Living paycheck to paycheck

94 comments

• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  But that Biden bitch says wages are growing faster than inflation... Prices are too out of control. Inflation like this isn't sustainable. By next year rents will be higher than most wages.
• docsavage

  •

  2 years ago

  U.S. life expectancy is declining too. There were three straight years of decline from 2015 to 2017 and then two more in 2020 and 2021. There also appears to be elevated mortality so far in 2022. This isn't due to lack of resources directed at health care. The U.S. spends 16% of GDP, the highest in the world, on health care. This compares to 6% in 1960. As spending in this area has increased, America has dropped from number ten to number thirty in country rankings of life expectancy. The medical cartel and big pharma are run for the benefit of the people who work in it and not the average person. This is true throughout the economy. I work for the military-industrial complex, the main purpose of which is to enrich the people who work for it. This requires that we exaggerate foreign threats in order to justify continuation of that spending. You also have the higher education complex, which sucks up increasing amounts of money while turning out graduates who can't get a job. You have the big Wall Street banks, which get bailed out when they get in trouble. You have big tech, which has joined into an alliance with the government to engage in censorship. I can go on, but you get the idea. The commonality is that all these industries increase their wealth through political connections. They use these connections to eliminate potential competition, get subsidized or bailed out when needed, get favorable tax or regulatory treatment and so on. Meanwhile, average people become poorer and live shorter lives. This will lead to the political rise of populist outsiders, either on the left or right, since the political establishments of both parties support the current system.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  There was a study, years ago, that asked people at all income levels, how much money they would need to be comfortable. The answer was 20% more than they were currently making. People making $50,000 wanted $60,000. At $100,000, they needed $120,000. And, so on. This suggests to me that false expectations about spending and poor money management are as consequential as income levels.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  Poverty in America is nothing new, from the creation of the USA the economic gap between the rich (British slave owners) and the poor (slaves) has expanded dramatically. Slavery by any other name “wage work” is still slavery. the USA large economic advantage is deeply tainted by how it was obtained (stolen) and accumulated over the course of one historical process (Colonialism and Imperialism) that has devastated the societies and cultures of four continents... “Poverty is not an accident. Like slavery and apartheid, it is man-made and can be removed by the actions of human beings. Overcoming poverty is not a gesture of charity, it is an act of justice.” ~ Nelson Mandela The UNDENIABLE REALITY is that: Most of our past and current “western” Economic Systems create Poverty, Greed, Violence, Disease, and Environmental Destruction "There is enough in the world for everyone's need, but not enough for everyone's greed." ~ Frank Buchman aka (Franklin Nathaniel Daniel Buchman) ~ Decorated by the French and German governments for his contributions to Franco-German reconciliation after World War II. ~ Born June 4, 1878 Pennsburg, Pennsylvania ~ Died August 7, 1961 Freudenstadt, West Germany
• Dolfan

  •

  2 years ago

  This is a result of more than just inflation. It goes together with the other thread about unrealistic expectations people develop from reality TV or social media and the conspicuous consumption culture feedback loop that exaggerates the effect. Instead of living a little below their means and building retirement and rainy day funds, people are spending every nickel they have flexing for the gram.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Another years-ago study correlated happiness with income. It found a correlation between happiness and income up to about $60,000 ( probably $80,000 in today’s dollars ). After that, more money didn’t make people happier over the long haul.
• Cashman1234

  •

  2 years ago

  I’m surprised that folks can’t save when making )100,000 a year. My guess is that those folks have either gotten into debt and won’t budget - or they simply don’t budget at all. There are many places in America where a $100,000 salary provides a very good standard of living. If a person has a reasonable budget, they can live nicely in many parts of this country. There are many folks who get in debt during college. This is not only student loans, but they get credit cards and make minimum payments, and run up a big tab. That’s foolish, and it’s not disciplined. That stuff leads to an adult who can’t understand how to allocate their earnings towards basic monthly bill payment. Sadly, those folks never think about opening a 401k or IRA - then they reach their 40’s and 50’s with no retirement savings (and no pension). In my view, financial literacy is a good skill and it should be part of the basic high school curriculum. It might start off with a simple understanding of a paycheck - to show what a salary becomes after taxes. They can also explain credit and credit cards - and the costs of making those frivolous purchases. Investments and the benefits of 401k accounts could be very helpful too.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  I had business partners, ostensibly smart people, who made $500,000 per year and had to take out loans to finance their lifestyle. I think a lot of people think they can spend their way to happiness. People at every level.
• Mate27

