Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

SteinbeckSawIt t1_iuswpn8 wrote

I always get a little tick under my left eye when people try to compare percentages and summed values as apples to apples.

197

totemlight t1_iutxe90 wrote

Eli5. What’s happening here?

15

OsteoRinzai t1_iutxrjb wrote

On the Y-axis, one is a number, the other is a percentage. This is a no-no

50

perec1111 t1_iuv8s2g wrote

Why? If you focus on sudden changes in trends, you clearly see something interesting here.

1

L1veFree t1_iuvfxq7 wrote

You're not wrong in the sense that trends still tell a story, regardless of units. But this is definitely a misuse of data for storytelling.

You're looking at $total-cc-loans (sum of all people) vs %savings (average of all people). Why not %loans-per-person vs %savings-per-person? Or $loans-pp vs $savings-pp?

OP has normalized one of the values (then scaled it to 0-50% for dramatic purposes) but OP didn't normalize the other.

8

perec1111 t1_iuvi3w1 wrote

I think everything you listed is personal preference, and I see good reasons for both of the decisions OP has made. Telling a story is such a buzzword here, it is starting to lose its meaning on this sub.

−4

SteinbeckSawIt t1_iux5mbi wrote

Homie, it's not personal preference, it's best practices.

4

perec1111 t1_iux6h3o wrote

Depends on what you want to see/show. Go on with gatekeeping though, it’s fun!

0

jasperCrow t1_ivz55kb wrote

Best Practices is more or less the best technical standard, its not your opinion 😂. He's not gate keeping, he's telling you how experts analyze data, and WHY.

0

perec1111 t1_ivzjmsp wrote

Is he? Are you an expert? If you really think about it, can you really not come up with just one reson to visualise data this way? If everything is rules by those best practices, why do we need experts to think about it? A high school junior could do your job then.

0

DaBearsManiac t1_iuump41 wrote

Meh, still a very easy to read graph and does tell a compelling story.

5

Perma-Chonk t1_iuudf9o wrote

I thought my head was trying to explode while interpreting this, thank you for confirming they are dumb

−1

mehnimalism t1_ius54c5 wrote

You’re comparing a nominal amount to a rate. Dollar amounts naturally inflate and grow over time but a propensity doesn’t necessarily.

Misleading.

194

upboat_allgoals t1_iut0byd wrote

Is OP reposting https://reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/yjowp1/us_personal_savings_near_historic_lows/ ?

14

mehnimalism t1_iut33fk wrote

Certainly looks similar, just with a much longer timescale.

Regardless, loan total should be contextualized by adjusting for inflation, income levels, or something similar. It’s a similar argument to debt vs GDP — it means relatively little without understanding growth rate, ability to pay back, etc.

I will say on its own that’s an unhealthy CC debt trend.

11

gravityraster t1_iuucvyo wrote

Also the population grew by 17% over that timespan. This should be normalized to population size.

6

[deleted] t1_iusvc54 wrote

Dollar lost about half its value since 2000. Credit card debt is up 4x. So adjusted, 2x. Still scary.

2

mehnimalism t1_iut3koa wrote

Right but loan amount should be in context of income trends and total debt picture. It’s not the case, but what if incomes were up 50% over that time? Makes it much more manageable. Point is simply this is a comparison that leaves tons of room for lurking variables or misleading conclusions.

17

DaBearsManiac t1_iuunodb wrote

Disagree.

Savings rates are a much better monitor of the general population's cash-on-hand, since total savings amount can be skewed due to the amount of wealth held at the top.

This is telling us the amount of money saved as a percentage of total income.

This is against a graph of gross credit card debt.

Which, looking at its sharp rise against the collapsing savings rate, would suggest that people are having a harder time paying their month to month bills.

Which I think is evidently true.

That sharp uptick in 08 would far expand beyond an inflationary dollar values over just a 20yr period.

1

[deleted] t1_iusiyz3 wrote

[deleted]

32

chetanaik t1_iut04vb wrote

>Also, cc debt tends to be highest when unemployment is low. People borrow more when they earn more. I buy that big screen TV because I feel confident I can repay it.

That's not certain. People also rely on cc debt to make ends meet. The spike in 2009 is not explainable otherwise.

1

[deleted] t1_iut5i8x wrote

[deleted]

5

fleebleganger t1_iutnpld wrote

That seems like a very reasonable explanation given the data we have.

If it were people putting money on CC to “get by” you’d expect it to return to something close to the prior level as a large majority of those people default and declare bankruptcy and the others pay it off as they get back to financial security.

5

SnipesCC t1_iuuyi6r wrote

It also dipped in 2020 because for people that did have a job that they did at home expenses dropped (gas/public transit, meals out, non-sweatpant clothes) and lots just applied their stimulus check to their credit cards.

1

TheFinestPotatoes t1_ius52gb wrote

Personal savings are done by different people than those who take out credit card debt.

