You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
27 points

You’re making a lot of assumptions. People can go without many things you may think are basic.

Those 30yo people buying PS5s may be living with their parents because they can’t begin to afford their own place. Maybe they have 5 roommates who all pooled their savings for 6 months to buy it together. Maybe they simply don’t have a car.

There’s also the obvious selection bias of being in a Game Stop. You won’t see all the people who can’t afford a game console shopping there.

To me it’s quite staggering that someone who considers themselves “Well Off” can’t afford an occasional $500 expense. That’s generally considered “Living Paycheck to Paycheck”. I can only assume you’re overspending in some ways.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

From their appearance, I would not be surprised if they were living with their parents - they seem to all be wearing old shabby clothing. So you’re right, people can and do go without many basic things, so where are they coming up with the $$$ for these PS5s? I consider myself pretty well off - that is, I have a trust fund and was bequeathed two large estates (private land) by my parents - so, I have more money than maybe any single person really needs. When I say I can’t afford a PS5, what I mean is, I can’t justify spending $500 for a game system when I have to buy clothes and groceries (especially groceries) and prioritize other expenses. I COULD afford to buy everyone in my neighborhood a PS5 - but seriously there are other things they really need more. But - to each his own, if some kid can get a PS5 and that’s majorly important then I guess it’s perfectly OK - I’m just amazed people of that age have that kind of discretionary money to spend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So you’re right, people can and do go without many basic things, so where are they coming up with the $$$ for these PS5s?

When they don’t spend money on nice cloths and their own apartment, it frees up a lot of money that can then be used on things that are more important to them. Things like a PS5.

I can’t justify spending $500 for a game system when I have to buy clothes and groceries (especially groceries) and prioritize other expenses. I COULD afford to buy everyone in my neighborhood a PS5 - but seriously there are other things they really need more.

Being able to afford something, is when you don’t need to prioritize necessities over it. You have enough left over after buying your cloths and food.

Looks like that’s where you’re overspending.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Yes you got it right, I’m not overspending, young people are. But that’s their perogative. I’m glad you agree with my viewpoint.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

Right and additionally I wonder how this person knew that the lady he mentioned had the “latest” iPhone and that her “Gucci” bag wasn’t a knock off. And perhaps she was able to afford these things because she doesn’t have a car note - does that revoke her right to complain about wasted money?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I know it’s the latest iPhone because I’ve seen the updated newest models online. And it wasn’t a gucci knockoff. I know. And if she was able to afford these things, then great - I have no problem, I’m just making a point. There’s no need to be hostile about responding.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’ll give you that you may possibly recognize the new iPhone from the near identical previous model. But I do not believe at all that you (or anyone) can confirm that bag was real unless you took it an examined it closely. And even if you could, why are you even paying attention to other people’s things like that? It implies that you are judging people based on an assuredly flawed narrative you’ve made up about them in your head. If you’re going to make assumptions, why not make it positive assumptions rather than assuming they make bad choices with their money?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

A knockoff, or maybe even a present.

It’s posts like that one that reek of ulterior motives and unrecognized privilege.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

OK so I have privilege - you seem to think that means I should not post or have any right to talk about what I’ve observed. I happen to own shares in Gucci and I know a knockoff from an original. You don’t have to persuade yourself that I must be delusional to somehow justify your unwillingness to accept that I might be reporting on a true incident.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 472K

    Comments