According to this survey:
https://www.wemoney.com.au/financial-wellness-survey
Maybe I'm just in privileged position but l I find this very hard to believe. Is it really that bad out there where people are not able to save much?
48.4% of Australians Live Paycheck to Paycheck
mrvaluepack on 11/01/2024 - 11:01
Comments
You're not allowed to talk about the amount of women in cafe's and gyms and down the beach in the mornings and middle of the day. The unemployment rate is 3.5% and we need more Indians. It's a full time job dropping the kids off, eating at a cafe, gyming and dropping in to the post office.
amount of women in cafe's and gyms and down the beach in the mornings and middle of the day
So what are you doing there in the middle of the day?
Where does the $800 come from?
At a guess from him. Wouldn't he have to pay spouse and child support?
No $800/wk is far too much for such payments unless OP is making bank.
Likely Centrelink+ support payments I'm guessing
Mate $450 a week after rent is not alot, what about groceries, fuel, bills (mobile/internet) and if your rego and insurance is due that month you're screwed.
Some people are just complete sh*te with their personal life and can't plan their relationships to save their lives…. usually they end up making excuses about how buying nappies for their kid is so unreasonable instead of taking accountability for their poor family planning.
Or we could stop making assumptions about people's personal lives. Easy for you to assume why a relationship may have broken down but without actual facts maybe best to keep personal opinion to yourself. There are many reasons why relationships fall apart. And the end result is hard on both parties. Sure his position is potentially biased but he knows why his relationship went south and has a right to be po'd over the situation.
Try re-reading the original comment. My comment is exactly as applicable as the original comment.
There are many reasons why relationships fall apart.
Not really - infatuation trumps rationality and looking at compatibility, pump out a kid, easier to break up/divorce.
Maybe once in a blue moon somebody has some drastic and sudden personality change, but lets not pretend that's the norm.maybe best to keep personal opinion to yourself.
Feel free to delete your comment and keep your personal opinion to yourself.
uh not saying you don't have a point but that's a really bad example. 450 to cover utilities groceries living expenses insurance etc for an adult and young child is really scraping by
Mate $450/wk is piss all these days, especially with a young kid. It is doable depending on where you live but it certainly is not some lux life that you're implying. You really sound like the typical out of touch absent father tbh
It's good to be in the majority.
thought it was closer to 80%
I am surprised it's not higher. We are in a cost of living crisis after all
The real figure should be 70% - 80%
I believe it. But with OzBargainers, they are not the demographic to live paycheck to paycheck.
I used to have colleague who would always cry poor, had to get food from food bank etc. When they got a bit of inheritance (not much I believe), they got a new iPhone, teen daughter got a $350 hideous hair dye job. Next week she was crying poor again. I gave up caring after that.
So many mis classify want as need
I understand this attitude, but it isn’t really sensible.
If you have no money and get a small windfall, how does a few thousand change “no money” in any meaningful way?
Maybe you can pay off a few debts, put some money aside for the car rego and skip cheap food/food bank for 6 months.
Or you can get some pretty modest gifts like a phone and a fancy haircut, enjoy yourself for a brief bit.If someone is frittering away a house deposit, sure, but does $1500 worth of one off spending detailed above make much difference in a budget over a year or two? That’s $20 a week better off for 2 years and you are back where you started with no iphone and without the happiness a haircut presumably brought.
Yeah, the point is that that's their entire mindset, and why they are in the position they are in. "I don't earn much, 3 packets of smokes a week won't make much difference". "I don't earn much, a couple of cartons of XXXX won't make much difference". Etc etc.
I don't know how much they got, but I'm sure it's not rich money. It would be weird to tell me how/where they spent the all the money. Buying a brand new high end iphone is modest? She already had an iPhone btw, she wanted the newest model. A $350 hair cut/colour is modest? Im in a much better financial position, an even I wouldn't be paying full price and $300 for a hair job.
You'll always be broke it fully keep treating yourself for nothing every time you come across some money. Especially when income hasn't changed.
My partner and I both make above the median personal income and she cuts hair for both of us at home.
that's precisely the problem however with this mentality. "how is a 2k iphone going to stop me from buying a house, I can't afford one anyway" "I'm not going to save much anyway might as well reward myself with a night out and blow 200 on grog and uber" "what's the point of saving a few thousand dollars is not going to get me far these days I will book another bali trip because YOLO"
and people wonder why they have no assets and still living paycheck to paycheck when you are 50 and invariably they'll blame everything from big government to capitalism to immigrants for their woes
But that isn't what is said here.