If the rich are saving half their income and the poor rely on credit cards, you could see both rising credit card debt and a very high savings rate.

6

CareerMicDrop t1_iusdhij wrote

All i seee is a Republican doing a democrat from behind. Thanks internet

4

000654 t1_iuunr9t wrote

Oh boy I may need to get laid... Seeing things lol

3

12kdaysinthefire t1_iutrd78 wrote

Perfection. Looks like we all have almost no money left and lots of fucking debt to pay off. Bueno.

1

datatadata t1_iuui49x wrote

As others pointed out, what’s up with $ vs %

1

JaxTaylor2 t1_iuukazf wrote

JPow says households have fortress balance sheets so this graph is cancelled. Everyone has plenty of cash to absorb the shocks and there’s nothing for us to see here. Move along.

1

a_electrum t1_iuv5re6 wrote

Sad. What ever happened to those Biden bucks that were supposed to rain down from heaven upon us Poors?

1

Turbulent_Dentist_65 t1_iuvcdti wrote

Better have a "per capita" approach and corrected for wage growth. Creditcard debt versus median income as a percentage would be nice. Maybe slice credit card debt to income by bottom 20% of incomes.

1

Spaghetti_Ninja_149 t1_iuvig7q wrote

It means that during the pandemic people saved more and got less loans? I probably got that wrong right? Makes no sense

1

k0nstantine t1_iuvs5y9 wrote

boiling frog: A person who, or thing which, is in a gradually worsening situation without any realization of the peril until it is too late.

1

SheetRocket t1_iuvvz1g wrote

Isn’t this just personal savings rate per that particular time period? So, even though people may be saving less per time interval right now, that doesn’t mean gross savings are terribly low? So it’s a little misleading when compared to a gross figure?

1

Then-Ad1531 t1_iv1q9m8 wrote

Looks like it about time for a run on the banks and to overthrow the dictator.

1

un_gaucho_loco t1_iuvhal4 wrote

Just inflation is needed for these graphs to divert. It’s so stupid

0

Impressive_Estate_87 t1_iutaskk wrote

Good thing banks charge prime + a shitload, I’m glad we’re putting more money in their pockets

−1

NeonsStyle t1_iutz49v wrote

Credit Cards are suicide. Just don't get one! If you adopt the mindset, that if you can't pay for it today, you can't afford it, then take 10% of your pay, and have it automatically moved into a savings account. You'll turn into a Saver vs a Spender. You'll build wealth rather than Debt! Just adopt that single idea! "If I can't pay for it in cash, then I can't afford it!" By the time you're 50 you'll thank me a million times over!

−1

[deleted] t1_ius4nxt wrote

[deleted]

−2

TheFinestPotatoes t1_ius5605 wrote

More like, food prices started rising by double digit %/year and the poor found themselves unable to afford their old standard of living without going into debt.

7

685327592 t1_ius7gn4 wrote

Prices rise BECAUSE you have too much money in the system and not enough workers.

1

jplebourveau t1_ius5fwh wrote

Forrr suuure. Just lay one narrative over the other. Both are true.

0

Optionsmfd t1_iutafyl wrote

pretty sure they are already talking about sending out checks this winter.....

−2

nothingcorporate t1_iusk9m0 wrote

Interesting. For the first time this century people were actually able to pay down their credit card debt (not much) and save a bit of of money. Too bad the stimulus was so short-lived, and we now have record-breaking high debts and low savings.

−4

685327592 t1_ius25bc wrote

Good graph to show how the 2009 stimulus was undersized whereas the 2020 stimulus was oversized (thereby creating inflation).

−7

retrovaporizer t1_ius37xq wrote

its not a good graph at all to say that one way or the other. youd need way more context blended in to come to that conclusion.

8

685327592 t1_ius3f6o wrote

Sure, but we have all that context. This is just a good graph to see what we already know.

−10

retrovaporizer t1_ius4go8 wrote

inflation was caused by a number of things including years of near 0% interest rate, massive supply chain disruptions due to covid in addition to global conflicts like the war in ukraine which have made resources scarcer

8

SteinbeckSawIt t1_iuswv50 wrote

There is not enough data to say this, this is beyond extrapolation, and thus this comment doesn't make sense.

3

685327592 t1_iusxetk wrote

There's plenty of evidence to say it. The statement is a fact. We know it to be true from mountains of data and I'm merely say we can see that fact in action in this specific chart.

−2

SteinbeckSawIt t1_iux5dnb wrote

Well, I'm merely say you are incorrect in your original comment as it pertains to the post. So I guess that's that.

1

NumbersDonutLie t1_ius669c wrote

2009 Stimulus didn’t go to people that account for the Personal Savings Rate.

2

685327592 t1_ius6u1m wrote

A lot of it certainly did including $1,200 checks to households ($600 to individuals).

−2