Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 76: Personal Attack Free Edition 2.0

(+) Yeah! (+)

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.
---

LKenri posted...

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.

Lol
---

Kenri posted...

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.

Income is only half the story. You need to subtract expenses because that also varies depending on where you live.
---

NFUN posted...

I don't think he was advocating for a hard cutoff.

he's not the one who really came up with that 250k, that was the obama cutoff. the top 5% of the nation. it's not middle class in any way no matter how you slice it but it's also not just filthy rich. it's upper class, people making seven figures a year are quite frankly beyond that. even just doubling it to 500k narrows down the "there's little excuse why you can't give back more" to there being none.
---

Kenri posted...

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.

Try making 250k in NYC. You'd basically be a pauper.
---

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Mershaaay posted...

Kenri posted...

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.

Try making 250k in NYC. You'd basically be a pauper.

the problem is people living in NYC tho
---

red sox 777 posted...

Because this is the number that people agree is NOT rich. And establishment Democrats continue to act like they represent the interests of people making 40k, just because they represent the interests of middle class people making 250k against the rich making 500k+.

do people really think that's not "rich?" like really, when you break a six figure income you cease being in middle class turf and are upper class. that always struck me as the simplest threshold people had because it's super visible. it doesn't mean you aren't incapable of having new expenses to accommodate your lifestyle, it just means you've got money. always saw it as something like 100k -> 250k -> 500k as the general hierarchy of "welcome to the upper class -> welcome to being rich -> so how many mansions do you want."
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

Mershaaay posted...

Kenri posted...

If you're making $250k you're super f***ing rich, just because literal billionaires exist doesn't stop $250k yearly from being an obscene amount of money.

Try making 250k in NYC. You'd basically be a pauper.

the problem is people living in NYC tho

it's not, no.
you can very easily live with a fifth of that. think NYC is more of a 50-70k living for when it's comfy enough.
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

ur a friggin moon man

As the originator of that insult you owe me 5 cents due to copyright
---

Wanglicious posted...

red sox 777 posted...

Because this is the number that people agree is NOT rich. And establishment Democrats continue to act like they represent the interests of people making 40k, just because they represent the interests of middle class people making 250k against the rich making 500k+.

do people really think that's not "rich?" like really, when you break a six figure income you cease being in middle class turf and are upper class. that always struck me as the simplest threshold people had because it's super visible. it doesn't mean you aren't incapable of having new expenses to accommodate your lifestyle, it just means you've got money. always saw it as something like 100k -> 250k -> 500k as the general hierarchy of "welcome to the upper class -> welcome to being rich -> so how many mansions do you want."

I'll play the other side of this for a second and say that 100k is definitely not 'upper class.' I don't consider someone to be upper class until they have enough money to buy political influence and hang around the kind of people who do. People who make 100k a year don't hang around in the fancy circles. You're nice middle class, but still middle class.

Paratroopa1 posted...

I'll play the other side of this for a second and say that 100k is definitely not 'upper class.' I don't consider someone to be upper class until they have enough money to buy political influence and hang around the kind of people who do. People who make 100k a year don't hang around in the fancy circles. You're nice middle class, but still middle class.

people who make 250k don't hang out in those circles either.
that's the turf more for people making millions a year. plural.

at the point you're mentioning i think the simplified 3-class system breaks and they're going beyond it.
---

Paratroopa1 posted...

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Rent control and food stamps. Quality of life between those people and people making $300k are pretty close.
---

Wanglicious posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

I'll play the other side of this for a second and say that 100k is definitely not 'upper class.' I don't consider someone to be upper class until they have enough money to buy political influence and hang around the kind of people who do. People who make 100k a year don't hang around in the fancy circles. You're nice middle class, but still middle class.

people who make 250k don't hang out in those circles either.
that's the turf more for millionaires.

at the point you're mentioning i think the simplified 3-class system breaks and they're going beyond it.

Our definition of what constitutes the 'upper class' is different, I guess. 100k a year means you're well off, but that's not 'don't have to worry about s***' money. You're not in a new class at that point, you're just doing well.

Wanglicious posted...

do people really think that's not "rich?" like really, when you break a six figure income you cease being in middle class turf and are upper class. that always struck me as the simplest threshold people had because it's super visible. it doesn't mean you aren't incapable of having new expenses to accommodate your lifestyle, it just means you've got money.

