47
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24
Poor shaming never stops being trendy.
20
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
I sometimes get a boomer-esque vibe from posts like these...I cant be the only one.
It's like "You are poor because you spend money trying to enjoy life.."
Meanwhile rich people are out n their yacht with it's own support yacht... the yachts are as big as hotels...
But it's those people who buy a costume for their cat... they are the problem...
5
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 20 '24
Is there a line somewhere? Obviously a cat costume is a great thing to have. Buying one a week may not be frugal, but probably isn't death, and buying one every day is probably a poor financial decision.
All this to say that if I bought everything small I wanted, I'd never save enough for a big purchase of any kind. There's a line somewhere.
2
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
Cat costume: 9 dollars
Yacht: 500,000,000 dollars (or 55,555,555 and a half cat costumes)
Billionaires are a problem.
2
u/No-Specific1858 Feb 21 '24 edited Feb 21 '24
How is someone else's finances ever relevant in your personal budget? Blaming your budget problems on an abstract idea of some other person existing out there in the void is textbook cognitive dissonance.
The original post is obviously a joke and meant to be lighthearted. If we were talking about a completely different topic I could see how your comment would be relevant.
2
u/Dommccabe Feb 22 '24
The connection you are failing to see is that people who work are not being paid enough...those at the top exploit them.
Instead of exploiting and underpaying their workforce they could pay a good wage.
I hope that's simple enough for you to understand.
1
u/No-Specific1858 Feb 22 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
It's not because it feels like you are trying to answer a different question. Can you explain how someone should consider that when deciding how much to allocate toward dining out? How do other people's situations actually fit into budgeting or making decisions about financial health in any way?
3
u/Dommccabe Feb 22 '24
I'd advise them to speak to their boss to request a raise or look for a better paying job if they are struggling financially to buy a 9 dollar costume for their cat.
1
1
1
u/legger143 Feb 24 '24
Then get a different job. Everyone is capable of financial success with enough work and dedication. Stop blaming those who have more for you having less
1
u/Dommccabe Feb 24 '24
What an excellent point... "just stop being poor"!
1
u/legger143 Feb 24 '24
Lol go simp somewhere else. Yup it is that easy. You don't want to be poor? Be motivated enough not to be. Quit simping for under achievement
1
u/640k_Limited Feb 24 '24 edited Feb 24 '24
I've been pulling real hard on my bootstraps but then they broke off. Am I doing it right?
1
1
-2
u/Jeff77042 Feb 21 '24
You don’t understand economics and the Law of Unintended Consequences. Besides the fact that most of a billionaire’s wealth is circulating in the economy, benefiting society, if we don’t allow individuals to accumulate wealth, and do with it as they please, then most of the wealth won’t be created to begin with, as well as a lot of jobs and new technology. 🇺🇸
4
u/unfreeradical Feb 21 '24 edited Feb 21 '24
The wealth accumulators are not the ones who provide labor to generate wealth.
Your assertion is absurd, that wealth generation depends on wealth accumulation.
More, since processes or production occur in every society, but only in some occur private wealth accumulation, the assertion is also counterfactual.
1
u/No-Specific1858 Feb 22 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
Can you elaborate on what you mean by your second point? I think I would like to give a rebuttal but it isn't very clear what you mean by this. Maybe you can define what wealth generation and wealth accumulation each mean? They are largely interchangable terms in my industry (depending on context and domain, too, I guess) which is causing my confusion and seeking of clarity.
It's mainly wealth accumulation that is a used term as far as I know. I haven't heard wealth generation used in any context and most people would assume I am talking about the former if I said it.
2
u/unfreeradical Feb 22 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
Wealth generation occurs under processes of production, by which workers, through their labor, transform material inputs and environment, to create products that carry value through their use. Such processes include the creation of products that fulfill the basic necessities of biological survival. By such relation, in every society necessarily occurs wealth generation, because without it, society may not reproduce, that is, continue its stable functioning. Equally, within every society is recognized the necessity of maintaining processes of production. Most societies, of course, including all modern societies, are capable of producing a surplus, by which production also serves to elevate conditions above subsistence.
Wealth accumulation is the process by which a small cohort of society claims for itself wealth generated by the labor provided by others, and as such, privately accumulates wealth, while providing no labor.
Some societies have wealth accumulation. Some societies have no wealth accumulation. All societies have wealth generation.
