-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
60% of millennials earning over $100,000 say they're living paycheck to paycheck
- Thread starter Septimus Prime
- Start date
Wishing you and yours a speedy trip into the gentle embrace of the American Healthcare System.
I think that's needlessly cruel, despite the ignorance. US society crushes all with enough debt already.
I don't understand what you're trying to get at. Doubting that even a majority of those 60 percent are in medical doesn't equate to me supporting out healthcare system.
These are high earners who.most likely have healthcare coverage. While yes,
Some are high deductible plans that still shouldn't lead a 6 figure earner to living paycheck to paycheck.
I'm just using some deductive reasoning
Well, the article does specifically state childcare as one of the expenses that is causing them to live paycheck to paycheck I think it safe to assume that they have kids and are not single earners.
That's the point. We have a hideous medical debt crisis in this country. I make just about 100k per year but I have a disabled spouse unable to work and medical debt that makes every month a struggle for survival. So all the financial experts in this thread talking about how we're just lazy deserve to walk a mile in our shoes.
If you think it's easy to get by in America with medical debt and caring for a disabled family member, and that insurance is in any way reliable, I hope you get the opportunity to try it.
I was assuming a lot of these stats were pulled from single people because the majority of people with kids would have a spouse to help with income. Even if the spouse makes only half their income that's a lot of extra money. Unless they have like 3+ kids that still seems off.
I think it goes without saying the people who are pointing to financial illiteracy and poor money management skills as the shared denominator are obviously excluding outlier situations such as people stuck with exceedingly high medical costs.
It's more a generality than a rigid rule of thumb.
Why not? It's apparently very easy to deal with if you are not financially illiterate.
But yes, me using the phrasing I did to get someone to think about how a situation might affect their perspective is definitely the problem here.
Read the room. No one is assuming that medical debt is easy, that isn't remotely what the thread was about. We are talking about people who are earning $100,000 a year, who more than likely have full benefits and retirement savings that are complaining they are living paycheck to paycheck.
Again, for those that seem to not understand the issue: There are plenty of people out there that are living in the exact same areas that are dealing with the exact same issues as you, childcare, medical bills, debt, emergencies, etc. that are making FAR less than $100,000 a year. Stop complaining about making $100,000 a year, it truly comes across as offensively stupid and callous.
Look into the cost of child care it is insane.
I know a number of couples were one of them have had to give up on their career because they were losing money when both of them were working.
there are better ways instead of being snide. that's usually counterproductive.
We can have threads about the exploding cost of housing, the student debt crisis, the absurd larcenous cost of US healthcare and everyone agrees this is terrible. But as soon as someone suggests that these might have an effect, even on people who make over an expected income level, then it's time to read the room?
The room just spent 8 pages telling me that I am irresponsible and deserve my situation, and that no one here would ever end up in that situation. I read the room and I'm making it clear that based on the lack of empathy displayed, I think the room is full of assholes.
I have a champagne lifestyle on a beer budget.
YOLO. Also, you only live once.
It cited the example of a college-educated 35-year-old earning more than $100,000 while juggling a mortgage, student-loan debt, and a child, which could leave them with little savings for big purchases or unexpected emergencies.
Article also points out that 100k is considered middle class now.
I didn't see anything about if living paycheck to paycheck meant there were minimal pre-tax/payroll deductions included.
My husband and I don't live paycheck to paycheck exactly, but there's weeks when the "entire paycheck" goes to expenses and weeks when it doesn't. However, we also save close to 20% because the paycheck is post-deductions/tax/etc.
YOLO. Also, you only live once.
It cited the example of a college-educated 35-year-old earning more than $100,000 while juggling a mortgage, student-loan debt, and a child, which could leave them with little savings for big purchases or unexpected emergencies.
Article also points out that 100k is considered middle class now.
I didn't see anything about if living paycheck to paycheck meant there were minimal pre-tax/payroll deductions included.
My husband and I don't live paycheck to paycheck exactly, but there's weeks when the "entire paycheck" goes to expenses and weeks when it doesn't. However, we also save close to 20% because the paycheck is post-deductions/tax/etc.
Last edited:
Congratulations on wishing people to get sick and injured over forum posts
Quote me one person who says that your medical debt is your fault and you deserve to be in the situation that you are in. Because that is exactly what you have turned this into.
One of the big things is food costs. Millennials tend to eat outside the home more often, or order in rather than cook for themselves at home. We don't have too much downtime. The only reason I feel like I cook is because I do that as a job...my wife is clueless about cooking she just spends money on take out.
I don't think anyone in this thread is ignoring people who are faced with overwhelming medical debt.