FWIW I agree with this, six figures has always been my threshhold too. Mind you, a person with a six figure income and a family with one are slightly different, but yeah.
---

Mershaaay posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Rent control and food stamps. Quality of life between those people and people making $300k are pretty close.

hahaha you are completely out of touch with reality

Wanglicious posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

I'll play the other side of this for a second and say that 100k is definitely not 'upper class.' I don't consider someone to be upper class until they have enough money to buy political influence and hang around the kind of people who do. People who make 100k a year don't hang around in the fancy circles. You're nice middle class, but still middle class.

people who make 250k don't hang out in those circles either.
that's the turf more for people making millions a year. plural.

at the point you're mentioning i think the simplified 3-class system breaks and they're going beyond it.

Would it perhaps be more accurate to say that it's more for the people who make the bulk of their income from investments, rather than labor/salary?

(Non-retired people, obviously)

Mershaaay posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Rent control and food stamps. Quality of life between those people and people making $300k are pretty close.

Uhhhhhh
---

SephG is being so obvious with his trolling right now, I really don't know how ya'll are falling for it.
---

My point is, Obamacare and most of the Democrats' policies are designed to help people making between roughly 100k and 250k per year. They call this middle class. But it's not working anymore, because people have figured out the Obama/Clinton middle class is ridiculously broad.
---

Yeah, 100k is upper-middle class, but still middle class. 250k is definitely upper class. Not sure where I'd put the boundary between the two.
---

Mershaaay posted...

Rent control and food stamps. Quality of life between those people and people making $300k are pretty close.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever seen posted in this topic series, and that's saying something.

For the record:
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/01/new_york_city_census_data_manhattan_and_brooklyn_are_much_poorer_than_you.html

New York City’s most suburban borough, Staten Island, is also its richest, with a median household income of $70,295, while the suburban counties surrounding New York are all richer than any of the boroughs.

250k is rich as f*** by average standards.
---

Are we talking about individual or family income?

For a single individual $100k is definitely pretty well off. For a family with kids living in an expensive city it isn't all that much.
---

Paratroopa1 posted...

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Tennessean, in my case. s***'s expensive.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Are we talking about individual or family income?

For a single individual $100k is definitely pretty well off. For a family with kids living in an expensive city it isn't all that much.

It's sort of hard to make this call because there's a big difference between family sizes and families where either both or only one parent works, and people don't always choose family size based on what is most comfortable for their income level, so yeah 100k doesn't stretch as far for some people as it does for others

Paratroopa1 posted...

Our definition of what constitutes the 'upper class' is different, I guess. 100k a year means you're well off, but that's not 'don't have to worry about s***' money. You're not in a new class at that point, you're just doing well.

yeah, i think we differ there. 100k isn't the point of having "f*** you" money, i can agree that's more in 250k, "welcome to being rich." which is still well off mind you, but not to the point where you're getting political dinners or whatever. 500k, that's different. break a mil a year, entirely different and anything forward from there starts to become similar with the main question being how much excess. i see the main split as being with the idea of thinking "hm, so when can i get a bigger, nicer place?" and six figures tends to do that. 50-70k and 100k is a sizable gap where the difference is mostly on how to "upgrade" your lifestyle, you'll accustom yourself to a richer one at that level, which is how i see the class gap. lower class doesn't really get to pick much on this, middle class gets to shop around a bit, upper class gets to play, and rich gets to laugh.


as for NYC - 30k is definitely in the lower class threshold, government assistance, rent control, or roommates are the answer there. but 50k that changes drastically, 70k is super comfy (money for travel, eating outside regularly, having steady savings, can think of children), and anything beyond that is having fun, getting nicer places in nicer neighborhoods, etc. 250k is def rich here too.

Reg posted...

Would it perhaps be more accurate to say that it's more for the people who make the bulk of their income from investments, rather than labor/salary?

definitely, yeah.
---

Wanglicious posted...

oh no, it's worse than that, kan.
insurance companies also insure themselves for losses.

they'll bankrupt someone else first completely, effectively making all their customers needing to change insurance because there's no money, making a massive domino effect that sucks.

from there the initial insurance company will fight over where else the money can come from in courts, run everyone else out of money until settlement hits, then file for bankruptcy as they've saved as much as they can.

