If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Click Orlando)   The death of the middle class continues, as the average income of middle-class families has decreased 40% compared to twenty years ago   (clickorlando.com) divider line 491
    More: Sick, consumer finance, account balances, middle class, families  
•       •       •

10680 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Jun 2012 at 2:22 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



491 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-12 03:06:19 AM

untaken_name: You mean Communism doesn't work? Color me shocked.


Are you sure you're in the right thread?
 
2012-06-12 03:10:22 AM
so this what makes us happier as a nation cause we have to ask our parents for rent money??
 
2012-06-12 03:12:12 AM

dericwater: I'm quite surprised that these 1%'ers really think they can outwit history.


There's always a causal disconnect. The people it happened to are already dead. The new breed rise to the top by being statistical outliers, who are always crazy and ruthless by nature. The simple landscape of humanity guarantees we will always have sociopathic, reckless garbage at the top economically. Until we have durable incorruptible education systems that makes society deal with these Stalins as they crop up.
 
2012-06-12 03:14:06 AM

kmmontandon: At this point, we need Paul Krugman to forge a guillotine from his beard and cock, name it "The Paradox of Thrift," set it up on Wall Street, and use it execute Grover Norquist, followed by anyone who uses the phrase "You can't spend your way out of a recession!"


farking BRILLIANT, that is.
 
2012-06-12 03:16:13 AM
home.comcast.net

Both sides are clearly the same, so vote Republican.
 
2012-06-12 03:16:45 AM

kmmontandon: At this point, we need Paul Krugman to forge a guillotine from his beard and cock, name it "The Paradox of Thrift," set it up on Wall Street, and use it execute Grover Norquist, followed by anyone who uses the phrase "You can't spend your way out of a recession!"


It's such a brilliantly simple plan now that you say it, I'm surprised no one has thought of it before.
 
2012-06-12 03:18:52 AM
Someone bring J.P. Morgan back from the dead. I just watch watch him start throwing everyone on Wall Street out of their offices, starting with JPMorgan.
 
2012-06-12 03:18:53 AM
Subtard has no analytical skills and can't do basic math. Subtard.

Why do people still talk about trickle down? That's been out of style since the 80's. Everyone knows trickle down doesn't really work after globalism and the advent of hot money. Do Republicans even stilll talk about trickle down? Or is that just a Bogeyman for the Dems?
 
2012-06-12 03:19:43 AM

Ebbelwoi: Subtard has no analytical skills and can't do basic math. Subtard.


So what did subby get wrong?
 
2012-06-12 03:20:57 AM

I sound fat: Dont let the door hit you on the way out.... sounds like a job just opened up in America for someone who wants to be here.



But only for people who think paying taxes is patriotism. So you and your kind can GTFO
 
2012-06-12 03:20:57 AM
Also relevant

fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net

/those percentages are all adjusted for inflation
 
2012-06-12 03:22:57 AM

fusillade762: untaken_name: You mean Communism doesn't work? Color me shocked.

Are you sure you're in the right thread?


Quite sure. Today, Americans practice all 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto in one form or another. Oh, we call them by different names, which totally means they're different, of course. In case you're actually interested, I will start you with the first plank: Abolition of all right to property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose. This is how land works in the US. If you think you own some land, stop paying rent (property tax), and watch the true owner claim his property and sell it on the courthouse steps. If you truly OWNED the land, that could not happen (and, in fact, did not happen in this country as little as 1 century ago.)
 
2012-06-12 03:23:51 AM

hbk72777: What do you expect when one side only worries about the poor and the other the rich. And they all want the middle to foot the bill.

/game over



Huh?

Democrats want the middle class to suffer by... raising taxes on the rich?
 
2012-06-12 03:25:46 AM

untaken_name: fusillade762: untaken_name: You mean Communism doesn't work? Color me shocked.

Are you sure you're in the right thread?

Quite sure. Today, Americans practice all 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto in one form or another. Oh, we call them by different names, which totally means they're different, of course. In case you're actually interested, I will start you with the first plank: Abolition of all right to property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose. This is how land works in the US. If you think you own some land, stop paying rent (property tax), and watch the true owner claim his property and sell it on the courthouse steps. If you truly OWNED the land, that could not happen (and, in fact, did not happen in this country as little as 1 century ago.)


Well well. Aren't you quite the liar.
 
