19
   

Why there are so many losers?

 
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2010 05:50 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

The poor of France, in 1789, gave a ****. The poor of today also give a ****.


The poor of France in 1789 lived at a bare subsistence level. That is certainly not true of the poor of today who believe they are poor if they do not have two TVs. (I am talking about the United States). As the man said, "It is all relative".


I took the following from Pdiddie's blog:


The 22 statistics detailed here prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the middle class is being systematically wiped out of existence in America.

The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer at a staggering rate. Once upon a time, the United States had the largest and most prosperous middle class in the history of the world, but now that is changing at a blinding pace. ...

Here are the statistics to prove it:

• 83 percent of all U.S. stocks are in the hands of 1 percent of the people.
• 61 percent of Americans "always or usually" live paycheck to paycheck, which was up from 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in 2007.
• 66 percent of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1% of all Americans.
• 36 percent of Americans say that they don't contribute anything to retirement savings.
• A staggering 43 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved up for retirement.
• 24 percent of American workers say that they have postponed their planned retirement age in the past year.
• Over 1.4 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009, which represented a 32 percent increase over 2008.
• Only the top 5 percent of U.S. households have earned enough additional income to match the rise in housing costs since 1975.
• For the first time in U.S. history, banks own a greater share of residential housing net worth in the United States than all individual Americans put together.
• In 1950, the ratio of the average executive's paycheck to the average worker's paycheck was about 30 to 1. Since the year 2000, that ratio has exploded to between 300 to 500 to one.
• As of 2007, the bottom 80 percent of American households held about 7% of the liquid financial assets.
• The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth.
• Average Wall Street bonuses for 2009 were up 17 percent when compared with 2008.
• In the United States, the average federal worker now earns 60% MORE than the average worker in the private sector.
• The top 1 percent of U.S. households own nearly twice as much of America's corporate wealth as they did just 15 years ago.
• In America today, the average time needed to find a job has risen to a record 35.2 weeks.
• More than 40 percent of Americans who actually are employed are now working in service jobs, which are often very low paying.
• For the first time in U.S. history, more than 40 million Americans are on food stamps, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture projects that number will go up to 43 million Americans in 2011.
• This is what American workers now must compete against: in China a garment worker makes approximately 86 cents an hour and in Cambodia a garment worker makes approximately 22 cents an hour.
• Approximately 21 percent of all children in the United States are living below the poverty line in 2010 - the highest rate in 20 years.
• Despite the financial crisis, the number of millionaires in the United States rose a whopping 16 percent to 7.8 million in 2009.
• The top 10 percent of Americans now earn around 50 percent of our national income.

But the conservatives in America cry "socialism", unemployed Americans and those on food stamps are "feeeloaders", and it's all Obama's fault.


So why are we witnessing such fundamental changes? Well, the globalism and "free trade" that our politicians and business leaders insisted would be so good for us have had some rather nasty side effects. It turns out that they didn't tell us that the "global economy" would mean that middle class American workers would eventually have to directly compete for jobs with people on the other side of the world where there is no minimum wage and very few regulations. The big global corporations have greatly benefited by exploiting third world labor pools over the last several decades, but middle class American workers have increasingly found things to be very tough.

This must be the fault of labor unions. If you believe FOX News.


The reality is that no matter how smart, how strong, how educated or how hard working American workers are, they just cannot compete with people who are desperate to put in 10 to 12 hour days at less than a dollar an hour on the other side of the world. After all, what corporation in their right mind is going to pay an American worker 10 times more (plus benefits) to do the same job? The world is fundamentally changing. Wealth and power are rapidly becoming concentrated at the top and the big global corporations are making massive amounts of money. Meanwhile, the American middle class is being systematically wiped out of existence as U.S. workers are slowly being merged into the new "global" labor pool.

What do most Americans have to offer in the marketplace other than their labor? Not much. The truth is that most Americans are absolutely dependent on someone else giving them a job. But today, U.S. workers are "less attractive" than ever. Compared to the rest of the world, American workers are extremely expensive, and the government keeps passing more rules and regulations seemingly on a monthly basis that makes it even more difficult to conduct business in the United States.

