this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2024
1494 points (98.8% liked)

Microblog Memes

6104 readers
2072 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Doesn't the quotes just ruin his whole thing? You either say "so much for progress" or something like "thanks for the 'progress'". 'So much for "progress" ' feels like a double negative

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 178 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

The wealthy are much better off though. If you looked at the wage increase of the top 1%, if has risen by $800,000 a year (https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/12/09/staggering-new-data-shows-income-top-1-has-grown-100-times-faster-bottom-50-1970) since 1970.

So capitalism is working exactly the way it is supposed to. Exploiting the middle and lower classes for the rich. This is exactly the progress they want.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It's a trickle-up economy.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago

The working class gives the wealthy their blood and sweat and the wealthy turn it into urine and piss it back on their heads and then tell the working class the reason they smell like piss is because of immigrants.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would say in capitalism "middle class" however you define it is something that is not ideal to have. Rich will be employers who underpay poor people 50 cents a day or less (speaking in fully open market without state intervention on minimum wage and other basic needs) poor won't have enough resources to fight for their right and will just pray to live to see better future or just die. Middle class is basically only ones who will have enough resources to fight but not have enough to be enslave other that's why they are problem in state with pure open market and pure capitalism.

My definition of middle class is someone who has enough money to live somewhat peaceful life but don't have enough money to call themselves rich.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago

There's an old definition of middle class that goes something like: has enough time to participate in politics.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Much more than that. The richest men in the country doubled their net worth this year alone.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

It's actually even worse than that. The doubling was just in the last few months. Essentially, election time. You can practically hear them salivating at an incoming Trump admin.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 112 points 1 week ago (3 children)

But somehow people are mad at queer folks and foreigners instead of the C-suite and their boards.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 week ago

Somehow? If it's not obvious that there are several engineered distractions, then people aren't paying attention.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago

Easy: people get their "news" from places controlled by those C-suites and their boards.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago

Last week at a get-together I actually heard a conservative family member say how the drones in the news are to distract from the important issues like immigration.

This is a standard boomer that keeps news on the living room TV all the damn time. It’s not even the disconnect from both reality and compassion that gets to me any more. It’s how widespread it is, and how the propaganda works even better in the real world than in fiction.

[–] [email protected] 79 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

But… I stopped going to Starbucks and quit buying Avocado toast? Can I buy a house yet?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You're posting here from a mobile or computer, right? Unless that PC is at the library, you're paying an internet bill of some sort! /s

[–] Lucidlethargy 13 points 1 week ago

Ugh, so lavish. I bet this guy also owns a water heater. No wonder he's poor!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Important to note here the important difference between "mean", aka the average, and "median", the middle number in a set. Assuming Krueger intentionally used "median", the situation is actually worse than people realize.

The average can be affected by large outliers - like billionaires. IF the "average" American makes $50,000 a year, the median could actually be more like $30,000 (totally made up numbers, as an example).

In other words, the median is the more "accurate" number to use in these comparisons because the income of the extremely wealthy has less of an impact on the result.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're right about everything, but the post explicitly talks about median for everything but healthcare, so it should be fairly accurate already

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

True, yeah. I just wanted to be clear about it in case people confused median and mean. I work with high school students who struggle with the difference every year. So, thought maybe some adults who'd been out of school for a while might also not realize the difference.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

But the 1% got 100 x wealthier! Ain't that great?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago

That means the economy is booming. Fuck yeah! 😎

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 week ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 week ago

Oh oh I got one too. Your McChicken, since 2014 alone, has risen in price 200% from $1 to $2.99. Along with most of their other items. They're artisan dining now, not fast food.

https://www.voronoiapp.com/economy/How-Have-McDonalds-Prices-Changed-Since-2014-1392

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Yeah, this kind of comparison really drives it home. The inflation figures, while not cooked in some grand conspiracy sense, really completely fail to capture the real price increases experienced by real people.

The limitation of CPI is that it is designed for one specific thing, but we end up using it for others. If you want to measure the value of a commodity over time, like a bushel of wheat or a barrel of oil, CPI is OK for that. A bushel of wheat or a barrel of oil now are pretty similar to ones in 1970. But most goods we purchase are not so directly comparable. The CPI calculation tries to compare like goods to like goods, and it applies adjustment factors to the price of goods that aren't constant through time. For example, the TV you can get in 2024 is far, far better than one you could get in 1970. In CPI terms, this means that the real cost of TVs has plummeted by orders of magnitude.

