Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 7th Apr 2014 19:55 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y

I'm using the URL slug headline for this one (check the link).

This map showing the locations of 280 million individual posts on Twitter shows a depressing divide in America: Tweets coming from Manhattan tend to come from iPhones. Tweets coming from Newark, N.J., tend to come from Android phones.

If you live in the New York metro area, you don't need to be told that Manhattan is where the region's rich people live, and the poor live in Newark. Manhattan's median income is $67,000 a year. Newark's is $17,000, according to U.S. Census data.

This fascinates me, as it seems to be a very American thing. In The Netherlands, Android has an 80% market share, and we have far lower poverty rates than the US (that Newark median income is crazy low by Dutch standards). I'm pretty sure the situation is similar for many other West-European nations.

This raises an interesting question: is it 'Android is for poor people' - or is it 'Android is for poor people in America'?

Thread beginning with comment 586716
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

Sometimes, but it's still a broad over generalization. There's just so much prejudice against the poor, to the point of pretending they're all just lazy worthless bums. The thing is there's a tendency to rope them all together as though they all deserve to be in that boat. This overlooks the real hardships of the situation, and that very few of us could realistically hope to escape from if we were the ones in poverty.


Well, if we say that stereotyping is bad, we will overlook the rampant stereotyping by liberals of rich people as seal-clubbing bastards and focus on the issue at hand. Although I know for sure that some poor people are lazy worthless bums (just as some rich people really ARE seal-clubbing bastards), I do not feel this way about the majority of them. For most of them, they made a lot of stupid decisions when they were younger, and then are like 'oh crap' when they hit their 30's. By then, their financial situation is in dire straits, they probably have 2 or 3 kids, and I doubt their health is all that great either, due to poor lifestyle choices. I'm sure that for many, they would go back and do it all again if they could.

And sure, we can give them more. But having already accumulated a lifetime of poor decision making skills, it isn't likely that they're going to do anything constructive with it, like continuing their education or putting it into savings. As it is, these people are always only going to have barely enough to survive, because they will likely squander the rest. (I once knew a lady that won $100,000+ in a lottery. In less than 3 years, it was all gone.) You ever see people that stand in line for 36 hours to save $300 on a big screen TV? What do you suppose their financial situation is like? These are the exact people that SHOULDN'T be buying big-screen TVs.

So no, I don't necessarily object to giving them a little more, but the people who are striking for $15 an hour for working fast food are smoking crack ;)

Edited 2014-04-09 00:42 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 0

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

WorknMan,

By then, their financial situation is in dire straits, they probably have 2 or 3 kids, and I doubt their health is all that great either, due to poor lifestyle choices. I'm sure that for many, they would go back and do it all again if they could.


I know most of us make stupid decisions at some point in our lives (internal factors), that has always been the case. Your earlier post indicated this was the case for you as well. However we are witnessing a great shift in distribution of wealth, and I tend to believe this has been caused by systematic changes in our economy amplifying inequality rather than personal factors.

In other words: there is a tendency for us to blame those worse off than ourselves, but in the same shoes I really don't think we'd be doing any better. Long term unemployment is worse than for previous recessions, the "recovery" has been anemic and "jobless". Older generations hurt by the recessions are deciding not to retire, which they're perfectly entitled to do, however it creates even less demand for new workers.

http://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2012/recession/pdf/recession_bls_spotl...

College graduates are assuming great debt only to enter the market underemployed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/us/many-american-workers-are-unde...

Tech skills, which traditionally have good prospects, are also facing weaker demand, which has been the case around my area.
http://www.epi.org/publication/issuebriefs_ib198/
Due to the persistent job losses in high-tech industries, long-term unemployment in the information industry (30%) continued to grow faster than the national average of 26% (see Table 4).



And sure, we can give them more. But having already accumulated a lifetime of poor decision making skills, it isn't likely that they're going to do anything constructive with it, like continuing their education or putting it into savings. As it is, these people are always only going to have barely enough to survive, because they will likely squander the rest.
...
So no, I don't necessarily object to giving them a little more, but the people who are striking for $15 an hour for working fast food are smoking crack


This is exactly the kind of prejudice I was talking about... Anyways, welfare may make their lives more livable, but it doesn't address the causes of social stratification IMHO.

Also, do you realize your figure is off by a factor of 2? Most of those jobs are pegged to minimum wage:

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=McDonald%27s_Corpo...
Fast Food Worker $7.72
Cashier $7.74
Fast Food Manager $9.20
Restaurant Manager $9.68
Country: United States | Currency: USD | Updated: 5 Apr 2014

Edited 2014-04-09 04:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I know most of us make stupid decisions at some point in our lives (internal factors), that has always been the case.


You are right. The difference is that some of us don't blame everything and everyone else for our stupid decisions.

However we are witnessing a great shift in distribution of wealth, and I tend to believe this has been caused by systematic changes in our economy amplifying inequality rather than personal factors.


You know, I used to make some of these same, bullshit excuses. 'Those goddamn, evil 1%'ers!' And you know where it got me? In a cheap-ass motel, making $6 an hour, and surviving off Ramen. You really don't think these arguments existed prior to 2007?

Also, do you realize your figure is off by a factor of 2? Most of those jobs are pegged to minimum wage


I don't know what you mean. The $15 is what they were striking for, not what they're making.

Edited 2014-04-09 06:06 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1