The problem with that phrase is that it's a lazy shortcut that doesn't offer any insight, is racialized in a suspect manor, and ignores interesting reasons why people might in your opinion "waste" their money.
Economically if someone is purchasing a nail job, which in many areas is dirt cheap, they may be receiving utility that you are not taking into consideration. A nice nail job may confer social status/capital which can ben spent in place of cash. It may be useful in attracting a more fit mate who can split costs of housing. It may be useful in maintaining your appearance for a customer service job.
Surely, to your point some people do "waste" their money, but it's not necessarily cut and dry what that means. Short sighted expenditures may confer short term value and alleviate short term problems where the capital requirement for a lasting solution may be too high for an individual to afford on minimum wage. This is part of the reason that poverty is a trap.
The charts show the way things are. One could certainly see things wrong with them. I believe the issue you see is that people spend more than their income? As 90% is going into the rent a cheaper lifestyle wouldn't change much. Teaching 40% of the population to spend only 1/3 on other things besides rent is not a reasonable goal but even if it was it wouldn't necessarily change anything. To state the obvious: It would be much easier to just lower the rent by 2/9. More interesting: The way rent works a reduction of 2/3 spending on other things would allow rent to grow to 110%.
I would change the game like this:
1) Remove interest from mortgage (with a maximum of 1 house per family)
2) Remove the obligation to pay that part of the debt backed by the house and make insurance mandatory.
3) Turn rent contracts into lease buy contracts retroactively.
4) Cut salaries by 70%.
For the US this would mean:
The minimum wage drops from 7.25 to 2.175 per hour.
Benefits drop from 1300 to 390.
Pensions drop from 2600 to 780.
And in stead of droves of people endlessly searching for a job that doesn't exist there would be countless jobs to chose from.
Personally I don't mind doing the same repetitive factory work for 3 months. If I can go do something else at any time it wouldn't bother me at all. Hell, flipping burgers for a few months might even be considered fun.
If you have people put a widget in a box for 50 years you shouldn't be surprised their mind draws a blank. Their entire education would amount to nothing more than a lack of boxed widgets. Years of missed widget boxing potential.