So corporations are moving operations out of the U.S. at breathtaking speed. Since the U.S. government does not penalize them for doing so, there really is no incentive for them to stay.

What has developed is a situation where the people at the top are doing quite well, while most Americans are finding it increasingly difficult to make it. There are now about six unemployed Americans for every new job opening in the United States, and the number of "chronically unemployed" is absolutely soaring. There simply are not nearly enough jobs for everyone.

God DAMN that Obama. Where are all the jobs he promised?


Many of those who are able to get jobs are finding that they are making less money than they used to. In fact, an increasingly large percentage of Americans are working at low wage retail and service jobs.

But you can't raise a family on what you make flipping burgers at McDonald's or on what you bring in from greeting customers down at the local Wal-Mart.

The truth is that the middle class in America is dying -- and once it is gone it will be incredibly difficult to rebuild.

We've got to get the Republicans back in there so they can fix this. It's their highest priority.

posted by Perry Dorrell, aka PDiddie @ 7/24/2010 10:20:00 AM -->
kittenluver97
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Jul, 2010 06:37 pm
@TuringEquivalent,
how are you asking that question and you dont look at yourself you are a loser i bet u eat junkfood and i bet you still would even if you were poor but i kind of agree with you on that one you make a really good poin have a nice summer Smile
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 08:30 am
@TuringEquivalent,
TuringEquivalent wrote:
Why there are so many losers? [...]
I suspect the reason so many people are losers( ie: poor) is because they internalize the **** up materialistic consumer culture around them.

I think the reason there are so many losers is much shallower than you suggest: The true reason is that when we categorize people as "winners" and "losers", we do it by comparing their success in life to each other's. We call people "winners" when they are much more successful than the average person, "losers" when they are much less successful. Now as a simple matter of logic, we can't all be above-average. We can't even all belong to the top ninety percent of the income distribution. Some of us have to belong to the bottom ten percent, where the rest of us looks at them and categorizes them as economic losers.

So if we take the USA as an example, and assume that "losers" constitute the bottom ten percent of it, that means there must be 30 million losers in America. That's a lot of losers. And the reason there are so many is that it's statistically inevitable. It really is that shallow.
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 11:05 am
@edgarblythe,
Wow! P Diddie has a powerful point there.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 03:04 pm
on reviewing this thread, i'd like to offer up the words of another wise man

"even the losers, get lucky sometimes"
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 03:05 pm
@djjd62,
Somebody got lucky
But it was an accident
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Jul, 2010 06:43 pm
@djjd62,
If he was wise, I'm pretty sure he didn't have a comma in there
Mr. Green









0 Replies
 
Razzleg
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Jul, 2010 12:17 am
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:

on reviewing this thread, i'd like to offer up the words of another wise man

"even the losers, get lucky sometimes"


You and i know that Tom Petty is one of the truly wise men left, along with Billy Joel, and that the comma you interposed signified a line break and nothing else. Bless you, and Mame, Billy Joel, and Tom Petty Very Happy ...and stop bogarting and pass that **** over here...
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:13 am
Look at how many replies..


I am still right. In general, people can raise above their misfortune by saving, hard work, studying, getting a good job, and investing wisely. The fact that they don ` t do it is because they are mentally weak. This is why they are losers. Their mental weakness is due to the materialistic culture around them.

TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:26 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

TuringEquivalent wrote:
Why there are so many losers? [...]
I suspect the reason so many people are losers( ie: poor) is because they internalize the **** up materialistic consumer culture around them.

I think the reason there are so many losers is much shallower than you suggest: The true reason is that when we categorize people as "winners" and "losers", we do it by comparing their success in life to each other's. We call people "winners" when they are much more successful than the average person, "losers" when they are much less successful. Now as a simple matter of logic, we can't all be above-average. We can't even all belong to the top ninety percent of the income distribution. Some of us have to belong to the bottom ten percent, where the rest of us looks at them and categorizes them as economic losers.

