Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/12/31 01:18:46
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
You try to feed a family of four and put two kids through college on 250k per year and see how "good" you have it.
I'm seriously not sure what lengths I would be willing to go to if it would gain me a lifestyle that "good".
His point was that its not all roses and sunshine. Its work and really isn't as nice it looks from the outside.
He isn't loads better off then people with an income half of what they have. They may be only 10% better off.
its diminishing marginal returns in action.
A person making 100,000 a year is better off than someone making 50,000 a year.
A person making 200,000 a year is better off than someone making 100,000 a year.
however, the difference in how "well off" the people are isn't linear.
Lets say the person making 100,000 is twice as well off as the person making 50,000. However, this does not mean the person making 200,000 is twice as well off as the guy making 100,000 and he certaintly isn't 4 times as well off as the guy making only 50,000.
What the situation really is is that the guy making 200,000 is only around 50% better off then the person making 100,000. Each additional dollar benifits you less than the dollar before it.
The actual amount for being better off isn't close to what I said either. In actuality the guy that makes 100,000 is probably less than 50% better off then the guy making 50,000.
In my Economic Analysis class my teacher used a study that had been done on Happieness and they found that it, as it related to how much money you made, really peaked out at around 500,000. And most of the increase was in the first 200,000.
You sir, are a poet and a scholar. Thank you for putting in clear terms what I struggled to illustrate.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
2012/12/31 01:20:17
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Grey Templar wrote: You will notice they are using Wealth, which is deliberatly done to make the chart look like they want it to look. Anyone who has taken an Economics class knows the difference between income and Wealth.
Now wealth is what we should strive for, not income. Income =/= Wealth.
Please, elaborate on this. References would be nice. Help me understand.
Ok, Income is money you are recieving every so often. So income is money.
What use is money to you? Is the money itself worth anything? the answer is no. You can't eat it, you can't build a house out of it. If you just simply have it it does nothing for you. its only worth something because people say it is.
Wealth is defined by Webster's as the following.
"2: abundance of valuable material possessions or resources"
Money is worthless without Wealth, Wealth is always worth something.
How much it is worth depends on the person evaluating it.
A particular object may be worth more to one person than another. And to another person it may be beyond value.
Now, what is all this Wealth that the Rich have and why do they have more of it. As per the definition above, it is valuable material posessions or resources.
Many Rich people own businesses, which are very valuable. Simply by owning their own business, they have suddenly increased the amount of Wealth they have. However, is the value of the business truly giving them all that much money? They may have a salary of only around 250,000 a year. However, the business itself is worth 100 million because it has expensive facilities and runs X amount of product.
The person owning that company has Weath exceeding 100 million. But they only make 250,000 a year. Compared to what they are supposedly worth and what they actually go home with shows you they arn't actually making money hands over fist. 250,000 is paultry compared to how much the business is worth.
Thats how someone in the top brackets can have lots of Wealth, yet not be making tonnes of money(comparativly speaking)
hence why people use that Wealth chart instead of an Income chart, it makes it look like the rich have everything. Yes, but most of it is in the form of businesses. its not in luxury homes, fancy cars, and wild parties in Las Vegas.
You sir, are a poet and a scholar. Thank you for putting in clear terms what I struggled to illustrate.
Well I wouldn't go that far, but thanks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/31 01:21:06
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Each additional dollar benifits you less than the dollar before it.
Only if we're limiting our determination of benefit to a fixed set of necessities. In reality every additional dollar beyond considerations of basic needs carries exactly as much utility as determined by the person earning it (this is the basis of marginal quality of life indices). Most notably, disposable income enables the acquisition of wealth, which you have already noted as a thing which we should strive for (and most people would agree with you).
In my Economic Analysis class my teacher used a study that had been done on Happieness and they found that it, as it related to how much money you made, really peaked out at around 500,000. And most of the increase was in the first 200,000.
Which is the danger of equating economic class with quality of life. They are most definitely not the same thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/31 01:31:37
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/31 01:35:52
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Indeed, the real issue is the quality of life for all Americans except the Upper Class is slipping. Which has nothing to do with the Upper Class.
We should focus on improving the quality of life for the Middle and Lower Class through allowing the Economy to recover, which will allow the Government taxes to alleviate the national debt. Taxing the Rich will not fix the National Debt, taxing everyone will. But you can't do that until the Economy recovers. So the only other option is to cut spending from everything, especially Entitlements.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/31 01:36:33
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Grey Templar wrote: The middle class is a massive group and has a large difference between its top and bottom ends.
While that's certainly true, it doesn't indicate that earning 250k per anum makes someone a member of the middle class. Then again, what constitutes "middle class" is largely predicated on emotional stigma. People consider how they feel with respect to the rough groups of lower, middle, and upper class and assign themselves membership in the one they feel the most positively towards.