2012-06-12 03:26:20 AM

Ebbelwoi: Do Republicans even stilll talk about trickle down? Or is that just a Bogeyman for the Dems?



No, Republicans don't talk at all about job creators and lowering taxes on the rich to help the economy. What dumbasses those Democrats are for creating this boogieman. Unless you are talking about some sort of airplane lingo, "bogeyman." If so then I apologize, retard.
 
2012-06-12 03:26:23 AM

James F. Campbell: [home.comcast.net image 454x340]

Both sides are clearly the same, so vote Republican.


These charts are silly are pointless. Here is one on CEO pay:
static1.consumerist.com
So if you look at the President Clinton years it shows that CEOs pay skyrocketed. So does that mean that Clinton is the worst president ever because under him the CEO made massive salary gains and the regular folk didn't? Wouldn't that mean that Clinton caused the massive income inequality that we see today? Or is it just a stupid graph that anyone can use a talking point while in reality it is a lot more complex.
 
2012-06-12 03:27:23 AM

untaken_name: If you truly OWNED the land, that could not happen (and, in fact, did not happen in this country as little as 1 century ago.)



Unless you were a native then you didn't own shiat.
 
2012-06-12 03:28:13 AM

Tellingthem: So if you look at the President Clinton years it shows that CEOs pay skyrocketed. So does that mean that Clinton is the worst president ever because under him the CEO made massive salary gains and the regular folk didn't? Wouldn't that mean that Clinton caused the massive income inequality that we see today? Or is it just a stupid graph that anyone can use a talking point while in reality it is a lot more complex.



Clinton was King during the 1990's?
 
2012-06-12 03:29:21 AM
2.bp.blogspot.com
Society can no longer live under the 1%, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society."

Isn't it funny how you can take the communist manifesto, and replace the words bourgeoisie and proletariat with 99% and 1% and it looks exactly like the complaints the occupiers are making?
 
2012-06-12 03:29:36 AM

archichris: Renting is almost always going to be cheaper in the long run for many reasons, not the least of which is that you can invest the difference between renting and buying, so that after 30 years instead of having paid 3 times what the house is worth to the bank you can have three times what you paid for it in retirement savings.

Plus if your neighborhood goes downhill because a bunch of dirty communist hippies move in next door and start leaving their stained underwear on the front steps, you can just move to a new apartment, you dont suffer the loss of value that accompanies a soft housing market.

You can rent for 12 years in a good school district then move out when your kids go off to college so you dont bear the lifelong expense of the high property taxes.

You never have to write a check for $6500 for a roof.

The benefits of renting are huge compared to the bragging rights of buying.

Now there are advantages to buying if you are a certain kind of person. For instance, a home is a tax shelter of sorts....not a great one, but you can borrow against it and have more liquidity while using the interest deduction to offset your income. If you are handy like me you can turn almost any fixer-upper home into something worth twice what you paid for it.

What you teach your kids while you live where you do doesnt have as much to do with whether you own your home or not.


Real hippies don't have underwear, therefore your premise is invalid.
 
2012-06-12 03:29:41 AM

Tellingthem: Wouldn't that mean that Clinton caused the massive income inequality that we see today?


I don't get it. Is your point that "Income disparity between the average worker and CEOs is bad, so vote Republican"? If it is, you're an idiot in addition to being an asshole.
 
2012-06-12 03:30:48 AM

Tellingthem: Or is it just a stupid graph that anyone can use a talking point while in reality it is a lot more complex.


Reality isn't complex, it just has to do with the private sector and not the government. However the GOP loves to act like the private sector is never wrong. Sooo.....
 
2012-06-12 03:31:16 AM

Deathfrogg: untaken_name: fusillade762: untaken_name: You mean Communism doesn't work? Color me shocked.

Are you sure you're in the right thread?

Quite sure. Today, Americans practice all 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto in one form or another. Oh, we call them by different names, which totally means they're different, of course. In case you're actually interested, I will start you with the first plank: Abolition of all right to property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose. This is how land works in the US. If you think you own some land, stop paying rent (property tax), and watch the true owner claim his property and sell it on the courthouse steps. If you truly OWNED the land, that could not happen (and, in fact, did not happen in this country as little as 1 century ago.)

Well well. Aren't you quite the liar.


Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?
 
2012-06-12 03:34:37 AM

Kali-Yuga: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 448x314]
Society can no longer live under the 1%, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society."