Yeah that was a vast oversimplification

Point is that if you want to put the insurance companies' balls in a vice, you need to blackmail its top brass, not f*** around with stupid laws that won't get them to care
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

That's not really a position of strength, though

It's a position where we're all trapped in a room and the GOP have activated a time bomb. Sure, the insurance companies lose big if a deal isn't made, but so does everyone who would lose insurance if a replacement was not negotiated, and consequently so would all of the GOP congresspeople would be blamed bigly for the ensuing disaster.

In fact, the people in the best negotiating position there would be the Democrats!

I'm not disagreeing here. If we legitimately just get the same bill and call it "Trumpcare" I'm going to go nuclear.
---

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_17760284.html

Bombshell.
---

VintageGin posted...

Yeah, 100k is upper-middle class, but still middle class. 250k is definitely upper class. Not sure where I'd put the boundary between the two.

Which is why the "upper one percent" argument is trash. There are legit issues brought up by liberals on this, but the ones ones who actually pay the higher taxes are small business owners. The ones with f*** you money are all exempt.
---

red sox 777 posted...

My point is, Obamacare and most of the Democrats' policies are designed to help people making between roughly 100k and 250k per year. They call this middle class. But it's not working anymore, because people have figured out the Obama/Clinton middle class is ridiculously broad.

okay, that makes sense. as i honestly always heard that number and it felt off, like... upper hits before that. and even as i got older the only difference in what i'm hearing is "this isn't the same middle class everyone else is thinking of." thanks for that.

LordoftheMorons posted...

Are we talking about individual or family income?

For a single individual $100k is definitely pretty well off. For a family with kids living in an expensive city it isn't all that much.

definitely thinking single. if it's family i generally go by 1.5x the value, so 150k. that's assuming standard mom/dad/1-2 kids kinda thing. if it's like 6 kids, grandma, etc well... yeah, that changes.

VintageGin posted...

Yeah, 100k is upper-middle class, but still middle class. 250k is definitely upper class. Not sure where I'd put the boundary between the two.

i can be okay with this too, a fuzzy line that gets into both and a clear moment there. that fits my 'welcome to the upper class' standard - you're adjusting the differences but you're not quite there yet. you've got your foot in the door but haven't really gotten to sit down on the silk covered couch.
---

Wanglicious posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

Our definition of what constitutes the 'upper class' is different, I guess. 100k a year means you're well off, but that's not 'don't have to worry about s***' money. You're not in a new class at that point, you're just doing well.

yeah, i think we differ there. 100k isn't the point of having "f*** you" money, i can agree that's more in 250k, "welcome to being rich." which is still well off mind you, but not to the point where you're getting political dinners or whatever. 500k, that's different. break a mil a year, entirely different and anything forward from there starts to become similar with the main question being how much excess. i see the main split as being with the idea of thinking "hm, so when can i get a bigger, nicer place?" and six figures tends to do that. 50-70k and 100k is a sizable gap where the difference is mostly on how to "upgrade" your lifestyle, you'll accustom yourself to a richer one at that level, which is how i see the class gap. lower class doesn't really get to pick much on this, middle class gets to shop around a bit, upper class gets to play, and rich gets to laugh.

That's fair - don't disagree with any of that, and trying to shove things into three classes is sort of a pointless exercise anyway.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_17760284.html

Bombshell.

The CIA has a cheat sheet for emoticons?

That... actually makes a lot of sense. Doesn't stop it from being amusing as hell, though.
---

South Park is so far ahead of its time. #EmojiAnalysis
---

Paratroopa1 posted...

Mershaaay posted...

Paratroopa1 posted...

then what the f*** are the people who make 30k in NYC

Rent control and food stamps. Quality of life between those people and people making $300k are pretty close.

hahaha you are completely out of touch with reality

Has anyone actually seen both ends of that spectrum in NY? I certainly have. You can live in a luxury high rise only if you're very rich or very poor. The welfare state here has ensured that they both live the same lifestyle.
---

https://news.vice.com/story/alex-jones-wants-you-to-know-hes-sorry-for-his-outbursts

Pretty funny compilation of Alex Jones yelling and apologizing for yelling.
---

HaRRicH posted...

