64% can't cover $1,000 emergency

signalmankenneth

Verified User
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/10/pf/emergency_fund/index.htm?hpt=hp_t2

Keep in mind the population of the US is 312,000,000?!!

This is sad, we have really deteriorated as a once great nation! We are well on are way of becoming a third world toilet, with abject poverty?!!
gold03.gif


Dow-Tanks-110808.jpg
 
75 million people, or close to 25% of the population, is 17 years old and under. How many nations in the world do you know of where little kids have that kind of dough? You throw in the college age kids who probably don't have a lot of spare cash and that percentage goes up even higher. If you want to throw in kids a year or two out of school who aren't making much money yet and thus aren't saving very much and your number is nowhere near 64% of the population Ken. That hardly describes a third world country with abject poverty.
 
The government is not the only entitiy guilty of depending on credit economy. All too many people are unwilling to wait for medium size ($200-$1000) purchases, choosing instead to buy on credit for those big plasma screens, computers, smart phones, etc. And then they find themselves using more of their monthly income to maintain their revolving credit lines, which in turn prevents them from setting cash aside for emergencies. Much of these types of economic woes are far more due to simple lack of planning and lack of convention "old fashioned" money managing skills, than they are due to a poorly performing economy. Even in the 90s under a booming economy, the numbers of people who could cover a $1000 emergency without relying on some type of credit was over 50%, because despite the booming economy, personal debt was rising at a precipitous rate.

It is all at matter of attitude. The government cannot come up with adequate spending cuts to reduce the deficit because one or another factions are firmly convince that each and every piece of spending is absolutely essential - and none of it can wait or be reduced. Similarly, in the private sector, people are firmly convinced they cannot possibly wait another two or three months for the newest iPhone release or other similar type purchase. The result is an economy which is almost entirely dependent on deficit spending, be it governments or households. The only winners in that world are those making the loans and collecting the interest and loan fees.

The maintenance off private debt costs several hundred billion dollars per year. That, like the national debt, is not sustainable over the long run. This phenomenonn is also why we have been on a slowly accelerating cycle of economic growth and recession. Each time the private sector spend enough on credit to reach the upward limits of available credit, spending contracts, and so does the economy. Then the government makes some changes, either to the prime rate, or to the banking laws so more credit is available, people start spending again - on more credit - and the economy picks up, only to slow down again as credit limits are once again stretched to the limits. The housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis was due primarily to over-extension of mortgage credit, with banks, at government's insistence, making sub-prime loans with temporarily subsidized payments to people who could not afford the mortgage. When the balloon payments and higher mortgage payments kicked in, the house of cards collapsed. And while people point fingers at which government agency or political party is most responsible, the bottom line is people were buying more than they could reasonably afford using government-enhanced credit to do so.

With a few exceptions of the truly brain dead, most people are now calling on government to bring spending under control. But what we also neeed is for the entire private sector to kick the credit economy habit. It's not that hard to do, either. Say you want a new iPad. Instead of hauling out the credit card and buying an iPad today, then paying the full price of the iPad, plus interest charges equaling anywhere from 20% to 200% of the original price depending on the time it takes to pay off that debt, the better option would be to set aside an amount each week, say $25, and buy the new iPad when the savings is enough to cover the price. Sure, you have to WAIT (gasp!), but in the end, you have saved yourself $100 or more dollars in interest and/or credit fees. That $100 can then be a head start on your next purchase. At the end of a couple years, you've saved enough in credit charges to by a new iPhone to go with your iPad.

All society needs to get on a paygo economy. Such an economy will be much stronger, and much more stable because there would be no built-in cycle of running up against credit ceilings. It will, of course, be a rough row to hoe, because the necessary drop off of immediate-gratification purchasing will contract the economy. But since we are headed that way, or worse, anyway, there is no time better than now to grab the credit bull by the horns and give its neck the ol' Istanbul Twist. In the end, without any other expansion, the purchase power of the private sector will increase by several hundred billion dollars per year - money that is being spent on real goods and services instead of being wasted on debt maintenance.
 