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ I have made 30% of the figure and live off 10%, but that’s just how much of a miser I am. Value is what you see with what you got, and I grew up with little and continue to live off little, but will pass on a lot to my loved ones. Do you know why? It’s because it will be exponentially more difficult to get ahead as time goes along, and the next generation will be priced out of many things if they don’t get assistance from their family, like education and a home. Planning really hoes a long way, but it takes several years, even decades, to see the payoff. Todays society puts an emphasis on immediate gratification, trained by corporate greed in their marketing tactics. Teach your kids to delay gratification so they can pay strippers to satisfy them when they get old!
• Cashman1234

  •

  2 years ago

  I agree with Mate27. Although I don’t plan my hoes that long away! Lol!
• skibum609

  •

  2 years ago

  Yeah, its always corporate greed to the lazy frauds of this world.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “Yeah, its always corporate greed that supports the lazy oligarchs of this world.” FTFY, YOU ARE WELCOME! @skibum609 In the USA today people have become psychologically conditioned to accept the current state of corruption and corporate greed. Decent American workers since the beginning have fought and died for the rights of the working class to have a better standard of living. For a fair days wage for a fair days work. The media now is just propaganda about the “evils of workers” and the “unfortunate wealthy owners” having to pay fair wages and follow the safety and environmental rules We are back to having unsafe working conditions, dumping toxic waste all over the world and having people work 70-80 hours a week. Slavery by any other name “Wage Work” is still Slavery. The USA society now is like in concentration camps, the selection process, work until you drop dead, stooges for the authorities, the guards and the 1%. People are being kept under control by the made up dramas and conflicts to keep their attention away from the lost of civil liberties and a decent fair standard of living for the people. While the coffers and bank accounts of the top 1% become more overfilled as the rest of society is sacrificing everything for nothing. THE UNDENIABLE REALITY IS THAT: “It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few.” ~ Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg ~ Born: 3rd January 2003 Stockholm, Sweden ~ Occupation: Student, environmental activist Awards: ~ Fritt Ord Award (2019) ~ Rachel Carson Prize (2019) ~ Ambassador of Conscience Award (2019) ~ Right Livelihood Award (2019) ~ International Children's Peace Prize (2019) ~ Time Person of the Year (2019) ~ Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity (2020)
• Htxx

  •

  2 years ago

  I can’t explain it, but just had my first ever 7 figure year after being in business almost 40 years now. I remember the lean times all to well so I live well below my means. Always have. My only vice? Strippers and lots of them. Bring on 2023 I’m ready!
• motorhead

  •

  2 years ago

  I can remember back, probably mid 90’s, I used to regularly drive to a favorite club most Saturday’s and would listen to some radio guy offering financial advice. Can’t remember his name. There was a doctors wife who called in. She claimed he made $400k per year but they were broke and lived paycheck to paycheck. I think that’s close to $800k today. Don’t know what their lifestyle was like that but that’s crazy
• Cashman1234

  •

  2 years ago

  This stuff is crazy. In all honesty, CJ Kent is too much involved in some bizarre conspiracy to understand the obvious truth regarding Americans. The fact is most Americans don’t want to have a budget. They have a sense of entitlement and a desire to consume beyond their means. When one has an income of $100,000 they have a decent income to live nicely in most parts of the country. They simply must make an effort to not spend beyond their means. This has nothing to do with government.
• Champphilly

  •

  2 years ago

  “Just over 47% of Americans earning more than $100,000 were living paycheck to paycheck as of November, spiking 4% from October“ What percent of that 47% have Strip Clb/OTC spending? Should be less than 5%. Fun goes on. 🤣🤣
• wallanon

