Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Middle Class?Follow

#52 Sep 06 2012 at 12:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
Why should you work less and make more money? So you can spend more time with your family.

Maybe I'm using my job as a plausible excuse to spend less time with my family, smart guy. Didja ever stop to think about that? Smiley: mad


(Kidding!)


If you hate your family that much, work 3 jobs, save for a year and start a business; the business of playing everquest at an office park.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#53 Sep 06 2012 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,720 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
You know who thinks that way? People without money ambition.


Not everybody aspires to be wealthy. I don't buy it when someone like Yodabunny says they don't care about the money (everybody does), but I do believe he lacks the ambition to do anything about it.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#54 Sep 06 2012 at 1:07 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

Perhaps there's a level of intellectual laziness involved but if people are happy working their 9-5 for average pay then that's the way they should live and I think a lot more people than you realize are quite happy living as middle class families.

Life isn't about money, money is a tool, it's a means to an end, if you've already found your end then all you need is maintenance cash.


You know who thinks that way? People without money.
We all have some money.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#55 Sep 06 2012 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
You know who thinks that way? People without money ambition.


Not everybody aspires to be wealthy. I don't buy it when someone like Yodabunny says they don't care about the money (everybody does), but I do believe he lacks the ambition to do anything about it.

If he doesn't aspire to be wealthy, why would he use his ambitions to make money?

Edited, Sep 6th 2012 9:10pm by Elinda
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#56 Sep 06 2012 at 1:09 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,559 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
You know who thinks that way? People without money.


Oh, and here I was thinking we were talking about rich people. I pursue things that make me happy, money may be a part of that but it's only a part to a certain point (Gotta have food, house, cable, movies, coffee, car, maybe a fishing boat) so I only seek it to that point then my energy is directed to other things that make me happy.

I'd probably give away a lot of my money if I was rich. Heck, I already give away a chunk of my money and I'm certainly not rich.
#57 Sep 06 2012 at 1:17 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,559 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
Not everybody aspires to be wealthy. I don't buy it when someone like Yodabunny says they don't care about the money (everybody does), but I do believe he lacks the ambition to do anything about it.


Oh I do care about money, I just make enough to cover my needs so it's not an issue. Making more money will not make me happier. My current ambition is to get into shape, and that's going quite well. My previous big goal was to quit smoking and I'm smoke free for 2 years now. I have plenty of drive/ambition/willpower and I direct it where I want it, not towards making money. If I decide at some point that money will make me happy I will point that drive and ambition in the appropriate direction.
#58 Sep 06 2012 at 1:24 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts

Oh I do care about money, I just make enough to cover my needs so it's not an issue. Making more money will not make me happier. My current ambition is to get into shape, and that's going quite well. My previous big goal was to quit smoking and I'm smoke free for 2 years now. I have plenty of drive/ambition/willpower and I direct it where I want it, not towards making money. If I decide at some point that money will make me happy I will point that drive and ambition in the appropriate direction.


The 10 starving children who just died because you didn't make enough money to donate food to them say keep on truckin man, your lack of materialism impressed them. They would have sent a letter but their hands were ravaged by malnutrition into claw like clubs only suitable for bashing their own skulls while praying for the sweet embrace of death.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#59 Sep 06 2012 at 1:24 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
I believe they said that $70,000 a year is the maximum happiness point. After that, you may have more money, but it doesn't necessarily translate into more happiness.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#60 Sep 06 2012 at 1:26 PM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,084 posts

I believe they said that $70,000 a year is the maximum happiness point. After that, you may have more money, but it doesn't necessarily translate into more happiness.


They got that datapoint because the people making 20 Mil a year were too busy nailing high priced escorts 9 deep to bother with surveys.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#61 Sep 06 2012 at 1:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Who said? People making 70k looking to validate thier self worth? People making significantly more than that looking to keep more money on the table for themselves? What about 70k makes it such a golden number?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#62 Sep 06 2012 at 1:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,431 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
Who said? People making 70k looking to validate thier self worth? People making significantly more than that looking to keep more money on the table for themselves? What about 70k makes it such a golden number?


Quote:
With every doubling of income, people tended to say they were more and more satisfied with their lives on a 10-point scale – a pattern that continued for household incomes well above $120,000.

But when asked to assess the happy hours of the previous day – whether people had experienced a lot of enjoyment, laughter, smiling, anger, stress, worry – money mattered only up to about $75,000.


First thing that came up on google.

TL:DR = Rich people don't laugh enough.

Edit: Also, seriously, who links to the PNAS journal main page and not the actual study? Smiley: mad

Edited, Sep 6th 2012 12:49pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#63 Sep 06 2012 at 1:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Timelordwho wrote:
If you hate your family that much, work 3 jobs, save for a year and start a business; the business of playing everquest at an office park.

Not exactly a growth industry.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#64 Sep 06 2012 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
I think risk aversion comes into play as much as ambition.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#65 Sep 06 2012 at 1:46 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
If you hate your family that much, work 3 jobs, save for a year and start a business; the business of playing everquest at an office park.

Not exactly a growth industry.

It doesn't even sound fun.

You could build Norrathland though with animatronic gnolls, roaming god characters and the Tube ride.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#66 Sep 06 2012 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Y
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
If you hate your family that much, work 3 jobs, save for a year and start a business; the business of playing everquest at an office park.

Not exactly a growth industry.


It's a niche market, but by running an outsourced plat farming team, you can keep costs low, and rake in those ill gotten gains.

