Whether that is because you simply dont have much money, or you spent it all on something frivilous is immaterial.
But living paycheck to paycheck to most people definitely does include spending one’s money on non-bill things like lotto tickets, consumer goods, restaurants, and things beyond their means.
You might be able to make ends meet by cutting the 401K and yoga classes, but if that's what you need to cut to eat the next month, what do you cut to eat the month after that?
This guy was obviously not living anywhere near paycheck to paycheck.
By this definition I was not living paycheque to paycheque, but my situation was definitely not good, compared up someone who made better money but spent it each month on nonessential.
Dictionary seems to agree, Merriam Webster says: "to spend all of the money from one paycheck before receiving the next paycheck", not specifying that you can't have spent the money on semi-essentials that could perhaps be moved by a few months but you'd need to catch up with sooner or later
There is also a way to borrow money short term from your 401k that turns into an unauthorized withdraw if you don't pay it back in a relatively short time (a year?)
These all seem reasonable.
[0] Yes, there are rules to prevent the worst abuse, mostly limiting you to doing so once every three years, the small total, and the need to fill out paperwork explaining the unexpected cost.
This exact debate showed up on another thread here the other day. While I agree with you, I was surprised to learn that many people view it to mean that tdon't have anything extra *after* they've done all of their socking away of money each money. Which is weird to me, but hey.