  •

  2 years ago

  There is a thing called generational wealth. And generational debts. Just because a person's debt tends to die with them doesn't mean they weren't a resource vampire the entire time they were alive. Case in point, there are also things called families. And children. And parents. Spouses count, too, I guess. If we want be to make the assumption that every person starts at zero and only concerned with themselves, then it's easy to make an argument that people are lazy, idiots, or whatever. And there are many, many cases of one household or family member doing relatively well while the rest of it is in the dumps. But there are just as many cases (hopefully more) of people helping out their family even if it means they achieve their personal goals a little later. Some people are just bad with money or try to buy things they can't afford with money they don't have. But there's probably more nuance here than this platform affords.
• skibum609

  •

  2 years ago

  I have spent 40 years looking at financial statements filed in Court and the personal finances of thousands of people. This doesn't cont the 20-30 thousand of cases I have suffered through hearing while waiting in Court for my case to be called. The simple fact is people spend too much and they spend too much on stupid shit. Stupid shit #1 expenditure is about 90% of all people own too much car. I see people making 60-70k driving a 50k car. Sorry folks, 5-year-old camry is what you should drive. Stupid expenditure #2 is eating out/delivery; stupid expenditure #3, which is caused by 1and2 is carrying a credit card balance. Same as burning money. Credit cards didn't exist back in the day. mastercard was called masterCHARGE and Visa was Bank Americard. They were for convenience and to replace travelers' cheques, not for granting yourself a personal loan at 19% interest. #4 paying for too many electronics and subscriptions. No different than kittens with a ball of aluminum
• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  Saying it's people's fault for spending money on basic needs instead of saving is out of touch with reality. Skicuck I hope you enjoy your wife's union insurance and pension as much as other men enjoy her pussy
• wld4tatas

  •

  2 years ago

  Its always suckers who are fooled into defending the ultra-wealthy, and advising the average Joe should learn to live on less. Soaring markets helped the richest 1% gain $6.5 trillion in wealth last year, according to the Fed [view link]
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Dave Ramsey uses the term “ everyday millionaire “. These are people who have a net value between $1M and $5M. The vast, vast majority of these people earned every dollar they have. They worked long, stressful hours for decades, led a modest lifestyle, and invested every spare dollar. Along the way, they raised a family, gave to charity, and plan on leaving something to their children and grandchildren. These are the people the left calls the 1%, implying this money was handed to them, or they mysteriously stole it from those “ less fortunate”. The left believes this money should be taken by the government to be distributed to people claiming to be victims.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  It is just common sense, like I ask my students: Q: Do you think/believe that a person working 8 to 12 hours a day will honestly earn enough to become a millionaire? A: Not mathematically possible, it does not add up, is just common sense. “Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu'il a été proprement fait.” “The secret of a great success for which you are at a loss to account is a crime that has never been found out, because it was properly executed.” Often quoted as ‘Behind every great fortune lies a great crime’ ~ Le Père Goriot (1835)
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “More like 0.1% of regular ass humans (the oligarchs, the so called founding fathers, the politicians, the religious leaders, the puppet presidents, the rich and powerful, the snake oil salesmen, the con artists etc etc) tricking the rest of us into fighting among ourselves while they rob us blind.” ~ SanchoRG, Texas ~ Joined Aug, 2017
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  A: Not mathematically possible, it does not add up, is just common sense. Here’s the math. Someone who invests $500 every month, earning 10% per year ( the historical stock return ), will have over $1M after 30 years. This would be the case for someone making $60,000 per year and consistently putting 10% into their 401k from the age of 20 to 50. If they did this from 20 to 65, they’d have over $3M. Not everyone has the discipline to do this. The people who do are called millionaires. Some of them are plumbers,or accountants, or any other average American.
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Icee since when is a 50k car a necessity? When is food delivery a necessity? How did you turn these luxuries into necessities? Is that why you stole a car and looted protests?
• chiefwiggum

  •

  2 years ago

  I thought that this was common sense. We were taught this in high school, I thought it was bs when I first heard it. Most recently, my financial planner told me this when I first started working. Personally speaking, I had a lot of resistance to this. I was making $8.50/hr in high school and thought there is no way I could save this much. When I was doing summer work in college, it seemed like it was possible, but still really hard. My starting salary out of college was $60k and while a good sized chunk of my take home, it was still doable. I had to choose between this and a car. As I was/still am a consultant, it was easy to not have a car. Even living in Chicago and not working at all during the Obama recession, I still am slightly living ahead of schedule.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Here’s another one for you. Let’s say you graduate college at 21 and have a good enough job that you find someone willing to let you finance a $50,000 car over 5 years. But, instead, you buy a $10,000 used Honda and drive it for 5 years. Plus, you take all the money you would have used for payments and contribute aggressively to a 401k. The month you invested, instead of car payments for that one car, would be worth over $1M at retirement.
• ilbbaicnl

