Quote Originally Posted by Atmosfear View Post
That's just a narrowsighted view of it. Some law professor didn't have any part in causing the crisis, so regardless of his income level, he is just as "fault-free" as a middle class family that's feeling tight, or a lower class family that's feeling tight. His job security and income are products of his skill and reputation within his field; you can't begrudge him that. Just like many middle-income families, he was living within his means, and now feels a crunch as his means are reduced unexpectedly.

It's easy to say, "Well, make sacrifices: move to a small house in a less expensive neighborhood; get a cheaper car; clean your house yourself; make your wife go back to work." It doesn't make those activities any less difficult to undertake, and some are just financially stupid. The luxuries he describes are the perks of working the way he does; sure, they might not be as modest as "woohoo, we just got a Keurig at the office!" but that doesn't make it easier to give them up. Change is difficult for everyone, especially when you believe, as most everyone does, that you have earned your station and the lifestyle associated with it.

I mean, I'm not saying it was smart to go on the record with a reporter about his specific lifestyle changes (and less so for the banker types, who all have a perceived responsibility for the crisis), because I wouldn't expect Joe Public to look objectively and relate. But as individuals, there's more in common than you expect; the difficulty, stress, and shame of admitting you need to cut back are difficult regardless of the social sphere in which you find yourself.
I agree with all of this (it can be summed up as people with higher incomes have higher overheads and that's not particularly unfair) but, come on, his actual complaints are pretty pathetic. $17,000 a year on his two dogs? At least one of the dogs was a rescue, though.