CantTrip [she/her]
When there is no actual outlet for your political imagination or building towards your goals, the “just do a bunch of charity” fantasies creep in.
I know, I have them too. Hopefully someday we’ll have built enough of a movement that there’s too much to do in that arena to think about a quiet life where I just give what I can away.
Wages aren’t entirely insulated by industry, though. A simple exemplary scenerio: if everyone knew engineers could stop engineering tomorrow and get data entry jobs for 45k/year, engineering firms would pay their engineers more to keep engineering. But if those decent jobs aren’t available to them, the firm knows the workers will be much more likely to accept 45k a year to engineer.
Though some industries (“biomedical engineering”) are more insulated from wage depression and men-dominated careers do tend to be more insulated than women- dominated or equitable careers.
People are opining about the validity of the room set-up, but the type of sexist bullshit in the title is really harmful: *Women are too superficial, too spiteful, too attention- seeking to be supportive of a man taking pleasure in simple, pared down things. Women’s lives revolve around men, so any women would have a strong opinion about how my room is. Women are incapable of experiencing contentment from having only what you need. *
Like there is bitter divorce guy sexism, but this is worse. This is a young guy who could be exploring new kinds of emotional intimacy with romantic partners (or friends, sexual partners, etc) but has been taught to compulsively think of women as non-human entities, incapable of human joy and therfore wanting to prevent him from happiness as well.
○"(Of course his psyche is so obsessed with women he imagines how awful they would be during a purportedly solitary, happy moment lol)
Yeah, there seems to be a gap between September (which is covered in their big working paper) to the above predictions. But here’s an overview of that paper:
Our findings suggest that rates of monthly poverty increased from around 15 percent in February 2020 to 16.7 percent in September 2020, even after taking the CARES Act’s transfers into account. In April 2020, the peak of the crisis so far, the CARES Act effectively blunted a rise in poverty rates, contributing to a decline in poverty of 5.5 percentage points relative to what would have occurred in the absence of those benefits. However, the expiration of the CARES Act’s core benefits – the stimulus checks and $600 per week unemployment supplement – contributed to monthly poverty rates above pre-crisis levels by September 2020. Our projections suggest, however, that the CARES Act’s income supports were not successful in fully blunting the rise in deep poverty, defined as having resources below half the poverty threshold.
Black and Hispanic individuals faced high rates of monthly poverty relative to white individuals before the crisis, but these differences have been magnified after the crisis and after the expiration of the $600 per week unemployment supplements, in particular. By September, the monthly poverty rate for Black and Hispanic individuals was 25.2 percent and 25.8 percent, respectively, compared to 12 percent for white individuals.
This source could be helpful i think. They use a poverty model beyond the “income cut off.” This is their predictions for January under different scenarios (click Download Brief)
Edit: If the unemployment bolsters from the CARES Act expire, they predict the poverty rate will climb to 17.5%
As of December 2020, two unemployment provisions of the CARES Act remain in place until the end of the year: Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA), which expands eligibility for unemployment benefits, and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC), which extends the duration of unemployment insurance coverage. If the PUA and PEUC expire, we find that the number of individuals in poverty in January 2021 will increase by approximately 4.8 million.
I can’t find their actual numbers for November. But my phone sucks.
I totally agree - I really like watching it as mindless entertainment. Cops upsets me too much - there’s violence against vulnerable people that are also being exploited and humiliated. But Shark Tank is just some upper middle class, wannabe tyrants waggling in front of some Uncanny Valley- looking monsters.
The only thing that bothers me is the heaps of liberal feminism:
-
“Young women like you are exactly what we need more of in the sports equipment subsector,” shouts Barbara
-
“You boys WILL let me finish talking” (about how many tons of plastic I’ve sold on TV that’s now in landfills), admonishes Lori
-
The massive, cringe chorus of “You go girl!” in response to any woman, of any age, having a good sales statistic
It’s soo superficial, of course 99% of women could never get off the ground enough to get on the show. But those women just aren’t hustlers.
Oh, and every veteran gets a deal. That’s a rule of Shark Tank.
I love when cats chill up high and then peer down at us. It is the correct way of things.
Good foresight. Although it’s amazing just how much they can make about communism [see blobjim’s comment].
In the same interview, they said that it was almost certain that asymptomatic people wouldn’t transmit the virus.
And I’m not upset they didn’t know things early on, it’s just the bravado over-confidence in the “Western method” of avoiding asking the populace to do anything and just letting the experts figure it out. They bent the limited data to their notion that something as goofy and paranoid as everyone masking up must be pointless.
Yeah because it’s much easier to exploit people who care about the future of their communities than it is to exploit people who will gladly allow the meadow on the other side of town to be bulldozed if it means they get a Red Mango closer to their house
Our competition with one another for everything is the most obviously exploitable thing wtf