Comment on I'm working on it, ok?
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 months agoAnd I’m saying not spending $15-$30 a month on things that make your quality of life better is not enough to cover any emergency you need to save cash for.
Not having running water is also a first world problem. I assume you think people want running water.
As for a flip phone, do you think anyone can get by in the modern world with a flip phone unless they are working some incredibly shitty job? You were poor when things were cheaper. The fact that you mentioned a color TV alone shows that this was a long time ago now that all TVs are color TVs.
This is no different from “I could afford college when I went without taking out any loans.”
fadedmaster@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
It was the mid 2000’s. And people spend a lot more than $15-30/month on fast food and streaming services. For the people whose finances I’ve seen, it’s usually closer to 30% of their monthly income that goes to pure wants.
Also, someone can absolutely survive in today’s world without a smart phone. It definitely makes things easier. Also, you can get a basic smartphone for free nowadays. Couldn’t do that back in the 2000’s. The equivalent today is getting a flagship versus a cheapy phone.
I agree that water is a need. I’m talking strictly fast food, eating out, and things like Netflix, Spotify, etc.
This the second time you’ve put words in my mouth. I may have misunderstood what you said initially. But first you’re saying I’m like that avocado toast guy (when I’m not saying people can solve their poverty), and now you’re saying I’m a college was cheap for me guy.
Costs are higher than they have ever been and that’s why it’s even more important these days to control your spending. Costs are high. Wages haven’t kept up. It’s the sucky reality of the world we live in and telling people to keep spending their money irresponsibly in the name of comfort is just going to damn them to worse conditions as they go into debt when real problems arise and that debt puts them in even worse conditions where now they absolutely cannot afford their true bottom of the barrel needs without more debt.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 months ago
And yet you made a general statement about poor people saying that none of them should spend the $7.99 a month for the lowest tier Netflix service because that $7.99 could go into their emergency fund instead.
fadedmaster@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
We’re talking in circles. You think I only mentioned Netflix. I didn’t. I also said fast food. You also think I said poor people. I didn’t. My suggestion is for everyone.
If you can’t afford luxury items (and I include fast food and streaming services in that category) then you shouldn’t spend your money on them.
I would no sooner suggest someone to purchase Netflix over feeding themselves and their family. And that’s what you could end up having to spend your emergency fund on if you lose your job. But you place these luxuries on the same tier as necessities and that’s just simply irresponsible.
Go ahead and tell all your friends and family, “Don’t worry, I know money is tight, but you shouldn’t save for future emergencies by cutting corners today. I think you should give that money to McDonald’s and Netflix. They clearly need it more than you do. I mean, you can always just put it on your credit card and pay 30% interest!”
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 months ago
So everyone should not pay $7.99 a month plus maybe $20 for fast food to because then they’ll have an emergency fund? And without that per month you’ll be able to afford to feed your family? That’s nonsense. Even if it were $50 a month, that would be nonsense.
People are entitled to live decent lives where they aren’t miserable all the time. I have no idea why you think they aren’t.