Stop Judging How the Lower Class Buys Technology

There's so many snap judgments we make about others especially the Lower Class. We scoff when we see them holding iPhones or playing videogames but why?
www.pewresearc....

[@doomsdayrabbit4398]

A big thing is that sometimes a reduction in income happens after a lot of technology has been bought. Just because you lose your decent paying job doesn't mean your nice smart TV suddenly disappears. Most of those things have very little resale value, too, and unless you're literally bringing them to a pawn shop that'll give you cents on the dollar and then resell them for next to full price, you're investing time that could better be spent in other aspects toward selling your appliances.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Life brings all sorts of chaos, and for most people, it's very easy to swing between doing okay and suddenly being destitute. And there's so many people that are working hard, yet they're being judged with this perspective that "all lower class people are stealing from welfare and making poor decisions." It's more reflective of one's own perspective especially when people are only judging on their own experiences rather than looking at any data. www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2012/09/10/a-third-of-americans-now-say-they-are-in-the-lower-classes/

[@scarletsfm4354]

I've seen people barely able to afford their food and utilities but still are buying expensive clothes and all of the newest games. All the while their kids are hungry and have nothing to their name. People who are just getting what is necessary in todays world like a phone or used car or a game console for entertainment are much different than that. Lumping financially responsible people at a low point in with genuine stupidity is disingenuous and a disservice to those people who are doing their best.

[@FilmyLabyrinth]

and yet, that’s what the rich do. they don’t gaf about who’s who down here.

[@scarletsfm4354]

@@FilmyLabyrinth yeah. That doesn't mean the general population needs to do the same. Just like this guy is doing.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

In your experience, is it everyone in that position or some? Is it your locale? And it seems like you're lumping people as well. Financially responsible people exist in all financial classes just like financially irresponsible people. So we're not sure what your goal is here other than saying that you want to judge lower income people in general.

[@scarletsfm4354]

@@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd I'm lumping people in by separating irresponsible people from responsible people? You make no sense.

[@dasfaasdf1454]

you've never talked to a lower class person in your life

[@leeellis47]

Well he can’t afford the newest iPhone or Xbox so in his mind he is poor 😂

[@monk3110]

Yeeeeaa… tech isn’t the problem in WV 😅

[@less_than_savory]

when people speak with a soft and feminine voice you can guarantee they've never spent a minute around lower class people

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks everyone! We hope you have wonderful lives full of prosperity, success, and empathy. :)

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

@monk3110 - This is actually a fascinating perspective. Before going more into it, do you mean West Virginia? Location vs larger scale generalization is always tough, but we're very intrigued to hear your opinions as we have met quite a few people from WV, and the topic of the type of careers in WV and their impacts is always fascinating.

[@KazmirRunik]

The average person isn't piloting military drones or using their phone for Microsoft Office. It's okay to have games, but it's also good to have a healthy relationship with them, including minding your expenditures on money drains like microtransactions or yearly-release games.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks for the comment! We agree! The most important thing is to have a healthy relationship with games as there are many vicious cycles and dark design patterns in them to be addictive. They also have incredible things like teaching people to puzzle solve and persevere. It's really up to interpretation on that aspect and based on each individual! We find that the judgment people place on them just because they HAVE videogames or any piece of technology seems too far. Some people are spending too much, but that's arguably true of every class and every vertical whether games, shopping, food, etc. Some people are being thoughtful about it. But why should we lumpsum so many people in one go, and instead, we should be thoughtful and kind in general.

[@AaravGhate]

brother, a $100-150 phone can do everything that a $2000 phone. There are people in India buying phones that cost >1000 dollars when their monthly income is less than 200

