The image is a screenshot of a tweet featuring a pair of screenshots put near each other and stripped of context. The tweet primes you to assume bad faith and given that assumption the inner pair of screenshots does seem like it’s blaming poor people.
But honestly, if you click on a link that lists common causes of headache and the first one doesn’t apply to you, do you construct a narrative about how the editors are disconnected from people who don’t suffer from the first cause of headache?
There are people who are living paycheck to paycheck who could lower their standards of living. Listing that as a way to resolve living paycheck to paycheck that will work for some people is simply correct.
At worst, we can blame the website for tweeting about this without the appropriate disclaimers when understanding it is going out to a broader audience many of who are genuinely poor. Especially because this sort of thing is often ragebait that attracts further engagement, as it did in this instance. But we can just as well blame the person who wrote the tweet for spreading that message and boosting their engagement, or lumpenproletariat for posting a screenshot of the tweet here and further boosting their engagement.
Maybe not controversial but it’s certainly triggering in a time of increasing class discrepancy.
Be happy with what you have and work harder if you want more are the mantra of those that typically already have more and are never happy with what they have themselves.
Living within your means shouldn’t be a controversial statement.
while I agree, the image implies that everyone complaining is not. aka “Eat less avacado on toast”.
when in reality it means “be homeless, you will save a ton on rent!” something about the disconnect of the wealthy editors.
The image is a screenshot of a tweet featuring a pair of screenshots put near each other and stripped of context. The tweet primes you to assume bad faith and given that assumption the inner pair of screenshots does seem like it’s blaming poor people.
But honestly, if you click on a link that lists common causes of headache and the first one doesn’t apply to you, do you construct a narrative about how the editors are disconnected from people who don’t suffer from the first cause of headache?
There are people who are living paycheck to paycheck who could lower their standards of living. Listing that as a way to resolve living paycheck to paycheck that will work for some people is simply correct.
At worst, we can blame the website for tweeting about this without the appropriate disclaimers when understanding it is going out to a broader audience many of who are genuinely poor. Especially because this sort of thing is often ragebait that attracts further engagement, as it did in this instance. But we can just as well blame the person who wrote the tweet for spreading that message and boosting their engagement, or lumpenproletariat for posting a screenshot of the tweet here and further boosting their engagement.
Maybe not controversial but it’s certainly triggering in a time of increasing class discrepancy.
Be happy with what you have and work harder if you want more are the mantra of those that typically already have more and are never happy with what they have themselves.