5 ms·

I'm not an English native speaker but that doesn't sound correct to me. If you need next month's paycheck in order to survive that month, for whatever reason (e

by lucb1e 2y ago

I'm not an English native speaker but that doesn't sound correct to me. If you need next month's paycheck in order to survive that month, for whatever reason (even if you gambled last month's money away, much less saved up for retirement or spent it on your health), that's my understanding of living paycheck to paycheck: you miss one paycheck and you're bust. (I assume you can't take it back out of that 401k thing or it wouldn't be a pension fund but a bank account. Correct me if I'm wrong about the mechanics of a 401k) Dictionary seems to agree, Merriam Webster says: "to spend all of the money from one paycheck before receiving the next paycheck", not specifying that you can't have spent the money on semi-essentials that could perhaps be moved by a few months but you'd need to catch up with sooner or later

MajimasEyepatch 2y ago
The problem with “paycheck to paycheck” is that it evokes images of people struggling to make ends meet—to pay the rent, keep the lights on, and put food on the table. But a lot of people today are using it to mean someone who’s living beyond their means—spending $1100/month on a brand new pickup truck while sending their kids to private school and maxing out their 401k. That’s not a problem of an unfair economy; it’s simply poor discipline. And so when a half-assed marketing survey asks people if they’re living paycheck to paycheck, you end up with 60% of respondents saying, “Yes,” when in reality only maybe 20% are struggling because they’re in a truly difficult situation. The rest of them may just need to settle for a less expensive car and maybe turn down their 401k contribution for six months so they can pay off their credit cards.
- lucb1e 2y ago
  Sounds all correct to me, just the second word in your comment: I'm not sure how this adds up to it being a "problem". It's what "paycheck to paycheck" literally sounds like, it's what the dictionary says it means, it's how people use it -- but apparently not everyone. If you want to refer to people who are financially struggling, not using a broad term but just saying what you mean sounds okay to me?
  - varjag 2y ago
    That's exactly what paycheck to paycheck is meant to convey in English.
HWR_14 2y ago
Random technical details: You can take money out of a 401k in a couple of ways that aren't retirement. The best way is an authorized reason: Up to a fairly small amount towards a first home. If you become disabled. If you are a victim of certain crimes. If you have a small (< $1000) emergency you cannot cover[0]. You can also take out that money at any time, paying a penalty on top of the tax required. There is also a way to borrow money short term from your 401k that turns into an unauthorized withdraw if you don't pay it back in a relatively short time (a year?) These all seem reasonable. [0] Yes, there are rules to prevent the worst abuse, mostly limiting you to doing so once every three years, the small total, and the need to fill out paperwork explaining the unexpected cost.

by lucb1e 2y ago

MajimasEyepatch 2y ago

The problem with “paycheck to paycheck” is that it evokes images of people struggling to make ends meet—to pay the rent, keep the lights on, and put food on the table. But a lot of people today are using it to mean someone who’s living beyond their means—spending $1100/month on a brand new pickup truck while sending their kids to private school and maxing out their 401k. That’s not a problem of an unfair economy; it’s simply poor discipline. And so when a half-assed marketing survey asks people if they’re living paycheck to paycheck, you end up with 60% of respondents saying, “Yes,” when in reality only maybe 20% are struggling because they’re in a truly difficult situation. The rest of them may just need to settle for a less expensive car and maybe turn down their 401k contribution for six months so they can pay off their credit cards.

lucb1e 2y ago
Sounds all correct to me, just the second word in your comment: I'm not sure how this adds up to it being a "problem". It's what "paycheck to paycheck" literally sounds like, it's what the dictionary says it means, it's how people use it -- but apparently not everyone. If you want to refer to people who are financially struggling, not using a broad term but just saying what you mean sounds okay to me?
- varjag 2y ago
  That's exactly what paycheck to paycheck is meant to convey in English.

HWR_14 2y ago

Random technical details: You can take money out of a 401k in a couple of ways that aren't retirement. The best way is an authorized reason: Up to a fairly small amount towards a first home. If you become disabled. If you are a victim of certain crimes. If you have a small (< $1000) emergency you cannot cover[0]. You can also take out that money at any time, paying a penalty on top of the tax required. There is also a way to borrow money short term from your 401k that turns into an unauthorized withdraw if you don't pay it back in a relatively short time (a year?) These all seem reasonable. [0] Yes, there are rules to prevent the worst abuse, mostly limiting you to doing so once every three years, the small total, and the need to fill out paperwork explaining the unexpected cost.