What the fuck are these statistics you’re trying to guide the conversation with?
We’re able to guage things like the “average” income of Americans during the Great Depression by looking at taxes. This means you had to actually make enough to file taxes. The average income of that time is based entirely off of that data, which I think only 2% of the population was filing taxes at the time compared to today’s 70%. The average American was not making today’s equivalent of 30k more during the Great Depression.
“Hunger rates” - the average American couldn’t buy fucking bread during the Great Depression.
“Homeless rates” 2 million people were homeless compared to the, fuck it I’ll throw in an extra hundred thousand, 700,000 homeless people today.
“Wealth inequality” Of course wealth inequality is worse today than in the Great Depression, the fucking stock market crashed in 1929.
I can’t believe I had to spend precious fucking neurons on this, stop.
Edit: “I’ve read plenty of history!” Doesn’t know what fucking Hoovervilles were.
Have you seen the reports coming from food pantry administrators? We have bread lines now, and they don’t have enough food for everyone who needs it. Police are literally guarding grocery store dumpsters to keep people from getting food out of them.
But we can play it your way. You’ve said a lot about how we shouldn’t measure the difference. How about you propose which stats we should use? Let’s look into those.
I suspect you won’t suggest any at all, because it’s bad by any measure.
Where in the direct comparisons between the two time periods did you conjure up that I’ve “said a lot about how we shouldn’t measure the difference.”? Where exactly did I suggest, while measuring the differences between the two time periods, that we shouldn’t measure the difference?
No, sorry I have a habit of not repeating anything to the illiterate. It’s not my job to teach you how to read, that was your parents - what a shit job, btw.
Learn from this folks. This is how you out the bad actors. When they try to dismiss any measurement that doesn’t fit their narrative, ask them for a measurement they would accept. Or ask them for a source they would accept. Etc.
They’ll never commit to any, because their job is to muddy the waters. They don’t want to come to an understanding. They don’t want anyone to seek the truth. They will never commit to any source or statistic being reliable, because then you can use it to prove them wrong, and their opposition stance will be completely outed as manufactured.
K. Which stats would you like? Homeless rates? Hunger rates? Wealth inequality figures? All worse now than during the Great Depression.
What the fuck are these statistics you’re trying to guide the conversation with?
We’re able to guage things like the “average” income of Americans during the Great Depression by looking at taxes. This means you had to actually make enough to file taxes. The average income of that time is based entirely off of that data, which I think only 2% of the population was filing taxes at the time compared to today’s 70%. The average American was not making today’s equivalent of 30k more during the Great Depression.
“Hunger rates” - the average American couldn’t buy fucking bread during the Great Depression.
“Homeless rates” 2 million people were homeless compared to the, fuck it I’ll throw in an extra hundred thousand, 700,000 homeless people today.
“Wealth inequality” Of course wealth inequality is worse today than in the Great Depression, the fucking stock market crashed in 1929.
I can’t believe I had to spend precious fucking neurons on this, stop.
Edit: “I’ve read plenty of history!” Doesn’t know what fucking Hoovervilles were.
Have you seen the reports coming from food pantry administrators? We have bread lines now, and they don’t have enough food for everyone who needs it. Police are literally guarding grocery store dumpsters to keep people from getting food out of them.
But we can play it your way. You’ve said a lot about how we shouldn’t measure the difference. How about you propose which stats we should use? Let’s look into those.
I suspect you won’t suggest any at all, because it’s bad by any measure.
Where in the direct comparisons between the two time periods did you conjure up that I’ve “said a lot about how we shouldn’t measure the difference.”? Where exactly did I suggest, while measuring the differences between the two time periods, that we shouldn’t measure the difference?
There it is! The non-answer! Can’t ever be held to your word if you never actually say anything.
I’ve addressed every “point” you’ve made, you’ve done nothing but prove you’re a troglodyte.
Go outside and talk to real people. Any other message from you and I’m going to give you my default response to cave trolls.
Give me a statistic you believe credible. Name even a single measurement.
Definitely an astroturfer trying to convince people things aren’t as bad as they are.
No, sorry I have a habit of not repeating anything to the illiterate. It’s not my job to teach you how to read, that was your parents - what a shit job, btw.
Learn from this folks. This is how you out the bad actors. When they try to dismiss any measurement that doesn’t fit their narrative, ask them for a measurement they would accept. Or ask them for a source they would accept. Etc.
They’ll never commit to any, because their job is to muddy the waters. They don’t want to come to an understanding. They don’t want anyone to seek the truth. They will never commit to any source or statistic being reliable, because then you can use it to prove them wrong, and their opposition stance will be completely outed as manufactured.