Skip Navigation

I'm working on it, ok?

210

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
210 comments
  • So everyone should not pay $7.99 a month plus maybe $20 for fast food to because then they'll have an emergency fund? And without that per month you'll be able to afford to feed your family? That's nonsense. Even if it were $50 a month, that would be nonsense.

    People are entitled to live decent lives where they aren't miserable all the time. I have no idea why you think they aren't.

    • You are minimizing how much people spend on streaming services and fast food.

      Average spending on eating out in the US is over $300/mo. https://www.statista.com/statistics/237215/average-away-from-home-food-expenditures-of-united-states-households/

      What do you suggest people do? What would you tell someone who is scraping by and doesn't have an emergency fund to do? Would you say they should carry on and not worry about emergencies? How should they deal with it when one does come along? I'm genuinely curious what your suggestions would be

      I wish everyone could live the perfect most comfortable lives all the time. Seriously I do. But you can't ignore that the reality is that's not the world you and I live in and sometimes it comes down to survival...

      • No, you're assuming everyone spends that much.

        An average is just that, an average. And it's an average heavily weighted towards the rich.

        It means that a vast percentage of people spend less than that, some of them far less.

        And what I suggest they do is keep doing it because it's only a few bucks a month and it won't make a difference.

        My family is not poor and we do not spend anywhere near $300 a month eating out. But we do eat out sometimes. It makes us happy. Sometimes I buy Taco Bell for my daughter. It makes her happy and I like to make her happy because it makes me happy.

        You would have us never do any of it.

        What else should people deny their kids in the name of money? Toys? Let them play with a stick and a rock?

        • I never said everyone. I never made that assumption. I only suggested that everyone should prioritize saving for an emergency over luxury.

          I would suggest you do other things for your family to make them happy that doesn't involve spending money. Go to the library, parks, etc.

          It's not in the name of money that you temporarily withhold these things. It's in the name of survival and making sure your kids aren't obligated to take care of you in the future.

          Your mentality is one of denial and defeatism. You don't want to improve your life because you'd rather have a few nice temporary things in the now.

          What should someone do when an emergency comes along and they don't have the money to afford it? You're not thinking ahead.

          It's not about the money. Without an emergency fund, you are stuck going into debt. If something happens to you or your family and you have to go into debt, what then? Do you still keep eating out and go further into debt? So you never retire? You force your daughter to have to help support you when you're older and no longer able to work? All because you didn't want to change your situation? Because it's just a few bucks and won't make a difference?

          I'm not going to call you a liar, but do you actually track your spending? Is it really $20/mo on eating out? Every single person who has told me they only spend a few bucks on eating out was proven wrong when we went through their spending.

          • You literally said everyone:

            We’re talking in circles. You think I only mentioned Netflix. I didn’t. I also said fast food. You also think I said poor people. I didn’t. My suggestion is for everyone.

            https://lemmy.world/comment/8995035

            • ...this is exhausting. I said my suggestion is for everyone. Not that everyone spends $300/mo.

              I'm done with this conversation. Several times now you've either put words in my mouth or taken what I've said out of context. I figured at first that you just thought I was targeting or speaking ill of poor people. Or that I thought "this one simple trick will guarantee that you're not poor" or some other such nonsense. I figured that maybe a little back and forth would help clarify my position.

              Clearly you think people spend a lot less than they do and that there's no point in even trying to improve one's situation.

You've viewed 210 comments.