• RagingRobot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    23 hours ago

    It’s not a contest over who is struggling more. Why are you against someone who is also struggling that makes no sense

    • kassiopaea@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      I’m not necessarily against anyone, but forgive me for not having much pity for the financial struggles of a class of people that can’t manage to be happy with incomes that more than double what I’ve had to make myself content with my entire life.

      Are we going to be saying that the struggles of billionaires actually matter next?

      • frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        I take a different line entirely. If you have $100k household income, and that’s still not enough cover expenses for a family of four, then something is very wrong. By income distribution, 80% of the population makes $100k or less, and it’s completely untenable for them.

        • kassiopaea@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          I completely agree, but your point is irrelevant to mine.

          Median household income is around 80k, which means that the vast majority of the population makes a lot less than 100k. I have little pity for the financial concerns of people who are having a hard time getting by with six figures, when so many people have to be content with far less.

          I will absolutely still stand in solidarity with them against the ruling class who make things far more difficult for all of us than it needs to be. That’s not the point.

          Asking me to have pity for the financial concerns of someone who makes more than double what I do (assuming similar circumstances) is like asking the average migrant laborer to have pity for mine.