I mean, this is obviously a senseless tragedy that’s going to make a lot of peoples’ already-bad situations even worse. Living in poverty in the middle of one of the wealthiest parts of the country is bad enough without having your entire life upended by a random disaster, especially when it was already about to be upended by a major redevelopment project.
I mean, the entire song was making fun of the Gangnam District being wealthy. It has the highest average income per resident in South Korea. I wouldn’t exactly say that’s people already in a bad situations.
There are of course exceptions, but a massive fire in Manhattan is totally different than one in the Bronx for instance.
I dunno, if I’m in my 70s making $240 a month and living in a shipping container that I don’t technically own while the guy across the street’s putting in skyscrapers, I might be inclined to call my situation comparatively not that great. I say that like that’s not better than my current retirement plan, but that’s beside the point.
Ah see that article has a completely different framing than the OP. The OP make sit seem that it’s the Gangnam District that’s known to be wealthy directly, not a “slum” nearby.
That is extremely important context that Reuters seems to have missed/ignored.
It’s low lying, but this is the Internet and thus a requirement.
I mean, this is obviously a senseless tragedy that’s going to make a lot of peoples’ already-bad situations even worse. Living in poverty in the middle of one of the wealthiest parts of the country is bad enough without having your entire life upended by a random disaster, especially when it was already about to be upended by a major redevelopment project.
Having said that?
ʜᴇʏ
SEXY LADY!
I mean, the entire song was making fun of the Gangnam District being wealthy. It has the highest average income per resident in South Korea. I wouldn’t exactly say that’s people already in a bad situations.
There are of course exceptions, but a massive fire in Manhattan is totally different than one in the Bronx for instance.
This is the place that caught fire.
This is the place across the street.
I dunno, if I’m in my 70s making $240 a month and living in a shipping container that I don’t technically own while the guy across the street’s putting in skyscrapers, I might be inclined to call my situation comparatively not that great. I say that like that’s not better than my current retirement plan, but that’s beside the point.
Ah see that article has a completely different framing than the OP. The OP make sit seem that it’s the Gangnam District that’s known to be wealthy directly, not a “slum” nearby.
That is extremely important context that Reuters seems to have missed/ignored.