Latest on twitter:
Before I start ranting I want to apologize, because I have been erroneously categorizing my financial situation. I’m not poor; I’m broke. You would think I would know to recognize this distinction but I misinterpreted the longevity of my financial state as equivocal to not being able to bring myself out of it, which is the very definition of poverty. I’m sorry and from now on I will refer to my financial situation accordingly.
Anyway I digress. I read this blog post on one of those financial responsibility blogs that some refer to as “sancta-money” blogs. I’m not opposed to responsibility in personal finances, but I’m skeptical of the types that tend to champion it. It’s fine and good they want to save money and I think it’s great they share their experience as I do mine. BUT, I don’t like all the finger pointing. When it comes down to condemning the poor I start seeing red. The post I’m referring to is on Free From Broke “25 Traits Of The Not So Well To Do.” It boils down to this: if you don’t have a high-yield savings account, and health insurance but have cable, then this is why you’re poor and if you fall in this category don’t complain because if you listened to me then you wouldn’t be so irresponsible. One commenter said they were surprised he didn’t mention bling or rap music. Apparently, I’m not alone in recognizing his bias.
If you don’t care to read it, I’ll summarize. Seven items are related to having cable, a flat screen TV, a cell phone, a new computer, nice clothing and things he calls “gadgets.” I’m not sure what he means, but I’m guessing iPods and the like, (but of course this guy didn’t deny himself one.) Three are eating habits, like being overweight, drinking soda, and eating at restaurants. He chides people for buying or leasing a car. Then he complains about buying Christmas gifts and picking up the tab at restaurants. (Cheapskate.) Only two directly relate to finances; which are not budgeting and not knowing monthly expenses. The others are purely value judgments like not going to college, not owning a home not recognizing their situation or having financial priorities (I’m guessing that means not agreeing with him), no high yield savings account, and not taking care of their things. He concludes by saying all of these people don’t take personal responsibility.
The guy who wrote this article lives in NYC and doesn’t have cable and that makes him a better person. Good for him. But why come down hard on other people? The people that the article describes are people not working off a five-year plan and for this author “responsibility” seems to come down to what his priorities are. Economics is behavior. Money is scarce and we spend our money based on our preferences. That’s it. People who love cable, eat out a lot, drive a two year old car, and rent are not better or worse than the smug prick who saves every penny and eats marked down fruit. Does he not realize crappy fried food, (and often fast food) is cheaper than cooking a healthy meal at home? I can eat a McDonalds for $2.00. You know what I can eat at home for $2.00? Mac & Cheese or Ramen.
This guy unknowingly (presumably) stumbled upon a class divide. He is imposing his social class values upon them. Yes, they may choose to have nice car because they know they’re depending on it to get to work and likely after a long period of having unreliable cars that require thousands in repairs or worse are beyond repair. He also fails to mention a lot of this stuff is for their kids. They buy newest toys and electronics because they want to give their kids what they don’t have or didn’t have growing up. They don’t have a 401k plan or a money market account. Even if they could give save a portion of their wages, it wouldn’t be enough to retire on. He doesn’t seem to realize that they are spending a good portion of their income on just getting by often because while he thinks they’re walking around with credit cards, he doesn’t realize most of these people don’t have credit. What he fails to realize is what separates the rich from the rest is not about tangible things like iPhones and new cars, it’s access to health insurance, upward mobility and a decent wage.
Secondly, while hating your job is a luxury these days, even when it wasn’t, not everyone has the option of working in a career they love. So, if you give up one job you hate, you’ll just have find another dead end job you will end up hating just as much. Education isn’t always an option. I loathe people who think everyone should go to college. He even says that, but yet he still condemns people for not going! So, you can save the money for the savings you won’t be able to keep because the cost of living is so freaking high and inevitably stuff will come up like a medical emergency because you either don’t have insurance or you do but it sucks or you can choose not to have cable and Internet.
These financial gurus often go mute when it comes to desperate situations when people have make a decision between running up their credit cards and being homeless. They repeat the same line about six months of savings yet these are the same people who actually have a “disposable income.” It doesn’t hurt their budget to save, so when they get to a point where they can reduce their spending or income without giving up things, they look back and say “See how easy that was?” You started off in a better position than most people, wow, good job staying there. That could be said for any middle class person. I hate hearing the middle class pat themselves on the back for “making it.” You could’ve been locked in a closet and probably still would’ve “made it.”
Ultimately I don’t think this guy intended to be an asshole. He was just pointing out (in his own myopic way) how different working class values are from his middle class values. He needs to be more mindful of such differences if he’s going to critique them. I think what infuriates me the most about this is because he is reinforcing the idea that poor people are poor because they choose to be. This thinking seems perfectly logical to him (and others like him) because they have different expectations, experiences and think about money in a very different way. For this guy money is a tool to be leveraged and expects his income and wealth to accumulate over time. This is very unlikely for a working class person. He needs to remember one thing: The most important decision regarding your wealth in life is who your parents are. So, can we just lose the smug?
Via: Free From Broke