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

A cheap phone and cheap computer do not prevent you from doing 99% of things. The pictures dont look as good and everything is slower. But almost everything will still work. Can't code or make PowerPoint presentations on a Chromebook? That's on you, because it's definitely possible. Can't run complicated Excel models on a Chromebook? Sure, but you can't on a Mac either, and cheap Windows PCs are within $50 of cheap Chromebooks; besides, people smart enough for those models to make sense aren't relevant to this discussion. I've been low income and bought nice electronics. I somewhat regret it, but that's not really what bothers people. It's when people complain about struggling to afford the essentials, but then get a new iPhone or Galaxy.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Sure. But isn't performing at the same speed as everyone else not doing something? Slowness prevents so much opportunity? And bad hardware can do very rudimentary code, and maybe that's a start. Macs and Windows can run complicated Excel models. Not sure why Macs can't, but in our video, we didn't say to get a Mac. The qualification of "smart enough" is a huge generalization. There are plenty of people who have the skills and drive but not the hardware or finances to make that happen. Yet there's that judgment from others that qualify they can't. I'm sure you're a thoughtful person in many situations, but if someone were to just look at your name, they might make the judgment that you're bigoted. Does that seem like a good choice for the other person to make? One could argue that "everyone's free to judge," but it seems like we're just teaching everyone to be assholes? The generalization that people complain about struggling to afford the essentials but then buy the latest technological gadget seems like there's a lot to break apart from that. 1. How large is that subset? 2. Does the subset set the rule for everyone? 3. What's an essential: food / lodging / etc.? 4. Is the internet not an essential? Or are we looking at tiers of essentials? 5. If we consider something like any psychology / business perspective on Hierarchy of Needs, is it that they should only get themselves to the baseline and then never go above that?

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd The subset is 99%. Yea, there are some Dave Ramseys out there who say no one should have expensive stuff if they're not already a billionaire. But the vast majority of people complaining about poor people having expensive stuff wouldn't care unless they're also complaining about not having money. If you want to have expensive stuff, that's fine. Just don't buy expensive stuff then complain about not having money. My point with bringing up a Mac is that how much you spend on a computer is largely uncorrelated to what you can do with it. Excel on Mac has a different, much less capable, scripting engine than Excel on Windows. You can do more with Excel on a $600 PC than a $2,000 Mac. You're doing a dishonest thing here. You're saying basics like having a computer and internet are essential, which almost everyone agrees with. Then extrapolating that to say there should be no concern about spending excess money on it. I have to have a car, so why not a BMW?

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Let's leave the qualifications and judgment off please. It's easy to get into the arguments of "you're dishonest" or "you're lying" or "you're uninformed" or "you're disingenuous" or any of those things. That argument goes both ways. Agreed on a BMW doesn't make sense. A $2000 mac or a $2000 windows machine typically last longer than the $600 or $300 laptops. I'll ask - have you listened to the whole video or did you stop? What we said is that a new iPhone (at $1000) is probably a better choice than getting a crappy phone and a crappy computer. They're likely the same price at that point. We also never said mac in our video. You brought it up here. We've followed your thought, and maybe we should break out of it. Go for the $1000 windows machine if that's better for one's needs. We qualified that people need to make thoughtful financial decisions, but not all lower-income families are picking up every bit of technology. Crappy phones and crappy computers typically have to be replaced more often because of planned obsolescence: cheaper technology (both in capability and quality) means power-hungry applications can't be run and they fall apart more easily. Comparing to cars doesn't make sense unless it's a gas car and in the next year all gas stations were removed. If we wanted to compare to anything, a closer approximation would be looking at clothes. We could buy clothes from Walmart vs the actual store. They sell derivative products at Walmart that are of lower quality and made to fall apart more easily. They're cheaper though. But buying a higher quality item may last longer. Your mileage may vary of course. And let's qualify lower class. What does it mean to you? What percentage of the US population? Are you talking about poverty (which according to the census is 11.5% of the population)? We're talking about households 30% of households (according to Pew), which according to the Hill would be about 50k. That would be 98 million people if we're looking at 30%. If you're talking about poverty, that's about 37.5 million people. That would be saying that 37.5 to 98 million people are all making poor financial decisions. We don't believe that's what you mean because this data wasn't presented previously, but please let us know. www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2024/05/31/the-state-of-the-american-middle-class/#:~:text=From%201971%20to%202023%2C%20the,share%20who%20are%20lower%20income. thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4603485-are-you-still-earning-enough-to-be-middle-class-check-these-new-tables/#:~:text=As%20of%202022%20(the%20most,and%20%24154%2C590%2C%20according%20to%20SmartAsset.

