sanitation@lemmy.radio to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agoMe_irllemmy.radioimagemessage-square169linkfedilinkarrow-up11.02Karrow-down115
arrow-up11.01Karrow-down1imageMe_irllemmy.radiosanitation@lemmy.radio to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agomessage-square169linkfedilink
minus-squareTrickDacy@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·2 days agoI agree with the person responding to you and would just add that “rich” shouldn’t be defined as “this is how much everyone should have”. Rich is more like “could afford to not work for decades if not forever” or something along those lines.
minus-squareFlexibleToast@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 day agoI don’t know. By that definition people who have saved and barely afford retirement are “rich”.
minus-squareTrickDacy@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 day agoI thought it was clear that this loose definition would not include retirement age people.
minus-squareFlexibleToast@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·1 day agoI don’t think you intended it to, but it does. Defining things can be hard.
I agree with the person responding to you and would just add that “rich” shouldn’t be defined as “this is how much everyone should have”. Rich is more like “could afford to not work for decades if not forever” or something along those lines.
I don’t know. By that definition people who have saved and barely afford retirement are “rich”.
I thought it was clear that this loose definition would not include retirement age people.
I don’t think you intended it to, but it does. Defining things can be hard.