37 points
*

I have always said that so long as McDonalds has a hot burger for a few bucks on every street corner, there will not be a revolution in the US.

Rather than starving to death, we have an obesity epidemic along with an opiate epidemic, which prevents the revolution from getting up off the couch.

Not trying to claim a conspiracy here, just the way things are.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Yeah, the gap between the wealthiest and everyone else literally does not matter at all, when it comes to ‘motivation for revolution’.

The overall level/amount/condition of poverty is what matters. And let’s be real, things are not nearly as bad in the US today as they were in France before the French Revolution. Not even close.

Fact is, if you magically bumped everyone up so that no one was making less than $75k a year, the wealth gap would be essentially identical to what it is now, because the gap between zero and 75k is nothing compared to the gap between 75k and hundreds of billions. But no one would be suffering in poverty, so would anyone care about the wealth gap, then? I seriously doubt it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Great point!

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

McDonald’s charging $10-20 for shit-tier burgers in some of the US:

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

McDonald’s is expensive now.

A double cheeseburger was a dollar a few years ago, sure. But it’s almost that much for a single nugget these days.

A hash brown is 3.50 at the one by my office.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Looked it up:

McDonald’s double cheeseburger hasn’t been a dollar for over 15 years (started in 2002, and in 2008, the McDouble replaced it, which had one fewer slice of cheese). And the McDouble itself stopped being a dollar in 2013, over a decade ago. Bit more than “a few years ago”–I think Covid screwed up everyone’s perception of time more than usual, lol.

That said, I get lunch at work several times a week at Wendy’s and always pay less than $5, not too bad all things considered imo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Wendy’s is still a pretty good deal. A cup of chili and some nuggets ain’t a bad price.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

It only takes about 3% of the population to push effective revolution. That’s still over ten million people. We might be getting close.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ahhh so the Wall-E form of public control.

I can see it

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Conspiracies happen in secret. There’s no hidden agenda, just the publicly-stated agenda.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Just offer free food and specially free opiates if they start a revolution. There’s many means to a end

permalink
report
parent
reply
95 points
*

Americans have historically been obsequiously subservient to the big man.

From Washington to Rockefeller to Bill Gates or Elon Musk, if you’re the richest man in the country people will practically worship you as a demigod rather than revolt at your presence.

We may say we love Jesus, but our real God is Mamon

permalink
report
reply
61 points

America is the wealthiest nation on Earth, but its people are mainly poor, and poor Americans are urged to hate themselves. To quote the American humorist Kin Hubbard, ‘It ain’t no disgrace to be poor, but it might as well be.’ It is in fact a crime for an American to be poor, even though America is a nation of poor. Every other nation has folk traditions of men who were poor but extremely wise and virtuous, and therefore more estimable than anyone with power and gold. No such tales are told by the American poor. They mock themselves and glorify their betters. The meanest eating or drinking establishment, owned by a man who is himself poor, is very likely to have a sign on its wall asking this cruel question: ‘if you’re so smart, why ain’t you rich?’ There will also be an American flag no larger than a child’s hand – glued to a lollipop stick and flying from the cash register.

Americans, like human beings everywhere, believe many things that are obviously untrue. Their most destructive untruth is that it is very easy for any American to make money. They will not acknowledge how in fact hard money is to come by, and, therefore, those who have no money blame and blame and blame themselves. This inward blame has been a treasure for the rich and powerful, who have had to do less for their poor, publicly and privately, than any other ruling class since, say Napoleonic times. Many novelties have come from America. The most startling of these, a thing without precedent, is a mass of undignified poor. They do not love one another because they do not love themselves.

Kurt Vonnegut

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Rockefeller hid in his guarded home for years before he and Carnegie did their philanthropy PR stuff. Carnegie fled to England, and was putting out press releases that supported the Unions, while at the same time telling Frick to gun down the strikers. The gilded age was full of violence that created folk heroes to this day. Bonnie and Clyde, Billy the Kid, Pretty Boy George, Al Capone. These people were absolutely loved by the masses because they would destroy all the paper that said that old widow Johnson still owed on her mortgage. Bankers were beaten, hung, and shot for attempting to evict poor people.

We may have revered Washington, but since The Gilded Age, lots of us were taught by our grandparents and great grandparents that the greedy have no end to their greed, short of a bullet to the brain.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

Was curious what that term meant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammon?wprov=sfla1 for anyone else who was wondering :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Everyone should know the real Mammon. I will accept one substitute.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Hah never thought I’d see that name on social media

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

Americans are too weak to demand what we deserve. Too complacent.

Worker productivity has skyrocketed over the last century, but we’re still working the same 40+ hour work weeks. What’s the point of advancing technology and increasing efficiency if our lives don’t get easier/happier?

Healthcare is dogshit and we’re all categorically getting ripped off by it.

We used to tax rich people appropriately in this country and, surprise surprise, the middle class was way stronger back then.

Now we’re just pussies that let the useless mega-rich do whatever the fuck they want to us and idolize them for it.

We’re a bunch of bitches is what we are. Too feeble and uneducated to bring about real change. Even voting against our own best interests because we can’t be bothered to learn anything. We’re honestly pathetic.

permalink
report
reply
58 points
*

The reason there isn’t a revolution in the USA is mostly down to atomization. Suburban growth directly leads to insular communities with no sense of responsibility to the rest of their brothers and sisters. Working class families in the burbs have functionally 0 ability to organize.

To add that on, I like to underscore the gravity of the situation here with details:

  1. The top 10% of earners starts at ~170k/yr
  2. The top 1% start at ~820k/yr
  3. The top 0.1% start at ~3,300k/yr (3.3 million)
  4. If Elon Musk had 100% of his net worth in really basic bonds giving 5%/yr he’d be pulling in 22 BILLION dollars per year, forever.

The interest on his earnings alone is equivalent to 130,000 workers at the start of the top 10%. That’s the entire workforce of American Airlines for comparison.

If the average person was paid like the 0.1% for 1 year they could retire and live off 65k/yr forever.

This chart is broken down by quintiles but it illustrates the disparity well imo.

Half of the wealth of the top 20% here (excluding top 1%) is in businesses or real estate they own. Most of that will be their own house and a small business, though leeches “landlords” mostly fall in this category too.

For the top 1% that’s more like 20% of their net worth.

permalink
report
reply
15 points
*

No dude you mixed some numbers up - 5%/yr of 440 billion is 22 BILLION dollars per year.

Unless you meant he could put 0.1% of his wealth (440 mil) to pull 22 million a year.

In fact, he could put less than half of his total net worth, 200 bil, into a basic savings account returning 0.5% a year and live off of a billion dollars a year, which is equivalent to the median income of 16,666 others.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

While you were writing this comment I was updating my original comment because I messed up! Correct: 22 BILLION.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Market 10 year average is 11%. 400B at 11% for 30 years left of his life. That’s not 1 trillion dollars, not 2… Not 3… It’s over 9 trillion.

His money if allowed to be passed down and kept in the market, would make more than 1T dollars a year at that point.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

What’s interesting is that this doesn’t even tell the whole picture.

Because those people earning $170k/year? More than likely their net worth is negative. They owe more than they’re making, and even at that income rate and excluding long term debt, they have just enough in savings to last three months max.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Yeah and those are national statistics.

You don’t hit the top 10% in New York state until you break 330k

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Most people that are making that kind of money are pretty smart. They have multiple investment strategies, multiple places that they store their money, and typically have some sort of easily accessible nest egg (like a mutual fund or crypto). I guarantee about 3/4 of them have enough to last AT LEAST 6-8 months without a job before things started getting a little tight.

If your living within your means and making that kind of money, you don’t really have to worry about losing a job or things breaking down, or other big issues (short of medical emergencies).

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That must really depend on where you live, because I know a LOT of people making that kind of money who aren’t living extravagantly, but are definitely not living within their means.

They could be, with proper money management and a decent budget, but they generally aren’t. The type of income in that zone often tends to come with jobs that require physical presence in an area that’s really expensive to live, with expensive childcare and a need to have it; often people also own a mortgage and a car lease and eat their lunches at restaurants as part of the social networking needed to maintain employment relationships.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Neighborhood politics, social gatherings, community hotspots has massively declined in the last two generations,

It’s really hard to organize anything face to face?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

It is and while I don’t think that was Eisenhower’s 5d chess play it is more or less directly from cold war era policies that encouraged Americans to live anywhere besides a city.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yet if you keep the comparison until present times, you can only acknowledge the fact that the French once again rioted very violently and for months back in 2018-20. The “yellow vests” were mostly lower-income workers from far away suburbs and villages. Facebook let them organize and have a real impact on national politics and policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Not sure where you’re getting your income percentiles from.

This site shows that 90th percentile (top 10%) household starts at $230k and 99th percentile (top 1%) starts at $631k.

For individuals the same site shows that the 10% starts at $150k and the 1% starts at $430k.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

https://www.investopedia.com/personal-finance/how-much-income-puts-you-top-1-5-10/

Because holy shit does “dqydj.com” look sketchy as fuck. The fact you clicked on a URL called that has me worried for your safety.

Like skipping through a minefield

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Ok, I see where your source went wrong. Par for the course for Investopedia, which tends to get a lot of little details wrong (and sometimes misses the mark on the applicable scope of data that someone else has reported). But they’ve cited the Economic Policy Institute study of 2021 incomes, which looks at the average (mean) earnings within that group, rather than the actual amount that represents the boundary of that group. So it’s not that it takes $3.1 million to be in the top 0.1%, it’s that all the people of the top 1% average out to $3.1 million per year. Which, for the type of power distribution for household or individual incomes, is skewed heavily by the people who have the highest amounts.

And looking at the mean within that group can be fine, for certain purposes, but they’ve gone with the incorrect headline of saying “how much income puts you in the top 10%, 5%, 1%, 0.1%?” So it’s a headline that is wrong, that reports on a different number within the data.

And your own comment, saying that reaching each percentile “starts at” the reported number, is also wrong.

Because holy shit does “dqydj.com” look sketchy as fuck.

It just stands for “don’t quit your day job” and I’ve found that it’s a reliable resource for statistical data that’s widely available (like the ASEC numbers published by the Census Bureau and left to other people to actual turn into data visualization). It’s up to date, and the data matches the summary report on the Census website, so what’s the problem? The summary only reports the 90th and 95th percentiles, though, so I needed to find someone who actually reported on the thresholds for 99 (and not the averages within the top 1%).

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Are you sure it’s not 220 mil or 22 billion a year

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Whoops it’s 22 billion not million.

permalink
report
parent
reply

The internet is also a big reason. Why put effort into fighting back when you can just bitch about it on social media?

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Tesla employee count: 140,473

SpaceX employee count: 13,000

Elon Musk could transfer $1 million in stock to each of his 153,473 employees,
which would cost him $153 billion and he would still have a net worth of $302 billion!
He’d still be the richest man in the world and would still have $56 billion more than Jeff Bezos!

And some of that money he has came from under-paying factory workers at his Fremont, California assembly plant. For a long time the hourly rate was $22 (not sure what it is now) but auto plants in the Midwest were paying that or better and he was paying $22 per hour in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country.

Elon is now worth more than Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates combined.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points
*

And some of that money he has came from under-paying factory workers at his Fremont, California assembly plant. For a long time the hourly rate was $22 (not sure what it is now) but auto plants in the Midwest were paying that or better and he was paying $22 per hour in one of the highest cost of living areas in the country.

All those employees were given stock options as part of their total compensation which those other auto factories did not give to everyone.

All the early floor workers would be multi millionaires if they kept their initial stock, not counting using the employee program to buy more at a discounted rate or further employee incentives.

Anyone who joined a little after the Model S was being sold and the early model 3 time up to around mid 2020 would have around a quarter million if they didn’t aquire any additional stock.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Tesla as a company created the most employee millionaires of any recent USA company due to giving every employee stock as part of their compensation.

Early SpaceX employees are in a similar boat, but it’s harder to get rid of their shares since it’s private so it’s harder to quantify it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Tbf, if he transfered that stock, the price of it would crash as the employees sold it. He’d have to do some kind of slow transfer over several years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

All businesses should be worker or consumer cooperatives. Capital shouldn’t be divorced from stakeholders like in our current capitalist system, but rather socially owned by the direct stakeholders like in Mutualism.

permalink
report
parent
reply

United States | News & Politics

!usa@lemmy.ml

Create post

Community stats

  • 4.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.2K

    Posts

  • 34K

    Comments