Over half of Americans say they're not even close to financial freedom

financial freedom is a myth peddled by billionaires
- I mean, it's not a myth, billionaires literally have enough financial freedom to live large for 100 lifetimes.
  The myth is that they're willing to share their ~~rigged casino gambling~~ "speculative investment" derived wealth/winnings, because reminder: nobody can come remotely close to earning a billion dollars through honest labor.
  
  You need state support to get that rich.
  
  You don't need billions for most definitions of financial freedom. Unless your definition is spend whatever you want, never worry about running out of money, and not have a job, you really don't need billions.
- financial freedom is a myth peddled by ~~billionaires~~ banks and investment brokers
- Not true, it seems that way but it is a thing that non-billionaires have. It’s just that those who have such freedom choose to live and often work out of view of everyone else, so you never see them. It plays heavily into confirmation bias. That isn’t to say that the wealth distribution is off, everyone should be in their class including billionaires. They do exist.
- This guy gets it.

I finally got a job that broke six figures.
Housing boom made houses twice as expensive in five years. Monthly grocery bill doubled. Renting doubled. Cost of cars doubled. Every day expenses doubled.
- Now consider the majority of people who do not have 6 figure incomes.
- I knew we were fucked when the same happened to me and I still can't afford a home.
- I have a house that was bought back when I made around 35K in 2006 and they where giving out loans to everyone, so nothing great by any means. Had someone come by and ask to buy it earlier this year now that I've gotten to a decent career class job and I had to tell them no. Like, have you looked at the price of things lately? My payment is less than most single bedroom appartments these days, no way I'm giving that up to someone. It's an ugly mess, but at least it's my ugly mess.
  
  I tell those companies I'll accept their offer if I have 3x the home's value in my pocket at the end of the process.
  They don't call back.
  
  This is essentially where I’m at, too, except bought in 2013 so probably slightly less good price.
  I can’t afford to do the fix up work on it properly, so it’s slowly crumbling, but I can’t really afford to move either because this place was on the low end when I bought it and hasn’t improved 😜. I literally can’t find housing for myself and 3 cats for the $550/mth I pay now. Even with my place being worth 3x what I paid for it, I’d end up in a worse or (at best) equivalent place for the same price. May as well just stick with the skeletons I know.
- Honestly, you need to make 6 figures to just not be “poor” these days. Very annoying, considering how quickly things changed over the last decade.
- Yep, pulling in 110k this year after bonus at my job and I’m having to DoorDash to get just a bit of breathing room.
  $3350 mortgage eats more than half my take home. The rest goes to debt (took out a loan to fix a couple things on the house last year, and student loans coming back now), caring for my aging dog, food, bills, maxed 401k that I’m considering dropping for a while, and a little bit for free spending so I can go on a date or two or out with friends. Even with this mortgage payment this would have been easy on just my salary even 3 years ago (it was easy af with dual income at the time). But the way costs have increased are making me feel broke in a way I haven’t felt in a long-ass time. I always thought that if I could make it to six figures I’d be properly wealthy, but I’m not. I’m barely comfortable.
  
  Where the fuck do you live with a $3350 mortgage? I pay 1/3 of that for rent and I think that's too high.
  
  Jeez. I can't fathom what kind of home you must be in to be paying $3350 in a mortgage. Genuine question, have you ever been like, actually poor? I do find it hard to believe anyone willing or even able to pay a mortgage like that could possibly live a life anyone would call barely comfortable.
  
  I doubt your maxing your 401k. I assume you mean the amount needed to get maximum match from your employer?
- Same here. Feels like I'm making the same, but my mortgage is huge now. Sucks.
- Its nice to see someone else mention the doubling. There are news things about gas being expensive but its cheap relative to everything else. People better be ready for eight bucks a gallone once it rights itself. Inflation would suggest 30% odd increase but for what you have to buy its 100% over 2020 prices.
  
  Don't worry urban planners are making driving more difficult instead of mass transit easier. That way when gas prices double the entire lowest tier of the workforce won't be able to afford to work. "No one wants to work anymore"
- My partner and I make over $300k, and we're struggling to buy a 4-bedroom house on the outskirts of Orlando, FL.
  
  As someone who lives in Florida I've got to ask, how? When thinking about finances and investments I often feel like I'm in my own bubble and I don't understand other peoples' situations, motivations, etc. So I'm genuinely curious. 4-bedroom houses near Orlando can be found in the mid 300s. With your income you should be able to pay in cash after saving for just one or two years (depending on how much savings you're starting out with). Even if you wanted something more expensive, are mortgages that difficult to get approved even for someone with such a high income?
  
