Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

navywater t1_izbrwv5 wrote

I call bullshit. How could you possibly get 40 maids a milking for only $290???

689

Fallacy_Spotted t1_izc6omo wrote

It looks like they didn't include the cows, unless they assumed they were milking themselves.

290

navywater t1_izczyyo wrote

If they are milking themselves that would be a massive up charge. I don’t think you could find 40 women willing to do that for less than $100 an hour

25

Dengareedo t1_izd412y wrote

On the news today (aus) they are setting up a milk bank like the blood bank

So may not be that hard to do

7

Maldunn t1_izd1quk wrote

self milking maids cost even more!

5

Nsvsonido t1_izfh7b0 wrote

If they were milking themselves I believe it would be more expensive than using a cow

1

ThunderThighsMegee t1_izc82cu wrote

I thought so too but it seems they did the math of 40 people working the federal minimum wage for an hour.. I dunno man, I’ve never heard of a maid willing to work for $7.25 an hour

88

samirac1e t1_izcdgng wrote

They hired undocumented maids-a-milking so they wouldn’t have to pay a living wage!

69

TrueBirch OP t1_izced5o wrote

Pretty sad how far the federal minimum wage is from a living wage. I don't know if $15 is the right number, but $7.25 is too damn low.

30

pingieking t1_izcfhy5 wrote

$15 isn't the right number because that's too damn low too. I remember reading a few months ago that if min wage kept pace with productivity since the 1960s it would be just over $20 now.

25

electro1ight t1_izcucmw wrote

This is why it's horseshit to pick a number. Peg it to CPI and be done with it. Just like social security, Medicare etc.

10

Ok_Frosting4780 t1_izcn03k wrote

Living wage varies from place to place. Some places in the US it probably is around $15/hour. Others may have living wages as high as $30/hour. What they should do is set the minimum wage based on a formula for local living costs.

8

TrueBirch OP t1_izcpv9l wrote

Some minimum wage jobs aren't designed to support someone living solo. I live in Washington DC, where the minimum wage is north of $16/hour. That makes sense here. But it's still not enough to buy a studio apartment.

5

tombradysballz6 t1_izd0gxk wrote

There are a couple bigger issues at play here. Minimum wage was created to protect unskilled workers, keyword unskilled. The intention was you’d be able to develop valuable skills, increasing your value to the company, which results in a pay bump because capitalism pays off value added.

When these laws were created though they didn’t plan for mega corporations like Walmart and McDonald’s (you can only add so much value at a job that can be replaced by a computer who works for free) so people get stuck making an unlivable wage because they’re either 1. Too lazy or disinterested to invest in themselves or 2. Are so behind that they need to work crazy just to keep afloat.

I’d be surprised to see major change on the federal front because ya know lobbyists so who the fuck knows, soon we may not have a middle class.

7

TurtleWitch t1_izf158j wrote

If it's not enough to get a studio apartment then it doesn't make sense

1

mykineticromance t1_izcx0cr wrote

the song doesn't say how long the maids were hired for, so the only way we can interpret being given any of the humans in the song is slavery. The prices for the birds aren't 1 hour of work, it's for ownership.

5

TrueBirch OP t1_izce8hk wrote

PNC Bank's annual report makes a lot of judgement calls. That's inevitable given the subject matter. I'll give them credit, though, since they keep their methodology consistent from year to year, which lets them accurately report the inflation.

2

TrueBirch OP t1_izcqa31 wrote

PNC Bank uses the federal minimum wage to calculate the cost of an unskilled farm laborer. Sadly, some farm workers earn even less than that.

9

hexe86 t1_izg03xy wrote

Slave wages

1

navywater t1_izg2bh9 wrote

Bruh it’s not a voucher to go see some people milking cows somewhere. You have to transport 40 women cows and buckets to your house in order to present them as a gift. That means a bus for the maids, trucks for the cows, and a serious amount of planning.

1

cox_ph t1_izb83r4 wrote

They may be the most expensive of this set of gifts, but definitely not the ultimate gift.

Swans are assholes.

211

TrueBirch OP t1_izb99iy wrote

True, but I'd say that geese are even worse. Especially when protecting their eggs.

