# Problem is, it ain't the 1%, it's the 5+% **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 21, 2011, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686 "2011-11-21T21:27:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/61 "2011-11-22T14:28:54Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > They are expressing frustration in a system that they believe doesn’t work. I would say “doesn’t work for them” but I have to wonder how many of these people, with their iPads and Northface tents are NYU and Columbia students, living off their parent’s dime who have chosen to “opt out” of the system. > > The problem isn’t that 5% or 1% or 9.9% make more money than some drum-beating hippies think they need. The problem is that we have created an unsustainable system that uses debt to create a form of indentured servitude to the banks. In order to live the “American Dream” of a house, car, college education and a bunch of stuff to play with, the typical American must incur hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt in the form or mortgages, credit cards, school, auto and home loans that will take most of their adult life to pay off, if ever. > > In order to pay off all this debt, most people are required to work the only jobs that pay well enough to do so for their limited ability and education level - typically low level dead end jobs performing mundane tasks for large corporations. There is typically little hope for advancement because more senior roles tend to be part of a separate career track targeted towards those individuals with the acedemic ability or financial wherewithall to attend the top colleges. In many cases they have little decision making or ability to prove themselves either because projects of any significants would be outsourced to consultants from Accenture, Deloitte, Booze Allen, McKinsey and so on. > > Because they can be terminated from these jobs at any time for any reason, post people live in constant fear that if they don’t kowtow to their overlords sufficiently well, they will lose their sole source of income and health care, be viewed as some sort of unhirable pariah and end up destitute. > > The government is complicit in this in that their constituents demand jobs and big business provide lots of jobs so they kowtow to the demands of big business. > > Ultimately the interest and principal on all that debt is paid to the banks. Banks that produce nothing or invent nothing and essentially do nothing but dole out capital and collect a piece of any wealth created off it. So you are saying people have to work all their lives to afford a car, a house, and a pile of goodies, education, etc. And that to do so, they can get financing from banks. So far, I am not really seeing the problem … I suspect the real complaint is not the fact of this lifestyle, but the _lack_ of this lifestyle: that is, even if people _want_ to work all their lives to pay for it, there is a _lack_ of soul-crushing corporate drone jobs for people who want 'em - particularly entry-level jobs. I also think that expectations of the lifestyle one should aspire to live have increased while the average income has stagnated and the amount of time and difficulty necessary to get one of those ‘serf-like’ jobs has increased. ---
**Author:** ![Implicit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Implicit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Implicit)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/62 "2011-11-22T14:51:00Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Easy. A simplified example: > > 100 “poor” married people and 100 “rich” married people. 50+50 couples. Each have 2 kids. > > Among the “poor” the “making it” rate of children is 50%. Among the “rich” it’s 80%. For the sake of argument. “Making it” for this calculation means being in the “rich” category. > > After one generation: 130 “rich” and 70 “poor” people. 50 (38%) of the “rich” are descended from the “poor”. > > After two generations: 139 “rich” and 61 “poor” people. 75 (53%) of the “rich” are descended from the “poor”. > > After three generations: 142 “rich” and 58 “poor” people. 82 (57%) or the “rich” are descended from the “poor”. > > You can continue the calculation yourself. Do you see increased stratification in the trend? The [numbers](http://www.economicmobility.org/reports_and_research/mobility_in_america?id=0001) aren’t so rosy in the real world. In the US, 6% of children born to parents in the lowest quintile end up rich, nowhere near the 50% of your “example”. In the real life model, the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor, but hey, your fantasy world sounds awesome. Maybe if we did some of the things Evil Economist mentioned, it could even come true. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/63 "2011-11-22T15:00:45Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Fine, your model starts out with 50% of the population in the top 50% and ends with 71% of the population in the top 50%. In Lake Wobegon there is no stratification of income, and everyone is above average. Again, I didn’t mention “top 50%”. > [@](#): > > It’ll be less embarrassing for you if you just admit your [error](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=is+100+%3C%3D+100). (You can just blame society for your math failure) Yes. Cuz computer programs are the arbiters of math. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/64 "2011-11-22T15:04:07Z")
What a stunning piece of evidence! Not only does the media have a liberal bias, so does the maths! ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/65 "2011-11-22T15:32:41Z")
