Rs 1 Lakh Salary With Parents Vs Rs 2.5 Lakh Alone In Big City: X User Sparks Debate
Several users have shared their views, with some sharing they prefer staying with family, and others emphasising independence, career growth and better opportunities in big cities.
In a social media post that has gone viral, a user questioned what mattered more—money or the comfort of living with parents.
In an X post on Monday, influencer Neha Nagar sparked a broader discussion on life and career choices by asking whether earning Rs 1 lakh per month while living with parents in a tier-2 town was preferable to earning Rs 2.5 lakh while living alone in a metro city.
The post quickly gained traction, sparking a social media debate over employment opportunities in big cities and modern living. The post has garnered over 2.38 lakh views and nearly 450 comments on X.
Hundreds of users have shared their opinions, with some noting that they preferred staying with family, while others emphasised independence, career growth and better opportunities in big cities.
“Life in tier 2 families is full of family politics and living up to padosi’s expectations and validation. Life in the metro, let’s not even go there…..not even clean air!! It’s rigged either way, the solutions are out of the box we are caged in!![sic],” a user commented. His comment alone has received over 200 likes, showing how strongly users related to the dilemma.
Some users strongly felt the corporate hustle was not worth missing important moments with family.
“I’d still choose Rs 1 lakh and live with my parents. Cities can wait, promotions can wait. But parents grow older every day. Coming home to their presence, their care, their silence— That is priceless,” a user said.
However, many users were of the view that real career growth can come from participating in the hustle culture.
“I’d take the Rs 2.5 lakh in a metro. Higher pay, better exposure, bigger network. Living alone forces you to grow fast personally and professionally,” read the comment.
One user broke the debate down to simple math. He commented that earning Rs 1 lakh in a tier-2 town with no rent could mean monthly savings of Rs 60,000 to Rs 70,000. In contrast, a Rs 2.5 lakh salary in a metro, after rent and lifestyle costs, may allow savings of Rs 80,000 to Rs 90,000. Over 10 years at a 12% return, the corpus gap works out to just Rs 30–40 lakh. The user argued that this difference was not life-changing.
“Real question: which lets you invest consistently without burnout? Wealth compounds from discipline, not gross salary,” the user asked.
Another user weighed in, saying a Rs 2.5 lakh salary in a metro city comes with higher costs, but builds independence and a strong professional network. “These advantages will compound over time,” the comment mentioned.
Many users echoed similar sentiments, saying the choice depends on what “wealth creation” means to each person. One noted that if wealth is only about money and building strong retirement funds, a metro city makes sense.
“If wealth is a good life and happiness, they will stay back in tier 2-3 cities,” the user noted.
One user offered a different perspective, saying Rs 1 lakh in a tier-2 town with zero rent can make you functionally richer than Rs 2.5 lakh in a metro. “After rent, taxes, and expenses, metro earners often save less. Wealth is what you keep, not what you make,” the user added.
A significant chunk of the comments emphasised that a Rs 1 lakh monthly salary in a smaller city was more than sufficient to live comfortably in India. Many also underlined the benefits of living with family, including emotional support and lower expenses.
The social media post has once again brought to the fore the dilemma young professionals often face in the evolving employment landscape of India.
