Someone who won't have that $433 has no business even thinking about a 1200$ phone in the first place
most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population.
That's not really applicable because:
1. the study is for an "unexpected" expense. This you can see from 2 years away
2. The wording in the study was something along the lines of "would have to dip into savings", not that they literally don't have any money for it. The fed's survey of consumer finances shows the median household has between 7-13k (depending whether you're counting median income or median wealth) in their checking accounts
https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/chart...
Should people be more financially responsible? Yes
Are they today? No
In a rational world payday loans, predatory auto loans, BNPL, perpetually rolling credit card debt etc would not need to exist. Yet these sectors are rapidly growing and companies in it are thriving.
I'm saying the specific claim of "most people live on credit cards as bridge finance between paychecks. when I mean most people - I mean 50% of the population" is false.
- written on my S10
This might be the funniest thing I’ve ever read on this nerd website.
Credit card statistics are heavily manipulated because it's easy to make them sound terrible. I don't know which factoid specifically you're referring to, but the studies about "X percent of Americans couldn't handle an emergency expense without putting it on a credit card" often use tricks like including anyone who would pay by credit card if they could. I remember reading some of these studies and realizing that I would have been included in the statistic because I prefer to use a credit card where I can, even though I pay it off before interest accrues.
Median wealth in the U.S just around $100k - see Wikipedia & other databases.
how many people own houses ? & for those people that own houses - average equity in those houses is less than 45%.
ain't no factoid - but lived reality of most people. maybe on the coasts where techies and finance bros live - but the rest of america is facing a bleak financial reality.
[0]: https://www.ubs.com/global/en/media/display-page-ndp/en-2026...
My comment said "median" explicitly
The number was for household wealth. I think you're looking at individual wealth, which would naturally be lower because it's spread across more people.
Source: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/table...
The average (mean) is closer to $1 million per family, but that's not a useful number.
Not by purchasing power. We're also in a weird position compared to our "peers" in that most of them have relatively easy access to much less wealthy neighbors via over-land transit or a cheap plane ride, whereas we have to travel quite a distance or pay for extremely expensive plane tickets. Which means that we're stuck here with what a USD buys in the US, instead of being able to hop over to someplace else where a dollar goes further. We also work more than our peers, so our per-hour earnings take a hit compared to theirs.
I could go on. The trick is trying to gaslight Americans into second-guessing the economic pain they've increasingly felt over the past few decades. The 50th percentile American household lives worse than the 50th percentile household of quite a few less-wealthy countries.
Which is primarily the market value of the home they live in. They can’t pay a bill with it.
The median American household has $8000 of liquid cash in all of their cash accounts combined.
That’s a lot of liquid cash. It reinforces the idea that the median American household has an unparalleled amount of money to burn on whatever.
And this is the median, which means that half of US households have less than this. Which is quite a lot of people who still use phones.
It is not like having a $1200 flagship smartphone is a requirement to earn a living like, say, having a mean of transportation is to many people not living close to their workplace. There is nothing one do in a flagship that you can't do - albeit maybe with less quality or slower - than a lower end one. All allows to make and receive calls, use messaging, have a browser, apps.
To be honest, I am clumsy and break stuff easily so I have never spent more than $200 on a smartphone, my current one is a pixel 6a running grapheneos that I bought for 180€ 2.5 years ago. It makes very good photos actually and is fast enough for everything I do. I understand people can want something nicer but it is not a need.
I don't have to deal with insurance, parking (if parking is free by you, it shouldn't be), maintenance (I work on them myself, I just pay for cheap parts), and fuel is effectively free. That's all on top of the car payment for people who haven't paid off their car.
People bike all winter in Germany and the Netherlands.
Biking is relatively popular and definitely feasible within ten km or so from most city or town cores here in Scandinavia, not just the metropolises.