Conclusions are in our own interpretations. Here's an example of a cynical take of the same situation:

I just learned that if a hermit crab finds a new shell that is too big, it will wait for other hermit crabs

So a less powerful crab cannot take full advantage of the shell, but recognizes its value to larger more powerful crabs. This is also an argument for scalping. If you find an expensive console or GPU which you can't afford long term, but you know you could carry the debt temporarily, you could buy it yourself then sell it to someone else later who could afford long term and you would personally pocket the profit. It could be argued that thats what the original-large-shell-finding small crab here is doing: scalping.

who need new shells to gather and then they will organize themselves by size and trade shells.

The original smaller crab knows that larger crab will cast off its current shell, which would be substantially better than the shell the smaller crab has, so it can still personally gain from finding the big shell it can't use, but its accepting a hand-me-down cast off only when the larger more powerful crab gets something better.

and I am pissed that the crabs have a better housing market than we do.

So the poster desires a system where larger and stronger crabs should have their pick of the housing market, and less powerful crabs simply have to take whatever smaller, less desirable housing, is left over.

Again, this is just a different interpretation for the meme. I'm not advocating for a position.

The crab story could just as easily be cynically re-written as an example of capitalism/free-market approach.