[@monk3110]

Already disputing this a bit. IF you have some of these things I don’t want to hear you complain about money. Knew a dude with kids complaining about money but had like every *subscription* imaginable, including 2 gaming subscriptions, bought lots of stuff on games like overwatch and had an Apple Watch, unrelated to tech but bought two very pricey pure breed dogs they just locked in a cage. I don’t want to hear ppl like this complain about money even if I wouldn’t judge them otherwise, save for giving those dogs a crap life. When I moved my second electricity bill was zero dollars 😅

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

We didn't see this message here, so happy we can speak in a separate thread. Please dispute anything. Respectful discourse is always encouraged. Sure. There's plenty of people making poor decisions, but there's also plenty of people who are working incredibly hard, but things are stacked against them. Here's an article from Pew Research. www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2012/09/10/a-third-of-americans-now-say-they-are-in-the-lower-classes/ And from our own experiences, we can't necessarily use that to judge everyone. It's the same issue with things like ACAB. The buying videogames is one of the things that seems to be triggering everyone the most here because it seems like there's two subsets of people: 1) Those who have qualified that many of the lower class have wasted their money away on videogames 2) Those who actually have wasted their money away on videogames The venn diagram is very interesting, but the question with the venn diagram is how much of the subset is this? I'll put the question here because we think this is a more thoughtful thread, but you had mentioned WV - is that West Virginia? And what's your take on the situation for the lower class there and what would help them get out? As local vs generalization has a lot of difference.

[@veryexciteddog963]

I just don't think anyone should buy an iPhone. Rich or poor, they have something wrong with them judgement wise.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Some of our team would agree with you on not buying Apple Products in general. :)

[@Tanmaydeshpande-nl5jy]

awesome. i agree. but your video only makes sense if i want it to. i can also make it mean you saying the most expensive iphones are necessities. i think extreme positions like this make sense if it is in the middle of a conversation

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks for the comment! We completely understand that our video is divisive and can be viewed as extreme. It's hard to give as much information in 2 minutes. Our intent was to tell people not to be judgmental because we don't know where each person is, and there's so much in peoples' lives that we don't see. And maybe we missed that mark. We'd love to know we can improve. Four our intent: We can understand that people are jumping to the most expensive of each category. In our video, we didn't qualify the most expensive, but we did qualify that the cheapest don't really work as well. And in following the operability and lifetime of cheaper technology, they typically break a lot faster too. Someone with a $200 phone may replace their phone every year; whereas, someone buying the latest Pixel or iPhone may be using their phone for 2-4 years. Similarly, a cheap laptop with an I3 / cheap and low amounts of ram / small amount of data storage may crap out very quickly. If we factor in cheap and slow, we can extrapolate that the technology is causing t hem to waste more time as well. Trying to do anything on slower hardware will take longer - paying bills, searching for jobs, planning anything. And then if the hardware breaks because it's cheap and/or planned obsolescence kicks in, then they're spending more time and more money replacing their hardware instead of doing everything else. But maybe we didn't hit our mark, and that's okay. Let us know what your thoughts are, and we appreciate your thoughtful comment.

[@waningbloom]

To preface what I’m about to say, I want to say that I am broke, but I buy a lot of technology. To simply put many of the tech purchases I’ve seen not only lower class, but also upper class make breaks my heart. Folks buy technology without understanding what the purposes of said technology is and therefore they often get grifted into making purchases that not only will not fulfill their purposes, but also expensive to maintain. Bad technology purchases never were derived from financial predicaments, but rather from a lack of education of said technology. Of course, demanding folks to be all knowing in how tech works is also incorrect, but I believe that when folks buy things, they _should be aware_ of what they are buying no matter if rich or poor. Tl;dr: Rich and poor people spend their money like idiots on tech because they’re not informed of said tech and the capacity of it

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Sorry to hear about your situation. Thanks for the comment, and we hope you're able to get into a better situation soon. If you'd like our team to send any research for resources, let us know! The technology grift, the political grift, the social media grift, and the corporate grift are real. Our focus is that there's a lot of necessary technology that people judge the lower income on. It's creating the perspective that: a) they're not allowed to have any entertainment other than specific types (even though again gaming / mobile gaming is incredibly cost effective) b) it's all lower income households. Like someone above commented that 99% of lower class are poor at finances and constantly making bad decisions, and then asking for more money. It's so easy to look at what we've had optics and and blanket statement it. It's the same concept when people complain about all boomers or all millennials. Creates infighting instead of thinking about the corporate and political grifts that are happening.

