ilene's picture

I think we're looking at something closer to the top 0.1% now, rather than the top 1%, but nevertheless, Mark Ames takes a deep, dark, disturbing look at economics. (And no, that chart below is not AAPL.) ~ Ilene



This article was first published in

A little over a year ago, while researching the Confederacy’s economy, I stumbled across this unnerving graph charting the value of America’s “stock of slaves” in the last decades before the Civil War.

This graph tells the real story behind the South’s secession: the value of the South’s “slave stock”—the property of the ruling class — soared as secession approached, reaching an almost 90-degree angle in those final years before Harper’s Ferry. The South’s ruling class seceded to protect their riches, period:


From afar, if you didn’t know that human “slave stock” was the asset being charted, you could easily mistake this graph, and its parabolic trajectory, for one of the many destructive asset bubbles this country has suffered right up through our own time.

Up close, this graph drips greed, mass murder and shame — it strips away the historical revisionism that falsely ascribed the South’s “cause” to an almost selfless, tragically romantic attachment to “tradition” and “culture”; it gives lie to the myth that slave owners kept their slaves to the detriment of their own bottom line.

Like the worst wars and the worst of history’s villains, the Confederacy’s one percenters seceded and fought in order to continue profiting from their most valuable investment properties — their human slave stock.

The graph comes from a grim working paper, “Capitalists Without Capital”, written in the late 1980s by a UC Berkeley economist, Richard Sutch, and a UC Riverside historian, Robert Ransom.

As they showed, slavery produced huge profits for southerners who invested in slave capital — to the detriment of all other portfolio investments, as the value of slaves soared in the mid-19th century. By that time, by far the largest cotton-growing states’ wealth was in slave stock, not in real estate or other investments.

The slave trade was outlawed in 1808; but the slave population quadrupled from 1 million in 1800 to 4 million in 1860 — encouraged by slaveowners who “bred” their human stock, thereby multiplying their profits as the value of each slave rose.

Slavery is often portrayed by revisionist historians as somehow antithetical to market capitalism; in reality, slavery was a winning portfolio investment, the very incarnation of just how evil “free-market” capitalism can be. As the authors write:

“If slaves … were an investment included in the asset portfolio of the planter/entrepreneur, they helped satisfy the owner’s demand for wealth. But unlike most other forms of capital, which depreciate with time, the stock of slaves appreciated. Thus, the growth of the slave population continuously increased the stock of wealth.”

What makes this graph so disturbing for us in 2012 is what it suggests about today’s “1 percent” — and how they view the rest of us. It gives form to the brutal crackdown on the Occupy protests — and suggests darker things to come as we try to free ourselves from their vision of civilization, and our place in it.

Contrast that with this McKinsey report put out a few years ago by the director of the consulting group’s New York office. Titled “The New Metrics of Corporate Performance: Profit Per Employee”, the report argues that the best performing firms in our increasingly financialized era are those companies that have learned to squeeze ever-larger profits out of each employee — and not by the more traditional “return on investment” metric.

The McKinsey report looked at the world’s 30 largest companies between 1995 and 2005, and found that their return on human capital more than doubled, from an average of $35,000 profit per employee to $83,000, leading to this rather frank and nauseating conclusion:

“If a company’s capital intensity doesn’t increase, profit per employee is a pretty good proxy for the return on intangibles. The hallmark of financial performance in today’s digital age is an expanded ability to earn ‘rents’ from intangibles. Profit per employee is one measure of those rents. If a company boosts its profit per employee without increasing its capital intensity, management will increase its rents.”

Extracting rent from “employees” as a business strategy: This is supposed to be the language of feudalism, not modern advanced capitalism — and yet this is the cutting edge in 21st century capitalist thinking, unashamed and unvarnished:

“One way to improve a company’s profit per employee is simply to shed low-profit employees. But if they generate profit greater than the cost of the capital used to support their work, shedding them actually reduces the creation of wealth.”