  •

  2 years ago

  $100K isn't a good as it may sound. Most of the better paying jobs are in cities where housing in a safer area will cost you $30K - 40K. And you'll be paying $20 - $25K in taxes. How far what you have left goes depends on a lot of things. Many people seem incapable of budgeting, let alone saving. Kids are expensive. Many people will now pay a vet bill in 4 figures rather than put their pet to sleep. I'm glad I didn't follow the advice to go to the "best" (generally most expensive) university you can. Doesn't seem to pay off for most people. Many people have lots of credit card debt, sometimes cause that's how they survived while unemployed. Many people don't feel they need savings because they have credit available to handle unexpected expenses.
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ Someone making 100K annually wouldn't be paying that much in taxes, depending where you live. Most jurisdictions your effective tax rate would be about 15% and if you have a few deductions you likely would be paying even less than that. 100K is solidly in the upper 35% of all wage earners, that means 65% of all Americans don't earn that much money. If you can't live comfortably on 100K you're doing something wrong.
• Muddy

  •

  2 years ago

  Well at the very least, don't these facts make you feel a little bit better about your situation. And here I was thinking I was bad.
• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  100k a year isn't much after taxes and paying 48k for an apartment. 100k in San Francisco or Los Angeles isn't the same as 100k in Mississippi or Arkansas
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ states the obvious What remarkable insights
• wld4tatas

  •

  2 years ago

  >These are the people the left calls the 1% This is a lie. We all respect those who have worked long, stressful hours for decades, to eventually save up enough to become a millionaire. However, these people are not representative of the top 1%. The vast chunk of the top 1% are corporate and Wall Street types who are siphoning off trillions from the hard work of the 99% below them, investing that money to acquire an even greater piece of the economic pie, or parking it in stocks with large dividend payouts and buybacks to receive further trillions in essentially free money. Some of the richest people acknowledge this and advocate for policies that distribute wealth more equitably. Others do not, and they love people who fight to protect them (knowingly or unwittingly) with classic right wing arguments like "Don't punish hard working people" and "Don't reward lazy people".
• motorhead

  •

  2 years ago

  ^^ “Don’t reward lazy people” But the simple fact is today’s modern governments do. Public welfare is now the single largest category of expenditure in state and local budgets. More than on schools, highways and roads, and law enforcement
• gammanu95

  •

  2 years ago

  There are income levels where paycheck-to-paycheck isn't a choice. I think anywhere over a household income of $65,000 (barring extraordinary circumstances) it is a choice. Choices that can increase discretionary funds: Drop the streaming. All of them. Drop any premium cable channels, drop any subscription services. Hell you can do away with cable and satellite radio and just do like we did in the early 80s. That is the fastest and easiest way for any family to save money. Eat out less or not at all. If you do eat out, get your lazy ass out the door and get it yourself. I have never, ever used grubhub, doordash, or UberEats. I never use any personal shopper. Once in a rare while I will order pizza for delivery. It amazes me how many convenience services people have to come to think of as an indispensable part of their daily lives. Examine your household energy habits. Where do you set your thermostat? How many lights do you use? How long and how hot are your showers? are TVs left on for background noise and company? These may come across as common sense questions, but I know most people don't do the hard work of examining their budgets. I know so many people who would rather be paycheck-to-paycheck than make a few small sacrifices to alleviate that stress and start saving up for luxury items and emergencies. They just plan to put the Hawaiian vacation or the emergency surgery on their credit card and make minimum payments.
• Tetradon