  You probably don’t want to buy a house there, anyway, what with all the insurance companies pulling out of the state.
  Your rates are going to be sky high, assuming you can even get insured, which isn’t remotely a guarantee anymore.
  
  Sell your house and move slightly further out of Orlando.
  Or don't have a family size of 7+ and try to live in a city while expecting every kid to have their own room.

- I also doubt that half of the 50% that say they're on a path to financial independence are actually on that path. There's no way that many people have enough cash or assets to retire with the current wealth inequality.
  
  Many people recognise that they're fucked, many others don't recognise that they're fucked.
  
  Financial independence isn’t necessarily never work again. Though some definitions include that.
  Even still, the article is talking about financial freedom, which even they recognize as a sliding scale
  Half of Americans describe "financial freedom" as being comfortable, but not necessarily rich, and 49.3% say it refers to meeting financial obligations and having some money left over each month. About 54.2% define it as living debt-free, and 46.2% believe it means never having to worry about money.
  I would be more in the latter part of saying it’s living mostly debt free. Or more depreciating debt free. Aka not house poor and able to manage finances.
  Unfortunately the US (at least, I can’t speak to other parts but it seems Europe can be grouped in here too) has abysmal financial education. So many people by into consumerism at such a deep level that they impoverish themselves in it. I’m not totally free of unnessecary spending, but I don’t buy into so badly it puts me in a bad place or in debt.
  We have debt. Mainly in our house but we still live below our means and always have. Places that loan you money aren’t looking out for you. And Society looks down on people that set boundaries or take the time to understand the full scope of a contract (such as a mortgage. I have seen it first hand).
  Better education and better cultural norms that didn’t prioritize “things” and consumerism would go a long way. And that starts with parents, not schools or teacher. It’s a parents job. We have a lot of lazy parents and it’s now a generational issue.
  Availability of credit wasn’t nearly as widespread in even the 80s but now we have a generation of people living in credit debt that haven’t taken the time to teach their kids either. Heck I’m partially at fault too (though my kids aren’t really of age to understand money quite yet)
  
  And even the insured are one inevitable illness away from being copayed into poverty.
- slavery is a spectrum
  And other white-people takes.
  
  Frederick Douglass, arguing for unity among black and white laborers in 1883, said that “experience teaches us that there may be a slavery of wages only a little less galling and crushing in its effects than chattel slavery, and that this slavery of wages must go down with the other.”
  
  No he has a point. You can argue about word choice and semantics but slavery and freedom are not all or nothing things.
  
  Glad this shit reaction is getting the appropriate downvotes, another whites bad strawman on display
  
  There are many different kinds of slavery, chattel slavery is one of many. Indentured servitude was a much less extreme and dehumanizing form of slavery, serfdom was something in between. Slavery is an incredibly broad term that basically means someone is unable to choose their labor, as it belongs to someone else. That doesn't necessarily mean the person does, like in chattel slavery, just that their work does.

I’m 45 and I’ve more or less accepted that short of an unexpected and massive windfall, I will never be able to retire, much less experience “financial freedom.”
- I'm 43 and literally had this exact conversation today. I work full time for a major financial institution. This shouldn't be how things work.
  
  Agree yet you work for the enemy.

Really? Do they? That's very interesting. Tell me, is the over half more like 99%?
- I think you knew exactly what idea they were saying. Agency, the ability to control your own life, varies. Clearly and obviously a regular person in the West has more agency than say a regular person in North Korea. It is not an one-off switch. The ever growing wealth inequality is making the population shift more and more to the slave side of things. That doesn't mean that you are a slave it means your papa was less of a slave compared to you.
  This is why being a lolitarian makes you stupid. It bifurcates slavery and freedom. It defines force to be a specific term, that no one else uses, and declares victory in the game it is playing with itself
  
  It's really disingenuous to compare US-only data to unrelated generalizations of other countries that function under different cultural and economic systems. But I feel like you already know that.
- 70% of Americans retire.
  
  I think the stat you're referencing is for people aged 65-69. That means 30% of those people are still working. That number should be much lower, like 0.

What is actually the definition of “financial freedom”? Having (earned / gained) enough money, so that a person has no need to go to work anymore? If that’s the case, I would expect that number to be much, much lower than 50%.
EDIT: sorry, I just read it in the article. If “financial freedom” just means to work and live more or less without having to worry about financial obligations and what will happen tomorrow, then less than 50% is a rather shocking figure.
- Agree. And anyone could quickly go one from side to the other. In need of a expensive surgery? Might lose your financial freedom. Bought an expensive house and lost your job? Goodbye as well.
  
  That’s what a health insurance would be good for. But for many Americans that would equal communism.

