Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Almighty Buck United States

As 'Buy Now, Pay Later' Surges, a Third of US Users Fall Behind on Payments (reuters.com) 163

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
A third of U.S. consumers who used "buy now, pay later" services have fallen behind on one or more payments, and 72% of those said their credit score declined, a new study published by personal finance company Credit Karma showed. From a report: The study, conducted by software firm Qualtrics, surveyed 1,044 adult consumers in the United States last month to measure their interest in buy now pay later (BNPL) and found 44% had used these services before. The usage figure was slightly up from a similar survey conducted by Credit Karma for Reuters in December, while missed payments was down from 38%. The latest survey found younger consumers were more likely to miss payments. More than half of Gen Z or millennial respondents -- those born between the early 1980s and mid-to-late 1990s-- said they had missed at least one payment. That compares with 22% of Gen X, who were born in the early 1960s to early 1980s, and 10% of Baby Boomers, those born between the mid-1940s and 1980.

There has been a surge in usage of BNPL services, which allow consumers to easily split payments for purchases into installments. The boom in volumes by providers such as Klarna, Affirm, AfterPay and PayPal, has been driven in part by online shopping growth during the coronavirus pandemic. The explosive growth has led to more dealmaking and competition. Earlier this week PayPal announced it would acquire Japanese buy now, pay later firm Paidy, while last month rival Square agreed to acquire AfterPay.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

As 'Buy Now, Pay Later' Surges, a Third of US Users Fall Behind on Payments More

As 'Buy Now, Pay Later' Surges, a Third of US Users Fall Behind on Payments

Comments Filter:

  • A question of definition (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:07AM (#61791309) Journal

    Isn't this exactly the point of buy now, pay later scams?

    • Re:A question of definition (Score:4, Insightful)

      by earl pottinger ( 6399114 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:10AM (#61791313)
      Yes, but it seems some people can't think ahead even a little, they want it NOW!
    • Scam? It's not a scam really but it is predatory. The only people this would really appeal to are those who can't afford the items to begin with. So defaulting on payments was inevitable. Much like dollar stores. They are put in economically depressed areas and make it look like they have a deal on something which ends up just encouraging people without much money to spend the very little they have.

      • It's not a scam really but it is predatory.

        To me it would only be predatory if the rates are really high,

        Comparing Affirm and Afterpay [investopedia.com], you see a mixed bag - low end of Affirm is 10% which does not seem predatory, while high end is 30% which does... not sure how they decide what interest rate you get on late payments.

        However Afterpay seems pretty reasonable, with a late fee of just $10 plus an additional $7 if payment is unpaid seven days after due date - no percentage at all which is a bit confusing as to

        • It sounds reasonable until you convert those fees into interest rates, what they are really doing is hiding the huge interest rates from those that can't do the math. Afterpay is predatory and worse they hide it behind fees.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mark-t ( 151149 )
        It also might be effective for people who can invest the money they would have otherwise used on the purchase up front wisely enough that the money they made off of that since, but before they have to pay will be worth the inconvenience of keeping track of when to pay it.

      • Scam? It's not a scam really but it is predatory.

        How is it predatory? The terms of the loan are disclosed up front. And this isn't even remotely some situation of "I must have this or I'm dead" kind of thing, it's all luxury items like iphones and TVs. Buying luxury items that you can't afford is called living beyond your means, and it's not a societal problem, it's a personal stupidity problem.

        • So if I tell a kid he gets a lolly if he gives me the 100 bucks their parents gave them for their birthday it ain't predatory either because the terms were disclosed up front?

          And no, "because it's a kid" doesn't matter. How many people above the age of 18, in other words, when they're absolutely allowed to trade their belongings for some magical beans, do you know that you'd actually classify as adults? And our society quite happily promotes this.

          Because else, how would our economy survive?

          • Age does matter. I don't know any 18 year olds that would give me $100 for a lollipop, but if I were a cartoonish villain I could probably convince my 5 year old nephew to make the exchange.

            I'll give you that the line is fuzzy. You don't magically become capable of making important financial decisions on your 18th birthday, but I'm curious what you propose as a better alternative. That no one is allowed to make a financial decision for themselves until they've passed a government-issued test? Or without

            • 100 bucks for a lolly, 1 grand for an iPhone, 10 for some car gimmicks... the only thing that changes with age is the amount of money and the toy.

