3 ms·

I think your calibration as to destitution has gone askew. These things you're complaining about are cheap compared to everything else in their life, but you a

I think your calibration as to destitution has gone askew. These things you're complaining about are cheap compared to everything else in their life, but you ask them to give it up so they can "act the part"? The person you are responding to made it very clear that just because you can afford an iPhone it doesn't mean you can afford a home, but you'd deny them the iPhone? Why? He just proved that removing the little things wont get them the big things, so why can't they enjoy the little things? It's not helping them to deny themselves, it's allowing you to feel correct in your understanding of what poor looks like. You demanding that all the poor wear a hair shirt to show their repentance is your own desire to watch them "act the part" as you believe their part to be, not something that will make their lives better, unless you believe the suffering is the point.

Dalewyn 4y ago
Let me put it this way: If someone supposedly destitute doesn't have the discipline to put their meager surplus income towards their savings, I'm not going to help them. Owning something like an iPhone is a luxury, if you spend on luxuries then you do not need help and I'm not going to help you. It's the same reason most of us wouldn't help a homeless man who spends whatever money he gets on booze.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  > I'm not going to help them. What help are YOU offering? You keep saying you won't help. And what would consider acceptable savings for said help? And what is being saved for? What do you want the poor to do with their savings? It will never be enough to retire or buy a home or nice car with. Again, it sounds like the denial is the point.
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    >What help are YOU offering? Whatever it is they actually need help with. So long as they have an iPhone, they clearly don't need help with money so I'm not helping them with money.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
      For many, the cost of a new iPhone isn't even the cost of rent for a month. In fact, a bare-bones iPhone is the cost of my rent a decade ago. You're claiming that that's the breaking point for you when it's not even going to be 8% of their annual housing cost, to say nothing of their other living expenditures. Also, is the very fact it's an iPhone offensive? Would you be as offended by a poor person having an iPhone 6?
- willcipriano 4y ago
  Lots of boomers have iPhones, will you remember this rule when we have to eliminate social security?
  - Dalewyn 4y ago
    Absolutely, luxuries are second to necessities. If someone gets into financial ruin or can't get out of being destitute due to a lack of proper budgeting, that's on them.

Dalewyn 4y ago

Let me put it this way: If someone supposedly destitute doesn't have the discipline to put their meager surplus income towards their savings, I'm not going to help them. Owning something like an iPhone is a luxury, if you spend on luxuries then you do not need help and I'm not going to help you. It's the same reason most of us wouldn't help a homeless man who spends whatever money he gets on booze.

SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
> I'm not going to help them. What help are YOU offering? You keep saying you won't help. And what would consider acceptable savings for said help? And what is being saved for? What do you want the poor to do with their savings? It will never be enough to retire or buy a home or nice car with. Again, it sounds like the denial is the point.
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  >What help are YOU offering? Whatever it is they actually need help with. So long as they have an iPhone, they clearly don't need help with money so I'm not helping them with money.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    For many, the cost of a new iPhone isn't even the cost of rent for a month. In fact, a bare-bones iPhone is the cost of my rent a decade ago. You're claiming that that's the breaking point for you when it's not even going to be 8% of their annual housing cost, to say nothing of their other living expenditures. Also, is the very fact it's an iPhone offensive? Would you be as offended by a poor person having an iPhone 6?
willcipriano 4y ago
Lots of boomers have iPhones, will you remember this rule when we have to eliminate social security?
- Dalewyn 4y ago
  Absolutely, luxuries are second to necessities. If someone gets into financial ruin or can't get out of being destitute due to a lack of proper budgeting, that's on them.