The problem on both ends is the tone, I think. The soylent guy is using really strong language to get you to think things are better his way -- he replaces his

The problem on both ends is the tone, I think. The soylent guy is using really strong language to get you to think things are better his way -- he replaces his clothes rather than cleaning them, he replaced his kitchen/fridge/groceries with his shakes, he replaced the need for preparing solid foods with eating out on every occasion. The author suggests he's disconnected from reality, because everything he says is only possible because he can afford it. In fact, soylent didn't permit him any of this, except possibly the ability to afford to live like this in the first place.