This only shows how big economic illiteracy is. Not how much people are earning vs the cost of living.

> Economic illiteracy

I respect your opinion but the stats presented before does not “shows“ illiteracy but low investments. Lack of liquidity to invest seems a very plausible raison because a revenu threshold has to be passed to be able to buy food before founds. This stat is probably almost a proxy for how many Americans are below that threshold.

It is really hard to believe that 71.93% of Americans are on the verge of homelessness and starvation. Much more plausible (and even mentioned in the linked article under "Lack of budgeting and financial planning" and "Social pressures") are just bad habits.

Of course there are economic literate people who really are struggling, but I doubt they make even half of those 71.93%.

In this case you are revealing your own (statistical) illiteracy. It’s referring to 70% of people who claim to be living paycheck to paycheck, not 70% of all people.

There’s a range of goods and services accessible on may consider after food but before investments : medical expenses, gas to visit family on week end…

The personal savings rate has slowly halved over the past 60 years[0].

Did everyone become illiterate or maybe the inflation rate has exceeded the growth rate of wages[1], among other things?

What's funny is that on two comments rejecting my argument one accuses me of considering people "too dumb" to take their own financial decisions, the other tells me people are actually too dumb and that's why they are in financial trouble.

- [0]: https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/personal-savings

- [1]: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/

The article you linked mentions "Lack of budgeting and financial planning" and "Social pressures" for reason of living paycheck to paycheck. And those are self reported values.

Last 60 years we experienced enormous growth of advertising - is it really hard to believe that many people are having big problems with limiting their spending.

>> "71.93% of Americans Living Paycheck to Paycheck Have $2,000 or Less in Savings"[0].

It's a meaningless statistic. They can still have high net worth and/or large incomes even if they don't keep cash on hand.

Well it might please you then that about 50% of the respondents report low income as the cause for living paycheck by paycheck. Even more report high monthly bills as a cause.

Just read it, it's all in there.

People thinking their income is to low is not exactly news. I haven't personally met anyone who would ever claim their income is to high. Why do you think I haven't read it? Do you always agree with everything you read?

I believe you didn't read it because your argument is quite poor and doesn't mention some relevant points the article makes.

I may not always agree with everything I read, but at least I take the time to read it before openly disagreeing with it.

I'm sorry to disappoint you. I did read it and found it unconvincing to say the least.

I'm confused about that figure, since not having any savings to fall back on seems to me to be the definition of living paycheck-to-paycheck. How is that not 100%? The argument you're making seems tautological, and doesn't really account for the elasticity of people's spending habits, or the income ranges they fall into in the first place.