|
Simple solution, when the drunk and bloated swine get guillotined, be up close to catch the arterial spray in your mouth.
MariusLecter fucked around with this message at 08:56 on Sep 16, 2014 |
# ? Sep 16, 2014 08:49 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 20:47 |
Zerilan posted:I live in a house of 6 people and all together we probably make about 1/8th of that. Are you all students, or, like, itinerant Gypsy tool sharpeners? $650/month/person is a crazy low income, assuming you don't live somewhere where the currency has a name like "the sump."
|
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 11:20 |
|
It's pretty old now but the Daily Show did a really great segment on the same subject as that horrible green infographic: http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/jfmt11/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over You food chilling motherfuckers! thathonkey fucked around with this message at 11:38 on Sep 16, 2014 |
# ? Sep 16, 2014 11:33 |
|
FuzzySkinner posted:Why is this still a loving issue for homophobes/christians with persecution complexes? Why? The guy is gay and he kissed his boyfriend when he was drafted. Somehow he's not allowed to do this period because you feel Tim Tebow is being "Mocked" for his faith? Why does this bug you so drat much?
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 13:39 |
|
That wasn't the first terrible WSJ thing I've seen, had to dig a little, but I remembered this from 2013. Even the people with no change in their taxes are unhappy.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 13:52 |
|
^^yep, that one. ^^ Did they just invent a "budget" that burns through $400K a year a think "Welp, the money is spent so now people will understand the burden of having so much money and how hard it is to live like this. Clearly they will see our list of outlandish spending and conclude that taxes are the problem"? This is as bad as the comic that showed how much various family's tax burden would rise and how hard their lives are going to become (while they were all making 6+figures).
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 13:54 |
|
borkencode posted:That wasn't the first terrible WSJ thing I've seen, had to dig a little, but I remembered this from 2013. We were just talking about that one in the discussion thread a few days ago. Rebuttal:
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 14:01 |
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Are you all students, or, like, itinerant Gypsy tool sharpeners? $650/month/person is a crazy low income, assuming you don't live somewhere where the currency has a name like "the sump." If only the poor would gain numeracy, maybe they'd stop being poor.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 14:14 |
|
You guys are making fun of this but you have no idea. After I had to buy my daughter a new dressage horse after we got back from our 4 week (got stiffed on vacation this year) mediterranean adventure, I only had enough money left to get a new E250 instead of the E550. Do you know how shameful it's going to be pulling into the country club in that? I haven't even gone for the last few weeks, I'll probably just consider the membership fees a loss
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 15:10 |
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Are you all students, or, like, itinerant Gypsy tool sharpeners? $650/month/person is a crazy low income, assuming you don't live somewhere where the currency has a name like "the sump." I've lived in places in rural Michigan where this wouldn't be a surprisingly low income for poor people. If you work a lovely minimum wage job and they won't give you more than 20 or so hours a week that's about what you're going to get, and that's not an abnormal situation in places where there aren't multiple minimum wage jobs to be had.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 15:32 |
|
It's entirely possible some people are unemployed too (or less likely but possible, have children and those are included in the number). Guess the original poster would know though
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 15:45 |
|
Look, man, I totally understand your situation. Back in my college days, I had to sell some of my stocks just to get by.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 16:07 |
|
Sorry we couldn't go to that Broadway show tonight, Ann, I had to sell the tickets to afford our nightly foie gras!
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 16:19 |
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Are you all students, or, like, itinerant Gypsy tool sharpeners? $650/month/person is a crazy low income, assuming you don't live somewhere where the currency has a name like "the sump." 'Sup? $650 to $700 a month is around my actual job earnings(net, not gross) every month. Also the mean average for the bottom income quintile is $11,490 a year http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=330 Which works out to around $955 in gross pay......or around $820 a month assuming 15% is taken out per paycheck(looking at my last check which was for $157 I had 15.4% taken out in federal taxes, so I'm going by that). And no, I'm not a student my currency is US dollars.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 16:38 |
|
I'm trying to wrap my head around the cognitive dissonance that allows the same people to say "goddamn entitled shits, most of you have microwaves and cars what are you complaining about " and "b-b-but $400000 a year isn't that much ".
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:05 |
|
God, gently caress these people. 'Oh, Toronto is such an expensive city, $196,000 here hardly goes anywhere, you hardly feel middle class.' gently caress you. The median household income in Toronto is $70,000. If you are making twice the median, you are not loving middle class so quit your posturing and be glad to get to keep your greasy piles of cash. That also goes for the assholes making six figures and whining about how expensive it is to live in New York (median income, $50k) or LA ($49k). Your cities are packed with people making a fraction of your income, toiling to enable your extravagant lives possible.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:06 |
|
Amused to Death posted:'Sup? $650 to $700 a month is around my actual job earnings(net, not gross) every month. Also the mean average for the bottom income quintile is $11,490 a year jesus christ is this depressing
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:07 |
|
Al Harrington posted:jesus christ is this depressing Yes, my life is depressing, but it's actually less depressing than a lot of people in my situation, both by personal circumstances and living in a sane state with empathetic social workers, so I actually have health care and a reasonable amount of food stamps.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:13 |
|
Al Harrington posted:jesus christ is this depressing Now imagine being in your mid 50s and having been in that sort of situation since your early 30s because that's pretty much been my mom's life, and there's no end in sight! I'd love to help her but I'm a 32 year old student so I don't really make any more money than she does.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:16 |
|
Soviet Commubot posted:Now imagine being in your mid 50s and having been in that sort of situation since your early 30s because that's pretty much been my mom's life, and there's no end in sight! I'd love to help her but I'm a 32 year old student so I don't really make any more money than she does. Same with my grandmother, except replace 50's with 69. The cycle continues At least she legitimately likes her low wage job since she works at a daycare and loves her kids, and no longer needs the money to barely live(lives with my aunt/uncle/cousins now)
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:22 |
Polybius91 posted:I'm trying to wrap my head around the cognitive dissonance that allows the same people to say "goddamn entitled shits, most of you have microwaves and cars what are you complaining about " and "b-b-but $400000 a year isn't that much ". The rich guy EARNED it since he has the money while the poor guy is obviously lazy and thus sponging off the government. If the poor man takes ANY government aide at all that is money taken directly out of the rich man's rightful property. My dad pulled the "$250k" isn't that much" line with me and I asked then how the hell can someone live on $30k? He at least had the decency to admit yeah that would suck really hard and changed the subject.
|
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:23 |
|
Radish posted:The rich guy EARNED it since he has the money while the poor guy is obviously lazy and thus sponging off the government. If the poor man takes ANY government aide at all that is money taken directly out of the rich man's rightful property. It's important to remember that $30k is the theoretical, golden $15 an hour minimum wage total that people are calling outrageous. The minimum wage right now is not livable, not even CLOSE. If you can't live on 400k then how the gently caress can you suggest that $15 an hour is too much?
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:30 |
|
we truly deserve an asteroid impact that wipes humans from the planet
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 17:38 |
|
I think these articles just go to show the relative emptiness of the consumer lifestyle. I mean, these people could be building some actual wealth that could support a modest lifestyle indefinitely and/or doing something in the world that makes a lasting, positive difference. Instead, they have to keep on working so they can just keep buying more and more. I can't say I am really jealous of any of the examples they gave for where the money goes.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 18:06 |
|
Everybody basically forgets that by raising the minimum wage, we are injecting money into a part of the market that is very likely to spend it on non-durable (and some durable) goods. It'd be a massive stimulus that would benefit just about everyone running a small business. Imagine, as a business owner, if you no longer had to convince people to buy your widget... but if they had enough money to just buy your widget on a whim.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 18:59 |
|
In response to me saying "Remember the number one rule of pricing is that everything is worth what the purchaser is willing to pay for it"quote:Prices also raise out of necessity to keep the company in business. You think a company with 10 employees makes so much money they can afford to lose $8000 per month without an increase in production or demand? "Trickle-down economics works! There's a plethora of jobs out there and if you've reached your max at your current employer just move on. Also the elimination of the middle class due to the surge of big businesses is just a talking point. Now let me tell you about this Just World we live in and how the poors(? I think that's what he's saying) ruined everything." I'm bowing out of the convo with him at this point in order to maintain what sanity I have left.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 19:13 |
|
quote:Prices also raise out of necessity to keep the company in business. You think a company with 10 employees makes so much money they can afford to lose $8000 per month without an increase in production or demand? But...the whole point is that demand WILL increase since there will be more disposable income... quote:To your point of only giving raises to those under the proposed rate. Why do you feel they deserve an increase when the person just over that Mark doesn't. I'm guessing person B has taken steps to get where he/she is only to find themselves making the same as new hires. I've worked retail, I make more money, more hours, and put up with so much less poo poo and do less work in my solidly blue collar job now than I ever did in retail. I'd honestly gladly make minimum wage working guaranteed 40 hours a week, 9-5, weekends off, vacation time, less work, less poo poo from customers, constantly worried about being fired by one of the seven managers etc etc etc etc quote:Another rule you are overlooking is companies are in business to make money. Make it easier for them to make more money and money will be distributed. Duke Igthorn fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Sep 16, 2014 |
# ? Sep 16, 2014 19:24 |
|
Duke Igthorn posted:they REFUSE to give up short term gains for long term gains. Also see: the entire finance industry pre September 2008
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:21 |
|
