> Tell your 0.1 friends to focus on all those points you made

They know it already, most of my friends are classical liberals/conservatives.

> they will be the scapegoat for the mob

You are probably in the top 10% (as most people here on HN), so a lot of people here might become the same scapegoat.

> Things are getting bad enough to where "cutting ones nose to spite the face"

I'm not sure things are getting bad. Poorest people now are more rich than poorest people 30 years ago.

Like in the US now average electrician makes 70K a year. That's a lot of money. And anyone can be electrician.

They say income inequality raises, which is bad, but it might be not that bad, because common inequality measures do not includes the costs of free stuff given to poorest people from the government, like better free hospitals which they can use in case of emergency.

> starts to make sense redistributing the misery the rich have insulated themselves from.

As I said, taxing the wealthiest (especially with extremely high taxes like proposed by certain "liberal" activists) will not make poor people more rich. It will make poor people even more poor because of economic recession.

Different measures are needed.

I'm in the bottom 50% of the population money wise, but you're right, HN is definitely full of people in the top 10%, and so literally shortwire in their brains when I say something like "it's bad enough to where cutting ones nose to spite the face is starting to make sense"

Because from your position it seems absurd.

From mine it seems like the only move left to make.

> it's bad enough to where cutting ones nose to spite the face is starting to make sense

What is the evidence that now is worse than say 30 years ago for the bottom 50%?

It is perceived that it is worse now. But is it objectively worse?

Cost of education Cost of housing Cost of healthcare

went up.

Income

went down.

So I guess you're right, objectively things are much better, it's just my perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem.

> Income went down.

I'm having a hard time finding where in the chart that happened across the last 30 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages#/media/File:United_...

Do you understand the difference between “income” and “income share”?

The graph defines what it charts very well at the bottom. You can read it, and then if I am somehow still very wrong about the fact that income in the bottom 50% has gone down, or hasn't kept up if you'd prefer, then you can really stick it to me on this public forum about how I am wrong, and you are right, the only thing that matters on the internet.

That graph is showing share of income (thus the y-axis is labeled in percentage [of total income]).

That graph makes no statement whatsoever about whether real income in the bottom 50% has gone down, stayed flat, or risen over the 30-year period under discussion. For that, you’d look at a real income chart over the 30 year period, which would show that real income has increased over that span.

If incomes at the bottom rise by 20% vs 10% inflation and incomes at the top rise by by 100%, the income at the bottom went up in real terms, though the share of income at the bottom will have gone down.

sigh. I feel so much more financially secure these days now that my pay is $1 more than 5 years ago, shame my cost of housing doubled.

this is why I think it will be hilarious when the kids start revolting, and burning shit down folks like you will be looking at graphs and going "how can they be upset, look at this graph! these gig economy renters should be jumping up and down with joy according to my statistics...ungrateful bunch!"

You're mixing up individual and group. As a group, people who have jobs have had their incomes go up.

Yours as an individual may not have. No one is saying you're ungrateful as an individual when your experience is different to the group's average.

> Cost of education went up

If you need high education, you just take credit, and pay for it with your salary which is much higher than it was 30 years ago.

And if you think that you won't be able to pay for credit because it's not possible to find a decent job with liberal arts degree, then probably you don't need that education.

> Cost of housing went up

I suspect that's because construction workers are paid well now. So instead of studying classical literature in high school, maybe study bricklaying.

> Cost of healthcare went up

This is the issue, but "taxing the rich" won't solve it. It need to be properly regulated. The fact that insulin costs $100 has nothing to do with taxes for the rich people.

> Income went down

Seems like it is not true. There's a chart: inflation adjusted median household income.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

It goes up.

> perception of paying 80% of my income to rent that's the problem

Man, I don't know your situation.

Sometimes people pay for something they shouldn't.

Like buying a shiny new car while old car only need occasional repairs, or buying top new iphones while cheapest android is 1/10 of that.

When I was young I rented a flat which costed me about 70% of income, while I could rent a room for 30% of my income, or a flat for 30% of income and two hours commute. But it didn't matter because I was young, and I would not do that now. If that's your case, you may need to reconsider your worldview. If it's not, than I don't really know your situation to comment on that.

Why is that a problem?

Looks like the issue is not that "I want to get rid of poverty" but rather "I want to get rid of rich people".

...I'm providing a counter point to your claim that income hasn't gone down.

Why is that a problem?

well it's a problem because I am in that group.

it's clearly not a problem for you or your friends, hence why I believe that cutting the nose to spite the face is the only way to make you and your friends care. Otherwise you'll spend the rest of time saying everything is perfectly fine, when me and a bunch of people keep telling you THAT WE ARE NOT OKAY.

Do you get it now?

> I'm not sure things are getting bad. Poorest people now are more rich than poorest people 30 years ago.

> Like in the US now average electrician makes 70K a year. That's a lot of money. And anyone can be electrician.

I would not consider electricians as an example of poor people. And no, not anyone can be an electrician. It takes training and licensing, and many people can't jump those hurdles. (Not to mention the fact that if everyone became an electrician, very few of them would get any work.)

> I would not consider electricians as an example of poor people

Exactly.

> not anyone can be an electrician

Who can't?

> It takes training and licensing

So?

By the way, just googled, entry level electrician apprentice with zero experience (you are required to do that for some time to get your license) gets about $30K. That's not a lot, but that you can do with almost zero training, and it in several years it is significantly more.

> and many people can't jump those hurdles.

Maybe they can be paintworkers then. 38K of income is not as lavish as the life of electrician, but that's should be good enough who cannot get an electrician license.

> Not to mention the fact that if everyone became an electrician, very few of them would get any work

Truck driver, nurse, carpenter, crane operator, plumber, car mechanic, firefighter and so on. There's a lot of thing you can do with little or no investment.