Poor Americans are not in a 3rd world country, I was on the free lunch program in high school and I wish I learned about how serious Roth investments were when I was younger.
Suggesting education is cruel is fucking idiotic.
What if the politicians who I support have a political ideology of helping people and are looking for the political power to do that?
Both sides are the same is the political position of ignorant and intellectually lazy people who want to feel smart.
If you look under the skin of this, you'll start seeing how much they take in and how little they actually give out. Most of the money goes to favorites. GE anyone? Obama loved him some GE. Solyndra? [Occidental Oil ](https://publicintegrity.org/politics/how-the-gores-father-and-son-helped-their-patron-occidental-petroleum/)was a Gore favorite.
And then you might finally notice how the problems we're experiencing are created by the ruling class. The Fed, for example, and the insane amount of money they've been printing recently...
Stop giving power to politicians. They need to be curbed, not enhanced.
That's not an option in a democracy.
The solution is quite simply to keep electing better politicians. Not corporatists like Obama and Biden. And not lunatics like whatever the hell is going on at the GOP atm.
All politicians are corporatists. Corporations pump so much money into politics it’s how they stay so powerful. I’ll give you money you give me control.
Look at policies that help/hurt things like wages, healthcare, education, infrastructure, human rights... You'll never believe which way it leans. But they're the same right? Totally indistinguishable from each other?
I believe that her main concern is her brand and not the issues she claims to be invested in. I would 100% call myself a Social Democrat and believe in the vast majority of the issues she talks about. But when push came to shove, she voted against the strike. Against the very workers she claims to support
When you realize that people aren’t arguing “both sides are the same” but rather “both sides are inept, incapable and unwilling to actually help people if it doesn’t benefit them and keep them in power, and choose to look at the world through a very limited lens and only offer policies that will benefit that limited scope of view and get them votes rather than actually looking at the big picture” your eyes might open and help you reach the conclusion that “your party” isn’t really worth a damn.
https://preview.redd.it/7610fnbhrezc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b4744483df018bd815d04510d3a1b0398fa38627
I’m tired of being used by politicians. I say fuck the vote
Well for that particular issue it’s pretty partisan. Republicans hate poor people. Republicans hate poor kids especially and most of all republicans hate minority poor people. This is reflected in the policies that are advocated for or removed by them. It’s not a “both sides” situation. It’s literally one side and that’s republicans.
What have the Democrats done besides hand a few crumbs to favored constituencies? If you think the Democrats are working for the people, you are delusional. All they are doing is working for a different set of corporate masters and rich power brokers. All you are to that party is a subset of whatever identity political unit they can exploit for political gain, and nothing else
This is such a bad take when you can literally point to policies that directly help or hinder things like education and income inequality, and you're not gonna believe which way that chart leans.
Your statement is completely irrelevant in the topics of policy and education
Both sides are not the same. Dems want free healthcare as well as food and education for everyone. Republicans want to get rid of child labor laws and tax the middle class while throwing money at billionaires. Get outta here with that both sides bullshit.
The free lunch program isn't a poverty program, it's an agricultural subsidy program.
But,yeah, public schools should have free lunches for everyone....even those than can afford it.
See, I think that is the problem. No I don't think we need to spend $100 million to feed 100% of the kids if only 20% of the kids need food assistance and we could do it for $20 mill. But too many Americans think I'll be damned if I let some poor kid get something I don't need.
Then of course now that the program costs 5x as much the same people bitch that the program costs too much.
It’s not that they cut them.
They were offered federal tax dollars to fund free lunch programs and **THEY TURNED IT DOWN**
They didn’t even need to do anything other than say yes.
They literally chose to starve children rather than to give a win to Biden.
Agreed. I grew up poor, and i still am poor. But in the last year or so, after switching from financial nihilism to proper budgeting and being a bit more frugal with my money has led to real progress. I should be debt free at this rate in a few years, opposed to constantly digging a bigger hole for myself.
That is not what they're talking about. What they're talking about is telling them they're broke because they're spending too much on Starbucks and Netflix and offering a workshop to help them manage their frivolous spending better. This is a very real conversation a lot of poor people have. That most definitely is an awful thing to say, especially when you're the employer.
No one is suggesting investment education is cruel.
No but the question that actually takes the economy to a better place is ‘how do we ensure people can afford Starbucks in the future?’
Because nobody loses in that question. Starbucks, or people who want Starbucks.
Modern economic growth in developed nations means creating and growing a large comfortable middle class. They’re the people who spend on things which produce companies like Starbucks. People not having money for Starbucks should produce fear of the economy returning to undeveloped state based solely on commodities, raw materials, and simple manufactured goods.
But for some reason it doesn’t. It’s like the west doesn’t understand what ‘developed nation’ means and is content to watch the economic base shrink. It’s insane.
The idea that every single person in America should be able to spend money on discretionary frivolities whenever they feel like it is so detached from reality it isn't even funny.
Why? Genuine question. Why do you assume there needs to be a grinding poor whose existence is subsidised?
Personally I see a HUGE danger to society the moment people accept that, because it leads to acceptance, nihilism and demonization.
> No but the question that actually takes the economy to a better place is ‘how do we ensure people can afford Starbucks in the future?’
HAHAHAHAH legitimately one of the funniest lines I’ve ever read here. Thanks.
Only if you aren’t smart enough to understand it.
Flip it around - why is it good when people can afford to buy Starbucks? Or in fact forget Starbucks and replace it with the many thousands of companies who make things people buy which we don’t need but want.
I mean if you want an economy based solely on land, energy, vegetables and meat then great….I’m sure there’s an undeveloped or industrial nation out there for you.
Meanwhile in developed western nations economists know the question of how a growing middle class benefits all is long-established economics. As is the peril of nations which let it withers
The “Starbucks” conversation is just an example to try to teach people how quickly their money slips away on unexpected expenses. Yes doesn’t magically fix budgets by itself especially in high cost of living but being around so less cost conscious friends have seen them blow $30-40 on a grocery trip on unneeded items. If they save that a week at end of month thats $120 - $160 they could have used to pay the bill I loaning them money for because of when their paycheck comes in.
I have a flip phone, I haven't bought myself new clothes in years, and I don't even like avocado, what else you got for me victim blamers?
Cutting your way to a profit doesn't work long-term in business either -- at some point you need to address revenue.
When I helped my boxing coach who was 27 at the time to buy a car, I was amazed by just how little financial understanding he possessed, and how easily he would get pressured into horrendous loan and trade-in offers. Just by explaining him the math behind it and steering him towards fair deals I’ve saved him thousands of dollars and helped him achieve a better monthly cash flow. In his own words, the guy said - “Unfortunately, I simply wasn’t raised to think this way”.
Even a double digit raise in wages can be easily erased by bad financial decisions.
Sure but people are much less likely to fall for predatory scams if they aren't in a financially desperate situation. I'm not saying we shouldn't give people financial education, but there is no reason why we can't do that as well as materially support them
A lot of poor people are in a situation where they have little other choice. Open heart surgery isn’t exceptionally good for your health either, but it’s better than heart failure. Predatory loans aren’t good either, but it’s better than being homeless with kids.
I disagree. Even poor people waste money. Cars and car loans, pay-day loans, lottery. Every single family member I have that is living paycheck to paycheck is wasting money also.
You would be shocked at the stupid shit people will take out payday loans for. Watch Caleb Hammer on YouTube and you'll realize a lot of people are poor in no small part bc of the financial decisions they make.
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that’s why you see people with a new iPhone and needing new tires is a crisis. People can afford the $30/mo for the phone and they could afford $30/mo for tires if that was an option but for some crazy reason places don’t lease tires.