The post above said a person was continually having financial problems and spent $1500 of a small inheritance on a fancy haircut and an iPhone.How could they possibly afford a house by not spending that? Do you think they get an inheritance every week so could save $75k over a year? Of course not.
You're assuming they actually have enough money usually but spend it wastefully, but the comment shows the spend on a phone and fancy hairstyle was a once off.I think the problem is there are a bunch of people who are lucky (talents, health, upbringing, timing, family etc) who have never had to face sustained hard times but who have convinced themselves their luck was actually their moral strength and others not so lucky are lacking. I don't think that is very common. I know plenty of people with little money who work much harder than the people I know with lots of money. Very often the difference is some bit of unearned good fortune that sent them on a good financial path.
@mskeggs: I was responding to your post, not theirs. but don't underestimate the power of habit. it may be just an one off iphone. and next week it will be 'just a new TV' and snowballs from there. habits, once developed, very difficult to change much like other lifestyle habits. that's why financial education is so important for kids. in Australia anyone on a minimum wage has enough to survive, whether you thrive depends on your income and how much you can save. there are plenty of people who have built a fortune from disciplined saving on a small salary. and plenty more who is living "paycheck to paycheck" on a 200k+ wicket.
@May4th: Yes, agreed on good habits and the frustration of watching people on good money blow it wastefully.
and spent $1500 of a small inheritance on a fancy haircut and an iPhone.
You're assuming it's only an iphone and hair job $1500 and that's it. The $1500 could have been used to pay for their car reggo she was whinging about the following week, thus being able to drive to work.
but the comment shows the spend on a phone and fancy hairstyle was a once off.
It was 1 example. I'm not going to list every lux/upgrade they've spent money on, then cried poor after.
It's not about affording a house. I never said anything about a house. For all I know, they might own the house. But living within your means and not struggling to pay for basic stuff.
What is this "paycheck" you speak of?
It's like Centrelink, but a company gives it to you instead of the government.
Sounds like it's for chumps
The question should be if Aussies don't spend by visiting Ozbargain. Do you think they do not need to live pay check to pay check
I say no. And nothing to do this site!?
we're the country who gave the world 'BUY NOW, PAY LATER'
however i doubt almost 50 percent of people are struggling that much i live in Melbournes West - Melton council so a NOT wealthy area and although i wouldnt say some people are finding it difficult i wouldnt say it is pretty much 1 in 2, Id probably believe maybe 20-30 percent are feeling the pinch though
Surely Australia didn't invent credit cards
It's actually not hard to believe and I'm surprised it's not higher. Lack of definition contributes somewhat here.
Take our example, we are two incomes family, one kid. Neither of us are considered low income, but my partner salary is slightly above half mine.
All my take home pay goes to mortgage and spendings. Partner chips in to cover remainder of the spends (ie. I won't be able to cover all the spends 11 out of 12 months. ). On a good month, she save 100% of her salary, down to probably 10%on a bad month.
If you ask me, I'd say I live pay check to pay check.
If you ask hey, she'd say she isn't.
In reality, if we are in a position where we do not spend all of my pay, then either of these two things could happen:
1. We contribute more to mortgage.
2. We upgrade our PPR.
Either way, we'd be back to the same response 🤣The title of this thread is factually wrong.
It is false facts. It is fake news.
What it says is not what the survey actually says.
The survey does NOT say 48.4% of Australians live paycheck to paycheck. It says 29.7% do, and another 18.7% are saving less than 10% of their income.
And, again, if you read the survey methodology you find that even that is not a true representation of the facts as regards Australians generally. This is not a survey of a random sample of Australians. It is a survey of members of a "social media financial wellness platform", who may belong to that social media group precisely because they have or have concerns about problems related to their financial wellness.
We are talking about an organisation that has done a survey and publicised it to get publicity for itself and its issues and to attract members by doing that. It is not an organisation that did the survey to tell us what the truth is like a properly done professional public opinion survey. Professional public opinion survey organisations have a methodology they have to follow to ensure the result is a true representation of reality, and they are required to disclose how they did it. All this survey discloses is that a number of the members of an organisation participated in the survey.
Hasn't anyone told you that when the media runs a story saying someone says something, you go to the source of what they claim to be the facts, see if that source actually said that, and see if it obtained those facts by a valid method. In this case the source didn't say what the OP claims. And the source is one that has an interest in us believing certain things.
Roy Morgan claims that more than 50% of Australians think that the country is heading in the wrong direction.
Along with most other countries
From the economic side Germany is currently de-industrialised.
That's just partisanship - swap governments and you'll have the other 50% think the country is heading in the wrong direction. These sorts of ambiguous polls are just misleading at best, and just ammunition for hacks to attribute any meaning to it that they want at worst.
