It’s important for making sure you’re asking the right question. If smarter people earn more, and if today, smart people are even more likely to go to college (college attainment for age 25+ is 2-3x what it was in the 70s), then of course we are going to expect people without college to have been able to afford more in the 70s.
Not surprisingly, numerous (mainly TV) journalists are reporting increasing threats of violence against them:
Someone’s likely to get killed soon, and if when they do, the Orange Fuckstick is going to have to share responsibility.
Right, but the question is not what heights we can get our bestest and brightest to, though that is a factor, but what level of dignified living we give to the lowest and dimmest.
The question is, can a single earner with a high school equivalent diploma afford to live in the same areas and houses as someone with a high school diploma was able to live in 40 years ago. Any other question is not the “right question”, it is just a different question, one that maybe you prefer to answer, but not one that is relevant to the discussion.
If we start getting into what a college educated person can afford today, then we have to start with the fact that they often cannot afford their student loans, much less a nice house.
I agree that it is almost the right question when comparing the times. However, the high school grad’s average income might be lowered by the fact that the greater rates of college participation might “skim off” those who may have been high earners anyway.
So I think that if there is a way to identify this section, which may be hard, you’d need to average their total lifetime earnings (minus their college expenses) in when you compare today’s high school grads to the previous “high school only” cohort. It very well may be that marginal college students don’t earn more than high school grads once you factor in the money spent in college and the time spent there and not earning money.
Or if you are interested in how many opportunities are afforded those who never would have had the talent or resources to go to college, if you can identify that cohort from ages ago, you can compare their outcomes versus today’s high school grads.
Freestanding single family homes in Astoria cost around 1.5 million, some are a little less and others are a lot more.
It’s a zoning thing, there’s one across the street from me that’s listed at 3 million - because the block is zoned for apartment buildings. It will probably be purchased by a developer.
You’ve pulled the best and brightest from the group. The average person today who does not have a college degree is not equivalent to the average person of yesterday who did not have a college degree. A difference in income is expected when you change the population like that, and is not indicative of any great difference in opportunity. That doesn’t mean there isn’t one, it just can’t be used to show it unless the inequivalent populations are accounted for.
And the same areas and houses do not have the same desirability today and yesterday. Queens is so much more expensive because people want to move there faster than housing supply has increased.
As far as actual policy is concerned, regardless of whether we can measure changes, we should always be concerned about what level of dignified living we give to the lowest and dimmest. And we would probably both agree we can give better.
Just not, IMO, in Queens.
College education has never been more accessible to those from low-income families as it is today. And for those eschewing community college plus state school for more expensive options, well, prices will come down only when people stop choosing to finance those more expensive options.
WE know he will, but HE won’t. He’ll blame the news media itself, specifically CNN. Plus the usual suspects, Hillary, Obama, Democrats in general, etc.
“I mean, can you really BLAME my fans when the fake media is so unfair to me 24/7? Can we BLAME them for finally losing it in the face of so much hate and lies against me?”
Had not heard they were not supposed to communicate, but there is no proof they did. Perhaps she was just hitching a ride, and they never actually met on the plane. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Indeed. I think the last successful overthrow of a government by the CIA was Guatemala in 1954, a full 64 years ago.
As someone without a college degree, and having about half of my peers with college degrees, and about half without, I would say that there is much more of a demographic difference between those with college degrees than there is in intelligence or motivation.
The difference in income comes from the jobs you are qualified for based on that arbitrary (but expensive) piece of paper.
Right, gentrification is responsible for quite a bit of the homelessness problem.
The problem is, is if the only affordable housing is not where the jobs are, how does this work?
Even going to community and state college is still going to leave you with tens of thousands in debt at the very least.
Ohio state wants 100k for an education.That’s a house in my neighborhood.
It is only accessible because they give these loans to people who have no ability to ever pay them back, which gets them a college education, but leaves them under enough debt that they can’t even move out of their parent’s basements, much less get a house in queens.
Then there are those who are duped into going into more expensive schools, they are usually first generation college goers, so don’t know that they are getting ripped off, but even state colleges are so expensive these days that it’s hard to compare. They go there because the rich people that go there are the ones who can afford to buy that house in queens after they get out of college, and they think that going to the same school that the rich people go to will help them get rich.
“We will have to look into ensuring that the lying media doesn’t continue to inflame my fans. Only Fox Will be allowed to broadcast, until congress figures out what is going on.”
He’s like Ricochet Rabbit in a septic tank. Lot of energy spent going from one position to another just to go nowhere, but covered in dung.
Yes, all too likely.
He has encouraged violence quite explicitly before, without paying any price:
^That’s a very well-sourced list of the many incidents of violence connected with Trump since he declared his candidacy, by the way.
I would doubt that Trump feels any need to tone down his anti-press rhetoric. He knows what he’s gotten away with so far, and he’s quite confident that he won’t be held responsible for any violence that may occur.
