Unless you are saving to something big in the near future it doesn't make sense not to. I have known many peohle to die young. I have known misers who died with millions in the bank. There is no point to money after death (at least not most religions, I cannot comment on yours) earn it, save a little for a rainy day and spend the rest.
I want to retire. I'm "paycheck to paycheck" but maxing a few retirement accounts. I could easily not work for a year and survive. Depending on how the survey or whatever was phrased, I'd be included in that 58%. I should not be.
There is an interesting cognitive dissonance around the economy.
The tone, the memes, the lived experience are all: We're struggling to barely survive. But when this gets brought up in the context of the current administration and their policies its: Its the best economy in a decade.
When you look at polling data, its always the economy at first position in terms of how people are going to vote. I think the current congress and the administration really shot themselves in the foot with the what they approached as priority in current legislation. It was all "might make a difference to peoples lives in 5-10 years" and almost nothing that "makes a difference in peoples lives they can sense right now". Its not like that bigger picture stuff didn't need to be done, but convincing a few wonks on the edges doesn't get you elected to a second term.
Ultimately voting is transactional. If voters vote for you and you don't provide the goods, they'll move on.
The article is misleadingly framed by implying 58% being historically bad (though they avoid mentioning any historical comparisons in the article to avoid outright lying). Unfortunately 58% is a historically good number for this. It was as high as 78% in 2017. Also check out the very well sourced other comment on this article with this number for many more years. 58% seems historically one of the best results ever recorded.
Not that we shouldn't push for it to be even better, 58% is still not a good number in absolute terms in my opinion, but the article is being very misleading when it portrays this as some unheard of worsening catastrophe.