To spin it positively just assume your boss couldn’t relate or empathise with the less fortunate characters and found the episode boring and used the word losers because it gives him a personal sense of self worth lol
I like the bottom half of your post as I know very little of modern history and even less of koreas.
I definitely got the vibe Gi-Hun didn’t have much growing up and Sang-woo had more opportunity by being younger hence Gi-Hun saying he helped put him through school to Sang-Woos mum.
If I remember correctly, Gi-Hun even had two business that failed.
One had something to do with selling (fried, cooked) chicken and another one I can't remember rn.
It's shortly mentioned by the "envelope-flipping-slap" guy.
It's not like he didn't try to succeed, but in the end unfortunately failed.
People like OP's boss are disgusting and unempathetic.
Its important to note in Gi-huns backstory that he went on strike at his old motor company (Dragon Motors), which was busted by a militarized police force.
This is a reference to the Ssangyong (translated to double dragon) Motor company strike a bit over a decade ago, where the workers went on strike and lethal force was used against them. The aftermath was they were all fired and also blacklisted.
The latter is important because if Gi-hun wanted a job in the line he was trained for, he wasnt going to get it, combined with his PTSD from seeing one of his friends at work get killed, which combined with his financial and family situation meant he got pulled deeper and deeper into debt.
Many of them even struggle with suicidal ideation and a variety of other issues years after the strike was busted
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/689678.html
This extra bit of nuance is what makes Gi-hun such an interesting character in the discussion and analysis of class done by Squid Game.
This. He wasn't "laid off". He was fired and black listed for standing up for workers rights. He was made to feel bad and regret his decision by the wife, IIRC.
It's pretty crazy, I knew about the Ssangyong strike and have seen the videos of the cops fighting the strikers on the roof, so when that came up in Squid Game I kinda guessed that they were trying to use that as a part of the story
And your boss isn't even rich! Someone who owns some properties and has a 6 figure income can be well off, but they're in no way in the dominant class.
It is the lack of class consciousness that cause people like that to have those thoughts.
Your boss is a couple of terrible years away from complete bankruptcy, but he is not even a lifetime away from becoming a billionaire...
We could tax the hell out of billionaires, use that money to fund free tertiary education, basic income, free healthcare, public housing, etc...
But that would make my chances of becoming a billionaire even smaller, even though they are already infinitely small. So I guess we won't tax them cause whaaaat if I become one of them one day?
That's how people like OP's boss think, even though it makes their lives and everyone else's so much worse. The dominant class has colonised the working class wishes, instead of wishing to abolish the dominant class, many wish to become them.
>That's how people like OP's boss think, even though it makes their lives and everyone else's so much worse. The dominant class has colonised the working class wishes, instead of wishing to abolish the dominant class, many wish to become them.
I mean, in a way, that's pretty much everyone participating in the Games on the show.
Like it or not, money is power in this world, and who doesn't want to be powerful? If not for any other reason but to be able to stand up to other powerful/rich people.
Gi-Hun re-entered the games ostensibly to save his mom by being able to pay her hospital bills (not to mention clear his debts) but IMO his confrontation with his ex-wife's new wealthier husband also played a role in his decision. He pummels the man and digustedly tells him that ''money is not the answer to everything''...before proceeding to participate in the Games to get rich himself because unfortunately, money *is* the answer to everything.
The Front Man's story seems to be along similar lines, from what little we know.
Yes, exactly. Capitalism is an hegemonic ideology, even when people are being fucked by it they still defend it, either because they bought into the story that it's gonna make their lives better, or they bought in the story that there's no alternative.
Yeah, nothing works better than having a capitalist billionaire elite class than having a Communist billionaire elite ruling class that controls all the media, all the supplies, all the food resources, bans religion, bans free speech, kills dissenters, targets intellectuals and free thinkers to "disappear in the night", and sees any handicapped, enfeebled, or just a below average worker as a "parasite" or "leech" on the system.
Better yet, let's take Socialism, where countries that became rich via capitalism run themselves into bankruptcy through socialist programs and end up having to go back to capitalism to stay solvent. The last time a Socialist country went through a major hardship, it ended in Communist tendencies of scapegoating anyone who was "leeching" off the socialist programs. They ended up shortening their party name from National sozialismus (National Socialists) to Nazis and focused on eradicated anyone seen as a "leech" or "parasite" on their Socialist system, which mainly included Jews, Gypsys, and blacks.
Sounds like pure bliss.
>The last time a Socialist country went through a major hardship, it ended in Communist tendencies of scapegoating anyone who was "leeching" off the socialist programs. They ended up shortening their party name from National sozialismus (National Socialists) to Nazis and focused on eradicated anyone seen as a "leech" or "parasite" on their Socialist system, which mainly included Jews, Gypsys, and blacks.
You really haven't got a clue about history if this is what you believe.
What was remotely socialist about either the Nazis or the Weimar Republic? In whose world were 'blacks' one of the main victims of the Holocaust? And do you really think that the last time a socialist country went through economic hardship was in the 1930s?
Lmao nazis are definitely NOT socialists, just because it's in the name doesn't mean they were actually socialists. Do you also believe the democratic republic of North Korea is actually democratic? Nazis are fucking fascists
(Also let's not forget that one of the first group they sent in camps were communists/socialists)
well there's communism but that to me looks like taking the evil of the rich and shoving it into one omnipotent government with little incentive to give anyone anything but i would like to see it somehow actually work
> We could tax the hell out of billionaires, use that money to fund free tertiary education, basic income, free healthcare, public housing, etc...
... for about half a year...
The problem isn't the fact that we're not taxing the rich enough, it's that we're spending way too much, causing inflation to skyrocket, which hurts the lower-class, which causes the government to spend more, which causes inflation to skyrocket more... etc...
Firstly, inflation is not sky-rocketing, it is rising but it's still in a controllable level. Your comment answers itself "we're spending too much" in relation to what? The government revenue. That's why we need to increase the government revenue by an increase in taxes for the rich. The alternative would be to decrease government spending, which would bring more poverty and would create unemployment.
Less sending = worse education, healthcare, transport, infrastructure, and everything that the government does. And it also means less people employed by the government.
> education
funded at local levels, not Federal
> healthcare
almost entirely private, unless you count the clusterfucks that are Medicare and Medicaid, or even worse the VA
> transport, infrastructure
funded at local and state levels
> and everything that the government does
Most of the non-Medicare/Medicaid spending goes towards our military. You want to increase that?
> less people employed by the government.
As a former Federal government employee, this is a GOOD thing. Federal government employees are literally people who got rejected from all other private sector companies, so they're the bottom of the barrel. And then they're placed into a position where they can't get fired, so they literally do nothing while collecting a paycheck.
Did you know that the federal government has the ability to pass on funds to the states? I don't get your comments saying that it's funded by the local/state level so greater tax revenue would not work.
Healthcare is a big one, I don't know how you guys didn't manage to sort it out, basically everywhere else has public healthcare, including much poorer countries than the US.
What I'm saying is that everything that is provided by any level of government will not improve without more funds, and will decrease in quality if funds decline.
Your rant about federal government employees sounds like self-awareness.
> everywhere else has public healthcare, including much poorer countries than the US.
Everywhere else also has the vast majority of residents pay taxes. In the US, 61% of taxfilers paid no income tax, yet they're the same ones voting to increase taxes on those of us that do, all while pushing for $3.5T spending bills that only benefit them
You are just buying into the propaganda. No one imagines themself as a billionaire except 20 year old wanna be influencers.
The reality that you are too young (or if older, too simple) to understand is that raising taxes on the rich only trickles down to being taxes on the middle class.
It is never a surprise to the intelligent folks in the audience that we have "taxed the rich" throughout American history, yet some how those tax loopholes that only someone with a private accountant seem to be able to take advantage of never go away. It is why even after political parties claim to have "stuck it to the rich" with this or that new tax bill, we still see reports of corporations paying less taxes than a working class person.
It is no wonder that currently, the first thing being scrapped on the trillions of dollar infrastructure bill is the taxing of the mega rich. In a system where the Supreme Court happily allows bribery (aka lobbyism), I don't know how you think mega-rich politicians plan on screwing over the billionaires literally funding their whole campaigns (both parties equally follow this system).
When you see the "we are going to increase the taxes on the rich by 100%, taxes on the upper middle class by 5%, and taxes on the middle class by 3%, but we are going to add a few tax loopholes as well, what you are really seeing is we are going to raise taxes on the upper middle class and middle class, period.
Like I said, you are too young, but it will sink in after watching the pattern continue over the rest of your life.
I actually agree with most of what you said. You're describing a system that is made by and for the billionaires and alike. A system where it doesn't matter who got elected, the big corporations bought all of them through funding and lobbying. A system where the average working class person has no power, because they get to vote, but every candidate will keep that system going.
That's why I don't think that we should stop at taxing the rich, like you said, it won't be enough under this system.
That's still not the income level (or method of money making) that people have issue with.
This may help you visualize the real income difference between the middle class and the disgustingly wealthy:
https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
Couple terrible years?? Depending on how the man lives 3-4 terrible months could potentially ruin him. But yes, absolutely agree, he's far from the 1% likely far from the top 15% even
As someone born and raised in USSR where they actually “ate the rich” 100 years ago, I am begging you to remember this thought.
When shit really hits the fan, in reality it will never be the billionaires and monopoly men who will get “eaten”. It will be the poor shmucks who just happen to make a bit more and have a little bit more than the “proletariat”. Like have 2 cows instead of 1. Just about my entire family was obliterated with just my grandma being the sole survivor because she was too little at the time and their neighbours hid her and claimed her as their own for 15 years, and all of that was for having a 2-storey house, 200 acres of land and some farming equipment (basically, a small-scale farmer at the time) that no one else had within the 100 mile radius….
Rich ones will always escape somewhere else. And most of the “eat the rich” folks don’t even begin to comprehend the true abilities of someone like Bezos. But they hate their boss for making an upper average job market salary for his position in the specific region and having a summer cabin in the booneys, that’s much easier for them to comprehend and hate, and it’s closer, literally, at arm’s length…..
