this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
805 points (96.4% liked)

Showerthoughts

38273 readers
556 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Lower, middle, and upper class is such an antiquated way of dividing people into groups to keep them at odds with each other.

The fact of the matter is, there are truthfully only two classes. The working class, and the capital class. 95-99% of individuals fall into some strata of working class. If you earn a wage, a salary, or a commission in order to purchase basic necessities- you are working class. If your money makes you money simply by existing, and your assets passively appreciating in value mean that you do not have to work for a living in order to buy basic necessities, then you are in the capital class.

[–] FahrenheitGhost@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

The working class and the capital class = The slave class and the ruling class.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Most people are a bit of both, no?

[–] Furbag@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Ideally, everyone would be in a position to break into the lowest strata of the capital class by the time they reach retirement age and can no longer work. For most people, that translates into a, IRA or 401k built over decades of years working, assets like a house appreciating in value (so that you can borrow against that increased value), and perhaps a pension or some other form of investment that yields dividends.

Even then. I'd argue that if you retire knowing that if you live within your means, your funds will last you for 20 years, you're not actually in the capital class. It doesn't matter for most people, because few people expect to be able to live for that long past retirement and they can always adjust their spending habits to push the number out a bit farther if it looks like they will outlive their retirement savings. But that's just it, it's more like a savings and not endlessly accumulating more and more wealth. For the true capital class, their money passively grows and generates more wealth faster than they can spend it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rooster326@programming.dev 4 points 3 days ago

It's class warfare

Always was..

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 145 points 4 days ago (6 children)

There's never been a middle class. The illusion of the "lazy poor" is fabricated by the wealth class to divide the working class.

[–] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 75 points 4 days ago (13 children)

Yes there was.

In 1960 the US minimum wage was $1.00/hour and the average house was $11,000.00.

Two kids could get married on high school graduation day and be self supporting homeowners by the time they turned 25.

Of course in those days, the rich were content with a mere $1 million...

[–] EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 68 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You are correct! And it's crazy how effective those high corporate tax rates were at distributing wealth to better society and create a healthy middleclass of consumers to fuel an economy and prevent it from collapsing.

Weird how everything's turning to shit now that corporations don't pay taxes and use all their earnings to influence government elections instead of needing to actually be accountable to them.

"Too big to fail" was actually just "too big to stop." So now where there used to be a US government, there is a handful of billionaire cultists.

The middleclass 100% existed. Billionaires just stole it. The money that drove US spending across 3 decades is now all in 5 people's bank accounts doing jack shit to help anyone but those 5 people.

Higher corporate taxes = a middle class. See most Nordic countries as a great example that still exists.

Thank you for making this point. A middle class is the sign of a functioning society.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

actually most middle class voters voted and supported for the policies that destroyed themselves.

they started deinvesting our healthcare and education systems in the 70s, often as a part of the backlash of civil rights and the economic stagnation of the 70s.

[–] EightBitBlood@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Who do you think was responsible for convincing the middle class to vote against their own best interests?

It was the people who didn't have to pay taxes after Reagonomics. They used their money to fill television, print, and eventually social media with propaganda. Propaganda that taxes were too high (for them) despite our entire social safety net outgrowing it's sustainability.

And this form of propaganda was SO effective, the Russians figured they would do the same. Then the Chinese. Now the Saudis. So now we have just about every country in the world that hates America purchasing every second of entertainment they can to make sure we're always voting against our best interests to the point we just about don't have a country.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Triumph@fedia.io 34 points 4 days ago

It is worth noting that:

  • The top income tax bracket in 2025 is 37%, for income earned over $751,600 (~$69,000 in 1960, married filing jointly).

  • In 1960, >$20,000 and <$24,000 was 38% (married filing jointly). (~$219,000 to ~$263,000 in 2025 dollars). The top tax bracket then was 91%, with all sorts of steps between 38% and 91%.

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 days ago (17 children)

You're right, but that's not middle class--that's working class. Making minimum wage and having a comfortable life is working class. The concept of "middle" class was a method of pitting one half of the working class against the other, so the rich could move from millions to billions.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

It's not fabricated, these people honestly think one can live the "welfare queen" lifestyle. Reagan said the words and it resonated with the Republicans, Fox News ran with it. But really, this isn't some master plan. Unless you've been through it or tried getting welfare, you can't know how hard it is and how little you get. I've talked to many people like this.