              The solution would probably be that we stop glorifying spending and teach our kids that only spending the money you actually have, and only on thing you actually need and not because some influenza tells you that you MUST buy this NOW or else you're no longer the collest person on the planet. That of course would not only first of all require that we actually give

          • And no, "because it's a kid" doesn't matter. How many people above the age of 18, in other words, when they're absolutely allowed to trade their belongings for some magical beans, do you know that you'd actually classify as adults? And our society quite happily promotes this.

            Because else, how would our economy survive?

            LOL so what do you propose as an alternative? Does the government tell you how much of your own money you're allowed to spend? Does each merchant you do business with have to somehow guess whether you're able to afford what you're buying? Yeah fucking right in both cases.

            Nobody, other than you, can truly know what you can afford and what you can't. Maybe you make minimum wage on part-time work, but you also live in subsidized housing and never eat out, and you're a pretty good saver, if so, you can probably

            • Nah, you can't safe the ones that are currently getting lost. All you can do is try to reach the next generation and stop teaching a society that only if you spend like mad you can be happy.

              • You know, we teach very aggressively for kids to not use drugs or tobacco. Yet what do so many people end up doing anyways.

                No amount of teaching is going to stop people from seeking their endorphin fix. Normal people plan how they're going to do that. Stupid people just want to get it quickly no matter the long-term consequences. People who do this have existed in every civilisation since time immemorial, and we'll continue to do so. No amount of education or changing of societal values will ever change tha

        • Simple. These schemes wouldn't exist if people didn't live beyond their means or at least saved for the things they wanted. The sole reason they exist is because people cannot afford to buy most of the stuff they have and corporations want to sell more of their junk so they can keep the profit wagon moving along. Perhaps /. is the wrong crowd to talk to about this who seem incapable of understanding that the a majority of Americans (those not on /.) are living from paycheck to paycheck and have less than
      • What's wrong with dollar stores? They do have cheap prices for their stuff don't they? I would say the ubiquitous liquor stores, title loans, and payday loan shops in poor areas are much more predatory.

        • What's wrong with dollar stores? They do have cheap prices for their stuff don't they? I would say the ubiquitous liquor stores, title loans, and payday loan shops in poor areas are much more predatory.

          Do a little comparison shopping at the dollar store some time. Notice that the item you get for $1 is smaller and lower quality than you would get buying elsewhere. Toilet paper is a BIG eye opener. Cleaning products are often watered down as well. I used to buy Pinesol at the dollar store until I realized the bottle at the store across the street was 5 times the size for only 3 times the price, then when I got home with it I noticed the difference in the color and smell. There are a few things worth buying

    • Re:A question of definition (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DaveV1.0 ( 203135 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:37AM (#61791463) Journal
      It isn't a scam. You want it to be a scam because then it can be someone else's fault rather than the people who can't afford something but want it now. Rather than do without or saving up to afford some luxury, they choose to sign up for "buy now, pay later" without ever looking into if they can afford it later. It is basically a credit card that isn't a card.
    • Not at all. They aren't scams they are a form of meritocracy. It can't be a scam if the terms are fully disclosed and winnable. It is simply a case of capitalism doing exactly what it should and funneling wealth from those who lack merit to those who have it.

      Idiots who can't make and follow through on these systems increase the economy of scale and provide a source of profitability when deferred interest kicks in, penalty rates apply, missed payment fees get added, and of course late payment fees applied. T

      • I just finished paying a digital piano I bought 18 months ago on a 0% APR special. Could I have bought it outright? Absolutely [but] I enjoyed the piano AND interest I gained from having the funds invested...People who actually follow the terms cost the lender money

        That's not quite right. Your credit card charged the retailer 1-2%, If it was Afterpay they were charged 4-7%. That figure is getting built into the final cost of the product, so worst case you need an after-tax ROI of 7% to break even (as a society, this is a Prisoner's Dilemma situation). Even if it was store credit, the store has to get its line of credit from somewhere and the overall cost is increased to reflect that.

    • Isn't this exactly the point of buy now, pay later scams?

      For the most part, they aren't a scam. They are a contract agreement. We are free to define them as "scams", but that doesn't mean the definition makes sense.

