3 ms·

(a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. (b) On the ot

by afafsd 12y ago

(a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. (b) On the other hand, popular and in-demand restaurants already have schemes for letting rich and/or important people get reservations ahead of the plebs. When I went to French Laundry (after a six-month odyssey to get a reservation) the waiter mentioned that only about half their tables are actually open for reservation by the ordinary scheme, the others are reserved for booking by other means. If you're a rich dude who likes to bring clients there and always buys the expensive wine, you'd better believe that they're gonna give you the number for their secret reservation hotline.

bulletsvshumans 12y ago
> (a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. In terms of the share of U.S. income going to the top 10% or 1%, the data would seem to imply that the U.S. is currently the most stratified it's been in over 80 years [1]. [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-richer-through-the-recovery/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-ri...
obstacle1 12y ago
>(a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. Terrible, cringe-worthy logic. If stratification still exists, whether or not it is of a lesser degree than in the past is irrelevant. It exists, and you can complain about it. In fact, if you don't complain about it, that may be misconstrued as implicit acceptance. So complaining is actually the better move, provided you actually want said stratification eliminated. Think.
Hello71 12y ago
this argument would be just as accurate after a replacement of "stratified" with "misogynist" or even "starving".

by afafsd 12y ago

bulletsvshumans 12y ago

> (a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. In terms of the share of U.S. income going to the top 10% or 1%, the data would seem to imply that the U.S. is currently the most stratified it's been in over 80 years [1]. [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-richer-through-the-recovery/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/the-rich-get-ri...

obstacle1 12y ago

>(a) Society is currently less stratified than pretty much any point in recorded history, so if you don't like stratification then don't complain. Terrible, cringe-worthy logic. If stratification still exists, whether or not it is of a lesser degree than in the past is irrelevant. It exists, and you can complain about it. In fact, if you don't complain about it, that may be misconstrued as implicit acceptance. So complaining is actually the better move, provided you actually want said stratification eliminated. Think.

Hello71 12y ago

this argument would be just as accurate after a replacement of "stratified" with "misogynist" or even "starving".