> [@Implicit](#): > > The [numbers](http://www.economicmobility.org/reports_and_research/mobility_in_america?id=0001) aren’t so rosy in the real world. In the US, 6% of children born to parents in the lowest quintile end up rich, nowhere near the 50% of your “example”. In the real life model, the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor, but hey, your fantasy world sounds awesome. Maybe if we did some of the things Evil Economist mentioned, it could even come true. “Evil Economist” claimed that in principle if a lower percentage of poor than rich succeed in life, it would lead to increased stratification of society. I demonstrated that it wouldn’t. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/66 "2011-11-22T15:33:54Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > A big part of how the Republicans have been able to win elections is by convincing people who are well-off BUT NOT WEALTHY to support policies that exclusively benefit the wealthy. They’ve created an ideological frame where high-income WORKERS are deluded into believing they share common cause with the investor class. The brilliance of the 99% strategy is that its focused on reminding successful workers that they’re still WORKERS, and as such are as much at the mercy of economic forces beyond their control as a guy driving a tow truck or a woman working the register at a supermarket. That’s all true. But it is also true that the high-income worker has more in common with the investor class, socioculturally, than with middle-income-and-lower workers. He might even hope to marry his son or daughter into an investor-class family, happens all the time. In fact, the two families might be distant cousins already. (American history being what it is, the investor is **also** a very distant cousin to the African-American who drives him around, but nobody likes to think much about that.) ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/67 "2011-11-22T15:51:50Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Yes. Cuz computer programs are the arbiters of math. Stupid sexy computers! > [@Terr](#): > > “Evil Economist” claimed that in principle if a lower percentage of poor than rich succeed in life, it would lead to increased stratification of society. I demonstrated that it wouldn’t. Actually, as I pointed out in a later post, you are wrong; your own model resulted in a stratified society. You hid your error by putting more than 50% of society into the top 50%, but once the model reaches equilibrium it becomes stratified. > [@Bricker](#): > > No. > > We are also grossly underrepresented in the ranks of the NBA, as drivers in the NASCAR circuit, and as judges on “American Idol.” > > The bastards just keep us down, you see. Underrepresented relative to your population share? So if Hispanic-males-whose-fathers-were-immigrants-from-Central-America-whose-childhood-homes-had-dirt-floors make up 0.0001% of the population, they make up less than 0.0001% of the upper levels of society? Is it because, as \*\*Terr \*\*suggests, they’re (you’re) malnourished and their (your) culture is geared to failure? ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/68 "2011-11-22T15:56:39Z")
Step 1: Figure out who’s successful. Step 2: Figure out what they have in common. Step 3: Rail against those things. Seems to me like the suggestion is that we should just hate people who are successful, no matter the reason. I’m also getting sick of the notion from the occupiers that we should resent the very corporations that employ people and make shit for us to buy. I’m not sure why everyone thinks their boss is the enemy, by virtue of his being the boss. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > In other words, you think America should be a plutocracy; you think that a direct correlation between wealth and political power not only should be legal, but should be enshrined in the Constitution. And as a direct consequence of that you are saying that the people who _aren’t_ rich deserve no voice in the government. They should just shut up and be good little serfs. Why do people persist with this myth that it’s possible to buy an election? There’s a very weak correlation between having the most money and victory, not to mention that it stands to reason that the more popular candidate would get both more votes and more donations. There’s a much stronger correlation between electoral victory and incumbency/state of the economy than between campaign finance and victory. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/69 "2011-11-22T16:05:44Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Actually, as I pointed out in a later post, you are wrong; your own model resulted in a stratified society. You hid your error by putting more than 50% of society into the top 50%, but once the model reaches equilibrium it becomes stratified. “Increased stratification”? I guess you really meant “weakly increased”, right? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/70 "2011-11-22T16:06:30Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > I’m also getting sick of the notion from the occupiers that we should resent the very corporations that employ people and make shit for us to buy. I’m not sure why everyone thinks their boss is the enemy, by virtue of his being the boss. Because your boss (or _his_ boss) probably looks at _you_ as the enemy. And because companies are working people harder for less. And because we can’t buy what they make when we aren’t paid enough or are unemployed. And because they did such a good job of driving the world economy into the ground. And because whenever possible they treat their employees terribly. And so on. > [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Why do people persist with this myth that it’s possible to buy an election? I wasn’t talking about buying elections, I was talking about buying politicians. Politicians vote according to the desires of whomever hands them the most money, not according to the desires of who votes for them. If you aren’t rich you can vote for whomever you like; they’ll ignore your needs and desires in favor of the company that just gave them more money than you make in a year. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/71 "2011-11-22T16:09:06Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > I’m also getting sick of the notion from the occupiers that we should resent the very corporations that employ people and make shit for us to buy. I’m not sure why everyone thinks their boss is the enemy, by virtue of his being the boss. It is funny, isn’t it? They sleep in tents made by evil corporations, eat food raised, processed and delivered to them by evil corporations, tweet and broadcast videos on computers and cell phones made by evil corporations and on networks run by evil corporations. But, as someone suggested in the OWS thread, they “nobly refuse” to work for those evil corporations. And of course, they rail and rant against the evil corporations. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/72 "2011-11-22T16:15:53Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It is funny, isn’t it? They sleep in tents made by evil corporations, eat food raised, processed and delivered to them by evil corporations, tweet and broadcast videos on computers and cell phones made by evil corporations and on networks run by evil corporations. What, are they supposed to carve cell phones out of wood? And since when did making things disqualify you as “evil”? Are corporations automatically immune to condemnation because they manufacture things now? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/73 "2011-11-22T16:20:28Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > Seems to me like the suggestion is that we should just hate people who are successful, no matter the reason. Just the opposite; there’s a culture of respect for the rich in America, sometimes blind respect; Americans are willing to forgive behavior by the rich which would never be tolerated in the poor. You’re seeing a handful of people who aren’t willing to kow-tow to the rich like they did in prior years, and interpreting that as hate. > [@](#): > > I’m also getting sick of the notion from the occupiers that we should resent the very corporations that employ people and make shit for us to buy. Corporations are large, powerful, rich, and amoral. That’s a dangerous combination. And when you have a political administration that seems to be stripping away regulations that prevent corporations from exploiting the populace, in return for unregulated cash payments from those same corporations, then you have what we have here. > [@](#): > > Why do people persist with this myth that it’s possible to buy an election? There’s a very weak correlation between having the most money and victory, not to mention that it stands to reason that the more popular candidate would get both more votes and more donations. Because it doesn’t matter which candidate gets elected; they’re all beholden to their financiers, which isn’t any of the 99%. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/74 "2011-11-22T16:20:36Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It is funny, isn’t it? They sleep in tents made by evil corporations, eat food raised, processed and delivered to them by evil corporations, tweet and broadcast videos on computers and cell phones made by evil corporations and on networks run by evil corporations. But, as someone suggested in the OWS thread, they “nobly refuse” to work for those evil corporations. And of course, they rail and rant against the evil corporations. Yeah, they sound just like ungrateful dissidents in some Communist country, don’t they?! I mean, the State **feeds** them! ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/75 "2011-11-22T16:23:37Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > “Increased stratification”? I guess you really meant “weakly increased”, right? Between the 10th and 11th generations in your model, what percentage of the rich are the formerly rich? ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/76 "2011-11-22T16:26:59Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > It is funny, isn’t it? They sleep in tents made by evil corporations, eat food raised, processed and delivered to them by evil corporations, tweet and broadcast videos on computers and cell phones made by evil corporations and on networks run by evil corporations. But, as someone suggested in the OWS thread, they “nobly refuse” to work for those evil corporations. And of course, they rail and rant against the evil corporations. It’s a pity that only evil corporations can make things. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/77 "2011-11-22T16:27:26Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > What, are they supposed to carve cell phones out of wood? And since when did making things disqualify you as “evil”? Are corporations automatically immune to condemnation because they manufacture things now? So - explain then, why is it “noble” to refuse to work for an evil corporation, but it isn’t craven to pay to the corporation when you buy its stuff? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/78 "2011-11-22T16:29:52Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Between the 10th and 11th generations in your model, what percentage of the rich are the formerly rich? Again, you claimed that the model reaches equilibrium. Equilibrium \<\> “increased stratification”. The fact that any society will have some stratification is a trivial result. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/79 "2011-11-22T16:33:40Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > I’m not sure why everyone thinks their boss is the enemy, by virtue of his being the boss. It’s an American thing. Far older than usages of words like “socialism” or “communism,” or even “republic” or “democracy,” on these shores. “Boss,” in fact, was a Dutch word borrowed because Yankees were too proud to work for a “master” (even though it means exactly the same thing). ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2011, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686/80 "2011-11-22T16:35:27Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > So - explain then, why is it “noble” to refuse to work for an evil corporation, but it isn’t craven to pay to the corporation when you buy its stuff? I didn’t say anything about “noble”, that was you. And they buy those things from the corporations because they have no choice. Again; are they supposed to carve cell phones out of wood? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/problem-is-it-aint-the-1-its-the-5/603686.md?page=5)