this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
1283 points (97.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

8769 readers
2134 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thesprongler@lemmy.world 145 points 2 years ago (2 children)

After years of working and saving, I can now afford to miss ONE paycheck. I'm no longer poor! /s

[–] Clent@lemmy.world 41 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Septimaeus 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Fuck outta here with your weak-ass bones!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 20 points 2 years ago

When the revolution comes, you will not be spared.

[–] Neato@ttrpg.network 87 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Lots of people in here fighting about what "working class" means. If you have to work to survive (other than minor household chores), you're working class. If you have enough money, or assets that you get dividends from or can borrow against, or passive income so you don't need a regular employment then you probably aren't working class.

Working Poor isn't as common and definition varies a lot.

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This is it, it’s super simple.

If I dialed back everything, I could probably live a few years off my savings/investments, and selling some stuff. But I would be just burning trough my money, and I would need to go back to work eventually. So I’m still working class, even if I’m in a luckier situation than most people.

[–] kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I feel like there is a world in between of these two

[–] lectricleopard@lemmy.world 32 points 2 years ago (2 children)

There really isn't. Each group has a wider pay rate than maybe is implied, but functionally, there isn't a role in capitalism between them. Wealthy people want us to think there is a wide range of classes so we argue with each other instead of cooperating against them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago (6 children)

Oh I think working poor is pretty easy to define. If you work full time (or equivalent at multiple jobs) and you're not able to pay your bills without government assistance then you're the working poor.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Electricblush@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago (3 children)

What I find interesting is how often statements like this that are trying to unify the working class (or whatever you end up calling it) just derails into semantics instead of actually people bringing out the pitchforks and shouting "eat the rich"

We are all fucked.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago

Amongst the little mice fighting under the table for crumbs falling from the cake being divided above, once in a while one finds a slightly larger crumb, proudly raises it over his head and shouts: "See?! The system woks!"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Clent@lemmy.world 44 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"But through my retirement I own .000000001% of a company!"

Having stock in a company doesn't make you a capitalist anymore than checking out a bible from the library makes you a Christian.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 14 points 2 years ago (1 children)

.000000001% of a $100 billion company is $1. The average person could own per year $5000 if they used automatic deposits and got the employer match.

I know you are trying to exaggerate to make a point, but don't discourage people from getting the employer match if they can.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (10 children)

I employee matched for years just to watch our CEO tank our stock to 1/5 the original price.

Point being, remember it's still an investment in a single stock and comes with that amount of risk.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 43 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • 10,000 seconds = 2.8 hours
  • 100,000 seconds = 1.2 days
  • 1,000,000 seconds = 11.6 days
  • 10,000,000 seconds = 116 days
  • 100,000,000 seconds = 3 years
  • 1,000,000,000 seconds = 32 years

Don't be fooled. It's billionaires against everyone else. Even multimillionaires are closer to the everyday person. The working class consists of two groups: those without disposable income (nominally those with "hours" in income), and those with some disposable income (days in income).

If they ain't got a "year" in income, their they're one of us.

[–] rando895@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think it's better to think of it like this:

How do you make your money? Do you need to make a wage? Or can you let your property (land, buildings, stocks, etc.) be your income?

The real amount doesn't matter, it's whether you have to work to live or not.

If you have to work, you are the working class. If you don't, you are the owner/capitalist class. But your analysis is still somewhat correct: millionaires and small business owners are closer to the working class than billionaires, it does still matter how they make it though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

Modern America is like Tsarist Russia. A tiny elite, a small 'middle class,' and a vast army of poor people.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's generally considered safe to withdraw 4% of your nest egg each year. Someone with 2 million can support an 80k/year retirement.

The average multimillionaire is literally just any person with a six figure salary who has been saving for retirement and is nearing retirement. You basically can't retire without at least being a millionaire.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GentlemanLoser@ttrpg.network 35 points 2 years ago

What if I can miss two paychecks? Super-rich, or?

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 32 points 2 years ago (10 children)

Yeah people don’t believe me when i say middle class is 300k because they want to be middle class

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 35 points 2 years ago (11 children)

A person making 300k can still be working class. Unless you own capital that makes enough money for you to live off, you are working class

[–] rando895@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 years ago

Exactly. It's how you make your money, not how much you make.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] TheIllustrativeMan@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

I think 150k (ish) in my city would be solidly middle class. You could buy a house/car/retire on that.

I'm in a super weird spot, because I make good enough money that I have savings to support me after job loss, and I make enough money that I don't really have to worry about my grocery bill (within reason). Heck, there's even a chance that I'll be able to have a decent retirement.

But a house? Not happening. New car? No chance. Even eating out every week isn't viable. And even what I have is only because I have a pretty sweet rent situation.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Middle class was originally defined as a class that gets at least some significant percent of their income from stocks bonds and other investments. I'm willing to bet that ain't you.

[–] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Is this a definition common in a specific country outside the U.S.? I see this claim in multiple places in the thread, but that's not how it has been historically defined in the U.S. or in France where the term originated. Middle class in the original context evolved out of the mercantile class that traded goods in cities - neither aristocrat nor serf - during the middle ages. That original definition had nothing to do with investments.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] saintshenanigans@programming.dev 30 points 2 years ago

ITT: lots of people making very concrete statements about cost of living that somehow apply equally to every single city in the US at the same time

[–] Aux@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's an American point of view. Here in Britain there are pretty much only two main classes: aristocracy and dirty peasants. Doesn't matter what you do and how rich you are, if your ancestors didn't sit at the round table - you're a peasant.

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I don't think that's true. There's definitely the three classes, but many people believe they're middle class when they're not.

It's basically impossible to become upper class. I think I read somewhere that it takes 3 or 4 successive generations at somewhere like Eton to be considered upper class.

[–] Cool_Name@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I can afford to miss a paycheck. In fact, I'm currently planning for a four month stretch where I'll need to live off of savings. Thinking that I, with my 11 year old honda fit, 10 year old PC, and my 2 roommates, am in the top 20% of this stat is very alarming.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Ilflish@lemm.ee 13 points 2 years ago (7 children)

I work paycheck to paycheck but if I told people how much I made and called myself poor I'd probably anger people. I just make sure that I do what's in my power to keep myself comfortable now, even if that means overspending on luxuries

[–] Microw@lemm.ee 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If you have no financial reserves, you are IMO poor or stupid. One of both.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kamen@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I like how things are defaulting to the US as if that's the whole world.

[–] dfc09@lemmy.world 28 points 2 years ago

She's probably American and talking about America. We shouldn't have to qualify every single thing we say, if it doesn't apply to you then it doesn't apply. It's certainly worthwhile to the discussion to add your own experiences in places it doesn't apply, but just pointing out that she didn't explicitly say she's talking about America (even though she very nearly did) isn't super relevant.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] obinice@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Bold of you to assume I'm American.

[–] Leg@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (5 children)

That was silly of her. I mean, look at you? Clearly nowhere near America. She should apologize to you.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›