The rise of Socialism and it's appeal to young people is troubling

originally posted by: neo96

Even if the statistics themselves are absolutely accurate, the words that describe what they are measuring can be grossly misleading.

I suggest people read this instead of parroting propaganda.

Just letting people know about the person that wrote the article you linked.
rationalwiki.org...#

a reply to: VoiceOfTheEmperor

No because you didn't READ IT.

A little over half of the households in the bottom 20% have nobody working. You don't usually get a lot of income for doing nothing. In 2010, there were more people working full-time in the top 5% of households than in the bottom 20%.

Household income statistics can be very misleading in other ways. The number of people per household is different among different racial or ethnic groups, as well as from one income level to another, and it is different from one time period to another.

Even individual income statistics have pitfalls when they lump together very different kinds of income, as is usually the case. Incomes from salaries are very different from incomes from capital gains.

This means that statistics on income inequalities are often comparing high multi-year earnings with lower single-year earnings -- that is, comparing apples and oranges.

Keep up.

This is even more relevant since the IRS only counts 'certain' kind of income. That's creates wealth.

originally posted by: MadLad
a reply to: VoiceOfTheEmperor

Wealth inequality is at a near-record high. The American worker is earning less and less, while owners and CEO's and shareholders are making more, and more.

The problem with this thinking is that wealth isn't a zero sum game. When the rich get wealthier it isn't because they take wealth from the poor. Wealth expands. We're all much wealthier, healthier, safer etc. than we were 100 years ago.

When the rich get richer, so do the poor.

That's why I posted a graph showing that on average workers are receiving less of the share of their production vs their employers. In this case, it is EXACTLY that these companies are taking advantage of their workers.

Upcoming generation wants a different system than the current generation.

Current generation doesn't like that.

Water is wet, sky is blue, snow is cold.

More news at 11.

Now, where did I put my shocked Pickachu gifs?

a reply to: Xtrozero

a reply to: Xtrozero

Oh, I absolutely think the trades are the way to go for young people. You're exactly right that my friends who went that route are much better off. Trades weren't going to work in my personal case.

My failure point was college. My argument towards it though was that I was 'forced' to go. Notice forced in quotes. I get I was 18 and had a choice. I had a steady high paying job that I had an upward mobility path planned out. My parents said I was going to college. My parents generation pushed college so hard because they didn't want their kids to have to work like them. I would LOVE to work like them.

I was the Ginny pig generation with college. It didn't go well. I didn't think I was going to make $100k out of college. I also had no idea how little $37k was an average salary with my major. I didn't have loan in my name. I had no idea how this stuff worked.

I don't want a participation trophy and I don't want to sue the business world. I would like to make sure future generations understand the repercussions of college, that trades are not to be looked down upon, and how to prepare for adult financial situations before it is too late for them.

a reply to: neo96

I know you're having a hard time understanding what I posted, but the crux of that article you shared is about Household income statistics, while mine are not.

Even individual income statistics have pitfalls when they lump together very different kinds of income, as is usually the case. Incomes from salaries are very different from incomes from capital gains.

I thought it went without saying that my stats about production outcome and wages would have nothing to do with capital gains.



Obviously, if we included capital gains income it would come out even more lopsided than it is, because the wealthy overwhelmingly gain from the sale of property and investment, lol. My stats don't even take that into account...

So, you were saying?

originally posted by: VoiceOfTheEmperor

originally posted by: MadLad
a reply to: VoiceOfTheEmperor

Wealth inequality is at a near-record high. The American worker is earning less and less, while owners and CEO's and shareholders are making more, and more.

The problem with this thinking is that wealth isn't a zero sum game. When the rich get wealthier it isn't because they take wealth from the poor. Wealth expands. We're all much wealthier, healthier, safer etc. than we were 100 years ago.

When the rich get richer, so do the poor.

That's why I posted a graph showing that on average workers are receiving less of the share of their production vs their employers. In this case, it is EXACTLY that these companies are taking advantage of their workers.

Well, yes. Of course workers are receiving a much less a share of the production. Employers, without whom workers we be out of work, take a much larger risk in starting and running a business. That production would be non-existent had the employer not taken that risk. If a worker wants a greater share of the production, they'll have to start their own company.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: neoholographic

Pretty simplistic notion think its much more than that, If a country hangs around long enough the socialists begin to form and get together. Sort of like you only get rats and mice after you have lived in a house so long. Lets remember FDR damn near had a silent coup early in his first term, I believe even though that wasn't socialist perse there was a large socialistic presence among others in America at the time. Europe has always had it's agitators mostly because of Russia, Get enough people together sooner or later some of them are going to want it differently.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

That's, honestly, a very true representation of the current economic/political issues facing modern America. Thank you for that.

a reply to: VoiceOfTheEmperor

Capital gains is what creates cumulative wealth.

And no it wouldn't.

Everyone spending their $$ on snip don't create cumulative wealth.

a reply to: MadLad

And I don't expect the profit to be perfectly distributed between the employers and employees. Certainly, you are right that the employer has risks and responsibilities above and beyond the average worker... but my concern is that all the stats show the wealthy getting more wealthy, while labor share is on the decline, and wages are flatlining.

CEO Pay Skyrockets To 361 Times That Of The Average Worker

I agree that of course if workers can that they should try and start their own business (highly recommend it, even) but that isn't a realistic option for many, and it has nothing to do with companies fairly paying their employees.

originally posted by: neoholographic


This is so sad to me. Socialism is the Politics of envy.

That says it all. What do you think social media really does besides control thought? It makes people feel inferior and envy everyone else, instead of driving them to improve their inner life first.
The younger generation, esp pre-30 live their whole lives staring at screens almost the whole day, plugged in to the envy machine. Of course an 'ideology' that promises free stuff and equality without much hard work will be popular in such a population. It's up to the older and more intelligent of the younger generations to combat this.

a reply to: VoiceOfTheEmperor

I don't think these figures account for economic mobility. The number of millionaires, especially in the US, is increasing exponentially year by year.

a reply to: neoholographic

Haha, I think young people are the first to change with the times. Almost everyone I know has grown up playing with code, and many of my friends are more than proficient in Python, Java, even Xcode, ect. Computer coding jobs are a dime and dozen... unless you're suggesting all young people try and writing and selling their own applications? It's a highly competitive and, frankly, flooded market. Playing coder isn't a replacement for a real job for most people, and honestly, it's not the best advice.

originally posted by: chris_stibrany

originally posted by: neoholographic


This is so sad to me. Socialism is the Politics of envy.

That says it all. What do you think social media really does besides control thought? It makes people feel inferior and envy everyone else, instead of driving them to improve their inner life first.
The younger generation, esp pre-30 live their whole lives staring at screens almost the whole day, plugged in to the envy machine. Of course an 'ideology' that promises free stuff and equality without much hard work will be popular in such a population. It's up to the older and more intelligent of the younger generations to combat this.

BINGO!

Stop worrying about what others are making, get off of Tinder or Face timing with friends all day and adapt to the changing environment. So many kids hear we will take from those who have and give you everything free.