  •

  2 years ago

  Look at people like this bloke who claims to make $350,000 a year but lives paycheck to paycheck. [view link] "While having a high income is great, there’s a concept called Parkinson’s Law, which essentially states that your spending will always rise to meet your income no matter how high that income rises," I'll admit my lifestyle has expanded with my income--I wanted to cut down on my Uber Eats. It's addictive to be able to say "I want Indian, or sushi, or Korean (or something else I don't know how to cook) today" and two minutes of clicking plus a 45 minute wait and it appears at my door. Everyone can afford a few luxuries, but not luxury everything. There was a whole other thread about this. I drive a 10-year-old car that I plan to run into the ground. I pay a $3,000 mortgage rather than the $1,000 rent I paid five years ago with roommates, but there's no room to build in my city so housing prices keep increasing. If anything I regret not buying a year before. Most of my clothing is pretty cheap, too. Take a look at your finances. My credit card statement automatically groups purchases by food, gas, etc. I rarely use greenbacks for anything other than clubbing, so my bank itemizes that well, too. Take a good hard look, and you can see where you can really save and what's just nibbling at the margins. You might be surprised.
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Uber eats and maybe other services have a pickup option now. Once in a while there are deals available to where you can save significantly when buying on uber eats, especially of you do the pickup option
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Icee where are you getting the 48k apartment number from? Its more like 24k, 30k tops... thats in the nicest parts A luxurious apartment is not a necessity, you’ve labelled all kinds of odd things as necessities, earlier you were saying meal delivery services are essential ??
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  The UNDENIABLE reality is that: “The system is rigged against our citizens” ~ Donald J Trump Trump has publicly admitted he has used the system to benefit himself and his accomplices, and brags about not paying taxes: 'That makes me smart'… The USA capitalist/imperialist system is, and has been since it’s birth, producing excessive inequality all over the world. “To him that hath, more shall be given; and from him that hath not, the little that he hath shall be taken away. The rich have become richer, and the poor have become poorer; and the vessel of the State is driven between the Scylla and Charybdis of anarchy and despotism." ~ Percy Bysshe Shelley ~ Born 4 August 1792 Field Place, Warnham, West Sussex, England ~ Died 8 July 1822 (aged 29) Gulf of La Spezia, Kingdom of Sardinia (now Italy)
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  The UNDENIABLE truth is that: “The country is governed for the richest, for the corporations, the bankers, the land speculators, and for the exploiters of labor. The majority of mankind are working people. So long as their fair demands — the ownership and control of their livelihoods — are set at naught, we can have neither men’s rights nor women’s rights. The majority of mankind is ground down by industrial oppression in order that the small remnant may live in ease.” ~ Helen Adams Keller ~ Born June 27, 1880 Tuscumbia, Alabama, USA ~ Died June 1, 1968 Easton, Connecticut, USA
• motorhead

  •

  2 years ago

  ^^ Sounds to me you would prefer a “Logan’s Run” type Utopia. And we know how well that works out - well, except for getting to see Jenny Agutter naked
• bang69

  •

  2 years ago

  Most American's are living pay check to pay check.
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Since when have a 3-4k apartment or food delivery services been necessities...
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” ~ Charles Darwin, Voyage of the Beagle
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “I pray for the day when working men and women are able to earn a fair share of the wealth they produce in a capitalist system, a day when all Americans are able to enjoy the freedom, rights and opportunities guaranteed them by the Constitution of the United States of America.” ~ Mother Jones ~ Jerry Ash, Hellraiser—Mother Jones: An Historical Novel
• ilbbaicnl

