Hacker News Reader

Comment by TACIXAT | Hacker News Reader

46% of people hold no investments. [0] 57% of Americans don't have enough savings to cover a 500 dollar expense. [1] Nearly half have no retirement savings, which pushes the median retirement savings in the US to 5,000 dollars [2]. Additionally, for families with retirement savings, the median amount of 60,000 dollars. [2]

It's not how they asked the question, it's not about savings account rates being low. Most people don't save. Most people are not prepared for retirement.

0. http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/20/investing/trump-stock-market...

1. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-afford-a-50...

2. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/13/heres-how-many-americans-hav...

View on HN

I can't help but feel like you're making a value judgement against certain individuals. That combined with looking over your comment history makes me feel like you're unsympathetic to individuals in situations that are less than ideal.

Some people have cancer and don't have health care. Some people have kids. Some people live in the Midwest have absolutely must have a car to get to work and have higher than average heating and cooling bills. Some people got arrested for having marijuana and now they have a hard time getting a job. Some people are supporting a parent who isn't self-sufficient. Some people are supporting a spouse who has substance abuse issues. Life happens to people.

Other countries have found a way for providing a high standard of living without a need to put the onus for saving onto the individual. I'm not saying this here to say it's the responsibility of the state to provide a comfortable retirement for individuals. But knowing that we could, in not some too unimaginable world provide a comfortable retirement and safety net for each individual, what are our reasons for not doing so? What is it in you that feels like the burden of life must be foisted upon individuals with lesser means or an inability to provide for themselves rather than a distributing that responsibility upon everyone?

You have drawn a lot of incorrect conclusions about my personal opinions. If you have the time to point out any value judgements I have made, or previous comments that were in poor taste, please do.

My OP comment was stating facts and refuting people who were questioning the validity of the survey. I'm not sure where you would draw any conclusions about my personal opinions from it.

>What is it in you that feels like the burden of life must be foisted upon individuals with lesser means or an inability to provide for themselves rather than a distributing that responsibility upon everyone?

Nothing in me feels that way. Thanks.

Dont forget!

https://apnews.com/9309128222ab4c4f92b0d0022e1ec133/In-shado...

The Hoovervilles are back. Maybe we should just call them Trumpvilles now.

When your business does not pay the workers enough to survive, do the job, and have a roof over their heads that isn't just that of a car? I think we know who the real leech upon this world is. Hint: not the guy tightning his belt by sleeping in his car.

"Savings? People have to think about what they'll do with extra money?! Brother, I'm just trying to find my next meal." -Average American in 5 years.

Trying to place the blame for this on Republicans is dishonest. Shantytowns have existed for years, and Democrats haven't done much to help. For example:

> In December 2014, the city of San Jose shut down what was then America’s largest homeless camp — a shantytown that stretched for sixty-eight acres along Coyote Creek where a few hundred men and women were living in tents, shacks, treehouses, and adobe dugouts.

https://placesjournal.org/article/tent-city-america/

Hoover could have, with some justification, claimed that the term "Hooverville" was unfair when the situation was hardly of his own making, and yet he got stuck with it. Ultimately the buck has to stop somewhere.

I can't tell if the conversation here is just being pointlessly pedantic or if they are simply out of touch with how many people lower on the socio-economic scale are living. For a variety of reasons living paycheck to paycheck has become the norm.

The U.S. median income is $59,000. There’s no reason if you’re making that much money to not have $500 saved up, so by definition of median at least 50% of Americans should have some kind of emergency fund... I’ve made less money than that and still had money saved up.

Some people go to college and be indebted and come out with no job or one that doesn't pay enough to pay off their debt. Some people NEED a car to get anywhere with America's car culture. Some people get sick or know someone who gets sick. Some people need to support others not their own kids but a family member. Some have disabilities whether it be physical or mental.

Have some empathy, try to see that your life is not that of another and people aren't just "lazy to save" or "spend too much". The sooner people realize America's systems and institutions need A LOT of work, the better it is for your country.

The constant touting of "I did this, it was easy, why can't you? Stop being stupid." helps nobody at all and just shows how self absorbed American culture is. Looking down at others to make themselves feel good is not evolved and as an outsider looking into American culture, I always wonder what makes America this way?

Is it the celebrity culture? Other countries have this but not to the extent of the US. You have people who are rich and famous - for being rich and famous... And they are praised by millions in your country. I'd rather be in a country where the majority can live a decent life no matter their situation and the culture of showing off your riches is actually frowned upon socially.

The "some" here is representing 57% of the population. While the proportion without savings is probably correlated with income, there are people making six figures with no money saved. According to some sources, nearly half of people making $100,000 to $150,000 have less than $1,000 saved up. 18% of these people have nothing saved up [0]

This isn't about having empathy (hell my family regularly asks for "loans" that never get paid back so they can make rent and mortgage payments), it's about people not taking responsibility. If you're making six figures, I can't imagine what the excuse is for not having an emergency fund.

