Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stay close to home for college. Live at home if possible.

Live with parents for a few years after graduation to save.

If everyone did that, they would be much richer.

Are you aware that the bolded is not an option for some people, or are you not aware of that? Serious question.

Yeah, my mom was in and out of institutions for most of my life. I have no family to fall back on. Once I was 17 I was out on my own.

The lack of empathy and understanding here is amazing.

I think it is hard to understand the lack of savings when lower income people have cell phones, cable, Starbucks, eat out....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question was why do people of privilege find it so hard to understand how hard it is to save, and this thread demonstrated this perfectly.

Being working poor is really hard. It is time consuming in a way that many people don't seem to understand. Taking a low-wage hourly job or two puts you at the mercy of someone else making a schedule, with a week's notice. Or maybe you will only get 3 shifts when you were counting on 5 that week. Then you have to find child care for a random schedule, which is why people frequently ask family to help, or you have to pay a sitter, who may make a bit less than you do. Because you are hourly, you don't have health insurance, or a way to budget because random hours.

This leads to the need for social services, whether that be reduced lunches, medical care, or an unemployment check because the factory closed and half the town is out of work too.

It takes time to figure out how to get medical care, and time to figure out how to fill out forms to get social services. It is complicated and confusing. Being poor has long-term impacts, like not knowing how to apply for college or the aid that they can likely receive because of a low family income, or skipping the health insurance options because that does cost extra, and maybe it's worth taking the risk of not having it.

This was my childhood, followed by me putting myself through college (I arranged my classes at a big ten school around my work schedule for one of my jobs and not the other way around. I ate an apple around 3p, and then ate whatever pizza was messed up at the restaurant that night) Saving just wasn't an option. There was nothing to save.

My husband is furloughed, and I run a consulting firm. We do have savings, and are fine. But I won't be the one scolding Americans who are $600 away from catastrophe at any moment.

Np: but, having children and those associated costs can be helped and for those of us who took the practical route and waited until we could afford them, it is hard to rationalize why others couldn’t do the same. That is, absolutely, something that can be delayed. Whether people want to admit it or not, children are a luxury.

I’ve walked the walk - mid 20s, laid off, no money, no food and when I recovered from that, I went back to school at night (6-10pm Mon-Thurs, Sat morning classes) after working 40+ hrs Mon-Fri, paid for it out of my earnings (early 2000s), sacrificed any sort of life for years to get an Accounting degree, so my sympathy for others not willing to make sacrifices for the big picture, is limited.

Look, again, you're not seeing your privilege. You seem to be talking to other people in exactly your same socioeconomic group. What am I supposed to tell my son's beloved daycare teacher who grew up in the DC projects, with likely terrible education and access to none of the things that enabled me to stay in my socioeconomic class? Never have kids?

PP: I didn’t say I was without privilege but as an adult, I have been hungry, have not known how I was going to pay rent, didn’t know how I was going to get to work and never want to feel that way again, so made changes to put me on the path to be where I am now. If you can’t afford to feed, clothe and shelter a child(ren), then no, you shouldn’t have them. How is that fair to those children to grow up in dire circumstances only to repeat it themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The question was why do people of privilege find it so hard to understand how hard it is to save, and this thread demonstrated this perfectly.

Being working poor is really hard. It is time consuming in a way that many people don't seem to understand. Taking a low-wage hourly job or two puts you at the mercy of someone else making a schedule, with a week's notice. Or maybe you will only get 3 shifts when you were counting on 5 that week. Then you have to find child care for a random schedule, which is why people frequently ask family to help, or you have to pay a sitter, who may make a bit less than you do. Because you are hourly, you don't have health insurance, or a way to budget because random hours.

This leads to the need for social services, whether that be reduced lunches, medical care, or an unemployment check because the factory closed and half the town is out of work too.

It takes time to figure out how to get medical care, and time to figure out how to fill out forms to get social services. It is complicated and confusing. Being poor has long-term impacts, like not knowing how to apply for college or the aid that they can likely receive because of a low family income, or skipping the health insurance options because that does cost extra, and maybe it's worth taking the risk of not having it.

This was my childhood, followed by me putting myself through college (I arranged my classes at a big ten school around my work schedule for one of my jobs and not the other way around. I ate an apple around 3p, and then ate whatever pizza was messed up at the restaurant that night) Saving just wasn't an option. There was nothing to save.

My husband is furloughed, and I run a consulting firm. We do have savings, and are fine. But I won't be the one scolding Americans who are $600 away from catastrophe at any moment.

Np: but, having children and those associated costs can be helped and for those of us who took the practical route and waited until we could afford them, it is hard to rationalize why others couldn’t do the same. That is, absolutely, something that can be delayed. Whether people want to admit it or not, children are a luxury.

I’ve walked the walk - mid 20s, laid off, no money, no food and when I recovered from that, I went back to school at night (6-10pm Mon-Thurs, Sat morning classes) after working 40+ hrs Mon-Fri, paid for it out of my earnings (early 2000s), sacrificed any sort of life for years to get an Accounting degree, so my sympathy for others not willing to make sacrifices for the big picture, is limited.

