Why has there been no revolution of the poor against the rich

File: 97 KB, 600x504, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 15:36:57 2015 No.928033 [Reply] [Original]

Why has there been no revolution of the poor against the rich

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 15:43:46 2015 No.928043

The world has changed, people are happy and distracted by materialism, they live happily being in debt to the rich with nice cars, houses, and fancy degrees. But let's be real, thats only first world countries where the rich have rights as much as poor people do. They are allowed to be rich and not have anyone bother them.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 15:52:34 2015 No.928054 Because middle class life isn't horrible and people have been convinced that working 40 hours for little money is fine

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 15:53:37 2015 No.928057

What would it accomplish? Poor people are poor because of their own deficiencies in skill, intelligence, talent, and ambition. Overthrowing the current social model won't make them better people. In a few years, the cream will rise to the top again, and the poor will still be poor.

Stop clinging to the myth that poor are just as capable and have just as much potential as anyone else. Everyone is not created equal. Some people will always have skills, talents, and attributes that make them superior to most. Society will always value these people, and they will always accumulate wealth as a result. Its biology, not sociology.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 15:56:21 2015 No.928062 File: 320 KB, 702x983, 572114789.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928057

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:04:40 2015 No.928076 If poor actually meant poor we maybe would. >western people are too distracted by how good they have it to revolt Every time

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:07:28 2015 No.928082 >>928062 well that was fucking stupid

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:10:32 2015 No.928086

>>928062
Oh boo-fucking-hoo. You poorfags are incredibly bad at maximizing the talents you have, but incredible skilled at coming up with excuses and blaming the world for your troubles.

If there was a job that paid you for being a sad-sack loser, you'd actually make decent bank.

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:18:55 2015 No.928094

What exactly are they going revolt over?

The fact that the poor chase materialism and luxury?

The fact that the poor don't value education the same way the rich do?

The fact that the poor don't invest their money like the rich do?

The fact that the poor go into debt for depreciating "assets" like cars and iphones?

The fact that the poor don't make it a priority to give their children an inherent advantage at birth like the rich do and the fact that the poor almost resent sacrificing their own children?

Muh evil bankers

Li_Sheng !n54GAoW8Vs Fri Oct 16 16:29:40 2015 No.928112
File: 106 KB, 2000x1516, Mcdonalds-90s-logo.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Well I think they've successfully made it so that the poor people are fed and too fat to revolt. reducing their effective numbers tremendously. the agile and swift leaders of business would overtake their servile swinelings.
The owners own the means of true energy production and horde it meanwhile keeping the poor on just enough energy to survive but to tired to do anything like revolt.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:46:01 2015 No.928143 And who would organize such a revolt, hm? It would have to be someone so capable that he wouldn't be poor in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:58:15 2015 No.928162 >>928033 everyone is waiting for Sanders to be president, that my friend, is when we will rebel against the greedy mongolians

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:58:39 2015 No.928163

>>928062
I came from a shit school/area and used my resources to become better while my old friends are still being retarded and have no goals. You just need to grow up and take some responsibility for yourself. Settling for a B is stupid when you could have easily gotten an A.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 16:59:57 2015 No.928165 >>928033 Because it's easy enough to live modestly but no one fucking does that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 17:02:15 2015 No.928169 Because they need them.

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 17:20:25 2015 No.928195

In the US? Previously high standard of living coupled with materialism and the idea that what worked before is working now.

As we can see there were already widespread revolts against the rich. French revolution, red revolution, etc. Even the american revolution was in a sense that.

Give it 50 years. Either we're all enslaved or we will have thrown a bunch of elites off their skyscrapers.

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 17:33:58 2015 No.928205

>>928195

Or, or, we could all just stop overspending.

Lots of people have a poor problem (and I feel bad for pregnant teenagers and morons who didn't get into a trade/go to college), but the people who work at full time for $10+ an hour are usually overspending not harmed by the rich.

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 18:50:25 2015 No.928263

>>928205

>Friend constantly complaining that she can't get ahead in life
>Smokes a pack of cigarettes a day
>She's a single mother to a complete dead beat
>Uses credit to buy the newest iphone every year.
>Financed a $1400 Macbook
>Financed a brand new car
>Is a nurse working 70 hours a week
>Got fired from her last two jobs because she couldn't find a baby sitter to watch her tazmanian devil son and all of the other sitters refuse to watch him because he's borderline dangerous for 6 year old
>Constantly saying shit about how capitalism doesn't work and hard working people like her are trapped in debt.
>Victim mentality gets so bad that I have to stop hanging out with her.

I literally know a dozen different people like this and the story barely changes. This is why the I won't even engage with the basic income and "economic justice" debate. It's nothing but consumer debt masquerading as class warfare.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:13:55 2015 No.928275 >>928165 This fucker gets it. Join the frugal hordes!

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:30:26 2015 No.928286 Because they're fat and entertained..

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:40:40 2015 No.928292
File: 848 KB, 763x990, Capitalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>928033

As long as a wealth gradient exists, and the possibility to advance and become rich exists, no such revolution will occur, since people perceive freedom, and a chance at equity.

When the divide and barriers get big enough the people will revolt. It has happened many times in the past.

I think if our current predicament in the USA were to get much worse, we could have a potential revolt, but thankfully Democrats will control Washington for at least the next decade and beat the fucking fatcats down.

> Making $250k+ a year
> HOW DARE YOU TAX ME AND GIVE MY MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO HAVENT "EARNED" IT
> Sits in an air conditioned office

Every fucking person should have to go through poverty for a fucking month, so they know just what it is like.

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:42:36 2015 No.928295

>>928094
>What exactly are they going revolt over?
>The fact that the poor chase materialism and luxury?
>The fact that the poor don't value education the same way the rich do?
>The fact that the poor don't invest their money like the rich do?
>The fact that the poor go into debt for depreciating "assets" like cars and iphones?
>The fact that the poor don't make it a priority to give their children an inherent advantage at birth like the rich do and the fact that the poor almost resent sacrificing their own children?
>Muh evil bankers
>>928094
>>928094
>The fact that the poor don't value education the same way the rich do?

Assuming you absolutely need education to get rich

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:43:41 2015 No.928297 >>928163 Good work lad

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 19:46:49 2015 No.928299 >>928062 just because your parents might not hold you to a high standard doesn't mean you can't do it yourself. my parents were satisfied as long as i passed, but i still always strove for top marks.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 21:56:20 2015 No.928432 >>928292 >but thankfully Democrats will control Washington Everyone, look at this goy and laugh

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 22:12:58 2015 No.928448 >>928292 A democrat has been president for the last 8 years. Obama promised a whole lot but has done close to nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 22:36:25 2015 No.928472 >>928292 >Implying it's hard to not be below the poverty line

Anonymous Fri Oct 16 22:40:51 2015 No.928478

>>928292
Do you think that $250k a year job fell into his lap? That ass hole had sell the best years of his life to the company for a job like that, or he built it from the ground up and put countless hours into it. Why should some lazy slob take all my money? Fuck you and your "gibs me dat" mentality.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 16 22:47:17 2015 No.928484 >>928292 >Every fucking person should have to go through poverty for a fucking month, so they know just what it is like. I bet you're thinking of 1st-world poverty, not real poverty

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 05:20:11 2015 No.928694
File: 51 KB, 628x353, police.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>928484
>>928295

true most people from the first world don´t live in poverty.

They don´t know what grinding poverty is (Like I used to live for nearly 2 years) no money to buy food, no electricity, just lighting candles in the evening, begging for food etc

And the reason people in third world countries don´t rise up is because they usually get shot by the government if they do.. picture related.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 05:42:21 2015 No.928702 >>928033 Because the people who fund revolutions are rich.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 05:59:22 2015 No.928708

>>928057
It's all good until the point where the wealth generated by everyone is divided just on basis of this assumption and not because the supposedly intelligent actually have generated that extra wealth they get.

And when the rich stop generating extra wealth to support their lifestyles they just start taking it away from the poor, the wealth they've actually generated themselves no matter how less skilled or inefficient they are.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 06:03:07 2015 No.928709

>>928708
In short - people are 99% identical, if someone claims he's million times more capable than another human thats just an excuse to steal from others.

