|
|
#91
03-28-2007, 06:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Do you know anyone who builds cars that can't afford one? Or many homeless people in the construction industry? [/ QUOTE ] Actually I know both. [/ QUOTE ] You must live in another country then. Everyone in this one (that works) can afford a car and a home unless they choose to waste their money on other things. [/ QUOTE ] This to me sums up the absolute disconnect between most of the privileged wealthy posters on this forum and the reality in the US. I'm a social worker. I spend quite a bit of time in inner-city ultra-impoverished communities. To say that all you need to do is work and you can afford a car and house is completely ridiculous and is the same meriotcratic [censored] always bandied about by capitalists in justifying a tremendously unequal and unjust socioeconomic system. Also, what if you can't work? What if you don't have the skills necessary for the jobs available to you? What if you are sick or old or developmentally challenged? 
|
|
#92
03-28-2007, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Again, this is such a corner case since there were SO FEW people of such great privilege. Even if a few people back then were better off than the janitors of today, clearly the 5th percentile of today is better off than the 95th percentile of 500 years ago. 99th and 1st percentiles are a bigger stretch. [/ QUOTE ] That's true. But like I said, Victoria was pretty recent. I might trade places with her (but probably not). Constantine? No way. [/ QUOTE ] What about a Roman Emperor with loads of sex slaves, all the alcohol he wants (hookers and blow of the time?), all day to sit on his ass and crap in his gold toilet. I mean, come on, that had to be better than cleaning crap from McDonalds. You can't be serious. It's not like these guys have plasmas and ipods. [/ QUOTE ] I thought about the sex slave angle, but the only thing I'd want with them is to free them. Being drunk constantly wouldn't be fun at all. People who think that being drunk constantly is fun have a very warped perception of what "fun" is IMO.
|
|
#93
03-28-2007, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Do you know anyone who builds cars that can't afford one? Or many homeless people in the construction industry? [/ QUOTE ] Actually I know both. [/ QUOTE ] You must live in another country then. Everyone in this one (that works) can afford a car and a home unless they choose to waste their money on other things. [/ QUOTE ] This to me sums up the absolute disconnect between most of the privileged wealthy posters on this forum [/ QUOTE ] You must be talking about someone else. I've been "poor" most of my adult life, largely working minimum wage jobs. During this time, mostly when I was working full time (not counting the time I've spent homeless), I had both a car and a home or didn't see a need for a car (but could have gotten one if I did).
|
|
#94
03-28-2007, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Again, this is such a corner case since there were SO FEW people of such great privilege. Even if a few people back then were better off than the janitors of today, clearly the 5th percentile of today is better off than the 95th percentile of 500 years ago. 99th and 1st percentiles are a bigger stretch. [/ QUOTE ] That's true. But like I said, Victoria was pretty recent. I might trade places with her (but probably not). Constantine? No way. [/ QUOTE ] What about a Roman Emperor with loads of sex slaves, all the alcohol he wants (hookers and blow of the time?), all day to sit on his ass and crap in his gold toilet. I mean, come on, that had to be better than cleaning crap from McDonalds. You can't be serious. It's not like these guys have plasmas and ipods. [/ QUOTE ] I thought about the sex slave angle, but the only thing I'd want with them is to free them. Being drunk constantly wouldn't be fun at all. People who think that being drunk constantly is fun have a very warped perception of what "fun" is IMO. [/ QUOTE ] You are the emperor of $*&$ing ROME! You can free them and they'll still want to bang you constantly. I mean COME ON!
|
|
#96
03-28-2007, 07:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Again, this is such a corner case since there were SO FEW people of such great privilege. Even if a few people back then were better off than the janitors of today, clearly the 5th percentile of today is better off than the 95th percentile of 500 years ago. 99th and 1st percentiles are a bigger stretch. [/ QUOTE ] That's true. But like I said, Victoria was pretty recent. I might trade places with her (but probably not). Constantine? No way. [/ QUOTE ] What about a Roman Emperor with loads of sex slaves, all the alcohol he wants (hookers and blow of the time?), all day to sit on his ass and crap in his gold toilet. I mean, come on, that had to be better than cleaning crap from McDonalds. You can't be serious. It's not like these guys have plasmas and ipods. [/ QUOTE ] I thought about the sex slave angle, but the only thing I'd want with them is to free them. Being drunk constantly wouldn't be fun at all. People who think that being drunk constantly is fun have a very warped perception of what "fun" is IMO. [/ QUOTE ] You are the emperor of $*&$ing ROME! You can free them and they'll still want to bang you constantly. I mean COME ON! [/ QUOTE ] It would be pretty sweet, but it's not as good as air conditioning. Also, easy sex isn't nearly as fun/rewarding as finding sex with someone you know's really into you.
|
|
#97
03-28-2007, 07:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
You can very easily empirically show that your statement is a falsehood (not about your personal circumstances which I don't know, the i apologize for the adhominem aside) but just calculate for example what you would make per year working full time at a minimum wage job, and then calculate expenses for say, a family with 3 children headed by a single mother.
|
|
#98
03-28-2007, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Again, this is such a corner case since there were SO FEW people of such great privilege. Even if a few people back then were better off than the janitors of today, clearly the 5th percentile of today is better off than the 95th percentile of 500 years ago. 99th and 1st percentiles are a bigger stretch. [/ QUOTE ] That's true. But like I said, Victoria was pretty recent. I might trade places with her (but probably not). Constantine? No way. [/ QUOTE ] What about a Roman Emperor with loads of sex slaves, all the alcohol he wants (hookers and blow of the time?), all day to sit on his ass and crap in his gold toilet. I mean, come on, that had to be better than cleaning crap from McDonalds. You can't be serious. It's not like these guys have plasmas and ipods. [/ QUOTE ] I thought about the sex slave angle, but the only thing I'd want with them is to free them. Being drunk constantly wouldn't be fun at all. People who think that being drunk constantly is fun have a very warped perception of what "fun" is IMO. [/ QUOTE ] You are the emperor of $*&$ing ROME! You can free them and they'll still want to bang you constantly. I mean COME ON! [/ QUOTE ] It would be pretty sweet, but it's not as good as air conditioning. Also, easy sex isn't nearly as fun/rewarding as finding sex with someone you know's really into you. [/ QUOTE ] Air conditioning? You live in ROME!! You have a more mild climate than Atlanta, you have chicks to fan you all day, you don't need Air Conditioning! You can probably swim in a pool of water all day if you want. You don't think every chick will be into you? There are definite advantages in being "better off" than everyone around you.
|
|
#99
03-28-2007, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
You can very easily empirically show that your statement is a falsehood (not about your personal circumstances which I don't know, the i apologize for the adhominem aside) but just calculate for example what you would make per year working full time at a minimum wage job, and then calculate expenses for say, a family with 3 children headed by a single mother. [/ QUOTE ] To repeat what I said: "Everyone in this one (that works) can afford a car and a home unless they choose to waste their money on other things." She's the one who got knocked up, and while I have a great deal of sympathy for her and would help her if I personally could, ultimately it's her own damned fault.
|
|
#100
03-28-2007, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why \"x% of people have y% of the wealth\" is irrelevant.
[ QUOTE ]
You can very easily empirically show that your statement is a falsehood (not about your personal circumstances which I don't know, the i apologize for the adhominem aside) but just calculate for example what you would make per year working full time at a minimum wage job, and then calculate expenses for say, a family with 3 children headed by a single mother. [/ QUOTE ] So you are poor enough to barely support yourself, then after the first two kids, you are still stupid enough to get knocked up?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
