• Shikadi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not too long ago the number was around 50% and not having $500 in the bank, so at least this is technically an improvement

    • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      That was actually a study that was completely misrepresented by the media. What the people actually said in the study is that if they were presented with an unexpected expense of $500, they would charge it, not that they didn’t have the money. But then unscrupulous mukrakers took that study and reported it as “50% of Americans say they don’t have enough cash to cover an unexpected $500 expense!”. There are plenty of valid reasons to charge an unexpected expense, regardless of how much money you have in the bank.

  • GregoryTheGreat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months 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?

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Which is still better than having extremely poor and extremely wealthy people.

      • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months 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.