It’s possible that any such incident would add to the list of Trump Troubles of those Republicans running for election or re-election, as well as to the lists maintained by the major GOP donors. The Kochs aren’t all that thrilled with Trump now; they’d be less so if it suddenly became clear that Trump was happy to encourage assassination. Rich people really, really don’t like cultural acceptance of assassination. They know that armed guards aren’t 100% effective in such situations.
So in the horrible event, this might not work out as well for Trump as he may imagine. On the other hand, he’s clearly been rooting for mass Muslim or Latino terrorism, and those people have been quite uncooperative. Anti-media types, however fond of Trump, may not be any more willing than the ‘terrorists’ have been to provide such drama.
HEY NOW! Ricochet Rabbit is one of the GOOD guys. :mad:
Chile 1973?
I hear that was suicide. Shot himself twenty-four times in the back, pausing only once to reload.:dubious:
I occasionally read Twitter feeds from the few Republicans left with any grey matter, Mike Murphy and Rick Wilson being among them. Yeah, what the hell, maybe Bill Kristol counts, too, but he was an apologist for the politics of Dick Cheney so I still nurse a grudge.
Anyhow, Mike Murphy tweeted what I thought was a pithy, good bit of advice: the media should just fucking boycott the Trump administration, starting with Sarah Sanders. He wasn’t being daft. Yes, he concedes it’s impossible not to cover the president - he’s the fucking president after all. But don’t do live pressers. Don’t cover Donald Trump on Donald Trump’s terms.
That goes for civil liberties and democracy too. African Americans understand what it means to fight for freedom. People in other countries understand what it means to fight for freedom. Authoritarians don’t just give it to you. Sometimes, you have to be willing to demonstrate how far you will go to defend freedom. And that can cost you your freedom, and more.
The hard part - the really hard part - about covering Donald Trump is finding intelligent ways to resist or circumvent his gladiator politics. How do you not cover his outrageous tweets. He tweets something outrageous and it becomes news because…how can it not be news?
The only way to beat Trump at Trump’s game…is not to play Trump’s game. Don’t be a Michael Avenatti. Don’t be a showboat. Be a Bob Mueller. Be a Carl Bernstein. Be a Bob Woodward. Be a Peter Arnett or Christiane Amanpour. Journalists in this country are starting to get a taste of what global journalists experience, and what it really means to protect freedom of the press and to shine the spotlight on dark corners. Freedom of the press is no different than any other freedom. People have to be willing to put everything on the line to defend it.
I’ve contemplated that for some time. I’m not crazy about being lied to, myself, hence activation of the fast-forward button as soon as that sick orangeness blights my screen, so I applaud Costa’s move, the other day.
One of the best Bill Maher shows was on last Friday, with excellent guests like NY Times op-ed columnist Charles Blow and intelligence and foreign policy analyst Malcolm Nance, but the highlight was former Republican political campaigns strategist Steve Schmidt, who delivered at least three doozie-like whoppers of diatribes on the current state of political affairs in the US. I found two of them (heh - conveniently spliced together).
Usually I’m not ear-friendly to locomoting, monotonal, rote-as-fuck-sounding rants, (and sure - he covers all familiar ground) but the way Schmidt so concisely, with no words wasted, and so incisively puts all the cards down on the table the way he does, here, truly hammers home as damning and comprehensive a summary of this zoo as can possibly be done in 2:40.
Normally I cannot fucking stand that chucklehead expression “BOOM!”, but I gotta say I had to say it after each three of his smackdowns.
Heh - if only I can locate the third one!
If they feel they have to cover him, then do it, but for God’s sake, don’t cover him like you would a normal person, a normal president, a normal politician even. Don’t discuss his “policies” in a serious way, or act like any word of what he says 1) isn’t a lie or 2) makes sense. Don’t give him the freakin’ benefit of the doubt. Hold his lying feet to the fire. I realize what he does is news, but cover him in purely descriptive terms without euphemisms.
When thump met with the New York Times guy recently (Salzberger? Salzburger?) and came out of the meeting spouting all kinds of lies, Salzberger said that thump “mischaracterized” what they discussed. Geez, bubba, don’t use a $50 word when a 25-cent one will do! “He LIED about what we discussed.” It’s that kind of softening spin that makes it sound like thump is just mistaken or uninformed or “got it wrong.” The man LIED and all he does is LIE. If Salzberger doesn’t want to use the L-word (although more and more media outlets ARE using it), then he can present the facts: “I said this. The president said that. Draw your own conclusions.”
To fall back on my metaphor, say it right out loud in front of God and everyone that he’s wearing his underpants on his head in cold, accurate, straightforward, journalistic language. What most of them are still doing is ANALYZING the underwear like it makes sense for him to be wearing it on his head. “Are those Hanes or Fruit of the Looms? I’ve heard that new microfiber has advantages over good ol’ cotton. Oh, I think not! Cotton will always be best! Blahblahblah.” THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS WEARING HIS UNDERPANTS ON HIS HEAD. REPORT THAT, FFS! That’s the news!