But that's also because the article this thread is based on is largely not about that.
Also, the extreme cost of healthcare in the United States impacts everyone. Not just those who make six figures a year.
But that's also because the article this thread is based on is largely not about that.
Also, the extreme cost of healthcare in the United States impacts everyone. Not just those who make six figures a year.
I don't if you're purposefully being obtuse, but while what you're describing a very realistic scenario, is not the norm for people who are making 6 figures. Therefore it's hardly a reason to justify that 60% of those earners living paycheck to paycheck. If you ACTUALLY read the article, the reason is mostly lifestyle creep and choices. NOT medical debt.
I don't buy it, you have to be really fucking bad with money to be living paycheck to paycheck on a 100K income. I could somewhat understand if you're living in New York or LA, but someone's not teaching these people money management skills
I notice none of those are talking about people who had a medical emergency and are now saddled with debt, did I miss something?
Did you even read the article?
Let me help you out:
On average, this isn't about someone with excessive medical debt, it is about people who are trying to follow the influencers and are living beyond their means. Are there individuals out there with excessive medical debt that are in this situation, of course, but they aren't remotely in the majority.
I don't know how to feel about the implication that poor people make bad financial decisions when they have kids while poor.
At least, to me, when I hear that, it sounds like the implication is that poor people should make "good" financial decisions to not have kids?
Because this is about 60% of Millenials making over 100k
Nowhere near a majority of that number is medical debt
When the fucking article actually spells out the reason for this statistic showing exactly what the cause for this is, and you keep on harping on one reason, we're not the assholes. I'm sure there are some of that 60% is living paycheck to paycheck due to medical but that's not the reason for most. That's what the article says. You'd know if you actually read it.
No no you see
We're the assholes for addressing the article
And that poster is a hero for wishing cancer or a near fatal car wreck upon us.
Apart from rare edge case scenarios like absurd medical debt, I still stand by what I said. You can always find exceptions if you look hard enough, but for the vast majority of people, you should be completely fine if you're making over $100k/year.
People aren't pointing at your specific situation and shitting on you though. People are talking in generalities in response to a piece of data. Obviously, everyone in here is aware that their could be a tragic set of circumstances that makes the generality incorrect, but that's baked into the idea of talking in generalities (which we have to do when talking about general trends), I don't expect people to speak in a way that covers every situation.
Or you could understand even in your situation you still have it better than like 2/3rds of Americans.
While I'm all for helping people like you in your situation what bothers me is a ton of people in your situation don't understand how much worse it is for a large swath of largely non college educated Americans.
Not so much about being frugal as it is not scaling your lifestyle to match your income if it's gonna put you in this kind of situation.
That is what is comical about this, that would be $32,000 a year, less than 1/3rd of what we are talking about in this thread. Those individuals are living paycheck to paycheck, not the person who is making 3x as much.
You're all right. I got angry and made something about me that wasn't. And in doing that I ignored all the people who are struggling even harder than I am.
I apologize for being snide and derailing the thread.
around 30
plus medicare tax
plus social security tax
plus state tax
then you have medical insurance and retirement deductions
you take home is usually less than half your pay check
Here's the thing: if this wasn't the result of an analysis of 60% of millennials who make this much, you might have had a point, but the idea that even a majority of these are due to expenditures outside of their control like medicals bills and not people spending more on expensive lifestyles than they can actually afford (which is the point of the article, mind you) is extremely unlikely, and you hiding this entire group behind such a strawman and wishing others a terrible fate is a problem in its own right.
2021 and people, even more informed people on this message board, still think millennials are spending too much on avocados and there have been no other changes in the last few generations.
Its all good, I think in general the majority on this forum and probably off this forum recognize that our healthcare system is fundamentally broken. I'm currently paying $500+ a month for medical for my wife, son, myself; it has a $7,000 deductible (I make $58k gross). Currently have an appointment for tubes in my sons ears.
It isn't avocado toast; there are escalating costs of living, but those costs of living are felt across the board. The same issues that you are dealing with making $100,000 a year are felt by the McDonalds working making $30,000.
Chicago is underrated for this reason. Don't need a car if you have a job in the city and way more affordable than NYC, LA, SF, Seattle, Boston...
I don't think anybody is disputing this reality.
I think the problem comes when you try to frame this reality around people who are making 100k a year and are, by their own admission, spending a lot of that money trying to "keep up with the Jones'" as it were...
It's a misrepresentation of the millennial generation; the majority of whom I'm going to guess are not making close to that much, and have a much more intimate understanding of what it means to live paycheck to paycheck.