j_b

[video:youtube]v=PJBVXhpzdaI

[video:youtube]v=myLHPvd8wyM https://occupywallst.org/

here comes douchebag who'll soon be "whining" about having been insulted or so other bullshit. Pathetic moron.

Non-discretionary spending for someone who is part of the middle class and not money spent on consumer items like those you listed in an attempt to demonize those in debt, and who happen to be mostly families with children hit by illness and unemployment. I guess it means that you finally acknowledge that the middle class is in serous trouble if you imply that housing, health, and transport is discretionary spending. Like the demagogues who blame the welfare queens, JayB always tries to paint those who are poor as having made those choices to pass off the last 30 years of growing household debt due to stagnant wages, and higher cost of fundamentals necessities (except food) as the result of character flaws. btw, you still haven't addressed EWarren's study, that is a blatant denial of your propaganda.

spare me what you think you know, just stick to the facts like studies showing that non-discretionary items have outpaced wage growth. and I mean studies, not propaganda by the latest Koch think tank, mkay?

Over most of the US, the cost of housing is correlated with the availability of public transit, thus if one can't afford more expensive housing, one usually needs a car to get to work. Moreover, most of us have other essential things to do instead of commuting for several hours per day (like taking care of kids).

let's see if you can cite more than one significant issue on which JayB isn't aligned with corporatists. I was talking about published academic studies, not the gossip report from your neck of the woods.

don't forget banning any financial activity with tax heavens

[video:youtube]v=htX2usfqMEs

Repeating drivel ad-infinitum doesn't make it true even if blaming stupidity and lust for consumer items proves to be effective demagoguery. Despite my numerous attempts at getting you to do so, you still have to answer adequately EWarren's study of middle class spending showing that large increases in prices of non-discretionary items like health care, housing in good school districts, local regressive taxes, child care, 2nd car for 2nd wage earner , etc account for spending outpacing income (and we won't even discuss the 30+ year long race to the bottom wage that you keep cheering).

[video:youtube]v=RRl-AzugWSs

On-going since Saturday: [video:youtube]CzVAw9DvMVA

yeah prole, when are you going to stop imposing your deregulating, privatizing, outsourcing, racing to the bottom, neocon warmongering on the rest of us?

Despite your claim, my answer is totally consistent with having watched that clip, which leads me to suggest that I won't bother counting down the decades until any logic permeates your thinking.

Wouldn't fixing it require that it'd be broken?

So, since you don't really know about the Spaghetti Monster, you should be agnostic about him too? Interesting. Or is it that there is no evidence for the existence of supernatural entities (like the Spaghetti Monster) so the question isn't even relevant?

Yes, I do get it now. DOH!

It'd be soft at Index or similar crag but it isn't quite a road side crag. Did you have a point or was your post misplaced?

why?

JayB is playing games about "state debt" in Greece as in he ignores exploding private debt in neoliberal countries where the upper 1% of the income bracket has taken 60% of productivity gains over the last 30 years.

Probably not true and definitely not true over the 200 years pictured in the animation you posted: in 1800, Cape Verde had the lowest GDP/capita ($340) and the UK had the highest at $2717 (less than order of magnitude difference between lowest and highest). Today, Congo has the lowest at $359 while Qatar has the most at $74,138/capita (more than 2 orders of magnitude difference). The spread of mean $GDP/capita is ~20 times greater today than 200 years ago. data Global. Not outlier vs outlier. Huh? what the hell are you talking about? As the plot I linked shows, the only outlier may be Qatar. If you substitute Norway (at $47k/capita), you still have a spread of GDP/capita that is over an order of magnitude greater than 200 years ago.

Technology isn't the only thing that changed. On average, objectives are today also a lot more ambitious, which may not have been possible to the same extent without the added security offered by com technology. As pointed out it is possible to leave the tech gadgets at home for added adventure. A reenactment of the FA of the Bonatti Pillar with Bonatti himself (in french): [video:youtube]hvl2BYsg_EU

Global wealth equality is probably higher now than at any time since the stone age. Probably not true and definitely not true over the 200 years pictured in the animation you posted: in 1800, Cape Verde had the lowest GDP/capita ($340) and the UK had the highest at $2717 (less than order of magnitude difference between lowest and highest). Today, Congo has the lowest at $359 while Qatar has the most at $74,138/capita (more than 2 orders of magnitude difference). The spread of mean $GDP/capita is ~20 times greater today than 200 years ago. data

"they aren't really poor once you factor in they get food stamps"