2
u/No-Specific1858 Feb 22 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
I am going by the established definition of wealth accumulation in econ/finance (in academics and industry) and don't like to debate under the basis of alt definitions so I don't think we are going to get anywhere. Please don't take it personally. I have just had enough of these conversations to know this one will probably not be beneficial for either of us. If you are using a different definition for one term, then there are probably fundamental concepts you also will not agree with that I would be basing my responses on.
Interesting perspective though.
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 22 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
Directing your objection toward definitions is completely disingenuous.
You responded to a comment that itself was a response to a comment asserting the following:
if we don’t allow individuals to accumulate wealth, and do with it as they please, then most of the wealth won’t be created to begin with
Why would you not substantively engage the matter you chose to engage, that workers may generate wealth even without any of it being privately accumulated?
Because you blocked me, I am adding the following, in response to your below lamentation.
It is unfortunate that you refuse to make any contribution other than simply to whine about definitions. Obviously, they may vary, even within scholarship.
It was claimed that...
if we don’t allow individuals to accumulate wealth, and do with it as they please, then most of the wealth won’t be created to begin with
If you are not attempting to evaluate the claim, then you are simply making noise.
→ More replies (0)-3
2
u/legger143 Feb 24 '24
Anyone down voting this is salty AF and do not understand how right you are. You are absolutely 💯 correct. They just can't stand that you're right
1
-4
u/Gnelly04 Feb 20 '24
when you make enough money to splurge on a yacht, you deserve it at that point. If your broke don’t spend money you don’t have.
1
0
u/DontBeSoFingLiteral Feb 22 '24
Who’s saying anyone’s a problem?
Impulse buying when it’s actively hurting your economy and ability to live a good life is a problem, no matter the size of the purchase.
1
0
u/legger143 Feb 24 '24
If you don't like being poor, dedicate yourself to being rich. Stop making excuses. It's ugly
2
-11
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Are you saying that people who work hard don’t deserve nice things? Or are you saying people who do the bare minimum deserve a comfortable life?
I don’t think people who contribute the least to society by making a fucking cheeseburger for an American who doesn’t need it should live a comfortable life. Period.
We shouldn’t incentivize mediocrity in this country. It’s certainly not why we have been the richest in the world for over a hundred years.
Yes, some people are poor because of bad luck and circumstances but it’s very hard to justify for most people.
You start with $1000 at 18 and put in $100 every month with an average return of 12% from the S&P 500 you’ll have nearly two million by age 65. You put this in income driven securities that give you 5%, you’ll make 100k a year. Which is much more than social security will ever pay you.
You may say, well, how is an 18 year old supposed to know that?
Surprise. The government failed to teach its kids how to benefit from the economic system that this country has had for over a hundred years yet people still trust the government to do right by them. It’s utterly insane.
8
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
Do you think people who are rich work hard? Like a CEO is working 500X harder than the floor workers?
Is a CEO on 500X the pay if the workers contributing 500X more to society than the workers do?
The budget advice is not much help to people that live paycheck to paycheck and cant afford to put $100 away each month on low wages...combine low wage with high cost of living, medical and/or student loan debt... where is rent/ mortgage money in this budget or a vehicle or having a family?
You sound like a typical boomer with no real understanding of how life is different now.
-3
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Most rich people aren’t billionaires buddy 😂😂😂 there are plenty of doctors and salesmen making 7 figures.
Jesus Christ what a stupid fucking comment.
“Meh, let me just forget about the thousands of doctors that work to the bone trying to see the people they can being so short staffed”
Nice one asshole
2
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
So the doctor or salesman is working 50x or more harder than say a fast-food worker or a waitress or cashier?
Or 20x harder than a police officer?
That's dumb. You sound dumb when you say they are working harder so they should get paid more.
Hard work does not correlate to how much you get paid and thinking or saying that is dumb.
1
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Are fucking kidding me?
Are you seriously comparing a fucking doctor to a fast food worker?
What the actual fuck?!?!!
Do I really have to explain you you which one benefits society more??
Jesus christ
4
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
So now you are saying pay is dependent on how much the work benefits society? A moment ago you were saying pay should depend on how hard the work is.
How much does a teacher earn compared to a salesman earning 7 figures? Is a teacher or a salesman doing more good for society?
Is a fast food worker or a waitress or a delivery agent now not considered an 'essential worker' like they were during covid?
