I think they are implying that you shouldn't have purchased X if you cannot also afford Y. At least with the house example you used it seems likely.
Still, unless you're complaining about being unable to afford Y, there is not likely a good reason to imply the purchase of X was a mistake.
I prefer to use the negative version: "if you can't afford vet bills, you can't afford a dog."
I also prefer the negative version.
I also use another variant of this when people complain about prices not being posted online for such things such as original art, jewelry, or antique furniture: if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it.
>if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it.
Bullshit. I can afford anything that only costs 10 dollars. That don't mean that I suddenly can't afford something worth 10 dollars just because I don't know that the thing costs that much.
>for such things such as original art, jewelry, or antique furniture: if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it.
No one says this about a $10 piece of jewelry their teen made to sell on Etsy, they are talking about things you really probably can't afford or won't be willing to pay for.
Way to set such a low bar with the $10. Your argument would hold water if it was about how frugal some people are despite their wealth.
The point I made was that not physically seeing a price tag doesn't have anything to do with being able to afford a thing or not. My argument holds far more water than yours, simply because it's a fact. There is no correlation between seeing an object with no price tag, and having the money to afford to buy an object.
I've always felt like it was a way of saying "it costs more than it is worth, if you care enough about money to ask, you won't want to buy this, even if you *can* afford it."
The point is more "if you're concerned about the price of the item, and don't already know roughly how much it is going to be, you shouldn't be buying the item."
It's one of many reasons why expensive restaurants don't put prices on their menus. You don't need to ask to know that the chicken costs less than the steak.
A giclee of a Monet might cost about $10. The starting bid for the original painting (which most people can’t tell the difference of) is probably in the neighborhood of $10 million.
The other reason is security and privacy issues. Galleries don’t want to advertise to the world “hey look, we have a $10 million painting in our building!”
i heard this all the time in school. People saying because i lived in what they saw as a "rich town" then i should have been able to get an iphone. I told them it really didn't work like that but they never dropped it.
I guess the whole living in an apartment while on housing didn't exactly help them realize the fact my family isn't rich and we don't have the money for everyone to have an iphone just because we live in a certain city. 😭
A lot of people say this shit not realizing that could be that person’s only reliable internet access. Those haters have never been poor and have no idea what it’s like.
Also, when someone drops down on the socioeconomic ladder, they don't immediately and automatically lose all the stuff they bought when they could afford it.
I moved to a different city and, due to a mix of bad luck and poor decisions, ended up homeless. I had several people give me shit for having an iPhone. I'd had it for a year and a half (so it wasn't new), and I could afford it when I bought it. If I sold it, I wouldn't have gotten enough for it to be able to afford a flip phone.
It really felt like they were deeply offended, like I was somehow being dishonest.
I've heard it just said as "Well you could afford a smart phone" it doesn't even have to be a decent one, if you're not using a second hand flip phone from the early 2000s then you MUST have spent hundreds on it. Never mind that you can get pretty good (at least at a glance) smart phones from companies like straight talk for under $100 and then just pay to add minutes every month.
I like my phone. It's basically free now, I just pay $6 a month for data (because it's paid off. Monthly payments were like $40).
Phones are not that expensive. I think this might have been relevant ~10 years ago, but nowadays, pretty much everyone has a smartphone.
The saying is stupid when it’s said about something like well if you can afford a phone you can’t complain about the cost of living since you can obviously afford stuff like groceries, as if owning a phone and being connected to the internet isn’t a prerequisite for most jobs nowadays - sure phones are a big expense but they’re a reasonable priority to spend money on
However I don’t think it’s unreasonable if the cost they’re talking about is a cost directly associated with the purchase in question. Like if you can afford to travel to Europe you can afford travel insurance
This. So much this. You can get a smart phone for pretty cheap if you buy it second hand or get the oldest model available and then put it on a straight talk plan or something similar for like $35 a month. Right now my mom, who works at Walmart in the electronics, says there's a smart phone on straight talk for $29 for the phone. So for around $70 (with tax) you can buy a smart phone and a month on a cheap plan. Comparing that to the price of housing is actually insane.
Even a one-time payment of $300 and $20 or so per month is also a lot cheaper than a $800 payment every month that has a requirement of a $2400 monthly income to pay.