The government is not the only entitiy guilty of depending on credit economy. All too many people are unwilling to wait for medium size ($200-$1000) purchases, choosing instead to buy on credit for those big plasma screens, computers, smart phones, etc. And then they find themselves using more of their monthly income to maintain their revolving credit lines, which in turn prevents them from setting cash aside for emergencies. Much of these types of economic woes are far more due to simple lack of planning and lack of convention "old fashioned" money managing skills, than they are due to a poorly performing economy. Even in the 90s under a booming economy, the numbers of people who could cover a $1000 emergency without relying on some type of credit was over 50%, because despite the booming economy, personal debt was rising at a precipitous rate.

It is all at matter of attitude. The government cannot come up with adequate spending cuts to reduce the deficit because one or another factions are firmly convince that each and every piece of spending is absolutely essential - and none of it can wait or be reduced. Similarly, in the private sector, people are firmly convinced they cannot possibly wait another two or three months for the newest iPhone release or other similar type purchase. The result is an economy which is almost entirely dependent on deficit spending, be it governments or households. The only winners in that world are those making the loans and collecting the interest and loan fees.

The maintenance off private debt costs several hundred billion dollars per year. That, like the national debt, is not sustainable over the long run. This phenomenonn is also why we have been on a slowly accelerating cycle of economic growth and recession. Each time the private sector spend enough on credit to reach the upward limits of available credit, spending contracts, and so does the economy. Then the government makes some changes, either to the prime rate, or to the banking laws so more credit is available, people start spending again - on more credit - and the economy picks up, only to slow down again as credit limits are once again stretched to the limits. The housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis was due primarily to over-extension of mortgage credit, with banks, at government's insistence, making sub-prime loans with temporarily subsidized payments to people who could not afford the mortgage. When the balloon payments and higher mortgage payments kicked in, the house of cards collapsed. And while people point fingers at which government agency or political party is most responsible, the bottom line is people were buying more than they could reasonably afford using government-enhanced credit to do so.

With a few exceptions of the truly brain dead, most people are now calling on government to bring spending under control. But what we also neeed is for the entire private sector to kick the credit economy habit. It's not that hard to do, either. Say you want a new iPad. Instead of hauling out the credit card and buying an iPad today, then paying the full price of the iPad, plus interest charges equaling anywhere from 20% to 200% of the original price depending on the time it takes to pay off that debt, the better option would be to set aside an amount each week, say $25, and buy the new iPad when the savings is enough to cover the price. Sure, you have to WAIT (gasp!), but in the end, you have saved yourself $100 or more dollars in interest and/or credit fees. That $100 can then be a head start on your next purchase. At the end of a couple years, you've saved enough in credit charges to by a new iPhone to go with your iPad.

All society needs to get on a paygo economy. Such an economy will be much stronger, and much more stable because there would be no built-in cycle of running up against credit ceilings. It will, of course, be a rough row to hoe, because the necessary drop off of immediate-gratification purchasing will contract the economy. But since we are headed that way, or worse, anyway, there is no time better than now to grab the credit bull by the horns and give its neck the ol' Istanbul Twist. In the end, without any other expansion, the purchase power of the private sector will increase by several hundred billion dollars per year - money that is being spent on real goods and services instead of being wasted on debt maintenance.

Summed up, money has become rather ephemeral to us, its this wierd shared dream that everyone believes in, there will always be more money that you can borrow or get credit on, or find a new way to make it work. Nobody really lives within their means anymore(save for the very wealthy) everyone has debts to pay, on their house, their car, their bills, and the fact that they won't pay them because they've bought the newest thing is the reason they won't get out of it. It's not just the government, the attitude comes from the ground up, politicians are people, and act like it. Then we get angry at the banks because they couldn't keep all our balls up in the air and suddenly the system which has gone on for so long people have forgotten that it is a system is just falling apart around our ears and everyone needs somebody to blame. The politicians, the banks, the big buisnesses, the wealthy, the people who were more fortunete when the reality is that shit happens.
 
