4 ms·

> Booz Allen last month admitted no wrongdoing while paying a $377 million settlement I wish I could get away with that, but i'm middle class.

skyyler 3y ago
I hear that term a lot, but what does "middle class" mean to you? When you say you are "middle" what do you mean?
- rescripting 3y ago
  It means that paying a settlement of hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to make legal troubles disappear is out of reach.
  - skyyler 3y ago
    That's true of whatever class is lesser than the middle class, as well. I was just curious what separates the "middle" from the "bottom".
    - dylan604 3y ago
      you gotta be in the upper middle at least to even come close to racking up $377 million of anything, right?
      - skyyler 3y ago
        Sure. But what separates the middle from the lower?
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > what separates the middle from the lower Property. Historically, this meant land. Today, it means assets. Savings of any kind. The poor live pay check to pay check; the middle class could survive a bad harvest.
        skyyler 3y ago
        Thank you for responding to my curiosity with discussion, not mockery. This makes sense to me. Owning things at all makes you middle class, and not destitute. Why is this distinction important?
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Why is this distinction important? The safety buffer it provides lets you take more risk, personally, civically and societally. That lets you access rewards someone fighting for sustenance can’t countenance. Consider the years we, as a society, spend educating our youth when they could be working a field to produce food. It also means leverage. If a harvest failed, the poor in the army got fed. The others didn’t. The middle class, on the other hand, wasn’t forced into that choice simply to survive. (We use the term “survive” nowadays to mean maintain some arbitrary quality of life, but I’m speaking literally.)
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        dylan604 3y ago
        there are plenty of middle class living pay check to pay check and do not own things.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > there are plenty of middle class living pay check to pay check and do not own things And there are plenty of the very rich who go bankrupt and die penniless. Someone relying solely on income from labour to sustain their standard of living may live as the middle class do, just as a poor person accumulating debt may sustain a middle-class lifestyle, but that doesn’t change their fundamental economic situation. Also: When middle class folk talk about living paycheck to paycheck, they’re usually ignoring retirement assets. But I don’t deny that plenty of people consume their economic security because they, and many times rightly, don’t believe they need it.
        3y ago
- briffle 3y ago
  Honestly, I make a low six figure income (starts with a 1), with a couple of kids, and a stay at home partner, and work from home in a moderate city for housing and costs on the west coast. We make ends meet, can afford the things we want to do, but never seem to actually build any savings. (grocery costs are eating us alive this past year or two)
  - pc86 3y ago
    Median household (not individual) income in the US is barely $70k, not sure I'd consider 50% above the median at the low end "middle." But most people here, myself included, probably make $150-200k/yr before any stock or RSUs so I'm looking forward to the mental gymnastics calling that middle class.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      Basing class structure on difference from the societal median is a bad idea. It means making the entire country except a few poorer grows the "middle" class. There are three classes: Struggling, comfortable, and rich. If paying for necessities like transport, housing, and food requires significant efforts to manage cash flow or is even impossible, you are struggling. If you don't know when your employer pays you because you haven't had a cash flow problem in a decade, you are comfortable. If you don't have an employer because your wealth comes from things, you are rich.
      - pc86 3y ago
        I mean you can simplify it even more into "haves" and "have nots" but there's a reason nobody serious does that anymore, because it doesn't give you any useful information, nor does those three categories. That doesn't change the fact that almost everybody wants to think of themselves as middle class, but especially here on HN most people are definitely not. If you make $200k cash plus RSUs on top of that you may not be rich but you're certainly on your way there and you're certainly not middle class in the way that carpenter making $75k with his stay at home wife in Houston is.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
praxulus 3y ago
You can, it's called an Alford plea. You maintain your innocence but accept the plea deal anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea
- burkaman 3y ago
  Maintaining your innocence is easy, anyone can do that, it's the avoiding any meaningful punishment that is difficult.
aidenn0 3y ago
You too can probably get away with a $377 million settlement for most torts.
- whatshisface 3y ago
  I wouldn't get a $377 settlement for defrauding the government $500, but apparently you can obtain a $377M penalty for defrauding the government $500M. In fact, I would not be able to "settle" at all...
  - dylan604 3y ago
    There's a lot of times where deals are made because the government looks at how much it's going to cost to get the full value vs the settlement price. If the cost to gain the full value is larger than the settlement, then getting the full value is actually a loss compared to the settlement. Also, the government makes deals willing to take a haircut to get some vs none. A settlement is both parties giving something, not just the accused.
sleepybrett 3y ago
In any smaller theft the thieves usually have to make >100% restitution (balance of stolen + fines). I wish I could get away with stealing and only having to pay back a small percentage of my takings. We need to stop passing out sweatheart deals to corporations it only leads to more theft.
- gabereiser 3y ago
  Agreed but then who would manage the state clerks IT department? Deloitte? It’s a case of “You’re in the wrong but we secretly need you because we are even more incompetent”
  - sleepybrett 3y ago
    I mean BAH or whoever can continue doing that after they pay back the stolen funds if the state clerk will allow it. I'm just griping with, time after time, a company stealing 100m dollars or whatever and then reaching a settlement that lets them get off scott free after paying back 50m.

