Thread: WTF happened in 1971?
06-15-2021, 06:01 PM
-
#31
Originally Posted By BulkingIsHard⏩
So wages only inflated for the top 20% of workers?That's from inflation not executive compensation
And I wasn't referencing executive compensation specifically before. The owners that benefit by paying lower wages and generally cutting costs without lowering the retail price of a product needn't be employees of the company.
INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
06-15-2021, 06:01 PM
-
#32
- Shortfuze
- "Your one f*ck fantasy"
-
- Shortfuze
- "Your one f*ck fantasy"
- Join Date: Feb 2004
- Location: United States
- Posts: 31,897
- Rep Power: 179945
-
-
Women's Lib Movement began (March 6, 1971)
*Simplicity is the key to life*
Thanks ZBlacktt for the mod rep!
Thanks ForumSentinel for the admin rep!
Thanks Gxp23 for the mod rep!
Thanks 400LB Gorilla for the mod rep!
Thanks CountryMike for admin rep!
Thanks Nics1246 for mod rep!
I got married on August 24, 2013!!
ლ(╹◡╹ლ)
06-15-2021, 06:15 PM
-
#33
- BulkingIsHard
- Registered Bigot
-
- BulkingIsHard
- Registered Bigot
- Join Date: Aug 2016
- Posts: 12,670
- Rep Power: 70015
-
-
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
Yes lolSo wages only inflated for the top 20% of workers?
And I wasn't referencing executive compensation specifically before. The owners that benefit by paying lower wages and generally cutting costs without lowering the retail price of a product needn't be employees of the company.
And I wasn't referencing executive compensation specifically before. The owners that benefit by paying lower wages and generally cutting costs without lowering the retail price of a product needn't be employees of the company.
The poor are very abysmally hedged against inflation due to the nature of their financial activities (ignoring supply and demand trends associated with skilled/unskilled labor in recent years).
The upper middle class will more likely have stock compensation, investments, appreciable property, and consumer debt, in addition to having more discretionary income due to cost of living being mostly static between individuals.
The absolute top are generally entrepreneurs or well connected with entrepreneurs, and have all the same things as the upper middle class but more, as well as income generating debt, such as corporate debt, leveraged investments, etc..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_decline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#By_absorption
06-15-2021, 06:24 PM
-
#34
06-15-2021, 06:28 PM
-
#35
- HMFIC_BROWSIN
- Buy high, sell higher.
-
- HMFIC_BROWSIN
- Buy high, sell higher.
- Join Date: Feb 2009
- Location: Arizona, United States
- Posts: 73,524
- Rep Power: 348838
-
-
technology.
If you can do three times as much, with the same, or less effort, why get paid more? I'm surprised this chart isn't on a massive downward spiral RN.
If you can do three times as much, with the same, or less effort, why get paid more? I'm surprised this chart isn't on a massive downward spiral RN.
06-15-2021, 06:28 PM
-
#36
Originally Posted By BulkingIsHard⏩
If we are talking the top 20% I think you mean upper class, not upper middle class:Yes lol
The poor are very abysmally hedged against inflation due to the nature of their financial activities (ignoring supply and demand trends associated with skilled/unskilled labor in recent years).
The upper middle class will more likely have stock compensation, investments, appreciable property, and consumer debt, in addition to having more discretionary income due to cost of living being mostly static between individuals.
The absolute top are generally entrepreneurs or well connected with entrepreneurs, and have all the same things as the upper middle class but more, as well as income generating debt, such as corporate debt, leveraged investments, etc..
The poor are very abysmally hedged against inflation due to the nature of their financial activities (ignoring supply and demand trends associated with skilled/unskilled labor in recent years).
The upper middle class will more likely have stock compensation, investments, appreciable property, and consumer debt, in addition to having more discretionary income due to cost of living being mostly static between individuals.
The absolute top are generally entrepreneurs or well connected with entrepreneurs, and have all the same things as the upper middle class but more, as well as income generating debt, such as corporate debt, leveraged investments, etc..
According to a 2018 report from the Pew Research Center, 19% of American adults live in “upper-income households.” The median income of that group was $187,872 in 2016.
