So my definition of living paycheck to paycheck is likely different from yours, if you don’t allow for saving.

If you never exhausted your supply of money (as you say you not only had savings, and were even adding to it with unspent money from each paycheck), I'm confused what exactly is "paycheck to paycheck" about your situation then? Is it simply that you receive a paycheck and then at the next pay interval you receive another paycheck? What is your definition?

Its not a binary yes/no condition, but instead different levels depending on how not-paycheck-to-paycheck you can get. It gives you the wonderful opportunity of thinking about tomorrow instead of today, next week instead of this week, next month instead of this month, and next year instead of this year.

Especially with today's cost of living and the challenge of holding good employment this is simply out-of-reach of so many people. However, if its possible for someone to cut back enough to get to the state of having unspent money left over when the next paycheck arrives, its really good path to get on.

It sounds very counter intuitive, but life actually gets less expensive when you're not constantly broke. It can be simple things like buying a 24 pack of toilet paper at a small fraction of the cost per roll compared to a 4 pack of toilet paper. It can also be as large as being able to afford to buy good tires for your car when your current ones are worn out. The worn out ones you've tried to "make due with" may leave you stranded on the side of the road with a flat paying for roadside service or a tow missing work or even worse, having good tires could mean being able to quickly stop the car in an emergency avoiding a collision costing thousands in auto repairs, medical bills, and possible legal costs.

But I would exhaust the money from my paycheck that was in my checking account, and I had many times where I would also empty my savings when I'd get hit with an unexpected expense.

My point was that even though I was saving money, it wasn't ever money that I ever saw in my bank account. My 401k was taken from my paycheck and I couldn't even think about touching that with a lot of effort and expense. I had my direct deposit setup to send most of my check to my checking account, but I always had a small amount going to my savings at a different credit union. My toughest years I was making around $25k a year and I had 5% of my income going to my 401k and 5% going to my savings. My rent, car payment and car insurance would be the first things I paid each month and usually that meant my first 2 weeks of the month were sparse and if I had stopped putting aside that 10% it would have been a little help, but not enough to get through to my next check. So yes, I had access to money, but I was still living paycheck to paycheck because I had strict rules on when I could access that money - and I tried to pay back to my savings anything I took out, when possible.

Would you consider someone adding to their 401k each check to not be living paycheck to paycheck?

Would you consider someone adding to their 401k each check to not be living paycheck to paycheck?

No.

So yes, I had access to money, but I was still living paycheck to paycheck because I had strict rules on when I could access that money - and I tried to pay back to my savings anything I took out, when possible.

Here is the key difference. You are not spending your additional funds because of choices you've made to save. Folks living paycheck to paycheck don't have additional funds to save. All of the paycheck is spent inside of that pay period. At any time you could have chosen to spend your saved money, but you chose not to. What you're doing what most would call "budgeting" and your choice to not spend your savings are "sticking to your budget". If you had a dire emergency such as being injured or ill for long enough to miss a paycheck would you have tapped your savings to stay afloat and pay your expenses even though it would have broken your budget? I think most would say "yes". I know I would. This is the difference. Those living paycheck to paycheck aren't able to put aside money to create an ever growing savings, as you did.

I very much commend you on your savings and budgeting! You're on great financial footing with your circumstances and your choices. Nicely done!

During the time I was getting paid around $25k a year I was bringing home around $700 a paycheck (every 2 weeks). Me putting aside 10% between my 401k and my savings meant that I had around $30 every 2 weeks going into savings. I often ran out of available money several days before my next check, and having an additional $30 would have been nice, but would have likely only given me another few days.

And yes, when I had unexpected bills, and later when I lost my job, I did dip into my savings because that's why I had it, but that 10% want going to be the difference between me living paycheck to paycheck, or not. In fact, the transition to not living that way was a very gradual process.

And yes, when I had unexpected bills, and later when I lost my job, I did dip into my savings because that’s why I had it, but that 10% want going to be the difference between me living paycheck to paycheck, or not.

I'm not sure I understand your logic. If you dipped into your savings, then you clearly thought it was needed in those extreme times and it made a material difference. If it wouldn't have made a difference, then why did you even dip into your savings?

I didn't say that the savings didn't make a difference, I said that having an additional small amount of money available to be each part period wouldn't have kept me from living paycheck to paycheck. Of course having the savings made a difference when something major happened, that was the whole point.

Of course having the savings made a difference when something major happened, that was the whole point.

And that is the monumental difference between what you are describing I would just call "sticking to a budget" vs living paycheck to paycheck. Those living paycheck to paycheck don't have that option to pull from savings because they have no savings. You did. What you were doing, by any definition I've run across up until yours, wasn't living paycheck to paycheck.

If you want to keep saying you're living paycheck to paycheck, certainly you can. Its a free country, but you're going to confuse people you talk to or misrepresent to them your situation. It may also be doing a disservice to those that are living paycheck to paycheck.

My point is that just because you are living paycheck to paycheck doesn't mean you can't still save. It's a decision that you have to make but it is doable because no matter how bad you're situation is, there are other people getting by on 5%-10% less than you. By insisting that someone living paycheck to paycheck can't also have savings is what's doing a disservice to them.

My point is that just because you are living paycheck to paycheck doesn’t mean you can’t still save.

For many, it does.

It’s a decision that you have to make but it is doable because no matter how bad you’re situation is

I think that is an extremely myopic view if you're making that as a blanket statement. There are absolutely people that spend every last penny of their paycheck each week on absolute necessities and still go without other necessities. There are families that have some or all of the members skip meals because they don't have enough money for food. There are people that can't afford something as simple as basic underwear that isn't worn out because they live with so few means. Some people have to skip taking life saving medicines because they simply can't afford that. Suggesting folks in any of those type of situations aren't deciding to cut back is a choice they are making is heartless.

Even people that aren't in as extreme situations as those, they may be buried under mountains of debt. Sure, saving a small emergency fund is good, but if they are paying down debt with all of their with the remaining amount of their paycheck, then the idea of saving for a house, car, child's education, or even retirement are likely out of reach for them.

there are other people getting by on 5%-10% less than you. By insisting that someone living paycheck to paycheck can’t also have savings is what’s doing a disservice to them.

I truly hope you never have to live in real poverty. I also hope that you have the good sense to never say what you said here to someone in poverty. I'm not saying you would. I'm not suggesting you did. I'm not strawmanning you here.

Are there people that aren't in poverty simply living above their means and could cut 5%, 10%, or even more without negatively affecting their lives or health? Absolutely! I'm not going to sit here and claim that everyone exhausting every penny in their paycheck before getting their next one is spending it only on necessities. For those that are simply living above your means, you are giving good advice to them! I agree with you on that.