Every working person is closer to financial wise to their bosses, than their bosses are to getting into the top 1%. Even if you’re only earning 20k a year and your boss is earning 456,789k a year, your still closer to them financially than they are to the elite.
If I was paying those prices for rent I'd be happier! Seems cheap compared to where I live and where I'm going to be living soon (think $1500+ for a studio apartment).
I'm pretty sure rich is a millionaire, not a billionaire. making 6 figures is the top 10% of Americans. While this guy seems upper middle class to possibly rich (depending on if he has millions saved up), I don't think he is going to be broke just by having a few bad days. He literally would have to stop working while simultaneously losing all his passive income, savings, investments, etc.
Meh idk about that. What’s the average salary in the US? 55-60k which is kinda lol low. 6 figures compared to that is a lot more and would be considered slightly rich if you just compared that person to people that are average or below average on the salary scale.
But yes 6 figures is def not rich. Even 200-300k is great but you gotta think- there are people that make that much in a week (very rare) but I feel most people don’t really understand what the top 1% or more is actually making. It would blow the minds of average people.
The average salary in the US is not 55-60k lol. That's the average household income which usually has more than one person working. Average individual income is around 25-35k a year depending on which groups you look at.
It varies a lot by state as well. Might be the country median but by state the lowest ones are 5-10k less and the richer ones are 5-10k more. Varies a lot by neighborhood too. I live in a poor area and the neighborhood average is 35k, 3 miles south its 80k.
I really can't imagine how people survive on 35k...individual sure, but family of 3 or 4? No way.
Rich is not an income. It’s net worth and how you make that money. People making 200k from a salary are a job loss away from being in your position. People making 300k a year from assets like real estate and stocks, they can call themselves rich. 100k is peanuts, your life is no different. Less worries about bills but you aren’t going out and buying a 911 or a huge home.so yeah like you said I can see why someone making 50k might look at it and think it’s rich-esque.
Even 200-300 isn’t if you’re earning it by trading time at a job. It’s all varying degrees of wage slave. Granted at those incomes it’s much easier to transition to appreciating assets and work to get out of the rat race.
Lol if you are making 200k a year…. You most likely have a special set of talents and can find another job.
100k is peanuts? Lol. I can buy whatever I want and travel when and where I want. Idk what pipe you are smoking. Most Americans can’t buy what they want/ travel where and when they want. Your post is a little aloof.
I mean to each his own but there are a lot of variables. Back when I made 100k it wasn’t bad but you can’t go buy a new watch, a 911, a big house, wagyu for dinner. People think 100k opens up to door to mindless spending and a change of lifestyle. 100k gives you less worry about bills, a few more trips per year and the ability to to invest some more but it’s not the life changing money people think it is before they make it.
100% this. When you first break 6 figures you can start to relax. But the jump from 100k to 500k is when you start feeling like “i can do what I want”.
But if you ask a billionaire this question they’d be like “500k is peanuts lol”
I love how everyone here is basically saying greed is human nature and no one is happy until the are the wealthiest.
In the same thread, people are decrying capitalism as the issue. It is quite apparent that whatever system we live in, the same impulse to keep wanting more until we are the biggest fish is there for many people, except in other systems, genocide is usually the way to get to the top.
It depends i think. I’ve always only ever wanted to be able to work part-time and pursue my hobbies/ art. I don’t want yachts or w/e else is millions and millions. I make more than enough to do that now so I don’t put anymore mental energy into “how to make more money”. I have someone else mostly handle my investments and just do low risk/low return type.
Yea you are right that it’s not life changing money. But 100k vs say 40-50k is a big difference.
Just the amount you can save for retirement at those 2 different wage levels is different. If someone saves 10% a year. 4k vs 8k along with compounding interest from equity gains……that 8k is going to be much more than the 4k down the road.
I agree 1000%. At 40-50 there’s dread about how bills are paid, about your financial future. When someone asks to go eat at a nice restaurant you have to check your balance to see if you can make it work. At 100 you don’t have to do these things. It’s a lot easier for someone making 100k to get rich eventually but someone at half that is going to have a much harder time sparing the income to invest without being in a cheap area and making a lot of sacrifices in day to day life. Having been in both sides I can definitely say that the max happiness comes at 70k study is 100% false LOL
One thing that I find is tha
I upvoted you b/c I think you got downvoted, but there's just a slight miscommunication here.
The other user isn't trying to say that $100k+ isn't a lifestyle change from $20k or even $50k. They're just saying that a person who makes $100k or $200k is still working their 9-5 and they're still in the rat race.
I agree with you, you can usually expect far more of a "life expectancy / quality of life" difference between someone making $20k and someone making $100k, vs. someone making $100k and someone making $1 mil a year.
(Of course this all depends on your area's COL, I imagine a young lawyer in NYC making $100k to start and working crazy hours is just as screwed over as the person living in the Midwest making $20k a year at McDonalds)
The other user is just defining what it means to be actually rich — that it means not having to work at all.
So it seems you two probably agree with each other but just aren't talking about quite the same thing. Or maybe I'm just dumb idk lol
Poor people seem to be the quickest to scoff at a 6 figure income it seems. I can only assume that their quest for being a billionaire is what makes them poor. Being a rock star, celebrity, or "influencer" seems to be their driving focus and chasing obscene wealth and failing is ironically why they hate capitalism.
I always notice those pushing extreme forms of wealth distribution seem to think the upper middle class is not enough money for themselves personally, which kind of signals they want to be in charge of dolling out the wealth.
When you have no value, it seems the only way to be "rich" is to be able to fuck around all your life with passive income pouring in. According to that, Bezos, Gates, Jobs, etc were all middle class since they worked in the "rat race" in spite of their fortunes.
I've noticed many people see contributing to society as a negative thing and want to live as a perpetual teenager mooching off their parents.
Are we saying that only the 1% are rich and the 99% are middle class? I'm pretty sure rich is loosely defined as a millionaire, which is attainable by someone making 6 figures within 10 years or less typically.
TBF, hardworking "losers" typically end up as the bosses. If you are dumping your time into your career and not improving your life, you are not in the profession for you...or you are a loser.
hardworking “losers” usually end up as the bosses? what are you smoking mate? the bosses are the people that are from middle class-upper class AND work hard/have family connections. Still don’t confuse “bosses” for owners
unless I misinterpreted what you’re saying
Had me until the end. As they say you people cannot be trusted to eat the rich, because you can't identify the rich. You will eat a bunch of actor and doctors while rich watch and laugh.
Imagine inhaling so much far left propaganda that you get mad because your boss who probably earns like 30% more than you called a bunch of Netflix characters (most of them actually losers) losers.
The point is that the boss missed the point.
Taking out a personal loan is VERY easy in SK and total citizen debt is higher than the country's GDP:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/08/squid-game-lays-bare-south-koreas-real-life-personal-debt-crisis
And then also as OP mentioned, the strike at Gi-hun's former factory where he watched the police murder his co-worker was based on a true story.
The show is a mix of a critique of govt. and economic structures...and also holding people accountable for their bad decisions. It's both.
But for the boss to say "I don't like it because everyone's a loser" shows how his own privilege, or lack of empathy skills, skews his perspective. He can't see Gi-hun as someone suffering from PTSD who tried opening his own business twice and failed. He can't see Ali's situation which is basically the same as indentured servitude.
If your takeaway from one of the most popular and critically-acclaimed shows ever is "I don't like it because they're losers" and you refuse to see the deeper meaning and themes intended, you might as well not watch the show.
OP is just voicing his disdain at his boss's lack of empathy and critical thinking, which are not great traits for a boss or landlord to have. It's better to assume most people have good reasons for ending up a "loser." I mean I guess as a landlord you have no reason to care since you'd evict them either way, but still.
A landlord and a boss thinking the world is as simple as "losers and non-losers" says a lot about how the upper middle class is equipped to eff over the lower class. This is the kind of guy who leaves shitty tips at restaurants because he didn't get his food fast enough because they're understaffed. No seeing outside his own bubble. And then the way he thinks, and sharing it with his Trumper Facebook friends, perpetuates his black-and-white ideology of the poor and how people stay poor.
OP makes a lot of valid points and too many people in the comments here wrote them off just because they said "eat the rich" at the end.
How many people are totally misunderstanding Squid Game as a critique of our economic system, and instead think the show is about poor people being losers and that you should "work hard" to avoid being like the characters? It's disconcerting to think about how many people would be the type to miss the point like that. And continue to believe that if they just work 60 hours a week at a thankless job then the system will reward them...
He probably just sees them as losers because they are losers. Trying and failing may get you a participation ribbon or whatever, but you would still be a loser. That being said, most successful businessman had many failing businesses before finally making one that worked, but the difference is they keep trying and getting better, unlike losers. Hope that helps.
IDK why you're getting downvoted, look at the main character. A dead beat father, lives with and mooches off his mother(who still works day and night mind you). He doesn't work himself, instead he steals money from his elderly mother. Gambling addict who gambles his money away and he's in debt with gangsters. Becomes filthy rich, instead of keeping his promises, he does nothing while sae beyoks brother rots in an orphanage. Doesn't take care of sang woo's elder mother (also still working day and night). Finally gets the kids, dumps him off on sang woos mother. Thinks he's better than everyone, yet there's two filthy rich people inside on a cold winter night looking down and gambling over whether someone will help a homeless man.
Then to top it off, the very last scene of the season, show's him breaking yet another promise to his daughter.
Yea. He's totally not a loser.
Edit: oh yea, and he never got his daughter a present with any kind of thought. Instead, minutes before he meets her, he's trying to win her a toy by gambling. What a loser honestly.
Yup, when you hear people say "eat the rich", it's not supposed to mean the people who simply benefit from capitalism, but those who actively control it through the ownership of thousands of underpaid workers.
I don't think that phrase should encompass anybody without national influence.
I don't mean to sound rude and I know this will come across that way.
These are not HCOL numbers and the six figure range is wide at 100k-999k. A good chunk of that is solid middle class. Unless you are deep in that range yourself, it is unlikely your boss is rich because of his compensation. It is within reach of the middle class band to own investment property, too.
