Most Americans live paycheck to paycheck

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: WeRpeons

I was trying to explain this on the last page but you did a much better job. Well said. The other thing that pisses me off about this is these colleges are blowing money left and right on their sports programs and buildings and whatnot, charging people through the roof for tuition, but then we're supposed to feel bad when the government decides they don't need grant money anymore.

There are only maybe 20-30 colleges/universities worth going into significant debt to attend. It is one thing to go into debt to attend MIT and graduate with a engineering degree vs some regional no name college majoring in social justice.

The problem is the availability of student loans has caused a tuition bubble. Students are willing to go into debt to attend college because they have been led to believe a college degree with provide better opportunities. Government subsidizing student loans and basically giving them out to anyone with a pulse means that there is no discipline in the purchase decision. There is also no incentive for schools to contain costs because they know the customer will pay it through the student loan debt.

a reply to: toysforadults

So much of that article is subjective in nature. For instance, what does "living paycheck to paycheck" really mean in everyday, real-life terms?

I'm not exactly a picture-perfect example of financial success. So, this thread helps.

originally posted by: Tempter
I'm not exactly a picture-perfect example of financial success. So, this thread helps.

many people are struggling especially younger people

a reply to: Edumakated

The job market demands a degree.

a reply to: face23785

I feel for you guys having to do your own taxes. here in the uk it is all sorted for us.
The good people of the tax office even sent me a rebate last week without me even knowing I had paid too much but I guess doing tax returns is a business in itself.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: toysforadults

So much of that article is subjective in nature. For instance, what does "living paycheck to paycheck" really mean in everyday, real-life terms?

Something along the lines of most people have no money if something comes up, I think here in oz some 80% of households do not have $500 cash available at a moment's notice for an emergency. Small payday loans are big business here for that reason.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: toysforadults

So much of that article is subjective in nature. For instance, what does "living paycheck to paycheck" really mean in everyday, real-life terms?

Something along the lines of most people have no money if something comes up, I think here in oz some 80% of households do not have $500 cash available at a moment's notice for an emergency. Small payday loans are big business here for that reason.

I wonder what the appropriate level is for monthly bills if a person makes $50,000?

I know of some people at that income who take nice vacations, have a nice home, decent late model car.

But I also know some who would, as you say, not be able to buy food, if they miss a paycheck or two. They have more, and/or more expensive assets and toys.

There was a time when banks went out of their way to entice consumers to take out bigger loans, and credit cards. Is that still the practice? I don't seem to get as many offers like I used to. That's fine with me. Smaller bag of trash to lug out to the curb every week.

a reply to: toysforadults

From data I have read of on this site and other place, it seems:

there about 45,000,000 homesess people in the US,

it would be reasoanble to assume about another 40-50 million people are about 30 days away from homelessness.

Lets say that wealth is a measure to ones ability to stay in ones own home living on ones own savings.

This would mean that about 40-50 million people are about 90 days away from homelessness

This all means that about one half of the US population could are 90 days or less from from homelessness.

Undoubtedly things have been like this a long time but the real issue here is that this same situation is likely to exist in all the western world so what might be the consequence of a 'overnight' global meltdown in the western world?

Dunno why but countries like, Iraq, Syria, Palistine and Afghanistan come to mind.

Why are western countries structured like this? - One shivers

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: seasonal

Until they designate everything that's not made out of paper a hazardous waste. There's even regs about what to do with batteries now. Not car batteries. AAs.

In Europe it is standard for decades. You simply do not want heavy metals or other highly toxic and biologically non degradable materials burned in incinerators or stored in leaking landfills ...

Visit some third world mine, compare work conditions and hazardous materials handling there and in USA or EU. I'm pretty sure you will prefer domestic "over regulated" operations in every aspect.

Over regulated pharmaceutical industry is drugging US population from prenatal to grave by variety of poisons. Unregulated/purely regulated distribution of antibiotics in human and veterinary fields leads to selection of antibiotics resistant strains of bacteria.

