Go, Economy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

The percentile from 99%-99.9% exploded but the .1% blew up like the Cyrax fatality in Mortal Kombat 4.

---

This may be the best analysis I have ever read. Well done. And that was the point I was trying to make. People see percentiles and make assumptions about what that means. I frankly would have guessed that the individual numbers would have been higher for 90%. My question remains how do you go after the 1% or 0.1% in a way that doesn't take the 90-99% or even lower in collateral damage? My contention is still that the most effective way is to close loop holes, with the most obvious examples being the offshore accounts that keep getting mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

The wife of a man that makes 100k is not going to drive 20 minutes over to the shitty part of town to get groceries or buy gas. She's going to drive 3 minutes to the new ultra whitey mcwhite shopping center that has a target and whole foods.

---

I can tell you with certainty that this is not always the case. You described a pair of shopping centers maybe 10 minutes away perfectly. One has a Target, and the one across the road has an Earthfare, which is basically a local Whole Foods. My wife rarely drives over there for food, and if she does, it's because there is something they carry that other places don't, like grass fed beef or something. The vast majority of our shopping is done at the Food Lion about 5 minutes away or the local IGA that is about 2 minutes away. Neither of them even remotely resemble "whitey mcwhite" shopping centers, and most of the employees are actually middle aged people of various races.

And when we eat out, we actually actively avoid places owned by white people, though not for that reason. We eat a lot of Latino and Asian food, because that's what my daughter and I like the most. I'm not buying Latino and Asian food from a white person.

Is that anecdotal? Sure, but so are whatever experiences on which you're basing your broad strokes. And I think you're falling into the trap I was describing to diff in that you're drawing the line way too low for what you're trying to describe. 100k is not rich in very many if any places in the US.

I think it its fair to say that if your yearly income is not enough to buy a new medium sized house, you are not rich.

I think it its you're yearly income.

I'll never understand why that is funny to you guys

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fe 26

I think it its fair to say that if you're yearly income is not enough to buy a new medium sized house, you are not rich.

---

What the hell is a "medium sized house"? And in which part of the country are you pricing it? This is why we need real numbers and not percentiles and random, poorly defined benchmarks. What is "rich"?

your mother's vagina

I can't eat but a small slice

See you in three days, Fe.

I guess he fell in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yoshi

What the hell is a "medium sized house"? And in which part of the country are you pricing it? This is why we need real numbers and not percentiles and random, poorly defined benchmarks. What is "rich"?

---

Rich for most people is enough cash to get a nice car/house and be able to do basically what you want w/o worry and not worry about immediate financial repercussions. Basically, go to Disney or 6 Flags on a whim in your F150 Platinum or GT500 and NOT miss your bills. Or rich enough to have all that and still be able to be an active investor.

Arguing over the definition of what's rich is dumb because every one basically knows the difference between impoverished/poor/midclass/rich/ultra rich/warren buffet. You can make 100k/year and not be "technically rich" but you're not hurting unless you're really stupid with your money, even if you live in San Fran or NYC.