40

SwarthyWalnuts t1_izc9qc3 wrote

Interesting that you interpreted it as a cumulative gift, each verse being an additional X number of gifts. I wonder what the results would be if it was just the numbered amount of each gift.

21

T_that_is_all t1_izcaugl wrote

That's how I've always interpreted it, but it seems to be a steady belief that it adds to the qty with each run through of the verses. Makes no sense. The song is about giving gifts over a certain period of time, so how would each day happen multiple times, without time travel/manipulation.

14

soniclettuce t1_izcxefx wrote

Read the lyrics...

>On the first day of Christmas my true love sent to me A partridge in a pear tree

>On the second day of Christmas my true love sent to me Two turtle doves, And a partridge in a pear tree.

You're clearly getting both things on the second day. And so on as the days continue.

There's no time travel you're just getting duplicate gifts every following day.

11

SwarthyWalnuts t1_izcy7yv wrote

Or the lyricist is just reiterating the gifts received on previous days.

6

soniclettuce t1_izczg67 wrote

That would be a pretty weird way to use the word "and".

5

SwarthyWalnuts t1_izdsekz wrote

Not if it’s simply a list of gifts given in prior days. I’ve always interpreted each verse as two separate thoughts: a gift given on a certain day followed by a listing of all prior gifts. I think this is plausible due to many of the singers’ renditions of this song vocally drawing out the current days gift, sometimes followed by a brief pause, and then running straight through the list of past gifts, as if keeping track or running tally.

4

robodut t1_izd9rvv wrote

Local radio station here in Hawaii does this. Every year they calculate the cumulative cost of all the gifts and they do it this way where everything is given multiple times so I've always thought that's how it was.

2

JulianMarcello t1_izd3jtv wrote

I seriously doubt that the writer of the song intended for repeat gifts, even though he/ she uses the word “and”. What other word would work as well and still keep the song “intact”?

If I gave my wife a puppy on day 1 and a ring on day 2. Well, I’m not also giving her a another puppy on day 2. Why would anyone think that, regardless of how I write it down?

4

cockmanderkeen t1_izdan1j wrote

Sucks to be your wife with her one puppy.

7

randomusername8472 t1_izev3sv wrote

If I said,

  • "On day one I give you A
  • On day two I give you A and B."

Then you would have 2A and 1B.

​

Otherwise I would say

  • "On Day one I give you A.
  • On Day two I give you B."

Then you would have 1A and 1B.

​

>Why would anyone think that, regardless of how I write it down?

Because words have largely agreed upon meanings and if you deviate from that meaning massively people don't understand you.

If you said to someone:

"On day one, I'm giving my gf a puppy, and on day 2 I'm giving her a puppy and a ring"

Then I'm certain almost all native English speakers would understand that you have given her a puppy on day one, and then another puppy and a ring on day two.

3

Grigoran t1_izcjbzo wrote

Well if folks would quit oiling those majestic eggs up we'd be able to see more of the Pride of Ornithologists everywhere

2

homity3_14 t1_izbaezj wrote

I see the gender pay gap is alive and well.

164

8bitbebop4 t1_izbodje wrote

You need to own land to be a lord. According to preddit anyone can be a lady.

5

WhenThatBotlinePing t1_izc0uh2 wrote

I’ve never understood this person’s priorities. He seems really stuck on gifting birds. Who wants this many birds?

143

pingieking t1_izcfp62 wrote

The song was written for the pidgeon lady in Home Alone 2.

60

lightms1729 t1_izb6csr wrote

How are the lords/ladies/maids prices calculated? I'm assuming it's not slavery.

Also, how do swans cost ~1900 dollars? That can't be right.

127

Not-your-lawyer- t1_izbkrcg wrote

Also, "ladies" can be pretty status-neutral, but "Lords" isn't exactly ambiguous.

I find it hard to believe that you hiring titled nobility to dance for you comes that cheap. $1398 each? Since when did the aristocracy sell themselves for so little?

82

JadeDolphi t1_izbtzbg wrote

Everyone is assuming they were hired and not captured in battle.

54

Grason20 t1_izbx88k wrote

It is thought that this song originates in 1780, which is relative peace (12 years before french revolutionary wars)

12

ReddFro t1_izbut1y wrote

While I agree your historic lords would be very pricy, there may be some budget options.