That said, it is perhaps foolish to use income as the sole means of determining class membership when wealth is also an important consideration. Not that it really matters of course, as economic class has far more to do with political consideration than economic matters.
We should focus on improving the quality of life for the Middle and Lower Class through allowing the Economy to recover, which will allow the Government taxes to alleviate the national debt. Taxing the Rich will not fix the National Debt, taxing everyone will. But you can't do that until the Economy recovers. So the only other option is to cut spending from everything, especially Entitlements.
The national debt itself isn't a serious short-term concern. The concern is the deficit, which cannot be addressed via spending cuts alone. It isn't politically feasible, nor is it possible to cut spending quickly without also doing serious harm to the economy. The only reasonable path is one featuring spending cuts and tax increases over an extended period of time. It will, of course, be economically painful, but that is to be expected when changing course after 30 years of largely consistent economic policy.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/31 01:46:53
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/31 02:00:09
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Grey Templar wrote: You will notice they are using Wealth, which is deliberatly done to make the chart look like they want it to look. Anyone who has taken an Economics class knows the difference between income and Wealth.
Now wealth is what we should strive for, not income. Income =/= Wealth.
Please, elaborate on this. References would be nice. Help me understand.
Ok, Income is money you are recieving every so often. So income is money.
What use is money to you? Is the money itself worth anything? the answer is no. You can't eat it, you can't build a house out of it. If you just simply have it it does nothing for you. its only worth something because people say it is.
Wealth is defined by Webster's as the following.
"2: abundance of valuable material possessions or resources"
Money is worthless without Wealth, Wealth is always worth something.
How much it is worth depends on the person evaluating it.
A particular object may be worth more to one person than another. And to another person it may be beyond value.
Now, what is all this Wealth that the Rich have and why do they have more of it. As per the definition above, it is valuable material posessions or resources.
Many Rich people own businesses, which are very valuable. Simply by owning their own business, they have suddenly increased the amount of Wealth they have. However, is the value of the business truly giving them all that much money? They may have a salary of only around 250,000 a year. However, the business itself is worth 100 million because it has expensive facilities and runs X amount of product.
The person owning that company has Weath exceeding 100 million. But they only make 250,000 a year. Compared to what they are supposedly worth and what they actually go home with shows you they arn't actually making money hands over fist. 250,000 is paultry compared to how much the business is worth.
Thats how someone in the top brackets can have lots of Wealth, yet not be making tonnes of money(comparativly speaking)
hence why people use that Wealth chart instead of an Income chart, it makes it look like the rich have everything. Yes, but most of it is in the form of businesses. its not in luxury homes, fancy cars, and wild parties in Las Vegas.
The 1%? You doubled your income over the past 30 years.
So.... while it may not be all beer and skittles for the moderately wealthy in the 90-95th percentile, they are certainly better off than the rest of us. And the 95-100th percentile have exactly NOTHING to complain about.
CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done.
2012/12/31 06:30:57
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
50,000 a year could be fantastic for one living in, say, Indonesia or India. The cost of living is very low and therefore this 50,000 gets you a lot further than the UK or US.
50,000 a year would not be middle class in Luxembourg or somewhere else because the cost of living is much higher.
That's what I think of all this, but I'm a 16 year old, so who gives a damn about what I think?
2012/12/31 09:48:50
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Surely the old schema of working, middle and upper class doesn't really work in a modern first world economy?
I mean, I can see why people want to see themselves as being Middle Class in a lot of places- the last few hundred years has been in many ways the narrative of the increasing power of the middle class, and people want to be part of that narrative.
"Upper Class" has all sorts of negative connotations due to the media.
I dunno. I earn around 34,000 euro a year, my girlfriend earns 40,000 or so. I'd consider us to be really pretty well off. I earn more than the rest of my family (bar my brother) combined. My dad and mam are on a policeman's pension, my sister is in childcare, and my other sister has a low level office admin job. My older brother is the outlier because he does private naval security, which is a big, if inconsistent earner. None of my family would consider themselves terribly badly off, mind you.
So America must be vastly different to Europe in terms of what your money actually gets you in terms of a life. Education seems to be the biggest difference outside of Healthcare, which it seems most people try and get their employer to sort.
Regardless of that, if you have 250,000 a year income, you are earning pretty damn well, and definitely in the top bracket in the world.
Da Boss wrote: "Upper Class" has all sorts of negative connotations due to the media.