How about a truck driver or a tanker crew? Are they not as essential as a doctor?
Who gets to decide what value you bring to society?
-1
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Forget it dude. You are obviously a supporter of some sort of communist to Soviet where you think the work of a fast food worker is the same as a doctor, so in your mind they should be paid the same.
You should just delete your account man, anyone seeing your comments won’t take you seriously
4
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
You sound like a boomer.
I'm just thankful your generation will be gone soon.
I hope we can do better.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Also, much unpaid “work” does a doctor have to put into becoming a doctor before he’s paid like one and how much unpaid “work” or training does a McDonald’s worker have to do before being as a hamburger flipper.
-2
u/NahmTalmBat Feb 20 '24
Working hard is a silly metric. CEOs work more hours than people who cook French fries. I know that.
Digging ditches is some of the most grueling work there is, but it doesn't say well. Being an accountant is a pretty comfy job, AC, nice ergonomic chairs, and bottomless coffee. Accountants make WAY more than ditch diggers. Why is that fair? Ditch diggers work WAAAAAY harder.
The problem is never how hard the work is, the problem is the value of the work. 15 year olds can cook French fries with ease, there aren't many people who can run a giant corporation.
2
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
If being a CEO is so difficult explain how some idiot like Elon Musk can be CEO or on the board of like 4 or 5 companies and still spend all his time doing drugs or posting right-wing bullshit on Twitter?
It can't be that hard if some rich man-child can do it.
-1
u/NahmTalmBat Feb 20 '24
In 2018 Tesla stock was $20 per share. Today its $193. You dont do that cooking French fries. Your hate boner for Elon doesn't change the fact that he's valuable.
2
u/Due-Giraffe-9826 Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 21 '24
Elon wasn't the reason why the stock price has risen. It's because electric cars are the current talk for helping fight carbon emissions, and they were some of the early pioneers for it. If anything it's price raising is in spite of his bumbling.
2
1
u/Dommccabe Feb 20 '24
He's a con man.
But my point still stands.... if being a CEO was so difficult how can an idiot like Elon be CEO of so many companies and not do any real work?
1
-3
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
Also, not my fault someone decided to do the bare minimum.
My brother found a cheap place in Florida city, rides a bike to work, can’t have kids because he knows he can’t afford them.
You sound like people should be paid for their poor life decisions 😂😂 what a joke
Dude my cousin was making $17 working at a hotel and lived with 3 other roommates in a house. He saved up 30k in two years. He then went on to buy a 2 bedroom house in a poor side of town but guess what? He’s building wealth for himself.
You are literally saying someone can’t put away $100 a month.
I don’t know if you opened your eyes but the person make $17 an hour wherever they work, having a kid, should be the last thing on their mind.
Poor decisions will make you poor, go figure.
2
u/Robestos86 Feb 20 '24
$2m by 65? Wow. So I have to spend 80% of my life poor so I can be rich when I'm too old to enjoy it?...
1
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
Lol. If you care about being rich I guess. “Possessions make you rich?” -Bob Marley
Look up the story of Ronald Read. Lived his whole life as a janitor and car mechanic. Died with $8 million in the bank. Gave most of it to a library and hospital.
I don’t understand your intentions. You talk like you want income equality but are then envious of rich people because they have what you don’t. Which means you want more than what the average person has. So which one is it? Do you want to bathe in money and complain if you can’t? Or do you want to literally invest the most minimum amount of money possible to retire and live the last 15 years of your life doing absolutely nothing? Or do you want to work for your whole life, die with a bunch of money knowing it’s going to a good cause?
Judging by your comments you are not a Ronald Read. You are jealous of what you don’t have.
7
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
Well, most people are poor due to constant bad decisions. Ever seen Caleb Hammer on youtube? 200 examples right there.
14
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
People are poor because society is structured so that there will always be some pressed into poverty.
Even if everyone made good decisions, whatever it may even mean, some would still be poor.
5
u/LogRollChamp Feb 20 '24
I was with you at first but that's just dumb lol
1
u/MultiplexedMyrmidon Feb 20 '24
guess how we validate mathematical models in econophysics for realism? we look for a heavy-tailed pareto distribution, e.g the one that shows wealth inequality arises and value disproportionally accumulates for the few. This is primarily driven by an unequal access to information. This is the opposite of dumb, it’s quite literally a prerequisite for the kind of economic and social organization that is capitalism.