  •

  2 years ago

  [view link]
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Living in LA, SF, or NYC is a choice. For those with moderate incomes, it might be an IQ test. Someone making $50,000 to $75,000 finds it nearly impossible to provide for a family in those cities. However, in most places in the US, that’s enough to live comfortably.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  There was a groundbreaking study/book in 1996 called The Millionaire Next Door. According to Wiki: “The authors compare the behaviour of those they call "UAWs" (Under Accumulators of Wealth) and those who are "PAWs" (Prodigious Accumulators of Wealth). Their findings, that millionaires are disproportionately clustered in middle-class and blue-collar neighborhoods and not in more affluent or white-collar communities, came as a surprise to the authors who anticipated the contrary. Stanley and Danko's book explains why, noting that high-income white-collar professionals are more likely to devote their income to luxury goods or status items, thus neglecting savings and investments.”
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  People in their 60s and 70s grew up in a time where the typical household had fewer financial demands. Smaller houses. Fewer cars. Modest vacations. No social media telling us we were failures unless could afford to buy myriad things. For us, living below our means seems natural. Younger people grew up in an environment where they were bombarded with media telling them the key to happiness was living a celebrity lifestyle. Driving the right cars. Exotic vacations. Designer clothes. All the tech. For younger people, living below your means is a bizarre concept.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  The first, and best, explanation of all this is the classic economic study by Thorstein Veblens called “ Theory of the Leisure Class” where he coined the phrase “ Conspicuous Consumption”.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  For anyone interested in living a simpler life, I recommend reading Walden by Henry David Thoreau. Reading it could change your life.
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Mark dont some economists say the veblen goods as he described them don’t actually exist?
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  The UNDENIABLE truth is that: America’s institutions, the government, education, and culture, all contribute or reinforce, to this day, the oppression of marginalized social groups of poor people of every color and nationality while protecting dominant social groups of mainly rich white elites and their criminal allies of every color and nationality. UNDENIABLE…
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  The undeniable truth is you get what you earn, if you work hard, you'll do just fine. Undeniable
• Muddy

  •

  2 years ago

  I agree nobody wants to go down in lifestyle. You only go up. But when that incomes goes down or gets inflated out most want to keep on a truckin.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Those on the right believe that most people are competent and capable of taking care of themselves and making educated decisions. Those on the left believe most people ( other than themselves, of course ) are weak, incompetent, bigoted, and uneducated. These great unwashed require the government to keep them in line and make decisions for them. And, of course, anyone on the right who becomes successful must have cheated, stolen, or had the money handed to them.
• rickdugan

  •

  2 years ago

  ===> "If you can't live comfortably on 100K you're doing something wrong." Maybe if you're single, childless and have the flexibility to choose where you live. But otherwise that's a broad statement that is far from universally true. For starters, a lot of people who make over 100k have to live in expensive areas near their jobsites. These areas also tend to have higher state taxes in additional to the federal nut. When you have 20-25% of your income being skimmed off the top between federal and state taxes and then have to shell out at least another 30k a year for a decent place to live (and often more), suddenly $100k doesn't seem like a heck of a lot. That leaves about 4k per month to cover everything else, including transportation expenses, student loans, food, electric and other utilities, local taxes on your car (called an excise tax in the northern states), out-of-pocket medical/dental expenses, car repairs, etc., etc. Sure it's definitely doable, but one misstep with a large unexpected bill that puts you in debt (like a big car repair) and you get into a hole that's hard to dig out of. Tbh I'd rather make $60k living in a cheaper inland area in Florida than $100k living anywhere near Boston, NYC or pretty much anywhere in CA. It's not even close. Everything is so much cheaper, including housing (a fraction), income taxes (none), annual car tax (none), electricity (half the cost or even less), no annual inspection sticker bullshit with mechanics holding older car owners up for repairs...I could go on. Then there are the kiddos. Again doable if you can find a cheap enough area, but there's a lot they aren't going to have. You won't be able to live in an area with the best public schools because that always drives property values up a lot. You also won't be able to afford many of the more expensive kids activities, at least if they become any good at something. Just for one of my kids I was spending north of $10k per year for several years on lesson fees and competition costs (including competition fees and travel expenses). I have 3 kids and this child wasn't the only one in activities - 'nuff said. I could go on. 100k just isn't nearly what it used to be in a lot of places.
• nicespice

  •

  2 years ago

  —>“People in their 60s and 70s grew up in a time where the typical household had fewer financial demands. Smaller houses. Fewer cars. Modest vacations. No social media telling us we were failures unless could afford to buy myriad things. For us, living below our means seems natural. “ Interesting. When you were talking about people in their 60s and 70s living below their means, do you mean in their private life? [view link] Or in the public life? [view link] But yeah, lots of young people are really obsessed with driving a prestigious car. [view link]
• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  The cosplay millionaire just wants to sound important. But forget about 100k look at what most people make. Say 35k. Life is getting unlivable
• Cashman1234

