I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:02 am

what a country

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/20 ... years.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post by **OpiateOfTheMasses** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:08 am

I've seen the same story reported elsewhere so I'm guessing it's not satire.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:14 pm

I don't think she really believes this woman is ruining the American "scam-tasy", but I don't know what part seemed like satire. It was pretty straight forward. If a 94-year-old can work twice a week at McDonald's, then nobody should retire or get social security or disability checks. The author genuinely believes this.

Monk · Post by **Monk** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:31 pm

The fact that she's working there isn't necessarily bad - she might genuinely enjoy it. That last paragraph though? Fuckin hell

phe_de · Post by **phe_de** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:33 pm

BruceSmith78 wrote:I don't think she really believes this woman is ruining the American "scam-tasy", but I don't know what part seemed like satire. It was pretty straight forward. If a 94-year-old can work twice a week at McDonald's, then nobody should retire or get social security or disability checks. The author genuinely believes this.

I don't think the author believes this, I believe the author is afraid that employers might believe this.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Thu Mar 30, 2017 1:31 am

phe_de wrote:
BruceSmith78 wrote:I don't think she really believes this woman is ruining the American "scam-tasy", but I don't know what part seemed like satire. It was pretty straight forward. If a 94-year-old can work twice a week at McDonald's, then nobody should retire or get social security or disability checks. The author genuinely believes this.
I don't think the author believes this, I believe the author is afraid that employers might believe this.

No she isn't, that bit was sarcasm. She thinks she's making some kind of point that too many people in America are lazy and that's why they're on social security and disability and retiring "early", and this lady is the beacon of truth to which we should all aspire. She sucks at writing though, so her point is muddled.

I do agree with Monk that there's nothing wrong with a 94-year-old who still enjoys going to work.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:50 am

BruceSmith78 wrote:I don't think she really believes this woman is ruining the American "scam-tasy", but I don't know what part seemed like satire. It was pretty straight forward. If a 94-year-old can work twice a week at McDonald's, then nobody should retire or get social security or disability checks. The author genuinely believes this.

Yeah, but those are such mind-bogglingly fucked up things to believe that part of my brain instinctively rebelled and thought she was just being deadpan sarcastic the whole time.

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Thu Mar 30, 2017 3:59 am

I'm pretty sure the last part was satire.

Monk · Post by **Monk** » Fri Mar 31, 2017 4:52 pm

I guess she needed the obligatory /s at the end of that paragraph, or maybe

The Pitters' Place

I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire

Re: I genuinely can't tell if this article is satire