Wasn't it like... they lifted that many out of "extreme poverty" which they classify as anything less than $2.30/day?
I mean, cool, cool. But also, you're not in poverty in China if you make $3/day, huh?
My old coworker used to say this all the time back around 2018:
"What's the difference between AI and machine learning?
Machine learning is done in Python. AI is done in PowerPoint."
You yourself have completely ignored the argument you're responding to in order to chastise about arguing with a bad take.
It's looping upon itself and it all starts with one bad take. Maybe you can accept bad faith arguments are bad and move on?
It's easy to get grumpy at mods, but lord knows I'm not gonna mod this cesspit, so... Idk... Sucks to be you.
I almost burned a neighbors house down by forgetting about a piece of cloth I put on that badboy for mood lighting.
35->38 is roughly what inflation would give you from 2021 to 2022. And that's when the 40k figure came from. So, the implication is still fairly positive.
The figure referenced in this tweet is likely referring to the 2021 net compensation chart we saw making the rounds a few weeks back. Indeed, it's correct, ~50% of all Americans made less than 35k per year in net total compensation in 2021.
In 2022, that figure rose to ~40k. So the trend is going in the right direction, at least. And IIRC, the chart does include teenagers, college students, people working part time or underemployed, etc.
It does seem to feature estimates regarding the average rather than median, so you're right. Higher CoL areas would drive that way up.
Plus, upon further review, I realized the study only involved the top 100 most populated cities. That would for sure skew the number upward as well.
It is worth mentioning that everything discussed so far was in terms of averages, not medians. The average salary is more like 58k.
The crux of this issue, why everyone has something to say about it: is because the word 'comfortably' seems open to interpretation. But it's defined in a way that makes sense here.
For the purposes of the referenced study https://smartasset.com/data-studies/salary-needed-live-comfortably-2024, they used the MIT Living Wage Calculator https://livingwage.mit.edu/ and extrapolated out total compensation needed to maintain the 50/30/20 rule, where 50% of your total income goes to necessities, 30% to entertainment and wants, and 20% to investments or debt payments.
So it's really not up for debate unless you'd like to argue against the figures presented in the MIT Living Wage calculator or the 50/30/20 'rule'.
It's just a cacophony of male birds literally shouting it over each other all day from sunrise to sunset.
Nature is so beautiful 😍
Never approach a woman under any circumstances lest you run the risk of unintentionally making her fear for her life, gotcha. Just ignore women unless they approach you first. They're scared of you because you're a member of the dangerous sex, and that's just all there is to it.
I can imagine a social butterfly looking down on nerds. Although I gotta level with you: that sounds like something that would primarily occur in high school to me. Maybe you're grown and still dealing with that, but either way: using the term normies is not going to help at all, I assure you.
"Layperson" is a neutral term that simply refers to someone who is not an expert or professional in a particular field.
On the other hand, "normie" is a slang term. It's often used pejoratively to describe someone who is perceived as mainstream or conventional in their tastes, interests, or behaviors, especially in contrast to subcultures that value niche, specialized, or unconventional interests. The term can carry a dismissive or derogatory tone, implying that the person is out of touch with certain subcultures or lacks depth in their interests. This can make it offensive to some, as it suggests a judgment on their personal preferences or social identity.
The difference in offensiveness comes down to intent and perception: "layperson" is descriptive and objective, while "normie" can be used to exclude or demean.
That's neither here nor there and sidesteps the point. Also, depending on how you define normies and nerds, it's a bit silly. You can't imagine a random person being worked up by being called names online. I mean, okay, if you say so.
Have someone refer to you as a normie and lmk if it feels neutral or derogatory.
And by commenting this, you're now on top with the superiority complex, lol. Getting to feel superior to both of us, bravo.