Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks.
-
a surgeon earning $400k with few investments living paycheck-to-paycheck (very possible if they have a sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices) has more in common with a food service worker than with Jeff Bezos, but the system is designed to make both workers forget that.
struggling with this one, maybe its a UK-US difference?
The median salary in the UK is about £39k. That's $51k in US money.
British members of parliament get £91k. That's $120k in US money.
$400k is a fortune.
and a food service worker with "a very sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices" will be in much more s**t than the surgeon.
what am I missing?
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity true!
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity NBA players and Hollywood actors, producers and directors are all unionized
-
struggling with this one, maybe its a UK-US difference?
The median salary in the UK is about £39k. That's $51k in US money.
British members of parliament get £91k. That's $120k in US money.
$400k is a fortune.
and a food service worker with "a very sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices" will be in much more s**t than the surgeon.
what am I missing?
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @clarity
$400k is a lot but someone who gets it through their work is a worker.
Someone who gets that much money through investments and assets is not.
The note about a sick family member feels like a bit of a red herring there although that could damage even that big of a salary.
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity Property rights exist because that is were the Epstein-billionaires make their money. Wage rights don't exist because that is where peasants earn their bread
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @clarity
$400k is a lot but someone who gets it through their work is a worker.
Someone who gets that much money through investments and assets is not.
The note about a sick family member feels like a bit of a red herring there although that could damage even that big of a salary.
The minimum salary in the UK is £22k for a full-time job. That's £29k.
So a surgeon work's 13x as hard as a service worker on minimum wage?
I see the point being made that workers are workers, but I think this is flawed. There's being paid for work and then there's being paid (wink wink) for work.
The idea of ensuring the difference between the highest paid and lowest paid in any organisation must not be more than 5x is an excellent idea. I think the UK Greens might do it
-
The minimum salary in the UK is £22k for a full-time job. That's £29k.
So a surgeon work's 13x as hard as a service worker on minimum wage?
I see the point being made that workers are workers, but I think this is flawed. There's being paid for work and then there's being paid (wink wink) for work.
The idea of ensuring the difference between the highest paid and lowest paid in any organisation must not be more than 5x is an excellent idea. I think the UK Greens might do it
@charlesdelavalleepoussin I would suggest that the way to think of it is how they pay back into society.
That surgeon pays income taxes on their earnings (at least here in the US).
But those with investment capital find ways around it. They claim operation losses and so on to reduce taxes, even as they use the investment's value as collateral for bank loans.
-
struggling with this one, maybe its a UK-US difference?
The median salary in the UK is about £39k. That's $51k in US money.
British members of parliament get £91k. That's $120k in US money.
$400k is a fortune.
and a food service worker with "a very sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices" will be in much more s**t than the surgeon.
what am I missing?
It's that focusing on the quantitative can gloss over the structural. People who earn a high salary do so from working, for someone else, who owns their labor. That is, capitalists.
Capitalists make their money from owning things, not from working.
-
@clarity Pretty much why I tend to instead say bourgeoisie or capitalist instead of "rich" or worse "1%", even though I feel like that could make some people react badly.
@lanodan @clarity “Predatory capitalists” may be a redundant phrase, but for those temporarily embarrassed millionaires, it may provide enough mental room to oppose their actions instead of rejecting the message entirely, while still describing the actions that they take and not their monetary worth.
-
struggling with this one, maybe its a UK-US difference?
The median salary in the UK is about £39k. That's $51k in US money.
British members of parliament get £91k. That's $120k in US money.
$400k is a fortune.
and a food service worker with "a very sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices" will be in much more s**t than the surgeon.
what am I missing?
@charlesdelavalleepoussin per this article https://yourbrainonmoney.substack.com/p/i-make-good-money-why-do-i-still
"41% of households earning $300K to $500K are living paycheck to paycheck."
-
@charlesdelavalleepoussin per this article https://yourbrainonmoney.substack.com/p/i-make-good-money-why-do-i-still
"41% of households earning $300K to $500K are living paycheck to paycheck."
