[RD] Daily Graphs and Charts

[civvver]

Everclear? REALLY? They have like 1 hit.

Yeah and a correlated trendline shows that US union membership has plummeted during that time frame as well. We've managed to create a very strong, long lasting bias against unions in this country and take a lot of steps to destroy them politically and socially.

While that is true, haven't most of the high paying us manufacturing jobs just shipped overseas anyway? So it was either unions take concessions or lose the jobs entirely?

Also a lot of the reasons in the us for these graphs is tech. You have billionaires coming out of nowhere with very little capital invested, like google, facebook, snapchat etc. Fortunes made overnight out of nothing and it skews the charts a lot. Cus normal people don't make any money cus of google. Google isn't hiring people proportionately to the income they make. Like Ford makes a car, it employs x number of people, pays x amount in wages per car. They want to ramp up production or something it's some ratio.

Software is infinitely clonable. So google, microsoft whatever make one OS or search engine and profit off it for a lifetime with minimal increases in payrolls. the profit margins are way higher in anything software or tech like that. Profits go to ceos/owners and shareholders and leave the middle class behind.

 

[Cutlass]

While that is true, haven't most of the high paying us manufacturing jobs just shipped overseas anyway? So it was either unions take concessions or lose the jobs entirely?

Also a lot of the reasons in the us for these graphs is tech. You have billionaires coming out of nowhere with very little capital invested, like google, facebook, snapchat etc. Fortunes made overnight out of nothing and it skews the charts a lot. Cus normal people don't make any money cus of google. Google isn't hiring people proportionately to the income they make. Like Ford makes a car, it employs x number of people, pays x amount in wages per car. They want to ramp up production or something it's some ratio.

Software is infinitely clonable. So google, microsoft whatever make one OS or search engine and profit off it for a lifetime with minimal increases in payrolls. the profit margins are way higher in anything software or tech like that. Profits go to ceos/owners and shareholders and leave the middle class behind.

Most US manufacturing jobs that were lost were lost to automation, not to foreign trade. Although there were a lot which were lost to trade. But of the manufacturing that remains in the US, most union jobs were lost to relocating factories to 'right to work' states. Since those states make it damned near impossible for a union to function, the jobs can remain in the US and still be forcibly de-unionized.

 

[El_Machinae]

Things like Google is where modern finance has a real problem. Economics is different from finance, and there's little dispute that Google has made our lives much, much richer. It vastly streamlined our ability to gather knowledge and to streamline messages. The "consumer surplus" on Google is very large.

Google doesn't directly employ a lot of people. But it certainly is a tool that allows a lot of people to be employed. Every job I've had in the last few years required knowing how to use Google. We use it all the time. So, while Google supplies relatively few tax dollars - but overwhelms its initial investment by the Federal government - it certainly helps production.

In a proper world, those gains to production would lead to increased tax revenue overall. The 'rich' get the benefit, since gains to productivity are floating upwards, but marginal tax rates at the top are higher too. So, as their income rises, so does the tax revenue. Nationwide finance doesn't really work like that, plus there are oodles of loopholes.

But the profits shouldn't actually leave the middle-class behind. I'm middle-class, and I own shares of Alphabet as part of an ETF

 

[Arwon]

Timeline of when Confederate memorials went up. Notice how late and where the peaks are - monuments as direct responses to the establishment of Jim Crow and then a bunch of schools in response to Brown v Board. They're kinda not at all about the US Civil War.

From here - https://www.splcenter.org/20160421/whose-heritage-public-symbols-confederacy

 

[El_Machinae]

That graph is fantastic.

People will whine about whether their specific monument on that timeline, but that overlap with Jim Crow and the Civil Rights movement sure shows the vibe of those things.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Do americans have graphics for everything?

 

[civvver]

Most US manufacturing jobs that were lost were lost to automation, not to foreign trade. Although there were a lot which were lost to trade. But of the manufacturing that remains in the US, most union jobs were lost to relocating factories to 'right to work' states. Since those states make it damned near impossible for a union to function, the jobs can remain in the US and still be forcibly de-unionized.