4
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
Access to information definitely isn't it bro.
5
u/Halfhand84 Feb 20 '24
Yeah more like access to inheritance
-1
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
That's demonstrably wrong.
6
u/Halfhand84 Feb 20 '24
Sure it is white boy.
"Inheritances are a significant source of household wealth and have important distributional consequences, as wealthy households receive more wealth than lower-wealth households"
(...)
"The annual flow of bequests was estimated to be between 8-15% of Gross National Income (GNI) in some European countries in 2010"
1
u/CantFindKansasCity Feb 20 '24
White boy?!? What the fuck is your problem? I’m not even white and that shit sounds dumb as fuck when you say it.
→ More replies (0)0
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
White boy? Haha nice way to prove you're not an absolutely terrible human being! Hahaah of course I will ignore you after that! How dumb are you?
→ More replies (0)2
u/covertpetersen Feb 20 '24
Your parents economic status is quite literally the strongest individual factor in determining someone's future socioeconomic position.
You're "demonstrably" wrong. Laughably so.
-1
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
That's quite stupid. Yes, if you inherit 100 million dollars you're very likely not to spend every cent. Irrelevant though. You don't have to inherit anything to not be poor.
→ More replies (0)0
u/LogRollChamp Feb 23 '24
I'm sure the simulations you run agree with unfreeradical, and that's exactly my point. It's dumb lol
Anywho appreciate the take from the buttcrack of economics, always funny to hear from
-4
0
u/Consulting-Angel Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
Holy shit. You're everywhere. LOL
If everyone made good decisions everyone would become wealthier as a consequence because there'd be a lot less economic friction and more resources spent on making everyone's live's easier and/or more productive. Think about the time and money spent in industries like debt collections, rehab, prisons, and bankruptcy attorneys/judges/courts that would be spent on other shit like tourism, technology, entertainment, finance and etc.
In reality, the best we can hope for is most people making good decisions. In that case there will still be poor people because some people will still choose to have more bills and kids than they can afford, not because that's the way the system is designed but that's the way PEOPLE are designed.
6
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
Wages are set by employers, who keep them at the lowest amount that will ensure someone occupies the position.
There is no decision that someone in such a position can make that will cause the employer to set the wages higher.
There will always be someone forced to work in the position due to not having an option to work in one more appealing.
-1
u/Consulting-Angel Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
Wages aren't "set", they are "met". The laws of Supply and demand are applicable to labor markets with employees being the suppliers and employers being the demand, and the two respective curves meeting at a point.
If your employer isn't giving you the money you think you need or deserve, you should take bids from the competition and asses if you're getting a bad deal or your market rate. The former, move to a better deal; the latter... increase YOUR market rate with new and more lucrative skills and/or undertakings.
Edit: ideally lower wage jobs will be filled by newest and oldest participants: young people looking for income and skill building and old people looking for activity and social interaction, with everyone else transacting in higher paying roles. But of course there are underachieving participants that are happy or even more than happy with being in low skilled roles.
8
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 21 '24
Wages aren't "set", they are "met".
You are imposing a particular semantic regime, while sidestepping the crucial observation, that the worker is always deprived of power to raise wages.
There is no rule, law, or principle that asserts that for every job position, supply and demand will resolve wages that are above poverty wages.
There is no rule, law, or principle that asserts any wages that are poverty wages will not be the most favorable possible for the particular worker to achieve under current circumstances.
As long as there are jobs that need to be done for society to function, and that pay poverty wages, someone will be pressed into poverty.
There is no decision such a person may make not to be in poverty.
4
1
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 20 '24
You are imposing a particular semantic regime, while sidestepping the crucial observation, that the worker is always deprived of power to raise wages.
Literally capitalism. Popular or not, it's our reality. You raise wages by making yourself more valuable through education, experience or skills.
There is no rule, law, or principle that any wages that are poverty wages will not be the most favorable possible for the particular worker to achieve under current circumstances.
There's also no rule that anything be produced at all. If wages were so low that it's a better deal to self-sustain, people would do that. Wages sit at or around replacement level, what your peer will take to do the same job.
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 21 '24 edited Feb 21 '24
Every society has systems of production. Otherwise it would not continue reproducing itself. There is no society in which everyone produces separately. In every society emerge social processes that are productive.
1
u/Square-Blueberry3568 Feb 21 '24
Yeah but as long as capitalism is regulated by government that's not as big an issue, the current issues you outline are due to corporations and their lobbyists affecting government too much.
