Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Nearly All Americans Living Paycheck-to-Paycheck

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nearly All Americans Living Paycheck-to-Paycheck

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...check-n1626180
    Roughly three-quarters of Americans are living paycheck-to-paycheck, with little to no emergency savings, according to a survey released by Bankrate.com Monday.

    Fewer than one in four Americans have enough money in their savings account to cover at least six months of expenses, enough to help cushion the blow of a job loss, medical emergency or some other unexpected event, according to the survey of 1,000 adults. Meanwhile, 50% of those surveyed have less than a three-month cushion and 27% had no savings at all.

    "It's disappointing," said Greg McBride, Bankrate.com's senior financial analyst. "Nothing helps you sleep better at night than knowing you have money tucked away for unplanned expenses."

  • #2
    Nearly all Americans have too expensive a vehicle, too big a house, too much bling, take too long and expensive vacations and in general pretend they can play the same revenue vs. expenses game they see the governments playing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by RNG View Post
      Nearly all Americans have too expensive a vehicle, too big a house, too much bling, take too long and expensive vacations and in general pretend they can play the same revenue vs. expenses game they see the governments playing.
      how are things north of the border amigo?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by RNG View Post
        Nearly all Americans have too expensive a vehicle, too big a house, too much bling, take too long and expensive vacations and in general pretend they can play the same revenue vs. expenses game they see the governments playing.
        Americans spend too much on eating out, on entertainment and on those monthly bills that don't seem all that big but add up to quite a bit (cable/satellite, internet, cell phone) and it doesn't help that such a large chunk goes to health insurance. But it does come down to poor spending choices for the vast majority.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by spudoc View Post
          Americans spend too much on eating out, on entertainment and on those monthly bills that don't seem all that big but add up to quite a bit (cable/satellite, internet, cell phone) and it doesn't help that such a large chunk goes to health insurance. But it does come down to poor spending choices for the vast majority.
          nice to know it doesn't have anything to do with shit jobs and shittier wages

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Who View Post
            how are things north of the border amigo?
            About the same. The Bank of Canada was amazed the last report issuing date. For the first time since they started tracking this statistic, average debt held by individuals excluding mortgages fell some miniscule amount.

            Comment


            • #7
              Americans don't have any savings because they don't know how to save. 75% of Americans take $100 and try to spend it like it is $1000.

              Comment


              • #8
                Terrible phrasing. That's not a bad thing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by spudoc View Post
                  Americans spend too much on eating out, on entertainment and on those monthly bills that don't seem all that big but add up to quite a bit (cable/satellite, internet, cell phone) and it doesn't help that such a large chunk goes to health insurance. But it does come down to poor spending choices for the vast majority.
                  This. Well said, and to the point. Just because you can affords the payments on an Escalade and still eat, doesnt mean you should get one. My days of living paycheck to paycheck were gone after my first learning experiance with credit cards when I was 19. From then on, if I couldnt pay cash, I didnt pay. Now, CC are just for deposits, and dinner out. If you keep those MFers down, you can lose the paycheck to paycheck.

                  Oh, and Honda Accords afford me to have nice things. I would love a Lexus, and can afford one, but then I have to worry about other things.

                  No car payments = Bliss

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Who View Post
                    nice to know it doesn't have anything to do with shit jobs and shittier wages
                    LOL, really?

                    No, it has to do with the FACT that even the very poor in America have more and spend more than ever before. And why not? If you cannot keep spending as you like, just ask the government for some cash.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      3/4 does not equal "Nearly All". If fact, how can you say someone is living "paycheck-to-paycheck" unless they have no savings at all - which only covers 1/4 of those surveyed?

                      And then the real question: Does living government check-to-government check equal living paycheck-to-paycheck? How do those on the dole figure into this survey?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by jcr View Post
                        LOL, really?

                        No, it has to do with the FACT that even the very poor in America have more and spend more than ever before. And why not? If you cannot keep spending as you like, just ask the government for some cash.
                        Who got a huge pay cut so he thinks it's all because of REPUBLICANOBSTRUCTIONISTAS!!!111!!!!

                        He's not very good at the whole 'grand scheme' thing.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by RNG View Post
                          Nearly all Americans have too expensive a vehicle, too big a house, too much bling
                          Originally posted by spudoc View Post
                          it does come down to poor spending choices for the vast majority.
                          When you compare things to 40 years ago - specifically the size of homes, the # of cars and their price compared to income and the amount of crap in their houses - it's not shocking to see the financial end results. The average sized NEW home in 1950 was about 1500 square feet and families had more kids than today. The size today is nearly 2,400 square feet.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Beagleboy View Post
                            The average sized NEW home in 1950 was about 1500 square feet and families had more kids than today. The size today is nearly 2,400 square feet.
                            Also....the home of today comes with central air standard, often has granite countertops, double sinks in the master bathroom, (a master bathroom, for that matter), and a space that would be "great for entertaining".

                            In the work time study, there's only three things that have gone up in cost in terms of "work time"
                            1-housing (but not if you account for increase in sq. footage as you noted)
                            2-college tuition (it's fairly stagnant, but the payoff is higher than ever)
                            3-healthcare (but again, hard to examine specifically because we don't consume healthcare, we consume health insurance, and we use it for a vaster array of quantity than we did in 1950)

                            work time=the amount of time it takes the average person to earn money to purchase something

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Beagleboy View Post
                              When you compare things to 40 years ago - specifically the size of homes, the # of cars and their price compared to income and the amount of crap in their houses - it's not shocking to see the financial end results. The average sized NEW home in 1950 was about 1500 square feet and families had more kids than today. The size today is nearly 2,400 square feet.
                              There's obviously more to that than poor choices or whatever you are trying to pin it on. Shitty insulation and inefficient heating/cooling were major reasons houses were smaller (not to mention building costs and financing options) More important of course was the suburbanization of America, the automotive industry in general that helped propel the United States into the stratosphere of world economies and created a "middle class"(I know wtf is that) is how homes got bigger. The further from the center of town you could live, the more space you had to build on.

                              The financing, again, is an important consideration and not a bad financial decision for Americans. Being able to afford payments on a home that are similar to the rent you were paying from someone else's property was a good thing for Americans and our economy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X