Can you come up with $ 400 in an emergency?

[MillCreek]

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/24/475432149/could-you-come-up-with-400-if-disaster-struck?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=news

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/05/my-secret-shame/476415/

To my surprise, apparently 47% of Americans cannot.

[Ben]

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/24/475432149/could-you-come-up-with-400-if-disaster-struck?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=news

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/05/my-secret-shame/476415/

To my surprise, apparently 47% of Americans cannot.

I've seen other, similar studies and have always been surprised by that*. I would give up cable, go without a cell phone, or whatever it took to have a little spare cash handy for emergencies. I wonder how much of it is bad saving practices and how much is younger people "going cashless"? They talk about not being able to borrow the money, but I wonder if they count paying with a credit card as "borrowing", or if they mean people are also so maxed out on credit that they can't get the additional $400 in emergencies?

*I'm also curious on the surveyed population. It's interesting that the 47% is the same as the old "Romney 47%", so is it 47% of people with a job, or do they count the EBT and others in the population who live off the largess of the taxpayers?

[MillCreek]

^^^From the Atlantic article linked above:

Since 2013, the federal reserve board has conducted a survey to “monitor the financial and economic status of American consumers.” Most of the data in the latest survey, frankly, are less than earth-shattering: 49 percent of part-time workers would prefer to work more hours at their current wage; 29 percent of Americans expect to earn a higher income in the coming year; 43 percent of homeowners who have owned their home for at least a year believe its value has increased. But the answer to one question was astonishing. The Fed asked respondents how they would pay for a $400 emergency. The answer: 47 percent of respondents said that either they would cover the expense by borrowing or selling something, or they would not be able to come up with the $400 at all. Four hundred dollars! Who knew?

http://www.federalreserve.gov/scf/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survey_of_Consumer_Finances describes the methodology used for the survey.  Interesting that a disproportionate number of wealthy families is included.

[Perd Hapley]

A few years ago I would have just paid it out of my checking account, and then hoped to get by on less for the next week or two. Or I would have used a credit card. The first option often meant using a credit card to cover my shortfall, anyway.

If such an unexpected expense came up today, I'd do the same thing, but substitute savings account for credit card.

[Tuco]

At one time, I was living well below the 47%tile of wage, income, and hours worked.  I was paying rent bi-weekly.  I had no insurance on my truck.  I had recently moved to a new area of the country for a job that didn't pan out and WAS NOT going back to Detroit. I took a job washing dishes at night to supplement my nutrition.

I was also 24 years old.

Four Benjamins? Yea, I got that.
And gratitude is the emotion du jour.

I can relate, but dammit I'm not going back willingly.

[Doggy Daddy]

Actually, I could cover that with rolled coin.  I think having a quantity of small bills and coin on hand is one element of good planning for a short term disruption.

[K Frame]

Yes. Easily. Wouldn't be happy about it, though.

[dogmush]

Well my wife and I have worked hard to build assets as well as disposable and emergency liquid funds.  We can come up with $400 if there's a good sale at Bed, Bath and Beyond (her) or a good deal in the AIM surplus E-mail. (Me)

There was a time where it would have been more difficult, or impossible without borrowing from someone. But like Tuco said we were in our early 20's and just starting out.  I'd be real curious about the demographic of that 47%.

[charby]

Yes. Easily. Wouldn't be happy about it, though.

Ditto, but you do what you gotta do.

[cordex]

Can and have had to. Have money set aside for just that purpose which makes emergencies a little less stressful.

[Mannlicher]

I try to keep at least a three months expenses, in cash, stashed away in one of my gun safes.  Hate like hell to access that though, and would rather cut back somewhere else if a temporary crisis pops up.
One major reason Americans don't save any more, is that the banks pay virtually nothing in interest for savings accounts.  Even CDs don't pay enough interest to be worth tying up assets for long periods of time. 

[Fly320s]

I try to keep at least a three months expenses, in cash, stashed away in one of my gun safes.  Hate like hell to access that though, and would rather cut back somewhere else if a temporary crisis pops up.
One major reason Americans don't save any more, is that the banks pay virtually nothing in interest for savings accounts.  Even CDs don't pay enough interest to be worth tying up assets for long periods of time. 

I think the lack of interest rates is a result of the economy, not a reason to not save money.  The lack of savings is from having an easy life, access to easy credit, and the idea that if you don't have the latest TV/phone/car/gadget/whatever then you aren't living "right."

Now, there are some good reasons to buy hard goods instead of saving cash right now, but I think that applies only after other investments and savings have been funded.

As for me, I also keep a little cash handy for emergencies, so the $400 is not a problem.

[De Selby]

This is an outrageous leftist criticism of the us economy.

It's not important if just under half of Americans can't weather $400 of storm.  All that matters is that low taxes and "fair" (meaning no) medical and social safety nets led them to where they are now.

Someday I'm sure an enterprising shanty town resident will make money off of foreigners touring American tent and bridge cities, just like they do now in Brazil.

