|
Nessus posted:To be fair, it might've been a generic piece of counter-sass, because really when have we NOT just had some random public massacre? Tuesday?
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
peter banana posted:Ted Cruz posts "Quick Poll" on Facebook about whether or not Americans are better off now with the ACA. It doesn't go exactly the way he planned. This link is the epitome of  . Like... goddamn that's refreshing.
Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Apr 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
LorneReams posted:I mean how is Wisconsin doing? It's poo poo now Statewide unemployment is 6.5%, Milwaukee is at 9.8%. Compare this to Minnesota's rate of 4.8% and MSP at 4.6%.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:It's poo poo now
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
According to the Heritage Foundation, the middle class is everyone with a household income between $71k and $613kHeritage posted:According to CBO, the top 1 percent of income earners—families earning more than $613,700 in 2010 (the latest year of available data)—paid an effective tax rate on all federal taxes of 29.4 percent. They paid 24.2 percent of all federal taxes while earning just under 15 percent of all income. Somehow, the middle class begins somewhere in the 30th percentile of household income and ends at the top 1%. Also, I'm pretty sure that $613k figure is utterly wrong. source
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:According to the Heritage Foundation, the middle class is everyone with a household income between $71k and $613k The somehow is that Republican policies have destroyed the middle class
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:According to the Heritage Foundation, the middle class is everyone with a household income between $71k and $613k
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:28
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:loving hell and goddamn. I went to Mitt Romney's old private school (with a scholarship bringing the cost down tolerably) and the moment from that which sticks out the most was during a class discussion on social divisions, income and so forth, one bright student from a monied family confidently stated that the middle class began at $250k a year. This has a slightly lower bound than that, but goddamn, how far out do you have to be to seriously think that everyone below $71k are the poors? How can people be so out of it? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:loving hell and goddamn. I went to Mitt Romney's old private school (with a scholarship bringing the cost down tolerably) and the moment from that which sticks out the most was during a class discussion on social divisions, income and so forth, one bright student from a monied family confidently stated that the middle class began at $250k a year. This has a slightly lower bound than that, but goddamn, how far out do you have to be to seriously think that everyone below $71k are the poors? How can people be so out of it? 71k as a household income with two earners isn't exactly balling. Two 35k incomes is keeping up with your rent and two running cars, but if you've got kids, and the sort of insurance you get with a 15$ an hour job, and anything that goes wrong, that is not a lot of cushion. Household income, not "job out of college wage"
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:44
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:71k as a household income with two earners isn't exactly balling. Two 35k incomes is keeping up with your rent and two running cars, but if you've got kids, and the sort of insurance you get with a 15$ an hour job, and anything that goes wrong, that is not a lot of cushion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:71k as a household income with two earners isn't exactly balling. Two 35k incomes is keeping up with your rent and two running cars, but if you've got kids, and the sort of insurance you get with a 15$ an hour job, and anything that goes wrong, that is not a lot of cushion. Nobody's saying $71K is rich, or isn't middle class, or anything like that, just that it's not the lower-bound of middle class. We're just saying that a household making $60K or $50K a year is also middle class. The median household income in the US is $53K. They're saying that the lower bound of the middle class is 40% more money than the median American household makes. That's not how pretty much anyone else would define middle class.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Goons immediately jumping to the conclusion that household income is a single earner. Who'd have thought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Every single discussion about the middle class in D&D ends up with goons defining the upper boundary as x multiples of their own income, and god forbid if you make more than that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
I make just north of 6 figures myself, and it feels fairly cushy and secure. Providing crazyness doesn't happen, and whenever it does, we have always had enough savings to cover it (though only just most of the time). I can't even fathom what we would do with even just twice that, let alone multiple times over. Savings and making it grow obviously. But for what purpose? It wouldn't take terribly long to have more than enough saved for anything future needs, and then what? It just sits around and becomes nothing more than a number that gets bigger for the sake of getting bigger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:04
|
|
|
Slickdrac posted:I make just north of 6 figures myself, and it feels fairly cushy and secure. Providing crazyness doesn't happen, and whenever it does, we have always had enough savings to cover it (though only just most of the time). But then how will you know you're WINNING? You have to know how well you're living your life, and money is the scorecard! RUN UP THE SCORE unless you're a communist who wants to see us all lining up for hours to get turnips!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:07
|
|
|
zxqv8 posted:It *is* pretty much a different side of the same coin, now that you bring it up in that context. Accelerationism is just suggesting that people must suffer further and that will at some magical break-point force them to seek change. It's a different way of rationalizing the same nasty bullshit republican legislators are doing to people now with all their regressive bullshit; making being poor bad enough is seen as a motivator in the accelerationist view, just as it is in the right-wing view ultimately. Honestly I think if the states keep polarizing we'll be able to point out just how horrible conservative policies really are without inflicting them on the entire nation. I mean, sucks to be Wisconsin but they not only elected walker once, but didn't throw him out when they had the chance. Speaking of incredibly lovely governors, how's polling for Florida? Do we even have a chance at getting rid of Rick, or are we stuck with him until 2018? It really sucks that we have an off-year governor cycle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