@charlesdelavalleepoussin an important thing here is that, in many of these high-earning industries, you will be pushed out of your career by complex social factors if you don't demonstrate that you "fit" the culture, and demonstrating that fit is -expensive-. It's an induced demand phenomenon: spend grows to meet available income and you'll be treated as a pity case (and denied promotions/opportunities) if you're leaving below those expected means.
-
@clarity If you're not an ownerr or management, you're a worker - but many who "earn high paychecks" sympathize with the management class and aspire to it. That's more of the issue. Of course we can get into the details of small business owners and entrepeneurs vs corporate C Level "workers" but it's the aspiration toward being on top of the shit heap and maintaining it so you might get your turn that causes class conflict even more than simple capitalism and rentseekeing etc themselves.
@ianrogers yeah class traitorship is very common among high-earners and is a serious problem that need addressing
-
The minimum salary in the UK is £22k for a full-time job. That's £29k.
So a surgeon work's 13x as hard as a service worker on minimum wage?
I see the point being made that workers are workers, but I think this is flawed. There's being paid for work and then there's being paid (wink wink) for work.
The idea of ensuring the difference between the highest paid and lowest paid in any organisation must not be more than 5x is an excellent idea. I think the UK Greens might do it
@charlesdelavalleepoussin @gbargoud "So a surgeon work's 13x as hard as a service worker on minimum wage?" this is a misnomer. of course not. the salary gap is a deep injustice that needs fixing. but they both -work-. unlike someone who collects a nice sum just from the money sitting in their stocks.
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
Is all we are saying that there are the rich in the eye of the beholden and then there are the filthy rich in the eye for the beheadin?
-
Is all we are saying that there are the rich in the eye of the beholden and then there are the filthy rich in the eye for the beheadin?
@unruly lmao yeah that works
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity I dunno, "the rich" to me, living in poverty, is basically everyone
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity you made me reconsider my beliefs about classes, thanks! It's a very interesting point of view and helps me feel better for having a higher income than many people I know. I already have a very strong feeling of belonging to the working class, but sometimes my privileged status makes me feel like I belong less? If that makes sense? Anyways, thanks again for sharing
-
Your regular reminder that "the rich" aren't people who earn large paychecks. They are people with capital that generates returns: investments, property, company shares. "High income earners" are not an intrinsic enemy of "the working class" – many of them are a member of it!
@clarity Are you saying the converse IS true, though? That people with capital that generates returns are intrinsic enemies of "the working class"?
Meaning that someone who had the good fortune to have some spare money, and the good sense to invest it wisely, the the second good fortune to have those investments pay dividends, should be the enemy of the working class?
Or that if a member of the working class finds themselves in the fortunate position to have some spare cash lying around, they'd better not dare invest it into anything that's going to pay dividends, or they will automatically find themselves being the enemy of those they once called friends?
-
a surgeon earning $400k with few investments living paycheck-to-paycheck (very possible if they have a sick parent with high healthcare costs or high childcare prices) has more in common with a food service worker than with Jeff Bezos, but the system is designed to make both workers forget that.
@clarity Yes, quite, the whole reason for the innocent, yet in-your-face phrase "a gentleman of leisure".
-
@clarity Are you saying the converse IS true, though? That people with capital that generates returns are intrinsic enemies of "the working class"?
Meaning that someone who had the good fortune to have some spare money, and the good sense to invest it wisely, the the second good fortune to have those investments pay dividends, should be the enemy of the working class?
Or that if a member of the working class finds themselves in the fortunate position to have some spare cash lying around, they'd better not dare invest it into anything that's going to pay dividends, or they will automatically find themselves being the enemy of those they once called friends?
@GrahamDowns @clarity in some countries a significant proportion of shares are held by pension funds, made up of the pensions of millions of normal working people. In effect people own the companies that employ them. The problem is that pension funds never vote against the board so a tiny number of robber barons can milk the system without even owning most of it.
In civilised countries no one goes bankrupt because of illness, because of socialised health care.