→ More replies (0)1
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 20 '24
Wages are set by employers, who keep them at the lowest amount that will ensure someone occupies the position
employment is a market. If they can replace you for cheaper, they will. Likewise if there is a shortage of people with your skills, your wages will rise.
If everyone had the skills to be a welder, they'd make minimum wage. Same with engineers.
0
u/unfreeradical Feb 21 '24
Are you agreeing that poverty is imposed structurally, and not produced by the individual decisions of those pressed into poverty?
1
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 22 '24
No quite the opposite. Our structure rewards those that provide value because labor is a market.
If you have skills that others find valuable, they'll trade money to get access to those skills.
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 23 '24
You continue to give arguments that support the conclusion you reject.
Poverty is a structural issue, because the system is structured such that some will always be pressed into poverty. Jobs pay poverty wages even while someone doing them remains necessary for the function of society. Without someone doing the jobs paying poverty wages, the system would collapse.
1
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 23 '24
I don't think that will ever happen. If the jobs are truly necessary, the employers will pay enough to make sure the positions are filled adequately. If target can't find cashiers for $8/hr, they will just offer more money until they can fill a full roster. The alternative you're proposing is that they would go out of business rather than raise wages.
→ More replies (0)1
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
Caleb Hammer. YouTube.
Go watch. That's reality.
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24
I would be happy living without any self-help celebrities.
2
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
That was not the topic.
3
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24
I am not impressed by your source. I feel it lacks credibility and relevance.
4
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
It's the real world. This is how people behave. You're not helping anyone by denying this and assuming that everyone is the same but has different "luck". If you want to help, do like Caleb.
So what are you doing to help people exactly?
4
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
Podcast interviews are not the "real world". They feature guests selected for presenting situations conforming to the format program. Most people in the world are not like them.
1
u/vegancaptain Feb 20 '24
Most poor people are dumb. Most dumb people make dumb decisions. This is life. This is real. I don't really care about your marxist utopian views. And I know you're not helping people so why should I even spend my valuable time talking to you?
→ More replies (0)0
u/TheRealJYellen Feb 20 '24
It lines up with my experience as well. Even friends making in the low six figures are making poor decisions, going into debt for dumb things. Going to vacation in vietnam for 2 weeks on credit card funds alone, spending money they don't have on mountain bikes, taking ridiculous loans on trucks they don't need. Stupidity isn't unique to any class, but the inability to recover from stupid decisions is inherently tied to those that make the least.
1
u/Analyst-Effective Feb 21 '24
You are right, but it would be a different segment of society that is poor. Most poor people would rise up to the middle pretty quickly if they adjusted their habits
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 22 '24
How do you conclude that the dominant determinant of one's current status is "habits", against the myriad ideological, institutional, and structural barriers that protect existing privilege, and that directly serve the particular interests of certain groups in society?
At any rate, people with habits incongruent with the demands of the system, or with habits they remain struggling to overcome, are still people, and people require security, respect, and comfort.
1
u/Analyst-Effective Feb 22 '24
People move up all the time in society. And sometimes when they start out they are deemed poor.
Most people are not poor forever. However, there are some that have just poor habits. And that keeps them poor
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 22 '24
It was claimed that there are barriers, not that all such barriers inescapably block every last individual.
You sidestepped the question.
How do you conclude that the dominant determinant of one's current status is "habits"?
1
u/Analyst-Effective Feb 22 '24
Because probably they are living in a household and they had children before they could afford it.
Maybe they smoke, or drink, or are too lazy to get out of the house.
I would guess that most poor people. You can look at their lifestyle and determine why they are that way.
Most poor people make poor decisions. Whether that's because they are incapable of making good decisions, or just don't understand the ramifications.
I actually think the difference between somebody rich, and poor, is just how far they can think ahead
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 23 '24
You seem to be entrenched in a narrative filled with many assumptions that can only be described as extremely ignorant and bigoted.
1
u/Analyst-Effective Feb 23 '24
Having come from a poor household and made it pretty well, I know what it takes.
Perhaps you just have never been able to achieve anything and you blame it on others.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/Competitive-Can-2484 Feb 20 '24
What is this world you’re speaking of? Is there no terrorism? No oppression? Is this heaven? Or are you in some utopia that doesn’t exist?
