It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
1–10 of 38 posts
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#2I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon.
That's between 1/7th and 1/8th of adults responding to a survey, some of whom presumably have kids to look after. This guy seems so in love with demonstrating his statistical abilities that it's made him dismissive of ~30-35 million people with severe cash flow problems.
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#3I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. That's between 1/7th and 1/8th of adults responding to a survey, some of whom presumably have kids to look after. This guy seems so in love with dem…
He isn’t dismissing those people or their hardships, he is saying that the actual number of 40% that many politicians use is disingenuous.
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#4I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. That's between 1/7th and 1/8th of adults responding to a survey, some of whom presumably have kids to look after. This guy seems so in love with dem…
He isn’t dismissing those people or their hardships, he is saying that the actual number of 40% that many politicians use is disingenuous.
He's dismissing it by saying people who can't come up with $400 in cash, can put it on their credit cards or borrow it from friends or family. That's pretty dismissive because the issue is that most people doing even reasonably well should really should be able to pay an emergency $400 bill in cash.
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#5I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. That's between 1/7th and 1/8th of adults responding to a survey, some of whom presumably have kids to look after. This guy seems so in love with dem…
He isn’t dismissing those people or their hardships, he is saying that the actual number of 40% that many politicians use is disingenuous.
I'm not having trouble understanding the article, I'm responding to the specific part that I quoted, and fairly I think.
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
He isn’t dismissing those people or their hardships, he is saying that the actual number of 40% that many politicians use is disingenuous.
He's dismissing it by saying people who can't come up with $400 in cash, can put it on their credit cards or borrow it from friends or family. That's pretty dismissive because the issue is that most people doing even reasonably well should really should be able to pay an emergency $400 bill in cash.
Except for the fact that the sort of person who cannot come up with USD 400 in cash is also the sort of person who has a poor credit rating and no credit cards, and most likely their peer group of friends and family are in exactly the same situation. This is the same sort of tone deaf advice that rich people give about starting your own company - "Why can't these poor people just borrow a few hundred thousand dollars from the family trust fund like I did, they must just be shiftless and lazy" - and should be dismissed in the same way. I suspect the author has neither been short of money in their life, nor met anyone else who was...
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's dismissing it by saying people who can't come up with $400 in cash, can put it on their credit cards or borrow it from friends or family. That's pretty dismissive because the issue is that most people doing even reasonably well should really should be able to pay an emergency $400 bill in cash.
Except for the fact that the sort of person who cannot come up with USD 400 in cash is also the sort of person who has a poor credit rating and no credit cards, and most likely their peer group of friends and family are in exactly the same situation. This is the same sort of tone deaf advice that rich people give about starting your own company - "Why can't these poor people just borrow a few hundred thousand dollars…
Not to mention the fact that a $400 dollar emergency is on the low end. In my experience, most emergencies that have cropped up have been closer to the $700-800 price (Doctor bills (after negotiation), vet bills, temporary relocation, etc).
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except for the fact that the sort of person who cannot come up with USD 400 in cash is also the sort of person who has a poor credit rating and no credit cards, and most likely their peer group of friends and family are in exactly the same situation. This is the same sort of tone deaf advice that rich people give about starting your own company - "Why can't these poor people just borrow a few hundred thousand dollars…
Not to mention the fact that a $400 dollar emergency is on the low end. In my experience, most emergencies that have cropped up have been closer to the $700-800 price (Doctor bills (after negotiation), vet bills, temporary relocation, etc).
[deleted]
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#9I am troubled that 12% say they couldn’t cover the $400 expense, and that 14% claim it would stop them from paying some of their other bills. But even if respondents are accurately reporting on their finances, these numbers suggest their situation is relatively uncommon. That's between 1/7th and 1/8th of adults responding to a survey, some of whom presumably have kids to look after. This guy seems so in love with dem…
He isn’t dismissing those people or their hardships, he is saying that the actual number of 40% that many politicians use is disingenuous.
It is bs. So is the one about "the average 401K only $8K in it" or whatever. I changed jobs a couple of times. I get a 401K at each job, it gets up to like $5-10K or whatever and then it sits unattended whereupon I eventually roll it over to my IRA account. Point being, I'm pretty damn wealthy but I have a couple of those "average 401K" accounts.
Statistics is hard because correlation does not imply causation, something your average J-school grad seems to not be able to even fathom as concept.
Re: It is a myth that a large share of people can’t cover a $400 emergency expense
#10I somehow read this article the first time without realizing it's totally wrong.
Here's the direct quote from the original government report [1]:
> If faced with an unexpected expense of $400, 61 percent of adults say they would cover it with cash, savings, or a credit card paid off at the next statement—a modest improvement from the prior year. Similar to the prior year, 27 percent would borrow or sell something to pay for the expense, and 12 percent would not be able to cover the expense at all.
That means 39% of people say they either cannot pay or must sell something or borrow for it. Representing that as "40% of Americans can't come up with $400 in an emergency" is perfectly fair in my view.
[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/2018-repor...