How much Americans make in wages • Hacker News Board

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#171

Post by notfromhere » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:33 PM UTC

briandear wrote: post #77

walrus01 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The authors write that "the incomes of the top 1% collectively made up 11% of national income in 1980, but now constitute above 20% of national income, while the 20% of US national income that was attributable to the bottom 50% in 1980 has fallen to just 12% today. Further, "while average pre-tax income for the bottom 50% has stagnated at around $16,000 since 1980, the top 1% has experienced 300% growth in their inc…

However the top 20% pay over 80% of the taxes.

It's not surprising to learn that the top sliver of society pays most of the taxes, given that they earn close to half of all income.

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#172

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:33 PM UTC

skilled wrote: post #65

I honestly wonder are people that delusional that they overlook the ridiculous debt that the country is in? Don't get me wrong, I am not from America myself but I have a lot of friends from there, and I generally don't hear anything good about the 'American dream'. If you take a hard step back, like way back. And take a moment to look at the "situation" with an outside perspective, don't you think it's a little ridic…

[deleted]

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#173

Post by notfromhere » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:34 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #95

JDiculous wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government debt denominated in one's own currency is not really a serious issue because governments can print their own currency to pay it off. Yes this can result in inflation, but the inflationary effects are vastly overstated. Most of the inflation happens at the point of spending. I recommend reading up on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2014/01/diagrams-dollars-...

MMT says that printing money has no effect if you give it to certain people. I’ve yet to hear of a real-world example where a major economy doubles or triples their monetary supply with no negative effect, which is what MMT will have you believe (“don’t give it to the banks - give it to poor people in Idaho!”). If it sounds too good to be true then it is.

MMT is economics for morons

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#174

Post by notfromhere » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #140

fzeroracer wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is remarkably ignorant of the actual circumstances that lower-class Americans have to deal with, especially when you share almost improbable statistics that are completely out of touch with reality. 30,000 is far from a decent income considering people get gouged on health insurance, which effectively functions as another tax on their post-tax income. When you start adding in the costs of food, internet, phone,…

According to paycheckcity.com, 30K a year is a net income of $2000 a month in GA. Rent - 800 Food - 400 Power/Water/Gas - 300 Internet - $50 Cell - $50 These are all reasonable numbers for Atlanta. It would be a stretch and you should probably have a room mate to give you some breathing room but it can be done. Also if you have roommates, you could afford a car and insurance. My son is living on his own in Atlanta so…

Now imagine this without familial support of any kind.

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#175

Post by danans » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #167

danans wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more robust and decentralized system than us all being atomized and being cared for by the state. Decentralized, sure. Robust? No way. Unless they are wealthy and economically independent, your family are a small number of failures away from not being able to support you. A locally correlated failure ( i.e a plant or industry that employs many of them folds) can knock out the support system. Not to mention that unl…

Here's some robustness for you: our ancestors have been depending on their respective families since humans were a species. Whereas the oldest extant government are only several hundred years old. And many aren't even as old as my grandparents.

> Here's some robustness for you: our ancestors have been depending on their respective families since humans were a species

It's apples-to-oranges to compare a biological definition of robustness at the species level over eons to the definition we use to evaluate the current condition of people in modern societies. They are completely different metrics, operating over different timescales, and measuring totally different phenomena. Your usage measures the survival of humans as a species on biological time scales. The version of robustness that is relevant to the article is the chance of destitution or suffering faced by the typical member of a modern society, given modern society's standards for measuring those.

Wild animal species experience extremely high mortality rates compared to humans, due to a number of factors, including predation, disease, displacement, and environmental changes.

The whole experiment of human "civilization", from animal domestication, to agriculture, to the development of technology and the societal structures needed to support all of those, has been about protecting us from the risks nature poses to our existence.

> Whereas the oldest extant government are only several hundred years old. And many aren't even as old as my grandparents.

Whether it's an extant government is irrelevant. Governments come and go, but their function doesn't remain unfulfilled for long. We know that governments of some kind or another have existed since at least 3000BC, and importantly, that these governments had mechanisms for redistribution of their society's productivity (regardless of the direction of that redistribution).

EDIT: fixed the fallacy name

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#176

Post by peterwwillis » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:39 PM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #166

badpun wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're white. If you're black, the median is $34K. So, only like, 1/3 less. Or if you're asian, the median is $72K. Lol, that single fact makes the "white people oppress everybody else" nonsense fall on its face. I wonder why it's not often used as a rebuttal.

You're being downvoted, but if you look at a ranking of household income by ethnicity in the U.S., it's pretty clear that you're right. The highest earning ethnic group is Indian Americans. You can make the (terribly convoluted) argument that East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) are somehow white, but there's no getting around the fact that Indians are brown . At least as brown as Mexicans and probably browner (Me…

Hooooo boy.

First off, it's not in any way accurate to refer to groups of people by skin color. I know "white" Mexicans and "brown" Caucasians.

Second, the parent comment is misguided for a number of reasons.