As with slave stock in a Southern investor’s portfolio, the McKinsey report argues that as a corporation learns to successfully extract rent from its employees, the more employees it extracts rent from, the greater its aggregate profits.


The new metrics: How much “rent” can be extracted from employees, not investments

To compare “the 99 percent” to African slaves would be crude; but the mindset of “the 1 percent” then, as now, is eerily consistent. They view the rest of us not as human beings with rights, but as livestock whose meat is “rent” to be extracted.

This is the language of plutocratic capitalism, a brutal system totally incompatible with democracy and antithetical to republican government and civilization. It is the language of misery, and misery is what “the 1 percent” is promising “the 99 percent” for years to come, in ever-greater doses.

Mark Ames is the author of Going Postal: Rage, Murder and Rebellion from Reagan’s Workplaces to Clinton’s Columbine.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
strangeglove's picture

So theres gonna be a war to abolish AAPL? Ala 451? Whats the temp that an ipod burns?

AldousHuxley's picture

Throughout history  the powerful always extracted 3 "Rents":

  1. Religious tithe 10%
  2. Government-military protection tax 15-50%
  3. Bankster loan shark interest on debt 5-15%


Notice how they are all in percentages.

Religion tax is for small uneducated villages and towns

Government tax is for citizens of cities and nation-states

Bankster tax is for all corporations and consumers using fiat currency.



pufferfish's picture

The gift of globalisation just keeps on giving.

"But Gush-Up certainly has. That’s why in a nation of 1.2 billion, India’s 100 richest people own assets equivalent to one-fourth of the GDP."



Sandmann's picture

those companies that have learned to squeeze ever-larger profits out of each employee


That sounds so McKinsey and the basis of Partnership Wealth

goforgin's picture

Few people realize that US ships patrolled coast of Africa in order to stop 'slavers' ships. Suspected ships were boarded and their captains would be put on trial. Unfortunately many slaves were simply thrown overboard in order to make ships lighter so they could outrun patrol ships.

This situation is very much analogous to what is going on now in the US. Illegals are enticed to enter US illegally with promise of jobs and benefits. But modern day salvers do not even have to pay the cost of passage and upkeep like the African slave traders and their owners did. The illegals are thrown out as their seasonal usefulness ends. The upkeep for illegals is paid by local taxpayers at the state level

The slave wage benefactors retreat to their walled-off enclaves protected by an army of private security agents and laws and like Southern Gentry call themselves Ladies and Gentleman.

imaginalis's picture

There was plenty of slave running carried out under the control of North East families well after the civil war. The slaves were offloaded in the Caribbean and molasses taken from there to the rum distilleries in Rhode Island. 

Baptiste Say's picture

"We have abolitionists in Illinois; we shot one the other day." - Abraham Limcoln.

Baptiste Say's picture

"The South’s ruling class seceded to protect their riches, period"

Rubbish, Lincoln had no intention of ending slavery and prior to the war even committed to enforcing the fugitive slave acts.

Try to escape redistributionary taxation, high tariffs and a Northern-centric government with delusions of empire, period.

"The contest is really for empire on the side of the North and for independence on that of the South....". - London Times 7 Nov 1861.

"Slavery is not the cause of the rebellion ....Slavery is the pretext on which the leaders of the rebellion rely, 'to fire the Southern Heart' and through which the greatest degree of unanimity can be produced....Mr. Calhoun, after finding that the South could not be brought into sufficient unanimity by a clamor about the tariff, selected slavery as the better subject for agitation". - North American Review (Boston October 1862

"The real causes of dissatisfaction in the South with the North, are in the unjust taxation and expenditure of the taxes by the Government of the United States, and in the revolution the North has effected in this government from a confederated republic, to a national sectional despotism." - Charleston Mercury 2 days before the Nov 1860 election

"They [the South] know that it is their import trade that draws from the people's pockets sixty or seventy millions of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, and in the protection and encouragement of Northern interests....These are the reasons why these people [the North] do not wish the South to secede from the Union." - The New Orleans Daily Crescent, 21 Jan 1861 (five days before Louisiana seceded)

Mox E's picture

There are a lot of moving parts in this story that seem to get overlooked.