That purple line in the graph w/$111K household income is upper middle class.INTP Crew
Inattentive ADD Crew
Mom That Miscs Crew
06-15-2021, 07:12 PM
-
#37
06-15-2021, 07:17 PM
-
#38
- Briisk
- EDM since way back when
-
- Briisk
- EDM since way back when
- Join Date: Mar 2008
- Location: United States
- Posts: 16,110
- Rep Power: 35877
-
-
Originally Posted By Holyfenix⏩
It's simple, the rise of Feminism (Marxism)
Women started entering the workforce competing for the same jobs as men in mass starting in the 70's. Business owners now had twice the available labor pool which drove wages down for the typically higher paid men. Why pay Paul $8 an hour when Paulina will do it for $4?
Then once we hit critical mass of a decent worker/job ratio and wages start climbing again, massive legal and illegal immigration. Why pay Paulina $15 an hour when Jose will do it for $7?
Then the illegal immigrant women started working too, Why pay Jose $10 an hour when Juanita will do it for $5
Then at the higher paying level you grant Indians and other southeast Asian and Middle Easter people from countries with decent college systems work visas to come work in tech for half the price of an American. Why pay Ben $125k a year when Sundeep will GLADLY leave his chithole country to come work in the US for $75k. The dude doesn't even have to worry about finding a wife because his parents are taking care of it back home.
There are only two ways to "Make It" in the United States Now. Either become successful at your own business, or be the top 20% in your field (80/20 rule). That goes for a decent amount of real careers too, from Doctors and Lawyers, to Tradies and Chefs. The best will always be able to make a good income. Unfortunately being the best isn't just about your work anymore. You need to be decently attractive, or at the very least in really good shape, have a good personality, AND out work and out smart everyone else in your profession.
If you have kids, you really need to make sure you are driving these points home and on top of putting in your all at work, put in even more time and energy into your children.
Good luck out their boyos, slacking, jacking, and degenMAXXING ain't gonna cut it in this world anymore.
Women started entering the workforce competing for the same jobs as men in mass starting in the 70's. Business owners now had twice the available labor pool which drove wages down for the typically higher paid men. Why pay Paul $8 an hour when Paulina will do it for $4?
Then once we hit critical mass of a decent worker/job ratio and wages start climbing again, massive legal and illegal immigration. Why pay Paulina $15 an hour when Jose will do it for $7?
Then the illegal immigrant women started working too, Why pay Jose $10 an hour when Juanita will do it for $5
Then at the higher paying level you grant Indians and other southeast Asian and Middle Easter people from countries with decent college systems work visas to come work in tech for half the price of an American. Why pay Ben $125k a year when Sundeep will GLADLY leave his chithole country to come work in the US for $75k. The dude doesn't even have to worry about finding a wife because his parents are taking care of it back home.
There are only two ways to "Make It" in the United States Now. Either become successful at your own business, or be the top 20% in your field (80/20 rule). That goes for a decent amount of real careers too, from Doctors and Lawyers, to Tradies and Chefs. The best will always be able to make a good income. Unfortunately being the best isn't just about your work anymore. You need to be decently attractive, or at the very least in really good shape, have a good personality, AND out work and out smart everyone else in your profession.
If you have kids, you really need to make sure you are driving these points home and on top of putting in your all at work, put in even more time and energy into your children.
Good luck out their boyos, slacking, jacking, and degenMAXXING ain't gonna cut it in this world anymore.
14-9 total correct guesses (1st place), 61% accurate - Lyon Gaultier Presents Euro 2012 Contest ||| 45-33 total correct guesses (4th place), 58% accurate - 2014 World Cup Pick Em' Giveaway by Lyon Gaultier
2015-2016 NFL Football Pick-em Trinity: 3rd place, 163 points, 163-93.
06-15-2021, 07:47 PM
-
#39
06-15-2021, 08:05 PM
-
#40
- cavillac
- Registered User
-
- cavillac
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2010
- Location: Eliot, Maine, United States
- Posts: 3,335
- Rep Power: 20401
-
-
I wonder how the US will be overrun by China. Right now it seems like China is just spending their dollars and actually buying the land of America. Its sounds so obvious that its brilliant.