If you look at the IQ, even the 0.0001% of population who happen to be geniuses doesn't even get twice as smart as average man.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 06:11:31 2015 No.928711

>>928062

That comic is bullshit. I was raised poor by single mom. I still ended up with a masters degree and a full time job that pays well. I've also never been arrested or anything like that. I did because I'm empirically smarter than the vast majority of people and out work them too

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 06:45:20 2015 No.928721 File: 164 KB, 500x376, 1416006419131.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928711

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 07:26:02 2015 No.928734 >>928033 because the poor are too stupid to lead themselves and whoever leads the revolution ends up being the new rich class

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:01:52 2015 No.928744 becuase the poor don't trust each other, and rely on the system perpetuated by the rich

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:09:14 2015 No.928747 >>928721 Tests and academic performance don't lie my friend. And neither does success

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:37:23 2015 No.928770 >>928744 it might be excessive trust actually "this politician says he's a communist and cares about the little guy, he must be a good egg"

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:44:02 2015 No.928777
File: 145 KB, 670x424, 1407516611372.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

not only poor people are financially poor, but they often carry inferior genes to rich kids.

there is quite strong correlation with iq and net wealth of your parents. and lower iq people are even more likely to divorce when you are a kid. smart people now it's a fucking doom from economi perspective. your income gets cut half but your spending stays the same.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:51:58 2015 No.928783 >>928033 See "the dark knight rises"

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 08:56:13 2015 No.928784 >>928263 >working 70 hours a week Not even remotely worth it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:03:10 2015 No.928790 File: 41 KB, 460x276, POL-POT-006.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw you are wrong

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:14:33 2015 No.928798 Why would i rise up? i have food in my belly, a roof over my head, clothes on my back, and the greatest opportunity to make something of myself in life. (perhaps excluding the colonial period)

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:15:34 2015 No.928799 >>928798 *greatest opportunity throughout human history.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:22:00 2015 No.928805 >>928747 >says the only successful person, ever.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:29:29 2015 No.928811 >>928770 they trust a constructed image presented on a tv screen that makes you believe he's a "politician" or a "movie star" but they're just puppets

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:30:22 2015 No.928814

>>928292

you fucking goy, why would you tax the guys making 250k? They are the drivers of the economy. A millionaire does not buy 5 times the number of TV's/consumer products as the 250ker.

Stupid goy you need to get REAL. Look at life as it really is, not as you want it to be, just to save your pathetic ego.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:37:48 2015 No.928819

>Why has there been no revolution of the poor against the rich
Because poor people could never organize and have no revolutionary potential, the only potentially revolutionary class is the proletariat. What you're talking about is the lumpenproletariat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat

t. Karl Marx

People begin to act stupider the poorer you make them, this is confirmed by modern behavioral science.

>>928798
It sounds like you're not poor but middle class if you have realistic access to opportunities to move up the social ladder.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:39:48 2015 No.928820 File: 91 KB, 494x303, aftd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928799 Attitude of gratitude? Unheard of.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 09:53:18 2015 No.928824 >>928033 And become like the French? Screw that.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 10:04:23 2015 No.928829

>>928820

I don't necessarily agree entirely with that article. The world doesn't owe anyone anything, yes, but it benefits past generations to provide opportunities for volunteering, training, and recreation to kids and teens.

Even vocational training opportunities provided through schools help kids secure a future while keeping them out of trouble.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 10:20:14 2015 No.928838

>>928829
That part you don't agree with is the entire point of the article.

It promotes self reliance and personal responsibility in it's purest form.

It's about not looking for opportunities but to create your own.

Kids don't need to be kept out of trouble. They need direction. That article provides that in a clear and concise way.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 10:30:18 2015 No.928843

>>928838

I continue to disagree, but then I grew up in a neighborhood where we don't have a lot of those things and kids do a lot of stupid things when not tied up by sports/school clubs.

Some people 'created opportunities', I'm sure, but I saw a lot more fighting and stealing than I did opportunity creation.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 10:39:24 2015 No.928852 Because the poor know the rich pay their bills. Why would you throw away your meal ticket (literally in some cases)?

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 10:43:59 2015 No.928858

>>928033
Because someone would have to do a lot of work, demonstrate a ton of leadership ability and organization skills to cause some kind of revolution and it is much easier to just become wealthy. All those poor people who whine about revolution and occupy wall street just want to be rich but are too stupid and lazy to do it so they think sitting in a park demanding it of others is the way to do it. They convince themselves the entire system is rigged because life isn't 100% fair and someone with a lot of money and education has it easier than them.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:06:26 2015 No.928872

>>928292

>Every fucking person should have to go through poverty for a fucking month, so they know just what it is like.

Did that for 2 years during a shit stage of my life when I was a loser feeling sorry for myself because I was unemployed. Had $20/week for food at a time when milk was $1/L and rice was $2/kg. Motivates the shit out of me not to go back to that ever again.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:10:14 2015 No.928878 >>928033 Because that would qualify as work, and poorfags are too bone idle.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:35:03 2015 No.928899

>>928843

That's a separate issue. You're talking about failed parenting. Which the world should (or has to) cope with and it does. Those facilities are widely available in most places. The point made is it's not _owed_ to anyone. Not that they shouldn't exist at all. If you approach it from that point of view having them is a benefit, not an entitlement. That's the point of the article. To change the way you look at it. Perspective is important. It shapes everything else.

I grew up in a near poverty level environment. Not once did I blame my surroundings. Yes, I was angry. The knee jerk was certainly there to blame - whoever honestly. Pick the biggest building; that fuckin guy, company, whatever.. in their ivory tower. Yeah! The rich!

However at a young age (16-17) I did realize the shortcomings of my parents and strive to learn from them. Not that they're bad people just that they are people with faults like anyone else. There was no outside force that woke me up to that. One day I just looked around and went 'I really don't want my whole life to be like this'. That's when I started seeking that direction I mentioned. Some people never grow out of that phase.

Now as an adult I'm no longer in poverty nor is my family. Born from that original moment of clarity if you will and whole lot of hard work and busting ass. Slaving away at shit jobs for $10/hr 60+ hours a week because I dropped out of high school. Using free time to get my GED. Night classes for trades following that. Libraries with free time learning about fields I was interested in. Keeping busy, making lists. Budgeting to the penny. Finding a solid mate that matched those goals and ideals.

I just don't buy into the product of our environment theory. It's a crutch the weak, lazy or ignorant use to make excuses instead of take responsibility.

Anyhow, I'm rambling now. And that's why there's no revolt against the rich. Because a lot of us were poor and earned everything we have.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:39:25 2015 No.928902 >>928852 >Because the poor know the rich pay their bills Ha. They just get special exemption for being rich.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:43:24 2015 No.928905

>>928811
it is also possible that the politician is actually fighting against the status quo, but only to replace the current oppressive elite with a new oppressive elite

>>928872
what does feeling sorry for yourself mean exactly, is there any actual psychology behind it or what

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 11:53:19 2015 No.928913

>>928057
>What would it accomplish? Poor people are poor because of their own deficiencies in skill, intelligence, talent, and ambition.

So you think the reason why 50% of the world's wealth is owned by 1% is because the 1% genuinely contributes more to production of resources (or more specifically COULD contribute) than the poorest 50% of the population combined?

Either you think anything below a PHD education is worthless to production or you're just repeating Fox's bullet points like a good goyim

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 12:05:35 2015 No.928921

>>928057
>Everyone is not created equal. Some people will always have skills, talents, and attributes that make them superior to most.

Indeed this is mostly true. Someone who catches 2x more fish than the rest will make more cash as a fisherman than average.
That, most will agree, is justified.
However, having 100x the income as someone else requires (if we claim to be meritocratic) that they prove that they're worth 100x the labour of another worker at the company, which I believe is a very hard burden of proof to overcome.

>Society will always value these people, and they will always accumulate wealth as a result. Its biology, not sociology.

This claim, I agree with in principle but in reality (with our highly unequal distribution of incomes) it doesn't play out to meritocratic standards.

If I fish 2x the average fish, we would expect me to be paid almost 2x the average fisherman's wage (or my own income from self-employment, w/e). This would be justified.
If I where to use this situation to today's distribution of income it would be like the average fisherman (who fishes at 1x efficiency) being paid for 50% of his work whilst the 2x efficient fisherman would be paid 1000% of what his labour is worth.
So whilst I agree with you in principle that a CEO should be paid more than a regular employee, it shouldn't be as discrepant to merit as it is now.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 12:11:38 2015 No.928925

>>928033
The poor are distracted into believing that either other poor people or foreign invaders (immigrants, invading nations) are taking their resources when in fact it's the people who's putting these ideas into people's heads (media moguls) who are taking from the rich.

The poor do not realize the rich are their enemies.

