- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/8485106
Definitely has nothing to do with sky-rocketing food prices in our capitalist hellscape.
Looking for the original link still…
Edit, found it:
https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-gen-z-splurge-groceries-spending-inflation-gen-z-boomers-2024-4
Another title could be “McKinsey & Company asks tone-deaf question and fails to recognize Millennial sarcasm.”
Love how even the examples make no sense, Like $130 for a week and a half is what like $12 a day? Like what even is a fancy soda or drink in this example? and for a 10 or 11 day stretch $35 on protein bars is the cost of a coffee a day. Hell I wish I could feed myself for only $12 a day.
"Gen Z, meanwhile, said they often choose high-quality snacks and beverages, which makes for expensive grocery bills.
One 23-year-old Gen Zer told Business Insider by text that he spends about $130 on groceries for a week and a half. “Fancy sodas and drinks” and “random snacks at Trader Joe’s” account for the bulk of the bill. He also said he spends about $35 on protein bars."
so, somebody lives with their parents and spends their cash on snacks. Makes sense.
If they don’t pay for actual groceries then 12$ a day sounds like a lot for snacks.
And if they do pay for groceries $12 a day is not abnormal, $4 a meal (assuming they are having 3 a day) is not some highfalutin lifestyle.
From the article it doesn’t seem like anyone failed to recognize sarcasm. It mentions how times are tough so the “splurge” target is much more mundane and low-cost.
“What do you splurge on?”
“Splurge? If I feel really wealthy, I let myself have a more expensive snack.”
Seems you missed it, too.
It comes with bitter humour for sure but the whole thing isn’t some sarcastic joke. And the article and surveyors understood it as what it is. Kids are poor as shit so can’t splurge on almost anything. One thing people spend more than necessary are fancier snacks but that’s about it.
The article is outrage baiting though which is a tactic that always works.
Ah, I see. You aren’t actually arguing with me. Got it.