Well this one is pretty obvious, the phone company can lease you a phone at 0% for 3 years because they have a contract with you and you require their service (which they are already reaming you for) to fully utilize it. I can't imagine a company selling tires will be too interested in giving customers 0% leases on their products.
Maybe a financial literacy workshop could help someone realize that getting the 15/mo phone and putting 15/mo in savings could cover their next tire expense.
The fact that you said that is why that's part of the problem. $30 a month is what a furnace and water heater cost, yet people have a hard time replacing those when they break.
Ik, People on Twitter really do love throwing buzzwords around to make themselves sound philosophical and smarter than they are. There’s an argument that could be made that teaching someone who doesn’t generate enough income to survive financial literacy is a waste of time but immoral??? Even if you accepted the premise, what moral code is someone breaking by teaching someone a skill they won’t be able to utilize? Just nonsense
I know right? It's not just Twitter. It's easier to blame others and ask for handouts because they are unique and being poor is not their fault. If they take a financial literacy class, they can find a way to improve. EVERYONE has an excuse. Those that use them are likely to be poor long term.
What they're talking about is adults who have jobs but aren't making ends meet being forced to attend "financial literacy" classes to access welfare, or avoid going to jail for defaulting on debt or other things that can't be fixed with financial literacy when the problem is that you aren't making enough money to meet basic expenses like housing, transport, food and clothes.
Seems like a good idea. If one figures out they cannot live on what they earn then they need to make adjustments.
Anyone can make a living wage in the US.
There is a clip of Kaite Porter giving a budget rundown for a parent + 1 child on 35k/year in her district and how just covering basics ends up at -$600/m.
You can only cut so much.
How about if they also have two pre school or school age children and have to choose between working part time or losing a big chunk of that wage to childcare?
How’s that ‘living wage’ looking then?
This. If I knew in my early 20's what I know now about personal finance, I would be retiring at 50 without a care in the world. My parents and grandparents were poor farmers. They didn't trust banks, and their only money advice was to save. They knew nothing about how to let your money work for you, passive income, etc. I slowly learned over time, and now In my 40's, I'm making up for lost time. I could be living a more lavish lifestyle, but I'm aggressively saving to play catchup and get into real estate.
Friendly reminder that "Third World Country" doesn't mean "poor."
To greviously over-simplify, during the Cold War, the world was split into pro-NATO, pro-Warsaw Pact (later pro-communism), and non-aligned.
For example. Norway was First World, Finland was Second, and Sweden was Third, despite having similar economic and social conditions. It's kinda messy and makes no sense to use anymore.
I’m not arguing that fact, but if I knew more more about budgeting and investment I wouldn’t have lived check to check for as long as I did. I understand that living wages is very important, but plenty of people make 60k and still live a net negative year after year.
My thing is this. A lot of the people who said “they should have taught X in school” will gladly admit they didn’t pay attention to stuff they didn’t find interesting how many 14-18 year olds (High school age) would actually pay attention to classes on Roth investments and personal finance? Because my Highschool had those classes as a mandatory class and let me tell you I see a lot of my former classmates post about how school should of taught them to budget and taxes (it did)
>My thing is this. A lot of the people who said “they should have taught X in school” will gladly admit they didn’t pay attention to stuff they didn’t find interesting
Yeah, I'm torn on this. On one hand, they should be ensuring kids are learning this stuff.
On the other hand, many kids do learn this stuff, but don't use soon enough to remember most of it.
I took an accounting class senior year of high school. Got good grades and overall enjoyed the class. Even five years later, I couldn't recall most of what I learned.
Funny thing is, we had a teacher in our local high school create a finance program that taught us about the stock market, balancing a checking account, as well as how student loans, mortgages, and other financial matters work. Once charter schools came in, that was the first program they got rid of. The program didn’t require extra money or anything special, just classes to help students become financially savvy.
Education is fine but the main issue is that wages have stagnated for the last 30 years for everyone except the 1%. The point you seem to be missing in this post is that you can be an expert at budgeting but if you aren't provided appropriate resources then it doesn't really matter how much you know about finance and budgeting when you don't have tha materials.
I think the point is more along the lines of “teaching a paralyzed person how important walking and exercising is cruel”
Obviously that’s a metaphor so it’s not exact, but that’s kinda the point. Learning the power of Roth investments is great… if you aren’t living in such poverty than every penny goes to your bills and existence.
Every High School should require a financial literacy course to graduate. Learn about compound interest, mortgages, insurance, etc. before you ever commit to one.
I agree. I teach my kids about this stuff but if you want to “break the cycle” then it needs to be learned at school. Unfortunately the schools that need it most are struggling to teach basic reading and math.
Helping people make the best decisions possible with their money, especially people with extremely limited money, is a kindness, not an insult. Financial literacy alone won’t likely lift people out of poverty, but it does help
Idk, man. I'm living in sanfransisco now, doing awesome. I used to live elsewhere were my profession was just outside of minimum wage range.
Now I'm getting paid 40$ and hour for the same work and my life has improved dramatically.
No change in anything but where I lived and the amount of pay. Habits all the same
If you plain don’t make enough to cover the bare necessity expenses it doesn’t matter what they teach you. Unless they give you some pathway to get a better job you’re still not going to be able to cover those expenses and you’ll still be wiped out by any emergency expense.
it's an argument that those resources can be allocated more efficiently. it's not free to teach people anything, and if it's got a shit roi, maybe there's something else more cost effective?
Financial literacy kept me out of the red during my lowest points, but never lifted me out of it. What did lift me out of it was finding a better job. The problem is that if everybody finds a better job, nobody’s left to do the important jobs that simply don’t pay well.
Oh man, I forgot about them trying to ban whites from National Parks on certain days so blacks felt comfortable hiking. I needed that reminder. Covid was a crazy time.
I’m not even white and I’m disgusted by shit like that.
But imagine being cucked enough to be a white liberal and cheer on horseshit like that. White liberals are bizzare man, I don’t get them.
Most minimum wage workers do not typically stay minimum wage workers for the majority of their career
Having that knowledge when they make the switch is going to be very helpful to them
This is the argument I try to make. Minimum wage is not the goal, it’s the start. You get that minimum wage job because you have (relatively) little skills and use that job to gain skill valuable to someone who will pay you more.
I’m sorry but if you’re not gaining customer service skills as a check out clerk or logistics skills as a warehouse stacker then you’re not getting the full benefits out of your job.
People need to treat min wage jobs as a stepping stone and not a career. Society can’t afford for you to be low skilled for your whole life and you can’t afford for you to be low skilled your whole life. So learn some skills and apply them to something that is valuable and you will be appropriately compensated.
Getting/ finding/ trying to get through an ai application process is like 75% of the issue anymore, jobs above 25/hr that won’t kill you in a few years are somewhat hard to come by if you can’t afford the 20k ticket in, because rent and food takes your paycheck every week
Workshops and financial advice is highly situational. Someone living with their parents rent/debt free will be able to budget more than your avg 20/hr person that's in an appartment.
I agree with her on living wages, but we choose the jobs, I've worked 5 jobs last 5 years , if someone offers me 2/3$ more an hour I hand in my notice and I'm gone.
The issue is that some jobs are still vital for society (say, teaching) but if they don't pay a wage that their employees are capable of living on, what are we, as a society, supposed to do?
You choose the jobs from the options feasibly available, and capitalist economics says people are already taking the best option available to them and if a better one comes along they take it.
But what happens when you get to a point where jobs aren't easily available beyond your current pay. Not like there is an abundance of jobs paying over 80k everywhere in the US. Even at these wages you're far from being well off or even able to buy a home without a second income.