Look, again, you're not seeing your privilege. You seem to be talking to other people in exactly your same socioeconomic group. What am I supposed to tell my son's beloved daycare teacher who grew up in the DC projects, with likely terrible education and access to none of the things that enabled me to stay in my socioeconomic class? Never have kids?

You guys just need to stop with the starbucks. Americans are not poor because they buy coffee or other trinkets. They're poor because the minimum wage is so low, housing is too expensive, childcare is too expensive, health care is too expensive. Even if they could put together $1000/year by scraping down to the bare minimum consumption, that could be wiped out and go negative with one car accident or illness.

One thing people here are totally ignorant of is that lower income people often have family responsibilities at very young ages. It's all very fine and well to say that a 20-something should just "live in a falling-down house with three roommates and eat beans for 10 years and work two minimum wage jobs." But a lot of low income 20-somethings are helping out their families, younger siblings, etc, in terms of both money and time. It's not as simple as just one person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The modern redefining of luxuries as necessities makes it hard to see that saving is doable for many people who claim that they can’t save a dime (while typing away on their smartphones).

+1

One word: Starbucks.

Starbucks is not the reason people don't have much leftover after paying rent, school loans, car loans, and medical bills.

It can be if it's a daily fix. That's $200-$250 a month.

Just FYI, a fancy grande latte is less than $6, even at the priciest locations downtown. So, even if you go to Starbucks daily, it's about $180 a month. Not suggesting that that's a reasonable expense for someone struggling but the math was wrong.

Yep. I get a grande skinny cinnamon dolce latte every morning. It's $5, so $140/month. If I were truly living paycheck to paycheck I probably wouldn't do it, but that isn't the reason people aren't able to save in a macro sense.

It’s the mindset. If you think Starbucks is “reasonable” you probably also think movie tickets, lunches and dinners out, cable tv, new clothes, owning a pet etc. are “reasonable.” When in fact you could forgo those things quite easily and save quite a lot. None are necessities by ANY stretch.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The modern redefining of luxuries as necessities makes it hard to see that saving is doable for many people who claim that they can’t save a dime (while typing away on their smartphones).

+1

One word: Starbucks.

Starbucks is not the reason people don't have much leftover after paying rent, school loans, car loans, and medical bills.

It can be if it's a daily fix. That's $200-$250 a month.

Just FYI, a fancy grande latte is less than $6, even at the priciest locations downtown. So, even if you go to Starbucks daily, it's about $180 a month. Not suggesting that that's a reasonable expense for someone struggling but the math was wrong.

Yep. I get a grande skinny cinnamon dolce latte every morning. It's $5, so $140/month. If I were truly living paycheck to paycheck I probably wouldn't do it, but that isn't the reason people aren't able to save in a macro sense.

Again, Starbucks is a symbol that represents unnecessary expenditures, big and small.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, I make $18/hr. thats about $2880/month (after taxes, it's more like $2500) if I work 40 hrs a week. I don't always get 40 hrs, so this is a rough estimate.

Rent: 1200
Food: 400
Utilities: $300
Phone: $100
Internet: $50
Car Insurance: $150
Health insurance: $200
Gas: $100

That comes out to about $2500.
No, I'm not going out to eat, getting fancy coffee, or getting my nails done. I'm paying bills. I don't feel poor... I feel comfortable but if there is any type of emergency, I'll be SOL.

You can’t afford to live alone. Your rent is too high. Also if you had a roommate you could share utilities and cable. I had a rooomate until I was married. And what car are you driving? In va dh and I pay $400 every 6 months combined. We have two 2008 camrys.

OR, I understand your struggle. This was me, too, until I was @ 31. I had a roommate until I was 30. I think the PP is giving good advice. If you want to make your money go further, I would get a roommate, cut down groceries by shopping at an ethnic market (I did, travelling to shop in another neighborhood, to get to some), and switch to Cricket or another budget cell phone company (my DH and I use Cricket). Then take the money saved and put it into an Emergency Fund (build up to 3-4 months of expenses). Once you have that, start saving in pre-tax retirement (if your employer has this) or an IRA. It took me a long time to do that but, once I had that foundation, it provided a safety net for me.

To the OP's point, saving can be extremely hard if not impossible. You can do all the right (super frugal, delayed gratification, forward thinking) things that are typically recommended, yet have one bit of bad luck (a job loss, graduating during a recession, an illness, an unplanned pregnancy, a landlord deciding to evict for more money, parent/sibling/other family member that need to be supported or cared for, a car issue, a busted water heater, a jump in health insurance costs, and so on) and still end up broke. You might have to work 2 or 3 part-time jobs because you cannot find an employer to hire you full time despite a college degree. Sure, there are lots of new little expenses that are a part of modern life, but that's not why people are strapped. Not making excuses for people, just laying out the reality.