Slickdrac posted:I make just north of 6 figures myself, and it feels fairly cushy and secure. Providing crazyness doesn't happen, and whenever it does, we have always had enough savings to cover it (though only just most of the time). I think having kids really changes the equation on this. It's easy to be frugal if you're single or DINK but you'll always be able to find things to spend money on if you have kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
Slickdrac posted:I make just north of 6 figures myself, and it feels fairly cushy and secure. Providing crazyness doesn't happen, and whenever it does, we have always had enough savings to cover it (though only just most of the time). I'm in the same boat and having things like a maxed 401k and 12mo emergency funds are just kind of a given. Then again we're pre-children and we don't live in a mansion. These people feel broke because they're saving over $45k/year and spend money like it's going out of style. How dare they have to pull a child out of a private high school that costs more than most universities! Kids are a big money sink, but the rest of civilization manages to do just fine without hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. Edit: I went to one of those elite private high schools and it was hilarious when people coming from families that owned private jets said they were middle class. Dr. Laffer's son (yeah that one) thought he was middle class. Guy had a pet Galapagos Tortoise. Bastard Tetris fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Apr 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
Harik posted:Speaking of incredibly lovely governors, how's polling for Florida? Do we even have a chance at getting rid of Rick, or are we stuck with him until 2018? It really sucks that we have an off-year governor cycle. RealClearPolitics has an average for the calendar year so far of Crist +4.5 points. Most of those polls are from January, but there hasn't been anything earth-shattering here since then to sway the numbers in a meaningful way. It's worth noting that UF and Quinnipiac both ran polls in late January that had Crist up 7-8 points. Rick Scott is in trouble here and has been running TV ads since early March.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:RealClearPolitics has an average for the calendar year so far of Crist +4.5 points. Most of those polls are from January, but there hasn't been anything earth-shattering here since then to sway the numbers in a meaningful way. Well that's something good. Not that Crist is great, but at least it's not Rick Scott again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
The FL Democratic party blew that election badly by nominating Alex Sink to run against Scott in 2010. Scott painted her as a Bank of America fat-cat/crony and the FL Dems weren't able to message that Scott was the most notorious Medicare fraudster in history. If the name "Alex Sink" rings a bell in your subconscious, it's because she also just lost the FL-13 special election to David Jolly for the seat left vacant from Bill Young's death. I have a whole lot of words I could write about Sink, Scott, Crist, and the political scene in this entire state but I'll just let it go for now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 07:42
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:The FL Democratic party blew that election badly by nominating Alex Sink to run against Scott in 2010. Scott painted her as a Bank of America fat-cat/crony and the FL Dems weren't able to message that Scott was the most notorious Medicare fraudster in history. Unless those words are just "gently caress" repeated over and over, this is the thread for it! And if those words are repetitions of gently caress, hey, still likely to be an improvement on some of our derails.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 08:21
|
|
|
N00ba the Hutt posted:Unless those words are just "gently caress" repeated over and over, this is the thread for it! I think it's because alzheimer's keeps them from remembering Alex Sink loses every election.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Goons immediately jumping to the conclusion that household income is a single earner. Who'd have thought. Literally not one single person did that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Literally not one single person did that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 09:30
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Well, another way to take that is that Richie Rich there was entirely correct, and that is where the middle class begins, and we're all proletarians This discussion always seems to come down to semantics. Does "middle class" refer to a certain income percentile (say, the 30th to the 70th)? Or does it refer to a defined lifestyle (say, owning your own home and having a reasonably secure career and retirement), regardless of how many Americans actually live that way?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 09:41
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:71k as a household income with two earners isn't exactly balling. Two 35k incomes is keeping up with your rent and two running cars, but if you've got kids, and the sort of insurance you get with a 15$ an hour job, and anything that goes wrong, that is not a lot of cushion. I read poo poo like this, and I thank my lucky stars I was raised in family that imparted useful frugality philosophy and skills. It's difficult for me to imagine "barely treading water" with a $71k household income. I understand it's not much for dual income, but with a decently non-hedonic lifestyle, that should be plenty to fund a family of four pretty comfortably. Anecdotally, I make about that much as a single earner, get like $50k net, and manage to invest about $30k of that and live QUITE luxuriously on the remaining $20k. My perspective is that most of my upper-middle class coworkers blow their paychecks on silly hedonistic things like hundreds on shoes and clothes, new $100k cars bought on credit, brand new furniture every couple of years, etc. I know this one couple that has a kid in 1st grade, and they live even better than I do but spend only about $25k/yr for all three of them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 09:49