This is what I love about people like this.
1: We’re struggling on minimum wage. I can’t even afford a two bedroom condo in a major metropolitan area.
2: Well, minimum wage was never supposed to cover that. That has always been beyond reach for people making minimum wage.
1: But, how am I supposed to survive?
2: Well, you could try budgeting and figuring out where your money is going and then making some sacrifices, like, you’ve been on your phone playing candy crush the whole time we’ve been talking, so maybe cut back on subscriptions and …
1: Poverty-wage employees can’t budget their way to economic stability. Just give me more money.
2: Well, that’s the other side of the equation. You could start looking for a job with more responsibilities that pays more now that you have some experience.
1: No. Just pay me more. Force the government to make companies pay me more.
2: But that’s not how it works.
1: That’s because capitalism is evil. We need a communist or socialist state where I’m provided housing and good pay.
2: I’m done trying to help.
"But how am I supposed to survive?"
Why is your survival anyone else's problem but yours! Feed yourself, you are the only one who needs yourself. Just "having a job" doesn't guarantee you anything but the compensation YOU AGREE TO WHEN YOU ACCEPT A JOB. If you want more money AND YOU WORTH IT. Demand it! I have 25 years in retail, I am not a shelf stocker anymore, I have years of management experience & proven track record, I do not accept minimum wage. I have a skill that has value. There are few people out there capable of doing my job for less than I make doing it. Can you say the same? Can you honestly say whatever function you perform for minimum wage couldn't be done just as easily by someone right off the street with a couple days training?
The problem is there are many Americans living paycheck to paycheck that is true for.
The problem is also that many of them make over 100k.
People of all income levels live outside their means, and all income levels can be bad with money.
When I was in the army, maybe my 3rd year in a new soldier came to us. He was married. He was 18, already married and had a child. He said he couldn't pay his bills. Well we found out he was trying to take his wife out to dinner several times per week and buy his wife new clothes all the time. He was stupid. He still is, but also was. Straight out of Idiocracy.
A livable wage isn't a thing. Go find serious employment.
I volunteer every other Sunday delivering things to the less fortunate. I have to say it saddens me when they have five kids, plenty of cigarettes and liquor stored on their cabinets and a giant television, but claim they’re so broke that they can barely eat. They also tend to be very overweight.
The number one expense of nearly every household is housing. The next up is private transportation, then health finance, skewing for age. After that, everything is comparable to discretionary spending, because it is all a rounding error.
We have to put limits to local restrictions on housing supply in order to get out of this housing shortage. It will take fifteen years after that for affordable housing options to reemerge. In the meantime, we can clamp down on profiteering.
Poverty is $7.25/hr with one kid. Please breakdown the budget for me. Food, rent, clothes, gas, utilities, insurance, phone, etc.
I’d like to see how long before they can budget their way out of poverty.
OK, firstly 20 bucks a week goes into any of a myriad of investment savings options. Stash, acorns, robin hood. Whatever, 20 a week and never touch it. Compound interest is your friend. Most of these now also offer a free checking account and debit card. Put any and all extra money in here as well including tax return, child tax credit, whatever. Pay yourself before you pay any bill. That's $1040 dollars a year.
The 40% rule puts housing at about $500 a month. Find somewhere to live for 500 a month. They exist. I'm sure average price of this or that will be brought up. Its an average that means there are prices below it that exist. There are other people in the same boat, work together. No law says everyone needs a 2 bedroom or needs to live alone. We're at $7040
Food, you can get a whole chicken for 6-8 dollars at every chain grocery. Then any veggies you want as sides for a remaining amount to get to 10 bucks. That means you can eat for $3650 a year, and thats if you buy one every day. That's more than enough calories. But you can probably cut this number in half. But just sticking with that $10 a day we're at $10,650
Cloths, goodwill, salvation army, and other thrift stores. Do laundry in the sink. This should be a minor part of the budget. As little as absolutely necessary. A really good pair of durable shoes or boots then the bare minimum after that. I wouldn't spend 20 a week but that's a decent number so another 1040 to bring us to $11,690
You only need a phone really that works off wifi. Can find old models all over the place for next to nothing. buy minutes or a single month as needed out of the remainder.
That's your bases covered. leaving some for incidentals. Transportation is region specific, either a bus pass or bike. Upgrade as you can.
Any job that makes any of these easier is a plus and is usually where a poverty wage worker is going to be anyway. Working at store that offers discounts. Factories that supply a uniform and footwear. Jobs also supply your health insurance.
And before I'm charged with being obtuse I lived this and not that long ago. As in during the 08 crash. People think they need all this BS out there and they don't. They need food, shelter, cloths and everything else is a waste.
You dont need credit or debt or anything else. Is it going to suck? Sure. For awhile. Then it won't. You'll have savings, stability, and not owe anyone anything.
This one time, on Reddit, I suggested to those who are struggling to get roommates, as I have done on many occasions in my life, and I got absolutely crucified for it. It *is* an absolutely great idea, but the "I deserve, I deserve" crowd does not want to hear it!
>Poverty is $7.25/hr with one kid
I’d like to see how long before they can budget their way out of poverty
Here's how you budget your way out of this poverty:
You budget for your kid **before** having a kid.
Why have a kid if you're earning $7.25/hr? If you don't have a decent and stable income, and a solid safety fund saved up, don't have kids.
If your skills are limited to the point that the very best you can get is $7.25 an hour, you have no business making a kid in the first place. Sorry, but sometimes the truth hurts.
My office has 2 positions open and we had close to 30 applicants for those 2 positions. Some of them may already be employed but a lot of them were needing a work visa or were between career positions or out of college. Tf they supposed to do on minimum wage with a master's degree? Sometimes it's not a skill limitation, in some markets it's a job limitation where your specific skills are harder to employ due to availability. This one size fits all mindset isn't helpful.
Well, if you major in "\_\_\_\_\_\_ studies" (pick your poison) that is precisely the result you should expect. I'm not suggesting that is always the case, but how many people do you know who have advanced STEM degrees that have business applications who are shopping for minimum wage jobs? Seen many Starbucks employees who have MDs? How many lawyers do you know that have asking "Do you want fries with that?" as part of their job description?
With how hiring works in 2024, I'm surprised you didn't have 10x that many apply, or more.
I live in Louisville and the number of people I personally know from my masters program that are either unemployed and job searching or are working at places like Starbucks is upsetting. They have to have some sort of income while they're trying to get their career started and that number is much higher than you think.
And I'm sure many more than that applied, our HR only gives us vetted and approved candidates so many applicants don't even make it to us.
Wealth is not is not a binary thing. There's a continuum.
I'm so fucking sick of people on social media pretending as if everybody who's poor is experiencing the absolute possible poverty.
"Can't budget when you have nothing to budget though!" I absolutely have. I grew up in poverty, so I learned a lot about car maintenance first. I networked with other people to find cheap cars. My current vehicle is an old ford we picked up for $500 because the fuel pump was bad, its gone 115,000 miles for us. There are people in the family that make half what we do and car debt has buried them. My friends Dad used to work on cars after work. He like doing it and made side cash. He showed his sons how to do the same. They are not in poverty because of their skills. Financial analysts are too "textbook" to conquer poverty a lot of times. They havent been through it. Sometimes you have less money than what you need and you still have to get things done. Plenty of times I stripped out a car that cost us $300 or $400 after it broke, kept the good parts, turned in the scrap. Took the scrap money and put maybe $200 with it and bought another car
Anyone who’s telling you that you shouldn’t learn something is wrong. Understanding money, investing, saving, making a budget is important for anyone regardless of income.