Enjoy all that freedom folks!  I know I prefer to see it on TV.

[Perd Hapley]

Low taxes and no safety net? Boy, that is such an apt description of the U.S. Really nailed that one, man.

[De Selby]

Low taxes and no safety net? Boy, that is such an apt description of the U.S. Really nailed that one, man.

Name a first world country with lower taxes and fewer safety nets.

[Boomhauer]

This is an outrageous leftist criticism of the us economy.

It's not important if just under half of Americans can't weather $400 of storm.  All that matters is that low taxes and "fair" (meaning no) medical and social safety nets led them to where they are now.

Someday I'm sure an enterprising shanty town resident will make money off of foreigners touring American tent and bridge cities, just like they do now in Brazil.

Enjoy all that freedom folks!  I know I prefer to see it on TV.

Get back under your bridge

fewer safety nets.

Well gee I guess a system where whole generations of families can live fairly comfortably on welfare without ever holding a job just ain't enough "safety nets". Let me explain something- all these goddamn social safety nets, of which there are far too many as opposed to "not enough" in your mind, comes out of the pockets of the productive members of society, such as me. I am sick and goddamn tired of the worthless wastes of oxygen voting for politicians who promise to use the power of the government to hold a gun to my head and take MY money that I earned and give it to these worthless *expletive deleted*s who have never worked an honest job in their lives.

Taxation is THEFT. I am taxed enough already, thanks.

[De Selby]

Get back under your bridge

Sorry mate, rent for those spots is more than $400 a month here.

Seriously though, there are no tent cities in Australia anywhere like there are in the moderately sized American cities.  I guess that's proof to some of how awesome the economy is, but I find it a bit retarded to talk about all the benefits of pauperism.

[De Selby]

Get back under your bridge

Well gee I guess a system where whole generations of families can live fairly comfortably on welfare without ever holding a job just ain't enough "safety nets". Let me explain something- all these goddamn social safety nets, of which there are far too many as opposed to "not enough" in your mind, comes out of the pockets of the productive members of society, such as me. I am sick and goddamn tired of the worthless wastes of oxygen voting for politicians who promise to use the power of the government to hold a gun to my head and take MY money that I earned and give it to these worthless *expletive deleted*s who have never worked an honest job in their lives.

Taxation is THEFT. I am taxed enough already, thanks.

Honest question:  what's the total yearly value of your taxes?  Just how many homes and incomes can be paid for from what the IRS and your state tax authority take from you?

[Perd Hapley]

So, De Selby, can you state whether or not the U.S. has any government "safety nets" or not? I can't really see continuing this if you can't give the correct answer.

[De Selby]

So, De Selby, can you state whether or not the U.S. has any government "safety nets" or not? I can't really see continuing this if you can't give the correct answer.

The US has far, far fewer safety nets than any English speaking country in the world including South Africa.  The fact that you failed to answer my question speaks volumes - to claim that US safety nets are the cause of the visible mass poverty which any visitor sees is patently ridiculous.  The shanty towns and beggars around most US destination cities are making more Latin Americans feel at home than they are making Europeans feel over taxed.

[Perd Hapley]

The US has far, far fewer safety nets than any English speaking country in the world including South Africa.  The fact that you failed to answer my question speaks volumes - to claim that US safety nets are the cause of the visible mass poverty which any visitor sees is patently ridiculous.

  "failed to answer my question." I don't mind answering. I just wanted you to admit you were lying about the U.S. having no safety net. And you did.

So let me go look up the information you requested, and you get ready to answer my next question: Who claimed that the "safety nets" caused "visible mass poverty"?

[cordex]

Seriously though, there are no tent cities in Australia anywhere like there are in the moderately sized American cities.  I guess that's proof to some of how awesome the economy is, but I find it a bit retarded to talk about all the benefits of pauperism.

Overall, Australia's homeless rate is not better than that of the US.

[wmenorr67]

I could do it if need be.

Wouldn't like what I would have to do to do it, but I can.

[MillCreek]

I try to keep at least a three months expenses, in cash, stashed away in one of my gun safes.  Hate like hell to access that though, and would rather cut back somewhere else if a temporary crisis pops up.
One major reason Americans don't save any more, is that the banks pay virtually nothing in interest for savings accounts.  Even CDs don't pay enough interest to be worth tying up assets for long periods of time. 

I still save, and have over six figures in my bank accounts right now, even at the crappy 0.03% interest paid by Bank of America and BECU.  But I no longer bother with my former approach of the laddered maturity CDs, since the minimal return of 0.07% or so is not worth my time to set them up.

[41magsnub]

To the OP, yes - easily.  I have a savings account with multiple sub accounts.  Things like vacation, insurance and property taxes, property maintenance, new car, dog stuff, and etc.  I drop $50 to $200/mo in each.  In an emergency I could pull out $400 from one or more of those accounts no problem.