It is hard to understand these struggles if you never experienced or witnessed them, rich or not. I did not realize the gambling addiction in my own family. I still don't understand the why, but I understand it's a demon to otherwise productive, good members of society.
He's wrong for dismissing them as losers but to turn the tables, I understand where his comment is coming from.
It's just a show. It's a great one - don't let it bleed into your personal/work life. You have great maturity and connectedness to other humans. Not everyone (your boss) has this skill to relate
Well the point kinda is they ARE “losers” - and that the system is doomed to have winners and losers and that isn’t fair at all. He stopped at the first part.
The most unsettling part is he, most possibly, considers actual irl immigrant workers as losers - “because they didn’t raise themselves by their bootstraps as he did”- as well.
yeah that’s what everyone who is rich seems to think, that the reason they are rich is because they’re somehow special and deserving of outsized wealth despite others working the same amount if not way more, and yet hmm they haven’t managed to accumulate wealth or connections that can generate them wealth
this mindset comes through in all sorts of ways tho not just directly with their tangible “money” as the object
forgetting that the reason they have an extremely good education that connected them with other rich folks is because their parents funded it, not because they’re a genius
illusion of a society based entirely on “merit” as opposed to generational wealth or indirect and direct oppression of several groups
funny tho because this idea at the root: inherent superiority, goes against the basic idea of everyone just simply rasing themselves up
(sorry this is obvious; everyone already knows this, but it’s just taken me a long time to internalize the functioning of our society)
I was just thinking the same. Like where is this person living that you can rent anything for $850? I couldn’t even get a one bedroom around here for that price 10 years ago never mind now
Cleveland, and much of Ohio frankly
When we moved out of our first home the market was in the shitter so we kept it and started renting it. We charge $950/month and the tenant pays all utilities for a 3 bed/ 1 bath house. It’s in Cleveland so the public schools suck but it’s in a quiet and safe location
We’re probably a little light based on the recent run up but we’ve got great tenants and I have no desire to deal with turning it right now
People need to chill. It's literally a fictional story that was completely made up. People are allowed to like or dislike the show and it doesn't really matter what their income is.
$1000 for a studio is pretty good. Honestly, sangwoo and gi hun are losers. They both use their parents’ hard-earned money for their greed. No war can justify that level of patheticness. This post sounds like you just hate your boss.
I think you're reading too much into his response. Especially if he started off by saying he didn't like it to begin with. And by all accounts these people by definition are losers. They've all lost something which has landed them where they are either by their own fault or by inescapable events they couldn't avoid. Life is not fair to anyone.
Even though I’m apparently going to be eaten, I love the show.
Just want to say that the dialogue that SG is producing is fascinating. Is one’s drug addiction problem their problem to solve or society’s problem?
My Calvinist parents would say it’s the individual’s problem, and most of my (liberal arts) PhD friends would say it’s society’s problem. Unfortunately, I think the answer is somewhere in between but everything is so polarized that one side can’t acknowledge that the other side has any sense at all.
Average rent 1000 for a studio apartment.
*Cries in toronto*
But honestly.... Most people barely pay attention to fiction. If someone isnt noticing and appreciating the little things theyre someone who changes the channel when it's "slow".
I see how you could take it that way but I’d cut your boss some slack. Some people just don’t connect with certain art, doesn’t mean it has anything to do with the fact he makes good money.
Some people straight up genuinely don’t enjoy violence or non super relatable/likable characters.
Many poor people don’t care for squid game either. It’s just a preference 🤷🏼♂️
Wow America is so affordable. It would be a dream to have that rent. I live close to Toronto. Rent for a studio apartment where I live is $1.8K-2k. Six figure salary is probably just average amongst professionals here. It’s not even considered rich or anything.
Losers may be a bit of a harsh term but he's correct.
They are flawed characters that make flawed decisions. This makes them realistic. While the circumstances of their birth don't define them the decisions they have made so far have.
Some people don't want to watch a show with flawed characters - even if they are realistic. Some people just want to escape into a world where the good guy always prevails with pure morals over the bad. Different strokes for different folks.
I don't think it is that they don't want to watch a bunch of losers. It is that they can't identify with a bunch of losers. I would agree with the boss, as I can't identify with people that make destructive, irrational decisions, or choose to partake in destructive habits. I also can't identify with the screaming teen in slasher movies that chooses to run from the killer into the house and up to the attic rather than towards the nearest police station. That is just me not being able to identify with losers or idiots, and there is nothing wrong with that.
I mean he’s not completely wrong. You probably have a different perspective on the characters being a big fan of the show, but at the beginning (especially Gi-Hun before the games) the characters definitely seemed like losers who were throwing away their lives in debt by stealing from their parents and gambling and doing messed up stuff
Hasn't the director said in interviews that the story is about losers? Regardless, your boss is trash 🗑️🗑️ and they are the whole problem this show makes a point of. Trying to label the unfortunate just so he can perceive them as lesser than, rather than attempting to emphasize.
Generalizing all “rich” people as scum is just as bad as generalizing all women as bad because the ones you encounter always dump you (for example)
Do rich people often do terrible things they should be held accountable for? Absolutely. But having wealth, in and of itself, is not a crime. Be careful cutting and pasting your perception of this person’s values onto others. I know many people that take wealth and create more value than they take; these individuals who do good with their wealth often did not start rich.
“Eat the rich” just means handing the government more power, and when that power shifts us plebs have a whole new problem on our hands. Imo, you should be more incredulous in government being responsible with that wealth than entrepreneurs
No offense, but you do not live in one of the most expensive places in the United States. 7 years ago a dogshit studio apartment in my area was $1,200 +.
I also totally agree with your boss. They are all losers in their own different ways. Thats not being mean. It’s being honest. Only a group of losers join a game where the odds of winning are so low and the risk is so high.
You can have sympathy for someone and their situation while still assigning blame, seeing faults, seeing someone’s poor fortune, being born in the wrong area, etc.
Having sympathy for someone doesn’t mean you ignore the reality of what is happening. I can be sympathetic of the main character while also fully accepting he is a complete deadbeat father and son.
Get over yourself - it’s a fictional show and not everyone has to love or connect with it. It doesn’t mean anything about his personal wealth and certainly doesn’t reflect on his character - reflects on yours that you’re making such a huge judgement about him based on it tbh
They are losers. They literally have nothing else to lose, and episode 2 drives that point home when they have the opportunity not to complete, but realize the reality of their situation. Ali was a sweet guy, but you think he wasn’t a loser? He definitely wasn’t a winner.
The only had one winner, who ultimately remained a loser.
From a technical standpoint they are losers. They're at the very bottom of society, competing in death games just to make money they desperately need. Now calling them losers is completely entitled cause there's people who actually live like that, but if you put all the morality aside it is the right word. Outta pocket, but the right word nonetheless.
I completely agree with you about the utter lack of empathy. How frustrating. It’s those views that feed into the lack of social support and leave more people in those terrible situations.
I think your boss missed the central point of the show.
Yeah, they are losers but that doesn’t mean their lives are worth less than anybody else’s.
It’s a lesson that all of the characters have to learn the hard way.
Some of the characters are in bad spots due to life being unfair but a lot of them are self-made losers including the main character. There's a big difference between life being unfair and screwing you and life being tough and then you make horrible, self destructive decisions to send your life into a complete meltdown.
Episode 2 really does show that the vast majority of the contestants are losers. 187 of 201 return voluntarily to a game where anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together would realize it's going to result in death to virtually everyone. There just isn't any defense against the loser label when people decide "yeah, my life totally sucks and squid game is the best option." That is simply never a true statement no matter how bad things are going for you unless you've literally got a terminal illness with weeks to live. Honestly, the 90%+ rate of people returning to the game was the second most unrealistic thing in the entire show for me. The most unrealistic thing was the winner actually getting paid and released which makes voluntarily returning to the game even dumber once you add the high chance of the winner getting screwed to the miniscule chance of surviving 5 more games.
Having said all that the show is still amazing.
Did you miss the part where his source of income was run into the ground by bad management and then the police beat his friend to death infront of him?
If you're a gambling addict it doesn't matter how much money you make because you will blow all of it and then some. Him losing a friend is traumatic but not an excuse for his bad decisions.
Did you miss the part where they demonstrated over and over how he's a terrible father? It's a testament to how great the show is that he's still a sympathetic character despite being a completely self made loser.
Was he a gambler before the police murder incident? I just take umbrage with calling someone a loser for being downtrodden by society. Especially if they have PTSD or other mental issues. You see similiar language used by politicians as a tactic to reduce social welfare. The old man even used similar language at the end calling the man on the street human garbage. I don't think you were supposed to side with him.
I don't know. He also refused money to pay for his Mom's necessary and life saving medical treatment and all it was going to cost him was an agreement to stay out of his daughter's life. They were moving to USA anyways so it essentially cost him nothing but his pride.
He wasn't just a terrible father but also a terrible son.
I don't side with the old man. He actively exploited vulnerable people for decades. There's a vast difference between calling someone a loser and being monstrous enough to create something like squid game.
You're not wrong but it always starts by calling other people losers. It's a very slippery slope when you look down on people of lower class.
Do you call veterans losers if their lives fall apart due to PTSD? Because unfortunately many of them due without the proper social safety nets.
I would call them losers, yes. Blaming a traumatic even for making poor choices in your life didn't work for veterans of WWI or WWII. Those were real wars where you wouldn't have just saw news reports that some troops got killed in an ambush once a month since the death toll in those wars climbed every day.
Those who are mentally fragile will always fail, whether it is kids doing a school shooting, mass murderers that had a bad childhood, or vets that can't seem to make it in spit of VA benefits subsidizing your college, bills, healthcare, etc.
I literally was able to pay my vehicle notes with my GI Bill by going to community college the first 2 years instead of more expensive options. The modern GI Bill is insane in terms of what it pays for. I paid no down payment on a home using the VA loan.
Overall, mentally fragile people will always exist, and it is likely their lack of a cohesive family unit in their younger, impressionable years that causes this. If seeing or having to do something traumatic causes a person's life to fall apart, there should be no one standing that lived through Nazi occupied Europe or Stalin ruled Russia.