The poor are too comfortable to revolt. Why risk your job or your life protesting when you could be comfortably at home?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 12:26:08 2015 No.928931 >>928086 >implying you're rich

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:27:28 2015 No.928955

>>13671464
Because, as a poor person, you can have a fridge full of food, a warm furnished roof over your head, and 20 channels for free over the air. For only $30 a month you can access unlimited entertainment over the internet.

Why would I want to riot in the streets, get injured or killed, when I'm doing quite alright as is? Also, of you own some nice clothes and are well spoken (bix nood motherfuckers don't apply), nobody will know you're poor.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:30:21 2015 No.928956

>>928921

>However, having 100x the income as someone else requires (if we claim to be meritocratic) that they prove that they're worth 100x the labour of another worker at the company, which I believe is a very hard burden of proof to overcome.

Is it?
I think that if I can write a piece of software, or build a piece of equipmente that can do the work of 100 men, then I've accomplished that quite easily.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:33:03 2015 No.928960 >>928292 >but thankfully Democrats will control Washington for at least the next decade and beat the fucking fatcats down. Christ, you had me going. Here's your complimentary reply.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:36:14 2015 No.928962

The problem is the US 'poor' are not really poor. I would consider myself 'poor' (my wife and I make less than 60,000) but we have a warm place to sleep, amazing food to eat, entertainment 24/7, healthcare that has never before been seen in humanity.. The list goes on and on.

Maybe I can't afford that new Mercedes. But hey, I don't care about that shit. It's a different story in Africa, for example, where every day is actually a struggle.

So, no, the poor in modernized countries are not going to revolt.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:41:16 2015 No.928966

>>928956
From an economic perspective I'd say that if you could make that program then you have overcome that burden of proof because 100 people could be sacked and the business not effected thanks to your contribution.

Economically you could demand a huge wage and still have the company close to pareto efficiency from the company's perspective.

You won't often hear that from a leftist such as myself.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:42:24 2015 No.928967

>>928709
>In short - people are 99% identical
Wrong. Just because you and everyone in your small life are average mooks, don't make broad assumptions about the world.

>if someone claims he's million times more capable than another human
No one said the relationship between capability and wealth was linear.

>>928913
>Either you think anything below a PHD education is worthless to production
Not worthless, but worth less. That's an important distinction.
>or you're just repeating Fox's bullet points like a good goyim
I'm a liberal and I'm Jewish. Where is your God now?

>>928921
>However, having 100x the income as someone else
No one said the relationship between value and wealth should be linear. Smart, capable, and talented people aren't wealthy solely because of their incremental contributions to society. More importantly, they're increasingly rare and therefore extremely valued at the top end of the bell curve.

>>928931
>>implying you're rich
My statements are true regardless of my personal wealth. I'm not insulting the 99% by calling them less intelligent, less talented, and less capable than the 1%. It's just a fact.

If you think the only reasoning I'm telling you this is because I myself am in the 1%, then you're in serious denial.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:57:43 2015 No.928976 >>928086 /biz/ - Projection

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 13:59:51 2015 No.928981 File: 506 KB, 1680x1050, 1444579493197.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928057 >>928094 underrated posts

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:00:57 2015 No.928982

>>928967
>Not worthless, but worth less. That's an important distinction.

That much most will agree. What they won't agree with is that the 1% contribute more than 10x a regular or average worker.

>I'm a liberal and I'm Jewish. Where is your God now?

Liberals follow neo-liberalism too and that's what i'm arguing against. I won't speculate on your religion but my god is nowhere because I don't believe in one.

>thinks the 1% deserves their widely disproportionate wealth/incomes
>not being in the 1%

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:07:26 2015 No.928986

>>928292
>Every fucking person should have to go through poverty for a fucking month, so they know just what it is like.

I was homeless for a year, living in boiler rooms and squatting. Opened at a gym at 4 am so I could have a place to shower and shave. This was after I paid my own way through undergrad.

Fuck everyone who thinks the world owes them a free lunch. 6 years later I'm making 130k+ and have 200k put away. That shit didn't just happen on its own. I cut the bad fruit off of the tree and moved forward. No one else is to blame for their economic situation but themselves. That's what's great about the US. You can make your own way. Or at least, you have a good shot at it.

I hate that I have to subsidize people's poor life decisions. My girlfriend's parents think that she needs to start giving back (monetarily) to the family, because they've supported her and given her free rent for the past few years. They haven't saved anything for their retirement and have absurd spending habits -- starbucks 2x/day, cable tv, etc. Why should the next generation pay for the lives of the last? I didn't get a free party. No one else should. I'll take care of myself.

Taxes are a necessity, to keep a stable government. Some of the taxes I pay, I don't mind. But much in the same way that the vast majority of water used in california is for supremely wasteful agricultural practices (seriously, incredibly wasteful and inefficient. Farmers are fucking lazy, and I've worked on farms, too. Fucking subsidies to not grow things.), in much the same way, the individual taxes I pay are a drop in the fucking bucket compared to the absurd corporate tax rates in the US. Why do you think there is so much domestic cash held abroad? Uncle Sam gets his cut on both ends.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:09:40 2015 No.928990 >>928814 They are parasites. They never do anything with that wealth.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:12:49 2015 No.928992
File: 47 KB, 986x860, 1444607096244.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>928986
Oh boy, another tale of survivorship bias.

Great, any more useless, anecdotal, entitlement-laced bullshit you want to spew out before we get the ladder for your horse, sir?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:14:04 2015 No.928993 Pools haven't revolted because of: SEX

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:15:50 2015 No.928995

>>928986
Also, if you think poverty is legit in america, get real. I was born in a no-kidding garage and barely had enough food growing up. My parents were pretty much as poor as you could be in coastal california. Doesn't mean I didn't know how to bust my ass and make things work for me. It also doesn't mean that i knew what poverty was -- have you been to shit ass Latin America? Outside of the tourist zones? I drove to panama and back. THAT'S poverty. Have you seen north africa or been to the middle east? I rode my motorcycle through there for a year. That's oppression, and that's misery in every face. People in the US are pussies, looking for a government hand out all while being surrounded by incredible opportunities if they actually tried for once in their life.

You might have less money than someone in a real poverty stricken area, or more. The fact remains that there is /opportunity/ in the US that doesn't exist if you're living in literal squalor in a third world country.

I was so lucky to be born here oh my god.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:16:15 2015 No.928996 >>928990 >>928992 >gimme dat

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:31:54 2015 No.929008

>>928033
Every large organization must have some sort of hierarchical structure out of sheer practicality. Autonomy and various democratic systems can be attempted as an alternative but they have their limitations. Each step up the hierarchy introduces more opportunities for corruption and more disconnection from the average person.

This problem afflicts every single large group, even the most liberal freedom loving anarchist revolutionaries. It is exacerbated by the forces of natural selection. To climb the political ladder you must have traits that enable you to gain power from your position so often the people who make it to the very top rungs are very rarely like the ordinary person in their motives and abilities.

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:36:12 2015 No.929012

>>928982
>What they won't agree with is that the 1% contribute more than 10x a regular or average worker.
Reading comprehension not your strong suit? I clearly said its wrong to assume a linear relationship, or to equate wealth with dollar-for-dollar contributions to society.

Highly talented, highly intelligent, and highly skilled people are rare. That scarcity drives up their value. The economy doesn't care about "muh feelings" or "muh equality." Its only about supply and demand.

>>thinks the 1% deserves their widely disproportionate wealth/incomes
>>not being in the 1%
1. "Deserve" is the wrong wrong. It imply a moral or equitable entitlement. Stop bringing your emotional insecurities into the system.
2. >implying

Anonymous Sat Oct 17 14:49:21 2015 No.929028

>>928913
>50% of the world's wealth is owned by 1%
Occasionally people earn their wealth through extortion or exploitation but the vast majority of this 1% are middle classes in the developed world who have done little other than receive a good education and tinker with the economy a bit.

If there are 100000 workers working in a sector of the economy and a scientist discovers a way for them to increase their productivity by 5%, this scientist is essentially worth 5000 workers. This is the general basis by which someone can earn such huge amounts of money in this economy without using force against anyone else. It might not be a scientist, it might be an entrepreneur who finds a slightly more efficient way of doing things, it might be someone who is part of a team that implements new technology or someone who designs a new product.