____________________________
Just as Planned.
#67 Sep 06 2012 at 1:50 PM Rating: Good
******
49,889 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
If you hate your family that much, work 3 jobs, save for a year and start a business; the business of playing everquest at an office park.
Not exactly a growth industry.
It's okay, you can make the tough choice of changing water companies for the cooler and become profitable.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#68 Sep 06 2012 at 1:56 PM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
Oh I do care about money, I just...


My dearest wish is to monopolise entirely the means of production. The only thing of value anyone else will have is their own flesh. Pimps will eke out a living selling the emaciated hordes to me, that I might fuck them with a billion golden ******

Don't pretend you're any different, man. They call it the American dream for a reason.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#69 Sep 06 2012 at 2:06 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,547 posts
Gbaji, you still evidently do not know how economics works. Maybe if you spent more time reading what experts say instead of making things up you would. But then you would have to acknowledge experts and facts and we know how you feel about those.

As for why they are good for the middle class, until you understand how economics works you wouldn't be able to accept the answer. Ill just put it this way...under Clinton the middle class was expanded and people did well, under Reagan and Bush it shrank and people did not do well. Coincidentally the economic viability of the US reflected the growth and recession of the middle class.

If you understood how economics worked you wouldn't even have to ask this question. But for a short answer, ill paraphrase Bill Clinton: "The Democrats believe that together we can achieve anything, The Republicans believe that you better succeed alone, or you are screwed."

____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#70 Sep 06 2012 at 2:35 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,008 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

We peaked at just over 10% unemployment in late 2010 and should have rapidly dropped to below 6% within a year after that point


Wait, that didn't happen? Was JoJo The Employment Unicorn too busy pooping his magical job apples elsewhere? In what fantasy land was there an expectation that unemployment was going to be at 6% in 2011? What a bizarre straw man to measure success against. Seems to strange to be arbitrary, did you read it on some whackjob blog? I'd be fascinated to know the source. Not that unemployment actually ever got 10% in 2010, but that's the least strange thing about it.


You're correct. The technical high was in Oct 2010 at 10%. However, it hovered within a few tenths of a percent until Nov of 2010 (which was the date I was thinking of), at which point it finally began declining. However, unlike past recessionary patterns, it didn't drop down to anywhere near the pre-recession levels.

It's not arbitrary Smash. Every recession for the previous 30 years followed a pretty standard 3 year cycle. 6 months of recession, about a year and a half after that point of high unemployment, then about a year of rapid recovery (for unemployment, other factors tend to recover earlier. Obama knew this going in. He counted on it. It's why he made the statement that if he didn't have our economic problems licked within three years, he'd be a one term president. It's also why the Dems made such a big deal about summer 2010 being the "summer of recovery". Because past recession patterns indicated that unemployment should have started a rapid decline starting in July of that year. But it didn't. It stayed high until November and then didn't come all the way down.

I can link to the employment numbers showing this pattern if you really want (although I've linked to them in past threads). It's not hard to see, and it's also not hard to see that the Dems were acting on the assumption that those patterns would be repeated regardless of what they did in terms of spending/stimulus/etc.


They were wrong. And it's absolutely ridiculous for you to stand here today and pretend that no one had an expectation that we should have been fully recovered sometime in mid to late 2011. That was exactly the expectation that your own party was operating on, and you **** well know it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#71 Sep 06 2012 at 2:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Supreme Lionator
*****
14,174 posts
Great, now this thread is about gbaji's mental illness again.

Nice work rdmcandie, you worthless piece of ****.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#72 Sep 06 2012 at 3:17 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,559 posts
Kavekk wrote:
They call it the American dream for a reason.


I'm Canadian.
#73 Sep 06 2012 at 3:37 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,547 posts
Quote:
Great, now this thread is about gbaji's mental illness again.

Nice work rdmcandie, you worthless piece of sh*t.



Sorry I didn't read the rest of the thread past Gbaji's post, and wanted to sound smart by using the words facts, and experts. Ill go back to lurking now.

Edited, Sep 6th 2012 5:41pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#74gbaji, Posted: Sep 06 2012 at 4:32 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Um... At the risk of stating the obvious: Clinton wasn't in office the last 4 years. Obama was. So how about we look at what he's done during that time period? Because BS speeches aside, Obama has more or less done the opposite of what Clinton did back in the 90s. And we got the opposite result. Shocking isn't it?
#75 Sep 06 2012 at 4:40 PM Rating: Excellent
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,360 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm still waiting for...
I'm still waiting for actual hard irrefutable evidence that lower taxes always mean more jobs are created, rather than just increased wealth for stockholders.

So, y'know, cite, please.



Here's a thought: link tax breaks to businesses on a $:jobs created scale. You make x jobs, you get y tax break. If you don't create the jobs, you don't get the break. That seems perfectly reasonable, don't you think, g?
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
Last week, I saw a guy with an eyepatch and a gold monocle and pointed him out to Flea as one of the most awesome things I've seen, ever. If I had an eyepatch and a gold monocle, I'd always dress up as Mr. Peanut but with a hook hand and a parrot.
#76 Sep 06 2012 at 4:42 PM Rating: Decent
******
21,720 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm still waiting for someone to detail one policy the Dems acted on in the last 4 years which helped the middle class. It's really easy to say the words "Our policies have helped the middle class". As I've stated several times, this seems to be repeated constantly at the DNC. I'm just curious what evidence supports that claim. Just repeating the claim again isn't sufficient.


https://www.dropbox.com/s/kc8fyc58k9rilxw/new_jobs_through_july_2012.png

Just for you. Explicit detail directly from the BLS.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 46 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (46)