It seems someone here is hell bent on slinging mud, but not so concerned with making a correct point. Not all wealthy people drive expensive cars. Is this too big for you to digest OP? Or do you have to resort to your ill efforts?

Anonymous wrote:16:15 - are you talking to yourself? This thread makes no sense, nor do you.

The university cited is not one I would go to for such a report. But what do I know, I only have three graduate degrees.

Does that make me one of the people you hate?

Please seek therapy for your issues, and then perhaps go back to school for a fourth degree in hopes you'll come out with better critical thinking skills.

OP Here.

Wow, I had no idea how defensive people were about this subject. I don't know why so many posters are threatened by this. And precious few of the critical posts have anything to do with the research. The only one that did pointed out that automobile make and model is not a perfect proxy for wealth, but she avoided discussiong the other studies, of which there are a total of seven if you go to the study itself.

If you have so little willingness to reflect or to respond to the substance, I'd say it reflects the basic truth of the research more powerfully than the studies themselves.

For those that care, the study is not available without subscription, but they provided supporting information on the study here:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/21/1118373109/suppl/DCSupplemental

Lastly, my conclusion prior to the descent of the angry posters was that the issue is not what the wealthy lack as much as what the poorer people have, namely increased empathy and increased respect for smaller amounts of money.

Increased empathy means that they are less likely to like about the duration of the job because they internalize how scary it would be for that person to be unemployed in six months and thus could not intentionally lie about a job's duration.

And as for respect for smaller amounts of money, I think that they have a tougher time lying to get a $50 gift card because to them it is a lot of money, maybe 6 hours of labor. That's a decent shift at a grocery store.

16:15 - are you talking to yourself? This thread makes no sense, nor do you.

The university cited is not one I would go to for such a report. But what do I know, I only have three graduate degrees.

Does that make me one of the people you hate?

Anonymous wrote:Hmm, all the nasty posts on this thread have been from people defending the wealthy from any form of questioning, and the thoughtful ones are from people wanting to consider the question posed. DCUM response seems to confirm the studies!

I noticed this too.

Here's a hint to those who feel attacked by the article- respond intelligently instead of ranting on in a way that makes you look stupid and serves to back up the study's findings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some people find it easier to believe that people with money are assholes. It helps them to feel better about their own miserable lives.

Ad hominem attack. Does not explain the numbers in the studies.

Some people just want to stereotype rich people as assholes, which is totally unfair. Fucking proles do this all the time, because they're miserable little nothings with no lives.

I'll hope this is a troll just trying to make wealthy people look bad.

Anonymous wrote:If you are so determined to cite this "study" OP, I'll bite. The study claims that the nicer cars are more likely to cut people off. The study is *assuming* (yes, assuming) that the wealthy drive expensive cars.

The correlations here are faulty on many accounts. For example, I know many people with expensive cars who are not wealthy.

OP does not sound as if she has ever taken basic statistics.

Wouldn't that be an issue with the authors of the study and not OP? Must the OP have studied statistics to discuss an article? If that is so, why aren't the results of all studies kept confined to scholarly journals and never released to the public?

Anonymous wrote:12:25 - you know not to whom you speak. Your problem, not mine. If you want to cite a flawed article, be my guest. But it does not make it accurate. It does not make you or your bitterness accurate. You are trying to create a firestorm against the wealthy. Not my problem. Get off DCUM and try to better yourself instead of attacking others.

You're responding to me as if I'm the OP, and I'm not, as indicated by me referring to the OP in the third person in my post and not in the first person.

Continue living in your ignorant stupor. Of course I "know not to whom" I speak. You're posting as anonymous just as I am.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some people find it easier to believe that people with money are assholes. It helps them to feel better about their own miserable lives.

Ad hominem attack. Does not explain the numbers in the studies.

Some people just want to stereotype rich people as assholes, which is totally unfair. Fucking proles do this all the time, because they're miserable little nothings with no lives.

It's hard to see your point when you call them "fucking proles". I think you are proving the researcher's point quite nicely. Also, you still are avoiding the content of the research. Do you think the researchers picked the shiftiest rich people they could find, and the saintliest poor people, in order to validate their studies?

Hmm, all the nasty posts on this thread have been from people defending the wealthy from any form of questioning, and the thoughtful ones are from people wanting to consider the question posed. DCUM response seems to confirm the studies!

Anonymous wrote:Just a little more propaganda to pit the poor against the rich......

except that it's called research. and data. and supporting evidence that the rich suck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some people find it easier to believe that people with money are assholes. It helps them to feel better about their own miserable lives.

Ad hominem attack. Does not explain the numbers in the studies.

Some people just want to stereotype rich people as assholes, which is totally unfair. Fucking proles do this all the time, because they're miserable little nothings with no lives.

Anonymous wrote:It also helps to bolster their belief that the wealthy are not deserving of their wealth and therefore, to should be mandatorily redistributed to the "poor" via taxes.

Whereas, if you look at the growing disparity in income alone, it's clear the exact opposite is true: the poor and the middle-class are taxed disproportionate to the services the receive from the government (whether the "rich" in question is a defense executive, a financial industry executive, an executive from one of the heavily subsidized extractive industries, etc, etc...) Meanwhile, the family who are working poor, and who can barely manage to suck $500 per year off the government teat through tax credits is supposedly a beneficiary of "redistribution".

Even the relatively pathetic social safety net that exists in this country for the poorest of the poor is not "redistribution". It's an insurance policy the rich pay to ensure social stability. The effective tax-rate at the end of a pitchfork is 100%

Anonymous wrote:I think some people find it easier to believe that people with money are assholes. It helps them to feel better about their own miserable lives.

Ad hominem attack. Does not explain the numbers in the studies.

Anonymous wrote:If you are so determined to cite this "study" OP, I'll bite. The study claims that the nicer cars are more likely to cut people off. The study is *assuming* (yes, assuming) that the wealthy drive expensive cars.

The correlations here are faulty on many accounts. For example, I know many people with expensive cars who are not wealthy.

OP does not sound as if she has ever taken basic statistics.

That was actually only one of seven separate studies in the research paper. So yes, the car is just a proxy for wealth. But that doesn't explain the other results.

I have a degree in physics. We do a lot of statistics.