South Park is so far ahead of its time. #EmojiAnalysis

Presumably they're actually behind the time, they just had clairvoyance to see CIA documents instead.
---

UItimaterializer posted...

A much better way of looking at it. Nick has made multiple topics about his son having chronic seizures on top of being autistic. Regularly, unless his son is having an extreme emergency with the seizures, his wait times to have his son see a doctor are obnoxious. He lives in Canada with its so called amazing universal health care.

America has its issues but we aren't making people with seizures wait weeks to see doctors. If you have an emergency, you get seen.

(Side note, it's incredible how good a dad nick is. I could never deal with all that.)

Nick also doesn't have to worry about crushing medical costs that could force him into bankruptcy.

There is a trade-off that has to be made between universal health care and the type of health care that is funded through insurance. You can either choose between the security of not being forced into bankruptcy by high medical costs, or having much shorter waiting times. It comes down to which one you would rather have.

I suppose the issue that Nick is having with his son's seizures is rather unfortunate, since it falls somewhere in the middle between a medical problem that is not immediately life-threatening or an actual life-threatening emergency. With seizures, you don't want to f*** around with those because they can potentially kill you.
---

HaRRicH posted...

https://news.vice.com/story/alex-jones-wants-you-to-know-hes-sorry-for-his-outbursts

Pretty funny compilation of Alex Jones yelling and apologizing for yelling.

Meh. That's not his best work. He was ranting non-stop the other day.
---

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment


Bring on President Pence!

HaRRicH posted...

https://news.vice.com/story/alex-jones-wants-you-to-know-hes-sorry-for-his-outbursts

Pretty funny compilation of Alex Jones yelling and apologizing for yelling.

https://youtu.be/V9oXDps8cJM?t=19m22s

Here's a better one. He just gets angrier and angrier and boom!
---

Taswell posted...

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-06/trump-s-wiretap-tweets-raise-risk-of-impeachment


Bring on President Pence!

This goes back to the "Proving intent of slander is bulls*** hard in these cases"

... libel?

Is Twitter kind of blurring the line, here, it's basically speech, but it's still technically text.
---

...And where do you think the money for charity care comes from?

Oh, right. Taxes.
---

http://www.abc10.com/news/local/former-stockton-mayor-anthony-silva-in-court-faces-6-felony-charges-da-lays-out-case/420289900

Stockton, California: Strip Poker Playing Ex-Mayor Stole Money From Kids Programs To Fund Filipino Fetish.

Former Stockton Mayor Anthony Silva appeared, not in a suit and tie, but in a red jailhouse jumpsuit, as he entered a San Joaquin County Superior Courtroom in Downtown Stockton earlier this week.

The DA alleges in the six felony counts, from January 1, 2010 to February 24, 2014, Silva defrauded and ripped off hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Stockton Kids Club.

They allege he pocketed the cash into his own personal bank account, taking control of Kids Club bank accounts and credit cards.

The DA said $2.7 million in a three year period flowed out of the Kids Club accounts in the form of "at best" 50,000 checks.

"He destroyed 45 years of good work at the Boys & Girls Club, a well-respected and heavily endowed institution for his own personal, ill gotten gains," District Attorney Tori Verber Salazar said.

Silva allegedly used the cash on dating website filipinocupid.com. He also allegedly used the money on trips to the Philippines, South Lake Tahoe, Motel 6 and Best Buy.

Hope you all have better mayors than this!
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-ii9Urw2o4

Turns out Ben Carson was just agreeing with Obama and the left is just hypocritical as always.

Awesome find. A lot of liberals are hypercritical as much as hypocritical these days. That Carson thing was way overblown. Slaves are immigrants, forced immigrants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_displacement
---

UltimaterializerX posted...

psaltery posted...

HaRRicH posted...

https://news.vice.com/story/alex-jones-wants-you-to-know-hes-sorry-for-his-outbursts

Pretty funny compilation of Alex Jones yelling and apologizing for yelling.

https://youtu.be/V9oXDps8cJM?t=19m22s

Here's a better one. He just gets angrier and angrier and boom!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_Ay3-CjwX8

Wow. I didn't think I'd listen to the whole thing but it's quite interesting Alex Jones is allegedly a descendant of Captain Jones of the Mayflower.
---