I agree losing majority of unions has hurt the middle class, I just question the degree. Many people act like it's a huge factor when I think it's a small one and globalization, automation and job obsolescence have been bigger.

Things like Google is where modern finance has a real problem. Economics is different from finance, and there's little dispute that Google has made our lives much, much richer. It vastly streamlined our ability to gather knowledge and to streamline messages. The "consumer surplus" on Google is very large.

Google doesn't directly employ a lot of people. But it certainly is a tool that allows a lot of people to be employed. Every job I've had in the last few years required knowing how to use Google. We use it all the time. So, while Google supplies relatively few tax dollars - but overwhelms its initial investment by the Federal government - it certainly helps production.

In a proper world, those gains to production would lead to increased tax revenue overall. The 'rich' get the benefit, since gains to productivity are floating upwards, but marginal tax rates at the top are higher too. So, as their income rises, so does the tax revenue. Nationwide finance doesn't really work like that, plus there are oodles of loopholes.

But the profits shouldn't actually leave the middle-class behind. I'm middle-class, and I own shares of Alphabet as part of an ETF

I don't understand your point precisely. Are you saying even though the middle class hasn't seen as many % gains to income their lifestyle is higher because of tech? I would agree with that.

If you look at stock ownership middle class might have some money in retirement funds by very, very few actually own stock outside of that and not much of it. Note we're talking about middle class, families making like 50k a year, not upper middle class white collar jobs making 75k+ a person and 100k+ a household.

 

[warpus]

Do americans have graphics for everything?

If it's race or food related, yes.

 

[El_Machinae]

I don't understand your point precisely. Are you saying even though the middle class hasn't seen as many % gains to income their lifestyle is higher because of tech? I would agree with that.

Yeah, that's exactly what I mean. Nearly everyone greatly values the contribution to our lives that Google has made. But this doesn't translate to higher incomes. Finance doesn't deal very well with this. Now, higher incomes are the same as lower prices. So, having a very cheap and very effective search engine is a 'net win'. But it doesn't reduce our taxes, at least, not in the way that we calculate such things.

If you look at stock ownership middle class might have some money in retirement funds by very, very few actually own stock outside of that and not much of it. Note we're talking about middle class, families making like 50k a year, not upper middle class white collar jobs making 75k+ a person and 100k+ a household.

I specifically mean retirement funds, yeah. So, one doesn't have to be 'truly rich' to be benefiting from Google's success, financially. But you're very right, the savings rate is really not high enough. Hasn't been for a long time. Dropping interest rates really did fool people into thinking that houses were a good savings vehicle, and we're going to be reaping that reward for a long, long time.

 

[Farm Boy]

That graph is fantastic.

People will whine about whether their specific monument on that timeline, but that overlap with Jim Crow and the Civil Rights movement sure shows the vibe of those things.

Yes, but it's a lie. Accidentally. And only partially. So spurious, I suppose.

People put up monuments immediately. Those are the headstones. Then they put up more when they're old to leave something behind. They still put them up to remember those they lost. Who was old when most of those went up?

 

[Lexicus]

Yes, but it's a lie. Accidentally. And only partially. So spurious, I suppose.

People put up monuments immediately. Those are the headstones. Then they put up more when they're old to leave something behind. They still put them up to remember those they lost. Who was old when most of those went up?

This really rubs me the wrong way. I simply don't think your explanation here is correct - we know, as a matter of public and historical record, why most of these monuments were built. Many of them are literally monuments to white supremacist organizations, like the one in New Orleans that commemorated, not the war dead, but a revolt against the Reconstruction-era government of New Orleans by white terrorists. And even if we ignore this your explanation doesn't account for the second spike, the one that just happens to coincide with the whole "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!" thing.

I am willing to bet that for just about any monument that's in that graph, you will find an ugly history - that, essentially, it was built to either directly terrorize African Americans (as some of these monuments were) or as a general symbolic statement of support for the terrorizing of African Americans.