"The slave trade was outlawed in 1808; but the slave population quadrupled from 1 million in 1800 to 4 million in 1860 — encouraged by slaveowners who “bred” their human stock, thereby multiplying their profits as the value of each slave rose."

Could it be that, as the slave trade was outlawed, the available supply shrank thereby increase slave value?  Could they not have been even more compelled to do engage in this activity to offset the confiscation of wealth by the northern government? This would make the author's assumption that the south was only defending their slave investment a specious argument.  Simply because the price of something goes up does not mean that it was the sole focus or cause of other events.


goforgin's picture

After Southern secession, Lincoln seized the moment and announced 'Emancipation Act."  Another words, the North no longer needed to appease the South.

southerncomfort's picture

Well that chart certainly looks like aapl's parabolic rise -- and aapl uses slave labor to produce its product.  But when I see someone in public all corked up w/ aapl (or like) gear, ears plugged up, eyes glued to pad, etc. I wonder who is the real slave.  Few years ago, there was public outrage regarding the implanted chip - no one wanted a chip implanted w/ all his basic data.  So "they" create a chip the monkey can love, sleep with, put all his friends' pictures upon, etc.  Created a chip where the monkey would not only beg, borrow or steal to get that chip - but record all of that monkey's deepest darkest proclivities on that chip for Big Bro to see and track and enjoy.  A chip beyond what even the biggest big bro freak could desire!  Monkey don't even realize he's the willing slave!  On the other side o' the planet, you got more than a million slaves - gonna have metacarpal by the time they're 30, and world wide media to take pretty pictures of what a mill grotesque souls look like who can't pick up a fork, chop stick or wrap their hands around a piece of food to feed themselves, and the first group o' monkeys gonna be all "outraged" at some-body for doing this to 'em when it was monkeys' own demand that did it to their slave bros.  Media tells me Lloyd Blankfien got mine cause he got more toys/power/recognized position than no-name me.  Way I see it, he bathes in the water 12million folk piss and dump their pharma excrement into each day, and even in his lovely penthouse, I bet they do a regular bed bug check.  lol, I never see him walking down the beach here - in the south, not plugged up on aapl gear.  Guess as some slave I shouldn't be feeling this good,eh?  lol....Ain't wearing Michelle's "Target" t-shirt either.  But media selling me that what they got is something I can't have ... but what this lil slave got is something they can't buy now - ever, in their lifetimes.  Sweet.

cherry picker's picture

When I was a kid they taught me about good and evil.  As I grew up I was exposed to both and would be a liar if I had claimed not to have tested the waters in each realm.

I have come to discover that this stuff called evil is not something I like at all, yet I see it all around me in one form or another.  I see good too, but it often takes a back seat as it is not "in" at the moment for one reason or another.

Meanwhile the conductor of these two diametrically opposing forces is watching his orchestra, waiting......

Will there be hell?  I do not know, but I do think there will be a price extracted from all of us while we inhabit our mortal bodies.

AldousHuxley's picture

teachings of good and evil from schools, churches, government is to keep you under their control while "evil" elites exploit you.


morality is relative. evil and good is not absolute. there is no heaven nor hell.


you have less than 100 years to live. elite want to make sure you feel good while working for them by installing false values of "good" while they don't believe any of that shit.


You don't become a king by observing morality laws. Kings want to make sure you don't become a threat.


thurstjo63's picture

ilene, with respect there is a great deal to dispute in your article. I don't dispute that the value of slaves was increasing but this is because of a number of factors. First with the cotton gin, the amount of cotton that could be produced by slaves exploded thus increasing greatly the profits of slave owners and rendering the slaves still on the plantation more valuable. Second, the number of runaway slaves to the north was increasing thus rendering the slaves who didn't runaway more valuable. There are numerous cases of plantation owners paying slaves to produce a certain amount of work (yes it did happen) since for the landowners the profitability of the cotton trade was such that this tradeoff incentived slaves to stay on the plantation and not runaway. Again rendering the existing slaves more valuable. 