[@TeaRiker]

Literally no one who works a real job requires gaming experience. A really stupid argument, i assume it was made by someone who's just addicted to video games and never spend any time with any other hobby. "Cost effect entertainment" my ass. 500 bucks for a gaming console + 70 bucks for every single game, many of which are never played after purchase. If you want eNterTainMent, just read a book. They cost 10 bucks each and will occupy you for 20-50 hours.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

That's a strong bias about "real job." Feels like those working in the game industry aren't contributing to the economy but okay. What qualifies a real job? Here's an article about surgeons training on the Nintendo Wii. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23460845/ You can look up military xbox controllers with a quick google search, but here's one regarding Boeing (LOL) using Xbox controllers. www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/military-contractor-just-went-ahead-and-used-xbox-controller-their-new-giant-laser-cannon-180952647/ Would you consider surgeons and the military not real jobs? Or people who work in the video game industry which is a trillion dollar industry? Books don't always cost $10. And games consoles are amortized across time, but that's okay. You can have your opinions on that and judge people for not wanting to read a book. Quick questions to you: what's your take on Star Trek and the finances in the world there? Does Star Trek seem utopic? We've replied to your other message as well.

[@TeaRiker]

@@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd I would assume that almost no Surgeon spends any of his free time on video games. Even if they do use a controller for anything, any "gaming experience" will not be necessary. My 6 year old brother learned to use a controller, it's nothing complicated. Also, most people in the gaming industry today don't even play games themselves anymore, not even their own. Either way, you have no right for entertainment and certainly no right to the most expensive and luxurious form of it. People who spend more time playing video games are less happy, anyway, and those who spend a lot of time in front of a screen in general are FAR more likely to kill themselves. If you can afford to play video games, you can also afford almost any other material pleasure. So if you buy video games, but also complain about not being able to afford basic necessaties, i will obviously judge your lack of discipline. But your position is actually the malevolant one. If you got any power, you'd most certainly rob from the productive and responsible ones to give to the poor in the name of compassion. You'd force me at gunpoint via taxation to give away my money so Peter Pan can play video games in his moms basement until he retires. I would obviously never agree to that.

[@TeaRiker]

@@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd Literally what book costs much more than 10$? If you include used books, that should be almost no book. And i'm afraid i can't answer your Star Trek question, not until we have an infinite abundance of energy and every other ressource.

[@Boneless6065]

It's not about simply having what are now products essential for daily life, it's the poor financial decisions you see many people make in regards to these types of products, i.e. impulsive behavior when it comes to new products ("I just have to have the new iPhone!") vs waiting for a time when it's more financially viable or when it's necessary. This is where the real judgment comes from, which I see as perfectly reasonable, even if it's best kept to yourself.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks for the comment! We believe what you're saying isn't mutually exclusive from what we're saying (and we do appreciate the nature of "keep it to yourself"). The question we really are asking is "is it that the lower class is making poor financial decisions" or "are we perceiving the lower class as making poor financial decisions?" What moment are we seeing them? It seems like there's holistic judgment across time - maybe they made a decision 6 months ago when they had a job and didn't buy a new phone because they were being financially responsible, but now, that job went away because big mining abandoned their town and laid off everyone? So now they're on food stamps and their 6 year old phone is dying. Just for a barometer, the household low class is $50k per household according to business insider and the poverty line is at 11.5% according to the census. Everybody has a different perspective on where low class actually is, but we're going based on lifestyle and ability to save for retirement. This means that at $50k, which for two working adults would be about $12 an hour, if one loses their jobs, they're practically into poverty. And if they had purchased a phone before losing their job, there's judgment that "they shouldn't have wasted money." And if they were waiting to purchase a new phone, and now they can't because they're in poverty, it's "well, they should only focus on the essentials and not waste money," even though the digital divide only further pushes down the lower class. That's a catch-22. thehill.com/homenews/nexstar_media_wire/4603485-are-you-still-earning-enough-to-be-middle-class-check-these-new-tables/#:~:text=As%20of%202022%20 www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/newsroom/press-kits/2023/iphi/20230912-iphi-slides-poverty.pdf

