• SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think the point is, they are living paycheck to paycheck unless they choose to decrease the quality of living.

    People who actually live paycheck to paycheck don’t have this option and this is ludicrously offensive to people who actually live this way.

    On one hand we can say these people are way better off than they deserve and laugh at their stupidity.

    It’s not about laughing at their stupidity but about the situation itself being laughable.

    The “every day” kind of rich person isn’t even that rich anymore. And lowering the ceiling pushes you into the floor.

    I thought lowering these gaps was the intention of Progressivism. Is it not?

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think it’s just one more side effect of “American exceptionalism” and the culture of individuality and “me me me me” here, that people don’t even see “change your lifestyle” as an option.

      They were told about the American dream or whatever, but they were sold a bill of goods, and now they can’t even comprehend cutting back on expenses in any meaningful way.

    • piecat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lowering the gap between 10th and 90th percentile is meaningless if the very top doesn’t change too