Do you really think that is the only reason? Anyone with any amount of sense knows that the upper class is pretty much the same as any other class i.e. a mix of good and bad people, but some of the negative feelings are well earned. Just as there are jerk poor and middle class, there are jerks in the upper class, the main difference being that the poor never instituted corporate serfdom, for instance, or have websites where kids post receipts to compete on who can waste the most money in one night and brag about it. "Let them eat cake", and all that, as it were. Perhaps it is similar to people freaking out about flying when a plane crashes even though more people die in car crashes: when someone with an obscene amount of wealth becomes a dick, it tends to effect more people in a spectacular fashion. Enron didn't just happen because of the the media, and the Hostess workers didn't lose their pensions to pay executives for bonuses for running the company into the ground because of the media.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
2012/12/31 13:39:00
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Nah, I didn't really think that, but I was quite sleepy when I wrote that reply so I used "the media" as a convenient shorthand. Something that bugs me when other people do it, so fair dues for calling me on it
So America must be vastly different to Europe in terms of what your money actually gets you in terms of a life. Education seems to be the biggest difference outside of Healthcare, which it seems most people try and get their employer to sort.
Another thing to consider is that in most of the US being without a car is not an option, and in many families two cars are necessary. For example, my parents each need their own car because their places of business are roughly 1.5 hours apart, and when I was in high school we needed three so that I could get to work. Minimally that adds automotive insurance, fuel, and maintenance to the pool of expenses; and likely car payments as well.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/12/31 16:04:27
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: How in the heck do you have $1000 for student loans? What is your total balance there and what kind of degree did you get?
Total debt is 60k, studied Industrial Engineering (originally aerospace but it wasnt to my liking), owe 30k to the govt,and the other 30 to private lenders. My monthly bill is 300 to federal loan (post consolidation, cannot lower rate), 350 to Sallie Mae (wont lower rate), and another 350 split across 3 loans from chase and citi.
Plus side is that Sallie mae will be paid off in another 4.5 years.
I'm hopping in here simply because this is pertinent (and well aware 2 pages have passed since the quoted post)
I find it very hard hard to believe that you owe more than I do a month, and have 2/3rds the amount of Student Loan debt that I do. I have 95 grand in student loan debt, and I don't even pay over 1000 dollars a month in Student Loan Bills I pay 429 in federal, 305 in PNC private, and 85 to Discover for a loan they bought off of CitiBank. My plans are set to be paid off in 10 to 20 years if I pay the minimum monthly payments. This doesn't include my cell phone bill of 163 (for my mother and myself), and my car payment of 300 a month and the 240 dollars I spend in gas commuting an hour to and from work a day. I make less than your family has in disposable income by several grand. If you're having issues paying off the debt you've incurred with the job you're at, something is seriously wrong, and I feel as though your parents are misrepresenting their total household income.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
2012/12/31 18:45:42
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
I only really started hating rich people after I worked security at a gated community. The difference between the people who made their money and the people who grew up in money is glaring. The former usually are quite pleasant. Everyone else is fairly horrible in a general sense.
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I only really started hating rich people after I worked security at a gated community. The difference between the people who made their money and the people who grew up in money is glaring. The former usually are quite pleasant. Everyone else is fairly horrible in a general sense.
Bill Gates always springs to mind when talking about making their money. The man gives frak tons of money every year, and is, from what I hear a generally likeable guy.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
2012/12/31 21:15:46
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
The everyone (lefty and righties) hate the current deal.
It must be good then... right?
-the tax cut for those making less than $400,000 would be permanent -- no sunsetting, no expiration date.
-however, some exceptions and deductions will be lost for those making more than $300,000 (jointly) or $250,000 (single)
-estate tax rises from 35 to 40%, but the $5 million exclusion (the first five million isn't subject to tax) remains.
-permanent fix to ATM -don't see any reference to sequestration or spending cuts
I stick with my theory: the house will vote on nothing until Tuesday or Wednesday.
They will think it is better to head over the cliff and vote for tax cuts than to vote for a tax raise to prevent the cliff. It doesn't matter that it will be the same bill, it's all about the primary challengers and being able to say "I didn't vote to raise taxes, I voted to cut them".
2012/12/31 23:57:50
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: I stick with my theory: the house will vote on nothing until Tuesday or Wednesday.
They will think it is better to head over the cliff and vote for tax cuts than to vote for a tax raise to prevent the cliff. It doesn't matter that it will be the same bill, it's all about the primary challengers and being able to say "I didn't vote to raise taxes, I voted to cut them".
Yep, just saw a headline that says the House won't vote until Tuesday, while the Senate hopes to vote tonight.
The sad part is, the majority of voters are just "sheep" enough to believe what you think will happen a year or two from now.
"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me." - Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks
2013/01/01 00:27:34
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: I stick with my theory: the house will vote on nothing until Tuesday or Wednesday.
They will think it is better to head over the cliff and vote for tax cuts than to vote for a tax raise to prevent the cliff. It doesn't matter that it will be the same bill, it's all about the primary challengers and being able to say "I didn't vote to raise taxes, I voted to cut them".
meh...