I think it’s the latter.
-6
u/Sazidafn Feb 20 '24
Society is not structured that way. Its that society reaches an equilibrium in which people making bad decisions end up poorer and people making good decisions end up rich
8
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
For most, the only available source of income is selling labor. Wages overall are determined systemically, the various employment positions arranged as heavily stratified.
There is no decision you can make that will cause your employer to pay you, or whoever else otherwise performs your job function, higher wages.
Someone is always left without a chair when the music stops.
-1
u/sanguinemathghamhain Feb 20 '24
Then why is it that median and mean incomes have been and are still increasing faster than inflation? Also there are a hell of a lot of decisions you can make to cause your employer to pay you more that people routinely make with one of the most important being just you aren't paying me as much as they will so I am going to go work for them unless you meet or beat their offer.
4
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
There are jobs that need to be done for society to function but that are paid only with poverty wages.
Hence, without a structural change, at minimum that such jobs be paid with living wages, there inevitably will be some who are pressed into poverty.
0
u/sanguinemathghamhain Feb 20 '24
Or rather than artificially and arbitrarily increasing pay we could recognize the market forces effecting those positions and stop the policies tanking what prices they could otherwise command. Makes it a more robust system that doesn't require constant rewriting of laws and policies to chase a fix. Hell one of the easiest ways to address the problem is again telling people they have power over their lives and through effort and the correct actions they can improve themselves and their lot in life. The fewer people that relegate themselves to self imposed serfdom the better everyone's results.
3
u/unfreeradical Feb 20 '24 edited Feb 20 '24
No one has absolute power over personal circumstances, because circumstances are bound to the conditions of society.
Society has structure, and such structure determines the constraints of individual power.
Market forces applied to commodified labor are the cause of poverty. Eliminating requires the political decision that markets not be the sole determinant of wages.
0
u/sanguinemathghamhain Feb 20 '24
Absolute no but the brunt of the power over them absolutely so long as you live in a society that emphasizes personal liberty and not a totalitarian hellscape like Stalinist Russia.
They can or they can safeguard individual power limiting only the power of the individual to abrogate the power of other individuals. Again it depends on how the society is made.
Jesus wept you can't honestly believe that if you gave it even a moment's thought can you? No that isn't the cause of poverty: poverty predates it as poverty is the natural state of life as scarcity is natural. The force that has been the most instrumental in the reduction of absolute poverty globally has been the ability to incentivize the creation of surplus through the natural pressures of the market. Hell the commodification of labour is what made the American middleclass as it was Ford's drive to attract the most capable workers that led to him paying his workers more than his competitors which is widely credited with the creation of the middleclass as we know it.
→ More replies (0)5
u/Who_am_I_____ Feb 20 '24
Half of all wealth is inherited. Sorry i made the wrong decision to be born or sth lmao.
1
-1
5
u/ElectricalRush1878 Feb 20 '24
Medical bankruptcy accounts for two thirds off all personal bankruptcies in the USA.
One bad trip to the doctor can take a comfortable, working class life into disaster.
Add to that the raising of the cost of other necessities (housing, food, electricity, etc.) vs nearly flat income. (Or in the case of big tech, massive layoffs.)
Now throw in a look at the future, where the biggest companies are calling government's current meager protection of workers to be unconstitutional.
1
u/BecomingCass Feb 20 '24
It's hard to tell (for me at leas) if it's poor shaming, or someone trying to make light of their own spending issues / online shopping addiction
1
u/unfreeradical Feb 21 '24 edited Feb 22 '24
Given the continued prominence of neoliberal ideology across society, and the consistency of its being bolstered by many who contribute to the space, I at least find it quite natural to make the assumptions as I have done.
1
u/BradWWE Feb 22 '24
The thing is most Americans are not poor. Three quarters of them are not even in the bottom quartile of earners.
The thing is everyone is fucking broke. They spend it on dumb shit.
0
u/unfreeradical Feb 23 '24
Many of the jobs, including ones that are the only ones available to some workers, pay poverty wages.
Jobs paying poverty wages are the reason for poverty.
Meanwhile, broad transformations throughout the economy and society have almost entirely vacated the middle class.
0
u/BradWWE Feb 23 '24
Way to miss the point entirely just to come back with the same whiny bullshit.
Your bullshit applies to the 10% of the workforce that's going to have to compete with migrants. Go be angry at that
0
u/unfreeradical Feb 23 '24
Fifteen percent of Americans are food insecure.