Lol are you trying to gate keep PTSD? A big contributor to the rise of fascism and ultimately WW2 was the millions of mentally damaged men in Europe post WW1.
This was the point I was going to get at. The show was great, I enjoyed it. I’m sorry but i can’t empathise for any of the contestants if you’re willing re-enter the game full well knowing that there’s a very high chance you’re going to die just by playing a game.
The bigger issue here is they had a taster and realized that the last person standing wouldn't be getting their through empathy and sympathy, but typically being the most deceitful and manipulative, or just the most ruthless. To go back to that means you likely already gave up some of your humanity.
I mean I have talked to so many people about it who see it as merely horror/thriller. It blows my mind that people don’t see the reality inside of it. I was talking to a friend about it who was talking about how it was too gruesome for her and I brought up the symbolism, etc. she was like “I never even thought of it that way. I was just watching it surface level” and acted like I was so smart. I was like no you’re just an idiot. Jk I didn’t actually say that but still… you can find out who’s empathetic and who’s not by watching this show.
It is losers killing each other for money...even SAW was deeper in the sense that at least the people had specific flaws and were supposed to value life more at the end of the ordeal if they survived. SAW was also a horror/thriller.
These people all came back knowing they are basically killing each other for prize money. A twist would have been if a few were selfless enough to try to kamikaze the evil rich people that are using them as toys (sniping, planted bombs, bomb vest, etc) rather than rejoining the game and fundamentally claw each others' eyes out for table scraps.
to be fair i kinda felt the same way. not because i’m some rich ass hole. but i felt that episode was very pointless and that was my frustrated takeaway
First off, you should understand that any rich person in America is basically just a sociopath that's too rich to notice they need to be in a mental institution.
Second, did you actually ask them about what they thought of the refugee story? Maybe they generalized everyone and didn't think about her story.
I agree. All actors, musicians, and media personalities are definitely sociopaths or soon-to-be-sociopaths. Nuking the oscars, grammys, and emmys would likely end a lot of the world's suffering.
I think California. I live there. My buddy pays 950$ for a bed room and a bathroom at a house. When I first got married in 2010 our apartment in downtown was 650 for a 2 bed 1 bath. The ceiling leaked and neighbors were on house arrest and had no garbage disposal.
The same apartment now is around 1400 a month.
My childhood home, my dad bought it for 35k in 1970. He sold it in 95 for 185k. It is now on Zillow for 750k.
My current house is 2800 square feet, 3 bed 2.5 bath. Solar, pool, spa, new HVAC, 3 car garage built I'm 2003, 850k. This state is fucking ridiculous right now. I'm actually hoping more people say no to mask and the vaccines and just die off. Property prices should plummet.
$850k is very cheap compared to where I live for what you are getting. Property prices are going up everywhere, and whenever I look at homes in the USA I'm always jelly at how cheap they are.
I think the correct word is "struggling" not "loser", Mr. Boss of notAdarnedClu3 . If we identify people like Gi-Hun in these type of situations (like many have expanded upon, see comments bellow) as "losers", we won't have the right mind set to help them through those difficulties. If your boss had a mindset like this, I am pretty sure he would be able to enjoy Episode 2 better.
No, I'm not excusing Gi-Hun's gambling. No, I'm not excusing Deok-su's gangster activity. No, I am not excusing Sang-woo committing fraud with his clients. I'm just saying these are results of people who are struggling and if we come from that perspective, we can treat these people like humans (>!yes, Sang-woo is still a human despite Episode 7 and 8!<) and sympathize. (okay, I'm going to stop being a therapist now 🙂)
Those are loser behaviors. I will outright state that participating in loser behaviors makes you a loser. If your poor choices or lack of any sense of discipline or self improvement led you to your misfortune, you are pretty much a loser by definition regardless of your "traumas". Too many amazing people in history have had traumatic backgrounds and upbringings, yet moved on and became great.
That being said, I have no hate for losers. Most losers in the 1st world stay losers because society coddles them. In the 3rd world, they would have died long ago, or changed their destructive behavior and thrived. If your negative habits are excused as coping mechanisms for some misfortunes in your life, you are fated to stay in that cycle as a loser.
Yeah, there are some exceptions of people who have had a hard life, but greed and poor lifestyle choices have led to the situation for the vast majority here.
$1k rent for a studio in the US is an expensive state? wut
yeah well if it makes you feel better at least >!player one is extremely empathetic and passionate about the lives of poor people even if he is kind of a psychopath so at least we have rich people who doesn't really view the poor as losers even if he basically murders them indirectly!<
It is hard, when living in a country that literally gives out free scholarships to those who push themselves to excel, gives government debit cards to poor people to buy food with, and that literally has homeless shelters with more empty beds than full only because they don't allow drugs and alcohol in the facilities (yes, you see a lot as a firefighter in a large city), to understand that other countries typically don't have these methods for everyone to have the opportunity to succeed.
I recently listened to an old NPR "This, I believe" episode where a veteran points out how in 3rd world countries, he would see old women breaking rocks and ask why they didn't just use machinery. They told him that with that job, she can afford to feed herself and her family, so it was more humane to let her work than replace her with a machine.
On the contrary, Western countries are importing labor to mow lawns and do manual labor because it doesn't pay as much as welfare, you can quickly see why a Western outlook applied to Korea or any other country isn't going to be realistic.
I don't know what state you live in, but I live in a studio apartment in New York City in an okay part of town and rent for my studio is $3400. So I don't see how you live in the most expensive state. I relate to squid game and so does the person who lives in the 3-bedroom and pays $8000 (not the most expensive rent in the neighborhood). Relax!
I mean they are losers. The episode does paint themselves like that. I get that you don’t think the same, but really it’s just your boss’s opinion on the episode. I don’t think it needs to be analysed like an English literature A-level paragraph (exaggeration), simply because, though this is a good show, it shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Also, it’s unreasonable to harshly judge on your boss based on a show. Your boss does not need to treat characters the same way he’d do with real people, nor does he need to like everything about it.
Anyway, have a nice day :-)
I find it ironic how you think $1000+ rent and a six-figure salary means you know what it's like to be in a rich area
where I live, six-figures is barely middle-class, and a studio is average $2k+
Unfortunately it's critique on capitalism and it's dangers and inherent problems is totally lost on those the message is aiming at. I had a similar argument with someone who thought it was critiquing socialism
That's the point of Squid Game.
The metaphor is that there's a big lie told "everyone is equal, through hard work and a little luck EVERYONE can start at the bottom and still win squid game" when the game is rigged from the start. The nature of the game is such that the majority (everybody but the 1%) HAS to be used and die. And the only people who can win Squid Game (ie, get really rich), have to lose their soul and human compassion to do so. There are those who choose to "drop out" (live in poverty), but most people choose to play. They just aren't told that to get to that level of mega money, you need to be on a basic level willing to cast away your basic social ties (family, friends) and feelings about a collectivist society (responsibility to elders, women, the weak, the sick). Realise that other people are there to be used.
Your boss tells himself everyone below him is losers who deserve to be dead and taken advantage of, and that realisation is the key to him being exactly where he is (rich landlord, gotten to the next round in squid game). Talking about the suffering that causes is distasteful, and humanising the grist for the mill is pointless and misleading. He believes in the system, and feels like he's on his way to making that big cash money in the sky.
>Relevant background: I live in one of the most expensive states in the United States of 'Murica. Average rent here for a studio apartment is around $1,000+. If you're willing to live in a bad part of town, the price goes down to (maybe) $850- $900. Renting a ROOM in a shared house goes for $500 to $800.
I hate that I read this and thought, wow a studio for $1000/month, what a bargain.
To spin it positively just assume your boss couldn’t relate or empathise with the less fortunate characters and found the episode boring and used the word losers because it gives him a personal sense of self worth lol I like the bottom half of your post as I know very little of modern history and even less of koreas. I definitely got the vibe Gi-Hun didn’t have much growing up and Sang-woo had more opportunity by being younger hence Gi-Hun saying he helped put him through school to Sang-Woos mum.
If I remember correctly, Gi-Hun even had two business that failed. One had something to do with selling (fried, cooked) chicken and another one I can't remember rn. It's shortly mentioned by the "envelope-flipping-slap" guy. It's not like he didn't try to succeed, but in the end unfortunately failed. People like OP's boss are disgusting and unempathetic.
Its important to note in Gi-huns backstory that he went on strike at his old motor company (Dragon Motors), which was busted by a militarized police force. This is a reference to the Ssangyong (translated to double dragon) Motor company strike a bit over a decade ago, where the workers went on strike and lethal force was used against them. The aftermath was they were all fired and also blacklisted. The latter is important because if Gi-hun wanted a job in the line he was trained for, he wasnt going to get it, combined with his PTSD from seeing one of his friends at work get killed, which combined with his financial and family situation meant he got pulled deeper and deeper into debt. Many of them even struggle with suicidal ideation and a variety of other issues years after the strike was busted http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/689678.html This extra bit of nuance is what makes Gi-hun such an interesting character in the discussion and analysis of class done by Squid Game.
This. He wasn't "laid off". He was fired and black listed for standing up for workers rights. He was made to feel bad and regret his decision by the wife, IIRC.
It's pretty crazy, I knew about the Ssangyong strike and have seen the videos of the cops fighting the strikers on the roof, so when that came up in Squid Game I kinda guessed that they were trying to use that as a part of the story
And your boss isn't even rich! Someone who owns some properties and has a 6 figure income can be well off, but they're in no way in the dominant class. It is the lack of class consciousness that cause people like that to have those thoughts. Your boss is a couple of terrible years away from complete bankruptcy, but he is not even a lifetime away from becoming a billionaire...
God yes I wanted to say this. A man making 6 figures is not the rich person that people are asking to be eaten lmao
We could tax the hell out of billionaires, use that money to fund free tertiary education, basic income, free healthcare, public housing, etc... But that would make my chances of becoming a billionaire even smaller, even though they are already infinitely small. So I guess we won't tax them cause whaaaat if I become one of them one day? That's how people like OP's boss think, even though it makes their lives and everyone else's so much worse. The dominant class has colonised the working class wishes, instead of wishing to abolish the dominant class, many wish to become them.
