When verbal acrobatics rule the day
When monk tries to justify a high living lifestyle of a millionaire as acceptable in present day, when words were twisted or given new meanings to justify the unjustifiable to the point of being deceitful, it won't last very long when the truth will come crashing down on the philanderers. The people were told to live within their means, buy things only if they can afford while on the other hand people wanting to raise their million dollar salary because a Lamborghini is now priced beyond their reach. What kind of logic are we led to believe in? Put it in simple layman lingo, if you have $1, find what $1 can buy and be happy with it, you losers. But for me, when my toy is now $2m instead of $1m, I want my salary raise to get my toy. Get it? That is my logic. This is the meaning of affordability to me. I make my income affordable, to buy anything I want. For the losers, your income is fixed and you get what it can get for you. The meaning of affordable is being stretched, logically of course, to mean different things to different people. It is like shifting the goal post every year, today here tomorrow there. Let's see how this twisted definition of affordable means over time. Once, a 3 room flat can be paid up with a mortgage of 10 years by a single income worker. That was affordable. Then it needs a 20 year mortgage. A new kind of affordable definition. Without realising it, the meaning of affordable becomes a 20 year mortgage to be paid by 2 incomes. And it went on to a 30 year mortgage with 2 incomes. Still affordable, sure, correct sir. Soon affordability will be defined by 2 incomes from two generations or 4 incomes, including the parent's incomes to buy a 3 room flat. It will still affordable. What else is new?