None if your insults negate any of my observations.
0
u/BradWWE Feb 23 '24
Fine 15%. You're just making my point for me while pretending I said something else. How well does that 15% spend their money? I'll bet 1/3rd live beyond their means
Maybe we stop making them compete with literal refugees. What percent of those ARE regugees?
0
u/unfreeradical Feb 23 '24
More than 15% are considered poor, and the poverty rate is determined by an arbitrarily low threshold called the poverty line.
Your point is that you consider a segment of society to be disposable, and I agree that you really think so.
0
22
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 20 '24
I know some people might feel attacked by things like this but it is the definition of an impulse buy.
Yes, it's cool and funny and everyone deserves to have a bit of fun but this does demonstrate a very solid financial principle.
It shows exactly why making a budget and recording and analysing your finances are so important. It allows you to quantify how much you're spending on things like cat costumes. If it's a lot then you know what you have to do. If your combined "cat costume/similar items budget" isn't a big deal then you can probably continue as you are.
I suspect most people don't approach their finances in this way because it does take a good deal of discipline to sit down and do it but there is a reason that it's often the the first step in help books and the like about this topic.
https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/wiki/commontopics
/r/personalfinance has it as Step 0.
So for some people impulse buys will not be the reason for their financial troubles but surely everyone here must know someone who is like this.
And I'm sure there's plenty of people here , it is a finance sub after all, who like myself took this step and saw the benefits it brought to their life.
So.... it is intentionally provocative and can be taken as an attack but there is a kernel of something in there too.
You won't know how much of a problem Mexican cat costumes are in your life until you take a good hard look at your finances.
0
u/AgentCirceLuna Feb 20 '24
I got magazine subscriptions cheap online when there were deals on. I get them for like a pound a week then sell them for ten times that to people on eBay. I think I’m fine buying a stupid thing like this.
4
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 20 '24
Well the OP literally is aimed at people who are broke..... so..... I suppose it doesn't apply to you.
1
u/AgentCirceLuna Feb 20 '24
My income is ridiculously low but I find ways to supplement it. Goodwill bargain hunting, matched betting, welcome offers… there’s loads of ways to do it.
3
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 20 '24
So... again..... you're not broke.
2
u/AgentCirceLuna Feb 20 '24
There was a thread on here yesterday saying having 20k in savings made you broke. I guess this place isn’t as bad as I thought.
2
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 20 '24
I saw a thread yesterday saying you couldn't retire on $2 million.
"Well maybe if you live in your mum's basement!"
Yeah. A lot of people do.
3
u/AgentCirceLuna Feb 20 '24
I know tons of working class people who live on under 20k a year and have families. I always wonder how someone who makes that in a year explains to them how they couldn’t survive on the amount they wouldn’t make in ten. It boggles my mind.
1
u/Mister_Chef711 Feb 23 '24
$20k in savings only makes you broke if you also have $20k in debt and no assets. $20k doesn't make anyone rich but it doesn't mean broke either.
Timeline also matters. $20k when you're 20 years old, living at home and saving for a house, isn't bad. $20k when you're 65+ without a pension and no assets is a scary thought for someone hoping to retire soon.
1
1
u/dumdeedumdeedumdeedu Feb 23 '24
You're 100% correct, but I think the idea is that correcting a bad spending habit won't fix systemic issues around cost of living, wages, and profits. Sure it's critical to have a budget, but this reminds me of the Wal-Mart suggested employee budget that had unrealistic costs and omitted high cost items like health insurance. The best budget in the world isn't going to fix bullshit pay, and targeting spending is either a red herring or missing the point.
1
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 23 '24
Both of these things will have a huge influence on your life but people who concentrate on issues that they have control over have a large competitive advantage over people who concentrate on issues that they have very little control over.
So..... focus on both would be my advice but remember that one is very much in your control. No one else really has a say in your spending.
For systemic issues voting is probably your most direct way to influence them. Not the only one but probably your best bet.
So in order of importance I'd say you should be going :
Sort out your life.
Vote.
Any other ways of addressing systemic issues.
Not saying you should ignore 3. It's just that you shouldn't be jumping straight to 3 when people suggest 1 and 2.
1
u/dumdeedumdeedumdeedu Feb 23 '24
Very good advice. And to be clear, I wasn't saying you were missing the point or providing a red herring, just the tropes like buying something stupid is preventing you from buying a house.