Anyone suggesting "all white people do " are misguided because they're trading in racist stereotypes. But there is a trend that they are trying to point out, which is an inherent bias of the majority population who receive a greater share of opportunities than any other group in this nation, which is shown by things like overall increased income, increased job opportunities, increased representation in government, increased representation on corporate boards, increased representation in the media and entertainment, etc. It's not hard to see that it's been a "white man's world" for a long time now and it's only starting to be rolled back. Unless you're white, in which case it's very hard to see.

In addition, the statement that this one metric alone proves that white people don't oppress other groups is silly! It's one year's median household income in the US! Even if asians as a group make more per median household, that doesn't mean they don't face discrimination, it just means they're well compensated. Show me all of the leading asian men in American movies, and all the asian men on boards of directors, and asian men as leaders of political parties, and so on.

Taking one arbitrary economic metric and using it to try to disprove an obviously problematic multifactored cultural norm, is really reaching.

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#177

Post by jki275 » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:40 PM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #91

tfigment wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are a good person. Money is really good to keep separate though at least for many people I think. I've done similar things like loaned my older brother enough to get through nursing school as he was stocking at Target at 33 and I thought this was a better path. I was better off then but not well off and this cause some strains. When he was doing better it was hard to get him to pay back anything even at 0% intere…

General advice: treat any “loans” to family or close friends like gifts. Once you hand the money over, imagine it is gone forever. Then if the loan is paid back, you will be happily surprised. But if it’s not you won’t be bitter about it, and it won’t ruin your relationship. Corollary: don’t lend your family members an amount of money that would cause you hardship if it’s not paid back. (Obviously extreme circumstanc…

That's the best advice I can see, and it's how I've always done it. I'll never loan family anything, but I'm glad to gift things if I can afford it.

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#178

Post by iron0013 » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:48 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #140

fzeroracer wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is remarkably ignorant of the actual circumstances that lower-class Americans have to deal with, especially when you share almost improbable statistics that are completely out of touch with reality. 30,000 is far from a decent income considering people get gouged on health insurance, which effectively functions as another tax on their post-tax income. When you start adding in the costs of food, internet, phone,…

According to paycheckcity.com, 30K a year is a net income of $2000 a month in GA. Rent - 800 Food - 400 Power/Water/Gas - 300 Internet - $50 Cell - $50 These are all reasonable numbers for Atlanta. It would be a stretch and you should probably have a room mate to give you some breathing room but it can be done. Also if you have roommates, you could afford a car and insurance. My son is living on his own in Atlanta so…

"We keep him on our family insurance and we can until he is 26."

You really buried the lede. Will you also pay the health insurance for all the other hypothetical Atlanteans that you're claiming can get by on 30k?

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#179

Post by jki275 » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:49 PM UTC

sascha_sl wrote: post #119

peterwwillis wrote: post #113

Well let's pile some more random data onto this tire fire and jump to some conclusions. (edit: comparing 2015 to 2017) How much do Americans earn? 2015 data [1]: median household income was $52K. If you're white. If you're black, the median is $34K. So, only like, 1/3 less. Or if you're asian, the median is $72K. 2017 data [2]: median household income apparently jumps to $62k. If you're white it's $65k, black it's $4…

The median Asian income is easily explained - only educated/relatively rich Asians can afford to immigrate. Most immigration is relatively recent (60s to present) so their status hasn't really had time to change a lot.

Citation? There are certainly rich Asians who immigrate, but I know plenty of people who immigrated and are absolutely not rich at all.

Many Asians who immigrate have little to nothing except an education, some don't even have that. We brought many over during the time frame of the Vietnam war who had nothing at all.

Re: How much Americans make in wages

#180

Post by zozbot123 » Fri, Jan 11, 2019, 6:55 PM UTC

peterwwillis wrote: post #176

toasterlovin wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being downvoted, but if you look at a ranking of household income by ethnicity in the U.S., it's pretty clear that you're right. The highest earning ethnic group is Indian Americans. You can make the (terribly convoluted) argument that East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) are somehow white, but there's no getting around the fact that Indians are brown . At least as brown as Mexicans and probably browner (Me…

Hooooo boy. First off, it's not in any way accurate to refer to groups of people by skin color. I know "white" Mexicans and "brown" Caucasians. Second, the parent comment is misguided for a number of reasons. Anyone suggesting "all white people do " are misguided because they're trading in racist stereotypes. But there is a trend that they are trying to point out, which is an inherent bias of the majority population…

> But there is a trend that they are trying to point out, which is an inherent bias of the majority population who receive a greater share of opportunities than any other group in this nation, which is shown by things like overall increased income, increased job opportunities, increased representation in government, increased representation on corporate boards, increased representation in the media and entertainment, etc. It's not hard to see that it's been a "white man's world" for a long time now and it's only starting to be rolled back.

These ethnically-focused statistics are so incredibly pointless and misguided, I don't know why anyone would want to bring them up other than to be purposefully divisive. What's the "median household income" among blue-collar, poor whites in the Midwest? In the Rust Belt? What about their "share" of national "opportunities"? You're focusing on what's literally a tiny bit of information about an individual (a handful of bits, at best)-- namely their racial/ethnic heritage-- and treating it like it's the One thing that Explains Everything about our society, or at least our "cultural norms". That makes zero rational sense, the only reason such an argument might appeal to us is cognitive bias.