Live & Direct from rural Iowa- GBR
06-15-2021, 10:08 PM
-
#41
- imbeingcereal
- Registered User
-
- imbeingcereal
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2009
- Age: 36
- Posts: 3,914
- Rep Power: 26058
-
-
[QUOTE=katya422 post_id=1640957103][img]https://media.tenor.com/images/6d6c2c39a4cbfb0694f32421c8ffdca5/tenor.gif[mg]
[img]https://www.advisorperspectives.com/images/content_image/data/82/82bfc15008dd38488a7ec33b3ccd266b.png[/img]
The bottom 80% have barely budged. The upper 20% has done alright, and the top 5% are feeling fine.[/QUOTE]I'm so confused by all these income charts. Top 20% is apparently over $250K household income/year, yet $120K is already at 91st percentile for individuals (assuming 2 earners). I don't really see how that adds up. It also just doesn't pass the smell test. Outside of certain jobs in tech/finance/law and many doctors/lawyers, I don't know that many people earning upwards of $120K in their 30s. Those jobs aren't easy to get, so I seriously doubt 1/5 people you randomly poll is working in those fields and in a city that pays top dollar for those gigs. I don't believe a lot of engineers are even paid that much outside of software and certain EE gigs.
[img]https://www.advisorperspectives.com/images/content_image/data/82/82bfc15008dd38488a7ec33b3ccd266b.png[/img]
The bottom 80% have barely budged. The upper 20% has done alright, and the top 5% are feeling fine.[/QUOTE]I'm so confused by all these income charts. Top 20% is apparently over $250K household income/year, yet $120K is already at 91st percentile for individuals (assuming 2 earners). I don't really see how that adds up. It also just doesn't pass the smell test. Outside of certain jobs in tech/finance/law and many doctors/lawyers, I don't know that many people earning upwards of $120K in their 30s. Those jobs aren't easy to get, so I seriously doubt 1/5 people you randomly poll is working in those fields and in a city that pays top dollar for those gigs. I don't believe a lot of engineers are even paid that much outside of software and certain EE gigs.
06-15-2021, 10:23 PM
-
#42
- SoutheastBeast1
- Join Date: Mar 2013
- Age: 39
- Posts: 63,852
- Subscribers: 6
- Rep Power: 260932
-
-
Crazy how it all changed 96 years ago
"One day I won't be able to lift any more. Not I won't want to lift. I mean physically unable. That day could be decades from now or it could be tomorrow. All I know is that's the day I'll wish I could lift more than ever. The day I'd give anything for one more workout, one more set, or one more cardio session. So go hard and enjoy every workout, every set, every rep. Because one day you will wake up and you will never get it back."
-SoutheastBeast1
06-16-2021, 09:12 AM
-
#43
- Holyfenix
- Registered User
-
- Holyfenix
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2014
- Location: California, United States
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,018
- Rep Power: 55892
-
-
Originally Posted By BulkingIsHard⏩
Next you're going to tell me trickle down economics works. An economic boom for businesses doesn't translate into an economic boom for the people. You are trying to come up with complex explanations for the current economic reality when it is legitimately as simple as supply/demand. Supply of labor started to skyrocket, wages stagnated because of that. Its fuking simple, ya retard.This. We increased social programs through LBJ's cuck reforms, waged a war with millions of bombs, landed a man on the moon, and fought an economic war with the USSR.
All that costs a fukcton of money.
Autistic take srs. Women only entered the workforce because they had to. Our economy had become so overburdened with taxation and regulation, as well as being eaten from the inside by inflation, that men could no longer support a family. Feminism for female workers was just a smokescreen. Even if the supply of labor was magically doubled overnight, we would have an economic boom due to surging profits in businesses as a result of decreased labor costs, but the 70s was the worst period of economic growth and unemployment for decades.