>good goyim
/pol/ plz, I often wonder why your conspiracy theorists aren't interested in the actual truth and seeing how deep you can go, you just seem to want 2spooky4u stuff

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 17 15:21:36 2015 No.929058 cuz the rich will just pay the poor to fight other poors so the poors kill themselves in a civil conflict

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 19:57:23 2015 No.930189 >>928747 my sides

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 20:28:50 2015 No.930209
File: 41 KB, 1035x1380, redbooty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>928448
Killed Bin Laden
Greatly decreased unemployment
Scaled back middle east military affairs
Helped assure auto industry would come back
Stock Market is at an all time high
Represented the country in a dignified, positive light

>>928478
I've worked for $10/hr and made $60k a year in a office. The proletariat takes more shit, and receives less in return for it.

>>928484
fair argument here

>>928814
> wealthy
> drivers of the economy

Do you even econ1101?

>>928872
I lived off about $9k one year. It was fucking horrible. So yeah, I guess that is weak sauce compared to the rest of world, especially the 3rd world. But it sucked a lot of dick. The worst part was not the experience itself, the worst part is how everyone you meet treats you. That is the saddest thing of all. How humans treat other humans who are "less than".

If I went anywhere in my shorts t-shirt and old shoes, people could care less who I was or what I needed.

If I walk anywhere any place any time, with my suit on hair cut, nice shoes, etc... I get treated like royalty. Socially, romantically, etc...

I guess I should blame the roots of human psychology and not politics.

>>928960
Democrats do better at supporting poor endeavors and controlling the excess of the rich.

I think.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 20:36:57 2015 No.930222 >>930209 Reddit; The Post

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 21:24:32 2015 No.930273

>>928033
A revolution by the poor against the rich is basically a communist revolution, which has been done in many countries and you can easily research the consequences of those changes.

It turns out that if you redistribute what the top 1% have, without doing anything else, it actually doesn't really accomplish anything for the remaining 99%, because most of what the 1% have for wealth is shit that doesn't actually have any meaningful value once you redistribute it.

What people need to redistribute is the labour that the 99% can offer. Instead of making unless widgets in a chinese/etc factory, they should be doing something more productive producing staples like food, shelter, or clothing, and they should be trained (where possible) to do so to a higher standard.

Essentially the world labour market is massively misdirected. Good quality staples like food, shelter and clothing are much more expensive than useless widgets, despite labour being required to create both of them - that means there's too many useless widgets being made and not enough of the other stuff.

Given the free-market status of the world, the 99% basically only have themselves to blame, because they spend their money on useless widgets. If the 99% didn't create a market for garbage, the labour would naturally move to things where there IS a market. The 1% aren't enough of a market to support this shit - especially since the 1% generally aren't the ones buying the cheap shit that is being produced.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 21:26:12 2015 No.930276 >>928062 why the fuck is this a gif?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 21:48:36 2015 No.930287 >>930273 Food is subsidized its not free market

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 21:54:56 2015 No.930291 >>928995 There's a relative distinction of poverty for each country, and what you're describing is absolute poverty which is not comparable.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 22:10:27 2015 No.930314 >>930222 >; >......................................................

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 22:24:48 2015 No.930322 >>928263 >credit to buy newest iphone every year >financed macbook Triggered

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 22:27:47 2015 No.930326

>>930209

>Killed Bin Laden
Obama was against going after Bin Laden until he essentially had no choice but to green light the mission.
>Greatly decreased unemployment
Is this bait? Do you not know how unemployment works? We have a record number of people out of work.
>Scaled back middle east military affairs
And undid all the efforts our troops died for now that ISIS is filling in the power vacuum.
>Helped assure auto industry would come back
Now I'm sure this is bait.
>Stock Market is at an all time high
Artificial bubble
>Represented the country in a dignified, positive light
Fucking lel you almost had me until this one. 4/10 overall.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 22:38:23 2015 No.930333 >>928094 this >six digits mortgage >four kids >three cars >make median salary >wife is part time kindergarten teacher >hurr the rich are getting richer

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 22:52:57 2015 No.930345

>>928057
FUCKING THIS

What the fuck is overthrowing the rich going to accomplish? An upper class will just develop again. Unless you plan on becoming a communist utopia like Russia (TOPCUCK).

So many entitled Fucking cunts in this thread. 'Omg that guy gets $200k a year'. Maybe it's because he works his fucking was off to get their you entitled lazy piece of fucking shit.

You have access to the net and everything possible to make a better life for yourself.

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 23:22:02 2015 No.930368

>>928033
Ignoring this thread, which is surely a shitfest:

Because plenty of people are neither nor (i.e. are middle class,) and because plenty of people who are either pretend to be middle class.

And also because revolutionary leaders consistently begin behaving like the old elite as soon as they seize power. Society's just a barrel of crabs.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 23:26:34 2015 No.930373 File: 34 KB, 423x420, thucydides.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928033 There's been plenty they just all immediately fail or never get off the ground. Due to the fact they lack education they can never compete in terms of realpolitik.

Anonymous Sun Oct 18 23:39:03 2015 No.930382

the standard socialist argument goes like this: the middle class is trying to 'make it' in society, so they don't want to mess up their chances of getting rich by having a revolution.

So socialists are always trying to destroy the middle class, even though all you hear from democrats is how they want to help the middle class - it's a big lie. They want masses of poor people and a rich elite. That's it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 18 23:42:02 2015 No.930385 >>930287 Food subsidies only emphasize my point.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 00:05:33 2015 No.930397

>>928967
You seem to base a lot of your ideology on some serious assumptions, and any reality that might contradict that probably scares you. The market, as it stands, does NOT allocate resources with 100% efficiency. It simply doesn't. A combination of poor regulation (too much in some areas, too little in others), market failures, and poor monetary policy severely hinder this efficiency. If you can't see that, you're blind.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 00:08:44 2015 No.930401

>>928033
People are only moved to action when they reach a precipice. We're not at that point. It'll take another great depression to reach that point. Good thing (terrible thing) everyone is increasingly reliant on debt and setting up the potential for a massive collapse. Maybe 5 years from now, maybe 20. We'll see.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 00:13:47 2015 No.930405 >>930382 >democrats >socialists It's cute that you think liberals in the United States are radical leftists.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 07:19:56 2015 No.930599

>>928263

This. "Poor" people usually have a bunch of material shit I couldn't even dream of. Really nice cars, all the latest phones, 100$ shoes, designer clothes, go out for food and drinks every day, always buying coffee out, macbooks and all manner of stuff.

I have a $1000 used car, a $550 laptop, and cook every meal for myself. Phone is a refurbished older model (that I take damn good care of. Got it an otterbox and keep it in a cloth bag so it won't get scratched.) If I don't have cash in my account for something, I don't fucking buy it.

Poor people, and god knows I grew up poor and everyone I know is poor, they all have spending issues. They buy buy buy yet value nothing. I take care of my shit (reasonably well at least.). They just beat the crap out of their stuff they spent bank on, throw it around, and buy new stuff when it breaks.

If it's worth the cost, I spend the money. Just very seldom do I need to buy anything. They buy wants, not needs.

Then they think it isnt fair that I have money and they don't, when they just blow all their cash while I frugal like a motherfucker.

The poor are a bunch of cockroaches. Every last one deserves to be where they are because they made poor decisions. I know people who can't afford groceries, but are always buying a new car or boat or are going on vacation or getting some new gadget, and their kids all have nice new phones and handhelds and Nikes. I don't have nikes. I "can't afford", even though I have $50 extra sitting unused in my account, to spend it on shoes.

Despite my parents being a goddamned nightmare for me and never supporting me or helping me while I was in college, I'm a senior now, set to get a good job, and they already have their hands out. "Oh anon you're gonna spread the wealth right? He he he." I just remind them I have loans to pay off. But fuck them, really, fuck them. I scrimp and save to get this and work my ass off. They just fuck around. I taught myself everything

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 07:33:45 2015 No.930604

>>928292
>Every fucking person should have to go through poverty for a fucking month, so they know just what it is like.

I've lived in poverty my entire life, and my current spending is less than 10,000 a year to live on (doesn't include tuition).

Fuck you. The wealthy sat down to study for hours a day, took years of their life being a poorfag student, while everyone else was fucking around and enjoying the earnings of babby first job.

Oh, the office cleaner works "harder" than the manager? The manager had to go to years of school, probably 6+, pass a multitude of exams, has to maintain his education, lived frugal as a student or else worked AND went to school, probably had loans to contend with. He networked and got resumes out and worked his ass off to get where he is. The cleaning bitch just pushes a washrag around. No worries, no cares. Didn't bother going to school, was probably out fucking around and going to spending sprees after her first paychecks.

