italy74
Well-known
Well.. I don't bet on it, however... anyone here saw "Zeitgeist" ? especially the 2nd or 3rd part of the movie are quite worrying just to say the least. However, I've always been persuaded that life isn't that straight line which science wants to believe. Despite all the science strives, life is a circle with an infinite radius so that it can be "exchanged" for a straight line to a "casual" observer. They think to own all the answers but they won't never able to get all, especially that infinite question living in each man's heart. But here I stop since it's philosophy, not photography.
Morris
-
I can't agree. If you have to work in order to eat, you are working class.
I doubt your income from free-lancing is much greater than the SMIC (French minimum wage).
Therefore you are firmly working class, otherwise you would be able to afford that Noctilux that you lust after so much, but keep telling us that you can't afford.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Morris,
There is of course a distinction between the bourgeois lifestyle and the level of income required to sustain it, but I think that defining as 'working class' those who need to work in order to eat is not outstandingly defensible. For a start, it removes all pensioners from the working class; a dubious assumption. Consider too a doctor or lawyer in his 30s. If he stopped work, he'd soon stop eating, barring large investments (unlikely among many at that age) and barring some form of welfare state.
In any case, 'eat' is a rather narrow distinction. Eat what? And do what else, except living on food that you can afford with a small income, or can grow yourself? We have friends nearby who live on a tiny pension, but grow a lot of food themselves. Are they 'working class'? Probably more like 'peasants'. But their lifestyle is bourgeois.
Your argument about income is entirely false, simply because a wage-slave has to work a set number of hours per week in order to be paid. My hourly rate is usually well above SMIC, but I don't work very many hours a week. Also, 'work' and 'leisure' are far more clearly differentiated for a wage-slave. If I am on a three-week motorcycle tour, in one sense I am 'working' -- getting pictures, ideas for articles, etc. -- but in another sense I am doing what most people do for relaxation.
Finally, the Noctilux. I don't want it badly enough to work harder for it (besides which, 'work harder' means 'finding more magazine or book outlets', which is rather different from 'getting more per hour' or 'working overtime') and I regard (let us say) another few months' travel as a better way of spending the money I've got (as well as more tax-efficient). Ergo, I can't afford it.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited:
Olsen
Well-known
I am glad that I proven wrong on Obama's intentions.
Sorry, but I don't believe in that. It is encouraging to see that more and more Americans doubt the concept too. Because it is a bluff.
What calmed down the people in Russia was that Putin saw to the all the old babushkas got their pension in time and even a decent increase. Despite the enormous growth of rich people fine little trickles down to the ordinary Russian from the oligarchs, - without a heavy hand from the legislators. Obama should do the same; give support to the people at the bottom of the economical pyramide and let it 'trickle up' to the rich. They will be fine anyway.
Migracer
"MigRacer&amp ;qu ot; AKA Miguel
I retired in 2000, I un retired in 2006. I figured we could not keep spending our Tax dollars the way we have been. History has shown us that printing more will only lead you to where we are now. I took a HUGE hit in the stock market mini crash of 2001. I invested my money after that in real estate and Builders I am now $200,000 in the whole. I never figured that real estate could have a total failure. The upside is I have always made great money during recessions My photo/writing and Custom Auto business are booming I should be out of the whole before I start collecting Social Security.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Olsen,
Sorry I was so unclear. All I meant by 'trickle down works' is that in a time of generally rising incomes, SOME of it trickles down, i.e. it cannot be ignored completely, and in fact, it is inevitable.
I see how easy it is to take that as an endorsement of 'trickle down' as an economic theory, i.e. as the sole driver of recovery -- where, as you say, it is a worthless confidence trick.
Once again, my apologies for lack of clarity.
Cheers,
Roger
Sorry I was so unclear. All I meant by 'trickle down works' is that in a time of generally rising incomes, SOME of it trickles down, i.e. it cannot be ignored completely, and in fact, it is inevitable.
I see how easy it is to take that as an endorsement of 'trickle down' as an economic theory, i.e. as the sole driver of recovery -- where, as you say, it is a worthless confidence trick.
