A Boring Dystopia

16428 readers

304 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

givesomefucks@lemmy.world

438

Nearly 40% of Americans have less than $500 in cash savings, survey shows (www.livenowfox.com)

submitted 5 days ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

120 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] arctanthrope@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

they cite numbers about "cash savings" but then imply that that's equivalent to savings in general, or liquid assets. like, I'm lucky enough to have a decent amount in my bank account, but my cash savings is probably like, forty bucks? I hardly ever use cash and when I do I just go to an ATM beforehand, why should I have hundreds of dollars in cash lying around? is that what they're talking about, or is "cash savings" some colloquialism or term of art that I'm unfamiliar with that also includes other things than strictly cash?

edit: to be clear, I'm aware many if not most Americans are in dire financial situations, not trying to dispute that, the wording just seems weird. my first instinct is they probably do mean liquid assets, but to use the word "cash" when "liquid" is a more accurate word that would still be understood by a broad audience seems like an odd choice to me. maybe that's just a bit of my slightly pedantic tendencies

[–] MycelialMass@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I think it usually includes savings accounts

[–] mrmaplebar@fedia.io 16 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Definitely. This isn't about physical "cash", this is about all liquidity across cash, checking and savings accounts. From the survey itself:

Most have little to no cushion. 14% of Americans have no cash savings, including 32% of those earning less than $30,000 a year, 20% of women and 16% of Gen Zers. Additionally, another 32% have some savings but less than $1,000. Almost half (45%) wouldn’t be able to cover more than a month of essentials if their income stopped, while just 21% could cover essentials for more than six months.

Almost half of Americans are a couple paychecks away from homelessness. It's dire.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

This still doesn't provide a clear definition of "cash savings". See the comment from WesternInfidels for the actual definition from the study.

[–] WesternInfidels@feddit.online 18 points 5 days ago

We defined cash savings as checking accounts that people consider savings, savings accounts, money market accounts, brokerage/investment accounts (nonretirement), certificates of deposit (CDs) and cash at home.

https://www.depositaccounts.com/blog/cash-savings-study.html

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I don't know why people would downvote you. I came here to complain about the same thing.

The actual problem is the shitty as usual reporting from faux news. The article never defines "cash savings" and provides no link to the referenced study. It's lazy slop.

PSA: Y'all, please don't post faux news ever. Find a better source or the original source. Thanks!

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

They are getting downvoted because other commenters here who have actually read the article have found and quoted the definition of cash, which includes savings.

As it pretty much always does in any financial reporting has in the past 50 years. This same story keeps getting re-reported on every 5 years and the conversations around it are always the same.