3 ms·

Let me step in right here. I'm not quite sure I get your reasoning or your disagreement. As I understand it, yummyfajitas is saying [roughly] "here's how much

by edanm 13y ago

Let me step in right here. I'm not quite sure I get your reasoning or your disagreement. As I understand it, yummyfajitas is saying [roughly] "here's how much money people make around the world, adjusted for purchasing power which means that it does make sense to compare. It's less than most people in the US. Obviously, they also live in much worse conditions, but that isn't the same as to literally be dying." What yummyfajitas concludes from the above is that having less money won't lead to people literally being "unable to live", but rather "unable to live with the lifestyle they are currently accustomed to". This is his position as I understand it. Which part of that are you disagreeing with?

ThomPete 13y ago
Can you please point to a place where I said someone would be dying? But I see strawmen works.
- edanm 13y ago
  Sure. From yummyfajitas' post: <start of quote> "...forcing salaries down way below what is possible to live off." This is an exaggeration. It may be forcing salaries below the level necessary to support US middle class consumption levels, but there is a huge gap between that and "possible to live off". </end of quote> This was in response to your post: <start of quote> The problem is that the jobs that are left for those without a tech degree of some sort aren't appreciated by the market and is forcing salaries down way below what is possible to live off. </end of quote> Maybe you meant "possible to live off" as being different from "dying", and if so I apologise for paraphrasing poorly. But yummfajitas is essentially saying that it is possible to live off of that money, because people do it, and you're saying that it's not possible. Note: I happen to agree with you that there is a problem and that most people don't recognise it. But I still think you and yummyfajitas are arguing past each other. NOTE: I accidentally posted this comment to the wrong parent earlier. reposting.
  - ThomPete 13y ago
    You do realize "to live of" does not mean you will die from right? As I have said the problem is that it's not enough and so they need to get help from the government which many of them get. It's bordering an absurd rethorical nitpicking if you really aren't able to discuss this in a normal manner with a fairly normal understand of the US system.
    - yummyfajitas 13y ago
      If I thought that you meant "to live off" was merely a drop in consumption to levels far higher than anyone lives off over here, I'd have written this in my very first response: It may be forcing salaries below the level necessary to support US middle class consumption levels, but there is a huge gap between that and "possible to live off". If you actually agreed with me but simply used a different definition that I did for the term "live off", why not just say "by 'live off' I actually meant 'maintain US middle class consumption levels'"?
      - ThomPete 13y ago
        i was asuming you had at least basic understanding of what happens to people who make 15k a year in the US. I guess i was wrong and you dont.
        tptacek 13y ago
        That's an emotional appeal, not an argument.
        ThomPete 13y ago
        Emotional? In what way? Did you read the discussion? As far as I can see I am the one getting down voted because of some peoples emotions.
        tptacek 13y ago
        You wrote, "i was asuming you had at least basic understanding of what happens to people who make 15k a year in the US. I guess i was wrong and you dont." But Chris Stucchio obviously does know many things about what life is like for people in the US who make 15k/yr (he's from the US, for what it's worth). He's demonstrated that amply in this thread and elsewhere. For your comment to be a real argument, you'd need to accompany that shrill statement with a list of specific things about what it's like to live on 15k/yr in the US; in other words, you'd need to support your statement with evidence.

by edanm 13y ago

ThomPete 13y ago

Can you please point to a place where I said someone would be dying? But I see strawmen works.

edanm 13y ago
Sure. From yummyfajitas' post: <start of quote> "...forcing salaries down way below what is possible to live off." This is an exaggeration. It may be forcing salaries below the level necessary to support US middle class consumption levels, but there is a huge gap between that and "possible to live off". </end of quote> This was in response to your post: <start of quote> The problem is that the jobs that are left for those without a tech degree of some sort aren't appreciated by the market and is forcing salaries down way below what is possible to live off. </end of quote> Maybe you meant "possible to live off" as being different from "dying", and if so I apologise for paraphrasing poorly. But yummfajitas is essentially saying that it is possible to live off of that money, because people do it, and you're saying that it's not possible. Note: I happen to agree with you that there is a problem and that most people don't recognise it. But I still think you and yummyfajitas are arguing past each other. NOTE: I accidentally posted this comment to the wrong parent earlier. reposting.
- ThomPete 13y ago
  You do realize "to live of" does not mean you will die from right? As I have said the problem is that it's not enough and so they need to get help from the government which many of them get. It's bordering an absurd rethorical nitpicking if you really aren't able to discuss this in a normal manner with a fairly normal understand of the US system.
  - yummyfajitas 13y ago
    If I thought that you meant "to live off" was merely a drop in consumption to levels far higher than anyone lives off over here, I'd have written this in my very first response: It may be forcing salaries below the level necessary to support US middle class consumption levels, but there is a huge gap between that and "possible to live off". If you actually agreed with me but simply used a different definition that I did for the term "live off", why not just say "by 'live off' I actually meant 'maintain US middle class consumption levels'"?
    - ThomPete 13y ago
      i was asuming you had at least basic understanding of what happens to people who make 15k a year in the US. I guess i was wrong and you dont.
      - tptacek 13y ago
        That's an emotional appeal, not an argument.
        ThomPete 13y ago
        Emotional? In what way? Did you read the discussion? As far as I can see I am the one getting down voted because of some peoples emotions.
        tptacek 13y ago
        You wrote, "i was asuming you had at least basic understanding of what happens to people who make 15k a year in the US. I guess i was wrong and you dont." But Chris Stucchio obviously does know many things about what life is like for people in the US who make 15k/yr (he's from the US, for what it's worth). He's demonstrated that amply in this thread and elsewhere. For your comment to be a real argument, you'd need to accompany that shrill statement with a list of specific things about what it's like to live on 15k/yr in the US; in other words, you'd need to support your statement with evidence.