Fediverse memes

2309 readers

72 users here now

Memes about the Fediverse.

Rules

General

Be respectful
Post on topic
No bigotry or hate speech
Memes should not be personal attacks towards other users

Specific

We are not YPTB. If you have a problem with the way an instance or community is run, then take it up over at !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com.

Addendum: Yes we know that you think ml/hexbear/grad are tankies and or .world are a bunch of liberals but it gets old quickly. Try and come up with new material.

Elsewhere in the Fediverse

Other relevant communities:

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

BoozeOrWater@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

Emperor@feddit.uk

wingsfortheirsmiles@feddit.uk

831

Probably not how it works (cdn.masto.host)

submitted 4 days ago by Blaze@piefed.zip to c/fedimemes@feddit.uk

81 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source: https://oslo.town/@luftvaffel/115327708667457159

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Its very easy to make an incorrect correlation

I think you don't understand what "correlation" means. The correlation is clearly and inarguably what I showed it to be: billionaires per capita went up as poverty went down. That's a plain fact.

43% of the US living in poverty

I'm not going to bother examining how legitimate this stat is, because even if I just take this at face value, what is that compared to the 40-60% I cited? It still does nothing to support the point that billionaires are 'holding the working class down' to any statistically-significant degree. If we take the bottom of the range of the estimate I got, 40%, and took your figure as-is, 43%, then a 7x increase in billionaires per capita increased poverty by 3% total over 100 years! That stat takes "nothingburger" to a whole new level.

That doesn't do much of anything to support the assertion that billionaires are 'capping the lives of the working class', when there being seven times more of them makes no statistically-significant difference in the poverty rate.

Not to mention that 1925 is in the midst of the roaring twenties, before the Great Depression, and your article was written a few years after a global pandemic that wreaked havoc on the world's economy—two facts that both skew things in favor of your claim.