com

Now, with that said ... our family home, that my parents purchased for $40,000 in 1973, Zillow shows it to be worth $240,000.  That would be a $2,000 per month payment given today's interest rates, property tax, insurance, etc.

On top of that, with food costs ... for my family (I have 6 children) our food budget is about 50% higher than my mortgage payment.  Used to be "neck and neck", but it's 50% higher.

Then the cost of automobiles, gasoline, and everything else that you need to buy, from toiletries to other supplies, tools, etc.

I don't believe that you could do a 60s lifestyle on a single income unless you were making, oh, about $100K minimum.  $25,000 of that would go to just the mortgage on this tiny 900-square-foot house, and $100K is probably only like $75K after taxes.  Then if you have another $25,000 on food.  That leaves $25,000 for EVERYTHING ELSE ... cars, gasoline, other supplies, books, school supplies, etc. etc.  You MIGHT just barely scrape by on $100K living a 1960s lifestyle in my old family home.

NOW ... looking it up, only 18% of wage earners in the US make $100K or more.  So only about 1/5th of the population could afford said "1960s" lifestyle on the one income.

So, that's nonsense, as my little neighborhood there consisted ENTIRELY of blue collar types, people who worked at a factory, or did other blue collar jobs that didn't even particularly require any skill or education, or who worked in retail or something else.  In other words, THERE'S NO WAY that the demographic I knew in that area was in the top 18th Percentile of Wage Earners, rendering them "Upper Middle Class".  These folks there were absolutely LOWER MIDDLE CLASS and even UPPER LOWER CLASS.

So, that's nonsense, as my little neighborhood there consisted ENTIRELY of blue collar types, people who worked at a factory, or did other blue collar jobs that didn't even particularly require any skill or education, or who worked in retail or something else.  In other words, THERE'S NO WAY that the demographic I knew in that area was in the top 18th Percentile of Wage Earners, rendering them "Upper Middle Class".  These folks there were absolutely LOWER MIDDLE CLASS and even UPPER LOWER CLASS.

I second that --
My dad never worked a skilled job, or even a trade -- the most skilled thing he did was security guard. So yeah -- being able to buy a house and raise a family on close to minimum wage, or manual labor/unskilled jobs -- that just shows how sweet the Boomers had it.

And how cooked we are now.

I must be doing it wrong. My phone is going on 10 years old... and it was a free upgrade.

I was giving an average, rather than an extreme case. More compelling that way.
Yes, many people could get by with a $50 Android phone. They are quite capable -- about 90% similar -- to a $200 phone. You can hardly tell the difference.

As for how long you can keep it -- it depends on the BATTERY firstly. They don't last forever. Next of all, it's a portable device, and has quite an adventurous life. It can be broken, cracked, dropped, dunked, lost, stolen, etc. So I'm just being realistic that not everyone can use the same smartphone for 8 years.

Next of all, what is the latest version of Android your phone was given? As you know, it's up to the manufacturer how long they'll support your phone with upgrades to new Android versions. After several years, some apps will no longer install on it, due to your Android version being too old. It takes a lot more than 3-4 years for this though.

As an aside, iPhones are luxury goods, designer goods, for status. That's what they are.