Money market accounts require a minimum balance and have penalties for liquidation, savings has withdrawal limits, and brokerage account liquidations come with a massive loss. They all bite you in the ass for pulling out a lot of money in a pinch, otherwise checking accounts would already have all the features of them. Credit card debt is already at an all time high and credit payments are at an all time low. What percentage of people making 60k-100k do you think have 1 out of those 3 let alone 2? 30%? How many have already had to liquidate those accounts to keep up with costs going up? You have to make 12k more a year on average to match pre covid levels.
You're not wrong about it being more complicated, but we're also talking about an emergency. Getting $500 from a savings account in an emergency even if you're at monthly transaction limit is going to cost you maybe $10 in fees. The premise is "can't cover a $500 emergency," not "has $500 sitting in a non-interest bearing checking account."
FYI: Federal Regulation D's requirements were removed in 2020. Banks aren't required to limit monthly "convenience transactions" anymore. Though plenty of them still pretend it's required so they can charge fees.
brokerage account liquidations come with a massive loss
Where'd you pull that out of? They come with some tax consequences of course but where are these "massive losses" coming from? Are you counting decades of future earnings against them? If you are, leaving the $500 in checking was already a "massive loss."
I'm not trying to say people are in great financial shape. But going from that kind of question surveyed to this kind of headline would be dishonest. The honest researched would ask something like, "could you deal with a $500 emergency without incurring debt."
I'm not trying to say people are in great financial shape. But going from the that kind of question surveyed to the headline is dishonest.
The survey wasn’t a “checking only” survey, making that connotation in the first place is dishonest, doubling down on it is stupid.
Getting $500 from a savings account in an emergency even if you're at monthly transaction limit is going to cost you maybe $10 in fees. The premise is "can't cover a $500 emergency," not "has $500 sitting in a non-interest bearing checking account.”
Again, not what the survey said. If said can you pay 500 tomorrow, not do you have 500 in your checking, you’re the one making claims that is not in the survey.
FYI: Federal Regulation D's requirements were removed in 2020. Banks aren't required to limit monthly "convenience transactions" anymore. Though plenty of them still pretend it's required so they can charge fees.
Find me a bank that lets people pull from their savings constantly, they’re eating their shirt if they do. Just because the fed stopped requiring it means absolutely nothing, it’s still in practice across the board.
Where'd you pull that out of? They come with some tax consequences of course but where are these "massive losses" coming from? Are you counting decades of future earnings against them? If you are, leaving the $500 in checking was already a "massive loss."
Again, show me where in the survey it said checking only, you’re going off what the dumbass said above, not what’s actually in the survey…
Find me a bank that lets people pull from their savings constantly,
"Emergency" now means "constantly." Okay.
Again, show me where in the survey it said checking only
Me: "Why do you think withdrawing money from a brokerage account is a massive loss?"
You: "But what was the question in this survey?!"
Did you quote the wrong thing or are just that obvious at dodging questions?
Edit: You want to discuss what the question was in this particular case, you can go track down the survey the guy in video was discussing (unsourced). Until someone shows me otherwise, I'm going to assume "researchers" and "journalists" are being dishonest as we've all come to expect.
You made a non argument because the fed changed a rule but bank practices stay the same.
Me: "Why do you think withdrawing money from a brokerage account is a massive loss?"
You: "But what was the question in this survey?!"
Did you quote the wrong thing or are just that obvious at dodging questions?
I’m sorry, are we pretending 401ks don’t have penalties for withdrawals now? What happens to the match when you withdraw early? You keep making non arguments that have zero to do with the survey.
Edit: You want to discuss what the question was in this particular case, you can go track down whatever the guy in video was discussing (unsourced). Until someone shows me otherwise, I'm going to assume "researchers" are being dishonest.
Sooo you didn’t watch the video… he was reading the questions verbatim.
Money market accounts require a minimum balance and have penalties for liquidation, savings has withdrawal limits, and brokerage account liquidations come with a massive loss. They all bite you in the ass for pulling out a lot of money in a pinch, otherwise checking accounts would already have all the features of them. Credit card debt is already at an all time high and credit payments are at an all time low. What percentage of people making 60k-100k do you think have 1 out of those 3 let alone 2? 30%? How many have already had to liquidate those accounts to keep up with costs going up? You have to make 12k more a year on average to match pre covid levels.
You're not wrong about it being more complicated, but we're also talking about an emergency. Getting $500 from a savings account in an emergency even if you're at monthly transaction limit is going to cost you maybe $10 in fees. The premise is "can't cover a $500 emergency," not "has $500 sitting in a non-interest bearing checking account."
FYI: Federal Regulation D's requirements were removed in 2020. Banks aren't required to limit monthly "convenience transactions" anymore. Though plenty of them still pretend it's required so they can charge fees.
Where'd you pull that out of? They come with some tax consequences of course but where are these "massive losses" coming from? Are you counting decades of future earnings against them? If you are, leaving the $500 in checking was already a "massive loss."
I'm not trying to say people are in great financial shape. But going from that kind of question surveyed to this kind of headline would be dishonest. The honest researched would ask something like, "could you deal with a $500 emergency without incurring debt."
The survey wasn’t a “checking only” survey, making that connotation in the first place is dishonest, doubling down on it is stupid.
Again, not what the survey said. If said can you pay 500 tomorrow, not do you have 500 in your checking, you’re the one making claims that is not in the survey.
Find me a bank that lets people pull from their savings constantly, they’re eating their shirt if they do. Just because the fed stopped requiring it means absolutely nothing, it’s still in practice across the board.
Again, show me where in the survey it said checking only, you’re going off what the dumbass said above, not what’s actually in the survey…
"Emergency" now means "constantly." Okay.
Me: "Why do you think withdrawing money from a brokerage account is a massive loss?"
You: "But what was the question in this survey?!"
Did you quote the wrong thing or are just that obvious at dodging questions?
Edit: You want to discuss what the question was in this particular case, you can go track down the survey the guy in video was discussing (unsourced). Until someone shows me otherwise, I'm going to assume "researchers" and "journalists" are being dishonest as we've all come to expect.
You made a non argument because the fed changed a rule but bank practices stay the same.
I’m sorry, are we pretending 401ks don’t have penalties for withdrawals now? What happens to the match when you withdraw early? You keep making non arguments that have zero to do with the survey.
Sooo you didn’t watch the video… he was reading the questions verbatim.