[gruez]

>living paycheck to paycheck have a budget where they're saving or investing a significant amount of their money

How can you be "paycheck to paycheck" if you have a massive savings pile? Are you dumping it all into 25 year treasuries?

[Workaccount2]

This is literally me. I live paycheck to paycheck but also have a six figure sum of money I can tap into if needed.

How I got here is living way below my means in my twenties, saving up tons of money, and nowadays living at my means while still maxing retirement. I also have almost all that saved money invested, which just grows the pot as it sits. I also have zero debt besides a 3% mortgage.

So basically I spend all of every paycheck, after retirement has been deducted, but if I lost my job I could maintain my current life with zero income for a few years before running dry.

[Kirby64]

That is not living paycheck to paycheck by any reasonable definition. If you could stop contributing to savings/retirement/investments and suddenly have a ton of additional disposable income, then it's not that.

[Workaccount2]

>That is not living paycheck to paycheck by any reasonable definition

Well then now we know that the media will happily use unreasonable definitions to bolster stats for click bait stories and headlines.

People assume paycheck to paycheck means "Spending each paycheck entirely on absolute necessities to live" but the survey definition is "Do you save any money from your take home pay every pay period".

This is how you get people at every income level reporting they live paycheck to paycheck.

[Kirby64]

I think you really underestimate how much people spend on stuff that is a non-necessity. People at every income level fall prey to the “if I’ve got extra money in my account, guess that means I can spend it”. There are, 100%, people living paycheck to paycheck that make 200k because they’ve made some terrible life choices and have outrageous debt to service, essentially.

[jandrewrogers]

I know several people who spend 100% of their income, saving none of it. Not because they have poor saving habits but because they've already saved more than they'll likely ever need for a comfortable retirement.

At which point, it actually kind of makes sense to blow your entire income on lifestyle.

[Kirby64]

That’s still not paycheck to paycheck. If you’re spending income on non necessities you could cut back and be just fine.

An aside, if you’re spending 100% of your income on just lifestyle stuff… you don’t to work at all if your retirement covers it.

[olyjohn]

That's not living paycheck to paycheck. The implication of living paycheck to paycheck is that you're a few missed paychecks away from homelessness.

[bdangubic]

where is this implication from? to me living paycheck to paycheck means you are living THE LIFE to the fullest. no “savings” or any BS like that. you make $50k a month, spend it all - wait for next paycheck. paycheck to paycheck

[jopsen]

In the context of economics and poverty, paycheck to paycheck is defined as having no ability to save because necessary spending is consuming the entire paycheck.

Necessary spending is food, utilities, clothes, rent. But not eating out, fancy housing is a nice neighborhood, designer clothes, etc.

[rascul]

If you can tap into a six figure sum of money then you're not living paycheck to paycheck.