4 ms·

The things you're stating would explain a small number of iPhones among a given group of poor people. The observation is that the things are damn near universal

by Banthum 10y ago

The things you're stating would explain a small number of iPhones among a given group of poor people. The observation is that the things are damn near universal and often quite new. It isn't just a failure of intelligence, but cognitive discipline, to miss these points.

M_Grey 10y ago
By all means, show me the evidence that these "things are damn near universal, and often quite new."
eganist 10y ago
> The things you're stating would explain a small number of iPhones among a given group of poor people. May you please source this assertion?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
jacquesm 10y ago
Besides the fairly obvious jealousy permeating your comment one has to wonder: Were you physically present every time a homeless person came into the possession of a phone? No? Then how do you know what caused them to be able to afford it? It could be: - a gift from a family member - still the property of someone else, but they get to use it (possibly including a plan) - a refurbished device and so on. It's a failure of intelligence to assume that just because someone has the use of something that they should not be able to afford that they are somehow making bad decisions. You could easily argue that for some yuppie buying a car on credit but for a homeless person their phone pretty much is the only expensive thing they will own.
resfirestar 10y ago
"damn near universal" is the biggest myth going around, implicitly and explicitly, in this thread. The data is clear, even in 2014, when cheap android phones were damn near universally terrible. https://gigaom.com/2014/02/20/npd-confirms-it-apples-iphone-is-the-affluent-consumers-device-in-the-us/ https://gigaom.com/2014/02/20/npd-confirms-it-apples-iphone-...
- M_Grey 10y ago
  I think it's safe to assume, from the total radio silence on the multiple requests to back up that claim, that the original poster probably knew that going in.
michaelmrose 10y ago
Can you prove that most poor people have new iphones for the edification of all of us?

by Banthum 10y ago

M_Grey 10y ago

By all means, show me the evidence that these "things are damn near universal, and often quite new."

eganist 10y ago

> The things you're stating would explain a small number of iPhones among a given group of poor people. May you please source this assertion?

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

jacquesm 10y ago

Besides the fairly obvious jealousy permeating your comment one has to wonder: Were you physically present every time a homeless person came into the possession of a phone? No? Then how do you know what caused them to be able to afford it? It could be: - a gift from a family member - still the property of someone else, but they get to use it (possibly including a plan) - a refurbished device and so on. It's a failure of intelligence to assume that just because someone has the use of something that they should not be able to afford that they are somehow making bad decisions. You could easily argue that for some yuppie buying a car on credit but for a homeless person their phone pretty much is the only expensive thing they will own.

resfirestar 10y ago

"damn near universal" is the biggest myth going around, implicitly and explicitly, in this thread. The data is clear, even in 2014, when cheap android phones were damn near universally terrible. https://gigaom.com/2014/02/20/npd-confirms-it-apples-iphone-is-the-affluent-consumers-device-in-the-us/ https://gigaom.com/2014/02/20/npd-confirms-it-apples-iphone-...

M_Grey 10y ago
I think it's safe to assume, from the total radio silence on the multiple requests to back up that claim, that the original poster probably knew that going in.

michaelmrose 10y ago

Can you prove that most poor people have new iphones for the edification of all of us?