  • Do people like Michael Flatley - “lord of the dance” count? Not sure what he’s doing now but might go for less than $2k
  • What about drug lords?

If we’re going with more traditional titled options:

  • There are about 785 lords in the UK parliament per a few websites, which seems like a lot so a few of them might go cheap
  • Also you can apparently pay to “Become a Lord or Lady” by buying a presumed title for prices like £195. Not sure its very legally binding, but this seems like a cheap route
11

AuburnElvis t1_izc9gvw wrote

I bet they counted Jesus as one of lords and that's where they got the savings.

6

Redburned t1_izcycol wrote

Naw that “established titles” shit is a scam

4

Chemputer t1_izerieg wrote

>Also you can apparently pay to “Become a Lord or Lady” by buying a presumed title for prices like £195. Not sure its very legally binding, but this seems like a cheap route

Yes, and you can also have bridges and stars named after you, too. All of them are scams.

2

BrightNooblar t1_izbyt61 wrote

I think its the total cost to hire Lorde to do one leap.

6

PM_me_oak_trees t1_izdbzqh wrote

I think you don't pay them directly. For that much money, you can throw a party good enough to attract nobility, and when they've had enough to drink, the lords will start dancing voluntarily.

5

4737CarlinSir t1_izc7lqk wrote

Lord's in the House of Lords get an allowance of £323 a day - just under $400. But many of them are doddery old buggars and I can't see many of them leaping.

3

adzz182 t1_izf8806 wrote

They're pretty cheap nowadays. Members of the UK House of Lords don't even get a salary, just a £166/day attendance allowance and you only need 10 of them, which is like $2030...

1

TrueBirch OP t1_izb6wgp wrote

According to PNC, "Hatcheries provided the cost of the hens and swans." Not sure the exact seller. This website suggests that some places charge even more.

5

acvdk t1_izd6m1p wrote

I saw this once a many years ago and they used the partner billing rate for the law firm of Miles Lord, an attorney in MN. His firm was family run and they had multiple “Lords” on staff.

2

ghtw3 t1_izbjg29 wrote

$250 for a gold ring? She's saying NO, buddy.

72

Milamber69reddit t1_izb711r wrote

I looked up the price of swans and the numbers that I got are way more than that. As it is swans a swimming. That means that they are hatched and not eggs. The least expensive that I could find was the white mute at $3,083 each with free shipping. That comes to $129,486. The ones I would rather have are the Australian Black Swans. Those come in at $6,500 each with a grand total of $273,000. Trumpeter Swans and Whooper Swans are even more.

27

ItsHowWellYouMowFast t1_izb7dre wrote

Bet you didn't wake up this morning thinking you would know the price of a swan today

35

TrueBirch OP t1_izb9fp0 wrote

PNC cites "a national bird supplier" as its source without giving additional detail.

8

Macrophage87 t1_izbevc3 wrote

But how are they more expensive than ladies dancing, or has the slave trade really collapsed in recent years?

7

TrueBirch OP t1_izbfm7v wrote

That's the cost of rental, not the cost of buying dancers

9

Macrophage87 t1_izbfqrq wrote

Can't you rent the swans then?

3

TrueBirch OP t1_izbhc90 wrote

PNC sets the methodology. To be fair, they've kept it consistent over the years to enable year over year comparisons.

7

RyanfaeScotland t1_izer2pv wrote

>The least expensive that I could find was the white mute at $3,083 each with free shipping.

Not sure who your swan guy is, but if you get me $78,750, I'll get you 42 swans.

3

mrber008 t1_izcwp8i wrote

This data is profoundly ugly

24

mightbeacat1 t1_izgc5wu wrote

Right? I understand that the red and green is festive, but my poor eyeballs.

5

FindTheRemnant t1_izbq0is wrote

30 Lords cost more than 36 Ladies?

The patriarchy strikes again!

18

NovaticFlame t1_izbpgxr wrote

Not really a fan of the layout here. The box labels should be to the left of the bars or a different color. Since they are in the middle of the bar and same color, the data looks messy and unclear.

16

TrueBirch OP t1_izceqbo wrote

I actually agree with you. I saw this on my phone after posting it and realized I really should have used a different approach. I included my fully reproducible code if you want to give it a stab.