The government is not the only entitiy guilty of depending on credit economy. All too many people are unwilling to wait for medium size ($200-$1000) purchases, choosing instead to buy on credit for those big plasma screens, computers, smart phones, etc. And then they find themselves using more of their monthly income to maintain their revolving credit lines, which in turn prevents them from setting cash aside for emergencies. Much of these types of economic woes are far more due to simple lack of planning and lack of convention "old fashioned" money managing skills, than they are due to a poorly performing economy. Even in the 90s under a booming economy, the numbers of people who could cover a $1000 emergency without relying on some type of credit was over 50%, because despite the booming economy, personal debt was rising at a precipitous rate.

It is all at matter of attitude. The government cannot come up with adequate spending cuts to reduce the deficit because one or another factions are firmly convince that each and every piece of spending is absolutely essential - and none of it can wait or be reduced. Similarly, in the private sector, people are firmly convinced they cannot possibly wait another two or three months for the newest iPhone release or other similar type purchase. The result is an economy which is almost entirely dependent on deficit spending, be it governments or households. The only winners in that world are those making the loans and collecting the interest and loan fees.

The maintenance off private debt costs several hundred billion dollars per year. That, like the national debt, is not sustainable over the long run. This phenomenonn is also why we have been on a slowly accelerating cycle of economic growth and recession. Each time the private sector spend enough on credit to reach the upward limits of available credit, spending contracts, and so does the economy. Then the government makes some changes, either to the prime rate, or to the banking laws so more credit is available, people start spending again - on more credit - and the economy picks up, only to slow down again as credit limits are once again stretched to the limits. The housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis was due primarily to over-extension of mortgage credit, with banks, at government's insistence, making sub-prime loans with temporarily subsidized payments to people who could not afford the mortgage. When the balloon payments and higher mortgage payments kicked in, the house of cards collapsed. And while people point fingers at which government agency or political party is most responsible, the bottom line is people were buying more than they could reasonably afford using government-enhanced credit to do so.

With a few exceptions of the truly brain dead, most people are now calling on government to bring spending under control. But what we also neeed is for the entire private sector to kick the credit economy habit. It's not that hard to do, either. Say you want a new iPad. Instead of hauling out the credit card and buying an iPad today, then paying the full price of the iPad, plus interest charges equaling anywhere from 20% to 200% of the original price depending on the time it takes to pay off that debt, the better option would be to set aside an amount each week, say $25, and buy the new iPad when the savings is enough to cover the price. Sure, you have to WAIT (gasp!), but in the end, you have saved yourself $100 or more dollars in interest and/or credit fees. That $100 can then be a head start on your next purchase. At the end of a couple years, you've saved enough in credit charges to by a new iPhone to go with your iPad.

All society needs to get on a paygo economy. Such an economy will be much stronger, and much more stable because there would be no built-in cycle of running up against credit ceilings. It will, of course, be a rough row to hoe, because the necessary drop off of immediate-gratification purchasing will contract the economy. But since we are headed that way, or worse, anyway, there is no time better than now to grab the credit bull by the horns and give its neck the ol' Istanbul Twist. In the end, without any other expansion, the purchase power of the private sector will increase by several hundred billion dollars per year - money that is being spent on real goods and services instead of being wasted on debt maintenance.

With regards to mortgages banks should offer the opportunity to pay interest only and extend the loan. At least that would help some folks.
 
75 million people, or close to 25% of the population, is 17 years old and under. How many nations in the world do you know of where little kids have that kind of dough? You throw in the college age kids who probably don't have a lot of spare cash and that percentage goes up even higher. If you want to throw in kids a year or two out of school who aren't making much money yet and thus aren't saving very much and your number is nowhere near 64% of the population Ken. That hardly describes a third world country with abject poverty.

No children were polled, but nice try to spin your right wing bullshit.
 
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/10/pf/emergency_fund/index.htm?hpt=hp_t2

Keep in mind the population of the US is 312,000,000?!!

This is sad, we have really deteriorated as a once great nation! We are well on are way of becoming a third world toilet, with abject poverty?!!
gold03.gif


Dow-Tanks-110808.jpg

It aint gonna get better any time soon Ken. As long as there's vast number of noobs more concerned about divisive wedge issues then economic ones you'll continue to see vast trade deficits, continued out sourcing of jobs, a crumbling infrastructure, rampant militarism, an undermining of funding for our public school system, astronomical costs for a college education, a continued erosion or collective bargaining rights, a dissapearing middle class and an continued increase in the disparity in wealth distribution.

