SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the I-can-spend-until-I-reach-my-credit-limit,-right? dept.
If you have credit card debt, it may be time to scale back what you spend on luxury purchases.
But we’re not talking about doing without small luxuries like your morning coffee or an afternoon snack – things like your car loan or lease, leisure travel, dining and more can make a bigger difference.
A new CreditCards.com poll shows U.S. consumers who have credit card debt are outspending debt-free households in seven of nine discretionary spending categories (see chart). However, few are willing to cut back on any of their luxury purchases.
In fact, 18 percent of Americans who have credit card debt are unwilling to trim expenses in nine categories, including dining out, leisure travel and clothing (see chart). This despite the fact that the average credit card APR is nearly 18 percent.
[...]Our luxury spending poll also found:
- Many can live without dining out. Dining and takeout is the category all respondents – in debt or not – are most willing to cut in half. Still, less than half of those with credit card debt (48 percent) would trim their dining budgets, which average $2,186 per year.
- But vacations are a big budget item many won’t budge on. The average household with card debt spends $2,211 per year on leisure travel. But only 3 in 10 of those respondents would be willing to cut their travel spending in half.
- Cars, haircuts and cellphone plans are the biggest must-haves. The three categories people in debt were least willing to cut in half are personal care and beauty (23 percent), cellphone services and upgrades (25 percent) and car loans or leases (26 percent).
- Cut my streaming? You’re dreaming. Only 39 percent of respondents with debt would be willing to cut back on subscriptions services such as Netflix, Spotify and Xbox Live. However, at $1,198 per year, it’s the second-least-costly luxury expense among this group.
https://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/luxury-spending-poll/
(Score: 5, Insightful) by ilPapa on Friday July 12 2019, @07:13PM (7 children)
"The problem is that working people just have it too damn good, with their haircuts and coffee and cell phones!" signed, the 1%.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 12 2019, @07:38PM (5 children)
Gotta love these culture warfare pieces, and the fools who lap it up.
You'd be rich if you'd just stop buying the latest iPhone!!@! /s
(Score: 4, Touché) by aristarchus on Friday July 12 2019, @10:03PM (3 children)
Just need some austerity! Worked so well in Venezuela! And in Greece! Coming soon to Palestine! Blame the Poor!
Evidently, we have some Malthusians here at SoylentNews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus [wikipedia.org]
Yes, virtue shaming! If you give the working class better wages, or lower credit card rates, they'll just blow it on booze and licentiousness, and have more kids, just like in "Idiocracy" [imdb.com].
Whereas, on the contrary, if we give the surplus wealth of the nation to responsible persons, like Jeffery Epstein or Donald Trump, they will not use it for such moral degeneracy!
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 12 2019, @11:11PM
Don't forget tiny houses [libcom.org]! That'll turn them into Randian bootstrappers! If they're serious about being rich, they'll build their tiny houses out of salvage, just like in the good old days in the 1930s!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday July 13 2019, @06:00AM (1 child)
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by aristarchus on Saturday July 13 2019, @06:22AM
Stop spending on those unnecessary pedicures, khallow! They really do nothing to increase your chances of attracting a mate, or of being able to sub-contract out any more back-ho's. Just saying!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 13 2019, @02:42PM
Straw man. No one is making the argument that they would be rich, but that if they were more frugal all around, that they would be in less debt, could perhaps eventually start actually savings money, and would be less stressed as a result of being in a better financial position. The system may be unfair in many ways, but that doesn't mean that people are completely powerless and can't take actions that improve their own lives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 13 2019, @02:38PM
Nope, not just the 1%. Why shouldn't we encourage people to make better financial decisions? Why shouldn't we discourage people from being mindless Consumers who try desperately to keep up with the joneses, put themselves into massive debt, and aid in the destruction of the environment as they do so? If you're an actual progressive, this is not desirable behavior.
No one needs ridiculously expensive haircuts, coffee, or cellphone plans; all of those things can be had for cheaper, resulting in less long-term stress. If you apply a mentality of frugality across the board, that can result in massive long-term benefits. You act like people are powerless, but that is far from the truth.
Financial literacy is an entirely separate issue from the 1% and income inequality.