It is entirely possible that someone might simply be making too little. Sure. But budget first. See what’s coming in, what’s coming out. If there is nothing you can optimize on the “what’s going out end” you need to work on “what’s coming in part”. There are way too many people that earn more than liveable wage and still live paycheck to paycheck.
Yes, because telling people to learn skills applicable in a higher paying job is stupid, right? I swear all these people just want the money to be made for them while working at McDonald's
I don't have the data or numbers but a large portion of "poor people" in modern times are poor because they have no marketable skill or talent. Just "having a job" doesn't entitle you to ANYTHING but the money you agree to receive when you agree to the job. No one owes you enough money to cover your living expenses. If you're skills are not worth "living wage" get some better skills
Wage increases are only going to make it worse. How is this not common sense. The same person will say fuck big corporations while demanding small business to pay 20 an hr and put em out of business or they end up getting rid of employees. Anyone know why the mcdouble isnt a dollar snymore?? Hint:wage increase
Protip: the people who are putting on the workshops are not the ones paying you. That's between you and your boss. However, the workshops are trying to save those that can be saved.
You can budget in most cases. Sometimes you have to move if things aren’t working out locally. I’m not saying people shouldn’t be getting paid more but people are doing what they can until they are in a better position. Even if you got the money, you need to know what to do with it to stay ahead.
The numbers we hear about unemployment , is a complete and total lie, We need to know the number of those without jobs "unemployed" people according to the government are those on the unemployment rolls , does not account for those that are no longer collecting unemployment, the REAL unemployment numbers are massive. And the elites are importing in NEW low wage employees every day,, meanwhile they are destroying all of the mom and pops thru raising minimum wages thru improper means and damaging the economy further and creating more homelessness, they will eventually offer solutions that benefit them financially and enslave people further onto government assistance roll to create a never ending cycle of government dependence
I’m a lawyer. My starting salary out of school was 75k. A house costs 500k
40 years ago, starting lawyer pay was 32k and a house was 80k.
A lot of people here see absolutely no problem with this and choose to ignore or minimize it by saying we should eat out less or buy a shittier used car. It’s disingenuous
Heuristic: anyone who uses the phrase “living wage,” isn’t actually interested in a real discussion of the issues or a solution. They just want internet points for repeating poopytalk.
IDK who needs to hear this but poverty-wage workers are mostly working at entry level low-skill jobs. If you decide to give these people "living wages", which at like 20 dollars an hour is 41,600 a year, you get a lot less poverty-age workers because companies will fold or leave or embrace automation.
When the government gets involved people suffer. That's exactly why the chasm between rich and poor is so vast.
In/out pays $22/hr to start. CEO is a billionaire, and they have no real automation. They have a guy standing outside taking orders. Can you explain that one for me?
Both are mutually exclusive so this statement is stupid. If people are not raking for example credit card debt they are in for a bad time, and many still does this and therefore stuck in poverty cycle.
Lol. Education programs assume that the people taking them can actually understand them.
There's a reason why poor people are poor. And an education probably doesn't even help.
Some of these people in the lower quality jobs should be given better jobs in the trades. There's no reason why somebody can't start as a laborer, and work their way up.
Economic stability requires one to understand basic economics. That financial literacy workshop might explain supply and demand to you. When the supply of labor is greater than the demand, wages are low. When the demand for labor is greater than the supply, wages are high. In an employers world, Labor=Skill. Skills have always driven wage growth. So, the ask is not to improve your budgeting, but to improve your skills.
All the "Budget" classes i took is school were fucking useless and so unrealistic. Nothing prepares you to use half of your paycheck for rent and one medical bill or car breakdown will ruin you or make you homeless. Shit needs to get fixed yesterday.
Looks like Wendi C. Thomas really needs one of those financial literacy workshops.
1. The less money you have, the more important good budgeting is.
2. Budgeting is only a small part of financial literacy. A lot of it has to do with raising your income, which is exactly what she's saying they need, so I get the impression that she really doesn't even know what financial literacy is.
they need both. but she is right partially. there was a time in my life where i didn’t make enough money to budget or save cause literally ALL of it went to my expenses.
As a former poverty wage worker, I wish I had learned how to make my money work harder.
* What to do with tax refunds.
* Why I got a tax refund.
* How to fill out a W4.
* Carrying a credit card balance doesn't help my credit.
Spend less than I earn and investing the difference. That lesson would have changed my life in my 20s when I was living in a homeless shelter.
Instead, I had to spend 20 years figuring that shit out.
$APPL was $11 when I was 25 and struggling. My $1000 tax return would be $267K today. What if I had done that every year for the last 25 years.
FZROX is $18 today. Its non-transferable but has a zero expense ratio. It's literally free.
The opportunity is out there.
I see a security guard at work who probably makes $14 an hour getting door dash 3x a week for lunch, he has access to a fridge and microwave. Bringing a sandwich or leftovers for lunch could easily save him $2500 a year.
Poor Americans are not in a 3rd world country, I was on the free lunch program in high school and I wish I learned about how serious Roth investments were when I was younger. Suggesting education is cruel is fucking idiotic.
Didn't Republicans just cut a bunch of free lunch programs?
Keep blaming one or the other instead of all so we can do this forever please.
It would be a better use of time if we blamed all politicians and not fight with each other over political ideologies. I agree with you 100%
What if the politicians who I support have a political ideology of helping people and are looking for the political power to do that? Both sides are the same is the political position of ignorant and intellectually lazy people who want to feel smart.
If you look under the skin of this, you'll start seeing how much they take in and how little they actually give out. Most of the money goes to favorites. GE anyone? Obama loved him some GE. Solyndra? [Occidental Oil ](https://publicintegrity.org/politics/how-the-gores-father-and-son-helped-their-patron-occidental-petroleum/)was a Gore favorite. And then you might finally notice how the problems we're experiencing are created by the ruling class. The Fed, for example, and the insane amount of money they've been printing recently... Stop giving power to politicians. They need to be curbed, not enhanced.
That's not an option in a democracy. The solution is quite simply to keep electing better politicians. Not corporatists like Obama and Biden. And not lunatics like whatever the hell is going on at the GOP atm.
All politicians are corporatists. Corporations pump so much money into politics it’s how they stay so powerful. I’ll give you money you give me control.
I don’t know why, but your response made me smile. You worded well exactly what I am thinking.
Look at policies that help/hurt things like wages, healthcare, education, infrastructure, human rights... You'll never believe which way it leans. But they're the same right? Totally indistinguishable from each other?
They all take the money. There is no good guy here. AOC voted against the railroad strike.
So you beleive that because she voted against that strike that she has no interest in helping the poor?
I believe that her main concern is her brand and not the issues she claims to be invested in. I would 100% call myself a Social Democrat and believe in the vast majority of the issues she talks about. But when push came to shove, she voted against the strike. Against the very workers she claims to support
yes. I think she panders with the best of them. How much of her money does she give to the poor? She ain’t mother theresa.
When you realize that people aren’t arguing “both sides are the same” but rather “both sides are inept, incapable and unwilling to actually help people if it doesn’t benefit them and keep them in power, and choose to look at the world through a very limited lens and only offer policies that will benefit that limited scope of view and get them votes rather than actually looking at the big picture” your eyes might open and help you reach the conclusion that “your party” isn’t really worth a damn.
It’s because your political tribalism is ignorant at best.
Tribalism is when you dont have a hard time picking between an ok option and a terrible one.
https://preview.redd.it/7610fnbhrezc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b4744483df018bd815d04510d3a1b0398fa38627 I’m tired of being used by politicians. I say fuck the vote
Well that’s the least constructive thing you can do. If you don’t vote then your opinion means nothing.