  •

  2 years ago

  Rick makes an important distinction regarding how far money will go. Some areas are true black holes of taxation. Living in a liberal state and in a liberal county - in NJ - I know the pain of a tax burden on a state and county level. Add in the fact that I sent my kids to private schools - and the tax expense provides little benefit. I think NiceSpice is correct about folks wanting prestigious cars. Although, in my area folks don’t blink an eye when they see a nice Mercedes or a BMW. I believe owning an expensive car - before owning a home, is a mistake. In my view, a person should own an inexpensive car and they should seek to buy the nicest house (in a good community). That way you spend less on a depreciable vehicle - and you have more invested in an appreciable home., I think folks come out of college with student loans, and then add to their debt with an expensive car purchase. They struggle to cover the cost of car payments, and they struggle more when they realize the service costs of an expensive car. The student loan payments add to their financial troubles, and they can barely make rent. This kills any ability to save money. When these folks finally get solvent enough to save, they don’t have that long of a time horizon, and they end up having to gamble on stock purchases, and they can easily get hurt and lose a lot.
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  Not an awful lot of people living on 100K in those expensive area's you're talking about Rick, and the facts are fairly simple, there's just not a lot of people making over 100K anyplace, according to the last census less than 35% of the population earns 100K or more. Here's the facts from State Single Couple Family of four U.S. average $26,093 – $78,280 $36,902 – $110,705 $52,187 – $156,560 Of course there are outliers and some folks will have circumstances different from the majority, But overall if you earn 100K you can pretty much count on living a middle class lifestyle if you choose to
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  @twentyfive “The UNDENIABLE truth, in America, working men and women do not “earn” a fair share of the wealth they produce workers don't get what they deserve, even when they work hard, just like the slaves… Because according to Trump himself; “The system is rigged against our citizens”” FTFY, YOU ARE WELCOME!
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ Funny you spiked the ball but you didn’t even reach the end zone Typical LULZ
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  "It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country." — President Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933 Minimum wage legislation emerged at the end of the nineteenth century from the desire to end sweated labor which had developed in the wake of industrialization, however the issue of the exploitation of Americans by Americans continues continues to this day in one form or another.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  Remember the UNDENIABLE fact: "There is enough in the world for everyone's need, but not enough for everyone's greed."
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ It seems to me that any doofus that has a mind of their own can articulate their points without trying to convolute shit that may have been said centuries ago to be relevant now. What a dope Maybe you should shut up seeing as you have nothing to say yourself.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  Remember children "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser” ~ Socrates :D
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “The owner, the employees, and the buying public are all one and the same, and unless an industry can so manage itself as to keep wages high and prices low it destroys itself, for otherwise it limits the number of its customers. One's own employees ought to be one's own best customers.” ~ Henry Ford, 1926
• rickdugan

  •

  2 years ago

  ===> "Not an awful lot of people living on 100K in those expensive area's you're talking about Rick..." You couldn't be more wrong 25. The median household income in most of the suburbs of Boston and NYC is well north of 100k. It would be even higher if you factored in government healthcare subsidies. In the cities themselves it is a little lower, but would be much higher if you factored in the value of government subsidized housing, federal and state health insurance subsidies, EBT and WIC. Keep in mind too that those median household numbers include retirees who have already paid there houses off and can live on modest income. If you exed out retirees with paid off homes and people living in subsidized housing, the median numbers would be MUCH higher. Someone just starting out of HS or college in those expensive areas is facing a MUCH different environment than their parents or grandparents faced in their times.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  Even a child from Sweden has been able to see and describe the UNDENIABLE Reality… “It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few.” ~ Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg ~ Born: 3rd January 2003 Stockholm, Sweden ~ Occupation: Student, environmental activist Awards: ~ Fritt Ord Award (2019) ~ Rachel Carson Prize (2019) ~ Ambassador of Conscience Award (2019) ~ Right Livelihood Award (2019) ~ International Children's Peace Prize (2019) ~ Time Person of the Year (2019) ~ Gulbenkian Prize for Humanity (2020)
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ Moron It’s easy to trigger you you just keep repeating the same meaningless shit over and over, too funny
• Tetradon

