1 in 5 wealthy americans has prayed for somebody to get fired

downtown

Crafternoon Delight
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Messages
19,541
Location
Chicago
That's just one of the interesting nuggets from this story on who prays, and what for:

One-quarter of respondents with an annual income higher than $150,000 pray for "bad things to happen to bad people," while only around 8 percent of respondents making less than $50,000 said they would do so. And nearly one in five Americans with incomes over $150,000 have prayed for someone to get fired; in contrast, only 1 in 20 Americans who make between $75,000 and $149,000 and only one in 100 Americans who make less than $30,000 say they have prayed the same.

http://www.vox.com/2014/10/6/6918427/lots-of-americans-pray-heres-what-they-pray-for-study

What do you think? Anything here surprise you? Is this a cause for concern? What does this mean?
 
Where do you think Romney is on that survey?
 
It may mean the term "job creator" isn't the most descriptive one. "vacancy creator" would be more apt.
 
It's not a terribly charitable thing to do, imo. Why not pray for the "bad" person to become less "bad", instead?
 
You'd think that people would stop praying after realizing that prayers don't really come true.

I suppose some of them must, due to statistics and coincidence and such, but still. I don't think it really is so surprising that some people are praying for negative things. To me the story is that so many are praying - and expect their wishes to come true.
 
Well, I'd expect wealthy people to value jobs more than poor people.
I'd expect the opposite. Sure, the wealther person has a bigger salary (and so, strictly speaking, more to lose), but the poor person's salary is more critical to his life and (statistically) less easily replaced.
 
Yeah.

But then a poor person's job is likely to be rather uninspiring, to say the least. And the marginal benefit of doing it may not lead them to value it overmuch.

In the First World, a poor person's job probably isn't the only means of them staving off destitution.
 
I am curious what the percentages would be if they hadn't been so specific and instead just asked everyone, "Have you ever prayed for anything even the least bit bad to ever happen to anyone?"
 
Yeah.

But then a poor person's job is likely to be rather uninspiring, to say the least. And the marginal benefit of doing it may not lead them to value it overmuch.
The thing is, a poor person's job is typically (let's keep aside the special cases of low-paid jobs 'cause they are a passion, which are certainly a tiny minority) about subsistance, not fulfillment. As such, the value put in the job is not how interesting it is, but how it simply allows to live.

By contrast, a typical person with well-paid job can afford much more easily to have a jobless phase, and can (again, typically) much more easily find another job with better pay than the poor one.
 
I am curious what the percentages would be if they hadn't been so specific and instead just asked everyone, "Have you ever prayed for anything even the least bit bad to ever happen to anyone?"

They mostly did. The 'lose a job' thing was some other study. The basic poll was just 'bad things to happen to bad people'. left out that 'least bit' part though.
 
Hmm. You may be right, Mr Akka. Maybe some one ought to do a study on this very subject.

It seems just as likely to me, though, that a rich person lives up to their income, with mortgages, bank loans, divorce settlements, and what not, and find themselves, on paper, in a much more parlous and dependent state than a poor person. And not at all able to simply resign from one job before finding another.

I very occasionally find myself feeling sorry for them.
 
Well, there's praying for something and just plain wishing for it. Are they any different from each other, though.

And have I ever hoped for less than pleasant things to happen to someone? Yes. I most certainly have.
 
Hmm. You may be right, Mr Akka. Maybe some one ought to do a study on this very subject.

It seems just as likely to me, though, that a rich person lives up to their income, with mortgages, bank loans, divorce settlements, and what not, and find themselves, on paper, in a much more parlous and dependent state than a poor person. And not at all able to simply resign from one job before finding another.

I very occasionally find myself feeling sorry for them.
Well, the whole thing is about the subtleties between proportion and tresholds. It's the same kind of system than what makes flat taxes actually unfair for low incomes.

The critical point is that everyone need a certain treshold of money to live. Anything above that is a bonus that can be spent on making life more comfortable. If you have barely the money to live around that treshold, it means that any dip in income puts you in a critical situation where you risk going under it. If you have a big margin, it means you are much more protected against such situation, and you'll recover from any problem much more quickly.


To illustrate with numbers (completely made-up, but whatever) : if you need 500 monetary unit (MU) to have a "liveable life", and your salary is 550, it means that the slightest unexpected problem will wreck all your personal budge to shreds : even if you don't use ANY money on a single luxury (that means no gifts for the kids, no restaurant for Valentine, no cinema ever, etc., a pretty dreadful life by our standards), it means that after a year you'll still have barely 600 MU saved. You lose your job ? You've one single month to find another before you've lost everything you saved in a year. Your car breaks up ? Here you go, your savings vanishes too.

In comparison, if you have a 1500 MU salary, and live a much more expensive life (let's say, 1100 MU a month, more than twice what the poor shmuck is able to), you still save four times as much as him each month, AND you have the added ability to restrict yourself (let's say to 700 MU) in case of something unexpected happens, which gives you a much better ability to recover.
So problems have comparatively a much lessened impact on you.
 
I agree. That should be the case.

It just doesn't seem to be so. I've met several high earners who were plainly struggling to meet their commitments. Commitments that are simply never in the scope of a poor person.

And what do you mean by "going under"? Becoming homeless? Because that seems to happen to comparatively wealthy people with alarming frequency. And, I have heard, it can happen to them really very quickly.

I've known poor people become homeless, too. But it doesn't seem to hit them nearly as hard. People, other poor people, will tend to put them up for a week or two.
 
I don't really see the point in differentiating between praying for that and hoping for it and I have a lot of doubts that these people have never wanted a politician, rich person, corporate CEO or high-profile person to lose their job.

Also "bad things" is a painfully broad term.
 
I imagine something along the lines of "Dear God, let so-and-so get fired. Thank you." (Intercessionary prayer.)

Rather than "I hope George Bush doesn't get re-elected." (Wishful thinking.)
 
Does this mean literally "prayed"? Like got down on your hands and knees and said a rosary? Because I have a lot of doubts that these people have never wanted a politician, rich person, corporate CEO or high-profile person to lose their job.

I think it's more a function of 'praying for bad things to happen' being different for people of lower incomes. The wealthy are insulated so loss of income is the worst thing they can imagine; so that's the 'bad thing' they pray happens to their victim. I generally pray for car accidents or other forms of dismemberment myself. Or lightning strikes. Lightning strikes are good.
 
Top Bottom