Isn't it funny how you can take the communist manifesto, and replace the words bourgeoisie and proletariat with 99% and 1% and it looks exactly like the complaints the occupiers are making?



Just wait until you start reading noted Commie Adam Smith. That guy was a complete Marxist.
 
2012-06-12 03:36:42 AM

James F. Campbell: Tellingthem: Wouldn't that mean that Clinton caused the massive income inequality that we see today?

I don't get it. Is your point that "Income disparity between the average worker and CEOs is bad, so vote Republican"? If it is, you're an idiot in addition to being an asshole.


No what I am saying is that all of these stupid charts are meaningless with out any proper context. You can make them say whatever you want or want to imply. They are getting posted so people can say "see republicans are bad" or "democrats are bad". It takes things down to a very low level of understanding. Certain things like the tech boom of the 90's can skew stats so much that you can use them for whatever narrative you choose. And as i said in that post "Or is it just a stupid graph that anyone can use a talking point while in reality it is a lot more complex."

I know that this is Fark where politics are treated as a mud slinging competition. So this is a worthless rant caused by too much drinking...
 
2012-06-12 03:36:43 AM

untaken_name: Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?


BTW care to explain all those other planks of communism that are in play in the US? It's fun watching you be wrong.
 
2012-06-12 03:37:02 AM

Kali-Yuga: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 448x314]
Society can no longer live under the 1%, in other words, its existence is no longer compatible with society."

Isn't it funny how you can take the communist manifesto, and replace the words bourgeoisie and proletariat with 99% and 1% and it looks exactly like the complaints the occupiers are making?


Yes, dearie, very cute. Now go back under your blanket where the mean ol' commies can't get you.
 
2012-06-12 03:37:25 AM

Tellingthem: Certain things like the tech boom of the 90's can skew stats so much that you can use them for whatever narrative you choose


It wasn't the tech boom that skewed it. It was the people. Or rather some of them.
 
2012-06-12 03:39:19 AM

WhyteRaven74: untaken_name: Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?

BTW care to explain all those other planks of communism that are in play in the US? It's fun watching you be wrong.


How would you know? You've never seen it. Why don't you go ahead and substantively criticize the plank I already did? If you can handle that, we'll move on to plank #2. Since you can't, I'm not worried about having to do more work for you for free.
 
2012-06-12 03:40:32 AM

untaken_name:
Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?



Until the early 1930's, if a bank held a mortgage on your property, it could foreclose on it and sell it any time they wanted to, even if you were current on your payments. It was also perfectly legal for them to lay claim to property if they had adjacent land to it that they wanted for something like digging a mine. That is exactly what is happening now. It was also perfectly legal for them to take your money out of your bank account and gamble it on the stock market. It was also perfectly legal for them to bet on the fall or rise of stocks without actually owning any of that stock and then using that leverage to purchase stocks or sell them short, against those bets.

You sir, are a baldfaced liar.
 
2012-06-12 03:41:23 AM

untaken_name: Quite sure. Today, Americans practice all 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto in one form or another. Oh, we call them by different names, which totally means they're different, of course. In case you're actually interested, I will start you with the first plank: Abolition of all right to property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose. This is how land works in the US. If you think you own some land, stop paying rent (property tax), and watch the true owner claim his property and sell it on the courthouse steps. If you truly OWNED the land, that could not happen (and, in fact, did not happen in this country as little as 1 century ago.)


Let me explain to you something about property:

Your property, and by proxy your rights, do not exist as independent value sets to be taken and given by anyone. Ownership -- of oneself, of property, of things in a complex modern society -- is a social conceit, not an individual one. You can claim you own something, but your ownership is meaningless if no one else recognizes that ownership. In other words, property and rights are not an *I* thing, they are a *WE* thing.

Now, you need a system to honor your property/rights, and to build the kind of infrastructure that makes your ownership meaningful, makes your property valuable, but more importantly, keeps it protected from theft or ruination. That kind of system entails rules, laws, government, and the social contract.

What you are suggesting is that you want all the benefits and entitlements of living and owning property in such a complex system, but you don't want to pay your share to help maintain it. That makes you, among other things, a mooching, selfish libertarian scumbag.

I think the question you should be asking isn't "Why should I pay taxes on property I own?" but rather "Why should the rest of us permit you to own property if you don't want to pay for the infrastructure necessary to ensure that ownership?"
 