|
|
|
Justus posted:I read poo poo like this, and I thank my lucky stars I was raised in family that imparted useful frugality philosophy and skills. It's difficult for me to imagine "barely treading water" with a $71k household income. I understand it's not much for dual income, but with a decently non-hedonic lifestyle, that should be plenty to fund a family of four pretty comfortably. Keep in mind location makes a big difference, moving from TN to MA changes my yearly rent bill from $5,400 to $34,800 for a smaller place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:This link is the epitome of Really. Have I stepped through a worm hole into a bizarro universe where Facebook and YouTube comments make sense and don't fill me with loathing (minus one, of course)?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 12:16
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:Median household income from 2008-2012 was $53000, and $71k is certainly above that. The median household is the working poor and they don't know it
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:According to the Heritage Foundation, the middle class is everyone with a household income between $71k and $613k One of the defining tenants of the American political system seems to be discussion about and ownership of words that the general public does not use regularly. Americans discussing "class" is interesting, because American society has not spent most of its existence with the concepts of a concrete class structure (too busy with slavery to divide the population by anything other than colour), thus the definition of "class" or "middle class" is subjective. Like "terrorism". It's basically the same tactic: take some words that aren't in every-day lexicon, bastardize their meaning, and then thrust that unfamiliar word with a new definition into the public view until it becomes part of the vocabulary.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 13:54
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:Every single discussion about the middle class in D&D ends up with goons defining the upper boundary as x multiples of their own income, and god forbid if you make more than that. Works out well for me, I'm not making any money. Y'all are all the bourgeois.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
shrike82 posted:I think having kids really changes the equation on this. Even then, my dad was a single earner at that level for a while (~$110k) and it was a fairly comfortable lifestyle. Not as many vacations, but still fairly comfortable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Justus posted:I read poo poo like this, and I thank my lucky stars I was raised in family that imparted useful frugality philosophy and skills. It's difficult for me to imagine "barely treading water" with a $71k household income. I understand it's not much for dual income, but with a decently non-hedonic lifestyle, that should be plenty to fund a family of four pretty comfortably. Congratulations on being the mayor of west bumblefuck I guess. Is there another 70k job there for anyone else, or would they have to move to a metropolitan center where you can easily spend 25k a year on single family housing? What I'm saying is some people spend their money badly, and maybe you don't, but that's not relevant in most places, where cost of living is higher than your experience. Seriously, living great on 20 or 25k? Where? Being middle class is not about being frugal
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Slickdrac posted:I make just north of 6 figures myself, and it feels fairly cushy and secure. Providing crazyness doesn't happen, and whenever it does, we have always had enough savings to cover it (though only just most of the time). But your next door neighbor has a newer maybach, a larger yacht and a faster jet. If you don't one up him maybe people won't give you as much money or your wife will leave you or... I don't know. The only people I know that had that level or money were burning it up on startups they were running so that's an entirely different category from the previous. (Ie, yay I have money now I can do what I want to do!)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But your next door neighbor has a newer maybach, a larger yacht and a faster jet. If you don't one up him maybe people won't give you as much money or your wife will leave you or... I don't know. Pfft, only a pleb wouldn't know Maybach hasn't made new cars since 2012. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Goons immediately jumping to the conclusion that household income is a single earner. Who'd have thought. It's less annoying than when I tell someone I make less than 40k a year and they think I'm poor because I make less than the average 2 adult household, having less bills to deal with (and no kids).  Your location means a lot too though. A family of 4 living in New York off of 100k a year is going to have a drastically different comfort level and cost of living than if that family was in Atlanta or Portland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 17:07
|
|
Jarmak posted:Keep in mind location makes a big difference, moving from TN to MA changes my yearly rent bill from $5,400 to $34,800 for a smaller place. ... That's a little more than moving states. MA is not 7x as expensive as Tennessee Evil Fluffy posted:It's less annoying than when I tell someone I make less than 40k a year and they think I'm poor because I make less than the average 2 adult household, having less bills to deal with (and no kids). God forbid someone thinks your poor, right?
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
peter banana posted:Ted Cruz posts "Quick Poll" on Facebook about whether or not Americans are better off now with the ACA. It doesn't go exactly the way he planned. Jesus, 9k more comments since I last looked at that. If you look he has a more recent post where he promises a full repeal of Obamacare, despite all of those people telling him they like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:04 |
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Jesus, 9k more comments since I last looked at that. If you look he has a more recent post where he promises a full repeal of Obamacare, despite all of those people telling him they like it. Don't you get it? Those are all liberal plants! (Ted Cruz hasn't actually read a single comment, the intern running the Facebook told him everyone hates Obamacare.) Plus he is probably ignoring all the protests in Southern States who want the Medicare expansion. These people live in an echo chamber and they can't fathom any other view than theirs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2014 17:41
|
|