>>928711

It's actually easier to get a high GPA in a bad school because the bar is set lower. (I went to a shit district.) If you can string two sentences together, you're already in the top 20%. High GPA equals scholarship equaled (for me) free community college ride. High GPA there gets you into a real uni.

She was probably banging the niggers and twerking rather than listening to the teacher.

>>928899

This guy knows it. I looked at all the mistakes my parents made (low/no education, drugs, had kids before marriage, shit spending habits, financially illiterate, scientifically illiterate, no old school austerity) and made sure I didn't fall in their place. Note that they didn't teach me anything, I just observed and thought about it. They still don't get what they did wrong. You listen to my mom bitch that waah being single mommy is hard, so much work, no thanks. Well bitch you are the one too dumb to figure out a condom. The poor always blame other people for their problems.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 08:02:26 2015 No.930611

>>930599
>How can you be poor yet afford electronics?
Get with the times fool, electronics are dirt cheap now, the laptop I'm typing on cost me £150 brand new. I hate when people equate one off purchases to regular expenses. My laptop was nothing but what really kills me is my £30 a week gas bill in winter.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 08:05:56 2015 No.930613 >>928711 >le anecdote Are you really trying to claim that your one success story overthrows decades of data saying that underfunded schools are shit?

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 08:22:38 2015 No.930621

>>930611

...Did you even read my post? I buy reasonable priced and refurbished if possible. But poorfags who buy high end macbooks to browse facebook and always upgrade to the newest phone, unlimited data plans, etc, that isn't a one off expense, that's a lifestyle. Plus they break their laptops and replace them at least every other year. Literally the bitch sat on hers...twice. Another time she lost it. Just lost it. How the fuck even.

It isn't a one off expense if: you replace it ridiculously often, upgrade it every year, or pay a monthly bill for it.

You're a fucking dumbass.

>waah I can afford consumer goods but not a basic utility bill

Put on a fucking sweater, sell some shit, and make due, you whiny little faggot.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 09:41:23 2015 No.930652

>>930599
hey man keep going down that road and you'll have people telling you on 4chan that survivorship bias means that all of your experience is worthless. Because apparently claiming a logical fallacy means you're automatically right? This might even make you reevaluate whether or not you're on the right track, and hey you know what? Poor people are people too, and they have needs and wants...they're just children to be pitied. They've never learned better.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 11:04:41 2015 No.930714

>>930652

Here of all the places we have poorfag and dumbfag apologists. Next thing you know, channers will be pushing care packages for african nogs so they can push out more babies. Sandwich in, another nigger pushed out of their aids ridden pussy with their mouth open and hand out. Or giving more money to drug addicts because oh woe they're so poor and oppressed.

I want the founding fathers to be resurrected. Country is a bunch of whiny pussies anymore, no sense of personal responsibility, always trying to blame someone else, always holding their hand out for gibsmedats.

The more liberals I talk to the more rightwing I become (more like reichwing amiright). I was leaning democrat once upon a time, can you believe it? /pol/ is always right. Welfare and wealth redistribution are theft and only encourage the lazy, stupid locust hoards to bankrupt this county. Welfare state off the backs of those who go out and fucking earn it.

The poor are poor for a reason, namely because they're goddamned stupid wastes of oxygen and only good for digging ditches and mopping floors.

Channers are starting to use (misuse) "logical fallacies" as a silencing tactic the same way sjw use the word "racist" or "privileged" to automatically disqualify anyone who disagrees with them.

Anecdotes are a low level of evidence, but they ARE evidence. Learn the fucking pyramid.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 11:10:14 2015 No.930723

>Lower income purchase way more than they can afford
>Highest income purchases way more than they can afford

Who are the greedy ones again?

I feel like the rich protect the bulk of the wealth from aggressive over consumption.

Even if all the wealth was evenly redistributed, spending habits wouldn't change. Economy would start doing implosive inverted backflips.

If you want more money produce more value.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:07:18 2015 No.930772 >>930621 And you probably have money left over and they probably have mountains of credit card debt. The appearance of wealth =/= the possession of wealth.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:10:25 2015 No.930775 >>930772 Exactly. Credit card debt boggles my mind. Lemme buy this shit I don't really need that looks shiny and pay 25% interest on it for a few years... Oh waaah so poor gibs money pls.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:13:15 2015 No.930776
File: 72 KB, 960x720, Slide218.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>930723
>Highest income purchases way more than they can afford
But they don't. The rich do not spend as large a percentage of their income on the market as the poor do. This is simple, undisputed fact. The wealthy save and invest their excess income which in turn makes them wealthier. And no, i'm not trying to vilify rich people. I'd do the same thing, but to argue that rich people spend proportionally the same as poor people is completely asinine.

>Even if all the wealth was evenly redistributed, spending habits wouldn't change.
No, but if we had better monetary policy and an interest rate that wasn't fucking zero percent, spending habits would. But heaven forbid the Fed do anything that frightens the stock market, despite things like unemployment often being a cause of the stock market crash, not the result of it. And unemployment is something the Fed was actually tasked with managing.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:14:46 2015 No.930779

>>930775
I agree with taht on an individual basis, because I've definitely met people like that. However, if it's affecting the American consumer on a macro-level, it seems to me there's more of a problem than just "American consumers are dumb," simply because this wasn't the case in the past.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:28:41 2015 No.930793

>>930779

In the past we didn't have the glut of consumer goods and the constant marketing campaigns we do now. Back in the day you made or at least repaired your own clothes, cooked your own food mostly, etc. Think 1800's. They had advertisements, sure, they had mail catelogs even. But not constantly. Get the paper, there's a few ads, get a magazine there's a few ads.

Think now. Go online (normalfags don't use popup blockers because howdoicomputerlololol?) flood of ads screaming in your face and popping up all over the screen. I used the internet once on a school computer and it was insane, I didn't recognize it. Listen to radio while you drive, there's ads every 5 minutes. Watch TV, constant ads, even product placements. House gets flooded with junkmail. Spotify, pandora, all ads. Youtube, ads. Amazon or ebay, ads for in site shit. Constant barrage.

Why do companies spend billions of dollars on advertisements? Because they fucking work. Proles watch ads, they buy the shit. Otherwise companies wouldn't waste their money.

People now have larger houses than ever, more clothes than ever, enough clothes to drown in. So many products they need decluttering solutions and extra storage spaces like sheds or paid units.

We're in more debt because we buy more fucking shit.

>durr it's all cheap though

It adds up. Ten bucks here, 100 there, and soon you have a second mortgage. You know this. Everyone on /biz/ knows that numbers add up if there are more and more every single day coming in. Maybe you only make 35 an hour, but at the end of the year that's 70k. Maybe you only spend 50 a week, a few hundred a kid at xmas and birthdays, at the end of the year it's thousands of dollars.

Fact of the matter is people are goddamned fucking stupid and don't actually understand finances and mathematics. They really don't.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 12:37:21 2015 No.930801

>>930779
>>930793

How do you think people end up in debt? Do you think someone comes one day and drops off 10,000 credit card debt from the sky just for the hell of it? They bought shit and rung up all that debt themselves. Well, what did they buy?

We see americans, especially the poor people, eating fast food every day. It can be 30 bux a meal for a small family to eat out. Meanwhile, that meal could buy several days of food at the grocery store. So they spend 4, maybe 5 times as much as they need to on food.

Let's see how many clothes we have. People in the day had maybe a week of outfits. Now the average person has enough clothes to wear a different outfit every day of the month. Again, spending 4-5x as much as was necessary. (But clothes are cheaper now. Okay, so why are you then buying more, and not buying the same low amount and taking the savings?)

House size has doubled or tripled... yet average family size is lower than ever. People have 1/2 or 1/3 as many kids as they used to. Yet houses are crammed full. With what? SHIT THEY BOUGHT. So the average person, logically, that means they have 8x as much shit as someone back in the day, say in the 1940's.

8x as much shit.

I wonder why they don't have money. Hmm.

>but cost of living is mostly housing, food, and utilities... consumer goods are cheap

Doesn't address why you are buying more goods if they are cheaper. Buy the same amount and keep the savings.

Food is cheaper than ever. Utilities in the US are dirt cheap compared to yurope. If housing costs more, why are you buying houses 3x the size of the previous generations'? Why aren't you buying a fixerupper and DIYing it like grandpa did?

Because people are lazy, spoiled, and greedy. People buy piles of shit and then bitch they don't have money at the end of the paycheck. WELL I WONDER WHY.

