[peterangular]

> Bikes are not a viable commuting option in most of America

Yea - this was the main point bud. You ever ride your bike 10 miles to get to work in the dead of winter in Iowa or Minnesota?

Like I'm glad you were able to rig a basket and all for your bike but acting like your story is relevant for people who are in actual financial hardships is disingenuous and weird. You're pissing people off who actually struggled... like didn't have food sorta struggle. Stop.

[yellowapple]

> You ever ride your bike 10 miles to get to work in the dead of winter in Iowa or Minnesota?

Not Iowa or Minnesota, but it was the dead of winter, and yes.

> Like I'm glad you were able to rig a basket and all for your bike

My point is that anyone can. The most expensive part was the $10 for the part to strap the crate on (attached to the pole under the seat). The basket was literally in the trash. The bungees were, like, $5, tops.

> but acting like your story is relevant for people who are in actual financial hardships

It is relevant, because I was in financial hardship, despite what you somehow seem to think.

You're the one pissing people off who actually struggled - that is, you're pissing me off by shitting all over me because God forbid I accepted some help from family when I needed it and wasn't in a position to refuse.

[peterangular]

> You're the one pissing people off who actually struggled

I have one person arguing with me - you. You have multiple people arguing with you, some even sharing difficult personal stories of having to go to a food kitchen to not go hungry...

I'm sorry "I'm pissing you off" and "shitting all over you" but you are not going to change my opinion: you had some serious help but still talk like you're an example..? I agree with others that you sharing your experience of being "poor" is punching down, tone-deaf, and invalidates those who actually find themselves struggling right now.

[yellowapple]

> I have one person arguing with me - you.

There are actually a couple people in this discussion who seem to be backing up my points.

> you had some serious help

What part of "less than $50 a month v. more than $500 more in rent" are you not getting here? Real fuckin' serious help. Obviously I was sitting there eating lobster and caviar every day, right? Is that what you think?

My intention is not to "punch down". My only intention is to describe a situation that I think is comparable, based both on facts (namely: the mathematical realities of having to live in a high-cost area with a low wage) and feelings (namely: the emotional toll of having to make the best of every resource available - which, yes, included a whopping $50 a month... wow, so extravagant and sheltered, that'll totally make up for my higher rent).

----

EDIT:

Nor should my experience be taken as "invalidating" anyone else's (except maybe the 1%ers trying to "relate"). Just because I was able to stay afloat taking home less than $1k a month after rent doesn't mean people should ever have to do that. We as a country should be paying our workers what they're worth, not merely "enough to live".

I think this stems from me misspeaking and saying $10/hour is "not unreasonable". What I meant was "not unlivable", and that much is true in much of America. We absolutely should be striving for a higher goal than simply "livable" for every American, given that this country was founded on inalienable rights beyond merely "life"; until every American can exercise one's rights to "liberty" and "the pursuit of happiness", this country has not fulfilled its mandate to its people and to the world, and every one of us should be working together to fix that.

[peterangular]

> I think this stems from me misspeaking and saying $10/hour is "not unreasonable"

Right, which is why a ton of people got flustered. $10 is unreasonable. You posited it was, positioning yourself as some sort of positive example as-to why it is.

> What I meant was "not unlivable"

You said that $10/hr is reasonable. I see "livable", "not unlivable", "survivable", "reasonable", and "not unreasonable" as all synonymous. Your shifting of definitions and "what I meant"-isms doesn't add any sort of positive spin to what you were putting forth with your original comment, it's just backtracking because people called you out.

[yellowapple]

Clarifying things that people like you misinterpreted (or outright invented, like the "hundreds of dollars in support" claim or the claim that I had health insurance even though I specifically said I didn't) is backtracking? And fuck me for admitting a single word I mixed up, right?

I stand by my original comment. Just because some random jerks on Hacker News think I wasn't poor merely because I accepted what amounted to less than $50 of help doesn't mean I wasn't poor.