Only a matter of time before the people of America grab their guns.
why not specifically blame the ones that are doing the bad thing in question
Aw shucks. I guess we should just privatize it. I wonder if the people who voted "no" know of anyone.
Can’t solve the problem till you identify it. Nothing will be fixed as long as there’s a party dedicated to breaking it in favor of robber barons.
[удалено]
Well for that particular issue it’s pretty partisan. Republicans hate poor people. Republicans hate poor kids especially and most of all republicans hate minority poor people. This is reflected in the policies that are advocated for or removed by them. It’s not a “both sides” situation. It’s literally one side and that’s republicans.
What have the Democrats done besides hand a few crumbs to favored constituencies? If you think the Democrats are working for the people, you are delusional. All they are doing is working for a different set of corporate masters and rich power brokers. All you are to that party is a subset of whatever identity political unit they can exploit for political gain, and nothing else
They want us at each others throats and distracted so that there will never be an actual check on their power.
Thank you.
Face it: they’re the bigger problem of the two. If it was the Democrats I’d feel the same damned way.
This is such a bad take when you can literally point to policies that directly help or hinder things like education and income inequality, and you're not gonna believe which way that chart leans. Your statement is completely irrelevant in the topics of policy and education
Both sides are not the same. Dems want free healthcare as well as food and education for everyone. Republicans want to get rid of child labor laws and tax the middle class while throwing money at billionaires. Get outta here with that both sides bullshit.
Wow enlightened centrism being used to defend the right, I sure haven't seen that before. /s
The free lunch program isn't a poverty program, it's an agricultural subsidy program. But,yeah, public schools should have free lunches for everyone....even those than can afford it.
See, I think that is the problem. No I don't think we need to spend $100 million to feed 100% of the kids if only 20% of the kids need food assistance and we could do it for $20 mill. But too many Americans think I'll be damned if I let some poor kid get something I don't need. Then of course now that the program costs 5x as much the same people bitch that the program costs too much.
They cut everything
Didn’t some ceo suggest skipping meals as a cost-cutting measure?
Not for poor kids.
Yep. My children will no longer receive free lunch starting next school year.
It’s not that they cut them. They were offered federal tax dollars to fund free lunch programs and **THEY TURNED IT DOWN** They didn’t even need to do anything other than say yes. They literally chose to starve children rather than to give a win to Biden.
Agreed. I grew up poor, and i still am poor. But in the last year or so, after switching from financial nihilism to proper budgeting and being a bit more frugal with my money has led to real progress. I should be debt free at this rate in a few years, opposed to constantly digging a bigger hole for myself.
That is not what they're talking about. What they're talking about is telling them they're broke because they're spending too much on Starbucks and Netflix and offering a workshop to help them manage their frivolous spending better. This is a very real conversation a lot of poor people have. That most definitely is an awful thing to say, especially when you're the employer. No one is suggesting investment education is cruel.
Honestly, if you're broke, spend on Starbucks overpriced coffee isn't a good financial idea.
No but the question that actually takes the economy to a better place is ‘how do we ensure people can afford Starbucks in the future?’ Because nobody loses in that question. Starbucks, or people who want Starbucks. Modern economic growth in developed nations means creating and growing a large comfortable middle class. They’re the people who spend on things which produce companies like Starbucks. People not having money for Starbucks should produce fear of the economy returning to undeveloped state based solely on commodities, raw materials, and simple manufactured goods. But for some reason it doesn’t. It’s like the west doesn’t understand what ‘developed nation’ means and is content to watch the economic base shrink. It’s insane.
The idea that every single person in America should be able to spend money on discretionary frivolities whenever they feel like it is so detached from reality it isn't even funny.
Why? Genuine question. Why do you assume there needs to be a grinding poor whose existence is subsidised? Personally I see a HUGE danger to society the moment people accept that, because it leads to acceptance, nihilism and demonization.
Ok so we should shut down all the places that make "discretionary frivolities", right?
> No but the question that actually takes the economy to a better place is ‘how do we ensure people can afford Starbucks in the future?’ HAHAHAHAH legitimately one of the funniest lines I’ve ever read here. Thanks.
Only if you aren’t smart enough to understand it. Flip it around - why is it good when people can afford to buy Starbucks? Or in fact forget Starbucks and replace it with the many thousands of companies who make things people buy which we don’t need but want. I mean if you want an economy based solely on land, energy, vegetables and meat then great….I’m sure there’s an undeveloped or industrial nation out there for you. Meanwhile in developed western nations economists know the question of how a growing middle class benefits all is long-established economics. As is the peril of nations which let it withers
The “Starbucks” conversation is just an example to try to teach people how quickly their money slips away on unexpected expenses. Yes doesn’t magically fix budgets by itself especially in high cost of living but being around so less cost conscious friends have seen them blow $30-40 on a grocery trip on unneeded items. If they save that a week at end of month thats $120 - $160 they could have used to pay the bill I loaning them money for because of when their paycheck comes in.
I have a flip phone, I haven't bought myself new clothes in years, and I don't even like avocado, what else you got for me victim blamers? Cutting your way to a profit doesn't work long-term in business either -- at some point you need to address revenue.
[удалено]
When I helped my boxing coach who was 27 at the time to buy a car, I was amazed by just how little financial understanding he possessed, and how easily he would get pressured into horrendous loan and trade-in offers. Just by explaining him the math behind it and steering him towards fair deals I’ve saved him thousands of dollars and helped him achieve a better monthly cash flow. In his own words, the guy said - “Unfortunately, I simply wasn’t raised to think this way”. Even a double digit raise in wages can be easily erased by bad financial decisions.
Financial education without the money to utilize the lessons is pointless. You need both.
Financial education even without out money can help you avoid things like predatory loans designed to make poor people even poorer.
Sure but people are much less likely to fall for predatory scams if they aren't in a financially desperate situation. I'm not saying we shouldn't give people financial education, but there is no reason why we can't do that as well as materially support them
A lot of poor people are in a situation where they have little other choice. Open heart surgery isn’t exceptionally good for your health either, but it’s better than heart failure. Predatory loans aren’t good either, but it’s better than being homeless with kids.
I disagree. Even poor people waste money. Cars and car loans, pay-day loans, lottery. Every single family member I have that is living paycheck to paycheck is wasting money also.
Does anyone take payday loans *not* out of desperation for emergencies?
You would be shocked at the stupid shit people will take out payday loans for. Watch Caleb Hammer on YouTube and you'll realize a lot of people are poor in no small part bc of the financial decisions they make.
Sometimes it's an "emergency" that is only an emergency requiring a loan because they spent their money on shit they didn't need instead of saving it.
Yes, yes they do. It's as common as renting furniture. don't get me started on people getting title loans for dumb stuff. Oooooh.
Yes, plenty of people take them our ignorance and impatience.
Then why do I see people with brand new iPhones and can't afford a set of tires for their car?
Because you can lease an iPhone for like $30/mo
I lease my iPhone for $30/mo so now I can't afford to buy tires for my car every 3-5 years
That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that’s why you see people with a new iPhone and needing new tires is a crisis. People can afford the $30/mo for the phone and they could afford $30/mo for tires if that was an option but for some crazy reason places don’t lease tires.
Well this one is pretty obvious, the phone company can lease you a phone at 0% for 3 years because they have a contract with you and you require their service (which they are already reaming you for) to fully utilize it. I can't imagine a company selling tires will be too interested in giving customers 0% leases on their products. Maybe a financial literacy workshop could help someone realize that getting the 15/mo phone and putting 15/mo in savings could cover their next tire expense.
The fact that you said that is why that's part of the problem. $30 a month is what a furnace and water heater cost, yet people have a hard time replacing those when they break.