So if we take the USA as an example, and assume that "losers" constitute the bottom ten percent of it, that means there must be 30 million losers in America. That's a lot of losers. And the reason there are so many is that it's statistically inevitable. It really is that shallow.


I equate losers with people with very little money, and "little money" is depended on how much one can buy at any given time. So, I can, without being vague classify people as "losers", because they are below a certain income.
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:29 am
@kittenluver97,
kittenluver97 wrote:

how are you asking that question and you dont look at yourself you are a loser i bet u eat junkfood and i bet you still would even if you were poor but i kind of agree with you on that one you make a really good poin have a nice summer Smile


and i bet you are a moron. Thanks for agreeing with me.
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:42 am
@Khethil,
Khethil wrote:

Wow, what a post.

Pursuing a materialistic vision of success is short-sighted and self defeating, irresponsible and destructive. What's more, the rat-race of career success and buying more crap, in pursuit of someone's idea of success, is not only a losing battle on a personal level but it tends to include using or overusing debt and becoming a slave to all that **** you've spent your time grabbing. All that stuff won't make you happy - to get that "thrill of satisfaction" that comes from 'stuff' you need to keep buying; which means keep working, harder, longer, pushing for more money. I never cease to be amazed at how many people live like this and keep riding that merry-go-round to nowhere.

Becoming a "success" in this materialistic vision relegates wisdom, compassion, responsibility, empathy and education to the background since not only are these not requisite for financial success, in the capitalistic world they're more of a liability.


TuringEquivalent wrote:
I suspect the reason so many people are losers( ie: poor) is because they internalize the **** up materialistic consumer culture around them.

You realize this is a blatant contradiction, don't you?

Those who internalize the materialistic consumer culture aren't necessarily the poor ones. Internalizing it - taking it on as a personal pursuit - more likely results in people who spend all their energies in pursuit of money and things (i.e., the non-poor).

Now... those who DO spend themselves into poverty (which I'm guessing might be where you were trying to go) might well have earned the judgment you've given. But to stereotype all poor into this category is really narrow minded; that they exist and that this happens doesn't mean that ALL have become that way.

I myself am poor by choice. After retiring from the military I spent four years as a CIO making well over 6 figures. It was only for the wisdom of my wife - that we realized this money grab horseshit was killing us - that we quit our jobs, moved to the most inexpensive place we could tolerate and now enjoy a quiet, humble lifestyle where exercise, family, reading, enjoying our yard, each other and community fills our time. I'm very proud to say I'm just below the U.S. poverty line. And although I am still tempted by stuff, buying all the neat toys, gadgets, close and cars is no longer an option. I'm free... standing on the sidelines trying to tell people to jump off that merry-go-round of failure; no one seems to care.

In any case, while I think you're right that materialistic consumerism is a social cancer-of-cancers and that some have spent themselves into poverty, don't be so narrow minded as to assume that all (or even most) are that way due to irresponsibility.

Thanks


I did not say anything about successful people. I was referring to the poor, or people with little money.


You said it is contradiction that i claim "poor people are materialistic". Is is not. People who are materialistic need to buy stuffs they don` t need, and as a result, they get into debt. That is one reason they are poor. Do you need another?

As for you. You are below the poverty line, but it seems you can go beyond it. What is the reason? You must be ******* lazy. Making good money does not following that you need to buy the newest i-phone. It is an unjustified assumption.
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:48 am
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

There are many kinds of losers as you speak of.

Those who have PTSD and other kinds of depressions, therefore lost all inner motivation and willpower for maintaining a normal life with job and such, and has fallen to a miserable life.

Those who learning difficulties.

Those who from early age mingled with the wrong kind of people, and got lost in a world of crime, violence and drugs, all cause by group think, flok instinct and suggesion.

Then theres those who havn't gotten the possebility to elevate themselves by school education, didn't have the goverment to provide jobs, infrastructure ..etc, a 3rd world country.

..etc.