You have to earn below 130% of the poverty line to get food stamps. More you make, less you get. I will say that when I first moved here I was getting a ridiculous amount for a single guy, and they just kept sending it, no questions asked for 6-months. Those days are long gone.

God knows what you have to do to get an actual check, but you have to be worse off than merely needing food stamps. And those checks are paltry. Unless you're renting a room in someone's house, you're not making rent.

Unemployment is a fucking joke. In Florida, employers have to pay $7,200 when you first start, and they have 6 months to get it all paid into the unemployment fund. I would have got a MAX of $4,200, then it's over. That was less than a month's pay from my last job.

There is a gauntlet to be run to get a single penny. And you have to keep running that gauntlet, over and over again. I could go on and on, but I figured out 3 decades back that it's easier, less time consuming, and more profitable, to work a shit job 40-hours a week.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 days ago (2 children)

how expensive it is to be poor

For anyone that needs the read, Terry Pratchett said it so well it is an economic theory now, the Boots theory.

The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for example. ... A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. ... But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socio-economic unfairness.[4]

From Men at Arms by Sir Terry Pratchett

Also, a history of "people don't want to work" bullshit going back to 1894: https://thunderdungeon.com/2024/07/14/nobody-wants-to-work-anymore/

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

People don't want to work and are lazy is a bullshit talking point even older than 1894.

The first ever modern self-help book ever published (literally called self-help) was made a man with a lifelong history of business and financial failure and yet also still believed that it was no legislation or social assistance, but personal 'morals' and ethics are what gets people out of poverty and into comfort.

It was bullshit then and bullshit now. It is such a dark realization that what causes so much quality of life increases is not productivity or technology but legislation and policy.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It is such a dark realization that what causes so much quality of life increases is not productivity or technology but legislation and policy.

And that's how we got Prosperity Gospel: rich folk trying to justify their lazy asses hoarding wealth and complaining about the people who actually do the work wanting fair compensation for their time and effort.

Prosperity Gospel is a bit older than that. There was a time when people thought that being rich or becoming rich was a direct blessing from god... ironically the people who really first disputed that in Europe were the Dutch, whose trade and double-entry accounting laid the foundation of modern capitalism.

I should mention that in 1001 Arabian Nights, at least in the story of Sinbad the Sailor, Sinbad (as an old man telling his story to a young man coincidentally named Sinbad as well) that his fortune was more luck than anything. At least he acknowledged that.

[–] Devial@discuss.online 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

In general it can be said that poor people do not have the capital to make upfront investments which become profitable over time. Not even just literal investing, but investing in things like a more fuel efficient car, upgrading the insulation in your house/apartment to save on heating, buying non-perishables in bulk when there's a good deal, buying a dish washer instead of hand washing...

So many things that let you save tons of money in the long run, require relatively large upfront investments, that poor people can't afford. That's a big reason why poverty can be such an insidious vicious loop, that can be extremely hard to escape from.

Two identical households, with identical income could have vastly different financial situations, just based on if their income was previously low, and they weren't able to afford any of these investments, vs. If their income was previously high, having allowed them to previously make these large investments to reduce their long term monthly costs, and secure enough liquidity to be able to continue occasionally making these investments.

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Thank you for the expansion.

[–] hayvan@feddit.nl 35 points 4 days ago (8 children)

There is no middle class. There are only working class and wealth class. Just because you are high earner in an office job doesn't mean you're not working class.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 68 points 4 days ago (5 children)

There is no middle-class. There is the working class and the aristocrats.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 14 points 4 days ago (3 children)

That reminds me of a joke.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 14 points 3 days ago

Screwing the poor is a time honored tradition in capitalism.