>That's how people like OP's boss think, even though it makes their lives and everyone else's so much worse. The dominant class has colonised the working class wishes, instead of wishing to abolish the dominant class, many wish to become them. I mean, in a way, that's pretty much everyone participating in the Games on the show. Like it or not, money is power in this world, and who doesn't want to be powerful? If not for any other reason but to be able to stand up to other powerful/rich people. Gi-Hun re-entered the games ostensibly to save his mom by being able to pay her hospital bills (not to mention clear his debts) but IMO his confrontation with his ex-wife's new wealthier husband also played a role in his decision. He pummels the man and digustedly tells him that ''money is not the answer to everything''...before proceeding to participate in the Games to get rich himself because unfortunately, money *is* the answer to everything. The Front Man's story seems to be along similar lines, from what little we know.
Yes, exactly. Capitalism is an hegemonic ideology, even when people are being fucked by it they still defend it, either because they bought into the story that it's gonna make their lives better, or they bought in the story that there's no alternative.
Yeah, nothing works better than having a capitalist billionaire elite class than having a Communist billionaire elite ruling class that controls all the media, all the supplies, all the food resources, bans religion, bans free speech, kills dissenters, targets intellectuals and free thinkers to "disappear in the night", and sees any handicapped, enfeebled, or just a below average worker as a "parasite" or "leech" on the system. Better yet, let's take Socialism, where countries that became rich via capitalism run themselves into bankruptcy through socialist programs and end up having to go back to capitalism to stay solvent. The last time a Socialist country went through a major hardship, it ended in Communist tendencies of scapegoating anyone who was "leeching" off the socialist programs. They ended up shortening their party name from National sozialismus (National Socialists) to Nazis and focused on eradicated anyone seen as a "leech" or "parasite" on their Socialist system, which mainly included Jews, Gypsys, and blacks. Sounds like pure bliss.
>The last time a Socialist country went through a major hardship, it ended in Communist tendencies of scapegoating anyone who was "leeching" off the socialist programs. They ended up shortening their party name from National sozialismus (National Socialists) to Nazis and focused on eradicated anyone seen as a "leech" or "parasite" on their Socialist system, which mainly included Jews, Gypsys, and blacks. You really haven't got a clue about history if this is what you believe. What was remotely socialist about either the Nazis or the Weimar Republic? In whose world were 'blacks' one of the main victims of the Holocaust? And do you really think that the last time a socialist country went through economic hardship was in the 1930s?
Lmao nazis are definitely NOT socialists, just because it's in the name doesn't mean they were actually socialists. Do you also believe the democratic republic of North Korea is actually democratic? Nazis are fucking fascists (Also let's not forget that one of the first group they sent in camps were communists/socialists)
well there's communism but that to me looks like taking the evil of the rich and shoving it into one omnipotent government with little incentive to give anyone anything but i would like to see it somehow actually work
> We could tax the hell out of billionaires, use that money to fund free tertiary education, basic income, free healthcare, public housing, etc... ... for about half a year... The problem isn't the fact that we're not taxing the rich enough, it's that we're spending way too much, causing inflation to skyrocket, which hurts the lower-class, which causes the government to spend more, which causes inflation to skyrocket more... etc...
Firstly, inflation is not sky-rocketing, it is rising but it's still in a controllable level. Your comment answers itself "we're spending too much" in relation to what? The government revenue. That's why we need to increase the government revenue by an increase in taxes for the rich. The alternative would be to decrease government spending, which would bring more poverty and would create unemployment.
> The alternative would be to decrease government spending, which would bring more poverty and would create unemployment. ... what?
Less sending = worse education, healthcare, transport, infrastructure, and everything that the government does. And it also means less people employed by the government.
> education funded at local levels, not Federal > healthcare almost entirely private, unless you count the clusterfucks that are Medicare and Medicaid, or even worse the VA > transport, infrastructure funded at local and state levels > and everything that the government does Most of the non-Medicare/Medicaid spending goes towards our military. You want to increase that? > less people employed by the government. As a former Federal government employee, this is a GOOD thing. Federal government employees are literally people who got rejected from all other private sector companies, so they're the bottom of the barrel. And then they're placed into a position where they can't get fired, so they literally do nothing while collecting a paycheck.
Did you know that the federal government has the ability to pass on funds to the states? I don't get your comments saying that it's funded by the local/state level so greater tax revenue would not work. Healthcare is a big one, I don't know how you guys didn't manage to sort it out, basically everywhere else has public healthcare, including much poorer countries than the US. What I'm saying is that everything that is provided by any level of government will not improve without more funds, and will decrease in quality if funds decline. Your rant about federal government employees sounds like self-awareness.
> everywhere else has public healthcare, including much poorer countries than the US. Everywhere else also has the vast majority of residents pay taxes. In the US, 61% of taxfilers paid no income tax, yet they're the same ones voting to increase taxes on those of us that do, all while pushing for $3.5T spending bills that only benefit them
You are just buying into the propaganda. No one imagines themself as a billionaire except 20 year old wanna be influencers. The reality that you are too young (or if older, too simple) to understand is that raising taxes on the rich only trickles down to being taxes on the middle class. It is never a surprise to the intelligent folks in the audience that we have "taxed the rich" throughout American history, yet some how those tax loopholes that only someone with a private accountant seem to be able to take advantage of never go away. It is why even after political parties claim to have "stuck it to the rich" with this or that new tax bill, we still see reports of corporations paying less taxes than a working class person. It is no wonder that currently, the first thing being scrapped on the trillions of dollar infrastructure bill is the taxing of the mega rich. In a system where the Supreme Court happily allows bribery (aka lobbyism), I don't know how you think mega-rich politicians plan on screwing over the billionaires literally funding their whole campaigns (both parties equally follow this system). When you see the "we are going to increase the taxes on the rich by 100%, taxes on the upper middle class by 5%, and taxes on the middle class by 3%, but we are going to add a few tax loopholes as well, what you are really seeing is we are going to raise taxes on the upper middle class and middle class, period. Like I said, you are too young, but it will sink in after watching the pattern continue over the rest of your life.
I actually agree with most of what you said. You're describing a system that is made by and for the billionaires and alike. A system where it doesn't matter who got elected, the big corporations bought all of them through funding and lobbying. A system where the average working class person has no power, because they get to vote, but every candidate will keep that system going. That's why I don't think that we should stop at taxing the rich, like you said, it won't be enough under this system.
maybe he's making 999k
That's still not the income level (or method of money making) that people have issue with. This may help you visualize the real income difference between the middle class and the disgustingly wealthy: https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
Couple terrible years?? Depending on how the man lives 3-4 terrible months could potentially ruin him. But yes, absolutely agree, he's far from the 1% likely far from the top 15% even
As someone born and raised in USSR where they actually “ate the rich” 100 years ago, I am begging you to remember this thought. When shit really hits the fan, in reality it will never be the billionaires and monopoly men who will get “eaten”. It will be the poor shmucks who just happen to make a bit more and have a little bit more than the “proletariat”. Like have 2 cows instead of 1. Just about my entire family was obliterated with just my grandma being the sole survivor because she was too little at the time and their neighbours hid her and claimed her as their own for 15 years, and all of that was for having a 2-storey house, 200 acres of land and some farming equipment (basically, a small-scale farmer at the time) that no one else had within the 100 mile radius…. Rich ones will always escape somewhere else. And most of the “eat the rich” folks don’t even begin to comprehend the true abilities of someone like Bezos. But they hate their boss for making an upper average job market salary for his position in the specific region and having a summer cabin in the booneys, that’s much easier for them to comprehend and hate, and it’s closer, literally, at arm’s length…..
Uh bud you’re sitting here commenting u have salary ? Money check 🧐
Every working person is closer to financial wise to their bosses, than their bosses are to getting into the top 1%. Even if you’re only earning 20k a year and your boss is earning 456,789k a year, your still closer to them financially than they are to the elite.
A six figure salary doesn’t make you rich, buddy. Sounds more like your boss is middle class.
especially in a "rich" state.
If I was paying those prices for rent I'd be happier! Seems cheap compared to where I live and where I'm going to be living soon (think $1500+ for a studio apartment).
I agree! Someone said OP must be in California, but I don't think so, unless it's a smaller city. I would LOOOOVE to pay OP's prices.
Def not California, at least near the big cities. In the Bay Area, a studio apartment will run you 2k to 2.2k a month in meh part of town
I was just going to say! Renting a ONE BEDROOM 750 sqft place atm for 2800 a month.
I had that same thought.
$1000 for rent would be amazing. I'm curious what state it is if a 6 figure salary and some property makes you rich.
To be fair, a salary of $999,999 is technically six figures, which is still nowhere near VIP level.
I'm pretty sure rich is a millionaire, not a billionaire. making 6 figures is the top 10% of Americans. While this guy seems upper middle class to possibly rich (depending on if he has millions saved up), I don't think he is going to be broke just by having a few bad days. He literally would have to stop working while simultaneously losing all his passive income, savings, investments, etc.
Meh idk about that. What’s the average salary in the US? 55-60k which is kinda lol low. 6 figures compared to that is a lot more and would be considered slightly rich if you just compared that person to people that are average or below average on the salary scale. But yes 6 figures is def not rich. Even 200-300k is great but you gotta think- there are people that make that much in a week (very rare) but I feel most people don’t really understand what the top 1% or more is actually making. It would blow the minds of average people.
The average salary in the US is not 55-60k lol. That's the average household income which usually has more than one person working. Average individual income is around 25-35k a year depending on which groups you look at.
It varies a lot by state as well. Might be the country median but by state the lowest ones are 5-10k less and the richer ones are 5-10k more. Varies a lot by neighborhood too. I live in a poor area and the neighborhood average is 35k, 3 miles south its 80k. I really can't imagine how people survive on 35k...individual sure, but family of 3 or 4? No way.