The civil war if you actually look at the statements made by the breakaway states, note that Lincoln introduced a constitutional amendment that would protect slavery by federal law as well as tariffs introduced by congress in the early and mid 19th century, you will discover that the civil war was not about slavery. It was because the northern manufacturing states had managed to introduce tariffs on goods from southern states (see Morrill tariff) as well as against foreign manufacturers that seriously damaged the economic situation of people in the south. That african americans took advantage of this situation in order to flee north and then fight for the north was an intelligent thing to do. Before this exodus north by slaves, the south was winning the war. But with the influx of slaves and Lincoln's declaration of the emancipation proclamation (which by the way only initially applied to southern states since actually there were more northern slave states than southern slave states at the time), that the north was able to turn the tide and get the upperhand. All that being said, it still doesn't excuse the fact that the southern states were perfectly within their rights to secede from the union. 

As for the slaves, if Lincoln was really interested in ending slavery he could have either paid off slave owners (like had been done in european countries that ended slavery) or worked with the states in changing laws in those states to be friendly towards slaves that escaped (i.e. that the fugitive slave law wouldn't be enforced - similar to what was done in Brazil) which would have made those states a magnet for runaway slaves and thus crippling the slavery in the south. But alas, when the president is the head of the Illinois Colinization Society that is trying to make America free of "negros" and was actively seeking this objective up until his death, don't really expect that rational solutions would be on offer if the "civil war" was really about slavery. All replies are welcome. All the best

JustACitizen's picture

In my past - I read articles on the subject of the Economics of the Civil War and the conclusions were in opposition to both Ilene's and your commentary.

What I read was that continual farming of cotton crops (no rotation back then) led to soil depletion and reduced output - specifically in VA, NC, and SC. Those states still had slaves - but the big plantation system had already moved on to GA, AL, MS and Arkansas - with a weather eye on TX and MO.

The articles concluded that the Civil War was about the expansion of slave states to the west. The abolitionists and small time farmers were against expansion but the slave holders needed new markets to sell the slaves to (greater fool theory?) to protect their "wealth".

My opinion is that without the expansion argument - most Americans of the time probably would not have cared one little bit if slavery continued in the south - I don't think they would have died for it/over it. Some folks will want to dispute that - and since all I have is an opinion - they certainly have a right to their idealism...

rwe2late's picture

the civil war was not about slavery. It was because … tariffs … seriously damaged the economic situation of people in the south.

An “economic situation” based upon a slavery economy.

Your argument that the war was not about “slavery“, but about tariffs which “seriously damaged” the slave economy is rather circuitous wordplay. The wealth and power of the leading elite was based upon slavery. The “culture” was based upon slavery. The politics were based upon slavery.

 Slavery was the common thread to which all other issues were tied.

Do not confuse the war being ABOUT slavery, and the issues arising from slavery ...

with the erroneous claim that the war was begun with the purpose and for the cause of ending slavery.



People try to boil the civil war down to a one cause and a morality play.   It was much deeper than just the slavery.  A majority of the men in the southern army were not slave holders. Testimonials at the time indicated that many felt the Northern interests were trying to subjugate the southern states as a source of raw materials for Northern industry. Many southerners saw their fight as very similar to the war of independnce fought by their grandfathers, slavery aside.  You can disagree with the argument but many did see the war in this light.

The great myth perpetuated is that the North went to war to free the slaves and was not the case. Lincoln would have retained slavery if he felt it would have kept the union together. 7 states seceded after Lincolns election. 4 more seceded after Lincoln raised 75 thousand troops to go to war with the southern states that rebelled.