We're not stupider than before. We just have more opportunity to be wasteful slobs and get ourselves in trouble. And so they do.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 13:16:43 2015 No.930832 >>930776 Thanks for the correction. I intended to say wealthiest spend less ratio wise. Changing rates doesn't make people more productive. Saving money won't drastically increase your wealth.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 13:42:50 2015 No.930867

>>930801
> If housing costs more, why are you buying houses 3x the size of the previous generations'?

/thread

As a yuropean it amazes me that something such as a negative amortization mortgage could even exist, let alone that people actually buy into it.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:32:45 2015 No.930912

>>930832
There are different ways to look at the health of an economy than growth, m8. Growth that is unsustainable, i.e. through mountains of debt, is not a good type of growth and will inevitably lead to either a bubble burst or a simple bogging down of the whole economic system.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:42:36 2015 No.930923

>>930867
>negative amortization mortgage

Even during the housing boom, such a mortgage was extremely rare. In fact, the craziest stories I've heard are interest-only mortgages. Nowadays, that simply does not happen in the US.

>>930801
I think it's extremely easy to blame all of the US' woes on the consumer. It's the classic "DEGRADATION OF GOOD WHOLESOME AMERICAN VALUES" argument, and it's a nice bedtime story, but it's not real.

You are completely and utterly neglecting key reasons why people buy so much. Partly is because things are cheaper now. Consumables are cheaper than at any point in history in the US. Electronics too. But for housing, that's where you're just unilaterally wrong. We haven't somehow gotten greedier. You seem to not realize that when we started bundling mortgages into securities and selling them to investors, we created INCENTIVE to give mortgages to fucking everyone. Hell, institutions other than fucking banks were handing out mortgages before the bubble burst. If banks benefit from selling off mortgage-backed securities to the market, they're obviously going to want to sell as much as possible, meaning they're going to have to expand the amount of mortgages and the size of mortgages they're giving to people. And so they did. And now the taht bubble burst, they cut back on it, but it still happens because mortgage-backed securities are still a thing.

Do you know why house sizes have doubled or tripled since the 1940s? Because in the 1940s people walked up to the bank and said "I'd like to buy this giant house please", and the bank would laugh and say "are you fucking stupid? you can't pay for that." Now they say "here's your loan. have a good day!"

No. People haven't changed. The institutions have changed. The consumer, on a macro level, will always consume as much as they can unless they're incentive to do otherwise. What incentive do you have to save with less-than-inflation returns on savings accounts and money market funds? Less.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:45:01 2015 No.930924 >>930793 >Why do companies spend billions of dollars on advertisements To edge out competition for market power. This isn't even advanced stuff. This is business/econ 101.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:46:03 2015 No.930925 >>928054 Please post a better alternative for the middle class.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:52:43 2015 No.930933

>>930923
>Partly is because things are cheaper now.

IF THEY ARE CHEAPER IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU NEED TO THEREFORE BUY MORE

>banks wanted to sell more mortgages
>company A wants to sell more product X

Fantastic, no fucking shit companies want to sell their products. That doesn't make it the fault of companies if people bankrupt themselves buying shit they don't need. The consumer makes the fucking decision. They could say no. They could rent that apartment instead or move in with someone else. They consent to signing the dotted line. the bank didn't hold a gun to their head. They CHOSE to sign up for it. The bank told them the details. Maybe the consumers were too stupid to understand the terms, but that isn't the bank's fault. If I went out and put 100k in the stock market, it isn't the stock market's fault for not explaining things to me clearly enough if I lose all my money.

>house size

The consumer still CHOOSES to buy something more luxurious and expensive than they need. Why is it the bank's fault? If I went to macy's and bought 5,000 in clothes and then couldn't make rent, that's my goddamned fault, not theirs.

So you're saying the banks didn't hold their hand and give them free financial advising and explain the birds and the bees of, "this costs 200k and you have five dollars and some chewing gum as a downpayment, and Larry gets paid ten dollars every other week off hustling pool. You can't afford it."

If people are so goddamned stupid as to buy things they quite obviously cannot afford, that isn't the fault of the salesman. I could sell you a bridge, and if you buy it that's your dumbass fault.

If you don't have the money, don't goddamned fucking buy it. This is not difficult. A seven year old kid can tell you that. "Waah the bank's fault halp halp." Personal fucking responsibility you nanny-state infant. No one forced them at gunpoint to buy shit.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:53:09 2015 No.930934

>>928711
Allow me to make an anecdotal counterpoint

I was raised poor by a single mom also
I don't have a degree in anything
I did a bunch of dumb stuff when I was young, drugs and thievery and just general retard-tier stuff
I am a programmer now and make over $160k a year
But really only because I'm kind of good at that one thing, really there but for the grace of God go I

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:56:38 2015 No.930937 Should be the other way around soon tbh

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 14:57:43 2015 No.930938

>>930933
>That doesn't make it the fault of companies if people bankrupt themselves buying shit they don't need
Actually it is when the job of a mortgage broker is to evaluate how likely a customer is to be able to repay their loans.

Again, you're just ranting about hwo people buy outside of their ability. And that's fine. But I'm saying your point about how they didn't used to do that is asinine considering the system simply wouldn't let them back then.

You know why your argument is so stupid? Because the only solution is "EVERYBODY NEEDS TO CHANGE!", and that's pretty retarded when a shift in regulation and policy would actually solve the issue without going through some weird change in people.

Are you a libertarian? Is that why you're so concerned about people's personal responsibility? Because I'm all for personal freedoms, but when those personal freedoms are left unrestrained by banks adn cause the collapse of our economy, I draw the line. If you can't afford a house, the bank shouldn't let you buy the house.

As for normal consumerism, again, I'd like to offer the point once more that the fed has a 0% interest rate right now. There's no incentive for consumer saving in the United States.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:01:19 2015 No.930942

>>930938
And I'd like to add that, when the market was rising, it wasn't actually a bad investment to buy a house you couldn't afford. Many people bought a house out of their price range adn then resold it a few years later when its value had increased, making a profit.

If you're a renter, and someone offers you an interest-only loan on a house that has monthly payments lower than what you pay in rent, and the house is going to increase 20% n value over hte next 3 years, why shouldn't you take it?

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:05:11 2015 No.930945

>>930345
Richfags make their children richfags, regardless of their children's contribution to society. A true meritocracy would make it so the children get taxed 90% of any money passed on to them, sans education. A richfag gets an inheritance, and expensive education poorfags don't usually get, and connections that let them easily get a good job.

Not to mention, CEOs get bigger wages/bonuses despite exporting good jobs and seeing profits fall.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:11:58 2015 No.930955 >>930945 The moral hazard problem with CEOs is pretty easy to fix if you pay them in company stock, forcing them to maximize company profits. I'm not sure why more boards don't opt for that. I must be overlooking some downside or something.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:15:00 2015 No.930958 File: 30 KB, 634x397, 1442452609844.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928057 Randfag detected

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:27:57 2015 No.930966

>>930345
>You have access to the net and everything possible to make a better life for yourself
Thanks to the internet,ironically, people can see how rigged the system really is, and hopefully unite to reset the whole damn thing. Meritocracy is basically non existent nowadays

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:34:12 2015 No.930975

>>930955
Dilution of their own shares, and of the stockholders they represent probably

>>928057
Good goy. I say that as a very rich person who wasn't at all created smarter, more capable, or least of all more hardworking than the poor scholarship kid that's my professor's research assitant

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 15:53:14 2015 No.931001 >>930966 I don't see why a hard reset is required. No system is too far gone you can't incrementally shift policy in a better way.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 16:04:20 2015 No.931009 because bill gates likes it in the butt from black guys that must be why he helps them so much

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 17:50:29 2015 No.931104

>>930938
what are the incentives that a broker, a realtor, shoot -- the buyer for that matter has to ensure that the buyer can adequately repay? Look up some case studies in the savings and loan crisis, the politicking that set up 07-08, and the incentive structures of brokers and lenders. It's fascinating stuff, and it shows just how much the general populace victimizes themselves.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 17:53:00 2015 No.931108 >>928033 Cause every time they tried that in the past some poorfag gets in power, makes himself rich, then kills all the poor people who don't like that he didn't stick to his word.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 17:54:16 2015 No.931109 >>930945 >>930966 This is only true for the mega rich, like CEOs of huge companies who earn millions a year.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:11:23 2015 No.931119 >>930945 >Taxed 90% of what's given to them So what's the point of saving money if you can't even give some to your own children....what the fuck is wrong with you.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:26:06 2015 No.931132

>>931104
Again, I find it silly to cast some nebulous blame on the consumer when we have real, tangible knowledge of mishandling on firms' part and poor monetary policy by the Fed.