  •

  2 years ago

  @25, why do you expect CJKunt to actually address anything you're saying? He repeats the same three irrelevant quotes on every thread. Just pretend he doesn't exist.
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ It’s funny
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  But, digital currency will provide wealth for all.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  @twentyfive The truth hurts, but if you accept it, it will set you free…
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ LOL The agony LOL
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  @twentyfive You’re not supposed to be so blind with patriotism, ageism, nationalism, indoctrination that you can’t face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or who says it, neither when or where it was done or said.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  “I don't get why some of you are so butthurt about the truth.” ~ IceyLoco ~ May 25th 2020 :D
• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  "twentyfive You’re not supposed to be so blind with patriotism, ageism, nationalism, indoctrination that you can’t face reality." It's called being senile
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  ^ Tweedledum and tweedledee are hilarious Between the two of them, they don’t have an original thought.
• CJKent_band

  •

  2 years ago

  Remember children "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser” ~ Socrates :D
• ilbbaicnl

  •

  2 years ago

  The structural government deficit began under Reagan, and it's true that boomers were the majority of the electorate when Reagan came to power. But they (I never voted for Reagan) were more bamboozled than greedy. The benefit only went to a fraction of the boomers (the most wealthy). I'd compare it to how later generations were bamboozled into getting saddled so much student debt. If you can get a high income in a low-tax location (that still somehow has good public schools if you need them), that's a no brainer. But the higher income opportunities seem be in places with higher state and/or local taxes, so it gets complicated.Tijuana Re conspicuous consumption, hard to characterize generations accurately, as it varies a lot within generations. But, when I was younger, I remember women bragging a lot about shopping at expensive, "upscale" stores. Most strippers I know are more focused on clothing that expresses their personal aesthetic, and they're proud to say it when they got it for a low price from Shein.
• ilbbaicnl

  •

  2 years ago

  No idea how "Tijuana" got inserted in my last post, maybe it's some PHP feature.
• captainfun

  •

  2 years ago

  In addition to what others have stated about overspending on cars, restaurants, allowing credit card bills is people have a tendency to blow their pay raise or bonus before it’s even in hand which just continues the trend of spending every nickel that comes in. As in, I just got a $5k bonus, let’s go on a $5k vacation and that bonus payment actually nets you $3k after taxes and you’ve dug a hole that is $2k deeper than before.
• captainfun

  •

  2 years ago

  Someone else referenced the Millionaire Next Door book. Good read for you young bucks trying to learn about how to save. In it one of the great stories was about how they hosted a gathering of millionaires in a hotel meeting room. They put out a fancy spread with ‘high end’ food like caviar and shrimp and no one ate it. When they asked the attendees why they didn’t partake they basically said we don’t eat that stuff; give me chips and a sandwich. Most of the attendees were regular working people who were smart savers, not Wall St types making bank.
• ilbbaicnl

  •

  2 years ago

  Definitely an effective money-saving technique, to shame the poor instead of helping them. And remember, time is money. It takes time to look at a realistic budget for a young family supporting itself through lower-paid work in service jobs. It takes much less time to tell them to eat potato chips instead of caviar, and they'll thus become millionaires.
• skibum609

  •

  2 years ago

  People are poor because there is always some liberal to make excuses and enact programs to keep them poor.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  Several years ago, someone did a study of food aid going to Africa. They discovered, in areas that got regular food aid, people had stopped farming. It was a rational decision since food was available for free. The people became dependent on the aid and lost the knowledge of farming. You want to help the poor ? Tie any aid to them either getting a job or entering a training program. Don’t take away their ambition and self respect.
• mark94

  •

  2 years ago

  I think I’ll try this: “FTX paid roughly $84 million in 2020 to take a majority stake in Blockfolio, in what was then among the largest crypto acquisitions. About 94% was paid in FTT tokens, a cryptocurrency that FTX created”
• skibum609

  •

  2 years ago

  I am amazed that anyone could lose money in a Ponzi scheme.................
• twentyfive

  •

  2 years ago

  The guy (Sam Bankman Freud) just made bail of 250 million dollars he claimed he was broke with less than 200 thousand dollars how did he get bail granted?
• rickmacrodong

  •

  2 years ago

  Ricky so this is an actual thing mechanics do? Lie about the problems in older cars in order to get repair money?
• Icee Loco (asshole)

  •

  2 years ago

  Mark saying cutting aid to the poor helps them is on par with him saying one income is better than 2 and Trump won the election
• skibum609

  •

  2 years ago

  We should ban aid to the poor, which would solve the illegal alien rat infestation.