Of course, the real problem is that the Confederacy should not be allowed to honor its dead, that honoring its dead who fought for one of the worst causes for which men ever fought in history is something that it needs to be trained out of doing, until it views those dead people the way (most) contemporary Germans view the dead Nazis. I will end this post by pointing out that the Allies didn't have any patience for any of this sort of nonsense when they finished beating Germany in 1945, and they not only destroyed all the overtly Nazi monuments but any monument that "tend[ed] to preserve and keep alive the tradition of German militarism."

 

[Farm Boy]

Of course it rubs you the wrong way. You a fighta! Rwarrrr. Fight fight rah rah. The righteousness! "Start handing out rifles," I believe you put it as?

It's not just one thing. It's more. That's why it's only partially incorrect. But you have your focus, idiot violent kids and idiot violent racists usually do(and idiot Farm Boys). They just happen to coexist simultaneously with everyone else who's stuck making sense of a fundamentally stupid world.

Only thing I know here is that the police should have quelled that most recent idiocy a lot sooner.

 

[Lexicus]

Of course it rubs you the wrong way. You a fighta! Rwarrrr. Fight fight rah rah. Mean words and the righteousness!

The funny thing is, I'm really not - I only look this way when placed in a space like this. Put me in an "SJW" space and I sound a lot more like El_Machinae. But I will say that I don't believe any progress happens without "fighters," so we need some around.

But you have your focus, idiot violent kids and idiot violent racists usually do.

I mean, I tend to think the thing I'm focusing on is the important thing to focus on. I also find it funny that you evidently think I'm violent - idiot kid, I'll take.

 

[civvver]

I specifically mean retirement funds, yeah. So, one doesn't have to be 'truly rich' to be benefiting from Google's success, financially. But you're very right, the savings rate is really not high enough. Hasn't been for a long time. Dropping interest rates really did fool people into thinking that houses were a good savings vehicle, and we're going to be reaping that reward for a long, long time.

A house is such a dumb savings vehicle cus you can't liquidate it. So you bought a house in 1995 for $200,000 and it's worth $300,000 now. Ok sell it. Now what? Where do you live? Oh you need to go buy another house. Well guess what? Those houses all went up in value and cost $300,000. So it's a net wash.

Of course it's not that simplistic, but unless you downsize or own multiple houses it doesn't make sense for your primary house to be a savings vehicle. Even retirees I know who downsize often move to more expensive parts of town or nicer houses so the money is still a wash.

 

[Farm Boy]

I mean, I tend to think the thing I'm focusing on is the important thing to focus on. I also find it funny that you evidently think I'm violent - idiot kid, I'll take.

Everyone does. But there's no way I'm going to read the rifle statement differently when it was made in regard to a democratic election result. And yes, violence is hilarious. You'll note my only real takeaway from the most recent kerfuffle is similar to that employed by the Civil War. The state should have applied far more violence significantly sooner. I'm with the blue thugs, remember?

 

[Lexicus]

But there's no way I'm going to read the rifle statement differently when it was made in regard to a democratic election result.

Eh? I don't know what you mean by this.

You'll note my only real takeaway from the most recent kerfuffle is similar to that employed by the Civil War. The state should have applied far more violence significantly sooner. I'm with the blue thugs, remember?

Well, the same forces in society that make the blue thugs thugs are responsible for the...ah...recent kerfuffle. Incidentally, if by "far more violence significantly sooner" you mean quelled the nazi thing before the counterdemonstrations could get well underway, I agree.

 

[Farm Boy]

We don't agree. You haven't listed enough quelling.

 

[Lexicus]

Cryptic.

 

[Farm Boy]

I didn't think so. We've got a lot of footage of people with weapons out, not trying to leave the riot. Hopefully we give them all a cage. Those same people? I think we should have given them all state violence from the boys in blue the minute they pulled weapons up to the point where they stopped or were incapable of continuing. Which feels like a very Lex-like response from where I stand. You're convincing me, eh?

 

[Lexicus]

Which feels like a very Lex-like response from where I stand.

The Lex-like response has mainly been to avoid looking at footage of the thing after watching that car smash a bunch of people. Too horrible for me. I'm not at all familiar with the footage to which you refer, either.