Let it burn.
I'm of the belief now that we need severe austerity for the public to truly hold the elected politician accountable. Otherwise, it'll be more of the same.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/01/01 02:46:41
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: I keep on getting email updates from Rep. Lankford.
He keeps on talking about 4 years of $1 Trillion deficits.
I wonder if he has a political agenda to lie about the number of years we have had the exact same deficit...
?? we're currently at 1 trillion deficits...
So, is he saying we're doing nothing to reduce it?
Bah... just ask Bernake to print more greenbacks.
We are currently on year 5 of the same level of deficits. Droning on about 4 years of Obama and 4 years of $1 trillion deficits is just the usual posturing of "It's Obama's Deficit" and "Obama has grown the Deficit" when it case it reached the current level under the final Bush budget and has been at the same level since. The deficit has actually not grown at all under Obama. He just hasn't done anything to fix it.
2013/01/01 03:00:59
Subject: Re:If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
I'm pretty sure it has grown on his watch... (looking for more info)
Oh... btw, saw this on my twitter feed... fricking hilarious:
On the House's floor no less, Rand Paul says:
“What does the [Senate] Majority Leader say? ‘We won’t do anything about entitlements.” Oh great, this is going to be a real great solution. But we’re going to stick it to rich people! I hope nobody works for those rich people.”
Sounds a little bit like his dad eh?
Edit: Don't get me wrong... I don't put this squarely on Obama's feet. ALL congress critters are at fault.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/01/01 03:03:01
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/01/01 03:10:48
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Which still means that Lankford is lying by ommision by pretending that we have had only 4 years of $1+ trillion deficit budgets and acting like Obama started them.
2013/01/01 03:22:31
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: Which still means that Lankford is lying by ommision by pretending that we have had only 4 years of $1+ trillion deficit budgets and acting like Obama started them.
Oh yeah... he's a punk.
Ya know what? They're all punks. o.O
Have we gone over the cliff yet?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I wish they stop the blame game... and work together to address the issues.
But... alas... it's more important to score political points.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/01/01 03:24:32
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/01/01 03:30:30
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Why is it that you love to blame Obama for stuff and point him out by name. But as soon as something comes out against anybody else it switches to "everybody is at fault (even though I always blame Obama)".
Senate reached a deal from the sound of it, of course the house went home and will vote for tax cuts tomorrow. What a surprise, and I am sure people will fall for it in 2014...
2013/01/01 03:37:16
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
d-usa wrote: Why is it that you love to blame Obama for stuff and point him out by name. But as soon as something comes out against anybody else it switches to "everybody is at fault (even though I always blame Obama)".
Just continuing our favorite blame everything game on the President...
But... honestly. It's the "politiian's" fault. Not just the Obama years... and not just the Bush years... this goes way back.
T'aint no angels in politics...
'cept maybe her:
Spoiler:
Yuri too old for me... but, whoa...
Here's one closer to my age, an Ireland politician:
Senate reached a deal from the sound of it, of course the house went home and will vote for tax cuts tomorrow. What a surprise, and I am sure people will fall for it in 2014...
Interesting...
However, I wouldn't be surprised if the House says "no" and may changes/admendments to that bill. Thus, forcing a reconciliation between the two house.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/01/01 03:41:14
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2013/01/01 03:54:47
Subject: If the US Fiscal Cliff Occurs, Who Is To Blame?
Senate reached a deal from the sound of it, of course the house went home and will vote for tax cuts tomorrow. What a surprise, and I am sure people will fall for it in 2014...
Interesting...
However, I wouldn't be surprised if the House says "no" and may changes/admendments to that bill. Thus, forcing a reconciliation between the two house.
If they do, that means a whole new round of negotiations between the House, Senate and Obama, which means things don't get solved for weeks. The mere pretense of a bill being worked on, however, might lessen he psychological impact on the markets, stop them from panicking too much. Still, I think the house is still going to crap all over itself again instead of passing a bill, because it's run by incompetent people at the moment, but we'll see.
Looking for a club in Brisbane, Australia? Come and enjoy a game and a beer at Pubhammer, our friendly club in a pub at the Junction pub in Annerley (opposite Ace Comics), Sunday nights from 6:30. All brisbanites welcome, don't wait, check out our Club Page on Facebook group for details or to organize a game. We play all sorts of board and war games, so hit us up if you're interested.
Pubhammer is Moving! Starting from the 25th of May we'll be gaming at The Junction pub (AKA The Muddy Farmer), opposite Ace Comics & Games in Annerley! Still Sunday nights from 6:30 in the Function room Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!
Oh yeah... he's a punk.
Come along and play Warmachine, 40k, boardgames or anything else!