• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do You Live Paycheck to Paycheck?

Do you live paycheck to paycheck?

  • Yes. I'm from the US or Canada.

    Votes: 10 28.6%
  • No, I have substantial savings. I'm from the US or Canada.

    Votes: 18 51.4%
  • Yes. I'm from Europe or Australia/New Zealand.

    Votes: 3 8.6%
  • No, I have substantial savings. I'm from Europe or Australia/New Zealand.

    Votes: 4 11.4%
  • Yes. I'm from outside the other countries/regions listed in this poll.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, I have substantial savings. I'm from outside the other countries/regions listed in this poll.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    35
  • Poll closed .

TransmutingSoul

One Planet, One People, Please!
Premium Member
For the purpose of this thread, "substantial savings" are enough money to cover your basic expenses—including rent, bills, and food—for at least three months where you live if you lost your income today.

The poll is anonymous.

Yes still pay to pay living.

Good thing is we and I on single income are 2 pays away from owning a home, so that is a real bonus for the future, and may allow savings going forward.

Retirement will not be an option, will need an income into the future.

Regards Tony
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Ah, a loan shark.
New pic for yer avatar then:

images
I prefer...
R.7d3af942c65360f4dd37f2cae8e50b82
 

amorphous_constellation

Well-Known Member
I guess the way I like to frame it, is that I live on the nation's energy capacity. Whether homeless or a rich rock star, I would be a person who was a byproduct of oil-derived energy. That is how most of us live. I don't know if it's a question about our inputs in the system, as much as it is a question of the system's inputs into all of us, however much we work, or whatever we do.
 

danieldemol

Veteran Member
Premium Member
For the purpose of this thread, "substantial savings" are enough money to cover your basic expenses—including rent, bills, and food—for at least three months where you live if you lost your income today.

The poll is anonymous.
My wife and I have a dual income yet still earning less than enough to cover monthly bills and requiring occasional parental support to stay afloat.

I may manage to change that this year but mental illness amongst other challenges is a giant spanner in the works.

Still with the way automation is taking over human work may become redundant in my lifetime so I'm of those pushing for a universal basic income.

In my opinion.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
I lived hand to mouth for most of my adult life. At 61, I have some savings now, mostly due to taking voluntary redundancy from the Royal Mail in 2012, and getting a decent payoff. I get a small pension from them, and will get another even smaller pension from my present employer when I retire; plus a state pension at 67. My partner works part time. So for the first time in my life, penury is no longer knocking at the door, and I can afford to help family out should they need it. But if I had to stop working now I’d be in trouble.

Life in London is really expensive. The housing sector is completely broken, private rents are astronomical, most social housing was sold off years ago, and buying a home here is now way beyond most people. Wages have been stagnant since 2010, and many people are in debt. And then there’s energy bills, which in the U.K. are currently the highest in Europe I believe. Britain is broken and many hard working people are broke.
 
Top