      The problem is with the "soft" credit score and low cred criteria being done by several of them. That can be exploited by unscrupulous lenders to target people they'll now they'll default (not unlike many did during the 2000's mortgage/subprime lending crisis.)

      There is merit in asking for our legal system to require lenders to do hard/deep credit c

    • "Isn't this exactly the point of buy now, pay later scams?"

      Exactly! Credit-card companies have been doing it for decades, but the very same people have already maxed out all their credit-cards, so every new scam gets them, they don't have to money.

  • The borrower is slave to the lender (Score:5, Insightful)

    by memory_register ( 6248354 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:15AM (#61791333)
    Do not borrow if you can avoid it. Better to go without some convenience than enter credit slavery to these sharks.

    • Re:The borrower is slave to the lender (Score:4, Insightful)

      by holophrastic ( 221104 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:26AM (#61791403)

      "...without some convenience..." like having a house to live in, decades before you can afford to buy it out-right?

      You might not have been thinking about a mortgage.

      "...without some convenience..." like having a car to get to work, years before you can afford to bey it out-right"

      Maybe you didn't mean financing, nor leasing.

      Maybe you didn't mean renting either. You might not have meant hotel rooms, nor even paying your gardener only after the job is done -- that's a borrowing too, technically.

      And that's the kind of borrowing that runs every business in the world. You can't pay suppliers and employees before selling the product to the customer. The money needs to exist first. Credit is time-travel. It allows products and services to happen in real-time, while payments for those products and services happen both before and after the products and services.

      If revenue had to wait for cash-flow, you wouldn't have an economy at all. You'd have a barter-system with money.

      There's a line somewhere. It's not where you've placed it.

      • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:42AM (#61791483)
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • Debt, however ridiculous it sounds, creates wealth.

          Debt also creates money. It might be more precise to say that money is credit, the opposite of debit. If I have $100 in my wallet, that $100 exists to be in my wallet because someone borrowed $100, in the process creating the $100 they borrowed. To a first approximation, every dollar in existence was created by a bank when they lent that dollar (which didn't exist before they lent it). Thus, every dollar is actually backed by debt, meaning someone, somewhere has made a legal commitment to do work to create

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by evanh ( 627108 )

        House prices mostly appreciate. A house is about the one exception for personal borrowing. Otherwise, rule of thumb is: If the loan isn't intended to generate a profit, ie: boost business performance, then it's probably money down the toilet. Basically anything personal.

        • House prices mostly appreciate.

          Look at the demographic charts for almost anywhere and tell us how house prices will mostly continue to appreciate...

          I do think buying a house makes a lot of sense, owning your own place outright is very powerful. But anyone doing so should be prepared that at some point that house may be worth less than they bought it for, especially if they buy one now with the market up a huge amount...

          • It's true that few people can afford to buy at today's housing prices. One way that might work itself out is for housing prices to fall. But another way is for an increasing share of all housing to be owned by the decreasing share of people who are able to afford it, by virtue of the ever-larger share of other peoples' incomes they can take away, as rent. This isn't like manufactured goods, where high prices soon result in increased supply.

        • House prices mostly appreciate. A house is about the one exception for personal borrowing. Otherwise, rule of thumb is: If the loan isn't intended to generate a profit, ie: boost business performance, then it's probably money down the toilet. Basically anything personal.

          Not really. Getting a newer car for the wife and kids to drive reduces the cost/risk of them having to deal with a broken car. It increases their safety. This on itself generates a gain (or a profit if we look closely) in terms of reducing risk. Risk is always a cost, and if you can reduce it, you gain. That's why more often than not it makes sense to get a full-cover car insurance than a minimal plan.

          Unless we are within walking distance of good public transportation or work remotely, we need a reliable

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Trailer Trash ( 60756 )

        For most cases, a mortgage isn't debt. There are two reasons for this. First, you have a balance sheet with "mortgage" on one side and "house" on the other. As long as the house doesn't lose value it will always be worth more than the mortgage. Second, you need a place to live and that's going to cost one way or another. So, even if you get rid of the house and mortgage you'll have to get an apartment, which is essentially a debt that will never be paid off. So the alternative is, at best, about equal

      • If you can avoid it. Besides, the more essential the item - car, house - the more likely there is something approaching reasonable terms. On the other hand, once you step into the world of credit cards and BNPL, you are entering the space of legal loan sharks and the worst of the worst.

