[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.