But it goes beyond electronics. Think of homes. People will wring their hands and decry Americans as greedy by citing the size of new homes today vs in 1970, as they have significantly increased. But it's not a matter of greed; you simply cannot buy a new 1200 ft^2 modest home in post places in the country today. They don't make them anymore. Zoning has so restricted housing construction that all new housing has to be luxury housing. Yes, if you actually could find a duplicate of some c. 1970 1200 ft^2 home built new today, it would likely be quite affordable. But in terms of both size and construction details, it's not legal to build homes like that anymore. But this won't show up in the inflation figure. They'll compare the 1200 ft^2 entry-level home in 1970 to whatever rare example of that they can find that is built today of someone building one of those in unzoned farmland in rural North Dakota, and conclude that house prices haven't risen so much. In reality, no one can actually find those homes near job centers.

Or consider college. The college experience of 2024 is vastly different from that of 1970. The MBA class wormed their way into university administration and kicked all the actual academics out of admin. The MBA class see the kids as "customers" rather than pupils or students. And all the colleges and universities, even the state ones, went into MBA customer-seeking overdrive. Colleges have been luxurified. Big fancy dorms, extravagant student unions and study spaces, decadent gym facilities, etc. College at a state school in 1970 was 4 people crowded in a tiny dorm room, where your 'gym' was the campus running track. CPI looks at what it would cost to run a 1970s-style university in 2024, and concludes that college hasn't gone up in price as much as it has. This is one reason community colleges have remained so relatively affordable. By their nature, they deal mostly with commuter students who wouldn't want to use your stupid fancy gym even if you built one.

And the same thing for vehicles. Automakers have chased higher and higher rates of return by making bigger and heavier vehicles. Yes, if you could find a car made today that was an exact duplicate of a 1970s vehicle, it wouldn't have inflated as much. And that's what CPI shows. But it doesn't capture the actual buying options Americans have at their fingertips.

Ultimately, here is what you are doing when you use an inflation calculator and put in 10,000 in 1970 and calculate to today. You are fundamentally saying, "consider the kinds of goods and services average people bought in 1970. If I bought that exact same basket of goods, literal exact duplicates, what would they cost today?"

And for economists, that kind of analysis is useful. If you want to calculate interest rates and GDP growth, CPI works great for that. But for real people in the real world, they cannot simply live like it's still 1970. The affordable options they had then simply no longer exist in the market. Sometimes things have changed for good reasons like product safety, but more often it is simply because the MBA class has turned everything into a luxury good to maximize return on investment. Everything has become a luxury good aimed at the top 20% of earners. And our policy tools for dealing with inflation have been utterly unprepared for this.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Income inequality is also much higher than it was in 1971, it's about where it was at the start of the Great Depression

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

B...b...but you have smart phones!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Our progress party was compromised, and by compromised I mean bribed to work against progress starting in the 1980s. Today's neoliberals.

Both parties are well paid to protect the rigged economy that exploits you that they spent decades rigging against you from you, while they war about social issue symptoms you get to vote on for the illusion of freedom.

We don't get a vote on shape or priorities of the economy. Well bribed Republicans and Democrats will lock arms, declare martial law, and authorize lethal force on us before they'll let the people end their legal Wall Street bribe gravy train. A shining example of why legality should never, ever be conflated with morality, especially post Reagan.

That's where we're at and why. Jimmy Carter was the last POTUS who wasn't all in on turning their constituents into desperate capital batteries. That is a prerequisite for party support.

Up vs. Down. Large shareholders vs everyone else. Everything else is dancing to their pfife. Pity their class traitor capitalism worshipping sycophants, but our true enemies can be identified by net worth.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Leaders don't care about you or me. If we collectively can't get off our lazy assess and force changes to happen that benefit us, they won't. It's really that simple. The working class needs to take responsibility for civilization back from politicians and corporations or well all continue to be genocided by the greed of a relatively few powerful human beings.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›