        Drive an old car for cheap if you can, but a smaller house than you can afford if possible, these are good practices. But treat it as an ironclad maxim that it is better to go without a new phone or even a couch than owe mo

      • "...without some convenience..." like having a house to live in, decades before you can afford to buy it out-right?

        You might not have been thinking about a mortgage.

        "...without some convenience..." like having a car to get to work, years before you can afford to bey it out-right"

        Maybe you didn't mean financing, nor leasing.

        Maybe you didn't mean renting either. You might not have meant hotel rooms, nor even paying your gardener only after the job is done -- that's a borrowing too, technically.

        And that's the kind of borrowing that runs every business in the world. You can't pay suppliers and employees before selling the product to the customer. The money needs to exist first. Credit is time-travel. It allows products and services to happen in real-time, while payments for those products and services happen both before and after the products and services.

        If revenue had to wait for cash-flow, you wouldn't have an economy at all. You'd have a barter-system with money.

        There's a line somewhere. It's not where you've placed it.

        I would have said "nice point you have going there" but I won't since you obviously decided to ignore the OP's opening sentence where he said to avoid borrowing IF YOU CAN AVOID IT.

        The keywords here (that the OP said) are these: If. You. Can. Avoid. It.

        If you cannot avoid it (for example, where it makes sense to borrow to make an investment on a home rather than renting, or getting a new, more reliable car for the wife and kids), then you got to do it. That is implicit in the OP's post.

        At home, we avo

        • You have a funny idea of the definition of the word "can". I "can" most certainly avoid having a mortgage -- I can live in a smaller home, or farther away. I "can" buy a cheaper car.

          I "can" sell a cheaper product, and I "can" grow my business slower.

          I "can" easily "avoid" borrowing money. But it'd be silly to do so. I "can" avoid taking all sorts of risks, including financial ones. But some [actually most] problems are better solved after-the-fact, than avoided in-advance.

      • There's a line somewhere. It's not where you've placed it.

        He placed it just fine with the line "if you can avoid it". Maslow's Hierarchy of needs houses and cars under physiological and safety needs.

        Where's your iPhone 17 or that fancy new TV fit into that equation? You know, the things you use BNPL for? You do know BNPL isn't a lease or a mortgage right? Please try and stay on topic.

        • "if you can avoid it" certainly covers the bigger house, the more expensive car. No physiological nor safety needs there. Thanks for your academic knowledge. Leave your spherical frog in Maslow's microwave. I'll meet you in practical reality.

          The iPhone 17 is absolutely vital for anyone in the iPhone 17 app development business. Is that on-topic now? That fancy new TV as a replacement for expensive movie theatre tickets?

          Paying interest rate in order to achieve time-travel isn't something that Maslow co

    • Trouble is we encourage people to live at or above their means rather than within their means. When I bought my current house in 2018 I told the bank how much I was willing to borrow. They said I was approved for a lot more, but I knew what I was willing to pay. People decided they deserve certain things - luxury cars, McMansions, the latest clothes from the season, etc and while many of them look right they are really barely keeping their eyeballs above water.

    • To a majority of Americans, it's about logic and common sense. To quote an short, old SNL skit about credit cards, Don't buy stuff you cannot afford [vimeo.com]. Best line by Cyril Figgis: "It's in the book. It's only one page long."

      For the rest of us emotionally driven impulsive types, however, it's second nature to make bad financial decisions. No matter how smart or educated we are about the math (I even have BA in Mathematics with an emphasis on Statistics), we're wired to do things that make you shake your head la

      • Debt is down, savings are up. People have been making better financial decisions since the start of the pandemic.

        It may not be your wiring that is defective, but your philosophy; you use your wiring as an excuse, so you make bad decisions. Even though you (purportedly) understand math, and even statistics.

        If you stop using the excuse, you may find that knowing math is part of your wiring.

    • That depends. In the eternal words of a comedian, if you owe 1000 bucks, you have worries. If you owe 1,000,000 bucks, your lender has worries.

