Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kind of old news. I think everyone knows that the majority of people don't have a lot of cash sitting in a savings account.
That said, statistics like this one are a little off. If I put money in the stock market it doesn't show up as me having it saved, despite the fact that if I had an unexpected expense I could easily sell off some shares to cover. The typical "Savings Account" offers incredibly low interest rates these days, so it's not really a good place to park your money.
It seems like the operative concept of "unexpected expenses" is that they are "unexpected" ... and, as such, how can one know whether they have enough money to pay for them?? Something about how the question is asked or the rationale used to answer it seems a little flawed.
The article might be a bit more credible if it stated, '3 in 5 Americans between the ages of 20 and 30 say they couldn't raise $2000 to pay for an emergency," but, then, that's probably too factual for those who depend in provocative hyperbole to attract readers.
28% say they'd have to borrow money to pay a ~$1000 unexpected expense.
64% would take it out of savings or cut back spending (the two of course are not mutually exclusive).
38% could cover it out of pocket that's not sensationalized
The other methods are either borrowing 28% or 26% cutting spending elsewhere, meaning not being able to cover something until more income came in. That's pretty sad imo
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.