Immigration doesn't really change that much at the higher level. Quality significantly decreases when ****** engineers with some "degree" from a ****** school enter the workforce, so competition is not significantly increased. It does affect low skill labor however, and the welfare benefits for immigrants increase the drain on chithole countries towards us. If workers really were being replaced by Joses and ****** en masse due to poverty wages, prices would have rapidly deflated and our standard of living would rapidly improve, but that is not even close to the case.
All that costs a fukcton of money.
Autistic take srs. Women only entered the workforce because they had to. Our economy had become so overburdened with taxation and regulation, as well as being eaten from the inside by inflation, that men could no longer support a family. Feminism for female workers was just a smokescreen. Even if the supply of labor was magically doubled overnight, we would have an economic boom due to surging profits in businesses as a result of decreased labor costs, but the 70s was the worst period of economic growth and unemployment for decades.
Immigration doesn't really change that much at the higher level. Quality significantly decreases when ****** engineers with some "degree" from a ****** school enter the workforce, so competition is not significantly increased. It does affect low skill labor however, and the welfare benefits for immigrants increase the drain on chithole countries towards us. If workers really were being replaced by Joses and ****** en masse due to poverty wages, prices would have rapidly deflated and our standard of living would rapidly improve, but that is not even close to the case.
*Updated* If you can't hit a 320 yard drive, are you even a man?
06-16-2021, 09:21 AM
-
#44
- mulletwarrior
- Registered User
-
- mulletwarrior
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2013
- Age: 41
- Posts: 13,586
- Rep Power: 99233
-
-
Originally Posted By BeanGainClovis⏩
Agree, except think the tax cuts didn't start going gonzo until the 80s. But the correlation between the implementation of trickle down economics and wage growth / gap between rich and poor is pretty telling.It's not some grand conspiracy, it's pretty widely understood among finance/econ nerds.
It's a product of federal financial policy. Namely moving away from the gold standard to a free floating currency.
Massive tax cuts for corporations were also a big part of it. You don't need some sprawling crazy essay to explain it.
All of this is great for corporations and bad for the people, that's basically how things roll on Capitol Hill.
It's a product of federal financial policy. Namely moving away from the gold standard to a free floating currency.
Massive tax cuts for corporations were also a big part of it. You don't need some sprawling crazy essay to explain it.
All of this is great for corporations and bad for the people, that's basically how things roll on Capitol Hill.
Also, to be clear, this is not a "liberal take" -- I think there is nothing more dangerous to our country right now than the current crop of fascist libs. This is a "conservative trying to fix his broken party" kind of take -- repubs adopting laffer economics is the worst things repubs have done in the last 40 years.
mo e
06-16-2021, 09:24 AM
-
#45
- PenorBrahNoHomo
- R1b
-
- PenorBrahNoHomo
- R1b
- Join Date: Aug 2011
- Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 28,218
- Rep Power: 130149
-
-
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
Americans have an idiotic conception of class. Earning 200K does not automatically make you upper class by any means. The real upper class is miniscule, a percent of 'the 1%' and is more about family, connections and prestige than just money.If we are talking the top 20% I think you mean upper class, not upper middle class:
That purple line in the graph w/$111K household income is upper middle class.
That purple line in the graph w/$111K household income is upper middle class.
06-16-2021, 09:32 AM
-
#46
06-16-2021, 09:33 AM
-
#47
- Ikarsuz1337
- Registered User
-
- Ikarsuz1337
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Age: 32
- Posts: 6,474
- Rep Power: 17032
-
-
"nooooo the central banker beta model was way better than the live version we have now!! we need to go back and everyone will be happy!!"
06-16-2021, 09:37 AM
-
#48
- BulkingIsHard
- Registered Bigot
-
- BulkingIsHard
- Registered Bigot
- Join Date: Aug 2016
- Posts: 12,670
- Rep Power: 70015
-
-
Originally Posted By katya422⏩
The trend still follows. The more exposed you are to cash and depreciating assets the more your life sucksIf we are talking the top 20% I think you mean upper class, not upper middle class:
That purple line in the graph w/$111K household income is upper middle class.
That purple line in the graph w/$111K household income is upper middle class.