From Cracked's article, 5 Cruel Ways Being Poor Is Expensive

  • Household Goods Like Toilet Paper Cost More For Poor People
  • The IRS Audits Poor People More Frequently Than Rich People
  • Poor People Have To Pay Extra To Access Money They've Already Earned
  • "New Customer Fees" Are Thinly Disguised Penalties For Being Poor
  • Nutritional Inequality Goes Much Deeper Than Food Deserts

From another article, 5 Screwed-Up Ways The World's Stacked Against Poor People

  • "Period Poverty" Is A Very Real Problem
  • "Transit Deserts" Keep People From Finding Work
  • Low-Income Housing Is Leaving Residents With Massive Energy Bills
  • Low-Income Neighborhoods Experience Longer Emergency Response Times
  • Low-Income Families Are More Likely To Be Audited

Finally, Why We Can't Stop Hating The Poor

  • We Have Laws Designed To Make The Poor Look Like Assholes
  • The Hate Comes From Some Unexpected Places
  • Poor People Smell Bad
  • The Poor Remind Us That Sometimes The System Is In Fact Bullshit
  • We Have To Believe People Deserve What They Get
[–] InputZero@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Because middle class is used wrong in North America.

Poverty class is simple, you don't have enough to live.

Labor class is divided into three;

Low labor, your barely paid enough to scrape by.

Middle labor, your paid enough for your work to live.

High labor, you're paid well for your work. Perhaps you own your own small business.

Middle class, you aren't paid a wage or salary anymore, you're income comes from the things you own. As rich as a politician or nobility but not much political power.

Upper class, in old Europe this would be the nobels. Duke's, Earls, Lords, that type of stuff. In modern north America this would be the ultra rich. You have political power and you own a lot of stuff. This is where most representatives are.

Politician class, former Royal class. You rule, extreme political power and wealth.

Most people in North America think they're in the middle class when really they're in the Labor middle class, it's very different

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

If you’re going to talk about class society, you might as well use the Marxist terms: proletariat, petit-bourgeoisie, and bourgeoise.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Tedesche@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Username tracks.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 21 points 4 days ago

They also don't understand that the impact of the "lazy poor" is exaggerated by the rich to turn your attention away from The Big Theft.

[–] radiouser@crazypeople.online 18 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah, I think people who say that don't realize a few key things.

First, they don't understand the 'poverty tax' - how not having money for things like a security deposit, reliable transportation, or bulk buying actually costs you more in the long run.

And second, they don't see how thin the margin for error is for most middle-class families. One medical bill or job loss is all it takes to fall behind

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 20 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Middle class IS below the poverty line.

The poverty line is a number made up by the wealthy to keep the "less poors" at odds with the "more poors" So that we don't join forces and guillotine the motherfuckers.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 7 points 4 days ago

There are conventional definitions of the poverty line. In France, it is defined by the national institute of statistics as:

The poverty threshold is conventionally set at 60% of the population's median standard of living. It corresponds to a disposable income of €1,288 per month for a single person and €2,705 for a couple with two children under 14 years old. https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/5759045

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 28 points 4 days ago (1 children)

The rich are the lazy ones

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 days ago

That used to be true, pre-1980's, when the middle class was way, way bigger than it is today.

[–] khepri@lemmy.world 16 points 4 days ago (2 children)

There's the Working class, who can't live in society without trading their time for money in some way, or being given charity. And the Capital class, who can live in society without doing either.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago (2 children)

There is no true definition of middle class. People making only $30k a month consider themselves middle class and people making $1 million also think they are middle class.

[–] GuyLivingHere@lemmy.ca 13 points 4 days ago (11 children)

There is no 'middle' class. There is only ownership and labour.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] L7HM77@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 days ago (3 children)

If we guesstimate middle class by comparable lifestyle when the term was coined, it starts around 250k in today money. Comfortable house, lots of kids, multiple cars (but not luxury), at least one real traveling vacation every year, never worrying about paying bills or buying food, all while saving enough to retire by 55. There aren't many people in the US with the income to match that. I'd say the middle class is dead.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] brendansimms@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Let the Leftist infighting commence!

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

"Anyone who has ever struggled with poverty knows how extremely expensive it is to be poor." - James Baldwin

No truer words.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 18 points 4 days ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

It's soooo much easier to be a class traitor when you don't realize you're part of that class

[–] boaratio@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It's really hard to even decide what middle class is. I have a good job, good benefits, savings and retirement account, but if I lost my job we'd be homeless in 6 months.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›