Quote from: Mordo on April 20, 2016, 02:05:21 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on April 20, 2016, 01:57:24 PM

Quote from: Mordo on April 20, 2016, 01:55:57 PM

Hey desu, not my fault your masturbatory socialist utopia didn't work out.

it actually kinda is, marginally

I'd love to hear how shitposting all the way from bongistan accomplished such a feat.

If people wanted to make socialism work, they would make it work. It's people with your mentality that enable treacherous memes like "socialism cannot work because muh human nature won't allow for it," and others.

And then you point to the socialist states that have failed, and pretend as though that there is no other way to run a socialist society, because it helps your narrative.

I just find it pretty self explanatory how every single socialist state that has ever been attempted always seems to transgress into a shitshow one way or the other.

I mean, either it's one massive improbable coincidence that """true""" socialism has never been attempted or there's something intrinsically wrong with logistically implementing it.

But by all means, continuing slogging the Bernie schlong until the cows come home.

This statement will always be a failure since people who use it are under the impression that all resources that are being "hoarded" are somehow finite. This isn't a game of StarCraft where the resources are automatically limited on the playing field, you have ample opportunities to build yourself up with whatever money you have.

I think it's great how the normal and "educated" point of view is one of maintaining the status quo where exceedingly wealthy people hoard everything for themselves while everybody else struggles to get by.

I don't understand what you're belittling here.

"you can make it little nigger boy "

Indentured servants were forced into their condition that led to a viscous cycle. If you make enough money to not only support yourself but also to afford things that you WANT (which can be anything from your hobbies to raising a child) than you are not indentured. We can argue about whether or not being paid only 7.25 an hour is the same as being indentured, but we'll just go around in circles with this argument since it's been proven the majority of people are paid more than 7.25 an hour.

It's not about poor old me, I'm talking about everybody being indentured servants.

The comment about advice wasn't addressed to you specifically, but anyone who finds themselves in financial situation they're not happy with.

As for the middle class, the link I showed you shows that's statistically untrue. Average household income has been hovering anywhere between 50k-58k since the mid-80's. When it comes to living "comfortably" that's entirely up to the individual. A single individual with no ties can live comfortably far below 50k a year, it's when they choose to get married or raise a child or go beyond what they can afford as far as living expenses is when the comfort begins to be stressed.

Yes, cost of living has been slowly been creeping up but so has the amount of jobs which can enable you to combat the cost of living.

The wages people are being paid is not enough and the fact that if you pay these same people too much ($15) this whole system falls apart is another huge problem with the way things are.

The way things are being that only a handful of people get to live comfortably. The middle class in America that was at one point thriving is now decreasing every year. It's the same everywhere else.

My claim takes responsibility and expenses into account. As long as you're not having a five course meal for dinner every night and wanting to live in a mansion while driving Lamborghini, you can live comfortably on less than 50k. It's about being reasonable with what you need and what you want at the same time. The whole point is making sure you're responsible with the choices you make.

So like I said, this bullshit system is perfect if you're a loner with no responsibilities and no expenses.

The problem here is you feel that anything less than over-the-top living is somehow very little. You don't need to make six digits to live comfortably or happily. Obviously more money will make getting better living easy, but you're not automatically poor just because you're not in a six digit bracket.

Right, so the majority of people need to be "reasonable" (AKA be content with very little) while a select few live like kings.

Did you just jump into the middle of the discussion? Your comment will only make this all go in a loop. I'm not saying living paycheck to paycheck is good, I'm saying it's not as common place as Chally is making it be and it's not as difficult to break out of it as he's implying. But thanks for missing the whole point of what I'm saying.

tell that to everyone living paycheck to paycheck, working their ass off for someone who doesnt care about their prosperity, worrying if theyll be able to pay their bills every month.

Chally's argument was that the majority of people were in poverty, not just one group. Once again, I never said that it was a significantly low number, I said it wasn't the majority of US citizens which Chally was trying to have me believe. And I said this even admitting that there is oppression in the work force.

I also said that breaking out of being poor requires motivation as well, going back to school and getting a degree is one way of handling this. Obviously it's not very time efficient since you have to juggle one or two classes with full time work, but with scholarships, grants, and loans (with a good number of them favoring people like blacks and natives) it wont put you any worse off financially.

I'm not sitting disagreeing that there's a poor problem, I'm saying it's not as black and white as Chally is making it. His comments come off as an "Us vs. them" mentality where there's only being a rich king and being a starving peasant and no in between, that is statistically untrue.

its extremely difficult to break out of poverty, especially if it affects your people perpetually (see: blacks and natives).

"In 2014, the official poverty rate was 14.8 percent. There were 46.7 million people in poverty. Neither the poverty rate nor the number of people in poverty were statistically different from the 2013 estimates."
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/

46 million people doesn't sound like a low enough number that I shouldn't be concerned.

No you don't, not even with raising a child. Obviously raising a child is a significant amount of time and resources, but it's not as much as you're making it out to be.

Yeah you do need six digits of you want to live comfortably. If you want to be able to live in a safe neighborhood and own your own home and car. Not have your kids pay off debts for schooling until they're 60 also under a shit ton of stress.

Different markets etc etc... Around here, a house bringing in 60 combined a year can be quite comfortable.

Untill the school district raises the property tax again. Fuck those assholes and fuck this system.