Both our options head in basically the same direction.
I saved up my house deposit at a minimum wage job, often not even doing a full work week. People who work & still claim they are on the edge are living beyond their means. NOBODY working solid hours without dependents is struggling except by choice.
How long ago?
Did you live at home? I find it hard to believe you saved deposit whilst paying rent, utilities, food etc on minimum wage. Not many are that fortunate.
What if they did? It’s a smart financial choice they made and has nothing do to with being fortunate.
Those who move out as soon as they turn 18 do so because they want the freedom to do what they want without their parents interfering. It’s a privilege which needs to be paid for and if they can’t find a good enough job to do that then by moving out they are living beyond their means.
And it’s a privilege to be able to stay at home and save for a deposit. Not every 18-year-old has a stable house to stay in and save. I don’t get these comments like “if I did it, you can too” because everybody’s circumstances are different, sometimes wildly so.
@400TX: Not all, but majority do.
Like anything else, I’m sure if you look hard enough there will always be exceptions. Yes, there are those who have no choice but to leave home as soon as they turn 18 and my comment doesn’t apply to them.
In the remaining majority of cases, when children move out, it’s almost always their choice, not the parents, or circumstances.
Not everyone leaves home 18 by choice, who wouldn't want to live at home? Who wants to pay $500 per week for a crap 2x1. The guy said nobody is struggling except by choice and said he saved a deposit with minimum wage so everyone can do the same lol what he didn't say was that was greatly helped by bank of mum and dad although indirectly, he didn't pay rent, utilities, bills. Always hear the same argument you leave home for freedom it's your fault, that's not always the case.
Boomer moment
good on you… but yes this is a priviledge many don't have. There is no way people can save for a house deposit on minimum wage today
Talk numbers.
What size deposit?
In what year, and over what time span?
Making how much exactly per hour/year?
Paying how much rent?
Leaving how much for food and transport per week?I look forward to seeing your working, but at the moment your answer is worth 0 marks.
Another useless comment trying to punch down. I guess they all should've invested in better bootstraps huh?
The survey results are 100% made up.
The number of adults in Australia living pay day to pay day is very small & almost all of those that do, only do so because they are financially incompetent & refusing to take responsibility for their money.
I actually do. I have many coworkers totally stressed out due to changes to their pay. Many has stopped going out even
Because of the reduction of your commissions?
There is some truly priveledged views here.
Inflation, housing costs, electricity medical have all gone up and wages have not kept up with this- this is a fact
we have never had more stress money, and yes a few are doing better for themselves but the average aussie is working longer, saving less and having less.Let's not judge others- many have come from priveledged backgrounds and always underate how much priveledge they have been given. living paycheck to paycheck shouldn't be embarrassing and for most its not a choice
Privileged*
Well, if only top of the range Iphones didn't cost $2.5K then we wouldn't have a paycheck to paycheck situation , would we?
it's all apples fault.
A lot of people do live paycheck to paycheck. BUT not that many, you need to look at the source of the survey which is people in serious debt looking for an app to help them manage it. This is always going to be heavily skewed by people with poor financial skills and knowledge.
People on good wages who maybe bought bigger houses or new cars that they didnt need are finding it tough.
Many young couples buying big homes or cars P platers are driving brand new ford ranger etc which would be under finance unless is the bank of mum and dad.
Multiple streaming services, uber eats, eating out all the time upgrading tech when they dont need to.
Thats the people who have jobs.
Now I'm lucky as my wife and i are pretty tight by habit due to upbringing and early working life of not much money and are now working towards early retirement.
My younger brother earns double what i earn but has considerable less assets than us his one of the must have now generation though in the last couple years has tightened his belt.
Lots of jobs out there are short term contracts or casual some jobs if it gets wet bosses will knock staff off and being casual that means no pay.
A lot of people out there also cant seem to help themselves one bloke where i work is a few years older than me and has nothing to his name just a car under finance from some dodgy company paying huge interest thats currently off the road as he cant afford to repair it.
Throw in marriage breakups, illness, loss of job etc doesnt surprise me at all i thought it would be a little bit higher percentage actually.
I'm one of the lucky ones ive always had family around that worked and tried to live good lives there are many people out there who dont have good family structure.
There are always people who have it tougher than you.
Does this include tradies who swear they only make $20K/year but have a $6M house, 3 boats, a jetski and $180K "work ute"??
So what's better? Being frugal during your working life and be relatively financially secure in your older years? Or spend money and live life to the max while you are young but struggle financially when older?
