4 ms·

> it's bad enough to where cutting ones nose to spite the face is starting to make sense What is the evidence that now is worse than say 30 years ago for the b

> it's bad enough to where cutting ones nose to spite the face is starting to make sense What is the evidence that now is worse than say 30 years ago for the bottom 50%? It is perceived that it is worse now. But is it objectively worse?

pope_meat 5y ago
Cost of education Cost of housing Cost of healthcare went up. Income went down. So I guess you're right, objectively things are much better, it's just my perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem.
- asteroidbelt 5y ago
  > Cost of education went up If you need high education, you just take credit, and pay for it with your salary which is much higher than it was 30 years ago. And if you think that you won't be able to pay for credit because it's not possible to find a decent job with liberal arts degree, then probably you don't need that education. > Cost of housing went up I suspect that's because construction workers are paid well now. So instead of studying classical literature in high school, maybe study bricklaying. > Cost of healthcare went up This is the issue, but "taxing the rich" won't solve it. It need to be properly regulated. The fact that insulin costs $100 has nothing to do with taxes for the rich people. > Income went down Seems like it is not true. There's a chart: inflation adjusted median household income. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N It goes up. > perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem Man, I don't know your situation. Sometimes people pay for something they shouldn't. Like buying a shiny new car while old car only need occasional repairs, or buying top new iphones while cheapest android is 1/10 of that. When I was young I rented a flat which costed me about 70% of income, while I could rent a room for 30% of my income, or a flat for 30% of income and two hours commute. But it didn't matter because I was young, and I would not do that now. If that's your case, you may need to reconsider your worldview. If it's not, than I don't really know your situation to comment on that.
  - pope_meat 5y ago
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-is-collapsing-finds-researchers-including-piketty-2017-02-07 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-...
    - asteroidbelt 5y ago
      Why is that a problem? Looks like the issue is not that "I want to get rid of poverty" but rather "I want to get rid of rich people".
      - pope_meat 5y ago
        ...I'm providing a counter point to your claim that income hasn't gone down. Why is that a problem? well it's a problem because I am in that group. it's clearly not a problem for you or your friends, hence why I believe that cutting the nose to spite the face is the only way to make you and your friends care. Otherwise you'll spend the rest of time saying everything is perfectly fine, when me and a bunch of people keep telling you THAT WE ARE NOT OKAY. Do you get it now?
        asteroidbelt 5y ago
        > I'm providing a counter point to your claim that income hasn't gone down. It went up even inflation adjusted. Share of income went down, but not the income. A median worker can buy more stuff than they could 30 years ago. > THAT WE ARE NOT OKAY. I heard that, but I still don't understand why you are not OK. You are richer than you would be 30 years ago.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  > Income went down. I'm having a hard time finding where in the chart that happened across the last 30 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages#/media/File:United_States_real_wages_(red,_in_constant_2017_dollars).png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages#/media/File:United_...
  - pope_meat 5y ago
    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-is-collapsing-finds-researchers-including-piketty-2017-02-07 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-...
    - twoodfin 5y ago
      Do you understand the difference between “income” and “income share”?
      - pope_meat 5y ago
        The graph defines what it charts very well at the bottom. You can read it, and then if I am somehow still very wrong about the fact that income in the bottom 50% has gone down, or hasn't kept up if you'd prefer, then you can really stick it to me on this public forum about how I am wrong, and you are right, the only thing that matters on the internet.
        sokoloff 5y ago
        That graph is showing share of income (thus the y-axis is labeled in percentage [of total income]). That graph makes no statement whatsoever about whether real income in the bottom 50% has gone down, stayed flat, or risen over the 30-year period under discussion. For that, you’d look at a real income chart over the 30 year period, which would show that real income has increased over that span. If incomes at the bottom rise by 20% vs 10% inflation and incomes at the top rise by by 100%, the income at the bottom went up in real terms, though the share of income at the bottom will have gone down.

pope_meat 5y ago

Cost of education Cost of housing Cost of healthcare went up. Income went down. So I guess you're right, objectively things are much better, it's just my perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem.

asteroidbelt 5y ago
> Cost of education went up If you need high education, you just take credit, and pay for it with your salary which is much higher than it was 30 years ago. And if you think that you won't be able to pay for credit because it's not possible to find a decent job with liberal arts degree, then probably you don't need that education. > Cost of housing went up I suspect that's because construction workers are paid well now. So instead of studying classical literature in high school, maybe study bricklaying. > Cost of healthcare went up This is the issue, but "taxing the rich" won't solve it. It need to be properly regulated. The fact that insulin costs $100 has nothing to do with taxes for the rich people. > Income went down Seems like it is not true. There's a chart: inflation adjusted median household income. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N It goes up. > perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem Man, I don't know your situation. Sometimes people pay for something they shouldn't. Like buying a shiny new car while old car only need occasional repairs, or buying top new iphones while cheapest android is 1/10 of that. When I was young I rented a flat which costed me about 70% of income, while I could rent a room for 30% of my income, or a flat for 30% of income and two hours commute. But it didn't matter because I was young, and I would not do that now. If that's your case, you may need to reconsider your worldview. If it's not, than I don't really know your situation to comment on that.
- pope_meat 5y ago
  https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-is-collapsing-finds-researchers-including-piketty-2017-02-07 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-...
  - asteroidbelt 5y ago
    Why is that a problem? Looks like the issue is not that "I want to get rid of poverty" but rather "I want to get rid of rich people".
    - pope_meat 5y ago
      ...I'm providing a counter point to your claim that income hasn't gone down. Why is that a problem? well it's a problem because I am in that group. it's clearly not a problem for you or your friends, hence why I believe that cutting the nose to spite the face is the only way to make you and your friends care. Otherwise you'll spend the rest of time saying everything is perfectly fine, when me and a bunch of people keep telling you THAT WE ARE NOT OKAY. Do you get it now?
      - asteroidbelt 5y ago
        > I'm providing a counter point to your claim that income hasn't gone down. It went up even inflation adjusted. Share of income went down, but not the income. A median worker can buy more stuff than they could 30 years ago. > THAT WE ARE NOT OKAY. I heard that, but I still don't understand why you are not OK. You are richer than you would be 30 years ago.
sokoloff 5y ago
> Income went down. I'm having a hard time finding where in the chart that happened across the last 30 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages#/media/File:United_States_real_wages_(red,_in_constant_2017_dollars).png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages#/media/File:United_...
- pope_meat 5y ago
  https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-is-collapsing-finds-researchers-including-piketty-2017-02-07 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/income-share-of-bottom-50-...
  - twoodfin 5y ago
    Do you understand the difference between “income” and “income share”?
    - pope_meat 5y ago
      The graph defines what it charts very well at the bottom. You can read it, and then if I am somehow still very wrong about the fact that income in the bottom 50% has gone down, or hasn't kept up if you'd prefer, then you can really stick it to me on this public forum about how I am wrong, and you are right, the only thing that matters on the internet.
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        That graph is showing share of income (thus the y-axis is labeled in percentage [of total income]). That graph makes no statement whatsoever about whether real income in the bottom 50% has gone down, stayed flat, or risen over the 30-year period under discussion. For that, you’d look at a real income chart over the 30 year period, which would show that real income has increased over that span. If incomes at the bottom rise by 20% vs 10% inflation and incomes at the top rise by by 100%, the income at the bottom went up in real terms, though the share of income at the bottom will have gone down.