3 ms·

> I’m wrong about this obviously but I still cannot understand why. I have this theory (I wish I could think of a way to easily prove it right with some kind o

> I’m wrong about this obviously but I still cannot understand why. I have this theory (I wish I could think of a way to easily prove it right with some kind of cherry-picked statistics/data but I'm not confident I'd be able to) that we've finally reached a point (I'm sure it isn't the first time in history but I don't know a lot of history) in "late-stage capitalism" that the top 20% don't mind paying/can pay/will pay/are willing to pay/compete with each other to the point where the bottom 80% can't keep up. My source is, I tried to buy a house semi-recently. All of the typical stuff you read. Lots of demand/competition. Middle class stuff. The houses sold for what it sold for because that's what people are willing to pay. Whether it's because the couple who won the bid had bought a $300k house 10 years ago and it doubled and they had $300k extra in funny money equity fall out of the sky is almost irrelevant because it puts them in that "20%" category. Once you are in that category (in my mind), things like "I should drive a Corollla to be efficient" go out the window when every stop light is people who can comfortably afford $80k BMWs without blinking an eye. "Who would pay that?! You can get a good used car for $20k! Blasphemy" I see it like this: If a house is priced for $600k but your gut (bias based on historical data) says "it was just $400k not too long ago, it should be worth $400k! this is madness", but then the market moves on and leaves you in the dust (and that $600k house goes from $600k to $700k and beyond), it's just upper middle class people paying (hopefully) what they can afford/are willing to pay.

phphphphp 4y ago
Essentially, the power of money grows exponentially. A well-off tech person earning a few hundred thousand dollars per year has the financial power equivalent to dozens of minimum wage people. I agree that we’re now at the point where there is so much money at the top that the power imbalance is too influential to be ignored. A few decades ago, the number of wealthy people was so small and their reach so short that it was unlikely the average person would experience any of their influence… nowadays, every block has someone wealthy enough to be buying up property with borrowed money to turn it into an airbnb. The influence of money today has permeated every aspect of our lives. And we, as well off tech people, are partly to blame.
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago
  > I agree that we’re now at the point where there is so much money at the top that the power imbalance is too influential to be ignored. Would you agree if I said the problem isn't really the billionaires when it comes to why middle class hard working people can't afford a single family house, but instead it's people making $200k/yr+?
  - phphphphp 4y ago
    I think the most direct responsibility for the community level impact is with the people earning $200k+ who are irresponsibly exercising the power that income brings. For example, it’s so common for families making good money to do things like buy investment properties in their local community… which is growing their wealth at the expense of their community. However, the reason we are all able to earn so much is due to the ruthless pursuit of capital further up the market. The only reason we are able to earn so much is because billionaire business people decided that the best way to maximise their company value was to take the not-innovative option and pay lots of people huge amounts of money.
    - MuffinFlavored 4y ago
      > I think the most direct responsibility for the community level impact is with the people earning $200k+ who are irresponsibly exercising the power that income brings. I think irresponsible is probably a poor word choice here (in my opinion) just because it leads my mind to think the assumption "why aren't they entitled to spend the money they earned the way they want to" But instead of splitting hairs there, I'd be more curious to potentially partner with you in the effort to accurately determine whether the effects of the group we are specifically discussing are actually having a sizable impact in "harming" (preventing) the groups below them from being able to purchase a house

phphphphp 4y ago

Essentially, the power of money grows exponentially. A well-off tech person earning a few hundred thousand dollars per year has the financial power equivalent to dozens of minimum wage people. I agree that we’re now at the point where there is so much money at the top that the power imbalance is too influential to be ignored. A few decades ago, the number of wealthy people was so small and their reach so short that it was unlikely the average person would experience any of their influence… nowadays, every block has someone wealthy enough to be buying up property with borrowed money to turn it into an airbnb. The influence of money today has permeated every aspect of our lives. And we, as well off tech people, are partly to blame.

MuffinFlavored 4y ago
> I agree that we’re now at the point where there is so much money at the top that the power imbalance is too influential to be ignored. Would you agree if I said the problem isn't really the billionaires when it comes to why middle class hard working people can't afford a single family house, but instead it's people making $200k/yr+?
- phphphphp 4y ago
  I think the most direct responsibility for the community level impact is with the people earning $200k+ who are irresponsibly exercising the power that income brings. For example, it’s so common for families making good money to do things like buy investment properties in their local community… which is growing their wealth at the expense of their community. However, the reason we are all able to earn so much is due to the ruthless pursuit of capital further up the market. The only reason we are able to earn so much is because billionaire business people decided that the best way to maximise their company value was to take the not-innovative option and pay lots of people huge amounts of money.
  - MuffinFlavored 4y ago
    > I think the most direct responsibility for the community level impact is with the people earning $200k+ who are irresponsibly exercising the power that income brings. I think irresponsible is probably a poor word choice here (in my opinion) just because it leads my mind to think the assumption "why aren't they entitled to spend the money they earned the way they want to" But instead of splitting hairs there, I'd be more curious to potentially partner with you in the effort to accurately determine whether the effects of the group we are specifically discussing are actually having a sizable impact in "harming" (preventing) the groups below them from being able to purchase a house