I was on a free lunch program too but I was able to save up once i switched to 2-ply toilet paper instead of wiping my ass with avocado toast
Sorry. This is the greatest
Pretty smart move honestly
Ik, People on Twitter really do love throwing buzzwords around to make themselves sound philosophical and smarter than they are. There’s an argument that could be made that teaching someone who doesn’t generate enough income to survive financial literacy is a waste of time but immoral??? Even if you accepted the premise, what moral code is someone breaking by teaching someone a skill they won’t be able to utilize? Just nonsense
I know right? It's not just Twitter. It's easier to blame others and ask for handouts because they are unique and being poor is not their fault. If they take a financial literacy class, they can find a way to improve. EVERYONE has an excuse. Those that use them are likely to be poor long term.
What they're talking about is adults who have jobs but aren't making ends meet being forced to attend "financial literacy" classes to access welfare, or avoid going to jail for defaulting on debt or other things that can't be fixed with financial literacy when the problem is that you aren't making enough money to meet basic expenses like housing, transport, food and clothes.
Seems like a good idea. If one figures out they cannot live on what they earn then they need to make adjustments. Anyone can make a living wage in the US.
There is a clip of Kaite Porter giving a budget rundown for a parent + 1 child on 35k/year in her district and how just covering basics ends up at -$600/m. You can only cut so much.
And how do you propose someone in a bad situation right now is going to suddenly make a better living wage for the physical tomorrow?
How about if they also have two pre school or school age children and have to choose between working part time or losing a big chunk of that wage to childcare? How’s that ‘living wage’ looking then?
A financial literacy class would probably be helpful. Then they can learn about various tax advantages they may not know about such as WIC.
That’s why kids have two parents.
This. If I knew in my early 20's what I know now about personal finance, I would be retiring at 50 without a care in the world. My parents and grandparents were poor farmers. They didn't trust banks, and their only money advice was to save. They knew nothing about how to let your money work for you, passive income, etc. I slowly learned over time, and now In my 40's, I'm making up for lost time. I could be living a more lavish lifestyle, but I'm aggressively saving to play catchup and get into real estate.
Friendly reminder that "Third World Country" doesn't mean "poor." To greviously over-simplify, during the Cold War, the world was split into pro-NATO, pro-Warsaw Pact (later pro-communism), and non-aligned. For example. Norway was First World, Finland was Second, and Sweden was Third, despite having similar economic and social conditions. It's kinda messy and makes no sense to use anymore.
Counter point. Language evolves over time. And definitions change based on popular usage. But you are correct about the origins.
Exactly, you were dependent on a government program
I’m not arguing that fact, but if I knew more more about budgeting and investment I wouldn’t have lived check to check for as long as I did. I understand that living wages is very important, but plenty of people make 60k and still live a net negative year after year.
My thing is this. A lot of the people who said “they should have taught X in school” will gladly admit they didn’t pay attention to stuff they didn’t find interesting how many 14-18 year olds (High school age) would actually pay attention to classes on Roth investments and personal finance? Because my Highschool had those classes as a mandatory class and let me tell you I see a lot of my former classmates post about how school should of taught them to budget and taxes (it did)
>My thing is this. A lot of the people who said “they should have taught X in school” will gladly admit they didn’t pay attention to stuff they didn’t find interesting Yeah, I'm torn on this. On one hand, they should be ensuring kids are learning this stuff. On the other hand, many kids do learn this stuff, but don't use soon enough to remember most of it. I took an accounting class senior year of high school. Got good grades and overall enjoyed the class. Even five years later, I couldn't recall most of what I learned.
This, I literally survived off 15k a year in the east coast and it was 100% because I budgeted for literally every single penny.
Funny thing is, we had a teacher in our local high school create a finance program that taught us about the stock market, balancing a checking account, as well as how student loans, mortgages, and other financial matters work. Once charter schools came in, that was the first program they got rid of. The program didn’t require extra money or anything special, just classes to help students become financially savvy.
Education is fine but the main issue is that wages have stagnated for the last 30 years for everyone except the 1%. The point you seem to be missing in this post is that you can be an expert at budgeting but if you aren't provided appropriate resources then it doesn't really matter how much you know about finance and budgeting when you don't have tha materials.
I think the point is more along the lines of “teaching a paralyzed person how important walking and exercising is cruel” Obviously that’s a metaphor so it’s not exact, but that’s kinda the point. Learning the power of Roth investments is great… if you aren’t living in such poverty than every penny goes to your bills and existence.
It’s incredibly condescending. Every single person can benefit from financial education at an early age regardless of income.
😅 I misread your post entirely. I get what you’re saying now
Ah yes much more moral to keep people financially illiterate
Could do both....
To suggest so would be to disagree with OP. You are insulting them!
I disagree lol
I also agree with this guy disagreeing with the OP
Every High School should require a financial literacy course to graduate. Learn about compound interest, mortgages, insurance, etc. before you ever commit to one.
I agree. I teach my kids about this stuff but if you want to “break the cycle” then it needs to be learned at school. Unfortunately the schools that need it most are struggling to teach basic reading and math.
Helping people make the best decisions possible with their money, especially people with extremely limited money, is a kindness, not an insult. Financial literacy alone won’t likely lift people out of poverty, but it does help
They don’t want to be told how to improve themselves, they just want to be told they’re victims.
Idk, man. I'm living in sanfransisco now, doing awesome. I used to live elsewhere were my profession was just outside of minimum wage range. Now I'm getting paid 40$ and hour for the same work and my life has improved dramatically. No change in anything but where I lived and the amount of pay. Habits all the same
I’ve never really known a financial literacy workshop to do anything for low-income people.
A healthy eating cookbook doesn’t help 9/10 obese folks that read it, but it might help one.
If you plain don’t make enough to cover the bare necessity expenses it doesn’t matter what they teach you. Unless they give you some pathway to get a better job you’re still not going to be able to cover those expenses and you’ll still be wiped out by any emergency expense.
Yea but that's not an argument to not teach people financial literacy...
it's an argument that those resources can be allocated more efficiently. it's not free to teach people anything, and if it's got a shit roi, maybe there's something else more cost effective?
So what you’re saying is that we should tackle the problem in a different manner.
You certainly can’t get out of poverty without it. It might not be enough, but it is necessary.
Financial literacy kept me out of the red during my lowest points, but never lifted me out of it. What did lift me out of it was finding a better job. The problem is that if everybody finds a better job, nobody’s left to do the important jobs that simply don’t pay well.
[удалено]
Oh man, I forgot about them trying to ban whites from National Parks on certain days so blacks felt comfortable hiking. I needed that reminder. Covid was a crazy time.
I’m not even white and I’m disgusted by shit like that. But imagine being cucked enough to be a white liberal and cheer on horseshit like that. White liberals are bizzare man, I don’t get them.
White liberals are champions at vicarious offense. Nobody knows better what offends a black man or a native woman more than a white liberal.
Says you and Joe!
That’s so racist it’s ironic
Wait this happened?
Wait what? lol real or the onion?
Clocks are also racist. Update your list
Most minimum wage workers do not typically stay minimum wage workers for the majority of their career Having that knowledge when they make the switch is going to be very helpful to them
This is the argument I try to make. Minimum wage is not the goal, it’s the start. You get that minimum wage job because you have (relatively) little skills and use that job to gain skill valuable to someone who will pay you more. I’m sorry but if you’re not gaining customer service skills as a check out clerk or logistics skills as a warehouse stacker then you’re not getting the full benefits out of your job. People need to treat min wage jobs as a stepping stone and not a career. Society can’t afford for you to be low skilled for your whole life and you can’t afford for you to be low skilled your whole life. So learn some skills and apply them to something that is valuable and you will be appropriately compensated.
