About 36% of U.S. adults say they have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts.

For analysis of the political views of that media: https://ground.news/article/over-half-of-americans-say-theyre-not-even-close-to-financial-freedom

  • SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is a pretty terrible article that takes an important issue (financial insecurity in the US) and manages to say absolutely nothing about it.

    Half of Americans describe "financial freedom" as being comfortable, but not necessarily rich, and 49.3% say it refers to meeting financial obligations and having some money left over each month. About 54.2% define it as living debt-free, and 46.2% believe it means never having to worry about money.

    Okay, so they don’t define “financial insecurity,” but leave the definition up to the people taking the survey? And the definitions themselves are all over the map and don’t have an objective interpretation. “Meeting financial obligations?” That just says that people want to be able to live within their means, but not how they live.

    Even the bit about savings accounts is problematic. A lot of people don’t have savings accounts because most people don’t bank that way any more. In our parent’s generation (and I am speaking as someone who is 50) savings accounts were where middle class and below people kept their money because it was an interest bearing account and things like the stock market and bonds were intentionally well out of reach of the average person. I do have a savings account but I really don’t need one and its balance has absolutely no correlation to how much money I have.

    The percentage of people living paycheck to paycheck, the amount of savings (in terms of monthly expenses), or having to defer things like medical treatment or car repairs are all more meaningful metrics, IMO. Even net worth inclusive and exclusive of the primary residence would be meaningful.

  • duderium [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Democracy is when everyone is desperately poor no matter how hard or smart they work.

      • duderium [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I should have clarified. In Amerikkka, there is a large number of extremely poor people (proletariat), a small number of people who are doing better and who therefore believe that capitalism is normal (labor aristocrats and petite bourgeoisie), and a tiny minority of haute bourgeoisie who control the country and think that it’s funny and strange that anyone supports them.

  • GregoryTheGreat@programming.dev
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    With the interest rates of savings accounts why bother. Just leave it in checking. Or cash.

    Or are we trying to act surprised most people don’t have money?

    • silent_water [she/her]
      ·
      1 year ago

      it's just further evidence that the rot in the economy is reaching a critical point. either some socdems push through reforms so the system can limp on or we'll hit the 3 days of missed meals tipping point.

  • lemming007@lemm.ee
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the respondents are defining "financial freedom" of course they're going to say they don't have it.

    I make a decent salary and I would still say I don't have financial freedom.

    • trudge [comrade/them]
      ·
      1 year ago

      That's because financial freedom is defined by social safety net (for non-bourgeoisie).

      It's not something that you earn as an individual, but achieved as a society.

    • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      A bunch of people say they do have it, though. A "decent salary" (also self-defined) doesn't guarantee financial freedom because of things like debt, the astronomical cost of healthcare, and the fact that you'll never be able to comfortably retire unless you're a literal multimillionaire.