Okay, and? That doesn’t change a thing braxy said. What if you’ve been aware for years of the pot getting hotter and hotter and have had every desire to leave but don’t have the ability to? Those that have left were in a position in which they had the means to do so. Those that want to but can’t for any number of reasons (finances, family, health, etc. etc.) don’t have much choice.
My take is that there’s nothing wrong in saying leave, or people leaving. But I also agreed that it’s not possible for everyone, or not all want to - until perhaps something is too late.
I don’t understand why the people who can’t/won’t/don’t want to take offense from it, when it’s a viable option for many.
And your take is at best tone deaf and at worst disingenuous.
People take offense because no one says, well, if you have the opportunity, and you don’t like it, leave.
People just say, if you don’t like it, leave. While ignoring that leaving is a privilege for most (how many is many anyway when most are living paycheck to paycheck).
So, I find your comment offensive. This one in particular. I don’t need to read the rest of the comment thread because this one hot take was plenty enough.
Are most people honestly living from paycheck to another? I find that quite difficult to believe. Then again I’m Finnish and not American, so that’s probably why I can’t see the big picture from a local pov. Just seems… baffling.
If you make 5k and spend 4k a month, while having 5k savings, that’s not pay check to pay check. Close though, but what the term implies is 0 surplus, all that you make goes before next pay.
Okay, and? That doesn’t change a thing braxy said. What if you’ve been aware for years of the pot getting hotter and hotter and have had every desire to leave but don’t have the ability to? Those that have left were in a position in which they had the means to do so. Those that want to but can’t for any number of reasons (finances, family, health, etc. etc.) don’t have much choice.
Some of us also want to cool down the pot instead. I’d rather swim in my pot than someone else’s.
My take is that there’s nothing wrong in saying leave, or people leaving. But I also agreed that it’s not possible for everyone, or not all want to - until perhaps something is too late.
I don’t understand why the people who can’t/won’t/don’t want to take offense from it, when it’s a viable option for many.
And your take is at best tone deaf and at worst disingenuous.
People take offense because no one says, well, if you have the opportunity, and you don’t like it, leave.
People just say, if you don’t like it, leave. While ignoring that leaving is a privilege for most (how many is many anyway when most are living paycheck to paycheck).
So, I find your comment offensive. This one in particular. I don’t need to read the rest of the comment thread because this one hot take was plenty enough.
Are most people honestly living from paycheck to another? I find that quite difficult to believe. Then again I’m Finnish and not American, so that’s probably why I can’t see the big picture from a local pov. Just seems… baffling.
The median savings in the US is 5k. The median monthly expense is 4k.
That gives most people in the US a one month cushion. That’s paycheck to paycheck.
If you make 5k and spend 4k a month, while having 5k savings, that’s not pay check to pay check. Close though, but what the term implies is 0 surplus, all that you make goes before next pay.
I forgot part of the equation.
Median savings 4k. Median debt is around 50k. Median monthly income 5k.
Most people are actually worse than pay check to pay check.