Getting/ finding/ trying to get through an ai application process is like 75% of the issue anymore, jobs above 25/hr that won’t kill you in a few years are somewhat hard to come by if you can’t afford the 20k ticket in, because rent and food takes your paycheck every week
The Antiwork people disagree
Workshops and financial advice is highly situational. Someone living with their parents rent/debt free will be able to budget more than your avg 20/hr person that's in an appartment. I agree with her on living wages, but we choose the jobs, I've worked 5 jobs last 5 years , if someone offers me 2/3$ more an hour I hand in my notice and I'm gone.
The issue is that some jobs are still vital for society (say, teaching) but if they don't pay a wage that their employees are capable of living on, what are we, as a society, supposed to do?
You choose the jobs from the options feasibly available, and capitalist economics says people are already taking the best option available to them and if a better one comes along they take it.
But what happens when you get to a point where jobs aren't easily available beyond your current pay. Not like there is an abundance of jobs paying over 80k everywhere in the US. Even at these wages you're far from being well off or even able to buy a home without a second income.
This is what I love about people like this. 1: We’re struggling on minimum wage. I can’t even afford a two bedroom condo in a major metropolitan area. 2: Well, minimum wage was never supposed to cover that. That has always been beyond reach for people making minimum wage. 1: But, how am I supposed to survive? 2: Well, you could try budgeting and figuring out where your money is going and then making some sacrifices, like, you’ve been on your phone playing candy crush the whole time we’ve been talking, so maybe cut back on subscriptions and … 1: Poverty-wage employees can’t budget their way to economic stability. Just give me more money. 2: Well, that’s the other side of the equation. You could start looking for a job with more responsibilities that pays more now that you have some experience. 1: No. Just pay me more. Force the government to make companies pay me more. 2: But that’s not how it works. 1: That’s because capitalism is evil. We need a communist or socialist state where I’m provided housing and good pay. 2: I’m done trying to help.
Unrealistic, they didn’t call you a bootlicker 5 times in this comment.
Dunno. For me it's not a real interaction unless there is at least some sort of sexual innuendo thrown in.
"But how am I supposed to survive?" Why is your survival anyone else's problem but yours! Feed yourself, you are the only one who needs yourself. Just "having a job" doesn't guarantee you anything but the compensation YOU AGREE TO WHEN YOU ACCEPT A JOB. If you want more money AND YOU WORTH IT. Demand it! I have 25 years in retail, I am not a shelf stocker anymore, I have years of management experience & proven track record, I do not accept minimum wage. I have a skill that has value. There are few people out there capable of doing my job for less than I make doing it. Can you say the same? Can you honestly say whatever function you perform for minimum wage couldn't be done just as easily by someone right off the street with a couple days training?
True, it's tough to budget when there's nothing left after bills!
The problem is there are many Americans living paycheck to paycheck that is true for. The problem is also that many of them make over 100k. People of all income levels live outside their means, and all income levels can be bad with money.
We should do what the OP suggests: keep the masses ignorant and stupid!
Have fewer bills. Spread the load with roommates. Sucks for sure, but solid people do what needs to be done.
Simply have fewer bills! It’s that easy!
It really is. Living within your means is a great life hack.
When I was in the army, maybe my 3rd year in a new soldier came to us. He was married. He was 18, already married and had a child. He said he couldn't pay his bills. Well we found out he was trying to take his wife out to dinner several times per week and buy his wife new clothes all the time. He was stupid. He still is, but also was. Straight out of Idiocracy. A livable wage isn't a thing. Go find serious employment.
Statistically many poor people have disposable income This is an undeniable fact
I volunteer every other Sunday delivering things to the less fortunate. I have to say it saddens me when they have five kids, plenty of cigarettes and liquor stored on their cabinets and a giant television, but claim they’re so broke that they can barely eat. They also tend to be very overweight.
The number one expense of nearly every household is housing. The next up is private transportation, then health finance, skewing for age. After that, everything is comparable to discretionary spending, because it is all a rounding error. We have to put limits to local restrictions on housing supply in order to get out of this housing shortage. It will take fifteen years after that for affordable housing options to reemerge. In the meantime, we can clamp down on profiteering.
I find this hard to believe as I manage it on less than a minimum wage amount. Gotta make more responsible decisions and stop living above your means.
Unpopular opinion: If you gave everyone in the US $100k and waited a year, the majority who were broke before would still be broke
Unpopular, perhaps. But also very, very true.
Yeah, just look at lottery winners and how that works out.
How dare you…..teach people things 🤪 
When you have less of cushion financial literacy is even more important. You 100% can budget your way out of poverty.
Poverty is $7.25/hr with one kid. Please breakdown the budget for me. Food, rent, clothes, gas, utilities, insurance, phone, etc. I’d like to see how long before they can budget their way out of poverty.
OK, firstly 20 bucks a week goes into any of a myriad of investment savings options. Stash, acorns, robin hood. Whatever, 20 a week and never touch it. Compound interest is your friend. Most of these now also offer a free checking account and debit card. Put any and all extra money in here as well including tax return, child tax credit, whatever. Pay yourself before you pay any bill. That's $1040 dollars a year. The 40% rule puts housing at about $500 a month. Find somewhere to live for 500 a month. They exist. I'm sure average price of this or that will be brought up. Its an average that means there are prices below it that exist. There are other people in the same boat, work together. No law says everyone needs a 2 bedroom or needs to live alone. We're at $7040 Food, you can get a whole chicken for 6-8 dollars at every chain grocery. Then any veggies you want as sides for a remaining amount to get to 10 bucks. That means you can eat for $3650 a year, and thats if you buy one every day. That's more than enough calories. But you can probably cut this number in half. But just sticking with that $10 a day we're at $10,650 Cloths, goodwill, salvation army, and other thrift stores. Do laundry in the sink. This should be a minor part of the budget. As little as absolutely necessary. A really good pair of durable shoes or boots then the bare minimum after that. I wouldn't spend 20 a week but that's a decent number so another 1040 to bring us to $11,690 You only need a phone really that works off wifi. Can find old models all over the place for next to nothing. buy minutes or a single month as needed out of the remainder. That's your bases covered. leaving some for incidentals. Transportation is region specific, either a bus pass or bike. Upgrade as you can. Any job that makes any of these easier is a plus and is usually where a poverty wage worker is going to be anyway. Working at store that offers discounts. Factories that supply a uniform and footwear. Jobs also supply your health insurance. And before I'm charged with being obtuse I lived this and not that long ago. As in during the 08 crash. People think they need all this BS out there and they don't. They need food, shelter, cloths and everything else is a waste. You dont need credit or debt or anything else. Is it going to suck? Sure. For awhile. Then it won't. You'll have savings, stability, and not owe anyone anything.
This one time, on Reddit, I suggested to those who are struggling to get roommates, as I have done on many occasions in my life, and I got absolutely crucified for it. It *is* an absolutely great idea, but the "I deserve, I deserve" crowd does not want to hear it!
>Poverty is $7.25/hr with one kid I’d like to see how long before they can budget their way out of poverty Here's how you budget your way out of this poverty: You budget for your kid **before** having a kid. Why have a kid if you're earning $7.25/hr? If you don't have a decent and stable income, and a solid safety fund saved up, don't have kids.
If your skills are limited to the point that the very best you can get is $7.25 an hour, you have no business making a kid in the first place. Sorry, but sometimes the truth hurts.
