69% of Gen Z respondents told Goldman Sachs they find it difficult to focus at work because they worry about debt or household costs, as did 67% of millennials.
It’s arrogant because they can’t afford much at all and you’re talking past what they’re saying. Poverty is the condition of much of the working class. Having enough to eat and having a place to live doesn’t mean all that much when the content of your life is doing work as an anonymous drone and maybe being able to watch Netflix after you get home. Any medical emergency can uproot your already frail social existence. The worker is treated like cattle, who, as you should know, have housing and food aplenty. The latter two facts are not the core of the argument here.
This guy is saying there’s a huge spot of black mould on the wall and you’re derailing what they’re saying with a nonargument.
I’m 35 and have been poor my entire adult life yet have never even thought about a second job.
This is what they said. I myself am in the exact same position as the person above. Saying that they never thought about a second job is stating that they have not been forced to lose even more of the little time of their own they have to achieve the basics. If anything this original comment is demeaning by implying that it’s possible to survive on a single income, albeit minimally, and that anyone doing more is choosing that.
Then don’t assume I am being arrogant! My original question was an honest one. How does them stating they get by better in this situation help someone that doesn’t? You are assuming my tone.
[earlier] Glad you can afford housing and food on one paycheck!
I don’t need to assume your tone. Just simply assuming things like being able to afford things when someone is not (as they have stated in their first reply to you) is arrogant, albeit unintentionally. How do you think this reads to the other person? Personally, I would feel like as if someone punched me in the face. To then say that the other party simply misunderstood you after they rightfully corrected you, is only fuel to that fact, or will seen as such.
How does them stating they get by better in this situation help someone that doesn’t?
Does them stating that bar people from being helped, are they necessarily doing better than people working two jobs? I would say the former is not an issue, i.e. it doesn’t demean the struggles of someone with two jobs. With the latter it’s hard to make any good conclusions about concretely. They didn’t say that they are doing better, therefore the people dealing with two or more jobs jobs should whine less.
To observe that this person is able to subsist on a single income? How is observing this fact arrogance?
It’s arrogant because they can’t afford much at all and you’re talking past what they’re saying. Poverty is the condition of much of the working class. Having enough to eat and having a place to live doesn’t mean all that much when the content of your life is doing work as an anonymous drone and maybe being able to watch Netflix after you get home. Any medical emergency can uproot your already frail social existence. The worker is treated like cattle, who, as you should know, have housing and food aplenty. The latter two facts are not the core of the argument here.
This guy is saying there’s a huge spot of black mould on the wall and you’re derailing what they’re saying with a nonargument.
This is what they said. I myself am in the exact same position as the person above. Saying that they never thought about a second job is stating that they have not been forced to lose even more of the little time of their own they have to achieve the basics. If anything this original comment is demeaning by implying that it’s possible to survive on a single income, albeit minimally, and that anyone doing more is choosing that.
However, you can’t just say they’re implying this or that. This is guesswork with respect to the commentator; You are putting words in their mouth.
Then don’t assume I am being arrogant! My original question was an honest one. How does them stating they get by better in this situation help someone that doesn’t? You are assuming my tone.
I don’t need to assume your tone. Just simply assuming things like being able to afford things when someone is not (as they have stated in their first reply to you) is arrogant, albeit unintentionally. How do you think this reads to the other person? Personally, I would feel like as if someone punched me in the face. To then say that the other party simply misunderstood you after they rightfully corrected you, is only fuel to that fact, or will seen as such.
Does them stating that bar people from being helped, are they necessarily doing better than people working two jobs? I would say the former is not an issue, i.e. it doesn’t demean the struggles of someone with two jobs. With the latter it’s hard to make any good conclusions about concretely. They didn’t say that they are doing better, therefore the people dealing with two or more jobs jobs should whine less.
Edit: phrasing/clarification
You’re ignorning their initial statement to prove your point. Your history shows you love to do this. Have a good day.
I am not ignoring their initial statement, in fact I acknowledge this. In fact I am being very rigorous. Don’t accuse me of falsehoods.