A, I'm not eating cat food when I'm retired
.Fine … don't retire then …
:-|
Yeah, think I'd rather just die.
like everything in life it's about balance. too much one way or the other is not attractive.
I want financial security and having "F$%^ you money" as it's known in some circles that I'm not a slave to my job and can spend time with family when I need/want to, but not at the expense of missing out on all the experiences when I'm young and healthy.
I'm willing to forego a nice car or a brand new phone but I still want to travel and see the world and spend time with the kids. It comes down to what really matters to youExactly this. You can be as tight and frugal as you want and retire as a multi millionaire but you aren't taking your money to the grave. Missing out on experiences and life is not a life well lived.
The second point ,
you don’t want to be old and struggling ,
With medical issues or just ageing and limited options .
Its probably true. But stats can be misleading (stating the obvious).
For instance, many (Smith Family charity is one that use this in the adverts) saying how many children in AU living in (relative) poverty - but they leave out the word relative because it allows sensationalism.
The very definition of relative poverty ensures a certain (significant) percentage of the population will be in RELATIVE poverty (double or triple everyone's wealth and income and the bottom would still be in relative poverty, even though fabulously well off).
In Australia, even the poorest are probably not in ABSOLUTE poverty, because of our social welfare policies and Centrelink.
You want to see absolute poverty, go to a third world nation. In Australia, we are incredibly lucky in an ABSOLUTE sense, and so we seek to garner sympathy if our RELATIVE position in our society is below average.
Having said all that, we charge our politicians and especially the PM for keeping our privileged position - relative to other societies and countries.
But really, we're all pretty damn lucky and well off.But really, we're all pretty damn lucky and well off.
It boils down to expectations, really.
Expect nothing and anything is just marvelous.
Expect high standards and everything is just not enough.Personal expectations.
I'd believe it. It's gonna be an interesting future.
The young guy at work (19) will go see a movie with his mates, then they'll each spend $30 on fortnight skins to play with each other as the movie characters. They're easily spending the 10%/week they could be saving on digital stuff that he uses for a few days.
Still more than half are able to save some money. Is that bad?
It has always been this way, most people spend as much as they earn, and let tomorrow take care of itself. Hence mandatory super, because we suck at saving. Do note that with mandatory super, why should one save at all? - you are already stowing away 10%.
Isn't this proves the importance of OZB?
I wouldn't believe that statistic. A large proportion of that % are in the middle-class who only struggle due to their own uncontrolled discretionary spending and eye-wateringly massive car, caravan and boat loans. There is no modesty in anyone's lifestyle anymore, just have to keep up the high roller image for your friends and Instagram photos. And it's all based around debt.
48.4% of Australians Live Paycheck to Paycheck
If factual and truthful it is fine if those 48.4% of Australians are basically paying their own debt, paying all those credit cards they own for all those items they bought.
Nothing sinister nor concerning.If that 48.4% of Australians are just paying for food (and shelter) and essentials then it is concerning.
I think it is the former.
It would be worse if the government didn't allow for negative gearing that gifts any investor a soft landing on their poor choice of overleveraged investment property, artificically keeping the market hot.
This is how you end up with high interest rates and no houses.
When you say "It would be worse…" I assume you meant to write "I've got a great idea,…"
Apologies, quite right
My Melbourne investment property
* costs me about 11% per year to hold (6.5% bank interest, 2.5% land and property taxes, minor repairs, agent fees, rates, etc, 2% depreciation on new build.)
* earns me at most 3% rental yieldI'm losing about 8% per annum to hold. 4% is offset by negative gearing, and the other 4% burns a hole in my pocket in the hope of capital gains down the line. If you take away negative gearing, rents would need to rise sharply or else investors will stop buying property and supply will dry up. By that point the housing market will be completely stuffed.
Renters need to be thankful negative gearing exists else their situation will be alot worse.
Orrrr
Maybe house prices are artificially high becuase investors like you are withholding loss making properties from people thay would then not need to rent?Renters need to be thankful negative gearing exists else their situation will be alot worse.
Please don't act altruistic, investors are the opposite of this.
;)
Wrong.
I built the units demolishing a vacant half-destroyed house and increasing density.
Without an investor willing to put significant amounts of money and risk into it, it would remain an unliveable unsafe old dump on prime land.
@drfuzzy: And I'm not altruistic. It's a business. But as I say, it is a loss making business where you accept the loss for hope of long term capital gains. If you start doubling the loss, what does that do to your business?
@drfuzzy: Wrong.
Actually, another family would've bought that lot and built a house or two on it, leaving one less renter.