Over regulated agriculture is destroying soil and life in general ... 85% of monitored underground water sources in Czech republic is over limit in one or more monitored toxic substances - majority of those are pesticides washed of fields. In ag intensive areas of USA is situation probably much worse.
25 years ago collective farms has 7 - 12 year crop rotation plans, usage of pesticides and synthetic fertilizers was much lower. After 25 years of almost unregulated advanced capitalism, fields are degraded to inertial substrate without any life.

a reply to: toysforadults

I really think it's much worse then that in the suburban areas,people have a persona to portray,which requires fancy house,car,clothing,toys,I think a majority live off their credit cards,and the sad thing is,when the economy crashes,they will still be responsible for these loans,and in marches the NWO's plan,to own everyone,you will be their indentured servants,the media pushes the"live beyond extremes",travel ads etc,implying if you don't do such things you are socially inept

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
Who forced the young people to get that debt? Was a gun held to their head?

I hold a GED. I make 10% more than the median household income of my state by myself. This doesn't include my wife's income.

I saw no benefit to a college degree. I didn't have a degree in mind for what I wanted to do. I wasn't willing to take on debt without a goal in mind. Now I have a much higher net worth than my friends who went to college and don't use their degrees.

It depends on your degree. I made $60/hour during my internship last summer. I currently make just under $100k/year working 20 hours/week in a more permanent position that I was given after the internship. That's while still going to school to finish my education, in a low cost of living area where our median household income is under $15k/year.

There's plenty of benefit to a degree, but it has to be the right degree, and you have to do a bit more than just collect a piece of paper.

You also have to be lucky enough to get a job. Not everyone who gets a degree will wind up employed in their field.

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
If I continue to save at this rate, and the market doesnt fall apart, I should have over 750,000 to retire on. The only trade off is that my take home is significantly less than it could be......so sometimes I do not have a huge margin for error. But I will take that, to ensure a comfortable retirement.

750k won't last you very long in retirement. You will have to work to supplement that.

originally posted by: Chromium51
Apparently I'm doing prettt ok.. just turned 27, I have a 300k house, have a new jeep rubicon and an older one to offroad, my girlfriend has a 12 grand Cherokee limited.. and I just dropped 40k cash on a kitchen remodel.. if you live paycheck to paycheck that's your own fault.. also
I don't have a college degree

And how much of that is fully paid off?

originally posted by: Edumakated
Financial literacy should be taught starting in the 9th grade. Far too many people simply have no idea how to manage money and understand basic finance. The spend money as fast as they make it and never save for a rainy day.

I agree with this. I just had a big fight with my mom about 3-4 weeks ago. Her financial situation isn't good (similar to mine before this recent job) but her housing situation is even worse. Anyways, long story short, she's needing to buy a new home to live in, except she has no money to put down, and no income to pay a mortgage. In my case, I've been saving money, I just got the cash together that I have 1 years worth of living expenses in cash reserves, and zero debt. Before I can really consider myself stable though, there's a few other things to do like get a more reliable car (that's paid off), and buy a house/pay it off, and catch up on my as of now zero retirement savings.

So my mom asks me to give up my cash reserves, so she can use it on a down payment for a house. It lead to a big fight but I refused. All that would do is put both of us into a bad financial situation, while I'm still trying to get myself out of a precarious one. If she had some understanding about finances, she would understand my position... instead she thinks I'm being greedy and not willing to help out because I have the money to do so, since I have a nice salary now.

But, I see the other side of this too. Not everyone is going to manage money well, just because they mess up, I don't see why society should turn their backs on them.

The other issue is that the impact of poor decisions these days can last you a lifetime. Dropping out of school. Catching a criminal case. The quickest way to being broke if you are a guy is getting some thot pregnant and winding up having a baby mama draining your check for child support. For a woman, letting some dead beat guy impregnate you is a sure fire to being broke. Trying to work and care for a kid you can't afford is not going to win you any races.

I think we need more focus on this, but even then... sometimes accidents happen, especially with kids and I don't think it's particularly reasonable to tell people they need to practice abstinence until they're financially secure, because everyone knows people won't do that.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Edumakated

This reminds me of something I read a while ago that should be mandatory reading in all high schools.

There's two types of millionaires. This article is referring to the people who have $1 million in assets, which almost always includes their home. With an above average job, and some good money management, anyone can do this.

The other type, which most people refer to when they say millionaires (and it's a less accurate description these days, because it was the same description in the 50's when money was worth 10x what it is now) are the people who have $1 million in liquid assets to spend on whatever they want. In addition to any other assets they own. Those people today are called billionaires. And that's what most people think of when they say millionaire.

originally posted by: AMPTAH
Then, since the majority don't earn enough, they have to borrow to fund their lifestyle, but they don't qualify for the low interest loans, instead they see high interest credit things like credit card debt.