American voters have grown lazy and feel entitled are not competitively educated nor motivated to fight for their share of the pie. In the last 20 years the productivity of American workers have more then doubled. They have recieved virtually none of that wealth they have produced and virtually all of that has gone to the top 1%. It's time for people to get off their ass and fight for what they've earned!

And anybody who calls you a socialist for working with others to to fight for your fair share is a hypocrite who only thinks an elite few have the right to charge what the market will bear for their services. Their not capitalist. Those are the aristocrats, who want it all, and their lackeys.
 
The government is not the only entitiy guilty of depending on credit economy. All too many people are unwilling to wait for medium size ($200-$1000) purchases, choosing instead to buy on credit for those big plasma screens, computers, smart phones, etc. And then they find themselves using more of their monthly income to maintain their revolving credit lines, which in turn prevents them from setting cash aside for emergencies. Much of these types of economic woes are far more due to simple lack of planning and lack of convention "old fashioned" money managing skills, than they are due to a poorly performing economy. Even in the 90s under a booming economy, the numbers of people who could cover a $1000 emergency without relying on some type of credit was over 50%, because despite the booming economy, personal debt was rising at a precipitous rate.

It is all at matter of attitude. The government cannot come up with adequate spending cuts to reduce the deficit because one or another factions are firmly convince that each and every piece of spending is absolutely essential - and none of it can wait or be reduced. Similarly, in the private sector, people are firmly convinced they cannot possibly wait another two or three months for the newest iPhone release or other similar type purchase. The result is an economy which is almost entirely dependent on deficit spending, be it governments or households. The only winners in that world are those making the loans and collecting the interest and loan fees.

The maintenance off private debt costs several hundred billion dollars per year. That, like the national debt, is not sustainable over the long run. This phenomenonn is also why we have been on a slowly accelerating cycle of economic growth and recession. Each time the private sector spend enough on credit to reach the upward limits of available credit, spending contracts, and so does the economy. Then the government makes some changes, either to the prime rate, or to the banking laws so more credit is available, people start spending again - on more credit - and the economy picks up, only to slow down again as credit limits are once again stretched to the limits. The housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis was due primarily to over-extension of mortgage credit, with banks, at government's insistence, making sub-prime loans with temporarily subsidized payments to people who could not afford the mortgage. When the balloon payments and higher mortgage payments kicked in, the house of cards collapsed. And while people point fingers at which government agency or political party is most responsible, the bottom line is people were buying more than they could reasonably afford using government-enhanced credit to do so.

With a few exceptions of the truly brain dead, most people are now calling on government to bring spending under control. But what we also neeed is for the entire private sector to kick the credit economy habit. It's not that hard to do, either. Say you want a new iPad. Instead of hauling out the credit card and buying an iPad today, then paying the full price of the iPad, plus interest charges equaling anywhere from 20% to 200% of the original price depending on the time it takes to pay off that debt, the better option would be to set aside an amount each week, say $25, and buy the new iPad when the savings is enough to cover the price. Sure, you have to WAIT (gasp!), but in the end, you have saved yourself $100 or more dollars in interest and/or credit fees. That $100 can then be a head start on your next purchase. At the end of a couple years, you've saved enough in credit charges to by a new iPhone to go with your iPad.

All society needs to get on a paygo economy. Such an economy will be much stronger, and much more stable because there would be no built-in cycle of running up against credit ceilings. It will, of course, be a rough row to hoe, because the necessary drop off of immediate-gratification purchasing will contract the economy. But since we are headed that way, or worse, anyway, there is no time better than now to grab the credit bull by the horns and give its neck the ol' Istanbul Twist. In the end, without any other expansion, the purchase power of the private sector will increase by several hundred billion dollars per year - money that is being spent on real goods and services instead of being wasted on debt maintenance.