It seems to me that the consumers and firms both behave rationally on a macro level. The former to maximize utility and the latter to maximize profit. The former will consume the maximum amount allowed to them by the firms, and the firms will operate in whatever way maximizes profit given the constraints set by government.

Neither party is seriously concerned with long-term growth. That's where the government steps in to prevent the firms from participating in X destructive behavior, which in turns prevents the consumers from buying X destructive services.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:31:06 2015 No.931138

>>931119
>what's the point of saving money if you can't even give some to your own children
I don't agree with anon's idea, but I do think your point is also dumb for the following reasons.

A. Why is the wealthy saving huge amounts of money intrinsically a good thing to begin with?
B. Most people I know don't save money with their children's inheritance in mind. They save it to afford expensive things and for retirement, for THEMSELVES to live off of.

I mean, is getting a big inheritance really that culturally important to wealthy people? My family's idea on the subject has always been that it's way better to spend your money with your kids and grandkids so you can enjoy it with them rather than just giving them a bunch in a lump sum when you die.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:31:40 2015 No.931139

>>931132
I'm surprised that you understand concepts like econ 101 shit, and yet think that there is no incentive for consumers to save just because the fed has a 0% interest rate. Like, saying that doesn't ring any alarm bells in your head?

>>931119
he's saying that estate tax should be a thing. Which it is. There are also ways to get around it, over decades worth of monetary gifts to offspring (think the standard rich kid allowance). This has the added benefit of making the next generation of rich kids quite spoiled, further adding to the rich kid stereotype. A big bonus of this is that spoiled rich kids don't stay rich for long, and then the cycle starts all over again.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:39:51 2015 No.931146

>>931139
>yet think that there is no incentive for consumers to save just because the fed has a 0% interest rate
Now your'e putting words into my mouth. In fact, I explicitly said "less" incentive in >>930923. I never implied that raising teh interest rate would magically get people out of debt. I'm saying that decades of decreasing the debt has resulted in a non-insignificant reduction in incentives to save. That builds up over time.

As for your point explicitly, another 66% of Americans DON'T have credit card debt. Of course there's still incentive to save, and many, many do. But there's LESS than there was before.

All of this goes to my first and most important point, which is simply that the American consumer hasn't undergone some radical shift over the last half decade, but the institutions certainly have.

Anonymous Mon Oct 19 18:45:31 2015 No.931149

>>931139
>he's saying that estate tax should be a thing. Which it is. There are also ways to get around it, over decades worth of monetary gifts to offspring (think the standard rich kid allowance). This has the added benefit of making the next generation of rich kids quite spoiled, further adding to the rich kid stereotype. A big bonus of this is that spoiled rich kids don't stay rich for long, and then the cycle starts all over again.

I love how you're a self appointed expert on the rich and how they raise their children

Maybe if you actually had some fucking money, you'd understand why double taxing money is a fucking horrible idea

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 20:21:22 2015 No.931217 >>928033 Capitalists own the media, the education system, the army and even the state. The poor are hopeless thanks to rich cunts, even the UN and human rights exist not to help the poor, but to protect the rich.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 20:22:24 2015 No.931220 >>931138 I think this is about those so rich that they don't choose between spending the money with or on your kids, they have enough for both.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 20:34:38 2015 No.931234 >>930209 >Killed Bin Laden >implying Bin Laden hasn't been dead since 2003.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 19 22:19:54 2015 No.931294 >>931220 Which is why I included point A. If they don't have as much incentive to save, then they would consume more, pumping the money back into the economy.

Anonymous Tue Oct 20 10:04:25 2015 No.931626
File: 39 KB, 630x550, ADS_percent_GDP_b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>930793
I would just like to point out that the amount spend on advertising, as a percentage of GDP, hasn't actually changed all that much since at least the 1920's. Hell, I looked at some old newspapers my dad has collected that date back to when the Confederacy was a thing, and they are full of ads.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 20 12:03:06 2015 No.931702 The answer to your question is Globalization. The poor in america are rich relatively speaking when compared to the ret of the world. There will eventually be a revolution, but it will be on the global level.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 20 12:19:41 2015 No.931716 >>928163 I like you anon, i like your ethic. Cheers big fella

Anonymous Tue Oct 20 13:29:47 2015 No.931771

>>931138
The ability to pass money to your children is a huge economic incentive. People work hard because they want their children to have good lives. Money means security, safety and health for many years to come. It is up to the parents to teach their children how to handle money responsibly. As a parent myself, I can tell you I am extremely motivated to make money so I can spend it with my kids, but also leave them with some security.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 20 13:39:06 2015 No.931775 >>928033 The poor became rich. The lazy stayed poor.

>>	Anonymous Tue Oct 20 18:51:23 2015 No.932091 >>928033 >what is French Revolution

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 21 16:59:50 2015 No.933009 >>928033 Did you 4get the 99 (people) per cent movement?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 21 17:56:51 2015 No.933057 >>931138 Everything you've said is purely subjective, simply your opinion on what you value. A lot of people want to leave money to their children, and they should be completely free to do so, it's their fucking money.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 03:01:21 2015 No.933461 >>933009 >Did you 4get the 99 (people) per cent movement? The 99% movement was mostly people in the 94-98% bracket being jealous little bitches.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 03:37:48 2015 No.933477 >>930925 revolt against the upper class, the whole point of this thread

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 03:41:08 2015 No.933478 >>933477 revolt= killing and looting rich people right?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 03:41:19 2015 No.933479 came here to say that if you or your parents don't have 1b+ you are fucked in future perspective. good luck yall gonna need it! ;)

Anonymous Thu Oct 22 04:03:43 2015 No.933484

Becaude being rich just means ur the governments puppet and a debtor to the poor and the poor feed off the rich ( rich r few poor and middlr clasd r many ) the poor need the rich more than the rich need the poor and if the poor obertake the tich tha it could make things even mote conplicated for them
Also its been proven over and over again that money has no correlation with happiness and the rich are often overpaid
There are peoplr who do jobs that almodt anyone can do and make investments that alnost anyone can make and because they were lucky enough to get the job or make the winning investment whether from knowing people or knowkng stuff or just being in the right plsce at the right time so they got a upperhand fron fsctors out of their control and I do think its a little unfair that some people can make 250k year sitting on their add signing papers or have hundreds of million in the bank while some people in the world bust their ass doing back breaking and exhausting work for $1 or $2 a day or $8 an hour ( in a first world country ) that is just not fair period I don't care who u are or who u ask or what u believe not everyone has the same opportuniry and chance to do things call it whatever u want luck, fate, divine providence, hard work but at the end of the day nothing is fair in this world

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 05:49:28 2015 No.933525 >>933484 I can't tell if this is serious or not.

Anonymous Thu Oct 22 06:48:57 2015 No.933550

>>930933
You. I like you.

From my perspective in the UK, drinking culture is a big part of it too. People who are willing to go out 1-2 times per week and not think of the cost are foolish. There are people who spend a good portion of their wealth having a good time and spending beyond their means in the process. This is somewhat evident in students, who are commonly joked about blowing their student loan on vodka. More than ever, there's a culture of "living for the moment", which isn't to say "don't have fun", but realise that every good time needn't cost a lot.

As an anecdote, I have a cousin around my age (24). I pay my expenses (I live alone, so this eats up most of my income) and split the remainder of my income in half. Half goes into savings, half goes into my personal wants. My cousin lives at home and has her every need taken care of her by her father. Any money she earns is more or less hers to spend. She was shocked when I told her yesterday "this is what I put into savings each month and I don't touch it", as if £200 is a lot of money to be able to free up. She earns £400 less than me per month (£1,160 after tax), but has next to no expenses. If we got into a discussion about economics and the poor, she'd be one rallying for a minimum wage increase and needing more money. She'd be saying I'm in the position I'm in because I earn more.

The cousin (and shit-talking aside, I do love her dearly) who will blow her money exactly as the quoted anon has described would rally with the poor.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 07:58:11 2015 No.933567 >>928033 >wants to overthrow rich people >wants it to be illegal for poor people to own guns

Anonymous Thu Oct 22 08:16:59 2015 No.933570

>>930209
>Stock Market is at an all time high

His party is literally running against this. Which is simply baffling. But the facebook contradictions are great:
>fight the rich you stupid republican!
>lol our guy has the stock market at all time highs!

