6 ms·

im presently reading Paul Fussells "Class" and this is a fascinating take on the idea in the age of wage stagnation. >the best way to climb the wealth ladder i

im presently reading Paul Fussells "Class" and this is a fascinating take on the idea in the age of wage stagnation. >the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend money according to your level. This is directly contradictory to, and detrimental to, how the US Economy expects its consumers to act. Credit has largely filled the gap of wages and productivity such that consumers now have no real sense of their level of real wealth, only that which is projected by their ostensible plastic card based opulence. The authors capstone to the article declares paradoxically at the end, "there is a lot more to life than saving money." so I suppose the siren call of conspicuous consumption remains a cornerstone of their life as well. id also cynically argue that level 6, philanthropy, has less to do with having a profound impact on the world around you and more to do with dynasticism and displacement of the state as an agent of change or agency in society. people at this level of wealth have a need to extend their name to objects of gravity an institutions of permanence and prestige. They are so far removed from the society as a whole that any perceived generosity in the pursuit of a just and verdant society is merely a facade for tax evasion and self grandeur. They realize no meaningful other symbiosis or benefit from the society as a whole in which they are mistaken to be a part of.

jacquesm 7y ago
>>the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend money according to your level. I would argue that the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend below 'your level'. Keeping up with the Jones' who are doing their best to display their achieved status is an excellent way to end up just like they will at the end of a long life of hard work: in hock to the bank for their primary residence and with little to no savings. Spend less than you could, pay off your primary residence as fast as you can, re-invest whatever you make after that in real estate and the stock market if you have an appetite for it, make your money work for you. Simple rules, nothing flashy and at the rate a typical IT worker can make money it won't be all that long before you will have a nest egg that you can retire on, provided you continue to control your spending.
- nradov 7y ago
  With mortgage interest rates being so low right now it hardly makes sense to pay off your primary residence. Better to have the cash available for emergencies or to take advantage of investment opportunities.
  - jacquesm 7y ago
    Key bit: right now. What will you do when interest rates change and you end up with an obligation to pay the now much higher monthly amount? If you have your interest locked down for an x period of time and you intend to keep your property always ensure that you can pay off enough of it to be able to continue to live there even if interest rates go back into the 5-10% range.
    - nradov 7y ago
      Most borrowers have 30 year fixed rate mortgages so future changes in interest rates are largely irrelevant to them.
      - jacquesm 7y ago
        Most? The rate difference is so large that if you are a good earner that it could very well make sense to go for a much shorter fixed rate term. There are many different products ranging from free floating all the way to 30 years, depending on the age of the borrower 30 years fixed might not even be available to them.
        nradov 7y ago
        Yes I would say that 87% counts as "most". https://www.debt.org/real-estate/mortgages/30-year-fixed/ https://www.debt.org/real-estate/mortgages/30-year-fixed/
        jacquesm 7y ago
        Wow, I had no idea that this was so common in the USA. Here it's a bit different, these are the current rates: https://www.abnamro.nl/portalserver/mijn-abnamro/hypotheken/rente/bekijken.html https://www.abnamro.nl/portalserver/mijn-abnamro/hypotheken/... The 10 year fixed term is right now better than variable (which is pretty odd for this market), the 30 year rate is at 2%. Typically first time home owners will choose for the longest periods and second ore later buyers will choose shorter terms depending on their income generating capacity and expenses. The other bigger differentiators are whether or not a payment on the principal is required each month and whether or not you get 'NHG', a warranty construct resulting in lower interest.
sixdimensional 7y ago
I think the hidden danger in this model, which I think about a lot, is that doing philanthropy is shown as an activity you can’t afford to do until you are very wealthy. The trick is to do good for the world long, long before then. You shouldn’t need to be wealthy to volunteer a few hours a month.. Before anyone judges me negatively, I say this as someone who has spent the vast majority of my lifetime trying to “climb a ladder” only to want to get to a point where I can give my resources away for free to help others. But I have never figured out how, and then one day it just struck me, why can’t I jump to level 6 now without the money, and maybe that might just be what’s wrong with the money driven world somehow, or at least my understanding of it. I feel like if I could understand how to not care/worry about the money then I could free up the mind and energy to do something better for the world, and I want to. And then I realize the counterpoint that we have to work within the rules of the system, too, and the system is much more cruel and demanding than I wish it was.
- hirako2000 7y ago
  I think you got it! The is a paradox in 'climbing the ladder' and giving away financial resources. Simply because, in the competitive market, you aggregate resources by taking it from others. Either competitors or random individuals. Philanthropy should start giving away those resources to the actors most in need, and they may be very close to your activities, but then you can't aggregate and climb up. The market doesn't have sympathy, and lack of resources can be devastating during tough times. Don't climb the ladder. Who cares.
- nradov 7y ago
  If you don't have money, you can contribute time.
shantly 7y ago
> im presently reading Paul Fussells "Class" That's a really fun read. I had a great time playing "spot the behavior of parents/relatives, described as if he knew them personally" (all of which fell somewhere in Prole or Middle, for the record, so nothing to brag about, particularly in the latter case—oh boy, the poor, sad, misguided Middle) Interesting lens through which to view Trump—does he ever have some weird displayed-class-markers. He reads as the most Middle and entirely un-self-aware and unobservant person possible, who's also won the lottery so all of that is on extreme display. Like a parody of the Middle. It's so strange. It's gotta be just a perfectly-maintained act, right? Given his upbringing it makes no sense for it to be natural, AFAIK. Utterly bizarre. Lots of subtle observations in there that really do seem to match reality. The "mirrored surfaces signal you don't clean your own house" thing—that's been a fun one to watch out for. I felt very proud in a totally raised-Middle way that I knew the obelisk thing among the Upper-Middle and Upper was aimed at oblique association with Paris rather than Egypt before he got to the reveal, hahaha. Some updated version by a similarly-observant person would be awesome, but Class is still remarkably accurate given how long ago it was written.

jacquesm 7y ago

>>the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend money according to your level. I would argue that the best way to climb the wealth ladder is to spend below 'your level'. Keeping up with the Jones' who are doing their best to display their achieved status is an excellent way to end up just like they will at the end of a long life of hard work: in hock to the bank for their primary residence and with little to no savings. Spend less than you could, pay off your primary residence as fast as you can, re-invest whatever you make after that in real estate and the stock market if you have an appetite for it, make your money work for you. Simple rules, nothing flashy and at the rate a typical IT worker can make money it won't be all that long before you will have a nest egg that you can retire on, provided you continue to control your spending.

nradov 7y ago
With mortgage interest rates being so low right now it hardly makes sense to pay off your primary residence. Better to have the cash available for emergencies or to take advantage of investment opportunities.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  Key bit: right now. What will you do when interest rates change and you end up with an obligation to pay the now much higher monthly amount? If you have your interest locked down for an x period of time and you intend to keep your property always ensure that you can pay off enough of it to be able to continue to live there even if interest rates go back into the 5-10% range.
  - nradov 7y ago
    Most borrowers have 30 year fixed rate mortgages so future changes in interest rates are largely irrelevant to them.
    - jacquesm 7y ago
      Most? The rate difference is so large that if you are a good earner that it could very well make sense to go for a much shorter fixed rate term. There are many different products ranging from free floating all the way to 30 years, depending on the age of the borrower 30 years fixed might not even be available to them.
      - nradov 7y ago
        Yes I would say that 87% counts as "most". https://www.debt.org/real-estate/mortgages/30-year-fixed/ https://www.debt.org/real-estate/mortgages/30-year-fixed/
        jacquesm 7y ago
        Wow, I had no idea that this was so common in the USA. Here it's a bit different, these are the current rates: https://www.abnamro.nl/portalserver/mijn-abnamro/hypotheken/rente/bekijken.html https://www.abnamro.nl/portalserver/mijn-abnamro/hypotheken/... The 10 year fixed term is right now better than variable (which is pretty odd for this market), the 30 year rate is at 2%. Typically first time home owners will choose for the longest periods and second ore later buyers will choose shorter terms depending on their income generating capacity and expenses. The other bigger differentiators are whether or not a payment on the principal is required each month and whether or not you get 'NHG', a warranty construct resulting in lower interest.

sixdimensional 7y ago

I think the hidden danger in this model, which I think about a lot, is that doing philanthropy is shown as an activity you can’t afford to do until you are very wealthy. The trick is to do good for the world long, long before then. You shouldn’t need to be wealthy to volunteer a few hours a month.. Before anyone judges me negatively, I say this as someone who has spent the vast majority of my lifetime trying to “climb a ladder” only to want to get to a point where I can give my resources away for free to help others. But I have never figured out how, and then one day it just struck me, why can’t I jump to level 6 now without the money, and maybe that might just be what’s wrong with the money driven world somehow, or at least my understanding of it. I feel like if I could understand how to not care/worry about the money then I could free up the mind and energy to do something better for the world, and I want to. And then I realize the counterpoint that we have to work within the rules of the system, too, and the system is much more cruel and demanding than I wish it was.

hirako2000 7y ago
I think you got it! The is a paradox in 'climbing the ladder' and giving away financial resources. Simply because, in the competitive market, you aggregate resources by taking it from others. Either competitors or random individuals. Philanthropy should start giving away those resources to the actors most in need, and they may be very close to your activities, but then you can't aggregate and climb up. The market doesn't have sympathy, and lack of resources can be devastating during tough times. Don't climb the ladder. Who cares.
nradov 7y ago
If you don't have money, you can contribute time.

shantly 7y ago

> im presently reading Paul Fussells "Class" That's a really fun read. I had a great time playing "spot the behavior of parents/relatives, described as if he knew them personally" (all of which fell somewhere in Prole or Middle, for the record, so nothing to brag about, particularly in the latter case—oh boy, the poor, sad, misguided Middle) Interesting lens through which to view Trump—does he ever have some weird displayed-class-markers. He reads as the most Middle and entirely un-self-aware and unobservant person possible, who's also won the lottery so all of that is on extreme display. Like a parody of the Middle. It's so strange. It's gotta be just a perfectly-maintained act, right? Given his upbringing it makes no sense for it to be natural, AFAIK. Utterly bizarre. Lots of subtle observations in there that really do seem to match reality. The "mirrored surfaces signal you don't clean your own house" thing—that's been a fun one to watch out for. I felt very proud in a totally raised-Middle way that I knew the obelisk thing among the Upper-Middle and Upper was aimed at oblique association with Paris rather than Egypt before he got to the reveal, hahaha. Some updated version by a similarly-observant person would be awesome, but Class is still remarkably accurate given how long ago it was written.