There's a simple solution to this problem. Tie the credit card interest rate to the government treasury bond and note rate, so say, nobody can charge a rate for credit cards higher than 1% over the government treasury rates. That would bring the loans in line with the investors interest rates, and reduce the disparity between the haves and the have-nots.

Or, don't use credit cards to fund purchases. I get it, from the time I was 18 (and even earlier than that, really) until I was 34 I lived under the poverty line. At 35, I finally got a glimpse of a way out, and I'm working at that. I'm above the poverty line now, but have a long way to go in order to catch up and achieve actual financial stability.

Don't use credit cards unless you can pay it off right away. I've run all of my transactions through credit cards for 7 years now. After getting into some trouble early on with a low cap, high interest card ($500, 30% APR), I got out of it and learned my lesson. Now I pay 0% on my cards because I pay them off in full every week. I treat my credit cards as a debit card and never spend money I don't have, except that I get some additional buyer protections on my credit card, and I occasionally get a points rebate. That's the trick to credit, don't use what you don't have. You don't need lower rates, you just need to not spend it on things you can't afford to pay with cash.

When used that way, credit cards are a more secure system of payment. They shouldn't be used as loans.

Can't say I've got any sympathy for someone earning six figures and struggling.

I earn 25k a year and do fine. I don't drink, smoke, or buy expensive crap I don't need. Even if you have a big family, six figures ought to be enough, if it isn't you're doing something very wrong.

Some people are clowns, though. My cousin doesn't even have a job but somehow has a mercedes...tried to borrow money from me recently to "feed his kids". But I know the truth...he has habits.

Enough said...many folk I know now have "habits", you get me? *Sniff*

Drop the habits and get with the program.

originally posted by: Edumakated
The standard of living in America is very high. Even our poor live better than the upper class in most countries. As you state, poor in America still means having a roof over your head, car, Xbox, cell phone, TV, shoes, clothes, public schooling, air conditioning, etc. Any ghetto in America would look like a life of luxury compared to some places I've seen in South America, Carribean, Africa, India, etc.

That's not necessarily true. We have things like better building codes, but I'm not really sure it's fair to say that's luxury. I have central AC, but it has a lockbox on it, my landlord is the one with access to choose how warm/cold my apartment gets (electric is included in my rent, so he pays for it). I don't have a TV, I don't have a game system. My personal cell phone cost me $30 and is a prepay, which I pay about $15/month for, to get about 5 hours of talk time. I do have a nice computer and good internet service, and a car. But I can only afford the car due to parental support (until recently), without that I would be walking everywhere.

I do have a roof over my head, but I have nothing underneath that roof. My furniture consists of a fold out table, a single office chair, and that's it. I don't even own a bed, I sleep on the floor, and own only a single pillow.

I would hesitate to call that a life of luxury by the standards of any developed nation.

originally posted by: LungFuMoShi
Can't say I've got any sympathy for someone earning six figures and struggling.

I earn 25k a year and do fine. I don't drink, smoke, or buy expensive crap I don't need. Even if you have a big family, six figures ought to be enough, if it isn't you're doing something very wrong.

Some people are clowns, though. My cousin doesn't even have a job but somehow has a mercedes...tried to borrow money from me recently to "feed his kids". But I know the truth...he has habits.

Enough said...many folk I know now have "habits", you get me? *Sniff*

Drop the habits and get with the program.

It depends on where you're living. I see from your profile that you're in Scotland. I don't know how it is there, but here in the US there's a huge difference in the value of a dollar. $100k in Silicon Valley, or San Francisco, or anywhere else in the Bay Area, or Los Angeles, or most of San Diego, or New York City, or several other places doesn't go very far. In the places I just mentioned, $100k will get you a room in a 4 bedroom house, that you'll be splitting with roommates. In these places, $3000 rents per bedroom are not uncommon. That's close to $40,000 per year just for rent... with roommates. Throw in $45,000 in taxes you'll pay between city/state/federal in those places, and that leaves you with very little to actually live on.

In other areas of the country, like where I live, one can rent a 3 bedroom house (all for themselves) for under $1000/month, including all utilities.

Just saying $100k without including the area doesn't tell you very much in the US.