When Lincoln emancipated the slaves, he did so only in the slave states that seceded.  Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware were slave states and had not seceded. At the time of the emancipation, slavery was not abolished in those states.  This was a pr and political act by Lincoln to cause uprisings against the confederacy. While he felt that in time slavery would die on the vine, the argument that rich southerns seceded to protect themselves is about as solid as the war was fought to end slavery


Element's picture

Dogs (Waters, Gilmour)  Pink Floyd - Animals



You gotta be crazy, you gotta have a real need.
You gotta sleep on your toes, and when you're on the street,
You gotta be able to pick out the easy meat with your eyes closed.
And then moving in silently, down wind and out of sight,
You gotta strike when the moment is right without thinking.

And after a while, you can work on points for style.
Like the club tie, and the firm handshake,
A certain look in the eye and an easy smile.
You have to be trusted by the people that you lie to,
So that when they turn their backs on you,
You'll get the chance to put the knife in.

You gotta keep one eye looking over your shoulder.
You know it's going to get harder, and harder, and harder as you get older.
And in the end you'll pack up and fly down south,
Hide your head in the sand,
Just another sad old man,
All alone and dying of cancer.

And when you loose control, you'll reap the harvest you have sown.
And as the fear grows, the bad blood slows and turns to stone.
And it's too late to lose the weight you used to need to throw around.
So have a good drown, as you go down, all alone,
Dragged down by the stone.

I gotta admit that I'm a little bit confused.
Sometimes it seems to me as if I'm just being used.
Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise.
If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze?

Deaf, dumb, and blind, you just keep on pretending
That everyone's expendable and no-one has a real friend.
And it seems to you the thing to do would be to isolate the winner
And everything's done under the sun,
And you believe at heart, everyone's a killer.

Who was born in a house full of pain.
Who was trained not to spit in the fan.
Who was told what to do by the man.
Who was broken by trained personnel.
Who was fitted with collar and chain.
Who was given a pat on the back.
Who was breaking away from the pack.
Who was only a stranger at home.
Who was ground down in the end.
Who was found dead on the phone.
Who was dragged down by the stone.


There is no excuse for this shit and if we don't change it, it won't change because there is no fucking way any Govt is going to change it:



AGoldhamster's picture

Good article ... but honestly:

Nothing changed since there are humans or since there is nature. And nothing will change in next zillions of centuries to come.

Once that is recognized - all this stuff is just noise.

Peter Pan's picture

It seems to me that Americans and Europeans found a new source of slaves during the last 20 years in the form of the Chinese worker.

 Furthermore the similarity continues when one considers the point made in the article about how Northeners ended up using the emancipated slaves of the south in their factories and steel works which in turn pushed wages of northern whites down causing much hardship.

Now that must surely ring a bell for many ex-manufacturing workers in the USA and Europe.



AnAnonymous's picture

A good thread all in all.

Shows US citizen spirit.

Very entertaining.

AnAnonymouses's picture

Ah so, US citizenses spirits like drunken crane in rice paddy!

JW n FL's picture



I come here for both of YOU!

I LOVE YOU AnAnonymous !!

I am a TRUE!! FAN!

Vic Vinegar's picture

STFU.  Seriously.

Then again, who's the bigger loser - you for writing this nonsense or me for trying to call you out on it?

Wait - don't answer that question. :-)

Here's a question for ZHchat: don't you think 90s rock started to indoctrinate young people into feeling self-doubt?

I submit my comment and this video as Exhibits A) and B).

Diet Coke and Floozies's picture

That is funny, I was just thinking two days ago about that exact song and your idea Vic... Weird...

JW n FL's picture



I come here for both of YOU!


I am a TRUE!! FAN!

Yen Cross's picture

 Who pissed in your Cereal Vic? You are generally a pretty placid poster.

Yen Cross's picture

 Hey?  A few shot guns, work well,

q99x2's picture

I quit. The world doesn't need any more junk. I have enough for the next 30 years without doing anything. Nobody needs anymore stuff. Only need to enforce the laws against banksters and redistribute their stolen wealth to live comfortably for the next 100 years. And that sounds like a fun thing instead of all that work crap. I quit.

Vic Vinegar's picture

Catch you in the chatrooms soon hopefully.

Yen Cross's picture

 Negative. I'm a bag man.

GoinFawr's picture

well I'm impressed. So knew, whaddya know?

