5 ms·

I had a coach that when I'd ask about how to get out of tricky situations he'd often respond with something along the lines of "Bro, you f'd up a long time ago"

I had a coach that when I'd ask about how to get out of tricky situations he'd often respond with something along the lines of "Bro, you f'd up a long time ago"... I don't think 40% is some magic number to begin hysteria. Neither is $400. Selling something to cover your expenses might be a blessing in disguise if the thing you sell is a liability in the first place (ex: a car you cant really afford). My observation of America is that for a whole lot of people we F'd up a long time ago... These people need financial education, they need to be taught to not buy things they dont need, they need to be taught delayed gratification and to not be consumerists.

zeth___ 8y ago
Unfortunately if we did this we would be in a much deeper hole than the great depression. The economy only works because people have been trained for 80 years to buy things they don't need, throw them out when they shouldn't and replace them with pretty much exactly the same thing they got rid of. This might be a bad state of affairs to be in, but before we go trying to change people we need to change the system. Else we will be looking at Hitler as a moderate who had some reasonable national policies.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Selling something to cover your expenses might be a blessing in disguise if the thing you sell is a liability in the first place (ex: a car you cant really afford)." In that specific case, no. In the US today, a car is damn near mandatory. Otherwise you'll be spending hours commuting on a bus, and that's if you're lucky enough to be somewhere with decent bus service. And that's assuming you have the type of job schedule where you can have that kind of time. Many times, not being able to keep your car, even if it's expensive in maintenance costs, means you could lose your job.
airstrike 8y ago
> they need to be taught delayed gratification and to not be consumerists. Except the American economy essentially banks on this fact, so you'd actually likely do more harm than good if people decided not to spend so much
ryanobjc 8y ago
So what I am hearing is we should spend heavily on time machines?
phil248 8y ago
"They" need to be taught to demand a degree of rights, protections and subsidies in line with the rights, protections and subsidies afforded the already-wealthy.
- maerF0x0 8y ago
  Sure, to exercise their rights as part of democracy.
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    You cannot exercise this right when there are no viable choices that will do so. Welcome to bipartisan politics with both sides not being socialist.
    - maerF0x0 8y ago
      Then you can exercise your right to add to the viability of another party, create one etc.
sugarpile 8y ago
Was he a BJJ coach?
jartelt 8y ago
I bet a lot of the people with little savings would argue that they didn't F up, they just were born into a poor family. If you are poor, it's much harder to take risks and try to get ahead. You are always on the hook for your rent and can't just go ask your parent for a 0% interest loan to help you out for a couple months. Yes, a lot of Americans have bad financial habits and buy unnecessary things. But some of these people with little savings are doing everything they can to stay afloat and just don't have the luxury of doing an 8 week data science boot camp to get a better job (or they would miss rent and get evicted).
- maerF0x0 8y ago
  > My observation of America is that for a whole lot of people we F'd up a long time ago I didnt say the individuals are the source of the issue. I'm saying as a society we screwed up by more or less creating this issue. Things like a lack of financial (and other) education, or failing to teach adequate data science in high school etc.
kamaal 8y ago
No body can be taught common sense. The remainder is just arithmetic, like addition and subtraction. You have two apples, you eat one. How many apples remain? The part about delayed gratification is pure psychology. And its just personal training. I'm not from the US, I am Indian, these problems are universal. Most people can't handle freedom, that is all there is to it.

zeth___ 8y ago

Unfortunately if we did this we would be in a much deeper hole than the great depression. The economy only works because people have been trained for 80 years to buy things they don't need, throw them out when they shouldn't and replace them with pretty much exactly the same thing they got rid of. This might be a bad state of affairs to be in, but before we go trying to change people we need to change the system. Else we will be looking at Hitler as a moderate who had some reasonable national policies.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

s73v3r_ 8y ago

"Selling something to cover your expenses might be a blessing in disguise if the thing you sell is a liability in the first place (ex: a car you cant really afford)." In that specific case, no. In the US today, a car is damn near mandatory. Otherwise you'll be spending hours commuting on a bus, and that's if you're lucky enough to be somewhere with decent bus service. And that's assuming you have the type of job schedule where you can have that kind of time. Many times, not being able to keep your car, even if it's expensive in maintenance costs, means you could lose your job.

airstrike 8y ago

> they need to be taught delayed gratification and to not be consumerists. Except the American economy essentially banks on this fact, so you'd actually likely do more harm than good if people decided not to spend so much

ryanobjc 8y ago

So what I am hearing is we should spend heavily on time machines?

phil248 8y ago

"They" need to be taught to demand a degree of rights, protections and subsidies in line with the rights, protections and subsidies afforded the already-wealthy.

maerF0x0 8y ago
Sure, to exercise their rights as part of democracy.
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  You cannot exercise this right when there are no viable choices that will do so. Welcome to bipartisan politics with both sides not being socialist.
  - maerF0x0 8y ago
    Then you can exercise your right to add to the viability of another party, create one etc.

sugarpile 8y ago

Was he a BJJ coach?

jartelt 8y ago

I bet a lot of the people with little savings would argue that they didn't F up, they just were born into a poor family. If you are poor, it's much harder to take risks and try to get ahead. You are always on the hook for your rent and can't just go ask your parent for a 0% interest loan to help you out for a couple months. Yes, a lot of Americans have bad financial habits and buy unnecessary things. But some of these people with little savings are doing everything they can to stay afloat and just don't have the luxury of doing an 8 week data science boot camp to get a better job (or they would miss rent and get evicted).

maerF0x0 8y ago
> My observation of America is that for a whole lot of people we F'd up a long time ago I didnt say the individuals are the source of the issue. I'm saying as a society we screwed up by more or less creating this issue. Things like a lack of financial (and other) education, or failing to teach adequate data science in high school etc.

kamaal 8y ago

No body can be taught common sense. The remainder is just arithmetic, like addition and subtraction. You have two apples, you eat one. How many apples remain? The part about delayed gratification is pure psychology. And its just personal training. I'm not from the US, I am Indian, these problems are universal. Most people can't handle freedom, that is all there is to it.