Originally Posted By Holyfenix⏩
Doubling down on low IQ again. Trickle down economics isn't what people say it is, so I'm not going to bother explaining a strawman. If you can't understand the correlation between lower production costs and lower prices of goods and services increasing the standard of living then I don't know how I could dumb this down any further.Next you're going to tell me trickle down economics works. An economic boom for businesses doesn't translate into an economic boom for the people. You are trying to come up with complex explanations for the current economic reality when it is legitimately as simple as supply/demand. Supply of labor started to skyrocket, wages stagnated because of that. Its fuking simple, ya retard.
You are trying to explain complex economic situations by blaming women. Supply of labor was already steadily on the rise, it's not a straight line up like Joe Biden votes.
It happened in Industrial America with (white) immigrants, and it happened with female workforce participation. Do you think people actually want to work? Do you think men really want to have no one raising the children? Women started working because the music started ending.
Secondly, wages didn't "stagnate", productivity just increased. Contrary to popular belief, wages lag behind inflation but do closely follow it. That changes however, when you overregulate and overtax an economy that maintains it's productivity through (inefficient) automation and imports/outsourcing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_decline
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse#By_absorption
06-16-2021, 09:38 AM
-
#49
- Goat_187
- Registered User
-
- Goat_187
- Registered User
- Join Date: Nov 2008
- Location: Miami, Florida, United States
- Age: 40
- Posts: 26,316
- Rep Power: 93130
-
-
Originally Posted By _zman⏩
Biden won the general election by defeating Republican Lawrence T. Messick, and took office on January 5, 1971.
This is where it all went wrong.
This is where it all went wrong.
06-16-2021, 09:48 AM
-
#50
- Ikarsuz1337
- Registered User
-
- Ikarsuz1337
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Age: 32
- Posts: 6,474
- Rep Power: 17032
-
-
@27:04
06-17-2021, 12:42 PM
-
#51
- Holyfenix
- Registered User
-
- Holyfenix
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jun 2014
- Location: California, United States
- Age: 36
- Posts: 8,018
- Rep Power: 55892
-
-
Originally Posted By BulkingIsHard⏩
You say I'm blaming women and call me low IQ. Just give up, you're wrong. It's supply and demand. Its fuking simple but because you want to seem cool on the misc. you are trying to make counterpoints to things I never said. I fuking hate miscers like you who can't even argue a point properly. You honestly belong on reddit, you'll fit right in over there.The trend still follows. The more exposed you are to cash and depreciating assets the more your life sucks
Doubling down on low IQ again. Trickle down economics isn't what people say it is, so I'm not going to bother explaining a strawman. If you can't understand the correlation between lower production costs and lower prices of goods and services increasing the standard of living then I don't know how I could dumb this down any further.
You are trying to explain complex economic situations by blaming women. Supply of labor was already steadily on the rise, it's not a straight line up like Joe Biden votes.
It happened in Industrial America with (white) immigrants, and it happened with female workforce participation. Do you think people actually want to work? Do you think men really want to have no one raising the children? Women started working because the music started ending.
Secondly, wages didn't "stagnate", productivity just increased. Contrary to popular belief, wages lag behind inflation but do closely follow it. That changes however, when you overregulate and overtax an economy that maintains it's productivity through (inefficient) automation and imports/outsourcing.
Doubling down on low IQ again. Trickle down economics isn't what people say it is, so I'm not going to bother explaining a strawman. If you can't understand the correlation between lower production costs and lower prices of goods and services increasing the standard of living then I don't know how I could dumb this down any further.
You are trying to explain complex economic situations by blaming women. Supply of labor was already steadily on the rise, it's not a straight line up like Joe Biden votes.
It happened in Industrial America with (white) immigrants, and it happened with female workforce participation. Do you think people actually want to work? Do you think men really want to have no one raising the children? Women started working because the music started ending.
Secondly, wages didn't "stagnate", productivity just increased. Contrary to popular belief, wages lag behind inflation but do closely follow it. That changes however, when you overregulate and overtax an economy that maintains it's productivity through (inefficient) automation and imports/outsourcing.
*Updated* If you can't hit a 320 yard drive, are you even a man?
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts