Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 245 posts

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#181

Post by Jill_the_Pill »

seibelj wrote: post #168
Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they create those new charter schools, they "compete" entirely on test scores. But no-excuses drill-and-kill for test scores is exactly the opposite of what's offered to the children of the elite, who get time to play and experiment, develop creativity and social skills, participate in arts and music, all in a non-restrictive environment.

I have no comments on how the charters are run, which is why I use them only as an example. I just think it's a tragedy that if you live in a district with a terrible school, with no capability of moving, your children are screwed out of an education.

You have more power to influence public institutions than you realize. In my city, we organize, attend Board of Education and PTA/PTO meetings, volunteer, raise money, lobby, write letters to the papers, and vote. We had about 400 people at the last Board meeting protesting a school closure. We'll never be a wealthy district, but an immense amount of energy is going into staving off "terrible."

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#182

Post by Jill_the_Pill »

refurb wrote: post #145
k__ wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this a strawman? Clearly someone who makes $1M could live of their investments.

They could once they acquire enough assets. By your definition, everyone who retires and lives off their investments is rich as well.

I would say so. 23% of married retired couples and 43% of single retirees subsist on their social security; 50% or so have pensions, and some rely on their children. It's the wealthiest minority who have sufficient investments to live off of.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#183

Post by dgreensp »

analog31 wrote: post #116
LateRuin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I tell you how “good” someone’s family or health is, you can tell me if they are a millionaire or not? Yes, I can. That's the point -- the rich and poor are far more visually distinct today. Take for example obesity/overweight and marriage status. The poor are far more likely to have both an elevated BMI and to be single parents / divorced / never married

I wouldn't have thought this until I had kids, who "forced" me to greatly expand my social milieu beyond my fellow geeks and musicians. Our kids got involved in some activities (e.g., violin lessons) that are almost exclusively the domain of the upper middle class. I remember attending a large group recital with maybe 100 kids, and virtually none of them were obese.

I have young kids. If violin lessons are apparently so expensive as to require you to be a millionaire (not merely, say, a six-figure-earner), what is a class or event I can go to to see all the poor, obese kids that I haven’t come across yet? I don’t live in a frou frou part of my town. It seems more likely to me that cultural forces are at play.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#184

Post by jadedhacker »

perl4ever wrote: post #166
jadedhacker wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Class differentiation is the central meaning of life. This is patently not true. We overthrew kings, introduced democracy, and eliminated slavery. Every time we have made people more equal, our society has become more open and less morally repugnant. Trying to be the winner of class competition is vulgar Marxism. You don't need so many things to be happy in life, nor do you need to dominate others. You merely need…

I don't care about class competition, nor do I need a "lot" (by the standards of the wealthy) of things to be happy in life. But I like things (art, collectibles) that wouldn't exist except for social competition of the rich, regardless of whether I will ever own them. I like that they exist. When people won't shut up about how terrible possessions and competition are, it tells me they are so torn up and conflicted a…

I mean, it's undeniable that the rich create luxury goods that are often aesthetically pleasing, but they are items that are enjoyed almost exclusively by the rich. At most, the average person might observe one of these on the street. Publicly funded art would create accessible beautiful things, not merely inaccessible toys you can dream about but never have.

EDIT: I kind of feel like this argument is like, well if we didn't have the Sun King we wouldn't have Versailles.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#185

Post by closeparen »

k__ wrote: post #106
refurb wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup! Asking someone "How much money makes a person rich?" is like asking someone "How many drinks makes you an alcoholic?". The answer is typically "Someone who drinks more than I do."

If you can live entirely from investments you're rich.

So all retired people are rich?

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#186

Post by closeparen »

seem_2211 wrote: post #87
zjaffee wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a big debate in the HN world too, where tech workers in that top 10% think they are working class. The real breakdown here is that in todays day and age, there's hardly a middle class, there's the working class who struggles, lives basically paycheck to paycheck, and at the age of 45 has up to 40k in wealth to their name. Then there's that top 10% whose able to afford a million dollar home, take yearly vacati…

Yep, you see it a lot in San Francisco (I've noticed it creeps into my mind a lot more frequently than I'd like to admit). The thing is, it's like the boiling a frog in water analogy. You get desensitized to it. I tend to work with salespeople, so there's a tendency to get flashier things than a lot of my programming friends, but it manifests in things like always having the latest iPhone (or it's Android equivalent)…

>Yep, you see it a lot in San Francisco

The median household income across San Francisco and San Mateo counties is $115k. People who make close to that are entirely justified in calling themselves middle class. Spending half your take-home on a crappy $2500 apartment doesn't make you rich just because the apartment is in SF.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#187

Post by closeparen »

Jill_the_Pill wrote: post #182
refurb wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could once they acquire enough assets. By your definition, everyone who retires and lives off their investments is rich as well.

I would say so. 23% of married retired couples and 43% of single retirees subsist on their social security; 50% or so have pensions, and some rely on their children. It's the wealthiest minority who have sufficient investments to live off of.

> 50% or so have pensions

A pension should be considered equivalent to the assets that would produce the same returns.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#188

Post by c0nducktr »

sergiotapia wrote: post #97
mozumder wrote: post #12

Class differentiation is the central meaning of life. The struggle is the point. You get up and wear nice clothes in the morning so that you're better than the slob that doesn't. Nobody wants to be the same as everyone else. If everyone was equal, then there would be no point in your existence. You become a bag of mostly water. Celebrate the fact that a few billionaires and royalty and celebrities exists. Life is mor…

Life is struggle, that's what makes life beautiful. Commies want to change that but we won't let them.

How nice for you that you're able to find beauty in other's suffering.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#189

Post by hndamien »

jacob019 wrote: post #172
taurath wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s relative on how you define wealth really - ability to provide stability in the form of a mortgage, or amount of money you make. I feel like in SF or any big expensive city owning a home is not something for the middle or upper middle class - there’s a point that no matter how many brunches or vacations you can take, you can’t trade them for a house except in an area where you’ll be basically going down in econom…

Owning a home is overrated, it owns you.

Depends how big the home is.

Re: The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy

#190

Post by LyndsySimon »

hndamien wrote: post #189
jacob019 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owning a home is overrated, it owns you.

Depends how big the home is.

Relative to your income.

My home was about $120k. It’s easily affordable on a tech industry salary. The median household income in my county is under $30k...

Post reply on HN