In other news, water is wet
- Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Heres Tom with the Weather.
  
  If, like me, you didn't have the reference: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2r85h2
  
  Bill Hicks, I reckon?

That's how society is, brother, literally 1% controls the world in their favor and keeps the wealth, impoverishing the 99%.
- It's been 10,000 plus years. Let's change it, brother.
  
  i agree, but not by passive aggressively shitting on people's life choices in a social media comment section.

49.3% say it refers to meeting financial obligations and having some money left over each month. About 54.2% define it as living debt-free, and 46.2% believe it means never having to worry about money.
I'm going to ignore that pesky 100% thing for the moment. Apparently we can't even agree on what "Financial Freedom" means. Defining the metric you're polling seems pretty critical if you want a consistent or useful answer. "Over half" is still burying the lede, though - less than one in ten fall into their personal version of that 150% noted above. Aside from the "American families are financially fucked" though, I'm not sure there's any hard data to extract from this.
-
"Peter don't ya call me cause I just can't go; I owe my soul to the company store."
- Don't also forget that we're talking about what people say about their own financial position - which may be different from what their financial position actually is. Self-reporting is never accurate, because people report what they feel or are aware of, which is different from objective facts, to a greater or lesser degree.
  Between letting individuals define the terms of the question they're going to answer, and then self-reporting, this "study" goes beyond useless and into detrimental.
- I agree, the definition is a real problem. While still interesting the survey is pretty screwed.
  I thought financial freedom was being independently wealthy. Idle rich. Apparently I was wrong, it means working class but with some "bonus" money. Maybe still struggling but struggling less than most working stiffs.
  How free can you be if you still have to work full time?
  
  There is a point in income where you have the choice, the choice to move, the choice to switch jobs, the choice to leave your partner, etc.
  That is freedom. A lot of Americans are just stuck exactly where they are.
- That's a good point. I make well into the 6-digits and the one reason I don't believe that anyone under 7-digits will ever be "financially free" is because of the for-profit healthcare system. One bad accident or cancer and I'm fucked for a long time if not the rest of my life as is anyone that can't just shrug off 5 to 6-digit bills.
  Now if I were somewhere that offered universal health care and I was making what I was, I'd consider myself to be financially free. So I guess I fall into the 46.2% category.
  
  Same. I'm financially stable. Meaning I can hit a few bumps and I'll be fine. But I don't think it's possible to be ' financially free' when at any time I could suddenly have hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical debt.
  I can roughly estimate potential pit falls with my home. And home insurance is reasonably reliable for catastrophic scenarios. Even if they aren't, bankruptcy is still feasible. The same cannot be said about healthcare. Insurance plans are extremely opaque and while they claim to have terms such as 'out of pocket maximum' that should**** in theory limit your losses, there are endless stories about how little that holds up when put to the test.
  Proper healthcare coverage would be the single biggest impact on American stability. Nothing else is even close.
- "This is ten percent luck, twenty percent skill, fifteen percent concentrated power of will, five percent pleasure, fifty percent pain, and a hundred percent reason to remember the name."

Probably the half that make $31k or less.
- Looking for a job is insanely depressing when you get to see just how many jobs-white collar, blue collar, fast food, whatever- all pay absolutely disgusting wages one person can't live of off...

I would also venture to say that applies to 90% of us. "Over half" is a fucking laughable fake figure.
- I mean, 90% is over half...
  
  Yeah, but it's marketing jargon to make it seem like less of a deal. When someone says "over half" do you immediately assume they're talking in the 90% range, or closer to 60%?

I'm now in a 2 income household with fewer kids as they grow up, and to us it feels more like we are close always, just no hope of ever actually getting there, if that makes sense. Always almost enough.
Which is better than my previous experience but since it's happening later in life, still wouldn't expect to ever stop having to earn money by working. I have never expected to retire though, it would take - as someone else noted - a windfall, luck, not effort. Effort has taken us as far as it can.

Sheeit I'm one step above homelessness living off plasma donations.
- @HereticHydra @fne8w2ah
  I'd go for this except I got a false HIV-positive back in '89 and no matter what I do I can't get it off my blood donation record. :(
- I do ok, but all my debt and bills are telling me I need to get on this gravy train

Clearly the answer is work harder and get a 3rd job. Eventually you'll be a millionaire!

I’d have thought more. With a big gaping chasm in between.

Wtf? Of course not. The workforce would be devastated if half of Americans had achieved financial freedom.
- Not if the goal was equilibrium/homeostasis rather than unsustainable growth/metastasis on a finite world of finite resources as it is today.
  That will never be permitted though. Humanity will destroy itself not out of hatred as once believed, but in the name of cold, insatiable, sociopathic greed.
  
