“If you have ever lost someone very important to you, then you already know how it feels, and if you haven’t, you cannot possibly imagine it.”
The Bad Beginning pg. 11
The first time around I didn’t appreciate this sentence the way I do now having read the whole series. Snicket doesn’t go into a long explanation of their feelings, or write metaphors so the reader can believe they understand. This line is basically: you either get it, or you don’t. Experiences matter, experiences are unique. I like his acknowledgement of that.
an anonymous online commenter on the current economy. (via alchemy)
LTMC: When I was working at a gas station, I had an old-timer come in and tell that he used to make $2/hour at a factory job when he was in his late 20’s. He said he could feed his whole family for the night by buying a 24-cut pizza for $2. Fast forward to my gas station job, where I was making $8/hour, but a 24-cut pizza in my town costs closer to $20—2.5 times more on a dollar-for-dollar basis. He said he had no idea how I even survived on what I was making (I was insured through college at the time, but had no savings, and relied on family for large expenses).
This is what people mean when they talk about income inequality. The reason wages have not kept pace with expenses is because the nation’s previous method of wage redistribution—union representation—has declined substantially. Wage increases have subsequently been absorbed on an increasingly larger basis by corporate entities and the top 1% of earners. Strong unions used to serve as a soft redistribution mechanism to help ensure that increases in prosperity were shared equally. A critical mass of union representation in the labor force has always had derivative wage benefits in the non-union labor market. That critical mass no longer exists, however. Consequently, the decline of union labor has led to a concurrent decline in wages relative to expenses, because there’s no longer an institutional mechanism for redistribution of earnings increases in the economy. The critical mass of union representation is gone, and nothing has taken its place.
Tangentially related historical note: John Ruskin, the 19th century british painter, had never seen a woman naked before he married, only classical nude statues, so he assumed real women were just as smooth and hairless as the statues showed. He refused to touch his wife when she disrobed on their wedding night, saying she was revolting. She was understandably like ‘wtf is wrong with you brb filing for annulment’ and went on to marry his (former) bff and have a long happy marriage with 8 kids. Ruskin died alone and probably still never having gotten over the whole ‘women have hAIR’ thing.
THE MORAL HERE is that you shouldn’t be like John Ruskin b/c he was a tool and also that media has been delivering unrealistic images of female body hair for a depressingly long time. And that Stoya is absolutely right.