    • this is more like basic furniture. I mentioned it elsewhere but 33% of the country is working "gig" jobs. This is more than likely young folks who at 18 have to get out of their parents house but don't have jobs that can support them. [cnbc.com] Their parents don't have any money either (if they did they probably wouldn't be kicking them out at 18).

      Yeah, there's work out there, but it's sporadic. Fast food will hire you, but what nobody talks about is that the hours aren't consistent. Modern scheduling software m

    • That's a nice sentiment, until one day you fuck yourself over 'cause you have no credit history.

      The better strategy is to not borrow more than you can pay back. Having a reputation as someone who pays back what they borrow in a timely manner makes borrowing money cheaper and easier, as lenders take it as a sign you can be trusted.

      Borrowing is fine. Debt is fine. It's a good way to finance expensive things or for emergencies. It's taking on more debt than you can pay back that's bad.
      =Smidge=

      • This. So much this. Not just to build credit for when you really need it, but because it is very often financially advantageous to borrow instead of pay cash. If the interest rate is lower than the return you could reasonably expect on an investment (e.g. Index mutual fund), then you should finance the purchase and invest your cash. This is generally true for mortgages and auto loans, but will vary depending on your credit history/score. Bad credit or no history, will not get you favorable rates (if approve

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RobinH ( 124750 )
      Borrowing only makes sense if it makes you more money. Borrowing money to go to university and get a job that pays $100,000 instead of $50,000 would make sense. Borrowing money to buy a work truck and tools makes sense if you're starting out as an electrician. Borrowing a bit of cash to buy your first rust bucket of a car so you can drive to your first job makes sense. Borrowing money to buy a TV because you can't afford it: not a good idea.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by eepok ( 545733 )

      Let's dial back that hyperbole. Words means things. Being in debt is not slavery. Being in debt makes you a debtor. The effects of one versus the others are vastly different and conflating the two is ridiculous.

      Caveat: There are SOME situations where people are held in genuine slavery due to a debt (see: https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/13... [cnn.com]). This should not be conflated with having a mortgage, student loan, car loan, credit card, etc.

    • Depending on the payment service, the seller can actually become a slave to the buyer. In Sweden it's the norm nowadays to offer 60-day delayed payment, without any added fee. This means that at the time of purchase the seller effectively only receives credit from the payment provider, and has to deliver a satisfying product before I -- the buyer -- decide to cover their credit.

      I also don't have to give my credit card or bank details to dozens of stores -- only a few payment providers.

      Even though I'm fairly

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Do not borrow if you can avoid it. Better to go without some convenience than enter credit slavery to these sharks.

      The only time debt is bad is when it's bad debt. The difference between bad debt and good debt is bad debt the item purchased is worth less when the debt is due.

      So buying a car on financing is something to avoid if possible - because a car depreciates. However, it's not entirely a bad option, if it enables you to get to work and make money. There are options though - taking a more economical ca

  • Distinct generational boundaries there (Score:4, Funny)

    by sabt-pestnu ( 967671 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @10:16AM (#61791345)

    So if I am born in 1970, am I a Baby Boomer or a Gen X-er? Both? Neither? Does it matter if I am born on Mars or in Sagittarius?

    • Baby Boomers, those born between the mid-1940s and 1980.

      It's a typo for 1960. I was going to say, "this is Slashdot after all.", but it is in TFA.

    • You're about dead in the middle of GenX.

      Baby Boomers: 1946-1964
      Generation X: 1966-1976

    • For two reasons. First, Marketers and political operatives would target you as such because statistically you're likely to behave like a boomer and not a Gen Xer.

      Second, you grew up before the college's State & Federal funding was gutted, and you hit the job market in the 90s and would have had your career established (or at least a chance at it) before the 2008 market crash wiped it out. You'll also get full SSI benefits. e.g. you're a boomer because you have advantages and opportunities for wealth

  • "...younger consumers were more likely to miss payments..."

    no shit, does this have anything to do with any particular 'Generation' or maybe this is just true in general? in 50 yrs, will it still be true or just an anomaly of those born from 1940-2010?

    and these bnpl transactions are not scams; two parties voluntarily enter into an arrangement both find beneficial; of course it's riskier to give the product away w/out initial full payment, so I have no problem with there being a greater reward, whether it

    • I think it's probably true in general. People expect income and expenses to remain consistent over time and take what is perceived as a low risk. It takes years of experience to learn that "unexpected expenses" come up often and at the worst possible moment. That and wages don't keep up with inflation so you usually make less over time if you're not actively working on your career.