That said -- and maybe because I grew up poor in the projects -- it's very important to find some way to save even a little bit. I think the Dave Ramsey advice to save a beginner Emergency Fund of $1000 is very important, because many emergencies could be saved with just having that much set aside. It's probably primarily because I have this mindset of save save save that I have the job I have (pursued because of stability and benefits), retirement savings, a house, a rental property, an Emergency Fund and sinking funds for home maintenance, and some 529 savings for two kids. My family and I splash out a bit regularly but I still act like I might need to switch to survival mode at any moment. I think that's the only way we have gotten ahead. (That, and extreme luck.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The modern redefining of luxuries as necessities makes it hard to see that saving is doable for many people who claim that they can’t save a dime (while typing away on their smartphones).

+1

One word: Starbucks.

Starbucks is not the reason people don't have much leftover after paying rent, school loans, car loans, and medical bills.

It can be if it's a daily fix. That's $200-$250 a month.

Just FYI, a fancy grande latte is less than $6, even at the priciest locations downtown. So, even if you go to Starbucks daily, it's about $180 a month. Not suggesting that that's a reasonable expense for someone struggling but the math was wrong.

Yep. I get a grande skinny cinnamon dolce latte every morning. It's $5, so $140/month. If I were truly living paycheck to paycheck I probably wouldn't do it, but that isn't the reason people aren't able to save in a macro sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up really, really poor in Appalachia. My family was well below poverty line most years. Poverty can be crushing but I agree many people way overspend and blame it on what they “deserve.” I got out by clawing my way out eating the rice and beans in a cold shared apartment and all that.

If you trade financial security for everyday indulgences, you will never get ahead without some serious luck. Otherwise you will continue to flounder. It IS a choice usually. Exception is crushing medical bills. We need basic nationalized health care. No, you won’t get the best, but we need adequate free care.

Who cared for the kids in your family before K and before/after school later?

My parents split shifts. My dad left the house at 5 am and my mom worked nights. That is still how many poor families do it. And we were latch key kids really young.

Anonymous wrote:The question was why do people of privilege find it so hard to understand how hard it is to save, and this thread demonstrated this perfectly.

Being working poor is really hard. It is time consuming in a way that many people don't seem to understand. Taking a low-wage hourly job or two puts you at the mercy of someone else making a schedule, with a week's notice. Or maybe you will only get 3 shifts when you were counting on 5 that week. Then you have to find child care for a random schedule, which is why people frequently ask family to help, or you have to pay a sitter, who may make a bit less than you do. Because you are hourly, you don't have health insurance, or a way to budget because random hours.

This leads to the need for social services, whether that be reduced lunches, medical care, or an unemployment check because the factory closed and half the town is out of work too.

It takes time to figure out how to get medical care, and time to figure out how to fill out forms to get social services. It is complicated and confusing. Being poor has long-term impacts, like not knowing how to apply for college or the aid that they can likely receive because of a low family income, or skipping the health insurance options because that does cost extra, and maybe it's worth taking the risk of not having it.

This was my childhood, followed by me putting myself through college (I arranged my classes at a big ten school around my work schedule for one of my jobs and not the other way around. I ate an apple around 3p, and then ate whatever pizza was messed up at the restaurant that night) Saving just wasn't an option. There was nothing to save.

My husband is furloughed, and I run a consulting firm. We do have savings, and are fine. But I won't be the one scolding Americans who are $600 away from catastrophe at any moment.

Np: but, having children and those associated costs can be helped and for those of us who took the practical route and waited until we could afford them, it is hard to rationalize why others couldn’t do the same. That is, absolutely, something that can be delayed. Whether people want to admit it or not, children are a luxury.

I’ve walked the walk - mid 20s, laid off, no money, no food and when I recovered from that, I went back to school at night (6-10pm Mon-Thurs, Sat morning classes) after working 40+ hrs Mon-Fri, paid for it out of my earnings (early 2000s), sacrificed any sort of life for years to get an Accounting degree, so my sympathy for others not willing to make sacrifices for the big picture, is limited.

Anonymous wrote:I grew up really, really poor in Appalachia. My family was well below poverty line most years. Poverty can be crushing but I agree many people way overspend and blame it on what they “deserve.” I got out by clawing my way out eating the rice and beans in a cold shared apartment and all that.

If you trade financial security for everyday indulgences, you will never get ahead without some serious luck. Otherwise you will continue to flounder. It IS a choice usually. Exception is crushing medical bills. We need basic nationalized health care. No, you won’t get the best, but we need adequate free care.

Who cared for the kids in your family before K and before/after school later?

I had 3 roommates until I got married at 28 (and we lived in a really crappy, falling-down house in a transitional (at best) area.
I'm not sure how common that is these days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The modern redefining of luxuries as necessities makes it hard to see that saving is doable for many people who claim that they can’t save a dime (while typing away on their smartphones).

+1

One word: Starbucks.

Starbucks is not the reason people don't have much leftover after paying rent, school loans, car loans, and medical bills.

It can be if it's a daily fix. That's $200-$250 a month.

Just FYI, a fancy grande latte is less than $6, even at the priciest locations downtown. So, even if you go to Starbucks daily, it's about $180 a month. Not suggesting that that's a reasonable expense for someone struggling but the math was wrong.