as a person on the lower end of the economic scale. However, "on a fixed income" really does not make sense, because a person could be on a "fixed income" and recieve $75,000.00 every month! That would be a "fixed income," but that person would not be on the lower end of the scale. Why do you think the term "fixed income" became associated with people at the lower end of the economic scale?
2007-06-18 00:57:53 · 3 answers · asked by Bluebeard 1 in Social Science ➔ Economics
You are right. This term doesn't have the meaning that it had 50 years ago. Almost all pensions are indexed to inflation, so these payments are not really fixed.
However, these folks are unable to get better jobs, since they are retired and not working. So, in some sense, they are not as flexible as those in the work force. We could say that they are on "relatively fixed" incomes.
2007-06-18 02:01:54 · answer #1 · answered by Allan 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Generally, this refers to people whose income is never going to increase in tandem with the cost of living. For example, people living on Social Security pension DO receive increases, but these are generally lower than the actual increase in the cost of living. If someone's income is $75K and will never increase, this is also a fixed income. Sometime in the future, this income may not be sufficient to support a family and a house and send children to college.
2007-06-18 08:04:35 · answer #2 · answered by Elaine P...is for Poetry 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It usually refers to people who just get Social Security each month, or perhaps, also have a small fixed pension. It was meant to describe the lower end of society.
2007-06-18 08:07:00 · answer #3 · answered by Legandivori 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