> "Savings account" however is commonly interpreted as including things like a stock market account, and therefore include most investments.
It is? If posed that question I would've responded like the GP suggested and only thought about what is in the bank account that's called a "savings account" and ignored any investments.
Are you sure that most people would interpret "savings account" to include checking accounts, gold bars stashed under their bed, Schwab accounts, etc? I'm not.
Yeah I totally think that's ambiguous, and people are likely to answer that under the definition of savings account as "my low-interest bank account that isn't my checking account" but the authors of the study actually meant "any account you use for saving money besides your checking account, including retirement".
A savings account isn't cash, its an immediately-callable loan from the account holder to a financial institution; for the account holder, it provides an asset with very good liquidity (but perhaps marginally worse than that provided by a checking account), essentially zero risk, but poor returns (but perhaps marginally better than that provided by a checking account). Its a way of meeting short-term spending needs (but perhaps slightly longer term than that met by a checking account).
Demand deposit accounts (both checking and savings) in general are, like cash, basically for short-term spending, but where the bank provides some benefits (actual storage, along with access mechanisms more convenient for many uses than pulling physical bills out of a storage locker).
> in something extremely liquid like a checking/savings account.
I was asking specifically if the surveys mean actual "savings" account, which often have some restrictions on them ("Make a total of 6 transfers and withdrawals each monthly statement cycle with no Withdrawal Limit Fee"). If you're getting a grand total of 0.01% interest, there's not much reason to also restrict activity as well.
That said, I realize I do have a 'savings' account, via an online-only bank, getting about 50x what my local bank's savings account rate is. I just didn't think of it as a 'savings' account as I'm so accustomed to thinking of 'savings acct'='brick and mortar location'.
This should be more explicit in saying "Savings Account" and not just savings.
I have plenty of savings yet have 0 savings accounts (since they're practically useless). A little misleading here when many people just keep their money in checking or investment/retirement accounts.
The parent is not talking about "savings" in the sense of savings accounts, but in terms of the macroeconomic sense of the word where savings denotes anything you do with money that is not immediate consumption (and therefore savings=investments).
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the point was that savings accounts are not worth it, leading many people to say their saving accounts are barren, not that they don't have savings saved up.
Personally I'd fall into that category, I put all my money in checking since the interest is so poor in savings accounts I'd rather see that money go to some retirement fund or investment than see it get so little return in interest and restrict how much money I can take out of the account at any given time.
I think the whole point of a savings account is that it's not an investment. Thankfully.
Banks don't use deposits when lending out money. They create the loan amount out of thin air. There are regulations as to how much they can do that relative to their assets. Thankfully.
It is? If posed that question I would've responded like the GP suggested and only thought about what is in the bank account that's called a "savings account" and ignored any investments.
reply