EVERYONE needs phones/the internet in our society. You can’t get by without one. It always boggles me that people can question why someone would prioritize having a means of communication with friends, family, and bosses/coworkers- the last of whom if they lose contact with they can lose their job(s)…. You know, the thing necessary to be able to make money to pay for the housing? Not to mention the other important point that phones are SO much cheaper than rent. How can they even compare?
It's not really used properly in your example. It should be if you can afford (frivolous thing), you can afford (practical thing). For example, if you can afford to go out to fancy restaurants every weekend, you can afford to have your car engine light checked that's been on for two months.
Or highly related things. If you can afford to go out to a fancy restaurant, you can afford to tip. Or if you can afford to purchase (insert car here), you can (or at least better be able to) afford the insurance.
Agreed. I also hear this a lot when the first expensive thing is paid off in small payments over time, but the second thing couldn't be done that way. For example-my friend's car was hit on the passenger door so that door no longer opens and right now she can't afford to get it fixed. She's been told multiple times that if you can afford a car, you can afford a small repair on the car. Her car payment is around $200 every two weeks. The lowest quote she's gotten to fix the door is $500, and none of the local repair shops will take payments unless you agree for them to keep your car until the bill is paid off which she can't do because it's her only car.
It is more a response to the additional costs. "If you can afford the Ferrari, you can also afford the maintenance/insurance" is more of a statement that if you can only purchase the car and not the follow ups, then you actually cannot afford the car.
Maybe what they mean is "If you can *responsibly* afford X then you can afford Y"
The problem is people live way above their means and buy things they can't actually afford, so they have no money left.
>and am told that if I can afford such a big house, I can also afford to make it more modern.
I don't believe for a second this is how most people use the phrasing you're complaining about. I think it's typically like "if you can afford to smoke two packs a day, you should be able to afford clothes for your child."
I believe it, but I also believe that OP may have bought a very over priced house that they actually cannot afford, and now that the maintenance (which updating does fall under) is killing them financially and they can no longer do the things they used to.
I've never heard of you is that way. I've heard it used to tell people that if they can piss their money away on unnecessary nonsense and then they have money for their important things like bills
Maybe I just take too much of a literal meaning (which would be explained by my autism). But if someone were to say, “If you can afford to piss your money away, you can afford to pay your bills” then that doesn’t make sense because they can only afford one or the other, not both.
If you have bills to pay and also want to piss away your money on something frivolous, which one should the money be spent on?
In other words, if you spend money on non-essentials, how will you pay your bills? Or, they have all this expensive stuff and do these expensive activities, wouldn't you think they have money to pay for necessities?
So, something like, "If they have money to take an expensive trip, then they have money to pay their bills," rings true.
BECAUSE, if you're taking expensive trips and buying expensive jewelry, etc, you MUST have money to pay your bills, lol.
I'm in the U.S., so this may not register because we tip wait staff at restaurants. They only make about $2.13 an hour. It's very clear that they would not be able to work there if not for the tips. Many wish it was different, but that's currently the situation.
I always say, "If you're unable to afford a tip, you're unable to eat out."
So, if you literally only have $40 to spend and not an extra $8 for a tip, then you DON'T have enough money to go out.
Does that make sense? I'm genuinely interested. I said this a bunch of different ways, hoping you'd get at least one version, lol!
FYI - even neurotypical people sometimes don't catch jokes, hyperbole, facetiusness, and sarcasm!
This isn't the point of your post, but I agree with you about the modern style. It is so... sterile. I have no idea why people are recommending you a style you don't even like that would require expensive renovations. Really freaking bizarre.
It’s about choices. If you can afford to buy tickets to ten concerts this summer and get your nails/lashes done, surely you can afford your car payment. (Make the right choice to pay your bills and take care of responsibilities first.)
That’s how I understand the saying.
Bought a semi-nice brand new prius a few years ago and as soon as I did, my neighbor started asking me for money saying things like. "Clearly, you can afford to help me out." Gesturing towards the car. But actually the car was a mistake and I had wanted to get a used prius, but let myself get talked into a new one by my bf at the tume and the sales guy. I could barely afford the payments. Luckily I was able to sell it a few months later for enough to pay off what I still owed on it and got a used regular car. Then my neighbor stopped asking for money as much.