Amused to Death posted:Also see: the entire finance industry pre September 2008 Almost the entire corporate world.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:24 |
|
Making it easier for businesses to make more money means those businesses will have more money which has to come from other people, anything else (like where it ends up) needs to be shown/proved.... like increasing the amount they have to pay people.quote:To your point of only giving raises to those under the proposed rate. Why do you feel they deserve an increase when the person just over that Mark doesn't. I'm guessing person B has taken steps to get where he/she is only to find themselves making the same as new hires. Wages sure as hell don't respond to individual performance unless they're commission based or you're in a powerful enough position to directly bargain your personal contract. Any skill or experience which places someone above the very bottom still exists if the bottom rises. This doesn't even matter at all if your argument is 'people working full time deserve to earn enough to live properly'.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:35 |
|
To be specific, it's a phenomenon of publicly traded corporations- it's a lot less prevalent in other corporate forms because the perverse incentives aren't as common or as strong.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:36 |
|
I'm crossposting this from the political cartoon thread because it's really too crazy not to share: The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics quote:One strategy, named the r-strategy, imbues those who are programmed with it to be averse to all peer on peer competition, embrace promiscuity, embrace single parenting, and support early onset sexual activity in youth. Obviously, this mirrors the Liberal philosophy's aversion to individual Darwinian competitions such as capitalism and self defense with firearms, as well as group competitions such as war. Likewise, Liberalism is tolerant of promiscuity, tolerant of single parenting, and more prone to support early sex education for children and the sexualization of cultural influences. Designed to exploit a plethora of resources, one will often find this r-type strategy embodied within prey species, where predation has lowered the population's numbers, and thereby increased the resources available to it's individuals. It's really one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:54 |
|
Wow that is quite stupid indeed
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 20:58 |
|
I don't even know where to start tearing that apart. There's so much wrong with it.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:04 |
|
So the only decent argument I got from somebody about a minimum wage hike being a job killer was from a dude who ran a manufacturing business that I would assume has really really tight margins. He told me he couldn't compete with overseas manufacturers with a wage hike because he was barely able to compete with them as is. I'm sure he probably blames Obama and taxes for his current trouble in competing. But yeah, I'm sure a wage increase would kill your business if you're barely able to stay afloat in the first place because you're a small fry in an industry that's fiercely globally competitive.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:12 |
|
Duke Igthorn posted:
If exectives could be sure they would be the ones getting rewarded for long term gains, rather than the guy who comes after them, maybe they would reprioritize.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:14 |
|
The author, "Anonymous Conservative", is listed as the author on a couple other books, a conservative version of the Art of War and illustrations on Rules for Radicals. Notably, Rules for Conservative Radicals is coauthored with Michael Patrick Leahy and someone named Gina Loudon- apparently the wife of a John William Loudon, a Missouri state senator from 2000 to 2008. Anonymous Conservative's real name is probably Michael Trust, since that's the name appearing on the copyright for this book. There's other folks online who've identified him, and he has some degree of fanbase, despite seeming quite possibly unbalanced (that link is similarly soul-crushing, btw). He also has a website, anonymousconservative.com . I'm going to quote a large section of the "About the author" page, because it's suitably nutty. Let me know if I should cut it down: Michael Trust, aka Anonymous Conservative posted:Although there were multiple authors involved in this work, I am the primary author. It was I who was responsible for the overwhelming majority of the work behind the theory and its conveyance. If there is anyone to blame, I am the primary party responsible. I am choosing to remain anonymous for now as I view this scientific advance as a guerrilla movement, and wish to keep all of my options on the table going forward. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Sep 16, 2014 |
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:22 |
|
Sulphuric Sundae posted:So the only decent argument I got from somebody about a minimum wage hike being a job killer was from a dude who ran a manufacturing business that I would assume has really really tight margins. He told me he couldn't compete with overseas manufacturers with a wage hike because he was barely able to compete with them as is. I'm sure he probably blames Obama and taxes for his current trouble in competing. That's still not a great argument on his part, though, because if he can't pay his employees a living wage and stay in business, he's being propped up by social programs as it is. It's lovely all around though, because the real issue there is the bigger fish lobbying for trade agreements that allow themselves to outsource(an option a small business doesn't have) and a wage hike probably would put him out of business. Having said that, most of the businesses fighting the wage increase aren't in this situation.
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:23 |
|
Discendo Vox posted:Anonymous Conservative's real name is probably Michael Trust, since that's the name appearing on the copyright for this book. There's other folks online who've identified him, and he has some degree of fanbase, despite seeming quite possibly unbalanced (that link is similarly soul-crushing, btw). He also has a website, anonymousconservative.com . I'm going to quote a large section of the "About the author" page, because it's suitably nutty. Let me know if I should cut it down:
|
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:40 |
|
|
# ? Mar 28, 2024 20:47 |
|
Davethulhu posted:I'm crossposting this from the political cartoon thread because it's really too crazy not to share: I'm pretty sure a freeper wrote that. I know I've seen one of those morons trying to use that as some kind of sick burn and getting a group tug for it. Also, the group he claims likes competition has an attitude to sex that by definition is the absolute pinnacle of anti-competitive and means you never ever have to compete against anyone for a mate by proving yourself any better than anyone, as neither of you will never know how poo poo you both are. Fancy that. Fulchrum fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Sep 16, 2014 |
# ? Sep 16, 2014 21:42 |