2012-06-12 03:41:44 AM

untaken_name: WhyteRaven74: untaken_name: Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?

BTW care to explain all those other planks of communism that are in play in the US? It's fun watching you be wrong.

How would you know? You've never seen it. Why don't you go ahead and substantively criticize the plank I already did? If you can handle that, we'll move on to plank #2. Since you can't, I'm not worried about having to do more work for you for free.



I know of at least 80 members of the Democratic party who are Communists.

Are you the baby of a cross dressing J. Edgar and his boy toy Allan West?
 
2012-06-12 03:41:46 AM

WhyteRaven74: Ebbelwoi: Subtard has no analytical skills and can't do basic math. Subtard.

So what did subby get wrong?


I don't see anything in the article that supports what he wrote in the headline.
 
2012-06-12 03:41:49 AM

untaken_name: How would you know? You've never seen it


Well besides reading the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, I must admit I am completely ignorant of the communist writings of over a century and more ago.
 
2012-06-12 03:42:03 AM

Somacandra: FTFA: The average American family's net worth dropped almost 40 percent between 2007 and 2010, according to a triennial study released Monday by the Federal Reserve...The stunning drop in median net worth -- from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010 -- indicates that the recession wiped away 18 years of savings and investment by families....The report also indicated that families with more assets at the start of the recession were able to retain more of their net worth than less fortunate families....Families in the top 10% of income actually saw their net worth increase over the period, rising from a median of $1.17 million in 2007 to $1.19 million in 2010.

So it was only a recession for the proles. Not for the elites. I see. Not sure where Submitter is getting the "twenty years" from. TFA is really about the recent huge-ass recession starting in 2007.


I don't know where average income is coming from either. The article is talking about a drop in net worth due to the bursting of the property bubble. Not income, although it will to a lesser degree have an impact on average income.

For the title to state that the average income of the middle class has decreased 40% in the last 20 years is mischievous regardless of whose political agenda it sets out to discredit.
 
2012-06-12 03:44:17 AM

Ebbelwoi: I don't see anything in the article that supports what he wrote in the headline.


Subby used income instead of worth, big whoop. The the 40 percent figure is accurate.
 
2012-06-12 03:45:14 AM
Taxes have been steadily cut over those 20 years...so what we need to do is cut them some more.
 
2012-06-12 03:45:17 AM

quickdraw: kmmontandon: At this point, we need Paul Krugman to forge a guillotine from his beard and cock, name it "The Paradox of Thrift," set it up on Wall Street, and use it execute Grover Norquist, followed by anyone who uses the phrase "You can't spend your way out of a recession!"

dude..... I think I love you.


If the only thing a Nobel Prizewinning economist can do to save the country is kill people with his dick, I'd say we've passed the point of no return.
 
2012-06-12 03:46:01 AM

WhyteRaven74: Tellingthem: Certain things like the tech boom of the 90's can skew stats so much that you can use them for whatever narrative you choose

It wasn't the tech boom that skewed it. It was the people. Or rather some of them.


Yeah that is what I meant. It just bothers me that we dumb everything down to such a simple level anymore. We twist and contort everything and slap it in a poster to put on a website. I just think that if we actually bothered to try to learn the whole story we would understand how we got here and where we go from here better. Probably just the history nerd in me coming out. and the whiskey talking...
 
2012-06-12 03:46:18 AM

Deathfrogg: untaken_name:
Oh, really? Well, that sure clears things up. Nice rebuttal. You have some information which differs from what I said or do you prefer to just cast aspersions without actually backing them up in any way, shape, or form?


Until the early 1930's, if a bank held a mortgage on your property, it could foreclose on it and sell it any time they wanted to, even if you were current on your payments. It was also perfectly legal for them to lay claim to property if they had adjacent land to it that they wanted for something like digging a mine. That is exactly what is happening now. It was also perfectly legal for them to take your money out of your bank account and gamble it on the stock market. It was also perfectly legal for them to bet on the fall or rise of stocks without actually owning any of that stock and then using that leverage to purchase stocks or sell them short, against those bets.

You sir, are a baldfaced liar.


How is having an asset that YOU VOLUNTARILY PUT UP AS SECURITY FOR A LOAN (because that's what a mortgage is) repossessed for nonpayment of that loan the same as paying property tax, idiot?
 