You are perpetrating a LIE. This is so typical of right wing scum.

fixedcosts.jpg
 
No children were polled, but nice try to spin your right wing bullshit.

Oh, it was right wing spin/bullshit when the OP stated "Keep in mind the population of the US is 312,000,000"? Because unless there has been a sharp jump in the population, close to 25% of THAT number is 17 or under.

Also, what GoodLuck said is VERY relevant. The reason many of those cannot cover a $1,000 emergency is that they are up to their eyeballs in debt buying electronics and other nonessential items on credit. We have become a nation of people whining for instant gratification. The cost of that is little or no cushion or safety net.
 
The government is not the only entitiy guilty of depending on credit economy. All too many people are unwilling to wait for medium size ($200-$1000) purchases, choosing instead to buy on credit for those big plasma screens, computers, smart phones, etc. And then they find themselves using more of their monthly income to maintain their revolving credit lines, which in turn prevents them from setting cash aside for emergencies. Much of these types of economic woes are far more due to simple lack of planning and lack of convention "old fashioned" money managing skills, than they are due to a poorly performing economy. Even in the 90s under a booming economy, the numbers of people who could cover a $1000 emergency without relying on some type of credit was over 50%, because despite the booming economy, personal debt was rising at a precipitous rate.

It is all at matter of attitude. The government cannot come up with adequate spending cuts to reduce the deficit because one or another factions are firmly convince that each and every piece of spending is absolutely essential - and none of it can wait or be reduced. Similarly, in the private sector, people are firmly convinced they cannot possibly wait another two or three months for the newest iPhone release or other similar type purchase. The result is an economy which is almost entirely dependent on deficit spending, be it governments or households. The only winners in that world are those making the loans and collecting the interest and loan fees.

The maintenance off private debt costs several hundred billion dollars per year. That, like the national debt, is not sustainable over the long run. This phenomenonn is also why we have been on a slowly accelerating cycle of economic growth and recession. Each time the private sector spend enough on credit to reach the upward limits of available credit, spending contracts, and so does the economy. Then the government makes some changes, either to the prime rate, or to the banking laws so more credit is available, people start spending again - on more credit - and the economy picks up, only to slow down again as credit limits are once again stretched to the limits. The housing bubble and subsequent financial crisis was due primarily to over-extension of mortgage credit, with banks, at government's insistence, making sub-prime loans with temporarily subsidized payments to people who could not afford the mortgage. When the balloon payments and higher mortgage payments kicked in, the house of cards collapsed. And while people point fingers at which government agency or political party is most responsible, the bottom line is people were buying more than they could reasonably afford using government-enhanced credit to do so.

With a few exceptions of the truly brain dead, most people are now calling on government to bring spending under control. But what we also neeed is for the entire private sector to kick the credit economy habit. It's not that hard to do, either. Say you want a new iPad. Instead of hauling out the credit card and buying an iPad today, then paying the full price of the iPad, plus interest charges equaling anywhere from 20% to 200% of the original price depending on the time it takes to pay off that debt, the better option would be to set aside an amount each week, say $25, and buy the new iPad when the savings is enough to cover the price. Sure, you have to WAIT (gasp!), but in the end, you have saved yourself $100 or more dollars in interest and/or credit fees. That $100 can then be a head start on your next purchase. At the end of a couple years, you've saved enough in credit charges to by a new iPhone to go with your iPad.

All society needs to get on a paygo economy. Such an economy will be much stronger, and much more stable because there would be no built-in cycle of running up against credit ceilings. It will, of course, be a rough row to hoe, because the necessary drop off of immediate-gratification purchasing will contract the economy. But since we are headed that way, or worse, anyway, there is no time better than now to grab the credit bull by the horns and give its neck the ol' Istanbul Twist. In the end, without any other expansion, the purchase power of the private sector will increase by several hundred billion dollars per year - money that is being spent on real goods and services instead of being wasted on debt maintenance.

I really do agree with you on the paygo economy. I also believe that should be re-instituted in congress. It was a critical tool in the 90's used to bridge the deficit gap. I don't see the Grover Norguist ass kissing fanatics agreeing to that as, to them, it's a proxy tax increase. You do realized though, that this may require tax increases and tax reforms to increase the revenue stream would be very justified to pay down that debt. Particularly at this time of historically low tax rates.
 