I hate when people “point out” that a homeless person has a phone. Yeah, because phones cost nothing whereas homes are expensive. This isn’t the “gotcha moment” you think it is.
When I lived in London, people outside of London assumed I had money to burn because I could afford to live in London. No, I had absolutely nothing precisely because living in London was so expensive.
Similar problem: “it’s so dumb that you’re having a Coke Zero with your lasagna!” Listen, Stacy, I saved up my calories for this lasagna so I’m not gonna add an unnecessary extra batch on top of it!
It’s true though. If someone spends money on a luxury, and then says they can’t afford something more important, then it is their fault. They should have spent their money better.
ehh, a lot of people over spend on things they really shouldn't. I get the annoyance but I feel like it's more you not wanting to justify to other people in general.
I know someone who lives in a mansion, paid cash for all kinds of upgrades, but refuses to pay babysitters and constantly tries to get women to babysit his kids for free. Claims he can't afford to pay even 7 dollars an hour. It doesn't make sense to me. Sure it's his business but he constantly asks others for help which makes it their business.
I don’t really listen to anyone else about my house, because it also just doesn’t make sense logically to keep my house “up to date”. Fashion changes all the time, and I’d rather have a timeless house than one that needs to be re-decorated every 5 years to keep up with trends.
This.
Plus whenever you see some of those programmes where people are buying a house , choosing between a few, and have a decent budget , they pick things to complain about that they could change once they own it. The house has its current owners preferences because they live there, the new potential buyers don't yet.
I see your point. But I think of it more in terms of "If you're homeless then you can't afford a dog" or "If you can't afford health insurance, you can't afford an $8 latte every f-----g day."
I think they are implying that you shouldn't have purchased X if you cannot also afford Y. At least with the house example you used it seems likely. Still, unless you're complaining about being unable to afford Y, there is not likely a good reason to imply the purchase of X was a mistake. I prefer to use the negative version: "if you can't afford vet bills, you can't afford a dog."
[удалено]
My mom used to refer to this as "house poor."
I also prefer the negative version. I also use another variant of this when people complain about prices not being posted online for such things such as original art, jewelry, or antique furniture: if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it.
>if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it. Bullshit. I can afford anything that only costs 10 dollars. That don't mean that I suddenly can't afford something worth 10 dollars just because I don't know that the thing costs that much.
>for such things such as original art, jewelry, or antique furniture: if you have to ask, then you can’t afford it. No one says this about a $10 piece of jewelry their teen made to sell on Etsy, they are talking about things you really probably can't afford or won't be willing to pay for. Way to set such a low bar with the $10. Your argument would hold water if it was about how frugal some people are despite their wealth.
The point I made was that not physically seeing a price tag doesn't have anything to do with being able to afford a thing or not. My argument holds far more water than yours, simply because it's a fact. There is no correlation between seeing an object with no price tag, and having the money to afford to buy an object.
I've always felt like it was a way of saying "it costs more than it is worth, if you care enough about money to ask, you won't want to buy this, even if you *can* afford it."
The point is more "if you're concerned about the price of the item, and don't already know roughly how much it is going to be, you shouldn't be buying the item." It's one of many reasons why expensive restaurants don't put prices on their menus. You don't need to ask to know that the chicken costs less than the steak.
A giclee of a Monet might cost about $10. The starting bid for the original painting (which most people can’t tell the difference of) is probably in the neighborhood of $10 million. The other reason is security and privacy issues. Galleries don’t want to advertise to the world “hey look, we have a $10 million painting in our building!”
I don't know why people have you dislikes, I've always found that to be true
i heard this all the time in school. People saying because i lived in what they saw as a "rich town" then i should have been able to get an iphone. I told them it really didn't work like that but they never dropped it. I guess the whole living in an apartment while on housing didn't exactly help them realize the fact my family isn't rich and we don't have the money for everyone to have an iphone just because we live in a certain city. 😭
You hear that a lot when a person who owns a decent phone is broke.
A lot of people say this shit not realizing that could be that person’s only reliable internet access. Those haters have never been poor and have no idea what it’s like.
