I expect there are plenty of working poor folks with macs. Maybe they could afford one when they had a job but are now on welfare. Maybe they got a hand-me-down from a friend. Maybe they found one in a dumpster or elsewhere.
Perhaps, but if you're going to come up with such hypotheticals, you can't say anything is rich/poor.
They could have won the Roll Royce in a competition. They may have a medical need for that champagne.
Ultimately in any of those scenarios we are talking first world poor, so the amount is relatively still small.
Further if they're 'working poor' that can afford Mac's, maybe they aren't that poor? Or if they are they obviously haven't got their priorities straight, and once you get to the point of saying society should help people on low incomes because they buy a Mac instead of food or some other nice thing they might spend their disposable income on, then you've lost me for one.
Edit: I really thought you were being sarcastic in your first reply. Now I'm not so sure? I really can't see how that's a legitimate pov. If I buy cheaper less processed food am I being discriminated against because I have to spend more time peeling my own potatoes? If I buy a cheaper car with a smaller engine do I get discriminated against because I have to press the accelerator harder and change gears more?
Poorer people have less money. Cheaper things tend to be less convenient than more expensive things. That's just how it works. It's not discrination, it's economics.
