or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook. - Page 235

post #3511 of 5454
You have to really be in a bubble to think that the overwhelming majority of people love Obama. The might have in 2008 and but that didn't last long.
post #3512 of 5454
You guys are getting trolled again.
post #3513 of 5454
Gotta be trollery. Hell, I voted for the dude twice and even I think that's a giant load of horseshit.
post #3514 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

30k will put you in the top 1% in the world, so 2.5 times as much as someone in the top 1% isn't rich? Bullshit.

30k puts one person at 3.6%.

30k for a family of four is 14.4%.

http://www.givingwhatwecan.org/why-give/how-rich-am-i

Your point?
post #3515 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

Brewster spent $30 million in one month to get his real inheritance of $300 million. $75k is a tame weekend in Hoboken.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Edit - also pretty sure Carter was smarter than Obama. And Reagan is more beloved. Washington was almost certainly our most competent and Clinton "feels your pain" so he is most caring.

Also, Obama is only half black.

And Lincoln was probably more hated by a minority of Americans.

He spent a good chunk of that on a third of a game of rounders against some dudes from New York who were wearing pyjamas.
post #3516 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

Your point?

Your previous post claiming $30k is 1%er territory is false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

He spent a good chunk of that on a third of a game of rounders against some dudes from New York who were wearing pyjamas.

No he didn't. Did you even see the documentary (Rockumentary) I am referencing? Hell, he was only allowed to gamble away 5% of the total. Your ignorance knows no bounds.
post #3517 of 5454
...
post #3518 of 5454
People, it's Christmas, let's try to get along.

Also, anyone who is familiar with Fang's work in conversations regarding units of measure should be well aware of what the problem is here: Fang is clearly talking about centigrade dollars, while everyone else is citing American dollars (the only dollars that matter).
post #3519 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

Your point?

Your previous post claiming $30k is 1%er territory is false.

Quibble, 30k puts you in "richer than the vast majority of people in the world" territory. potaytoe/potartoe


Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

He spent a good chunk of that on a third of a game of rounders against some dudes from New York who were wearing pyjamas.

No he didn't. Did you even see the documentary (Rockumentary) I am referencing? Hell, he was only allowed to gamble away 5% of the total. Your ignorance knows no bounds.

Don't know which Brewster's Millions you are talking about fool, but in the 1985 film version staring Richard Pryor and John Candy, Brewster hires a team of rounders players called the New York Yankees, they play for three-innings against Brewster's team of rounders players and everyone was wearing pyjamas. Who said anything about gambling?
post #3520 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

Perhaps so, but if you look at what I actually wrote there is no conflict. "if as an individual you pull in 75k and you are not rich, then you must be doing something pretty fucked up with your money." Sure you can piss 75k a year up the wall, but that takes a lot of pissing. Also in this context I think we can assume that we are talking about an American who makes 75k.

You cannot assume there is no conflict. If you come from a poor family in the US, have student loans, went to work in a high cost of living area, between that and taxes, your disposable income is negligible. That's just one fast example. 75k and not rich does not mean you are pissing away your money.

So in some extreme cases 75k isn't rich, the exception that proves the rule.
post #3521 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG View Post

People, it's Christmas, let's try to get along.

Also, anyone who is familiar with Fang's work in conversations regarding units of measure should be well aware of what the problem is here: Fang is clearly talking about centigrade dollars, while everyone else is citing American dollars (the only dollars that matter).

You are probably correct, I wasn't factoring in the weakness of the U.S. Peso.
post #3522 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

So in some extreme cases 75k isn't rich, the exception that proves the rule.

That is really not an extreme case. You are misframing the entire conversation for trolling purposes. Earning 75k in the US and not being"rich" is pretty much standard. One would have to earn 75k for many years, be frugal, and invest well to become "rich." As has been pointed out already your framing would have a homeless person in the US classified as "rich" because they beg for 8k a year.
post #3523 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

So in some extreme cases 75k isn't rich, the exception that proves the rule.

That is really not an extreme case. You are misframing the entire conversation for trolling purposes. Earning 75k in the US and not being"rich" is pretty much standard. One would have to earn 75k for many years, be frugal, and invest well to become "rich." As has been pointed out already your framing would have a homeless person in the US classified as "rich" because they beg for 8k a year.

Reductio ad absurdum, repeating it doesn't make it valid.
post #3524 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

Reductio ad absurdum, repeating it doesn't make it valid.

This is special as it is actually you that is employing this. Your reduction is, "75k in the developed world must be rich as so many people in the entire world make far less." But as we all know everyone here is wrong but Fang.
post #3525 of 5454
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fang66 View Post

Reductio ad absurdum, repeating it doesn't make it valid.

This is special as it is actually you that is employing this. Your reduction is, "75k in the developed world must be rich as so many people in the entire world make far less." But as we all know everyone here is wrong but Fang.

You are obviously too thick to understand what Reductio ad absurdum means, not only have you employed it again in the above post without realising it, you've also added a strawman to boot. Well done you utter dullard.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook.