Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common • Hacker News Board

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#211

Post by rland » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:16 PM UTC

matis140 wrote: post #107

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…

Another change, but one much harder to manage is that many of the products people buy today have no value left after 2-4 years and some both have no value after 2-4 years and do things degrading their performance forcing you to again purchase an expensive item that does nothing to build wealth. Vehicles, electronics, home appliances all sit at something like a max of 8-11 years of use and loose 30-50% of their value…

Things were repairable in the past because they were both mechanically simple and far more expensive up front. If you want, you can live as people did in the 50s and spend $2,000 for an automatic dishwasher, $3,000 for a washer/dryer combo, and $4,000 for a refrigerator. If you spend that much today, you will get something that will last you decades.

But you probably won't. Instead, you'll go for something that is a third of the price, and it'll last you about 10 years.

In particular: cars are far more reliable and efficient than they were even 10 or 20 years ago.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#212

Post by wonderwonder » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:18 PM UTC

danieltillett wrote: post #186

dragonwriter wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

This is then compounded by giving more money to the successful schools and less to the failing schools. This seems paradoxical as most students are zoned for a school and don't get to elect to transfer to a better one. So they are stuck in a bad school that is going to get worse due to reduced funding for failing. So kids who's parents can afford to send them to a good school district are rewarded driving home that generally where you start socio-economically is where you end up.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#213

Post by demarq » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:30 PM UTC

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…

I would absolutely love this!!!

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#214

Post by jchw » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:35 PM UTC

leoedin wrote: post #27

perfmode wrote: post #6

Don’t discount the weight of emotional trauma and the self-sabotaging habits it has the potential to engender. Most people are slaves to their limbic systems. Most people don’t have self-education or resources to seek the help they need to fix these underlying problems. Society does them no favors. Media and advertising are designed to promote consumption. And not even healthy consumption. The idea that we are black…

I think the very fact that people in wildly different circumstances are living paycheck to paycheck is a huge flag that this isn't as simple a problem as "they don't get paid enough". Income and expenses are intricately linked by psychology. It's almost irrelevant what your paycheck is, if you're prone to this problem then somehow expenses will always rise to meet it. If expenses weren't actually determined by payche…

I think a lot of people misunderstand. Before I had a nice tech job, I literally could not afford to do my dental work or take care of my car. So later on, when I started, it costed a lot more. And I spent it, because it's important.

Same can be said about many expenses. When you don't have the money, you make it work even if you can't. When you do, you gotta balance it out again. Saving your money isn't as important as saving your life. Saving your automobile might be cheaper than having to buy another later. Etc, etc.

So, just because this problem exists among a wide range of paychecks doesn't mean shit really, because paychecks scale with rent and people are suffering to make the rent as it is. I would argue for most people, the trouble isn't their attitude. It's that wages ultimately grow far, far slower than living expenses and inflation, and cuts have been made to essential expenses at the cost of degraded quality of life.

A lot of people harp on others for buying frivolously but frankly an iPhone every year would be a drop in the bucket compared to my medical expenses, maintenance and gas for my car, etc. My monthly rent is more than three iPhone XS Maxes and it's literally within a couple hundred of the cheapest thing I could find in a 20 mile radius. Don't get me wrong, it's great and I'm not complaining, but it still puts things into perspective.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think everything that needs to be said is already covered by graphing minimum wage vs inflation. That's a lot of folks real realities today.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#215

Post by supertrope » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:35 PM UTC

ip26 wrote: post #67

wccrawford wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's human psychology. Below a certain level, your mind will simply talk itself into spending your available money to make you happy. You don't need that car. A car half the price would have been plenty good enough. But you did it anyhow. You don't need fancy breakfast cereal that costs twice what the generic stuff at Aldi costs. You don't need all those electronics and toys. You don't need to eat out that much. If y…

The "funny" part I think would be how rent, child care, student loans and medical bills tend to scale in cost to your locale, so despite your well paid job, your cost of living has gone up to match. It might be expected & natural for that to happen, but it's still kind of... "funny" if you look at it from a certain angle.

Child care, education, and medical are labor intensive. It's not like making widgets in a factory that can double in per worker productivity every two years. Industries that don't mechanize like a string quartet playing Mozart still command higher wages over time because they need to afford their bills too.

Real estate is limited by the supply of desirable land. Location, location, location.

I'm fairly sure that student loans do not scale with locale. That payment is the same no matter where you move to after graduation but it's easier to earn it in a high cost of living (unless housing costs are so high that your free cash flow is less).

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#216

Post by demarq » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:35 PM UTC

apo wrote: post #108

National data on the paycheck-to-paycheck experience is flimsy, but a recent report from the Federal Reserve spotlights the prevalence of extra-tight budgets: Four in 10 adults say they couldn’t produce $400 in an emergency without sliding into debt or selling something, according to the 2017 figures. This quote links to a report from the Federal Reserve, which contains this gem: When asked about their finances, 74 p…

Also just not having a plan. I can usually tell how I'm doing by looking at my financial goals and comparing them to what my numbers are.

Goals force you to think beyond paying for your cable subscription!

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#217

Post by claydavisss » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:45 PM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #85

tjr225 wrote: post #2

"They work in big cities and rural towns. They’ve tried to save — but rent, child care, student loans and medical bills get in the way." Yikes. I'm not exactly living paycheck to paycheck, but I can relate to this. It's really funny - my wife and I make quite a bit of money - whatever twisted form of capitalism we currently live in has been designed in such a way to extract most of it away from us. One begins to wond…

The problem is not a "twisted form of capitalism". The problem is us . In the 1950s, a family could live on one blue-collar salary. You could probably live on a single blue-collar salary today, too - but you'd live like people did in the 1950s. You would eat out very rarely. You wouldn't have college debt because you wouldn't have a college degree. You'd only have one car. You'd have only one TV for the whole house.…

the 1950s in the US were a unique blip in all of modern history.

at no other time before or since did a working class population have it so good.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#218

Post by supertrope » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:49 PM UTC

derekp7 wrote: post #10

tjr225 wrote: post #2

"They work in big cities and rural towns. They’ve tried to save — but rent, child care, student loans and medical bills get in the way." Yikes. I'm not exactly living paycheck to paycheck, but I can relate to this. It's really funny - my wife and I make quite a bit of money - whatever twisted form of capitalism we currently live in has been designed in such a way to extract most of it away from us. One begins to wond…

You bring up a good point, that even people who make decent money still can't get ahead much more than those making close to minimum wage. Why is this? My theory, is that life is full of stress, and throwing money at problems can make some causes of stress diminish. Whereas a minimum wage worker will shovel his own driveway, a higher paid office worker may typically have a snow plow contractor on retainer (for them i…

There's nothing inherently better about any specific trade-off between time and money.

Not buying a car and riding the bus saves hundreds of dollars per month but costs hours a day. Eating out saves the effort of cooking and washing dishes. Hiring a maid might be used out of laziness or to eek out more family time.

I have to remind myself to try to focus on what really makes my life better. Usually that involves estimating time+money+intangible factors. And if it will still be useful in a year.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#219

Post by wildmusings » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 10:59 PM UTC

perfmode wrote: post #6

Don’t discount the weight of emotional trauma and the self-sabotaging habits it has the potential to engender. Most people are slaves to their limbic systems. Most people don’t have self-education or resources to seek the help they need to fix these underlying problems. Society does them no favors. Media and advertising are designed to promote consumption. And not even healthy consumption. The idea that we are black…

Both perspectives need to coexist. Yes, human beings are partially products of their environment. But that environment includes the moral disapproval of others, and people do respond to internalized moral sentiments. Those moral sentiments can be undermined by too many excuses accepted or made on their behalf.

Some people are naturally more conscientious than others. Their moral burden is lighter. Life is unfair like that, but the answer isn’t to exonerate the rest of us from moral responsibility for managing our own affairs. On the contrary, those moral sentiments are most important for those who struggle with self-discipline.

Which is not to say that it’s wrong to try to organize society to give people a better chance at succeeding in their moral struggles. But at the end of it all, every man must carry his own cross.

Re: Living paycheck to paycheck is disturbingly common

#220

Post by walshemj » Mon, Dec 31, 2018, 11:02 PM UTC

ohithereyou wrote: post #193

nunez wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your parents are able to pay for your college tuition, you are provided with a much stronger launch pad. Ain't that the truth. I've spent 10 years at ~$1300/month paying my student loans down. I'm two years from done, but that would have been half a mortgage paid off! To be fair, though, I knew squat about personal finance coming out of college, so I probably would've burned the money some other way.

Quick back of the envelope calculation ($1300/month * 12 months/year * 12 years = $187,200) shows part of the problem - either college should not be necessary (we need a programmer's guild) or the cost of college is way too high.

guild ? you know that historically they where set up to restrict access