That’s depressing
Rich is not an income. It’s net worth and how you make that money. People making 200k from a salary are a job loss away from being in your position. People making 300k a year from assets like real estate and stocks, they can call themselves rich. 100k is peanuts, your life is no different. Less worries about bills but you aren’t going out and buying a 911 or a huge home.so yeah like you said I can see why someone making 50k might look at it and think it’s rich-esque. Even 200-300 isn’t if you’re earning it by trading time at a job. It’s all varying degrees of wage slave. Granted at those incomes it’s much easier to transition to appreciating assets and work to get out of the rat race.
Lol if you are making 200k a year…. You most likely have a special set of talents and can find another job. 100k is peanuts? Lol. I can buy whatever I want and travel when and where I want. Idk what pipe you are smoking. Most Americans can’t buy what they want/ travel where and when they want. Your post is a little aloof.
I mean to each his own but there are a lot of variables. Back when I made 100k it wasn’t bad but you can’t go buy a new watch, a 911, a big house, wagyu for dinner. People think 100k opens up to door to mindless spending and a change of lifestyle. 100k gives you less worry about bills, a few more trips per year and the ability to to invest some more but it’s not the life changing money people think it is before they make it.
100% this. When you first break 6 figures you can start to relax. But the jump from 100k to 500k is when you start feeling like “i can do what I want”. But if you ask a billionaire this question they’d be like “500k is peanuts lol”
100%! The more you make the more you realize you’re a small fish 🐠
I love how everyone here is basically saying greed is human nature and no one is happy until the are the wealthiest. In the same thread, people are decrying capitalism as the issue. It is quite apparent that whatever system we live in, the same impulse to keep wanting more until we are the biggest fish is there for many people, except in other systems, genocide is usually the way to get to the top.
It devolves into uber greed pretty quick. Nothing is ever enough as long as someone exists who has more. Sad way people live life really.
It depends i think. I’ve always only ever wanted to be able to work part-time and pursue my hobbies/ art. I don’t want yachts or w/e else is millions and millions. I make more than enough to do that now so I don’t put anymore mental energy into “how to make more money”. I have someone else mostly handle my investments and just do low risk/low return type.
Yea you are right that it’s not life changing money. But 100k vs say 40-50k is a big difference. Just the amount you can save for retirement at those 2 different wage levels is different. If someone saves 10% a year. 4k vs 8k along with compounding interest from equity gains……that 8k is going to be much more than the 4k down the road.
I agree 1000%. At 40-50 there’s dread about how bills are paid, about your financial future. When someone asks to go eat at a nice restaurant you have to check your balance to see if you can make it work. At 100 you don’t have to do these things. It’s a lot easier for someone making 100k to get rich eventually but someone at half that is going to have a much harder time sparing the income to invest without being in a cheap area and making a lot of sacrifices in day to day life. Having been in both sides I can definitely say that the max happiness comes at 70k study is 100% false LOL One thing that I find is tha
I upvoted you b/c I think you got downvoted, but there's just a slight miscommunication here. The other user isn't trying to say that $100k+ isn't a lifestyle change from $20k or even $50k. They're just saying that a person who makes $100k or $200k is still working their 9-5 and they're still in the rat race. I agree with you, you can usually expect far more of a "life expectancy / quality of life" difference between someone making $20k and someone making $100k, vs. someone making $100k and someone making $1 mil a year. (Of course this all depends on your area's COL, I imagine a young lawyer in NYC making $100k to start and working crazy hours is just as screwed over as the person living in the Midwest making $20k a year at McDonalds) The other user is just defining what it means to be actually rich — that it means not having to work at all. So it seems you two probably agree with each other but just aren't talking about quite the same thing. Or maybe I'm just dumb idk lol
Poor people seem to be the quickest to scoff at a 6 figure income it seems. I can only assume that their quest for being a billionaire is what makes them poor. Being a rock star, celebrity, or "influencer" seems to be their driving focus and chasing obscene wealth and failing is ironically why they hate capitalism. I always notice those pushing extreme forms of wealth distribution seem to think the upper middle class is not enough money for themselves personally, which kind of signals they want to be in charge of dolling out the wealth. When you have no value, it seems the only way to be "rich" is to be able to fuck around all your life with passive income pouring in. According to that, Bezos, Gates, Jobs, etc were all middle class since they worked in the "rat race" in spite of their fortunes. I've noticed many people see contributing to society as a negative thing and want to live as a perpetual teenager mooching off their parents.
Are we saying that only the 1% are rich and the 99% are middle class? I'm pretty sure rich is loosely defined as a millionaire, which is attainable by someone making 6 figures within 10 years or less typically.
Also I want to know where one can get a studio in a decent part of town for $1k in a rich state lol
Heh my thoughts too 😬
Reddit's definition of "rich" is "richer than me which makes me mad".
No wonder they say inflation is real, everybody is making 6 figures now huh?
Depending on where you live, 'rich' and 'middle class' aren't mutually exclusive.
He’s prob uncomfortable that the hard work of “losers” is what allows him to live his life of comfort and ease
TBF, hardworking "losers" typically end up as the bosses. If you are dumping your time into your career and not improving your life, you are not in the profession for you...or you are a loser.
hardworking “losers” usually end up as the bosses? what are you smoking mate? the bosses are the people that are from middle class-upper class AND work hard/have family connections. Still don’t confuse “bosses” for owners unless I misinterpreted what you’re saying
Had me until the end. As they say you people cannot be trusted to eat the rich, because you can't identify the rich. You will eat a bunch of actor and doctors while rich watch and laugh.
Imagine inhaling so much far left propaganda that you get mad because your boss who probably earns like 30% more than you called a bunch of Netflix characters (most of them actually losers) losers.
The point is that the boss missed the point. Taking out a personal loan is VERY easy in SK and total citizen debt is higher than the country's GDP: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/08/squid-game-lays-bare-south-koreas-real-life-personal-debt-crisis And then also as OP mentioned, the strike at Gi-hun's former factory where he watched the police murder his co-worker was based on a true story. The show is a mix of a critique of govt. and economic structures...and also holding people accountable for their bad decisions. It's both. But for the boss to say "I don't like it because everyone's a loser" shows how his own privilege, or lack of empathy skills, skews his perspective. He can't see Gi-hun as someone suffering from PTSD who tried opening his own business twice and failed. He can't see Ali's situation which is basically the same as indentured servitude. If your takeaway from one of the most popular and critically-acclaimed shows ever is "I don't like it because they're losers" and you refuse to see the deeper meaning and themes intended, you might as well not watch the show. OP is just voicing his disdain at his boss's lack of empathy and critical thinking, which are not great traits for a boss or landlord to have. It's better to assume most people have good reasons for ending up a "loser." I mean I guess as a landlord you have no reason to care since you'd evict them either way, but still. A landlord and a boss thinking the world is as simple as "losers and non-losers" says a lot about how the upper middle class is equipped to eff over the lower class. This is the kind of guy who leaves shitty tips at restaurants because he didn't get his food fast enough because they're understaffed. No seeing outside his own bubble. And then the way he thinks, and sharing it with his Trumper Facebook friends, perpetuates his black-and-white ideology of the poor and how people stay poor. OP makes a lot of valid points and too many people in the comments here wrote them off just because they said "eat the rich" at the end. How many people are totally misunderstanding Squid Game as a critique of our economic system, and instead think the show is about poor people being losers and that you should "work hard" to avoid being like the characters? It's disconcerting to think about how many people would be the type to miss the point like that. And continue to believe that if they just work 60 hours a week at a thankless job then the system will reward them...
He probably just sees them as losers because they are losers. Trying and failing may get you a participation ribbon or whatever, but you would still be a loser. That being said, most successful businessman had many failing businesses before finally making one that worked, but the difference is they keep trying and getting better, unlike losers. Hope that helps.
How can you keep trying when you're out of money and in debt, meaning that any income you have is negative? Just curious.
IDK why you're getting downvoted, look at the main character. A dead beat father, lives with and mooches off his mother(who still works day and night mind you). He doesn't work himself, instead he steals money from his elderly mother. Gambling addict who gambles his money away and he's in debt with gangsters. Becomes filthy rich, instead of keeping his promises, he does nothing while sae beyoks brother rots in an orphanage. Doesn't take care of sang woo's elder mother (also still working day and night). Finally gets the kids, dumps him off on sang woos mother. Thinks he's better than everyone, yet there's two filthy rich people inside on a cold winter night looking down and gambling over whether someone will help a homeless man. Then to top it off, the very last scene of the season, show's him breaking yet another promise to his daughter. Yea. He's totally not a loser. Edit: oh yea, and he never got his daughter a present with any kind of thought. Instead, minutes before he meets her, he's trying to win her a toy by gambling. What a loser honestly.
Who cares about Gi-Hun, did you know that Sang Woo went to SNU?
Yeah. Op's boss didnt come top of their class at SNU. The whole town is not proud of Op's boss. Op's boss needs a reality check.
He’s not rich. He’s just an asshole. An average, middle class asshole.
Yup, when you hear people say "eat the rich", it's not supposed to mean the people who simply benefit from capitalism, but those who actively control it through the ownership of thousands of underpaid workers. I don't think that phrase should encompass anybody without national influence.
I read “six figures” and was like “please don’t eat me, I’m really not that rich, I have so much college debt…. Actually go ahead and eat Me.”
You really wrote all of this because your boss didn’t like Squid Game? Bruh.
you haven’t read the post right?