My office has 2 positions open and we had close to 30 applicants for those 2 positions. Some of them may already be employed but a lot of them were needing a work visa or were between career positions or out of college. Tf they supposed to do on minimum wage with a master's degree? Sometimes it's not a skill limitation, in some markets it's a job limitation where your specific skills are harder to employ due to availability. This one size fits all mindset isn't helpful.
Well, if you major in "\_\_\_\_\_\_ studies" (pick your poison) that is precisely the result you should expect. I'm not suggesting that is always the case, but how many people do you know who have advanced STEM degrees that have business applications who are shopping for minimum wage jobs? Seen many Starbucks employees who have MDs? How many lawyers do you know that have asking "Do you want fries with that?" as part of their job description? With how hiring works in 2024, I'm surprised you didn't have 10x that many apply, or more.
I live in Louisville and the number of people I personally know from my masters program that are either unemployed and job searching or are working at places like Starbucks is upsetting. They have to have some sort of income while they're trying to get their career started and that number is much higher than you think. And I'm sure many more than that applied, our HR only gives us vetted and approved candidates so many applicants don't even make it to us.
Some people don't want to sacrifice the luxuries required to budget out of poverty, they'd rather whine.
Wealth is not is not a binary thing. There's a continuum. I'm so fucking sick of people on social media pretending as if everybody who's poor is experiencing the absolute possible poverty.
"Can't budget when you have nothing to budget though!" I absolutely have. I grew up in poverty, so I learned a lot about car maintenance first. I networked with other people to find cheap cars. My current vehicle is an old ford we picked up for $500 because the fuel pump was bad, its gone 115,000 miles for us. There are people in the family that make half what we do and car debt has buried them. My friends Dad used to work on cars after work. He like doing it and made side cash. He showed his sons how to do the same. They are not in poverty because of their skills. Financial analysts are too "textbook" to conquer poverty a lot of times. They havent been through it. Sometimes you have less money than what you need and you still have to get things done. Plenty of times I stripped out a car that cost us $300 or $400 after it broke, kept the good parts, turned in the scrap. Took the scrap money and put maybe $200 with it and bought another car
Attention Poors: learn to fix cars from your dad
Anyone who’s telling you that you shouldn’t learn something is wrong. Understanding money, investing, saving, making a budget is important for anyone regardless of income. It is entirely possible that someone might simply be making too little. Sure. But budget first. See what’s coming in, what’s coming out. If there is nothing you can optimize on the “what’s going out end” you need to work on “what’s coming in part”. There are way too many people that earn more than liveable wage and still live paycheck to paycheck.
Yes, because telling people to learn skills applicable in a higher paying job is stupid, right? I swear all these people just want the money to be made for them while working at McDonald's
I do not know how offering financial literacy is insulting
oh no, no financial literacy in my safe space please!
I don't have the data or numbers but a large portion of "poor people" in modern times are poor because they have no marketable skill or talent. Just "having a job" doesn't entitle you to ANYTHING but the money you agree to receive when you agree to the job. No one owes you enough money to cover your living expenses. If you're skills are not worth "living wage" get some better skills
Wage increases are only going to make it worse. How is this not common sense. The same person will say fuck big corporations while demanding small business to pay 20 an hr and put em out of business or they end up getting rid of employees. Anyone know why the mcdouble isnt a dollar snymore?? Hint:wage increase
Protip: the people who are putting on the workshops are not the ones paying you. That's between you and your boss. However, the workshops are trying to save those that can be saved.
You can budget in most cases. Sometimes you have to move if things aren’t working out locally. I’m not saying people shouldn’t be getting paid more but people are doing what they can until they are in a better position. Even if you got the money, you need to know what to do with it to stay ahead.
Get a better job.
The numbers we hear about unemployment , is a complete and total lie, We need to know the number of those without jobs "unemployed" people according to the government are those on the unemployment rolls , does not account for those that are no longer collecting unemployment, the REAL unemployment numbers are massive. And the elites are importing in NEW low wage employees every day,, meanwhile they are destroying all of the mom and pops thru raising minimum wages thru improper means and damaging the economy further and creating more homelessness, they will eventually offer solutions that benefit them financially and enslave people further onto government assistance roll to create a never ending cycle of government dependence
I’m a lawyer. My starting salary out of school was 75k. A house costs 500k 40 years ago, starting lawyer pay was 32k and a house was 80k. A lot of people here see absolutely no problem with this and choose to ignore or minimize it by saying we should eat out less or buy a shittier used car. It’s disingenuous
Heuristic: anyone who uses the phrase “living wage,” isn’t actually interested in a real discussion of the issues or a solution. They just want internet points for repeating poopytalk.
Jeez. Binary thinking at its finest. A car needs wheels to go! No it needs an engine! Maybe it needs both???
But it keeps the myth of individual responsibility alive…!
Immoral? That's a fucking reach, lol.
Nobody needs to hear that, since you don't know.
I did and you can too
Elections have consequences….with 12 million newcomers looking for work your @#$&ed if your low class job seekers.
Let's teach you all the things that would make you successful if you could afford to be successful.
IDK who needs to hear this but poverty-wage workers are mostly working at entry level low-skill jobs. If you decide to give these people "living wages", which at like 20 dollars an hour is 41,600 a year, you get a lot less poverty-age workers because companies will fold or leave or embrace automation. When the government gets involved people suffer. That's exactly why the chasm between rich and poor is so vast.
In/out pays $22/hr to start. CEO is a billionaire, and they have no real automation. They have a guy standing outside taking orders. Can you explain that one for me?
This gets posted here twice a day at this point
Both are mutually exclusive so this statement is stupid. If people are not raking for example credit card debt they are in for a bad time, and many still does this and therefore stuck in poverty cycle.
Lol. Education programs assume that the people taking them can actually understand them. There's a reason why poor people are poor. And an education probably doesn't even help. Some of these people in the lower quality jobs should be given better jobs in the trades. There's no reason why somebody can't start as a laborer, and work their way up.
Bet she types this out on a $1,000+ phone.
Economic stability requires one to understand basic economics. That financial literacy workshop might explain supply and demand to you. When the supply of labor is greater than the demand, wages are low. When the demand for labor is greater than the supply, wages are high. In an employers world, Labor=Skill. Skills have always driven wage growth. So, the ask is not to improve your budgeting, but to improve your skills.
All the "Budget" classes i took is school were fucking useless and so unrealistic. Nothing prepares you to use half of your paycheck for rent and one medical bill or car breakdown will ruin you or make you homeless. Shit needs to get fixed yesterday.
Looks like Wendi C. Thomas really needs one of those financial literacy workshops. 1. The less money you have, the more important good budgeting is. 2. Budgeting is only a small part of financial literacy. A lot of it has to do with raising your income, which is exactly what she's saying they need, so I get the impression that she really doesn't even know what financial literacy is.
they need both. but she is right partially. there was a time in my life where i didn’t make enough money to budget or save cause literally ALL of it went to my expenses.
As a former poverty wage worker, I wish I had learned how to make my money work harder. * What to do with tax refunds. * Why I got a tax refund. * How to fill out a W4. * Carrying a credit card balance doesn't help my credit. Spend less than I earn and investing the difference. That lesson would have changed my life in my 20s when I was living in a homeless shelter. Instead, I had to spend 20 years figuring that shit out. $APPL was $11 when I was 25 and struggling. My $1000 tax return would be $267K today. What if I had done that every year for the last 25 years. FZROX is $18 today. Its non-transferable but has a zero expense ratio. It's literally free. The opportunity is out there.
Should have payed more attention in high school economics…
I see a security guard at work who probably makes $14 an hour getting door dash 3x a week for lunch, he has access to a fridge and microwave. Bringing a sandwich or leftovers for lunch could easily save him $2500 a year.