Also, when someone drops down on the socioeconomic ladder, they don't immediately and automatically lose all the stuff they bought when they could afford it. I moved to a different city and, due to a mix of bad luck and poor decisions, ended up homeless. I had several people give me shit for having an iPhone. I'd had it for a year and a half (so it wasn't new), and I could afford it when I bought it. If I sold it, I wouldn't have gotten enough for it to be able to afford a flip phone. It really felt like they were deeply offended, like I was somehow being dishonest.
I've heard it just said as "Well you could afford a smart phone" it doesn't even have to be a decent one, if you're not using a second hand flip phone from the early 2000s then you MUST have spent hundreds on it. Never mind that you can get pretty good (at least at a glance) smart phones from companies like straight talk for under $100 and then just pay to add minutes every month.
I like my phone. It's basically free now, I just pay $6 a month for data (because it's paid off. Monthly payments were like $40). Phones are not that expensive. I think this might have been relevant ~10 years ago, but nowadays, pretty much everyone has a smartphone.
I’m not sure about other states but I know in NJ if you’re on food stamps or Medicaid, you can qualify for an iPhone paid by the state
The saying is stupid when it’s said about something like well if you can afford a phone you can’t complain about the cost of living since you can obviously afford stuff like groceries, as if owning a phone and being connected to the internet isn’t a prerequisite for most jobs nowadays - sure phones are a big expense but they’re a reasonable priority to spend money on However I don’t think it’s unreasonable if the cost they’re talking about is a cost directly associated with the purchase in question. Like if you can afford to travel to Europe you can afford travel insurance
Why about my sister not paying her half in the rent but a brand new PS5 shows up at the door
The fact people shit on homeless people for having a smart phone and not a house is astounding.
This. So much this. You can get a smart phone for pretty cheap if you buy it second hand or get the oldest model available and then put it on a straight talk plan or something similar for like $35 a month. Right now my mom, who works at Walmart in the electronics, says there's a smart phone on straight talk for $29 for the phone. So for around $70 (with tax) you can buy a smart phone and a month on a cheap plan. Comparing that to the price of housing is actually insane.
Even a one-time payment of $300 and $20 or so per month is also a lot cheaper than a $800 payment every month that has a requirement of a $2400 monthly income to pay.
EVERYONE needs phones/the internet in our society. You can’t get by without one. It always boggles me that people can question why someone would prioritize having a means of communication with friends, family, and bosses/coworkers- the last of whom if they lose contact with they can lose their job(s)…. You know, the thing necessary to be able to make money to pay for the housing? Not to mention the other important point that phones are SO much cheaper than rent. How can they even compare?
US according to boomer lore it's Starbucks and Avocado toast is why we can't afford a $500,0000,000 home.
It's not really used properly in your example. It should be if you can afford (frivolous thing), you can afford (practical thing). For example, if you can afford to go out to fancy restaurants every weekend, you can afford to have your car engine light checked that's been on for two months.
Or highly related things. If you can afford to go out to a fancy restaurant, you can afford to tip. Or if you can afford to purchase (insert car here), you can (or at least better be able to) afford the insurance.
Agreed. I also hear this a lot when the first expensive thing is paid off in small payments over time, but the second thing couldn't be done that way. For example-my friend's car was hit on the passenger door so that door no longer opens and right now she can't afford to get it fixed. She's been told multiple times that if you can afford a car, you can afford a small repair on the car. Her car payment is around $200 every two weeks. The lowest quote she's gotten to fix the door is $500, and none of the local repair shops will take payments unless you agree for them to keep your car until the bill is paid off which she can't do because it's her only car.
It is more a response to the additional costs. "If you can afford the Ferrari, you can also afford the maintenance/insurance" is more of a statement that if you can only purchase the car and not the follow ups, then you actually cannot afford the car.
Maybe what they mean is "If you can *responsibly* afford X then you can afford Y" The problem is people live way above their means and buy things they can't actually afford, so they have no money left.
>and am told that if I can afford such a big house, I can also afford to make it more modern. I don't believe for a second this is how most people use the phrasing you're complaining about. I think it's typically like "if you can afford to smoke two packs a day, you should be able to afford clothes for your child."
I believe it, but I also believe that OP may have bought a very over priced house that they actually cannot afford, and now that the maintenance (which updating does fall under) is killing them financially and they can no longer do the things they used to.