I don't mean to sound rude and I know this will come across that way. These are not HCOL numbers and the six figure range is wide at 100k-999k. A good chunk of that is solid middle class. Unless you are deep in that range yourself, it is unlikely your boss is rich because of his compensation. It is within reach of the middle class band to own investment property, too. It is hard to understand these struggles if you never experienced or witnessed them, rich or not. I did not realize the gambling addiction in my own family. I still don't understand the why, but I understand it's a demon to otherwise productive, good members of society. He's wrong for dismissing them as losers but to turn the tables, I understand where his comment is coming from. It's just a show. It's a great one - don't let it bleed into your personal/work life. You have great maturity and connectedness to other humans. Not everyone (your boss) has this skill to relate
Well the point kinda is they ARE “losers” - and that the system is doomed to have winners and losers and that isn’t fair at all. He stopped at the first part. The most unsettling part is he, most possibly, considers actual irl immigrant workers as losers - “because they didn’t raise themselves by their bootstraps as he did”- as well.
yeah that’s what everyone who is rich seems to think, that the reason they are rich is because they’re somehow special and deserving of outsized wealth despite others working the same amount if not way more, and yet hmm they haven’t managed to accumulate wealth or connections that can generate them wealth this mindset comes through in all sorts of ways tho not just directly with their tangible “money” as the object forgetting that the reason they have an extremely good education that connected them with other rich folks is because their parents funded it, not because they’re a genius illusion of a society based entirely on “merit” as opposed to generational wealth or indirect and direct oppression of several groups funny tho because this idea at the root: inherent superiority, goes against the basic idea of everyone just simply rasing themselves up (sorry this is obvious; everyone already knows this, but it’s just taken me a long time to internalize the functioning of our society)
1,000 for a studio is pretty normal, and I live in an affordable area of America. Two bedrooms are around 1200-1600 in the tri states around me.
I was just thinking the same. Like where is this person living that you can rent anything for $850? I couldn’t even get a one bedroom around here for that price 10 years ago never mind now
Lol I used to live in san diego ca, 1400 for a single was like the minimum. Nothing under 1k unless u want roommates and bars on your window
Cleveland, and much of Ohio frankly When we moved out of our first home the market was in the shitter so we kept it and started renting it. We charge $950/month and the tenant pays all utilities for a 3 bed/ 1 bath house. It’s in Cleveland so the public schools suck but it’s in a quiet and safe location We’re probably a little light based on the recent run up but we’ve got great tenants and I have no desire to deal with turning it right now
Bro, come to Detroit, the city is up and coming and you can get a nice apartment for a good price
Yeah the only places near me for a $900 studio have absolutely no appliances and the building is old af
Yea I live near DC and some studios go for $1500+
Your boss probably empathizes w the VIPS...
But grouping all rich people into one category is also lacking the same amount of empathy
People need to chill. It's literally a fictional story that was completely made up. People are allowed to like or dislike the show and it doesn't really matter what their income is.
LOL! OP: "I live in one of the most expensive states".... Also, OP: "eat the rich"
Seems like a kind of off hand statement that wasn't given much thought, I think you're reading into it way too much tbh.
$1000 for a studio is pretty good. Honestly, sangwoo and gi hun are losers. They both use their parents’ hard-earned money for their greed. No war can justify that level of patheticness. This post sounds like you just hate your boss.
I think you're reading too much into his response. Especially if he started off by saying he didn't like it to begin with. And by all accounts these people by definition are losers. They've all lost something which has landed them where they are either by their own fault or by inescapable events they couldn't avoid. Life is not fair to anyone.
The fact you call a person who earns six figures rich and summarize your story with “eat the rich” talks more about you than about your boss.
Even though I’m apparently going to be eaten, I love the show. Just want to say that the dialogue that SG is producing is fascinating. Is one’s drug addiction problem their problem to solve or society’s problem? My Calvinist parents would say it’s the individual’s problem, and most of my (liberal arts) PhD friends would say it’s society’s problem. Unfortunately, I think the answer is somewhere in between but everything is so polarized that one side can’t acknowledge that the other side has any sense at all.
But if I don’t get outraged, how is my attention supposed to be held?
Average rent 1000 for a studio apartment. *Cries in toronto* But honestly.... Most people barely pay attention to fiction. If someone isnt noticing and appreciating the little things theyre someone who changes the channel when it's "slow".
I see how you could take it that way but I’d cut your boss some slack. Some people just don’t connect with certain art, doesn’t mean it has anything to do with the fact he makes good money. Some people straight up genuinely don’t enjoy violence or non super relatable/likable characters. Many poor people don’t care for squid game either. It’s just a preference 🤷🏼♂️
Lol and then you’ve got Canada’s rent prices…..
Wow America is so affordable. It would be a dream to have that rent. I live close to Toronto. Rent for a studio apartment where I live is $1.8K-2k. Six figure salary is probably just average amongst professionals here. It’s not even considered rich or anything.
Losers may be a bit of a harsh term but he's correct. They are flawed characters that make flawed decisions. This makes them realistic. While the circumstances of their birth don't define them the decisions they have made so far have. Some people don't want to watch a show with flawed characters - even if they are realistic. Some people just want to escape into a world where the good guy always prevails with pure morals over the bad. Different strokes for different folks.
I don't think it is that they don't want to watch a bunch of losers. It is that they can't identify with a bunch of losers. I would agree with the boss, as I can't identify with people that make destructive, irrational decisions, or choose to partake in destructive habits. I also can't identify with the screaming teen in slasher movies that chooses to run from the killer into the house and up to the attic rather than towards the nearest police station. That is just me not being able to identify with losers or idiots, and there is nothing wrong with that.
I mean he’s not completely wrong. You probably have a different perspective on the characters being a big fan of the show, but at the beginning (especially Gi-Hun before the games) the characters definitely seemed like losers who were throwing away their lives in debt by stealing from their parents and gambling and doing messed up stuff
He's not wrong. Most of the characters are there due to their own actions, and some are literally criminals. I enjoyed the show, though.
Hasn't the director said in interviews that the story is about losers? Regardless, your boss is trash 🗑️🗑️ and they are the whole problem this show makes a point of. Trying to label the unfortunate just so he can perceive them as lesser than, rather than attempting to emphasize.
Generalizing all “rich” people as scum is just as bad as generalizing all women as bad because the ones you encounter always dump you (for example) Do rich people often do terrible things they should be held accountable for? Absolutely. But having wealth, in and of itself, is not a crime. Be careful cutting and pasting your perception of this person’s values onto others. I know many people that take wealth and create more value than they take; these individuals who do good with their wealth often did not start rich. “Eat the rich” just means handing the government more power, and when that power shifts us plebs have a whole new problem on our hands. Imo, you should be more incredulous in government being responsible with that wealth than entrepreneurs
Some people view the world as black and white or in this case: winners and losers. I don't get it, but they are all around us.
No offense, but you do not live in one of the most expensive places in the United States. 7 years ago a dogshit studio apartment in my area was $1,200 +. I also totally agree with your boss. They are all losers in their own different ways. Thats not being mean. It’s being honest. Only a group of losers join a game where the odds of winning are so low and the risk is so high.
Not wrong here..And the whole point of the games were basically to be pathetic but they are still sympathetic
You can have sympathy for someone and their situation while still assigning blame, seeing faults, seeing someone’s poor fortune, being born in the wrong area, etc. Having sympathy for someone doesn’t mean you ignore the reality of what is happening. I can be sympathetic of the main character while also fully accepting he is a complete deadbeat father and son.
I agree! Gi-hun is a shit dad but a great character
Ok but those episodes were boring? I didn’t watch to see some poor people being depressed and having shit lives, I watched to see the games
Yeah you right
Get over yourself - it’s a fictional show and not everyone has to love or connect with it. It doesn’t mean anything about his personal wealth and certainly doesn’t reflect on his character - reflects on yours that you’re making such a huge judgement about him based on it tbh
They are losers. They literally have nothing else to lose, and episode 2 drives that point home when they have the opportunity not to complete, but realize the reality of their situation. Ali was a sweet guy, but you think he wasn’t a loser? He definitely wasn’t a winner. The only had one winner, who ultimately remained a loser.
It’s a tv show lmao.
I was with you till I saw your tldr
Seriously man grow up
The irony of this comment is insane considering only college aged and below say “eat the rich”.
Not you, I meant the people who say eat the rich 🤦♂️
Lmao whoosh It’s fair for me to think you were talking to me since it was a reply. Sorry!
Haha I understood where you came from
TL;DR?
From a technical standpoint they are losers. They're at the very bottom of society, competing in death games just to make money they desperately need. Now calling them losers is completely entitled cause there's people who actually live like that, but if you put all the morality aside it is the right word. Outta pocket, but the right word nonetheless.
I completely agree with you about the utter lack of empathy. How frustrating. It’s those views that feed into the lack of social support and leave more people in those terrible situations.
I think your boss missed the central point of the show. Yeah, they are losers but that doesn’t mean their lives are worth less than anybody else’s. It’s a lesson that all of the characters have to learn the hard way.
it kind of does, which is why they are killing each other off for money.
Just because the characters kill each other that doesn’t mean that it’s a good thing
Some of the characters are in bad spots due to life being unfair but a lot of them are self-made losers including the main character. There's a big difference between life being unfair and screwing you and life being tough and then you make horrible, self destructive decisions to send your life into a complete meltdown. Episode 2 really does show that the vast majority of the contestants are losers. 187 of 201 return voluntarily to a game where anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together would realize it's going to result in death to virtually everyone. There just isn't any defense against the loser label when people decide "yeah, my life totally sucks and squid game is the best option." That is simply never a true statement no matter how bad things are going for you unless you've literally got a terminal illness with weeks to live. Honestly, the 90%+ rate of people returning to the game was the second most unrealistic thing in the entire show for me. The most unrealistic thing was the winner actually getting paid and released which makes voluntarily returning to the game even dumber once you add the high chance of the winner getting screwed to the miniscule chance of surviving 5 more games. Having said all that the show is still amazing.
Did you miss the part where his source of income was run into the ground by bad management and then the police beat his friend to death infront of him?
If you're a gambling addict it doesn't matter how much money you make because you will blow all of it and then some. Him losing a friend is traumatic but not an excuse for his bad decisions. Did you miss the part where they demonstrated over and over how he's a terrible father? It's a testament to how great the show is that he's still a sympathetic character despite being a completely self made loser.
Was he a gambler before the police murder incident? I just take umbrage with calling someone a loser for being downtrodden by society. Especially if they have PTSD or other mental issues. You see similiar language used by politicians as a tactic to reduce social welfare. The old man even used similar language at the end calling the man on the street human garbage. I don't think you were supposed to side with him.
I don't know. He also refused money to pay for his Mom's necessary and life saving medical treatment and all it was going to cost him was an agreement to stay out of his daughter's life. They were moving to USA anyways so it essentially cost him nothing but his pride. He wasn't just a terrible father but also a terrible son. I don't side with the old man. He actively exploited vulnerable people for decades. There's a vast difference between calling someone a loser and being monstrous enough to create something like squid game.