[@Boneless6065]

@@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd Right, you've misunderstood. I know the question you're asking, the original one you've described in your video at least, and what I'm saying is that it isn't the case. No sensible person would make such a judgment. Everyone needs a phone. For example, you've left out an important variable that would lead someone to make this sort of judgment: the type of phone they buy. There is a whole range of smartphones one could buy on the market, from affordable to expensive. If one were in the sort of situation like you've described, if they went out and bought themselves an affordable $120 phone instead of a brand new $1200 phone, the type of judgment would be slim to none. Even if the more affordable option is actually above what they can afford with hard cash, we live in a time where smartphones are an essential item a majority of people have. In your video you mentioned buying the lowest end phone prevents you from... wow, none of the things you described in that list are things people do on their phone, nor are any of the things that you listed a common work activity for the lower class (and if they were, it wouldn't be on a personal device, it would most likely be on a work computer). Most of the lowest end phones are Androids capable of all the essential use cases of a phone. Obviously, like I said originally, if they were to buy the high-end model instead, it would be a financially irresponsible decision, so accordingly, the risk of judgment would be higher.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

We get the perspective, and we think that makes sense if looking at purely the dollar value. We don't think someone should necessarily buy the $1200 phone, but we'd argue that the $120 phone probably will break faster, not perform as well, shorter battery lives, and have faster end of life support (which will lead to a faster replacement). So they may still be needing to replace a phone every year when they could buy a $500 phone. Even an $8000 phone honestly isn't as crazy of a stretch if it's their main source of use for everything. It's a strong belief that the lower class are getting work computers, but it's just as strong a belief that they aren't. To qualify the lower class, it's under $50k for a household. So with 2 working adults in the house, that's $25k per adult or $12/hr jobs. And we're not too familiar with $12/hr jobs that give work laptops to take home, and honestly, doing any personal or non-work related activities on a work laptop is a VERY bad idea for privacy as well as ownership of ideas. The law favors companies if you do any non-related work on a work device even outside of work hours because the work device is company property. This also seems potentially based on generations. More of the younger generations rely on their phone for everything including coding / writing / spreadsheeting.

[@dallassegno]

Who does this? I judge them on what they eat.

[@TeaRiker]

If you can afford an iPhone, you are not poor. It is a huge luxury that even the richest and most powerful people would have envied just 50 years ago. You can not make me pity someone with an iPhone based on their economic situation. Never. Jobs will provide you with a smartphone or laptop if you really need one. If you need to apply for jobs, most libraries offer free computers to use for free.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

50 years ago is also 2-3 generations ago. 1974 also had far more financial balance than it does now. You don't have to have pity, but you can have empathy. Do you believe every job will give a phone? You bring up libraries here, but we also provided libraries in our video as well for helping to supplement the costs of videogames. Making it just the purchase of the console and a TV, but maybe you're anti-TV as well. Library computers are shared, and when you get there, you may not have access because someone else is using it. That makes it harder for those who are trying to apply for positions to get them. A lot of libraries also limit the amount of time, and they're older hardware, so they're slower. Telling someone they have to work even harder and harder and harder to find an opportunity doesn't seem like a solution to get them out. Please read about the digital divide. Here's the Wikipedia page to get you started: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide We've replied to your other message as well.

[@TeaRiker]

@@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd 1974 did not have better financial stability. In fact, you will not find any metric that was better in the past than it is today. And if you apply to a job, it will take a few weeks. Surely you can afford the patience, if not your own computer.

[@cisium1184]

You need to get up from your computer, go out into the world, and actually meet people different from yourself. This is spectacularly cocooned and tone-deaf.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks for the opinion. Would love to hear what your thoughts are on tone-deafness? Is it that the lower class should be judged or that we're not looking at other avenues like education?