Oh, it was right wing spin/bullshit when the OP stated "Keep in mind the population of the US is 312,000,000"? Because unless there has been a sharp jump in the population, close to 25% of THAT number is 17 or under.

Also, what GoodLuck said is VERY relevant. The reason many of those cannot cover a $1,000 emergency is that they are up to their eyeballs in debt buying electronics and other nonessential items on credit. We have become a nation of people whining for instant gratification. The cost of that is little or no cushion or safety net.

The other reason is that the cost of living has spiraled upwards while wages are flat, second jobs are no longer available, first jobs are being sought by 500 or more people per opening, etc.
Stick your head back in the sand.

You can't save money if you earn less than it costs to live.
 
The other reason is that the cost of living has spiraled upwards while wages are flat, second jobs are no longer available, first jobs are being sought by 500 or more people per opening, etc.
Stick your head back in the sand.

You can't save money if you earn less than it costs to live.

I have not said its easy to save money. I have simply pointed out that Cawacko was not spinning and that the credit lifestyles are responsible for problems too.

Plus, if you look at the rates of savings accounts before the economy tanked, it was miniscule. When times are good people don't save money either.
 
I have not said its easy to save money. I have simply pointed out that Cawacko was not spinning and that the credit lifestyles are responsible for problems too.

Plus, if you look at the rates of savings accounts before the economy tanked, it was miniscule. When times are good people don't save money either.

Sorry, but in my opinion cawacko was spinning like a top.
 
Oh, it was right wing spin/bullshit when the OP stated "Keep in mind the population of the US is 312,000,000"? Because unless there has been a sharp jump in the population, close to 25% of THAT number is 17 or under.

Also, what GoodLuck said is VERY relevant. The reason many of those cannot cover a $1,000 emergency is that they are up to their eyeballs in debt buying electronics and other nonessential items on credit. We have become a nation of people whining for instant gratification. The cost of that is little or no cushion or safety net.

Ignorance is not an excuse, but the fact you are nothing but a right wing social regressive turd who 'claims' he cares about others keeps being verified.

WHAT don't you comprehend about the chart I posted?

Need another to dismiss your ignorance?

glt77.jpg
 
Ignorance is not an excuse, but the fact you are nothing but a right wing social regressive turd who 'claims' he cares about others keeps being verified.

When you post what I hear is "Waaaaaa you are a turd!" or "Waaaaaaaaa right wing scum!"

I think its time for the iggy bin for your obnoxious little whiney ass. If you ever want to have a civil discussion, send me an email and I'll unignore you.
 
Sorry, but in my opinion cawacko was spinning like a top.

Of, so the OP's claim that 64% of the 312,000,000 does not include the millions of people under 17?? Wow, you'd think that sort of population spike would have been on the news.
 
The answer is really somewhere in the middle. No doubt, GL has a point about credit debt. Everyone wants to keep up w/ their neighbors & have the best stuff, so most live beyond their means.

But, means is an issue as well. The gap between rich & poor keeps growing, relentlessly. Wages for lower & middle income earners are in a perpetual state of stagnation. There is little doubt that we are indeed becoming a nation of haves & have nots.
 
The answer is really somewhere in the middle. No doubt, GL has a point about credit debt. Everyone wants to keep up w/ their neighbors & have the best stuff, so most live beyond their means.

But, means is an issue as well. The gap between rich & poor keeps growing, relentlessly. Wages for lower & middle income earners are in a perpetual state of stagnation. There is little doubt that we are indeed becoming a nation of haves & have nots.

A voice of reason. What a welcome change.
 
When you post what I hear is "Waaaaaa you are a turd!" or "Waaaaaaaaa right wing scum!"

I think its time for the iggy bin for your obnoxious little whiney ass. If you ever want to have a civil discussion, send me an email and I'll unignore you.

Yea, cut & run. You can't handle the truth. WHY do you continue to post ignorance, and try to pass it off as knowledge?

You right wingers run 100% on emotion and fear.
 
Back
Top