4 ms·
Yes and if you’re assuming that’s less than a quarter of the persons income then that’s an income north of 90k. That’s actually far above statistically importan
by ianai 3y ago
Yes and if you’re assuming that’s less than a quarter of the persons income then that’s an income north of 90k. That’s actually far above statistically important incomes even if it doesn’t sound like much to this crowd. Just looking to add some context.
And simply telling such people to go find better paying work is also clearly not going to work for everyone.
Context is important. I suppose I’d rather suggest that people be saving, sure, and doing everything they can to live below their means-knowing full well that’s still a high bar. Things like having roommates, always driving a paid off used car (10-20 years old), not having a car, etc. Manage the ego against hoping on the hedonic treadmill, as others pointed out.
A still better solution would be treating each other better and demanding it from our institutions and representatives. Doesn’t mean everyone should live like a king, but we can do better than the current.
- WalterBright 3y agoAmerica's poor live better than medieval kings.
- roland35 3y agoI wasn't trying to make any larger point about income inequality - just saying that employer matches do not contribute to your individual 401k limits :)