DailyDirt: Getting Ahead Is Getting Harder

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

More and more stories about economic inequality appear to be written more frequently. There are all sorts of statistics about the 1% versus the other 99% and how much wealth the top 1% controls compared to the rest of the population. The numbers vary all over the world. Russia apparently has 110 individuals who control 35% of the country’s wealth, while worldwide, the top 1% controls 39% of the world’s wealth. If you’re not feeling rich now, check out a few of these links if you have the spare time.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Companies: costco, quiktrip, trader joe's

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DailyDirt: Getting Ahead Is Getting Harder”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
21 Comments
That One Guy (profile) says:

Balderdash!

It costs money to save money, so it’s not so easy to bootstrap your way out of poverty. Getting sick, having a car break down, getting a parking ticket… are all unlucky events that could ruin your life if you have no savings and a low-paying job.

In the good old US of A, the only poor people are lazy people! If you aren’t successful, then it’s because you’re not trying hard enough, or lack the work ethics to hold an honest job! All it takes to get ahead in life is hard work, ‘luck’ has nothing to do with it!

(I’ve asked before, but seem to have forgotten the suggestion, any suggestions on what ‘I mean it as a Poe, but others have meant it in complete sincerity’ be called?)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Balderdash!

Stop Punishing Success!!! – Sarah “Waterboarding is How We Baptize People” Palin

I’ve asked before, but seem to have forgotten the suggestion, any suggestions on what ‘I mean it as a Poe, but others have meant it in complete sincerity’ be called?

Unsure, but Misaimed Fandom would be a good description of the people who take quotes like the above seriously.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MisaimedFandom

McCrea (profile) says:

Keeping People Down is Easier.

Is there a name for this following phenomenon?

Poor people are hurt more and more often and wealthy people by reconnection fees.

It only logical: Poor people are more likely to have service terminated due to failure to pay. A fixed dollar fee will be a greater percent of a poor person’s wealth than that of a wealthier person.

In my real life I was flabbergasted when I was charged $100 to reconnect my water, which I paid 45 minutes after it was shut off. Apparently I lost the notice.

$100 is too much to turn a handle (in town).

Rekrul says:

Re: Keeping People Down is Easier.

A year or so ago, I forgot to pay my property tax bill on time. The bill was due on Jan. 1st and I had until Jan. 31st to pay it without incurring a penalty. I ended up paying it on Feb. 3rd, so I figured that I would be charged a late fee for the three days past the 31st.

Imagine my surprise when they charged me for TWO months worth of late fees!

The logic works like this: Even one day into a month is treated as an entire month, and since it was due on Jan. 1st, I got charged for both January and February!

So if I pay it on Jan. 31st, I don’t pay a single cent in late fees, but if I pay it on Feb. 1st, I get charged two months worth of late fees.

I know I made a mistake and I was perfectly prepared to pay a reasonable late fee, but rigging the system so people are charged an absolute minimum of two months for a single day is just legalized robbery.

The woman wasn’t too amused when I asked if I could work for three days out of the month and then get paid for the entire month.

Rekrul says:

Re: Re: Re: Keeping People Down is Easier.

It was due Jan. 1st. If Feb. 1st, or 3rd for that matter, is one day, I want to come to your New Years Eve Party!

You’re missing the point. Why is it that I can pay it on Jan. 31st and not get charged a late fee, but if I pay it on Feb. 1st, I get charged two months of late fees?

In what world does it make sense that the absolute minimum late fee a person can be charged is two months? There is no condition under which a person will only incur a single month of late fees.

Not to mention the ripoff of charging for an entire month based on only three days.

Imagine if you needed to stay at a hotel for a couple days and they charged you for the entire month.

Michael (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Keeping People Down is Easier.

Here’s the problem, you seem to have taken a 31 day grace period that they were nice enough to give you and turn it into them being a**holes.

It was due January 1st – they were going to be nice enough and NOT CHARGE YOU the late fee if you got around to paying it less than 1 month late. Since you didn’t do that, they charged you the appropriate fees.

I would suggest that you ask them to stop giving you a grace period. Then you will be less confused.

Rekrul says:

I read an article a while back which said that the corporate strategy of paying workers the absolute minimum is starting to backfire on them. Since they pay their workers so little, those same people have no extra money to spend in their stores. They’re saving money in worker pay, but losing profits.

What we have now, isn’t really a functioning economy, it’s more like a wealth vacuum cleaner that sucks the money out of the lowest levels and distributes it all to the rich. Eventually the money runs out and there’s nothing more to vacuum up.

Christopher (profile) says:

Re: Re:

In a rush to elevate capitalism as an awesome tool against communism, we seemed to have lost the counterbalance to the unchecked greed that is a natural exponent of capitalism.

That counterbalance is, ironically, labor unions and other progressive tools like anti-trust regulations and banking laws that, ha ha, the 1% beneficiaries managed to gut.

-C

John85851 (profile) says:

Banks

Okay, I’ll start the rants about banks and how they seem to prey on people don’t have much money to begin with.

It goes something like this:
You have $200 in your bank account, you deposit a check for $400, and write two checks: one for $300 and one for $200.
By your accounting, you should have $600 total before writing the checks, then $500 in checks, for an ending balance of $100.

However, your bank cashes the checks first, before honoring your deposits:
Your first check for $300 is cashed and your balance is now -$100.
Then they charge you a $35 under-balance fee.
Then they cash your second check for $200 and your balance is now -$335. (They cash your check for your “convenience” rather than bouncing the check.)
Then they charge you another $35 under-balance fee.
Then they charge you a $35 fee for not having more than $100 in your account.
Your balance is now -$405 and they honor your deposit of $400.
And your balance is now -$5.

All because you didn’t make enough money to keep your checking account above a “safe” threshold.
And then people wonder why poor people use check-cashing services and payday loans.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...