Don't Bet Your Life on a Paycheck
By Jim Bauer
@porwest (109861)
United States
October 23, 2025 10:24am CST
Although it may, on the surface, sound counterintuitive, relying solely on a paycheck to carry you through life is a dangerous gamble—and one that almost always ends the same way. It leaves you broke. It's not a question of if. It's a question of when.
Most people assume that they will always be able to find another job. But life doesn't always make guarantees. Illness, age, or unforeseen circumstances can strip away your ability to work. And when that happens, the safety nets—social security, disability, government assistance—are often too thin to catch you.
That's why you should treat your working years as if they are your last. Not out of fear, but out of foresight.
Live below your means. Save aggressively. More importantly, stop trying to chase money. Instead let your money follow you. If side gigs are pursued, if they are only to catch up or spend more, you are literally wasting your time and getting nowhere.
You will still be broke. If not now, eventually.
Study dividend and investment strategies to allow your money to work for you instead of the other way around and build your own, more stronger safety nets. If you take side gigs or participate in surveys or platforms like myLot, put the money to work for future gains, not immediate ones.
When you accumulate money, everything changes. You pay less interest. You take vacations without debt. You breathe easier. And when the paycheck stops, you're not left gasping.
Build an emergency fund for surprise expenses like car repairs or the furnace breaking down. Save six month's worth of living expenses to buffer against job loss and still be able to proceed forward until something else comes along rather than have to take three steps back and struggle even harder to catch up later.
On the latter, think of it like trying to catch a ball. Every time you reach down to grab it your foot kicks it farther ahead. You never really ever actually catch it. You've locked yourself into a game you can never win.
Having money is more about keeping it than earning it. Doing the right things with your money won't make you invincible. Catastrophes happen. Life has many challenges along the way. But if one works as hard on their personal finances, and considers the real value each paycheck can potentially have, you have more options. You have more time. You are more prepared. You actually have a fighting chance.
Money isn't everything. But without it, you're pretty much left being a victim of circumstance instead of being someone in control of their own destiny.
Consider a paycheck like a boat. Consider your finances like one too. Too many people spend too much time patching holes in a leaky one. They never think to pool their resources into building a better one.
When you are more often thinking ahead, it is much harder to fall behind.
4 people like this
5 responses
@porwest (109861)
• United States
23 Oct
Absolutely right. At the same time, too many people get caught up in this misbelief that higher incomes equal better outcomes, or that lower incomes create a barrier to wealth. Statistically it is not true, and I have tried tirelessly to deliver that message. One can have a very low income and become wealthy, and on the flip side, one can have a very high income and become poor—it's all about a mindset and how one deals with money.
52% of people making $100,000 or more are living paycheck to paycheck. That's a staggering figure to me. So, clearly money isn't the key to wealth. Sure, the more you earn, if you are good at managing it, is going to have money grow to a larger end number and accumulate faster. But low income doesn't guarantee poverty any more than a high income guarantees riches.
For me the key thing to consider is what I like to call "Income replacement." In other words, keep and invest what you don't need and grow the base of income derived from dividends and capital gains and other things like options premiums from writing covered calls.
Done right, a paycheck becomes a bonus. Not a necessity.
1 person likes this
@kaylachan (80147)
• Daytona Beach, Florida
23 Oct
That's smart thinking not enough people follow. Most people live paycheck to paycheck, instead os saving as much as they can. It can be scarry to set money aside at first, but if you don't go above your means, you'll be much better off and much happier for it, too.
1 person likes this
@porwest (109861)
• United States
12h
What is scarier to me is being broke, which is just one of the reasons I save money. But of course, it is also because I always desired freedom and not to be tied down by the lack of finances. Like I say, money isn't everything, and there's a lot it can't buy, but it CAN afford peace of mind and at least some sense of comfort.
1 person likes this
@kaylachan (80147)
• Daytona Beach, Florida
8h
@porwest Yeah, because we need it to live, sadly. I can understand why it was created, but I never liked feeling like I never had enough.
1 person likes this
@porwest (109861)
• United States
2h
@kaylachan Why do you say "sadly." Money is a driver of progress. Without the need for it, we would still live in caves. As for never feeling like one has enough, that's the reason one reads books and learns how wealth is created, and how to make every penny count for something.
Wealth is not created through big paychecks and luck. It is created through knowledge and action.
1 person likes this

@LindaOHio (204195)
• United States
11h
For the past 6 months I have been concentrating on living on the SS and Pension payments and not touching the savings unless a huge project comes along. It's working quite well.
1 person likes this
@porwest (109861)
• United States
2h
This is a good idea, and you won't hear me poo-poo it one bit. At the same time, and you might be surprised to hear me say this, you are in the "spend down years." What that means is that you can comfortably take your balance divided by your life expectancy and draw that down.
For example, let's say you have $100,000 and expect to live another 15 years. $100,000 divided by 15 equals $6,667.00 a year. If you want to be extra cautious only draw down 4% at $4,000 a year. OR if that money is invested, it will EARN roughly $6,000 a year depending on where and how it is invested. You could simply take the dividends and spend that and leave the principal alone.
In any event. Just my two cents. I know you are considering the prospects of long term care, and having more in savings affords you a potentially better place, but really, unless you have $1,000,000, it is likely that you will have a choice where you go in the beginning only be transferred to a cheaper facility when Medicaid takes things over—and of course Medicaid REQUIRES a liquidation of assets so...
You might want to just enjoy what you can while you still can. Again, just my two cents.
@LooeyVille (55)
• United States
23 Oct
And this is what is bothering me related to this subject . . . government workers are "shocked" and "saddened" that they might lose their jobs. Why? Corporate and real life everyday employees have no guarantee of work so why should government employees expect it? It's like they think they're immune or elite.
1 person likes this
@porwest (109861)
• United States
23 Oct
Excellent point. You have to keep in mind that when it comes to Democrats, there always has to be someone who is "heartless" and "greedy," or someone who is a victim. Normally this gets applied to corporations when they talk about low wages, corporate greed, firings and layoffs—it's the evil rich guy we're supposed to be mad at who the Democrats say they are fighting against in our (the Average Joe's) defense.
In the case of the government and the jobs associated with it, the evildoers are the Republicans. Again, the Democrats need an enemy, and they need a victim. So, they portray things in a manner as to incite a reaction and pull at people's heartstrings. "Look at what they are doing to you. Isn't this terrible?" They think it will win them votes, and sometimes it does.
In the case of the shutdown, it's a double down the Democrats get to try to put out there. "How will you get your services?" and "What about these worker's families?" Welfare recipients will panic and the touchy-feelies will weep, imagining people becoming homeless and babies starving.
But yes, the reality is that government work should not be guaranteed any more than those who work in the private sector. In FACT, government workers should be MORE accountable, and those jobs should be MORE heavily scrutinized for purpose and effectiveness, because these workers are paid by taxpayer funding and it is the job of our elected officials to hold them to a particular standard as to be good stewards of taxpayer money.
Granted, that answer runs a bit outside the scope of your response, but I still thought it was an important point to make anyway.
The fact is that life happens and people need to be prepared one way or other to deal with it. Too many people are NOT prepared. Too many people feel entitled to a paycheck, to a job, they expect guarantees where none are or ever were explicitly offered. They lean on bailouts and safety nets and someone else being there for them to guide them through their lack of proper planning they, in their own minds, label as unfairness or wrongdoing. They expect the system to be there for them and then complain the system is rigged.
I could go on and on. lol
1 person likes this