[@phantomderp834]

Who has ever complained about the poor buying microwaves? Microwaved foor is synonymous with being poor. Poor people who wast their money on luxury items like apple products instead of cheaper stuff are the ones who are criticized. You seem very out of touch.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

Thanks for the comment and judgment. It's so wonderful casting judgment isn't it? Here's an article about Bill O Reilly from 2011 commenting on appliance ownership as showing that poverty isn't hardship. www.mediamatters.org/fox-nation/fox-cites-ownership-appliances-downplay-hardship-poverty-america Here's the direct video. www.mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2011%3A07%3A20%3A18607%3Afnc-oreilly-20110720-poverty It's 13 years old, so we may be out of touch. But the fun part about soundbites and human consciousness is that even if it's far back, it still has influence in many of the millions of people who watched that clip. Sure - if they're only buying a new apple MacBook, iPad, and iPhone every year. But if they've gotten one and they use it for 3-4 years, how is that bad? We linked a 3 year-old article about the technology divide in the description (here it is for ease of finding it: www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/06/22/digital-divide-persists-even-as-americans-with-lower-incomes-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/#:~:text=Roughly%20a%20quarter%20of%20adults,incomes%20are%20not%20tablet%20owners). Most of them don't have all that, so when judging and pointing fingers at other people being out of touch, remember that 3 more fingers point back at you. But we are also likely out of touch in a world that's constantly changing and shifting, and we hope that instead of just jumping and attacking ad hominem, we can actually talk.

[@doraemon402]

Dude, what? You say "microwaves" and you start talking about videogames, which is literally the biggest waste of money any poor person could partake in as they are not a resource like the internet, which can be used for work and education. Pathetic. Tell people to keep being poor next time, it'll just take 10 seconds instead of 2 minutes. You do not seem to realize poor people are financing phones worth over 1k and then complaining they can't afford food. Get a 100 dollar smartphone, if anything. Same with laptops, I see people "struggling" with brand new latest model computers all the time. No need for any of that either. Of course we should judge people by their money managing skills...

[@thefrostbee4182]

then judge the rich for spending millions and billions on useless crap. poor people deserve to enjoy life. yall act like poor people ought to suffer, and keep nagging people for the most nonsensical garbage ever. theres a planet-wide economy that commits fcking genocides for oil money, and u wanna sit and nag poor people for eating food and having entertainment? fck off

[@LiamLoves]

Video games do massively reduce your potential though. If there is something wrong with your life and you play them, you are making the problem worse. Almost anything else is more productive.

[@anselmschueler]

you can't expect anybody to be maximally productive. and things like reading books can also be as "useless" as playing games…

[@anselmschueler]

everyone has a right to leisure

[@JC-Alan]

This is untrue. Look up the video “Dark Souls saved my life”. Sure, some games are mindless wastes of time, but beating Elden Ring was a moment that built up my feeling of self efficacy. Call it dramatic if you will, but I thought to myself: “if I can beat this game I do anything.” Then, over the last couple years I’ve lost tons of weight, written a quarter of my novel, have made leaps and bounds in my career, now finding myself at the best mental state I’ve ever been in. Video games are like any other form of art. As a great book can change someone, so too can a great game.

[@LiamLoves]

@@JC-Alan I'm am glad that you are thriving, but exceptions do nothing but prove the rule. But I'm thinking now about how I ought to change myself. I condemn video games but argue with strangers on the internet. Rather silly of me. I shall stop.

[@JC-Alan]

@@LiamLoves I don’t think we are arguing. We are just having a discussion. Even if we disagree, this doesn’t need to be something you’re ashamed of.

[@iotaayushshrivastava114]

Lol so many first world american boomers still jump on to bash this good video

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

This is a terrible video because it misses the point entirely. Also, most of his arguments are factually incorrect.

[@TwoMinuteTalks-wt9nd]

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 If you have facts and evidence, we'd love to see it. Always up for actual discourse vs feelings of "experience" vs "experience." The digital divide is in our description, but here's a link to it. www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/06/22/digital-divide-persists-even-as-americans-with-lower-incomes-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/#:~:text=Roughly%20a%20quarter%20of%20adults,incomes%20are%20not%20tablet%20owners @iotaayushshrivastava114 Thanks for the support. And we wouldn't say it's just boomers. We're sure many other generations have been taught this same animosity and judgment. It's all optics and perception and "personal experience" pushing away any data or research. www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2012/09/10/a-third-of-americans-now-say-they-are-in-the-lower-classes/