q1w2e3 saidThe absurdity is in the unequal distribution of income, and trying to fix it by having people save more when there is not "more" to be saved.
And yes, I'm well aware that the poor can save. And your bias shows when you point to smoking and drinking as activities less suitable to the poor simply because they are poor and should save their money instead. Vices are vices and all walks of life indulge in them. The rich just have more resources to do so.
Everyone has vices - you're right and that's what I was highlighting. The rich could do less and generally do do less already as a % of their overall incomes. That's not a bias, that's a fact... the bias however is in saying "How much cheaper can you get when people have gone from Walmart to dollar stores?" - a somewhat bizarre assumption at best.
If they moved more towards savings instead of spending on credit for things that don't generate a return, they'd by definition be wealthier - and then there's also a change in mindset as well for many choices.