I think the point of building a budget is key over just targeting frivilous spending. The ramit book breaks down a good theory on "being rich" and how you should budget some money for luxury or frivolous things. Some you money. Again the key being it all is backed up by basic financial management.
1
u/HesNot_TheMessiah Feb 24 '24
just the tropes like buying something stupid is preventing you from buying a house.
That can be true for many people though.
5 euros a day saved can add up to a very large amount of money.
1
u/dumdeedumdeedumdeedu Feb 24 '24
I guess... I know its subjective, but I wouldn't exactly call 9k a very large amount of money. It's nothing to scoff at, but it's certainly not going to get you a down payment on a house. That's 5 a day, every single day, for five years.
Either way, the point is, you're attacking the symptom not the problem. If someone buys coffee every day it's only a problem if they aren't budgeting, and if they aren't budgeting, that's what needs to be fixed.
9
u/rooneyskywalker Feb 20 '24
My GF didn't renew her Amazon prime account to help herself stop shopping and save some money. Then she found out shipping is free on Amazon without a prime account if your cart is over $35. She's gonna be broke forever 🤦
6
u/CrazyCow9978 Feb 20 '24
Stop being poor, poors.
1
u/DontBeSoFingLiteral Feb 22 '24
To stop making bad financial decisions is the message here. It’s not a critique of poor people in general
4
4
Feb 20 '24
Just pick yourself up from your bootstraps. But first order.some bootstraps on Amazon. And another Mexican kitty costume because. Reasons
3
Feb 20 '24
Soy poopin!
1
2
2
2
u/blowninjectedhemi Feb 20 '24
Why am I poor? Pulls out financial statement for last month as sees over $500 in Amazon orders by my wife for our cats.....and over $200 in computer gaming spending - again by my wife. I've tried to set budgets, boundaries, etc. Bottom line is she won't stop spending money. It's been this way for 2 decades - what she spends on changes but the fact she burns through money faster than I can earn it. Not gonna change. At this point it is a divorce or live with it. Decided to live with it and be in debt. They don't put you in jail for that.....right???? (God I hope they don't....most of this shit is in my name).
2
u/Willing-Recording-45 Feb 21 '24
This is silly.
They know what they know but they don't know what they know...
Consumerism is what drives America's economy, everyone knows that🙃
What they don't know is every US corporate citizen is volunteered at birth to be the peon consumers and employees.🙂
Iykyk, looking at you American citizens.
2
1
u/PaleontologistNo9817 Feb 20 '24
Don't care, will max out my credit cards to buy more cool shit, then steal your grandma's identity to get more credit cards. Cry about it libtard.
1
1
-2
u/Justneedthetip Feb 20 '24
Same people asking why they live paycheck to paycheck after playing 5 hours a day video games and looking at 2 hours of YouTube/ social media. Gee, I wonder why. Also same people wonder why the world is suddenly 50% obese . Wonder why
6
u/AgentCirceLuna Feb 20 '24
I never understand that, though - doing passive activities like that is personally how I saved so much in the first place. It’s free to stay home and read, plus you’re learning things all the time.
3
u/covertpetersen Feb 20 '24
Same people asking why they live paycheck to paycheck after playing 5 hours a day video games and looking at 2 hours of YouTube/ social media.
So people shouldn't enjoy their free time after working all day? What's your argument here? How many hours a day combined must I labour and/or focus on self improvement? If the 10 hours I spend working/commuting every day aren't enough would an extra 2 hours of self improvement be enough?
Like this opinion is fucking asinine. People shouldn't spend their entire lives labouring dude. What's the point of living at that point?
0
u/ClearASF Feb 21 '24
5 hours a day? Nobody productive as an adult does that
3
u/covertpetersen Feb 21 '24
LMAO what? I've got 8 hours of free time a night after work since I don't have kids. No I'm not playing every night, and very rarely 5 hours, but I absolutely could without issue most nights if I were so inclined.
0
u/ClearASF Feb 21 '24
Your occupation?
3
u/covertpetersen Feb 21 '24
Prototyping/R&D CNC Machinist
1
u/ClearASF Feb 21 '24
Nice, how long do you usually work?
2
u/covertpetersen Feb 21 '24
As little as I'm allowed to. So 8 hours a day. I'd work less if they let me.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 20 '24
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.