Anyway, as far as I can tell all lucre is filthy, but I have yet to meet someone who doesn't enjoy rolling in it at least a little bit.

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Misplaced post, my apologies.


oddjob's picture

Now an apology for that ridiculous handle please.

batterycharged's picture

Yeah, I see it only had 3/5 stars. Pretty typical for the crowd on this site.

It's the same crowd that doesn't want to pay a chinese manufacture worker a livable wage (meaning have-a-life versus merely sustenance).

Of course, it's easy making these choices when you're not the one toiling for 12 hours per day just for a meal so that some other person can have an iPad while working a fraction of what you work.

I work for a company now that offers a health care plan where they charge you $1500 per year, but cap your doctor/exam pays at $900. That brings "getting rent from employees" to a new level.

It's a sad world and getting sadder every day. The amount of heartless bastards out there that don't value any life other than their own is astounding to me.i.e. the I've-got-mine-fuck-the-rest folks

Without compassion you'll have violence. And IMHO, that's the only way things will change in this pathetic money-driven nation.

I think of kids with $100,000 of unforgivable college loans who are fucked for life. What a great fucking country this is, eh? Or people that make minimum wage and can't afford a simple prostate exam.

BUT FUCK HEY!  You can make money on Wall Street! Let's not fuck that up just so our society can stop being such a shit hole.

Shizzmoney's picture

I work for a company now that offers a health care plan where they charge you $1500 per year, but cap your doctor/exam pays at $900. That brings "getting rent from employees" to a new level.

Same thing here.  I have HC with my employer, yet when I have to go to the ER for something urgent to get fixed, *I* get stuck with a $1700 bill.  Yet I still pay the premium every month. And my work responsibilities go up each year, and my 2.5% raise comes no where close to the uptick in my volume of work I do.  And I can't say anything or challenge this, because if I do, I'll get canned.

But I have to be "grateful".

Bascially folks, you have to get out of personal debt.  Once you do, you are FREE.  Not completely free, but free enough to where you can decide what to do with you life.  Sure, you'll have future expenses.......but the reason why it is such a buyer's market for employers today is because the 18-34 generation is so much in debt, that they have no choice but to take jobs to cut down the wood of debt fiat.

That's also what managers, via the baby boomer generation ,don't understand.  They worked hard, they got paid for it, and they keep their bargain of the social contract.  Our generation works even harder (although it's not your typical "labor" of dirty hands persay; just high volume, computer based configuration), and therefore createsbigger profits......yet doesn't see the benefits in their pockets (nor will we anytime soon).

In a sense, I think this may of been what the Mayans talked about 2012.  They said that it will be an end of an Age where time stops and the world resets.  But instead of a comet, I think it maybe the serfs and wroking classes around the world holding hands and finally saying, "Hey assholes, STOP".

This friction of money....its worse than rascism.  It's worse than civil rights.  As you see with OWS, Arab Spring, governments funded by corporations will defend their "god given" right to capital to the teeth, and go to any means to do so.  There won't be any sympathy like when LBJ, a Texan with racist leanings, even had to say, "You know what, I gotta stop this shit before it gets out of hand" when he instituted JFK civil rights legislation after some white redneck set a blaze a Black Church killing innocent children. TPTB at the time hated what LBJ did, but they understood the reasoning stop a social and political revolution.....and therefore got kickbacks in the form of increased involvement in Vietnam. 

The world was different back then......things are more complicated, epople more empathetic, and there are just so many people not willing to listen because we, as a society, are a more selfish people.

There IS a reason for that.   

Dollar Bill Hiccup's picture

A tasty new treat ... the worker burger. And the rich are hungry.

FXPortent's picture

Wrong buddy.


It's precisely that mentality that drove us here in the first  place.

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Except you and most of the first world are in the top 1% globally as half the world exists on less than $2/day,

otherwise razor sharp bitching and moaning about those 1/2 of 1% above you.

The new game is really about how much denial can one possibly create surrounding their existence in a largely futile attempt to portray themself as a victim.