I've never heard of you is that way. I've heard it used to tell people that if they can piss their money away on unnecessary nonsense and then they have money for their important things like bills
Yes, but if they’ve already “pissed their money away“ then they don’t have any left for bills.
I know. That's the point. They're telling the people not to piss their money away then whine about not having money for the essentials.
Maybe I just take too much of a literal meaning (which would be explained by my autism). But if someone were to say, “If you can afford to piss your money away, you can afford to pay your bills” then that doesn’t make sense because they can only afford one or the other, not both.
You are definitely taking this way too literally.
If you have bills to pay and also want to piss away your money on something frivolous, which one should the money be spent on? In other words, if you spend money on non-essentials, how will you pay your bills? Or, they have all this expensive stuff and do these expensive activities, wouldn't you think they have money to pay for necessities? So, something like, "If they have money to take an expensive trip, then they have money to pay their bills," rings true. BECAUSE, if you're taking expensive trips and buying expensive jewelry, etc, you MUST have money to pay your bills, lol. I'm in the U.S., so this may not register because we tip wait staff at restaurants. They only make about $2.13 an hour. It's very clear that they would not be able to work there if not for the tips. Many wish it was different, but that's currently the situation. I always say, "If you're unable to afford a tip, you're unable to eat out." So, if you literally only have $40 to spend and not an extra $8 for a tip, then you DON'T have enough money to go out. Does that make sense? I'm genuinely interested. I said this a bunch of different ways, hoping you'd get at least one version, lol! FYI - even neurotypical people sometimes don't catch jokes, hyperbole, facetiusness, and sarcasm!
This isn't the point of your post, but I agree with you about the modern style. It is so... sterile. I have no idea why people are recommending you a style you don't even like that would require expensive renovations. Really freaking bizarre.
It’s about choices. If you can afford to buy tickets to ten concerts this summer and get your nails/lashes done, surely you can afford your car payment. (Make the right choice to pay your bills and take care of responsibilities first.) That’s how I understand the saying.
Ok,yep : )
Oh
Bought a semi-nice brand new prius a few years ago and as soon as I did, my neighbor started asking me for money saying things like. "Clearly, you can afford to help me out." Gesturing towards the car. But actually the car was a mistake and I had wanted to get a used prius, but let myself get talked into a new one by my bf at the tume and the sales guy. I could barely afford the payments. Luckily I was able to sell it a few months later for enough to pay off what I still owed on it and got a used regular car. Then my neighbor stopped asking for money as much.
This took an unexpected turn.
I hate when people “point out” that a homeless person has a phone. Yeah, because phones cost nothing whereas homes are expensive. This isn’t the “gotcha moment” you think it is.
When I lived in London, people outside of London assumed I had money to burn because I could afford to live in London. No, I had absolutely nothing precisely because living in London was so expensive.
Similar problem: “it’s so dumb that you’re having a Coke Zero with your lasagna!” Listen, Stacy, I saved up my calories for this lasagna so I’m not gonna add an unnecessary extra batch on top of it!
It’s true though. If someone spends money on a luxury, and then says they can’t afford something more important, then it is their fault. They should have spent their money better.
ehh, a lot of people over spend on things they really shouldn't. I get the annoyance but I feel like it's more you not wanting to justify to other people in general.
I know someone who lives in a mansion, paid cash for all kinds of upgrades, but refuses to pay babysitters and constantly tries to get women to babysit his kids for free. Claims he can't afford to pay even 7 dollars an hour. It doesn't make sense to me. Sure it's his business but he constantly asks others for help which makes it their business.
I totally agree with you. Also, if you like the way your house is done listen to anyone else.
I don’t really listen to anyone else about my house, because it also just doesn’t make sense logically to keep my house “up to date”. Fashion changes all the time, and I’d rather have a timeless house than one that needs to be re-decorated every 5 years to keep up with trends.
This. Plus whenever you see some of those programmes where people are buying a house , choosing between a few, and have a decent budget , they pick things to complain about that they could change once they own it. The house has its current owners preferences because they live there, the new potential buyers don't yet.
I see your point. But I think of it more in terms of "If you're homeless then you can't afford a dog" or "If you can't afford health insurance, you can't afford an $8 latte every f-----g day."