[version_five]

Really? Even if you just do calisthenics in your home, you still need the space, the free time, and the lack of distractions, not to mention being blessed with the focus to do something so boring.

I'm a pretty hardcore runner (but also hate buying unnecessary things) and spend thousands of dollars a year on shoes and shorts. I weigh 200 pounds and run 300km per month, shoes do not last, and good ones make a difference. And again, I'm only able to have the time to do it due to life circumstances that haven't burdened me with other responsibilities.

Most other sports have gear or memberships that make them more expensive. Many people can't stick to a regular workout regimen and a lot of people I know only were able to when they paid big bucks for a personal trainer.

Yeah, it's possible to work out without money, but I wouldn't pretend it's free, and it only gets easier with money.

[jmull]

I don’t think you’re making much of a case here. Money doesn’t generally buy you free time, lack of distractions and focus. The space needed can be pretty minimal.

I do think running is probably easier for middle-class people to get into, not because of the equipment (it’s fine if it works for you, but I have no idea how you could spend that much — few will need to). I think middle-class people just are a lot more likely to be living in places that are nice to run around in.

But there are many forms of exercise and various options for limited space and budgets. Bodyweight/calisthenics, e.g., and basic weight-lifting.

[version_five]

> Money doesn’t generally buy you free time, lack of distractions and focus. The space needed can be pretty minimal.

I don't agree. Money buys a nanny, a housekeeper, uber eats, shorter commute or work from home... all of these can be a major factor in having the time and focus to exercise regularly.

[EvilEy3]

> you still need the space, the free time, and the lack of distractions, not to mention being blessed with the focus to do something so boring.

Facepalm.