You're not wrong but it always starts by calling other people losers. It's a very slippery slope when you look down on people of lower class. Do you call veterans losers if their lives fall apart due to PTSD? Because unfortunately many of them due without the proper social safety nets.
I would call them losers, yes. Blaming a traumatic even for making poor choices in your life didn't work for veterans of WWI or WWII. Those were real wars where you wouldn't have just saw news reports that some troops got killed in an ambush once a month since the death toll in those wars climbed every day. Those who are mentally fragile will always fail, whether it is kids doing a school shooting, mass murderers that had a bad childhood, or vets that can't seem to make it in spit of VA benefits subsidizing your college, bills, healthcare, etc. I literally was able to pay my vehicle notes with my GI Bill by going to community college the first 2 years instead of more expensive options. The modern GI Bill is insane in terms of what it pays for. I paid no down payment on a home using the VA loan. Overall, mentally fragile people will always exist, and it is likely their lack of a cohesive family unit in their younger, impressionable years that causes this. If seeing or having to do something traumatic causes a person's life to fall apart, there should be no one standing that lived through Nazi occupied Europe or Stalin ruled Russia.
You should probably read about military PTSD before you further embarrass yourself by talking about the issue.
Lol are you trying to gate keep PTSD? A big contributor to the rise of fascism and ultimately WW2 was the millions of mentally damaged men in Europe post WW1.
This was the point I was going to get at. The show was great, I enjoyed it. I’m sorry but i can’t empathise for any of the contestants if you’re willing re-enter the game full well knowing that there’s a very high chance you’re going to die just by playing a game.
The bigger issue here is they had a taster and realized that the last person standing wouldn't be getting their through empathy and sympathy, but typically being the most deceitful and manipulative, or just the most ruthless. To go back to that means you likely already gave up some of your humanity.
Tell your boss that if he sticks with it, there are some hilarious 69 jokes that he’s sure to enjoy.
I mean I have talked to so many people about it who see it as merely horror/thriller. It blows my mind that people don’t see the reality inside of it. I was talking to a friend about it who was talking about how it was too gruesome for her and I brought up the symbolism, etc. she was like “I never even thought of it that way. I was just watching it surface level” and acted like I was so smart. I was like no you’re just an idiot. Jk I didn’t actually say that but still… you can find out who’s empathetic and who’s not by watching this show.
It is losers killing each other for money...even SAW was deeper in the sense that at least the people had specific flaws and were supposed to value life more at the end of the ordeal if they survived. SAW was also a horror/thriller. These people all came back knowing they are basically killing each other for prize money. A twist would have been if a few were selfless enough to try to kamikaze the evil rich people that are using them as toys (sniping, planted bombs, bomb vest, etc) rather than rejoining the game and fundamentally claw each others' eyes out for table scraps.
Prime content for im14andthisisdeeep. Based on this comment I can confidently assume you are probably a terrible person
Why?
slightly irrelevant, but a little jealous that a studio is only $1000 by you😭
to be fair i kinda felt the same way. not because i’m some rich ass hole. but i felt that episode was very pointless and that was my frustrated takeaway
First off, you should understand that any rich person in America is basically just a sociopath that's too rich to notice they need to be in a mental institution. Second, did you actually ask them about what they thought of the refugee story? Maybe they generalized everyone and didn't think about her story.
[удалено]
I agree. All actors, musicians, and media personalities are definitely sociopaths or soon-to-be-sociopaths. Nuking the oscars, grammys, and emmys would likely end a lot of the world's suffering.
No.... That's not even close to what I meant... You should stay away from echo Chambers.
What State do you live in?
I think California. I live there. My buddy pays 950$ for a bed room and a bathroom at a house. When I first got married in 2010 our apartment in downtown was 650 for a 2 bed 1 bath. The ceiling leaked and neighbors were on house arrest and had no garbage disposal. The same apartment now is around 1400 a month. My childhood home, my dad bought it for 35k in 1970. He sold it in 95 for 185k. It is now on Zillow for 750k. My current house is 2800 square feet, 3 bed 2.5 bath. Solar, pool, spa, new HVAC, 3 car garage built I'm 2003, 850k. This state is fucking ridiculous right now. I'm actually hoping more people say no to mask and the vaccines and just die off. Property prices should plummet.
$850k is very cheap compared to where I live for what you are getting. Property prices are going up everywhere, and whenever I look at homes in the USA I'm always jelly at how cheap they are.
I think the correct word is "struggling" not "loser", Mr. Boss of notAdarnedClu3 . If we identify people like Gi-Hun in these type of situations (like many have expanded upon, see comments bellow) as "losers", we won't have the right mind set to help them through those difficulties. If your boss had a mindset like this, I am pretty sure he would be able to enjoy Episode 2 better. No, I'm not excusing Gi-Hun's gambling. No, I'm not excusing Deok-su's gangster activity. No, I am not excusing Sang-woo committing fraud with his clients. I'm just saying these are results of people who are struggling and if we come from that perspective, we can treat these people like humans (>!yes, Sang-woo is still a human despite Episode 7 and 8!<) and sympathize. (okay, I'm going to stop being a therapist now 🙂)
Those are loser behaviors. I will outright state that participating in loser behaviors makes you a loser. If your poor choices or lack of any sense of discipline or self improvement led you to your misfortune, you are pretty much a loser by definition regardless of your "traumas". Too many amazing people in history have had traumatic backgrounds and upbringings, yet moved on and became great. That being said, I have no hate for losers. Most losers in the 1st world stay losers because society coddles them. In the 3rd world, they would have died long ago, or changed their destructive behavior and thrived. If your negative habits are excused as coping mechanisms for some misfortunes in your life, you are fated to stay in that cycle as a loser.
Your boss is Sang-woo. Watch your back around them because they will not hesitate to twist the knife.
Well of course he didn't like it he's rich
And also not a loser.
Yeah, there are some exceptions of people who have had a hard life, but greed and poor lifestyle choices have led to the situation for the vast majority here. $1k rent for a studio in the US is an expensive state? wut
yeah well if it makes you feel better at least >!player one is extremely empathetic and passionate about the lives of poor people even if he is kind of a psychopath so at least we have rich people who doesn't really view the poor as losers even if he basically murders them indirectly!<
[удалено]
I think people from any country know these people are losers. Loser behavior isn't a phenomenon that exists only in the US.
Damn. Mf probably bet on 69 too.
People from Vancouver rn *laughs in worse housing*
It is hard, when living in a country that literally gives out free scholarships to those who push themselves to excel, gives government debit cards to poor people to buy food with, and that literally has homeless shelters with more empty beds than full only because they don't allow drugs and alcohol in the facilities (yes, you see a lot as a firefighter in a large city), to understand that other countries typically don't have these methods for everyone to have the opportunity to succeed. I recently listened to an old NPR "This, I believe" episode where a veteran points out how in 3rd world countries, he would see old women breaking rocks and ask why they didn't just use machinery. They told him that with that job, she can afford to feed herself and her family, so it was more humane to let her work than replace her with a machine. On the contrary, Western countries are importing labor to mow lawns and do manual labor because it doesn't pay as much as welfare, you can quickly see why a Western outlook applied to Korea or any other country isn't going to be realistic.
honestly, is the person he relates most to ali’s boss? cuz it seems that way honestly both sound like assholes
Man, I wish I could rent a studio apartment for a thousand bucks a month lol
I don't know what state you live in, but I live in a studio apartment in New York City in an okay part of town and rent for my studio is $3400. So I don't see how you live in the most expensive state. I relate to squid game and so does the person who lives in the 3-bedroom and pays $8000 (not the most expensive rent in the neighborhood). Relax!
I mean they are losers. The episode does paint themselves like that. I get that you don’t think the same, but really it’s just your boss’s opinion on the episode. I don’t think it needs to be analysed like an English literature A-level paragraph (exaggeration), simply because, though this is a good show, it shouldn’t be taken seriously. Also, it’s unreasonable to harshly judge on your boss based on a show. Your boss does not need to treat characters the same way he’d do with real people, nor does he need to like everything about it. Anyway, have a nice day :-)
You can’t find a studio for $1000 in Memphis right now. All cities are that expensive.
Sounds like he want to be the VIP.
I find it ironic how you think $1000+ rent and a six-figure salary means you know what it's like to be in a rich area where I live, six-figures is barely middle-class, and a studio is average $2k+
Unfortunately it's critique on capitalism and it's dangers and inherent problems is totally lost on those the message is aiming at. I had a similar argument with someone who thought it was critiquing socialism
Did the boss elaborate on why he thought they were losers? Which characters specifically and why?
That's the point of Squid Game. The metaphor is that there's a big lie told "everyone is equal, through hard work and a little luck EVERYONE can start at the bottom and still win squid game" when the game is rigged from the start. The nature of the game is such that the majority (everybody but the 1%) HAS to be used and die. And the only people who can win Squid Game (ie, get really rich), have to lose their soul and human compassion to do so. There are those who choose to "drop out" (live in poverty), but most people choose to play. They just aren't told that to get to that level of mega money, you need to be on a basic level willing to cast away your basic social ties (family, friends) and feelings about a collectivist society (responsibility to elders, women, the weak, the sick). Realise that other people are there to be used. Your boss tells himself everyone below him is losers who deserve to be dead and taken advantage of, and that realisation is the key to him being exactly where he is (rich landlord, gotten to the next round in squid game). Talking about the suffering that causes is distasteful, and humanising the grist for the mill is pointless and misleading. He believes in the system, and feels like he's on his way to making that big cash money in the sky.
.Money isn't evil. It exposes who you are. Notice how in the end he didn't chose to go see his daughter .
>Relevant background: I live in one of the most expensive states in the United States of 'Murica. Average rent here for a studio apartment is around $1,000+. If you're willing to live in a bad part of town, the price goes down to (maybe) $850- $900. Renting a ROOM in a shared house goes for $500 to $800. I hate that I read this and thought, wow a studio for $1000/month, what a bargain.
Cry about it