  Yah we won't stop using resources and fucking the air until we all die off. There's no other way cause humans, specifically the humans in power with the ability to make change. Won't. Cause cold hard cash.
- Yup. Workers in America desperately need more rights. But so long as there are unpleasant jobs thst have to be done, total financial freedom isn't really possible. Even under a socialist/communist model.

🎶 Day's never finished, masta got me workin, someday massa set me free! 🎶
- Labour will set you free, indeed
  
  That's a good slogan, we should put it up over the front gate

There is $222 in the wallet in the link preview. Just found that interesting.

Old news. How about providing some ideas of solutions to this problem. Like, I dunno, tax the rich... 🤔

I'm actually the polor opposite of that, as are many.
Financial Freedom? I don't understand. You might as well be calling me an asshole in Greek.
- Eyyyy

I certainly don't live debt free, though the debt I have has a ROI that makes it worth having.
What amount would be enough to consider yourself financially free? $30K in savings? $100K, $500K, $1 Million?
- Personally, to be "financially free" I would need enough investment income to cover all my expenses without making any sales/withdraws. Ideally this would include owning my home outright. So probably in the neighborhood of one million. I doubt I will ever get there.
  
  Unless you pay cash upfront for a house, it serves no benefit to pay it off early due to inflation. As inflation goes up your debt says flat but your home value increases as well as equity. With a interest rate lower than the inflation rate your making money on the loan, not losing it. A mortgage is an investment, let it roll for as long as you can. Also it's convenient that taxes are collected within the mortgage rate, once that is gone it becomes a pain.
- 300x my average monthly expenses invested. (Based on a 4% withdrawal.) Multiple ways to get there.
  If I spend, not earn, 1K per month, then I need 300K invested.

I'll feel free when i finally have savings

- If over half of a country's population doesn't understand how essential functions of our own financial security work, that is indicative of a failed system
- 40+% of people polled didn't have a savings account at all, so yeah, they're dumb.

Freedom is a subjective term, what do they mean?
- Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose

Money makes money.
Feedback loop concentrates the money towards those with more money.

Dog I've been lying flat since I figured out the world wasn't how I imagined it. I'm so stuck in my lack of freedom I'm like not even in the top 10 decision makers in my own life.

What is YOUR definition of financial freedom?
- I view it as living within your means. I make more money than I spend.
- I'd define it working on whatever you want for a living.
  I don't necessarily mean surfing and getting drunk every day, but just being able to make a living off something that you actually want to do.
  I make enough to make ends meet and pay off my mortgage and then some, but I'm not financially secure enough to just quit from one day to the next or start a company myself to make the things that I think the world needs or that I find interesting.
  I believe that there's a huge potential if people weren't bound to always have a job that pays the bills. Most people are limited to carrying out the ideas of a few people who have the means to live their dreams.
  Universal basic income could solve this and realise that potential. And it only requires taxing of the richest or automation of the government services. If we did a little of each, we could actually have this.
- My definition is:
  Ability to pay all expenses, including things like sudden repairs, medical payments, job loss for up to 6 months, etc with minimal impact to quality of life.
  Ability to partake in moderate luxuries such as travel, dining out, new phone/TV/etc every so often. Does not mean you have enough to always buy whatever you want, but have enough to have some extra enjoyment.
  Ability to take care of 1-2 children including education, day care, medical, activities, etc
  Just based on the healthcare component alone, I don't think it's feasible for Americans to be financially free until they hit the millions. Otherwise, if you ignore that aspect I'd say its around the mid level executive type of income or about ~$300-600k year depending on location. If it's just moderate financial stability, then it's maybe only $90-200k, but I don't think I'd call that level 'free'

The article is really bad and confusing, but the very first statistics says only 10% are living with their defined financial freedom. ~~It also doesn't appear to provide any sources for this data.~~
edit: They do have sources, I'm just blind.

Sobering post

If you just saved 5% of your pay in a 401k from the time you were 22 and invest in the stock market for 40 years and never get sick, quit your job to raise a family or care for loved ones, then you might become a millionaire. Not that a million would be enough to retire on after 40 years of inflation.
Also, this plan depends on the world economy continuing to grow at the same rate as it did in the past, never mind that this growth is toxic to the planet. But, hey you might see some financial freedom at that point.
Just stick with it.

But why would more than half of Americans be financially free? Are more than half of all Americans already over 65 where they need to be financially free? If not, then it would be very odd that more than half would be close to financial freedom. It's an odd statement that makes you feel bad, but if you think about it, it would make no sense if it were true.

People who are surprised: Americans.
People who are not: the rest of the world.