The underlying assumption is that living within (or beneath) your means is for squares, losers, and Abe Simpson.
Silly, really.
Living within their means isn't going to make 'life uncomfortable'; it's going to make *people* uncomfortable. Their lives will be fine--their brains, though, are going to go through some pretty heavy-duty withdrawal symptoms when they can't buy every $40 Abercrombie and Fitch T-shirt they see. Their bodies will be just as warm in the $7.50 from the discount retailer.
It's too bad that a recession is most likely going to do the most damage to people on the bottom of the economic ladder--the ones who already know what belt tightening is about. I really wouldn't be all that upset seeing some H2-driving, over-priced suburb-living, $30K-credit-card maxed folks learning a lesson about self-discipline. (Petty, I know.)
1
Doesn't that just point to the very *heart* of the problem
Submitted by Jon A on November 26, 2007 - 14:13.
The underlying assumption is that living within (or beneath) your means is for squares, losers, and Abe Simpson.
Silly, really.
Living within their means isn't going to make 'life uncomfortable'; it's going to make *people* uncomfortable. Their lives will be fine--their brains, though, are going to go through some pretty heavy-duty withdrawal symptoms when they can't buy every $40 Abercrombie and Fitch T-shirt they see. Their bodies will be just as warm in the $7.50 from the discount retailer.
It's too bad that a recession is most likely going to do the most damage to people on the bottom of the economic ladder--the ones who already know what belt tightening is about. I really wouldn't be all that upset seeing some H2-driving, over-priced suburb-living, $30K-credit-card maxed folks learning a lesson about self-discipline. (Petty, I know.)