And what does it matter if someone is doing "relatively well" if they're still literally living paycheck to paycheck? Or if they're saving such a meager amount compared to inflation that they know for certain they'll never retire?
Exactly. I would argue that if "relatively well" means you're paycheck to paycheck with no end in sight, then it doesn't matter that you're doing as well as or better than your peers. Your financial health relative to the average is irrelevant if the average person is also doing poorly. If most people had cancer, you could argue that having a melanoma is better than having stage 4 pancreatic, but you wouldn't say that you're healthy just because your cancer is less detrimental than the average.
And what does it matter if someone is doing "relatively well" if they're still literally living paycheck to paycheck? Or if they're saving such a meager amount compared to inflation that they know for certain they'll never retire?
Exactly. I would argue that if "relatively well" means you're paycheck to paycheck with no end in sight, then it doesn't matter that you're doing as well as or better than your peers. Your financial health relative to the average is irrelevant if the average person is also doing poorly. If most people had cancer, you could argue that having a melanoma is better than having stage 4 pancreatic, but you wouldn't say that you're healthy just because your cancer is less detrimental than the average.
It's an extremely "let them eat cake" statement.