Talk:Disposable and discretionary income

Just a dictionary entry

Just a dictionary entry. Difficult to see any way that this could become a useful article. Tannin

As discussions on "US middle class" have taken on many flavors, if someone better versed than I would take the time, the significance of discretionary-income would be more apparent. Anyone, anyone... --Walts0042 (talk) 21:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Any reason as to why you just delete my work? AyrtonSenna

I honestly think you just don't want your article just to be a definition so you take my article's work into your definition. If what Tannin says is true then maybe both our pages shouldn't exist. Plus I had more to add to discretionary income anyway. AyrtonSenna

While this may be "just a dictionary entry", it's informative and gave me the exact information I was looking for when I came here. I think it should stay. Haddock420

The dictionary comment was made a while ago when it was just that, it has since matured into a reasonable article. Martin - The non-blue non-moose 18:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Disposable versus discretionary income

Since this article points out that the two are different, why does discretionary income redirect to this article? Should it be renamed Disposable and discretionary income? ~ Rollo44 05:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Expanded definition

As per cited sources. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:39, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Disposable Income Definition Makes No Sense To Me

I'm not disputing the definition, I assume it's right. What I'm saying is that it makes no sense. I've always thought that disposable income is how it sounds - "disposable". As in, after taxes and all your bills/commitments are taken care of, whatever is left is disposable - and can be frittered away on trivialities, because it's disposable. Of course, after reading the page, I see that what I've always been thinking was disposable income was actually discretionary income. I just think it's a bit crazy that true disposable income is earmarked for various things that you must pay. 188.174.4.196 (talk) 09:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Disposable and discretionary income. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050123214555/http://disposableincome.net:80/ to http://www.disposableincome.net/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602043608/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu:80/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/2-30042010-CP/EN/2-30042010-CP-EN.PDF to http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/2-30042010-CP/EN/2-30042010-CP-EN.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:51, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Is a rework appropriate?

This is not at all my field (and first talk suggestion, apologies in advance), so I can only suggest, but could this article not benefit from a rework? Particularly for the disposable section. As a layman it seemed very jumbled. Some points:

• As in the discretionary section, can a disposable formula not be presented? And for each element in the formula, a list of examples given? Currently, the long lists and parens make it difficult to grasp the initial concept.
• What are national accounts? Is this USA-centric?
• 'hence the income left...' also seems to be a rearranging of the formula, but again uses different wording.
• Is "personal (or, private) savings" more readable as "savings (personal or private)"? That is if there is no other type of savings..
• The "Restated" paragraph only seems to include some of the elements of the previous paragraph. At the very least because consumption expenditure seems to only be one part of personal outlays, not the entirety of it. Should it not be restated as 'personal outlays' plus 'savings' instead, if it is just a rearrangement of the formula?
• Should the MPC paragraph be moved to a subsection?
• The study paragraph needs dates (the ref only includes a retrieval date)
• From a technical standpoint, could the discretionary formula not also be written in terms of disposable income? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.55.69.142 (talk) 05:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)