This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultAsking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

60% of Americans now living paycheck to paycheck - again. You can't blame Bidenomics for this, but it sure hasn't helped . . .



Photo above - Nancy Pelosi (age 83, net worth $120 million) consults with Pope Francis on eradicating poverty. Stop laughing - what else could they possibly be discussing?

I wasn't surprised when I read the “60% living paycheck to paycheck” headline – again. (See link below). It's been popping up for years. I remember it during the Trump administration, and during the Obama years too. I'm not an expert on presidential eras before that, but if you showed me discouraging “paycheck to paycheck” stats from Bush, Clinton, Carter, Ford and beyond, I wouldn't dispute them. I suspect that during George Washington's presidency people lived “harvest to harvest”, and a poor one meant misery or starvation over the winter.

What caught my eye this time was the subtitle: "nearly half of people earning $100,000 a year are also living paycheck to paycheck." Geez Louise – I don't earn close to $100,000 (it's $58,000), and I'M not living paycheck to paycheck. Where do all these hamsters earning 6 figures live? Are they all in Silicon Valley, Seattle, NYC, and Los Angeles?

I suspect that's part of the answer. “Affordable housing” NYC style is around $3,500 a month for a walk up junior 1 bedroom on a crappy street. So right off the bat, nearly half their after-tax income is gone, before they even start thinking about food, clothing, electricity, cable, internet, cellular, subway fare, health insurance, liquor, pot, or junkets to Atlantic City to pay the slots and blackjack.

Don't scoff when I toss in “Atlantic City”. Half of all personal bankruptcies are precipitated by gambling losses. This is an official court statistic. And if your state has Powerball or scratch off lotto sales, then you've seen senior citizens lined up a dozen deep to buy tickets. Half of all retirees believe “lottery winnings will be an essential part of my retirement income”. I blame public schools for not including statistical probability in the core curriculum required for a diploma. But every kid has seen at least a dozen global warming films.

Snark of the day – wasn't Obamacare supposed to fix this paycheck to paycheck problem? To prevent people from being driven into bankruptcy by an auto accident or cancer? The actual cost of health insurance has skyrocketed. Most single worker coverage is around $700 a month ($8,500 a year) split between employer and employee. Coverage for a family of 4 in California or NY can easy top $25,000. It's surpassing car payments, for sure, and possibly edging up to match rent/mortgage payments for some unlucky people. No wonder some are tempted to ditch coverage and just pay the penalty - and hope for the best.

If we're alarmed at 60% living paycheck to paycheck (and we should be), here are some other official statistics to throw into the mix.

- 44% of workers don't earn enough to owe any income tax.

- 70 million people collect social security.

- 38 million people are on food stamps

- 13 million people work at least 2 jobs

- 10 million people live in rent subsidized units

- Over 2 million are homeless, live in tent cities, or sleep for free on a relative's couch

- Nearly 2 million are in prison or jail. Another 5 million are on court supervised parole, or out on bail awaiting trial.

- Only 1.4 million new homes are built annually, in recent years. This includes apartments, tiny homes, mobile homes, manufactured homes, etc.

Okay – that's a lot of data, I know. The conclusion I reach is that America doesn't build enough new homes, and people couldn't afford them anyway. At least not as Uber drivers, Amazon pickers, ex convicts, healthcare system compliers, and weekend blackjack players.

I'm not blaming President Biden. I'm not blaming people in general. But these statistics are so effed up. How can we be at “full employment” (like Bidenomics always claims) and have so much poverty and misery? How can we keep re-electing a US Senate where the starting salary is almost $200,000 annually (plus food housing and travel stipends), their average net worth is $7 million, and their average age is 64? How is this dystopian paycheck to paycheck life ever going to change with the same rich, old ruling class always in charge?

I'm just sayin' . . .

Nearly half of Americans earning more than $100K now report living paycheck to paycheck — here's why your savings are more important now than ever (msn.com)
Top | New | Old
LILY61 Best Comment
if the rich and the government would step up and end homelessness we would all eventually be very well off. but the way things are going...there will be too many people to do anything....we will be mostly homeless ...and WWIII will begin....(which it already has but no one is saying it).

Don't you think it is odd that we had a pandemic and there are still way too many people here.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
The yearly influenza pneumonia deaths totals are the yearly covid numbers.

The apparent amnesia of the yearly influenza death totals aside, it's become increasingly difficult to obtain any explanation as to why the influenza without covid rates appear to have suddenly stopped when covid showed up.
@SusanInFlorida I wondered about that last part myself...China and India... i have a tv movie mentality and when people are fighting over something that seems useless...that means they know something we don't know. That land has purpose and meaning. maybe someone wants to build something there.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@LILY61 just a guess here:

it has "strategic potential" for electronic/signal intelligence gathering of the other guys, because it's on a mountain top.

SteelHands · 61-69, M
The problem isn't poverty.

It's miseducation. Abandonment of worthy education and instead,

Government preaching, anti faith morals.

Here we see two costumed fakes pretending to like each other.
@SteelHands And yet like a robot, you keep responding. If my user id and picture lead you to ignore me, when does that start?
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@LeopoldBloom Quite a while now.

Yet you still show up on my threads.

Funky mf won't be told to go.
@SteelHands As long as you're posting on a public thread, people are going to comment. You could always be a pussy and block me.

I didn't come here for you, anyway. The OP is pretty smart and I like to hear what she has to say. You're just a chimp throwing poo at people who are trying to have a conversation.
Oh come on stop sticking up for Biden.
Pretzel · 70-79, M
But if you want to retire rich...be a congressman or senator.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Pretzel i don't think presidents and senators get rich on their salaries. i suspect it involves

1. becoming members of corporate boards
2. writing books
3. speeches and personal appearances
4. right of first refusal on sweeheart real estate and investment deals.

hillary clinton famously made $100,000 profit in a single day, on her first "pork belly futures" trade. She never made another trade since. if that's not some sort of scam, i don't know what else would rise to that level.
SteelHands · 61-69, M
@SusanInFlorida Stock share prices are super easily manipulated by publicly announced political candidate and the winners federal government policy agendas. Those agendas may or may not be enacted by writ, blocked by the houses, fought in the courts, abandoned by executive writ, and so forth.

Assuming a president is allowed to reverse his own policies and anyone knows he will, trillions can change hands on wall street.

That's how the middle class public gets fkd. The fiduciary players are no less involved in this massive con job. The Clintons were blatant as could be with it.

The Tech monopoly story makes Rockefellers Oil goliaths look like a shell game in a dirty alley by comparison.
Pretzel · 70-79, M
100k and living paycheck to paycheck? Maybe in NYC or CA?

Otherwise people are just sucked into the capitalistic n3d for the newest and best.
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Pretzel i'm using a 4 year old Samsung Galaxy S10+. It's probably 4 generations old. I'd used it forever, except that the case is sealed, and I can't replace the battery. This should be illegal. suppose they sold flashlights (or cars) this way.
Tetsuya · 56-60, M
@SusanInFlorida I had to give up the slide-phone with a full keyboard I had for 11 years when they kicked everyone off 3G
and my cheap as hell legacy plan disappeared with it
SusanInFlorida · 31-35, F
@Tetsuya my phone is 5G. but most of the time it defaults to 4G because 5G signals have less range and coherence.
thank you for best comment

 
Post Comment