4 ms·

Crikey, what a strawman. The article isn't about making individuals feel guilty. It's about what it says on the tin: stop pretending you're not rich. The media

by vacri 9y ago

Crikey, what a strawman. The article isn't about making individuals feel guilty. It's about what it says on the tin: stop pretending you're not rich. The median household income in California is $64k; across the US as a whole it's $52k. Half of all households are below these figures. If you're earning six figures, you are rich. It doesn't matter where you live, or what you spend your money on, you are rich. You're earning a minimum of 50% more than the median household income in a wealthy state. "Yeah, but my rent is high!"... well, go and see how the poor people live. Your rent may be high, but that's because you choose to live somewhere nice. The article isn't about trying to make people feel guilty, it's about trying to pierce this bubble that the US upper middle class has (and HN has it in spades) that they're hard done by and kinda poor.

JoeAltmaier 9y ago
The article's conclusion is all about guilt and morality. Says so in the closing paragraphs.
- vacri 9y ago
  It's about morality, but it's not about guilt. You don't have to feel guilty to break your own sense of entitlement. The whole theme of the article is 'stop pretending you're not rich', not 'you're rich and should feel guilty about it'.
  - jasode 9y ago
    >The whole theme of the article is 'stop pretending you're not rich', not 'you're rich and should feel guilty about it'. The "stop pretending" is certainly the title but it's not the whole theme. He covers several themes. The author also wrote: >The American myth of meritocracy allows them to attribute their position to their brilliance and diligence, rather than to luck or a rigged system. At least posh people in England have the decency to feel guilty. In other words, if Americans had the right moral sense, they'd feel guilty about it too. The theme for "pretending" is more about awareness if where six figures fits in the percentiles. Maybe people making $100k don't know or don't admit that such an income is in the top 17%. Yes, it's more than 83% others make so he advises, "don't pretend you're not rich." The other theme is guilt and morals which the author is trying to convey to readers via claims of "luck", "good fortune", and "myth of meritocracy". This line of argument is orthogonal to the "stop pretending" theme. At least 2 different themes with 2 different sets of supporting arguments in that blog post.
    - vacri 9y ago
      He's not trying to make people feel guilty, he's trying to make them admit some truths about the system - because until that happens, it can't be fixed. Everyone kicking back in these comments about 'being shamed' is utterly missing the point, and the 'guilt' line is a throwaway comment meaning that the upper class in England are aware of the issue, not that their emotional state is his desired target state for wealthy people to live in. It's explicitly stated in the conclusion: For Americans to solve the problem of their deepening class divisions, we will have to start by admitting their existence and our complicity in maintaining them. The morals the author is interested in isn't "you should feel guilty", but "we need to fix this in order to even start helping the other four quintiles". Not to mention that you're misrepresenting what he's saying, framing it as 'claims of luck', when his literal words are "in part the result of good fortune" (my emphasis). He's mirroring the same kind of thing that Warren Buffett says, yet people on HN don't complain about being guilted by Buffett's utterances. The author isn't trying to make the reader feel guilty in that article; if the reader does feel guilty or shamed in reading it, then perhaps they're hiding something from themself? I mean, there's hard evidence right in this thread, where you see someone on $300k honestly arguing that someone on $30k is better off because they pay less income tax by percentage (!?!?). That takes a bizarre level of self-delusion.

by vacri 9y ago

JoeAltmaier 9y ago

The article's conclusion is all about guilt and morality. Says so in the closing paragraphs.

vacri 9y ago
It's about morality, but it's not about guilt. You don't have to feel guilty to break your own sense of entitlement. The whole theme of the article is 'stop pretending you're not rich', not 'you're rich and should feel guilty about it'.
- jasode 9y ago
  >The whole theme of the article is 'stop pretending you're not rich', not 'you're rich and should feel guilty about it'. The "stop pretending" is certainly the title but it's not the whole theme. He covers several themes. The author also wrote: >The American myth of meritocracy allows them to attribute their position to their brilliance and diligence, rather than to luck or a rigged system. At least posh people in England have the decency to feel guilty. In other words, if Americans had the right moral sense, they'd feel guilty about it too. The theme for "pretending" is more about awareness if where six figures fits in the percentiles. Maybe people making $100k don't know or don't admit that such an income is in the top 17%. Yes, it's more than 83% others make so he advises, "don't pretend you're not rich." The other theme is guilt and morals which the author is trying to convey to readers via claims of "luck", "good fortune", and "myth of meritocracy". This line of argument is orthogonal to the "stop pretending" theme. At least 2 different themes with 2 different sets of supporting arguments in that blog post.
  - vacri 9y ago
    He's not trying to make people feel guilty, he's trying to make them admit some truths about the system - because until that happens, it can't be fixed. Everyone kicking back in these comments about 'being shamed' is utterly missing the point, and the 'guilt' line is a throwaway comment meaning that the upper class in England are aware of the issue, not that their emotional state is his desired target state for wealthy people to live in. It's explicitly stated in the conclusion: For Americans to solve the problem of their deepening class divisions, we will have to start by admitting their existence and our complicity in maintaining them. The morals the author is interested in isn't "you should feel guilty", but "we need to fix this in order to even start helping the other four quintiles". Not to mention that you're misrepresenting what he's saying, framing it as 'claims of luck', when his literal words are "in part the result of good fortune" (my emphasis). He's mirroring the same kind of thing that Warren Buffett says, yet people on HN don't complain about being guilted by Buffett's utterances. The author isn't trying to make the reader feel guilty in that article; if the reader does feel guilty or shamed in reading it, then perhaps they're hiding something from themself? I mean, there's hard evidence right in this thread, where you see someone on $300k honestly arguing that someone on $30k is better off because they pay less income tax by percentage (!?!?). That takes a bizarre level of self-delusion.