Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 390 posts

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#181

Post by aparks517 »

in_cahoots wrote: post #142
sys_64738 wrote: post #128

Show us your incoming wage and outgoings then we can discuss whether you are living paycheck to paycheck. Living paycheck to paycheck means your needs are not being met rather than your wants. Cable (free OTA), eating out at all (pack sandwiches), heat (wear more clothing), etc, are all things which need to be cut if you think your outgoings are greater than income.

In many parts of the country, cutting heat is impossible. Disregarding the fact that it’s nearly impossible to find enough clothing to stay warm long-term when the temperature drops below 20 degrees Fahrenheit or so, pipes will start to burst when the indoor temperature falls below freezing as well.

Sure, you can’t just turn it off where I live. But reducing the temperature somewhat can have a larger than expected impact on heating cost, especially in homes with poor thermal resistance. Personally, I’d cut the cable TV first (and did).

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#182

Post by leetcrew »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #146
zozbot123 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposite is the case. High rent is a localized problem (mostly found in relatively dense cities) and UBI would go a lot farther in a low-cost-of-living area where rents are low as well. So, people who have no use for living in the city (not hyper-productive or anything) would gradually opt to spread out and rents would fall.

High rent is localised? The whole of the UK has high rent AFAICT, our very poor city has high rent. Rental means paying the costs of property plus paying profit to someone who is already well off enough to front some capital (or at least to get a mortgage) plus paying profits for the bank ... how could renting ever be reasonable priced in a system that requires those without capital to pay those with capital just bec…

> how could renting ever be reasonable priced in a system that requires those without capital to pay those with capital just because those with money already have enough money.

landlords aren't guaranteed to make money. it's true that monthly rent is almost always higher than the monthly mortgage payment on that property, but the landlord can only profit if, in the long run, the difference between the rent and the mortgage is greater than the overall cost of maintenance and possible devaluation of the property.

personally, I could afford to put a down payment on a mortgage if I really wanted a house where I live, but for now I am happy to pay extra for the ability to relocate at the end of the lease and to avoid the risk of actually owning a house.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#183

Post by cpwright »

ianleeclark wrote: post #106
learnstats2 wrote: post #94

Living paycheck-to-paycheck can be representative of good choices being made (and I'd guess it is, in most cases). Most people can't afford everything they optimally need while minimising their risk, and so have to manage this by optimising as much as they are able within their paycheck. People with limited resources are going to hit a barrier somewhere, and spending your income is often going to be the least bad bar…

> Most people can't afford everything they optimally need while minimising their risk, and so have to manage this by optimising as much as they are able within their paycheck. Not being able to afford basic necessities-in the most wealthy nation in the world-indicates something being broken.

I think the point is that living paycheck isn't indicative of not being able to afford basic necessities. It is the desire to spend most of your income on more than what are actually basic necessities.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#184

Post by zozbot123 »

kenmicklas wrote: post #154
zozbot123 wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The opposite is the case. High rent is a localized problem (mostly found in relatively dense cities) and UBI would go a lot farther in a low-cost-of-living area where rents are low as well. So, people who have no use for living in the city (not hyper-productive or anything) would gradually opt to spread out and rents would fall.

That's exactly the problem. It would encourage unsustainable sprawl to a massive degree.

Unsustainable sprawl is a side-effect of high rents. When rent is low, people tend to cluster naturally in order to minimize their costs (and hence, the burden they exert on the surrounding environment) because they can afford to - you see this happening even (perhaps especially) in tiny rural villages and towns, not just in the wealthiest cities.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#186

Post by danieltillett »

dragonwriter wrote: post #150
HarryHirsch wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble is, in America the bigger mortgage often comes with a better school district.

> The trouble is, in America the bigger mortgage often comes with a better school district. That's because our metric for school and school district quality largely is a measure of effects of socioeconomic status of the students, not anything the schools actually produce. So, yes, the schools in areas that have a higher buy-in cost have better marks, because they have on-average students better set-up for success. Th…

It is actually more due to the students who are not there. Yes it is true that the actual teaching is little better between districts, but the number of disruptive students that prevent any learning is vastly less in the expensive districts.

If you have the ability to kick out any student who is disruptive you can turn any school in any area into a high quality school.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#187

Post by sokoloff »

nunez wrote: post #159
spidey1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you manage this conflict? I think a lot of us suffer from this at different scales. I've always found it difficult to work on things that will pay off in the future, even if I plan something I just don't seem to be able to carry through a long term project to the end unless I'm in an environment where there's accountability such as deadlines on projects at work. I'm very prone to instant gratification, which i…

The way I "managed" it long-term was by creating a spreadsheet of all of the things I really want (like, spent years wanting) and their costs, adding them up, buffering it a little and saying "that's my target number, and I'm sticking to it." Last time I did this, I calculated that $5M is my number. This would generate about $200k/year with 4% return and withdrawal rate. Everything I do in my career is centered aroun…

Aren’t those carpet cleaner rentals only $30 for 24-hours and at most home centers and grocers? I get wanting to have clean carpets, but I’d much rather rent and not have to deal with storing the thing, let alone buying it.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#188

Post by anigbrowl »

mac01021 wrote: post #124
SmirkingRevenge wrote: post #28

As someone who didn't learn the very basics of personal finance at the optimal point in life, I feel like it should be part of our standardized education. I'd like to think that would make things at least marginally better. Another thing I'd love to see, would be for banks to fundamentally reorient themselves to be their customer's advocates/financial guardians, instead of being yet another party encouraging people t…

So, when you log into the Bank of America website, you want to be greeted every time with things like the following? "Dude, maybe you should sell this car that you're paying $450 per month for and get a $7000 used car." "Did you know that between starbucks and happy hour you spend an average of $120 per week, and that amounts to 10% of your take-home pay?" "You currently spend $2500 per month on rent. If you downsize…

An automated fiduciary would be a huge boon, the robotic equivalent of a piggy bank. But it should be client side; it's role is to screen you from from being exploited by those who you do business with, including your bank.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#189

Post by sokoloff »

diminoten wrote: post #145
zeta0134 wrote: post #104

One of the simplest and most effective things I did recently was to split my bank account into two checking accounts, and one savings account. I carry two debit cards with me that are visually distinct. One is for day to day purchases, and the other is meant for bills and the occasional unusual expense, like maybe tools for a surprise home repair. Each time I get paid (every two weeks) I have my employer deposit the…

By not making use of credit cards, you're losing out on thousands of dollars every year.

Several hundred? Yes. “Thousands”? Not very likely for most people to be plural thousands per year.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#190

Post by golemiprague »

scarface74 wrote: post #11

If I took a job at a unprofitable startup that was VC backed, I would understand the risks and ask for the appropriate compensation and have a larger cushion than normal. On the other hand, the only reason for working at a government job is short term stability - you “know” the federal government has access to capital to pay you and the long term stability of pensions, lifetime healthcare etc. But now, on the federal…

[dead]
Post reply on HN