undefined | Better HN

story

0 pointsJabbles1y ago0 comments

How are you all discussing this question from memory without linking to the source?

Poorly, that's how.

When faced with a hypothetical expense of $400, 63 percent of all adults in 2022 said they would have covered it exclusively using cash, savings, or a credit card paid off at the next statement (referred to, altogether, as "cash or its equivalent")

https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2023-economic-we...).

0 comments

Izkata1y ago

I suspect multiple things are getting mixed together... I swear I remember reading what GP said much further back than two years ago.

Edit: That said, the part you quoted supports GP, the part in quotes seems to be what they actually asked. Credit is probably not what most would think of as "cash equivalent", that would be debit, checks, and transfers like Zelle.

16% straight answered like that, if you scroll down to the next table for non-cash-equivalent payments:

> Put it on my credit card and pay it off over time

jrmg1y ago

The question actually asked is also published. It was:

Suppose that you have an emergency expense that costs $400. Based on your current financial situation, how would you pay for this expense?

If you would use more than one method to cover this expense, please select all that apply.

a. Put it on my credit card and pay it off in full at the next statement

b. Put it on my credit card and pay it off over time

c. With the money currently in my checking/savings account or with cash

d. Using money from a bank loan or line of credit

e. By borrowing from a friend or family member

f. Using a payday loan, deposit advance, or overdraft

g. By selling something

h. I wouldn't be able to pay for the expense right now

https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2024-supplementa...

Edit: The people running this survey also had the same thoughts about ‘maybe some people are choosing to not this directly even though they could?’ And added this question:

Based on your current financial situation, what is the largest emergency expense that you could handle right now using only your savings?

1. Under $100

2. $100 to $499

3. $500 to $999

4. $1,000 to $1,999

5. $2,000 or more

This is discussed just below the stats @Jabble sites!

To explore this potential difference between how people would pay for a small, unexpected expense and whether they could pay for it with cash or the equivalent, the survey included a question asking people what the largest emergency expense was that they could handle using only savings. Eighteen percent of adults said the largest emergency expense they could handle right now using only savings was under $100, and 14 percent said they could handle an expense of $100 to $499

ChadNauseam1y ago

So this statistic means most people are not living paycheck to paycheck right? (Although I didn’t think that “paycheck to paycheck” meant you would be ruined by an unexpected $400 expense)

Anyway, it still doesn’t seem like most people live paycheck to paycheck, according to your link:

> Some financial challenges, such as a job loss, require more financial resources than would an unexpected $400 expense. One common measure of financial resiliency is whether people have savings sufficient to cover three months of expenses if they lost their primary source of income. In 2023, 54 percent of adults said they had set aside money for three months of expenses in an emergency savings or “rainy day” fund—unchanged from 2022 but down from a high of 59 percent of adults in 2021.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse