374
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
374 points (100.0% liked)
News
23274 readers
2976 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I hate to sound callous, but I don't feel much sympathy for a rich person who went out to the desert to pretend to be a hippie and didn't check the weather forecast.
I used to run in a party crowd that had a LOT of burning man folks in it. There were a couple of them that had middle class incomes, maybe even leaning upper middle class. Those are usually the ones that had an art car or whatever that they sank some money into, instead of the crap that most upper middle class Americans blow their money on.
But the rest of them? They worked at restaurants, did massage therapy, teachers, etc. normal people with median or lower incomes that would forego other expenses to set aside a little a money for their annual get high in the desert trip.
Yes, there’s a bunch of elitists at the core of the event, but it’s not the majority.
This year's BRC census.
TLDR: The trend of wealthy people is going up while the less wealthy trends down.
The other takeaway is that more than half the attendees make more than 100k a year so not exactly a minority.
100k salary is a decent amount of money but it’s far as fuck from being “rich”.
If 100k isn’t rich to you then you have lived an exceptionally blessed life. Also “more than” doesn’t mean all of them are making exactly 100k
How rich you are on 100k really depends on where you live.
Tell that to people making less than 30k and describe the look they give you
100k in a place like NYC is literally living like someone making 30-45k in some rural town.
What about the people in NYC making 30k then?
For the most part: they're doing better than you'd expect (ie homeless) given that they'll generally be living somewhere rent controlled.
They're still in abject poverty by comparison. It's like somebody living in a trailer park on 5k a year.
But no matter how you shake it out and keep whataboutisming people the fact is that 100k a year is the new 50k in a lot of US cities where average rents are well above 2.5k/mo.
The national median rent is 24k/yr.
In 2016 that was 11k/yr
100k doesn't mean what you think it does anymore. In nyc 100k means you can maybe live alone in a 1br (2.7k/mo) without a car, but not downtown (4.1k/mo). You'll be commuting 45ish minutes and be able to have a rainy day fund. You'll pocket about 60k/yr after taxes, after rent you'll have 24k/yr to spend on food in the most expensive city in the USA. You'll be able to shop at discount stores to make that money go a bit further. You'll go to dive bars to try and get $5 drinks instead of $15. You'll make your own coffee. You'll do your laundry at a laundromat because it's too pricey to rent a place with a washing machine.
It's a nice life. If that sounds like rich to you then the billionaires have brainwashed you. It's a middle class lifestyle.
The brainwashing is real. So many people are so poor that they don't believe you can be poor unless you're absolutely destitute and on the edge of homelessness each month. This 100k/year lifestyle should be afforded by minimum wage, tbh.
You guys keep bringing up cost of living like it’s some cool trick that lets you claim poverty while making nearly three times the local average salary.
If Bill Gates spent most of his fortune to live like a college freshman in a space station would you be calling him middle class? It would cost him several times an average Americans yearly salary just to eat puréed meats and shit in a closet, so clearly he couldn’t be considered rich anymore.
Who the fuck claimed poverty. I claimed it's a middle class lifestyle.
It's not rich.
More whattaboutism and strawmen
Yeah man any attempt to illustrate a point with hyperbole and metaphor is clearly just whattaboutism. Do you think middle class people aren’t seen as rich to people who are below middle class?
"Poverty" means not having enough money to meet basic needs. "Cost of living" is defined as the minimum money needed to meet basic needs. It's not just relevant to the discussion, it is the discussion.
Someone living in Idaho can own a house on $70k. Someone living in NYC is homeless on $70k.
If the local average is four times lower than the cost of living in a local area, the people making three times the local average are still feeling the effects of poverty. It's not a competition to see who is "more poor," it's a fight for a living wage regardless of where you live.
It's not a complicated concept.
No one in the comments above yours has said that $100k/yr is poverty. They are making the claim that someone making $100k/yr is not rich. There is a difference between poor and rich.
To me being rich is being able to afford practically anything. An annual salary of $100k does not buy that. In the US, a $100k salary affords you a middle class or upper middle class lifestyle. In San Francisco, a $100k salary qualifies you for subsidized housing. Location and COL matters. If it didn't, people wouldn't deliberately move to lower cost of living places where they can afford more and better things.
Then just move to the suburbs where your 100k is worth more… and where the 100k jobs don’t exist… or the commute to the 100k jobs is over an hour each way… dummy
As one of those people you are presuming to speak for, no, I wouldn't consider 100k rich. I find that to be an absurd statement.
Bro, median household income in the US is almost $80k. It's not 1998 anymore.
It's 70k and median means that half of households make less than that, not that its the most common salary.
True for one person but this is household income. A married couple both making $50k would fall into this. While that is definitely not poor by any means. I think it is fair to say that it would be a bit of a stretch to call a person in the us today making $50k "rich."