It is rich.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 08:24:26 2015 No.933573 >>928033 the poor are too content with their lives living off welfare. the only ones who want a revolution are those on welfare who want to receive more welfare.

Anonymous Thu Oct 22 08:28:34 2015 No.933576

>>931771
>I can tell you I am extremely motivated to make money so I can spend it with my kids, but also leave them with some security.
I wasn't being rhetorical. I was genuinely asking if it's common for rich people to place high value on inheritance. For me, I don't think I would work any less if my children couldn't inherit as much, so it's interesting that for some people such an incentive is so important.

>>933057
>Getting mad at a poster who literally said that he didn't even agree with a high inheritance tax in the first fucking line of his post.
Reading is hard.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 22 09:12:19 2015 No.933591 >>928033 Because the poor are just lumpenproletariats who will never be class conscious.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 23 03:21:24 2015 No.934456 >>933576 >not realising someone was replying to their subjective posts about someone's use of money. Reading is hard.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 23 08:50:54 2015 No.934589 >>928263 Shit, I'm getting closer to becoming this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 01:18:18 2015 No.935485 File: 9 KB, 480x360, 1546922633-gallery_3031_396_1369457427_12318.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928033 What is the Arab Spring, you lying sack of shit?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 01:30:35 2015 No.935496 >>928033 Because the poor are too busy posting on their iPhone about how they're watching tv in their apartment

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 01:48:15 2015 No.935508 I've wondered the same thing while standing in line at the local food banks, soup kitchens and church pantries, grinding my teeth in hate, staring at the sorry excuses for people there....

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 02:17:34 2015 No.935529 >>935485 What is the Arab spring? The Saudis are still in charge, no shieks were over thrown, there are still billionaires in the UAE doing what ever they want. The only places that had "revolution" were shitholes to begin with, and are still shitholes

Anonymous Sat Oct 24 03:22:38 2015 No.935569

>>928838
so what if i literally do not want to mow the law, wash windows, cook stuff, build a raft (huh), get a job, visit the lessons, study the sick, and when im all done, read a book?

i have no motivation, no ambition, no talent, and no purpose in life

i am nothing but a drain on a society that can't use me and doesn't need me, but doesn't want me to go away. if you want to keep me here, i need some reasons tbqh fams

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 03:36:53 2015 No.935578 >>935569 We all need reasons. With an attitude like that my advice is just to blame others for your inability to do anything at all beyond suck air. That's your purpose in life with that kind of attitude. Enjoy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 08:24:39 2015 No.935681 >>928205 Yeah, stupid poor people, should stop overspending on luxuries like food priced by the rich and rent priced by the rich.

Anonymous Sat Oct 24 08:30:21 2015 No.935685

>>928292
You know, I don't get this "the rich worked harder and studied so everything is your fault" meme. I've worked with alot of people in IT that made alot of money but couldn't do jack shit. I don't understand what I was supposed to do. Was I supposed to sleep through my C++ classes, like like crazy at interviews, and make excuses on the job? Because that seems to be the ticket to a high salary in IT.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 08:31:34 2015 No.935686 >>935685 >like like crazy lie like crazy, I mean already getting worked up thinking about those incompetent fuckers

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 15:20:31 2015 No.935963 >>935685 >on to my scam Dont blow it!

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 24 18:05:51 2015 No.936107 >>935529 This. Other than Lybia, the Arab Spring happened in places with no oil.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 25 12:34:59 2015 No.936751 There's no true poverty in the west, because capitalism works? No, because we profit from badly paid third world workforce.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 25 12:44:38 2015 No.936758 >>936751 reported

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 25 13:50:45 2015 No.936820 >>930945 I guess I'm buying that 300m yacht then if I have to give 90% of my money to the state anyway when I die!

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 25 14:40:28 2015 No.936873 >>936751 The west was still the west in the 1950s when global trade was at a local minimum and cheap goods were still manufactured domestically. Try again.

Anonymous Sun Oct 25 16:03:15 2015 No.936973

There's nothing wrong with wealth disparity, there are always gonna be those who are rich and poor. The real issue boils down to the wealth gap, if a small percentage of the population controls most the wealth in the nation then there's a huge problem.

The rich are not productive members of society, they're parasites like welfare dependants. For instance the top 1% the ones who are heirs to billion dollar fortunes they contribute little to society and simply game the system in order to perpetuate their wealth. None them care about the wealth gap and scions of these families are tutored and coached to deflect such questions.

The most productive members of society has always been the middle class. They have enough resources to consume goods and enough to put into their savings to invest in the future thus contributing to the growth of an economy. However due to the poor economic policies started under Reagan (who was really nothing more than a patsy for big business) the strength of the middle class has been shattered and those households are shrinking every year.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 16:51:07 2015 No.937901 >>928981 The Escapist is basically a massive liberal sinkhole. If that wasn't a staff member who made the post, he would have been perma-banned.

Anonymous Mon Oct 26 17:19:50 2015 No.937932
File: 179 KB, 741x1024, AiVLNTW.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>928992
An anecdotal example is better than no support whatsoever. Crying "survivorship bias!" doesn't invalidate anything, it just casts the statement into a different light. Simply stating a term, like a logical fallacy or something else, doesn't mean anything. It's like seeing a nail and saying "hammer!" You're misusing rhetorical devices.

I really don't understand how people can just state a logical fallacy and then oh boy you win you smarty, you. Except that's just a red herring. Which makes a circular argument. Which ultimately makes you a fedora-tipper, and what's worse, you haven't proven anything /wrong/, just that a statement might be slightly invalidated in a certain way.

Oh wait, it's because it's not truth that matters, but what can be argued. And winning the argument is the Most Important Thing.

So the fact that I got ahead in life a little bit doesn't make me entitled, it just means that I got a bit lucky and worked hard. Have fun feeling inferior to your own ideas of what people are, I'm sure it'll get you really far in life.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 17:39:06 2015 No.937940 >>928986 how did you get a job and rent an apartment etcetera or did you easy mode it and crash at a friend's place

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 17:45:34 2015 No.937946 >>928033 >>928299 >>928711 >>930322 >>928899 Nice dubs guys! Absolutely hilarious xD >>930222 great trips anon, lost two whole times before I could reply xDD keep it up! >>928955 >>928811

Anonymous Mon Oct 26 18:23:49 2015 No.937982
File: 207 KB, 1600x577, David-Lee-Ferrari-0004.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>935685

So then why is that, as I have moved up in my career I expend less physical effort and receive more money...?

I'll just give you a rundown:
- waiter (2 years) worked my ass off, did not make shit
- salesman (1 year) worked pretty hard, made a decent life
- business owner (1 year) honestly, not all that much work and I'm making more than I ever have.

obviously entrepreneuership and leadership should be rewarded, but how much is too much? Things in the USA have gotten out of hand.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 18:33:41 2015 No.937993 >>928992 >entitlement-laced you, meet le trash.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 21:01:32 2015 No.938118 File: 55 KB, 365x494, 1258402188613.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>928033 If they could they would've done it already

Anonymous Mon Oct 26 21:12:00 2015 No.938130

>>937901
It's not like the're completely wrong about his assumptions, though. Take /pol/, for instance.

There are legitimate ways one can go about discussing the difference in races, the fallacies of feminism, the problems with philosophy, etc. What do they do instead? Spout buzzwords like "niggers", "degeneracy", and "cultural Marxism".

It's not that everyone who uses the term "cultural Marxism" is a neo-nazi. It's that there's a very high correlation between being a neo-nazi and using the term "cultural Marxism" By using easily-identifiable buzzwords, the /pol/ack defeats himself. .

Anonymous Mon Oct 26 21:12:13 2015 No.938131

>>931771
This

I was born in a wealthy family and a lot of my friends are middle class. I don't want my kids having a middle class lifestyle where they have to watch how much they spend on stuff. I want my kid to have a nice car, not have to worry about paying rent and to be able to afford good healthy food.

Regardless of how rich my kid is, he is going to a public school. I went to both a private and public school and the relaxation of rules and lots more freedom is better for the kid as he is more adapted to the real world.

>>	Anonymous Mon Oct 26 21:49:51 2015 No.938156 >>938131 This 1 million times over Private school fucks you over. It is much better to just go to a well-known public school. Wealthy family=wealthy neighborhood=very good public school districts. Private school is a waste of money imo.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/biz/ - Business & Finance