0: Make Six Figures? There's a Decent Chance You've Got Almost Nothing in the Bank https://bloom.bg/2cQ97hN

There is a lot of back-and-forth on this issue, but honestly I think simultaneously both positions are true: people are not making enough money and are in precarious, difficult financial situations. But many also do not use their money wisely. For many people it's not an either-or but rather both things are true.

That's the figure for the median household income. That means that many people "in the middle" are making 59k between 2 people and probably several kids.

The average household contains 2.54 people for 2017. Remember that households also includes things like roommates, cohabiting couples, and adult children living in the basement. The idea of an average household having 2 parents and several kids ended around 1973 [0], assuming that back when households had around an average of 3 occupants it was due to the so called "atomic family."

0: https://www.statista.com/statistics/183648/average-size-of-h...

So $23k per person per year. That's absolutely nothing.

Being poor is being preached at by Silicon Valley know-it-alls about how you're not saving enough of your not-big-enough paycheck.

That's totally dependent on cost of living and many are making less than that.

Median income generally increases in areas with a high cost of living. In the San Francisco Bay Area the three largest cities and counties have median income going from $87,000 to $103,000.

Cool, so half of your people are above 87-103k, the other half are good and properly fucked in that situation.

Maybe when we're talking about the bottom 10% or 20% I'll care less but having lived in that situation where even one major would have wiped us out I think it's a pretty serious problem that's often overlooked or blamed away.

I'm doing fine now(yay getting out of gamedev) but I'm always shocked how few of my coworkers are aware that most people are just scraping by.

https://apnews.com/9309128222ab4c4f92b0d0022e1ec133/In-shado...

Oh look, a news story about people with full-time jobs having to sleep in cars.

Even with $100k in SF, it can be tough to save with a family. Let's do some math. Taxes are about 25%, so you're down to $75k right off the bat. Median rent in SF is $3880, so that's $46560 a year on rent. We're down to $28k. Last year I spent $11k on student loans, between me and my wife, and we're down to $17k. $1700 on electricity and internet: $15k. Car payment and gas was $3k, down to $12k. We're left with $1000 a month for food, clothing, and everything else in one of the most expensive cities in the US, a city where a hamburger can easily cost $20. That doesn't go very far at all. Add in the medical debt I have, and I was pretty much broke at the end of each month.

Oh this is easy:

1. Go back in time and don't go to college

2. Get roommates

3. Don't have internet. Ration electricity.

4. Sell your car and steal a bike.

5. Don't eat.

and finally, move to Montana where your dollar goes further. This all seems to be relatively in the ballpark of what's commonly suggested when people on here rightly complain about CoL.

Short version, join Mennonites or Amish?

Re: sibling comment, citing high wages in SF as evidence that cost of living pushes up wages is getting the direction of causation at least 50% wrong.

You might equally say that owning a Rolex increases your income, since it seems most people who have one make a lot of money.

> There’s no reason if you’re making that much money to not have $500 saved up

That's a pretty hard comment to digest. There are a plethora of reasons that could prevent people in a low income bracket to save that sort of money.

Come over here to Sydney and let's see how well you live on that $59k. Your post is far too broad.

Stop buying coffee and avocado then and start buying a house... Sheesh!

I suspect the audience here on Hacker News aren't familiar with your reference, hence the down votes.

Millionaire tells millennials to stop buying avocado on toast [to save $150,000 for a deposit on a house): https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/15/austral...

The OP specifically mentions the U.S. In the U.S. as cost of living increases, so does median income. New York City and the SF Bay Area have median incomes that are tens of thousands dollars higher than the U.S. median income.

When was that? Should we adjust for inflation? How has the cost of housing changed? What additional monthly expenses have emerged as necessary to participate in society?

Yes. Median. Meaning half of people are below that level that you found no reason to leave, ya lazy bum.

The 46% without investments is not surprising. In addition to people with low income, I had plenty of friends who never invested until their 30s despite having a great income.

A significant percent of individuals who don't have savings, I believe is due to poor financial choices: spending more than what they earn, buying too many unnecessary things, financing to buy a new car, buy a big home... the list goes on. Sure thing, some people have extraordinary bills because they have to support people other than their kids or have a medical situation. But I doubt it's the majority of it.

I think you're value judging a lot of people without cause. Parental wealth is a huge factor as well, my parents are terrible at saving and basically paid for nothing directly for me (despite both having high payingish jobs) but thankfully their spending bought me into good opportunities. Now I loan them money, and when they repay it I put it into a savings account for them (crazy, I know).

Meanwhile my wife's parents are good savers and investors and paid for all her education, her first car, started her a significant investment account, etc.

Unless you think the sins of the parent should be visited on their children, pause and consider your judgements.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com