- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why the recent surge in hate against capitalism?
Posted on 6/12/20 at 3:30 pm to genuineLSUtiger
Posted on 6/12/20 at 3:30 pm to genuineLSUtiger
quote:
The thing they don’t seem to grasp is that when everyone becomes equally miserable under their plan there won’t be any upper class taxpayers and individuals to foot the bill anymore. They are killing the goose that lays the golden egg
Yeah, but new leftist leaders will live like royalty and act like it too.
0
Posted on 6/12/20 at 3:30 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Why the recent surge in hate against capitalism?
Because the idiots have come out of the woodwork...
Posted on 6/12/20 at 3:44 pm to meansonny
quote:
The median income is literally the 50% point of individuals. For it to be the median by definition, 50% of the individuals are under and above that income.
Maybe you are smarter than me. But you are going to have to explain how 50% of the population doesnt make more than the median income
No problem. You're looking at it wrong. Here's what that graph shows -
The median household income in 2010 was $50K (don't hold me to that, but it was in that neighborhood).
50% of the median is $25K, right? To be within 50% of the median then, your household income would be between $25K and $75K. That's one way to define the middle class.
In 1970 over 50% of households had income within that range (within 50% of the median).
Today that's down to about 40%.
I think if you went with 2020 numbers before the silly COVID lockdown, the median was approaching $65K, so the middle class defined this way would be $32.5K to $97.5.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:23 pm to Drewbie
quote:
That said I do think capitalism isn't perfect in the fact that it can be exploited for personal gain at t he expense of others without proper moral guidance. That's where a lot of the bad taste from capitalism comes from. These fortune 500 CEOs just laying off hundreds and thousands of workers off the bottom to keep a steady profit margin instead of trickling losses throughout the entire chain but allowing everyone to keep working. However, this is a humanitarian issue not a systemic one. Saying screw it there are too many Scrooges out there let's pick up Communism doesn't fix anything.
I believe that this, moreso than the argument of people being lazy, is the root of the problem.
Also to note is that fewer degrees hold value. Outside of STEM, Business, and Vocational occupations their really isn't a large demand for generic college degrees.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:24 pm to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Why the recent surge in hate against capitalism?
Because it's a system of have and haves not and rewards people who work hard.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:27 pm to David_DJS
Any chart using the national median income and deviation from it to describe the middle class is as retarded as basically everything else that uses National numbers when talking about statistics
Especially when doing it by doing time phased comparisons also.
This is because middle class in any given location in the United States varies widely. Now that probably wouldn't screw up the time phased stat if people remained distributed throughout the United States in roughly the same way over
But that's nowhere near true. I am so tired of lazy statistics. it's like people no longer use them in order to gain informative answers. They just use them to prop up bullshite arguments.
Especially when doing it by doing time phased comparisons also.
This is because middle class in any given location in the United States varies widely. Now that probably wouldn't screw up the time phased stat if people remained distributed throughout the United States in roughly the same way over
But that's nowhere near true. I am so tired of lazy statistics. it's like people no longer use them in order to gain informative answers. They just use them to prop up bullshite arguments.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:29 pm to David_DJS
quote:
50% of the median is $25K, right? To be within 50% of the median then, your household income would be between $25K and $75K. That's one way to define the middle class.
In 1970 over 50% of households had income within that range (within 50% of the median).
Today that's down to about 40%
My God
I give up.
How is it people don't comprehend the statistical realities of what happens when a number range has no ceiling but has a floor?
SMDH
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:32 pm to DavidTheGnome
some of what you attribute is simply not true of anyone with iq of 115 or better.
the piece you are so far ignoring is how capitalism sends work to low bidder.
between 3rd world and automation capitalism just does not need as many people to do work.
meanwhile population grows.
water and food are scarce some places. capitalism bought the headwaters of lake michigan.
in south america nestle bought the water rights in andean countries.
capitalism is great for the winners.
for the bottom half is a horror show.
the piece you are so far ignoring is how capitalism sends work to low bidder.
between 3rd world and automation capitalism just does not need as many people to do work.
meanwhile population grows.
water and food are scarce some places. capitalism bought the headwaters of lake michigan.
in south america nestle bought the water rights in andean countries.
capitalism is great for the winners.
for the bottom half is a horror show.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:34 pm to DavidTheGnome
Hate isn't the right word. People don't hate getting milk and bread, for example. They hate that they can't get milk, bread, and a lamborghini.
There is a massive growing gap between people who make a lot of money and people who can't afford shite.
It's like that globally.
I went from being stresssted and frustrated to "shite, I want even more money even though I make damn good money and yes it is still growing."
Lot's and lot's of poor people and lot's of new millionaires happening every year.
There is a massive growing gap between people who make a lot of money and people who can't afford shite.
It's like that globally.
I went from being stresssted and frustrated to "shite, I want even more money even though I make damn good money and yes it is still growing."
Lot's and lot's of poor people and lot's of new millionaires happening every year.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:36 pm to DavidTheGnome
I don’t think capitalism is a perfect system but it’s the best option to the others.
Media, huge corporations like Google, Amazon, Facebook etc are what make me think twice about capitalism because they are selling the country out.
Media, huge corporations like Google, Amazon, Facebook etc are what make me think twice about capitalism because they are selling the country out.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:38 pm to CelticDog
quote:For a guy who claims to have an IQ of 188, you'd think you'd know that a static view of the economy wasn't something an intelligent person would use.
the piece you are so far ignoring is how capitalism sends work to low bidder. between 3rd world and automation capitalism just does not need as many people to do work.
quote:Possibly the stupidest thing every typed in this history of the world.
capitalism is great for the winners. for the bottom half is a horror show.
The lives of America's poor are shite about 4 billion people on the planet can't even fathom possibly living that well. It's beyond a dream to them.
So, if by "horror show" you mean, better than basically EVERY frickING THING ELSE...……..yeah
Posted on 6/12/20 at 4:54 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
This is because middle class in any given location in the United States varies widely. Now that probably wouldn't screw up the time phased stat if people remained distributed throughout the United States in roughly the same way over
Rather than stroking out about statistics you don't agree with, how about expressing your opinion/argument?
Over the last 50 years has the American middle class grown, shrunk or been static in terms of its share of the general population? Does today's middle class find it easier or more difficult to live a middle class life with mom staying home in comparison to 50 years ago?
Posted on 6/12/20 at 5:06 pm to David_DJS
quote:I literally just did.
Rather than stroking out about statistics you don't agree with, how about expressing your opinion/argument?
You can't draw a circle around a population of 330M people......who span MULTIPLE economic realities...........across thousands upon thousands of square miles at time 0...……...run numbers...………...and then use the same circle at time 0.1 and run the same numbers UNLESS the following is true.
1. The population remains distributed in much the same way
2. There aren't significant variations in economic status within sub-areas inside that giant circle.
You can illustrate this problem by simply examining the implications when there's no numerical change.
Imagine a $50K median in year 1 with everyone within 50% of that range.
Now, move to year 10. Imagine, somehow, you still have a $50K median with everyone inside of 50% of it...……..BUT...…….during that time, there was significant migration from flyover states to Californa and NY.
Would this represent a nation whose middle class remain unchanged? If you answer "Yes", you're an idiot. It represents a massive DOWNWARD move in the middle class.
OK. Flip it. Reverse the migration. Answer.
The point being...……...if you have distribution variance AND, you have variance within regions regarding what would REALLY be "middle" class, then deviation from the median becomes COMPLETLEY frickING UNINFORMATIVE!!!
I'm tired of this though. You are all fricking gullible. It's hopeless. Go ahead. Ruin the country. A hundred years from now, when something decent pops out of it, they'll study your stupidity. Unfortunately, a hundred years after that, morons who are gullible will be arguing to dismantle that too!!!
This post was edited on 6/12/20 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 6/12/20 at 6:13 pm to ShortyRob
You have an unrealistic belief in how refined/precise statistics have to be to be informative when you’re considering something as broad (and nebulous) as the “middle class.” There’s a difference between making the argument “the middle class has shrunk” and making the argument that the middle class has shrunk 13.73% between April 1998 and November 2019.
As for statistics, to be pure you’d have to go much more granular than the movement of people between regions. There are so many variables you’d have to account for that You’d be modeling the economy like Ferguson modeled Coronavirus in no time.
I have no idea what you’re typing about at the end of your post with “ruining the country” and dismantling something.
As for statistics, to be pure you’d have to go much more granular than the movement of people between regions. There are so many variables you’d have to account for that You’d be modeling the economy like Ferguson modeled Coronavirus in no time.
I have no idea what you’re typing about at the end of your post with “ruining the country” and dismantling something.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 6:35 pm to David_DJS
quote:False
You have an unrealistic belief in how refined/precise statistics have to be to be informative
I have a VERY good understanding of exactly this subject.
I don't expect it to be ultra refined. But, doing it the way it's done for this discussion is so unrefined as to be meaningless.
Not to mention, you STILL have the ceiling/floor problem which is insurmountable when discussion income distribution. Surely I don't have to explain that too, right?
Posted on 6/12/20 at 8:50 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Not to mention, you STILL have the ceiling/floor problem which is insurmountable when discussion income distribution. Surely I don't have to explain that too, right?
Yes or no - over the last 50 years, has the American middle class shrunk?
Posted on 6/12/20 at 8:54 pm to Magician2
quote:
don’t think capitalism is a perfect system but it’s the best option to the others.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 9:54 pm to David_DJS
quote:Because the baseline is median it also means more people fall above the 50% interval.
Today that's down to about 40%.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 11:15 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Because the baseline is median it also means more people fall above the 50% interval.
I don't think that's true.
Posted on 6/12/20 at 11:21 pm to David_DJS
quote:
don't think that's true.
It is.
Upper and lower class have grown almost in equal proportion. Maybe a little more so upper class. It could be argued that upper class was smaller and had more room to grow though
This post was edited on 6/12/20 at 11:22 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News