TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

The double whammy of being poor – making less and getting charged more

47 点作者 ericglyman超过 9 年前

11 条评论

wildmusings超过 9 年前
A few problems with this article:<p>1. The absurd proposition that it&#x27;s unjust that you will find a better deal if you spend more time looking for one. Of course you will.<p>2. The claim that e-commerce is a regressive tax on the poor because purchases are bigger percentage of the poor&#x27;s income. You can say the same thing about any purchase. A burger is a bigger percentage of a poor person&#x27;s income than a rich person&#x27;s income.<p>Paribus is providing a great service, but this is a marketing&#x2F;PR article pretending to be serious economic commentary and analysis. It&#x27;s just hopping on the bandwagon of a narrative that&#x27;s politically en vogue (that the world is stacked against the poor).
评论 #10249453 未加载
评论 #10249352 未加载
jacquesm超过 9 年前
There are many examples of this and some even more direct: poor people have to deal with debt collectors more frequently out of necessity and as a result end up paying both their original debt+whatever the debt collectors tack on.<p>In many cases the added on part is larger than the original debt.<p>Then there&#x27;s buying quality products that last longer by the wealthy and crappy products that need to be replaced (far) more frequently by the poor and many more examples like these.
评论 #10249716 未加载
评论 #10249196 未加载
bane超过 9 年前
I was reasonably poor once (even did a stint homeless living out of a motel).<p>The basic assertion: you make less and end up being charged more is in a sense &quot;correct&quot;.<p>For example: if you&#x27;re poor, you&#x27;ll probably shop at a discount retailer and buy discount or knockoff clothes, which will fall apart and need replacing faster than if you had just bought more expensive clothes. Over time, the replacement costs will add up and you&#x27;ll &quot;pay more&quot; for clothes.<p>Another example: if you buy in bulk, you can get some items cheaper, but poor people tend to buy in small quantities (e.g. cigarette and alcohol &quot;singles&quot; are a phenomenon that only exist in poor areas for example)<p>This all sounds kind of stupid, but there&#x27;s a rationale for it that makes sense from the inside, here&#x27;s a scenario:<p>I just paid rent, I have $100 left in my bank account and payday isn&#x27;t for 2 weeks. I work a physical labor job and my work boots need replacement. Do I?<p>a) Buy the $29.99 on sale boots at Walmart and hope they last for a couple months?<p>b) Buy the $259.99 boots at the high-end boot store and they&#x27;ll last for a couple years?<p>c) Buy the $84.99 boots at the discount shoe store and they&#x27;ll probably last for 6 months to a year?<p>Of course the answer is a). This leaves me with $50 to eat on for two weeks. I can&#x27;t afford b) no matter what so it may as well not exist and c) leaves me starving before payday.<p>You count pennies when you&#x27;re poor, you know exactly how much small amounts of things cost because you spend all your time buying small amounts of things and balancing out the bottom few rungs of Maslow&#x27;s Hierarchy of Needs against your daily purchases.<p>Getting out of this cycle is <i>very</i> hard. It&#x27;s not like you can save up enough to be worthwhile. Even with $5&#x2F;mo left over at the end of every month, it takes 52 months to save up to buy the b) boots.<p>This means also that you live in a constant state of emergency. Literally <i>everything</i> is an emergency -- and this short circuits your ability to prioritize and make what seems like rational decisions. It also means that whatever spare money&#x2F;time you have you may as well spend on stupid bullshit because you&#x27;ve convinced yourself it won&#x27;t make any difference anyway.<p>It really is a vicious cycle.
评论 #10251272 未加载
yummyfajitas超过 9 年前
The article misrepresents the federal reserve study it uses to make it&#x27;s case. It claims that the federal reserve study implies rich &quot;have more leisure time so they get to know prices and deals well&quot;.<p>But this is nonsense. The federal reserve study doesn&#x27;t study rich and poor at all - it studies the unemployed vs employed. Specifically, the article shows that <i>unemployed</i> people spend less time shopping than <i>employed</i> people. Is the article really claiming that unemployed people have less leisure time?<p>In fact, the article actually claims that reduced working time causes a (small) drop in shopping time.
评论 #10249715 未加载
vacri超过 9 年前
Characterising this as &quot;the 1%&quot; is a disservice to the concept. You don&#x27;t have to be &quot;1%&quot; wealthy to do what&#x27;s in the article.<p>Also, I question <i>&quot;The wealthy build a better sense of when prices are low and deals are good.&quot;</i> - the poor are very aware of how much their food costs, for example. Wealthier people aren&#x27;t, because they&#x27;re not counting pennies. A question illustrating this, taken from Yes Minister: &quot;How much is a pound of margarine?&quot; The <i>really</i> wealthy, the 1%, aren&#x27;t going to have a good idea. But the poor are aware of the costs of their staple foods.<p>The underlying point of the article isn&#x27;t a bad one, but extrapolating &quot;this dude orders clothes sight-unseen from his smartphone every two weeks&quot; into &quot;the poor have it so tough&quot; is a strange path to take.
refurb超过 9 年前
Did I miss something? The deal was only offered via the website and not via mobile. What does that have to do with being poor?
评论 #10249320 未加载
评论 #10249291 未加载
评论 #10249297 未加载
评论 #10249303 未加载
评论 #10249601 未加载
ams6110超过 9 年前
Paribus: I&#x27;ve never heard of you. I don&#x27;t know what you do. You have no link to your website on your blog.
评论 #10249279 未加载
frogpelt超过 9 年前
The example I&#x27;ve noticed is the poor person who doesn&#x27;t have means for transportation will usually go to the closest source for staple items, like a convenience store. Milk and bread are 50-100% at these stores versus a traditional grocery store and they rarely put things on sale.
geoffwoo超过 9 年前
Cool to see screenshots of price discrimination in practice
评论 #10248590 未加载
评论 #10249233 未加载
shkkmo超过 9 年前
I agree with the point that this article makes and think we should be discussing the questions article tries to raise.<p>However, the article is a poorly written piece of PR. It makes several mathematical errors, mis-represents the study on shopping time, and fails to provide any evidence to back up it&#x27;s critical point of &quot;e-commerce today acts like a regressive tax&quot;.<p>Why is this crap on HN?
thadd超过 9 年前
Inflation- the secret tax