Comment by criley2 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by criley2 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>So a $30,000 car (or less if bought used) when you make $120k is living outside your means?

You realize that their means change when they lose their job and apply for government benefits right? That we should reevaluate our priorities and budgets when our means change (we lose our job and become unemployed for a long period of time!)

If you make 120k/yr and you receive government benefits like food stamps, I have some harsh words regarding your clear abuse of our safety nets.

>then you're probably so cheap you don't take vacations

Some offense intended: Just how young are you? Too "cheap" to take vacations? We're talking about losing jobs in a dual income family situation. How boring am I? Boring enough to budget and successfully raise a child.

How immature are you? Because it clearly sounds like you are WAY WAY WAY too immature to raise a child. "Too cheap to take vacations"!! The audacity of an entitled young twenty-something! You sound like someone who is too immature to successfully put food on the table for your child because you're too busy spending your money validating your entitled luxury lifestyle to save your money and prepare your family for the unknowns of life.

Woah there internet tough-guy

So now being able to take vacations (even if you're in financially good shape) is off limits? I'm not justifying anything that the lady in question did... but I think a 30k car and one vacation a year is reasonable on a 120k salary. Sounds like two people, yourself included, have said no- that is not acceptable (and that makes you entitled for thinking so). I know some extremely thrifty (or smart if you will) people that don't place any value on emotional experiences that might "recharge your batteries" that would argue it's a waste (even if you have more than enough money). Looks like you're one of them.

When you lose your job, you're right- the "means" change and you need to re-evaluate things. I'm not questioning that. I was questioning how is a 30k car out of the means of $120k/year person, especially if they can buy it in cash.

I think, given the context (accepting food stamps), it's somewhat reasonable to expect the family to cutback on luxuries until they get their finances in order. No one is saying they can't buy a car or take a vacation, but if they don't have any savings and are taking tax payer's money to support themselves, it's perfectly reasonable to claim that's irresponsible.

I can definitely see that now, I look like an ass, my bad

Yes, you should absolutely do whatever it takes to support the family, including selling the Benz.

I misread that original comment as "Benzes are only for rich people, not for peons that make $120k or below" and made a Jackie Chan face

"So now being able to take vacations (even if you're in financially good shape) is off limits?

Of course not. This is outside the context of the thread where a family LOSES JOBS and starts accepting food stamps because they cannot afford food.

Yes -- IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD FOOD, you are too poor to take luxury vacations. I apologize if that is offensive.

Otherwise: PLEASE learn to follow basic context. This isn't a generalized conversation of yuppie finances.

It's a specific conversation of a specific case where a dual income family becomes a no-income family, but keeps luxury vehicles while accepting government money.

I find it irresponsible to store value in a depreciating luxury vehicle while asking your neighbors for food, but there are other opinions on the subject.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com