Once again, my apologies for lack of clarity.
Cheers,
Roger
Olsen
Well-known
Roger,
- I was wondering if you'd had a cognac too much after Sunday dinner. Fine that you confirm that you are still sober.
Olsen
Well-known
Over here we have a lavish public pension system that is run by the government. But I can not retire with such a pension before age 62 and get a pension which is more than 60% of what I earn today. I can wait and get a even higher pension from age 67. A few and rich middle class (<-what we call middle class, that would be annual income of 100.000 $ and up and 'millions' in fortune) folks do retire earlier and live on saved means.
Our pension system is a bit intricate; I can retire now, but then I have to depend on savings until I am 67. Or I can retire when I am 62 and live on a combination of pension and savings from then on. Which would be quite lavish. The latter is what I am going for.
Still there is two factors to consider; health, and the up coming business melt down. If you are going to enjoy retirement, then retire early. You will not enjoy to have a lot of money if you are sitting in a wheel chair. Then there is this business crisis coming up. It is difficult to predict how deep it will be over here. I am a bit uncertain to how seriously my work will be effected.
Migracer
&amp;quot;MigRacer&amp ;qu ot; AKA Miguel
It is a shame that the citizens of the United States have no real surviable retirement or guarantee or health benefits except for whatever we are able to provide for our selves. I have come to the conclusion that I will work until I die, as my work is what most people fantasies of work are, did not adapt well to being a gentleman of leisure, what is normal to me is very exiting to others. I will drive fast, love hard and eat well until my last breath.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
My plans for my last a la carte camera have been pretty squashed, as things seem to be selling for quite a bit less than they did a few months ago, and selling slower. I too have been on reduced credit load at the college I work at, so my plans for buying and selling to buy are pretty reduced.
italy74
Well-known
In Italy you can retire if you have 40 years of contribution AND 57 yrs (actually a colleague of mine just did it) otherwise you should pass your 60's and wait the sum of your age AND the years you worked is 100 or something like that, but it often changes. For sure, having only 12 years of contribution, up to date, I won't pose the problem for a while lol. You get 80% of your income and pay "only" 12% of taxes on what you get. If you want you can remain at work earning more (paying less taxes on your income) but this won't affect your final pension which will be locked to the last valid point before retirement. This is however stupid (i think) because if old people don't retire, (the few) youngs don't enter the system and so none pays the pensions to come. I said "the few" since italy is really one of the world's oldest countries, for average age. I can't remember if 1/4 or 1/3 of our population is over 60s (so already ready for pension) The problem is that until there's no real push for newer families and kids, pension won't be never solved
Olsen
Well-known
In Norway you have max 40 'earner' years. The 10 years with the highest gross (mind you) income compared to a inflation adjusted average income decides how much pension you will get. Typically will be 66% of the average of these 'best years', inflation adjusted. In later years they have 'flatened' out the system, but with a possibility to retire at 62. I'll go for that.
Erik L
Well-known
im buying a lot, seems theres more on the market now. im seeing somewhat high prices on consumables like film though.
Migracer
&amp;quot;MigRacer&amp ;qu ot; AKA Miguel
If You Have Adequte Financial Reserves
If You Have Adequte Financial Reserves
Now is the time to buy if you have adequate financial reserves. Prices for quality goods and equipment have never been lower. I have sideline of building custom cars and classics and my well financed customers are snapping up bargains. I have recently snapped up some cameras on ebay at incredibly low prices.
If You Have Adequte Financial Reserves
Now is the time to buy if you have adequate financial reserves. Prices for quality goods and equipment have never been lower. I have sideline of building custom cars and classics and my well financed customers are snapping up bargains. I have recently snapped up some cameras on ebay at incredibly low prices.
Olsen
Well-known
If you wonder about where all the money went, read this: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/nov2008/ceos-n28.shtml
John Lawrence
Well-known
My buying / selling habits haven't altered any since the downturn in the economy. That may be more to the fact that these days I tend to use less gear than I used to and I'm far more careful about what I buy than I ever used to be.
Gumby
Veteran
Still no effect on me.