    • does this have anything to do with any particular 'Generation' or maybe this is just true in general?

      It seems to be truer now than it was in the past. We can look at the rising numbers of foreclosures or bankruptcies. Unfortunately, the credit system is so new a more direct analysis is not possible.

      these bnpl transactions are not scams; two parties voluntarily enter into an arrangement both find beneficial;

      Many scams are predicated on a voluntary arrangment. How was Madoff's scam not a "voluntary agreement

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jm007 ( 746228 )

        truer now than in the past? where does that come from? the same knucklehead younglings of today will grow older and wiser, only to be replaced by the next set; it's always been this way

        rising foreclosures and bankrupties? there are so many contexts, complications and conditions to those that merely reducing them to a generational issue just doesn't smell right to me; am open to stats and numbers but this article is shite, so let's look elsewhere for rational facts

        the fact that many scams are entered in

        • where does that come from?

          The increased foreclosure and bankruptcy numbers between generations at the same age level? Like I said?

          rising foreclosures and bankrupties? there are so many contexts, complications and conditions

          Right, there are so many. And reducing them to a generational difference is one way to characterize the differences. Just like Baby Boomers are more likely than Gen Z to be worried about communism.

          let's not forget that an unpaid-for item means the seller is the victim

          That's bullshit. Th

  • Encouraging people to buy silly frivolous things they cannot afford doesnâ(TM)t go well.

    • What are you saying, it goes exceptionally well for the seller.

      Or at least the banks.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jm007 ( 746228 )

        the article is about folks not paying the seller as was agreed upon; doesn't sound exceptionally well for the seller to me... more like the seller is the victim of a broken contract

        it all comes down to personal responsibility; some are better at it than others but to me, it's far better than having some other entity deciding for an individual what's in their own best interest

        • actually it does go exceptionally well for the seller. most of the BNPL BS is based on making money from defaulting on the payments which incurs late payment fees and extortionate interest rates.

    • doesnâ(TM)t go well.

      Financial advice from Jarjar? I don't think so!

  • It sounds like the rent-to-own scam

  • Because I'm entitled to things I can't afford.

  • We've been living on government stimulus for a while now and that stream is drying up. The crash is coming, October will be ugly.

    • nah, government will keep stimulating if it needs to. Now I don't think it's a good thing, but the reality is there is roughly ninety trillion dollars in this world, if we include "broad money". That's why it's not really a big deal to have stimulus, adding some gallons to the pool as it were.

      • As far as we know in the US, the gov is done writing pandemic related checks to most people. The extra unemployment stimulus ends in September. While there will still be some money flowing, the direct flow to most folks is drying up quickly. The infra bill has an uphill battle. The Feds can't keep rates near zero forever, especially when they are seeing inflation - what they think about that inflation will matter however (they think its temporary but its higher than expected). The writing is on the wal

    • They've been saying the crash has been coming for the past decade. They predicted 20 out of the last 2 crashes.

  • Live within your means.... period (Score:3)

    by Morpeth ( 577066 ) on Monday September 13, 2021 @12:34PM (#61791971)

    'nuf said.

    Yes, life's unfair, some people have more than you (worldwide most probably have less), but the BNPL is just dumb and I don't have sympathy for those who get in a hole. I'm talking about non-essentials/don't need to have, not food, or housing, or paying for the doc, etc.

    I live pretty comfortably now, but after college, the economy wasn't great -- I had a job that got me by, bought a cheap but functioning used car -- though I was lucky enough to be able to bike to work when the weather allowed, had a roommates in very modest apartments to split the bills, ate out very rarely, found free/cheap things to do for fun, etc.

    I paid off my student loans in 7 yrs instead of 10, but scrimping by and sending in a bit more money every month than was required.

    I didn't live high on the hog, but I had friends, still had fun, and did ok. I never felt anything was owed to me or that I 'deserved' to have x if I couldn't afford it.

Slashdot Top Deals

With your bare hands?!?

Close