[valar_m]

Except that's not at all what the article is talking about:

> But the tightwads I spoke with have very real agita—panic, guilt, stress—over their financial situation, even though there’s no real reason for them to worry. They drag around a phantom limb of poverty, burdened with the sneaking sense that something isn’t right, no matter what their bank account says.

[defrost]

It's the reason the article was written by a marketing professor, it's motivated by exploring why people are resistent to marketing and the end goal would be to change the thinking about people who save rather than spend.

You can see yourself the language used to describe saving not spending as that used to describe abnormal behaviour driven by unreasonable delusions.

It's an article crafted to normalise spending.

[arp242]

> the article was written by a marketing professor

This is flat-out false.

[defrost]

My apologies, I should have said written by Olga Khazan, drawing extensively upon the works of marketing professor Scott Rick and marketing professor Abigail Sussman.

This seems more an error of attribution than flat out wrong, but sure, take a performative extreme by all means.

[arp242]

So it's not even a mistake or confusion, and you knowing and willingly lied through your teeth. That you attempt to shamelessly defend your outright brazen lie only makes it worse. Absolutely indefensible and morally decrepit. Among the worst I've seen on HN.