But instead you overpaid for a property that is now loss making (god knows how in this market), fuelling the FOMO of people that actually want to buy their own property to live in.But hey, you do you.
Definitely misinformation. I work in healthcare (hospital) and literally no one picks up extra shifts, the casual pool is hopeless as outstanding shifts are rarely filled.
I advertised on hipages a few weeks ago I needed a yard clean up ( 3 to 4 hrs work) happy to pay $300 and not a single response. I advertised for a deck reno happy to pay 25k+ not a single response. Myself and a wardie friend did it for 8k. It seems that most people have enough cash to not bother working a little more. I advertised for the installation of some ceiling speakers and got one response. 90% of the nurses I work with are part time and have no motivation to pick up extra shifts.
Most of the retail sales are crap cause it would seem people have money and there is zero insensitive to discount.I'm sure you don't pick up every single extra shift you are offered. Even if you love work, there is a point at which you must rest and do something else.
Well I do, im full-time so everything I pick up is overtime…..I'm at work anyway, costs me nothing to stay on for extra hours.
so you work in a field with above average salary in one of the highest job security careers available. that doesn't sound surprising at all? there's also a limit to how many hours you can work, and those struggling cannot meet the demands all by themselves regardless of how many they take up
Yeah ok what about all the work I advertised?…..$300 at $100hr for non skilled work and zero takers….. people are doing ok.
Maybe the problem is hipages? I know a heap of people that would have jumped at that if it was in Melbourne.
@mapax: Yep it's Hipages fault for sure. What about the crap sales over the past couple of years?
Happy to disagree cause I see zero evidence in everyday life that people are actually struggling. Shops are not being boarded up en mass, in fact they are doing so well that they can't be bothered offering decent discounts when the sales are on…….cause people have money.@Socialsuicide01: that's a bit of a confirmation bias isn't it. broke people aren't going to be at the shops. they are broke because they may not have the physical or mental fitness , or any extra capacity to do the jobs you mention. you "not seeing any struggling people" is a sign of your privilege
@May4th: But we are supposing that almost half of the working population are broke. So the retail sector should be struggling, shops closing en mass etc, and this is not happening.
You're absolutely correct about my earned privilege, I have been privileged to be in the workforce for almost 40yrs, I use my privileged position to work 40-56 hr weeks and on the odd occasion work 2 jobs. I'm little unsure how this prevents me from seeing a large part of the community struggling.@Socialsuicide01: why is half the population broke? that's an assumption you made. paycheck to paycheck does not mean broke or living in poverty. it means you are spending most of your disposable income and not saving. you can earn 200k and blow it all on cocaine and hookers every weekend and be living paycheck to paycheck.
the fact you don't see any broke people tells us you have a job, you are employed, live in a reasonably safe neighbourhood and your family and social circle is full of similarly employed people. that's privilege
@May4th: Well I'm happy to disagree with everything you said.
Pay check to pay check is being "broke"
…."you are employed, live in a reasonably safe neighbourhood and your family and social circle is full of similarly employed people"……it's sad that you think this is privileged when it's actually pretty normal living.Well I'm happy to disagree with everything you said.
I can't care less whether you agree or not. all the things you said are for people struggling to meet the cost of living, not for those who choose to spend all of their discretionary income. that is the difference between "broke" and "bad with money"
it's sad that you think this is privileged when it's actually pretty normal living.
thank you for making the point for me
@May4th: ….."all the things you said are for people struggling to meet the cost of living", yeah ok that's the subject right? No one but you is discussing people being irresponsible with their money. Pay check to pay check once again is being broke, and I see zero evidence that almost half the population is broke.
If you honestly think that living a "normal life" is privileged then that says more about you than me. That sentiment is a bitter one.No one but you is discussing people being irresponsible with their money.
uh you are the one mixing up the two - you made the comment "I find it hard to believe 48% of people are broke" - my point, made many times, is living paycheck to paycheck is not equivalent to struggling.
If you honestly think that living a "normal life" is privileged then that says more about you than me. That sentiment is a bitter one.
not at all bitter, I'm very cognisant and grateful for my privilege to live in one of the best cities in one of the highest standard of living countries in the world. I'm not 'rich' but I have stable income, I don't worry about bills, my family's safety or having a roof over my head. If you can't see the privilege in that, then no one can help you there and I wish you the best in life.
The gardeners would probably rather just mow lawns and make $100+ per hour instead now that it's peak growing season. Garden tidy ups can be hard work and you utilise a lot more tools. But who knows. I would jump at a 3 hour job for $300.
@nubzy: But that’s the optimistic customer version ,
Probably you’ll have to double (or more) the hours guessed at .
@johnno07: Savage.