2012-06-12 03:47:00 AM

LordJiro: Yes, dearie, very cute. Now go back under your blanket where the mean ol' commies can't get you.


I guess whatever you want to label it, the people who are unable to achieve anything for themselves will always want to take things away from those that can. They're like children throwing a temper tantrum because Johnny has a nicer toy than they do, stomping their feet and crying "it's just not fair!"
 
2012-06-12 03:47:47 AM

WhyteRaven74: I must admit I am completely ignorant


Truest Fark post I've ever seen.
 
2012-06-12 03:49:58 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: No, subby, you are wrong.

please re-read and try again. you get 3 chances.


Over in one. I assume the admin who greened this link was doing so in a "hey, get a load of this idiot" sort of way.

/most commenters who posted without reading TFA are idiots also.
 
2012-06-12 03:50:43 AM

untaken_name:

How is having an asset that YOU VOLUNTARILY PUT UP AS SECURITY FOR A LOAN (because that's what a mortgage is) repossessed for nonpayment of that loan the same as paying property tax, idiot?



Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit is it?
Either that, or you're just lying some more.
I'm betting on the latter.
 
2012-06-12 03:52:01 AM

WhyteRaven74: Ebbelwoi: I don't see anything in the article that supports what he wrote in the headline.

Subby used income instead of worth, big whoop. The the 40 percent figure is accurate.


You know, there are those of us for whom "small details" like the difference between net worth and annual income really are "big whoop", i.e. very significant. I gather you don't have much to do with money at your job. He also got the timeframe wrong, as many have noted.
 
2012-06-12 03:52:30 AM

untaken_name: Truest Fark post I've ever seen.


So care to explain how those 10 plans of communism are in use in the US? Also as for your rant on property, look up things like adverse possession, there have been all sorts of ways someone could lose their property for centuries. Under the English system, it's not just about ownership but utility as well.
 
2012-06-12 03:53:12 AM

Ambivalence: The My Little Pony Killer: In before somebody chimes in with airtight advice for how to get high paying jobs, like going into engineering...

I was going to say stripping but then I realized....no one really wants to see most of us naked.


Strippers, at least in Houston, aren't making near the bank they have in the last 10 years. You can leave with the better looking ones for 2 bills.
 
2012-06-12 03:54:14 AM

Ebbelwoi: You know, there are those of us for whom "small details" like the difference between net worth and annual income really are "big whoop",


It's a headline on Fark, not the title of a paper in an economics journal. Hell odds are subby didn't even realize the gaffe. So how about dealing with the actual meat and potatoes of TFA? Or shall we have more fun with ad hominem at subby's expense?
 
2012-06-12 03:54:29 AM

Ebbelwoi: You know, there are those of us for whom "small details" like the difference between net worth and annual income really are "big whoop", i.e. very significant. I gather you don't have much to do with money at your job. He also got the timeframe wrong, as many have noted.


Knowing terms like "net worth" and "annual income" are for the college educated elitist bourgeoisie!
 
2012-06-12 03:54:54 AM

dericwater: It's interesting to note that those who are vociferously anti-communist are doing everything they can to destroy the middle-class, which will put the US into a feudal system, which will lead to a very bloody communistic uprising when the peasant class has enough of the oppression. Russia went through that where the aristocracy were taken over by the Bolsheviks. China went through that where the local feudal lords were taken out by the communist groups led by Mao. French aristocracy also went through that, but the outcome wasn't exactly communism (since it occurred roughly soon after the creation of the US of A, the revolution in France mirrored the origins of the US, and that pre-dated communism by about 150 years).

I'm quite surprised that these 1%'ers really think they can outwit history.


That's an interesting paraphrasing of Marxist philosophy, with one twist. Getting rid of the middle class isn't what causes the collapse. The cause of populist uprisings is mistreatment aimed directly at the bottom rung, while leaving the educated middle class intact to serve as the qualified leaders and organizers of a rebel movement.

The best way to undermine a populist uprising is to do what the US is currently doing: destroy the middle class social leaders, but give extra special handouts to the poorest fraction of society to keep them happy. It's comparable to sapping the corner turrets of a medieval fortress - don't aim for the gate or the walls, just take out the corners that provide the real structure.

Without the middle class, disgruntled poor people never get beyond mild discontent. There's a reason the Middle Ages were so free of revolts, until the rise of the bourgeoisie.
 
Displayed 50 of 491 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report