It might be a perspective thing, and how you both define "rich".
If someone gets by every week on ramen, a salary of $100k/year would seem like a crap ton of money. Doubly so if most of their community is also living off of ramen. One year on that salary alone would be life changing for this person.
If someone lives in a pricy area and maybe has a few kids, a salary of $100k wouldn't seem like nearly as much. Doubly so if most of their community makes that much. One year on that salary is just another year for this person.
For some people, "rich" is not having to worry about starving and knowing that they have a roof over their head. It's about finally being able to buy non-necessities, and it's about being able to have things just for enjoyment. Some people are very month to month in terms of costs and bills.
To others, "rich" is being able to buy expensive boats and cars. It's about having excess wealth and never having to worry about any monetary problems. These people might think of millionaires and billionaires when they hear the word "rich".
Of course some people would consider $100k/year rich. I'm certain that MANY people would take that salary boost in a heartbeat.
I'm not saying that $100k would set you up anywhere near as much as $1m would, but it's a hell of a lot more money than many people can make.
In 10 years, that salary is $1,000,000. For someone making $50k/year, it would take 20 years for them to make that much. For someone making $25k/year, it would take 40 years for them to earn that much. I would feel disingenuous telling someone who makes $25k/year that making $100k wouldn't be becoming "rich" to them.
Maybe that's their monetary sweet spot, and they rely on other things to finish fulfilling their personal definition of "rich". Family, friends, hobbies, etc.
People tend to acquire wealth over time? There is a solid correlation between wealth and age, so this shouldn't be surprising in the least. And especially those who had time/energy to spare to attend festivals earlier are especially predisposed for acquiring now wealth down the line. Assuming that they return over the years, all of this is pretty much to be expected.
---In 2013, the median age of burners was 32, and in 2022, it was 37.
My take away was that it seems like it is the same people going every year: they are getting older and richer, because that is what happens over time.
They still should have checked the weather report.
Even if they had checked the weather, would they have known 0.8 inches of rainfall translates into being stranded in the desert and possible death? I've never been to BM or spent time in a desert so this is news to me. Were people warning about this and attendees just ignored it?
Yes. You need to stay out of the desert if there is any rainfall. That is basic knowledge you should know before going out there.
That's a fair point, but at the same time the desert is well known for being the harshest of all environments on earth. It's surprising so many people treat it like just a drive to the store.
Yeh I don't understand it either. I'm from Australia. Driving into a desert sounds like a pretty dangerous thing to do, no matter what the weather forecast is.
I didn’t say they were smart people. Just not all rich people.
And done what exactly??
It rains there sometimes. Forecasts change wildly day to day regardless. But it’s a desert and the water typically evaporates so quickly that an hour later there’s no evidence it rained.
Not to mention, it’s unlikely the person died from being trapped in the rain. I’m not sure why the article mentions both things except to give news about the event conditions I guess.
No, you fucking revel in it. Why the fuck else would you feel the need to post this?
First you replace them with your straw man (“rich tech bros”) and then burn it down (“tech bros just deserve what they get”)
Well, stay in your basement you smug piece of shit. Mommy will have tendies ready soon.
Maybe in ten years you can rename it to "Monsoon Man" and theme it around rain.
It's not a total loss.
Art floats. I see potential.
Lol, lmao even.
Not OP but I also laughed at the ocean sub crushing like a beer can against the forehead of god and I am CACKLING at this.
Blocked.
With that attitude, the only difference between you and the type of rich person you seem to despise, is wealth.
Most people at Burning Man aren't rich. I hung out with a bunch of people who go regularly last night and I imagine less than half even own their own property.
So yeah, you sound pretty callous tbh
That’s because the people saying this shit think a 100k salary makes you rich.
These people are so broke that any amount of money to them is “rich”.
The cost of living here isn't very high. The people I mentioned in my comment as not owning property probably make less than 50k.
A lot of them camp together to split set up costs, gas, etc. So, they make it work, and I know a lot of them make sacrifices to make it work (living in a shitty apartment the other 51 weeks a year so they can afford the lifestyle for example).
It's not for me, personally. A fun crowd. Like carnies on LSD. But chronic pain and a history of interpersonal trauma make the desert sound like a really horrible time. Plus I'm poor poor (like on disability poor).
I do enjoy the regionals though when I feel up for them.
right, but it's the reply you're talking about was the callous one... smfh (/s to be clear - you are the callous one, a classist ass literally making fun of people who are struggling to survive, like wtf)
Dude shut up. Plenty of non rich people go too. In fact, the chill guy I procure cartridges from is there now and I’m actually concerned. He’s just a normal dude. I mean…he LOVES weed but besides that lol…
Apparently the weather stations in the SoCal desert didn't see it coming at all. Not sure how that's possible, but that's what they said Friday. Tons of flooding in Palm Springs and Vegas too.