3 ms·

I'm sorry, this is just loser talk. If you put enough effort into your skill set you should be able to make enough to afford goods and services in moderation.

by tsotha 15y ago

I'm sorry, this is just loser talk. If you put enough effort into your skill set you should be able to make enough to afford goods and services in moderation. Middle class, in other words. If you can't, then you're doing something wrong.

rayiner 15y ago
Loser or not, it's absolutely rational. http://www.epi.org/publication/large-disparity-share-total-wealth-gain/ http://www.epi.org/publication/large-disparity-share-total-w... The top 5% have captured 82% of all economic growth since 1983. That economic growth has been to a great extent the result of the productivity gains of the other 95% working harder and longer and more efficiently (with better technology). The bottom 60% have actually lost, on the whole, from their additional striving. Their return on additional labor has been negative. It's irrational, given that state of affairs, to strive. It's exactly akin to the arguments people raise when you talk about 90% marginal tax rates --- who would rationally work more when most of their gains go to the government? Well, who would rationally work more when most of the gains go to the rich? We keep people working more through cultural influence, but that doesn't make it rational.
- tsotha 15y ago
  >The top 5% have captured 82% of all economic growth since 1983. Lots of people convinced themselves credit is the same as cash. As long as that's true they will have no wealth. I know single people who make over six figures and have a negative net worth. Saying xx% of people haven't saved any money is not the same thing as saying that same percentage of people couldn't save money. They just didn't. That's the point of the article, and no matter how trite it seems, it's true. >The bottom 60% have actually lost, on the whole, from their additional striving. Their return on additional labor has been negative. You have to pick your time frame very carefully for that to be true. It's definitely the case the rich have been getting richer. The poor have been getting richer as well: http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/42130 http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/42130 Realize that the people in the bottom quartile are not the same people who were in the bottom quartile twenty years ago. Between 1985 and 2010 we had over ten million people immigrate to this country with no ability to speak English and no marketable skills. You can hardly blame the economy for not lifting them out of poverty yet. >It's irrational, given that state of affairs, to strive. Complete, unadulterated BS. It's not irrational at all. Even today, with the deleveraging that's going on, you can make a comfortable life for yourself if you're willing to "strive". Or, I guess, you can stay at your mom's place, drink beer, and play video games. But you'll have to pardon the rest of us for not having much sympathy when you complain the man is keeping you down.
- JanezStupar 15y ago
  When I started my corporate job - there were a lot of people around me with similar attitude. They would refuse to go an extra mile, saying: Somebody else will benefit from this more than I do, fuck this. I used different strategy, I hopped at every opportunity I got. Eventually (pretty goddamn scary fast TBH) it started paying off. I got salary increases, advancements, etc... By the time I left the company I was best paid member of the original team (while being the youngest and with least original experience), I also got to enjoy some really cool perks (how many of you were offered a position of "free electron"?). It was possible to do - not because I worked so hard ( well I did work hard, tbh) - but mostly because my competition set the bar so low. When people think the way you do, it really doesn't take an "extra mile", an "extra step" will do a lot of the time. Don't get me wrong, I knew that the environment I was in was shitty and hopeless. But I would not let that destroy my odds. And after 5 years I loaded up on network, experience, opportunity. I also managed to save a bunch of money. And my parents are both blue collar people, without connections in high places, but they had some connections in the department of rationality that I am grateful they passed my way.

by tsotha 15y ago

rayiner 15y ago

Loser or not, it's absolutely rational. http://www.epi.org/publication/large-disparity-share-total-wealth-gain/ http://www.epi.org/publication/large-disparity-share-total-w... The top 5% have captured 82% of all economic growth since 1983. That economic growth has been to a great extent the result of the productivity gains of the other 95% working harder and longer and more efficiently (with better technology). The bottom 60% have actually lost, on the whole, from their additional striving. Their return on additional labor has been negative. It's irrational, given that state of affairs, to strive. It's exactly akin to the arguments people raise when you talk about 90% marginal tax rates --- who would rationally work more when most of their gains go to the government? Well, who would rationally work more when most of the gains go to the rich? We keep people working more through cultural influence, but that doesn't make it rational.

tsotha 15y ago
>The top 5% have captured 82% of all economic growth since 1983. Lots of people convinced themselves credit is the same as cash. As long as that's true they will have no wealth. I know single people who make over six figures and have a negative net worth. Saying xx% of people haven't saved any money is not the same thing as saying that same percentage of people couldn't save money. They just didn't. That's the point of the article, and no matter how trite it seems, it's true. >The bottom 60% have actually lost, on the whole, from their additional striving. Their return on additional labor has been negative. You have to pick your time frame very carefully for that to be true. It's definitely the case the rich have been getting richer. The poor have been getting richer as well: http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/42130 http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/42130 Realize that the people in the bottom quartile are not the same people who were in the bottom quartile twenty years ago. Between 1985 and 2010 we had over ten million people immigrate to this country with no ability to speak English and no marketable skills. You can hardly blame the economy for not lifting them out of poverty yet. >It's irrational, given that state of affairs, to strive. Complete, unadulterated BS. It's not irrational at all. Even today, with the deleveraging that's going on, you can make a comfortable life for yourself if you're willing to "strive". Or, I guess, you can stay at your mom's place, drink beer, and play video games. But you'll have to pardon the rest of us for not having much sympathy when you complain the man is keeping you down.
JanezStupar 15y ago
When I started my corporate job - there were a lot of people around me with similar attitude. They would refuse to go an extra mile, saying: Somebody else will benefit from this more than I do, fuck this. I used different strategy, I hopped at every opportunity I got. Eventually (pretty goddamn scary fast TBH) it started paying off. I got salary increases, advancements, etc... By the time I left the company I was best paid member of the original team (while being the youngest and with least original experience), I also got to enjoy some really cool perks (how many of you were offered a position of "free electron"?). It was possible to do - not because I worked so hard ( well I did work hard, tbh) - but mostly because my competition set the bar so low. When people think the way you do, it really doesn't take an "extra mile", an "extra step" will do a lot of the time. Don't get me wrong, I knew that the environment I was in was shitty and hopeless. But I would not let that destroy my odds. And after 5 years I loaded up on network, experience, opportunity. I also managed to save a bunch of money. And my parents are both blue collar people, without connections in high places, but they had some connections in the department of rationality that I am grateful they passed my way.