Those unfortunate people can work! They can live within their mean. They are find a better job with education, and whatever. So, they can transcend their limitations. The reason those people are poor, and remain poor is because they are lazy, and get themselves into large debt.
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:50 am
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:

to me, the so called winners are mostly douchebags, give me the losers any day

as a wise man once said

i'd rather laugh with the sinners, than cry with the saints
the sinners are much more fun



I never said anything about winners.
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:57 am
@Intrepid,
Intrepid wrote:

It is not the poor who are losers. Losers are the people like you who have nothing better to do than look for some misfortunates to blame the woes of the world on.

You do seem to be an expert on losers, but not for the reasons you have outlined.

You can show how much of a loser you are by calling me some names taken from your loser vocabulary.

Thank you for your time and have a nice day.


Moron, i did not "blame". To "blame" someone, that someone must be the cause of my misfortune. No one cause me any problem. I am merely generalizing people who are poor, dumb bitch
0 Replies
 
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 12:59 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:

TuringEquivalent wrote:

I suspect the reason so many people are losers( ie: poor) is because they internalize the **** up materialistic consumer culture around them.
They don ` t value education, nor do they have any interest, or passion for studying. For them, their only goal in life is to get by. They take the path with the least risk, and hope to not attract any attention. They don ` t value patience, self-discipline, or planning for the future. For them, money is the end, and the goal is to to gratify their instinctual needs, but since they are losers, they lack the means to do so.

Most people know that fast food is bad for them, and yet they eat that ****. This shows a lack of self-control.

A lot of people are compulsive buyers. Why? Some people know that they can` t afford it, and yet they buy. Why? They are easily distracted by material goods.


Probably, because there are so many winners. Since, for every loser, there is a winner.



This op did not say anything about winners.
failures art
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 01:01 am
@TuringEquivalent,
TuringEquivalent wrote:

Look at how many replies..

Jesus didn't brag about how many nails they put into him when was crucified, I don't think you should either.

TuringEquivalent wrote:

I am still right.

Precious.

TuringEquivalent wrote:

In general, people can raise above their misfortune by saving, hard work, studying, getting a good job, and investing wisely.

Lot's of people could be great cyclists with practice. It still takes a bicycle though. You shouldn't trivialize the hard work many struggling people do.

TuringEquivalent wrote:

The fact that they don ` t do it is because they are mentally weak. This is why they are losers.

They do, and they aren't.

TuringEquivalent wrote:

Their mental weakness is due to the materialistic culture around them.

And yet the most wealthy are the ones most invested in the materialistic culture.

You're still wrong.

A
R
T
oolongteasup
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 01:06 am
@TuringEquivalent,
I find it quite inconvenient sometimes to realise that being is winning.
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 01:06 am
@failures art,
failures art wrote:

TuringEquivalent wrote:
Look at how stupid you are.

I have been known to misplace my keys occasionally.

TuringEquivalent wrote:
Instead of using arguments, and reason to refute me, you are using slogans.

Based on what you've provided, it doesn't seem like you've got much an appetite for reasoning.

TuringEquivalent wrote:
You ******* predictive [sic] piece of ****.

I believe you meant "predictable," to say I'm "predictive" is to foretell on the basis of observation, experience, or scientific reason.'

What exactly is it that you think you're supposed to be presented with here? The idea that the poor are poor because they subscribe to a materialistic world-view and consumerism completely ignores that the richest people on earth are the people subscribe to the exact same things. You're blame the poor garbage rant is nothing more than curled lip sneers recited from a comfortable armchair.

TuringEquivalent wrote:
Yes, you are ******* loser, and you are not alone.

Well, I'm not poor, so there goes your theory.

A
R
T


In the op post, i did` t not say anything about rich people at all. So, it makes no sense to say rich people are materialistic. Being materialistic is not a sufficient condition for being poor, but it is a sufficient condition for poor people to remain poor, since they get into debt. This is one reason why you are a ******* moron.
TuringEquivalent
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Jul, 2010 01:10 am
@oolongteasup,
oolongteasup wrote:

I find it quite inconvenient sometimes to realise that being is winning.


I am not winning. So, there goes your hypothesis, bitch.

 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 07:32:39