Not only are you in the top 1% but you are in about the top .00000001% of all time humanity and are considering those who are .000000005% higher than you the greedy ones. To the point you are being victimized by them because you are not 1/2 of 1millionth of one percent higher.

jpmrwb's picture

Thus, however ironic it may be, it turns out that virtually all of the problems the Occupy Wall Street protesters complain about are the result of the enactment of policies that they support and in which they fervently believe. It is their mentality, the Marxism that permeates it, and the government policies that are the result, that are responsible for what they complain about. The protesters are, in effect, in the position of being unwitting flagellants. They are beating themselves left and right and as balm for their wounds they demand more whips and chains. They do not see this, because they have not learned to make the connection that in violating the freedom of businessmen and capitalists and seizing and consuming their wealth, i.e., using weapons of pain and suffering against this small hated group, they are destroying the basis of their own well-being.

However much the protesters might deserve to suffer as the result of the injury caused by the enactment of their very own ideas, it would be far better, if they woke up to the modern world and came to understand the actual nature of capitalism, and then directed their ire at the targets that deserve it. In that case, they might make some real contribution to economic well-being, including their own.

AnAnonymous's picture

Except you and most of the first world are in the top 1% globally as half the world exists on less than $2/day,


Result of Smithian economics.

Late stages of globalization exposed an inconvenient truth.

In Smithian economics (core of US citizen economics) labour is not valued but also location of labour.

In the end, one works a same job with the same productivity earns very differently depending on the location.

Export of inflation.

It is not possible to compare living standards on grounds USD per day.

Actually, if one looks at the poorest among US citizen societies, their lives is only slightly better than a third world poorest.

No real improvement there. One Indian male living on a reservation has very similar life expectancy as a negro living in Liberia, Sierra Leone (war zones)

US citizenism lifts much more the other extremum of the spectrum. And of course the middle class.

Down, at the bottom, it is another story.

But clearly, poors who fit the bill do not post on this site, so it is easy for a US citizen to claim that they belong to the 1 pc.

Vic Vinegar's picture

You know what, buddy, it's time you get some high praise.

I can log onto ZH on a Tuesday afternoon and see a bunch of spacemonkeys getting their panties in a bunch over Million Dollar Bonus.  It seems kind of pathetic, but there they are getting all riled up, talking about how he's either a troll or a brilliant satarist.

Who cares either way, right?  Kind of like wondering whether Ben B is a sadistic freak or a useful idiot.  It's all the same in the end.

And while I think those people are kinda pathetic, here I am, on a Saturday night "talking" with you.  

I say AnAnonymous is infinitely > MDB.  Fuk anyone who doesn't appreciate that.  You got my panties in a bunch, and kudos to you for doing so.

You just compelled me to buy more physical.  Because your comment and mine were most definitely wastes of time. 

SWRichmond's picture

Thanks for the EJ.  I have that on vinyl.

Lednbrass's picture

You really dont comprehend math do you? Arent you the same guy who asserted here recently that the US poor are in the top 1% globally?

As amusing as it is, before you continue to illustrate what an idiot you are Im going to give some friendly advice. Get a calculator.

There are 7 billion people in the world. The top 1% would be 70 million. There are 300 million people in the US.  In what alternate mathematical universe is it possible that (for example) the bottom 10% segment of the 300 million in the US are in the top 70 million globally? How is the lowest 30 million of 300 million here in the top 70 million on the planet?

Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

IF half the world exists on $2/day please by all means what percentile does that put the US poverty stricken?

Oh way in the upper whatever of the distribution?

But thanks for playing.

Really oh so not top 1% but top 15% BIG FUCKING DEAL.

Good thing you know the maths, it really, really changes the context!

They exist in the top 1% of all time humanity by leaps and bounds.

You are genius.

As if it changes anything one single iota.

Go for the spell check bot option next time.

Similar to your slave table, should I go post underneath it believing in government data from the 1800's regarding anything is beyond farcical, why would I bother I get the point.