skyyler 3y ago

I hear that term a lot, but what does "middle class" mean to you? When you say you are "middle" what do you mean?

rescripting 3y ago
It means that paying a settlement of hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars to make legal troubles disappear is out of reach.
- skyyler 3y ago
  That's true of whatever class is lesser than the middle class, as well. I was just curious what separates the "middle" from the "bottom".
  - dylan604 3y ago
    you gotta be in the upper middle at least to even come close to racking up $377 million of anything, right?
    - skyyler 3y ago
      Sure. But what separates the middle from the lower?
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > what separates the middle from the lower Property. Historically, this meant land. Today, it means assets. Savings of any kind. The poor live pay check to pay check; the middle class could survive a bad harvest.
        skyyler 3y ago
        Thank you for responding to my curiosity with discussion, not mockery. This makes sense to me. Owning things at all makes you middle class, and not destitute. Why is this distinction important?
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Why is this distinction important? The safety buffer it provides lets you take more risk, personally, civically and societally. That lets you access rewards someone fighting for sustenance can’t countenance. Consider the years we, as a society, spend educating our youth when they could be working a field to produce food. It also means leverage. If a harvest failed, the poor in the army got fed. The others didn’t. The middle class, on the other hand, wasn’t forced into that choice simply to survive. (We use the term “survive” nowadays to mean maintain some arbitrary quality of life, but I’m speaking literally.)
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        dylan604 3y ago
        there are plenty of middle class living pay check to pay check and do not own things.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > there are plenty of middle class living pay check to pay check and do not own things And there are plenty of the very rich who go bankrupt and die penniless. Someone relying solely on income from labour to sustain their standard of living may live as the middle class do, just as a poor person accumulating debt may sustain a middle-class lifestyle, but that doesn’t change their fundamental economic situation. Also: When middle class folk talk about living paycheck to paycheck, they’re usually ignoring retirement assets. But I don’t deny that plenty of people consume their economic security because they, and many times rightly, don’t believe they need it.
        3y ago
briffle 3y ago
Honestly, I make a low six figure income (starts with a 1), with a couple of kids, and a stay at home partner, and work from home in a moderate city for housing and costs on the west coast. We make ends meet, can afford the things we want to do, but never seem to actually build any savings. (grocery costs are eating us alive this past year or two)
- pc86 3y ago
  Median household (not individual) income in the US is barely $70k, not sure I'd consider 50% above the median at the low end "middle." But most people here, myself included, probably make $150-200k/yr before any stock or RSUs so I'm looking forward to the mental gymnastics calling that middle class.
  - mrguyorama 3y ago
    Basing class structure on difference from the societal median is a bad idea. It means making the entire country except a few poorer grows the "middle" class. There are three classes: Struggling, comfortable, and rich. If paying for necessities like transport, housing, and food requires significant efforts to manage cash flow or is even impossible, you are struggling. If you don't know when your employer pays you because you haven't had a cash flow problem in a decade, you are comfortable. If you don't have an employer because your wealth comes from things, you are rich.
    - pc86 3y ago
      I mean you can simplify it even more into "haves" and "have nots" but there's a reason nobody serious does that anymore, because it doesn't give you any useful information, nor does those three categories. That doesn't change the fact that almost everybody wants to think of themselves as middle class, but especially here on HN most people are definitely not. If you make $200k cash plus RSUs on top of that you may not be rich but you're certainly on your way there and you're certainly not middle class in the way that carpenter making $75k with his stay at home wife in Houston is.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

praxulus 3y ago

You can, it's called an Alford plea. You maintain your innocence but accept the plea deal anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alford_plea

burkaman 3y ago
Maintaining your innocence is easy, anyone can do that, it's the avoiding any meaningful punishment that is difficult.

aidenn0 3y ago

You too can probably get away with a $377 million settlement for most torts.

whatshisface 3y ago
I wouldn't get a $377 settlement for defrauding the government $500, but apparently you can obtain a $377M penalty for defrauding the government $500M. In fact, I would not be able to "settle" at all...
- dylan604 3y ago
  There's a lot of times where deals are made because the government looks at how much it's going to cost to get the full value vs the settlement price. If the cost to gain the full value is larger than the settlement, then getting the full value is actually a loss compared to the settlement. Also, the government makes deals willing to take a haircut to get some vs none. A settlement is both parties giving something, not just the accused.

sleepybrett 3y ago

In any smaller theft the thieves usually have to make >100% restitution (balance of stolen + fines). I wish I could get away with stealing and only having to pay back a small percentage of my takings. We need to stop passing out sweatheart deals to corporations it only leads to more theft.

gabereiser 3y ago
Agreed but then who would manage the state clerks IT department? Deloitte? It’s a case of “You’re in the wrong but we secretly need you because we are even more incompetent”
- sleepybrett 3y ago
  I mean BAH or whoever can continue doing that after they pay back the stolen funds if the state clerk will allow it. I'm just griping with, time after time, a company stealing 100m dollars or whatever and then reaching a settlement that lets them get off scott free after paying back 50m.