1

NovaticFlame t1_izcnqr7 wrote

Ha, I wish I could! Sadly, I don’t know how to display data the way you’re doing it. I’m much more… vanilla in my skills lol. Just my opinion!

2

TrueBirch OP t1_izcpqsa wrote

I encourage constructive feedback, so thank you. And don't bash your own skills. I started my journey in data science by reading Visualize This. Skip ahead a decade and I run data science for a corporation.

1

OL-jordy t1_izch22z wrote

I’m sorry I’m confused… what’s up with the numbers that are before each object? Like its 12 days of Christmas? Why is the lowest number 12? The song says FIVE golden rings not FORTY?!

10

TrueBirch OP t1_izcj1uv wrote

As PNC explains it in their calculations, "This represents the total cost of all the gifts bestowed by True Love when you count each repetition of the song, totaling 364 presents."

9

OL-jordy t1_izcjaur wrote

You do understand when the song repeats a verse that it actually ISN’T an accumulation of past repetitions right?? That logic is so flawed.

21

soniclettuce t1_izcw9uq wrote

>On the first day of Christmas my true love sent to me >A partridge in a pear tree

>On the second day of Christmas my true love sent to me >Two turtle doves, >And a partridge in a pear tree.

>On the third day of Christmas my true love sent to me >Three French hens, >Two turtle doves, And a partridge in a pear tree.

How do you interpret that and NOT have it be cumulative?

16

Khal_Pwno t1_izd3psi wrote

I always assumed they said no to the gifts, so the true love takes the gift(s) back and returns with the same the next day and a new one added on.

7

solsbarry t1_izcmg09 wrote

I totally agree. This makes me want to close my pnc account.

13

Graylian t1_izcqoxd wrote

To me the song is cumulative considering the day is said at the beginning of each verse.

On the fourth day: four calling birds, three French hens...

10

portalscience t1_izer48m wrote

It is recalling the previous day's gifts, so you know just how amazing their true love is. If you didn't repeat them on subsequent days, no one would remember the pear tree by day 12.

3

OL-jordy t1_izcvchp wrote

I would like to see what the cost of these items would have been during the original time period of the song!

2

wgp3 t1_izck6ja wrote

Each day they recite what was gifted to them. Each day they get all the gifts of the days before plus a new gift. So, for example, the first day you get a partridge. But on the second day you get two turtle doves and a partridge. So now you have 3 partridges and two turtle doves. Repeat as the days go up. So the total number of any given item will be equal to the number given times the result of 13 minus the day it was given, or Total = N(13-d). So golden rings is 5(13-5) which is 40. Partridges is 1(13-1) which equals 12. Etc etc.

4

TrueBirch OP t1_izb46ol wrote

I created the chart using R and ggplot2. The full reproducible code is pasted in a following comment.

This post made me curious about how much you'd have to pay for each set of gift in The 12 Days of Christmas. Turns out PNC Bank tallies the prices every year. They make a few judgement calls, such as treating a "maid a-milking" as the cost of hiring a single individual at the federal minimum wage. Here's how PNC explains its methodology:

>

"The partridge and dove prices came from a national bird supplier. Hatcheries provided the cost of the hens and swans. The price of the geese came from a waterfowl farm. A national pet chain provided the price of the calling birds, or canaries. The pear tree price came from a Pennsylvania nursery. A national jewelry chain provided the cost of five 14-carat gold rings, and PHILADANCO, a modern dance company in Philadelphia, offered the price of ladies dancing, while Philadelphia Ballet supplied the cost of the Lords-a-Leaping. Maids-a-milking are the only unskilled laborers in the PNC CPI and, as such, they reflect the federal minimum wage. Year after year, the sources for the prices remain the same for the most part for consistency, but they have changed on occasion due to changes in the market or business landscape."

8

TrueBirch OP t1_izb47vx wrote

library(tidyverse)

price <- tibble(item_name = c("12 Partridges in a Pear Tree", "22 Turtle Doves", "30 French Hens",

"36 Calling Birds", "40 Gold Rings", "42 Geese a-Laying", "42 Swans a-Swimming",

"40 Maids a-Milking", "36 Ladies Dancing", "30 Lords a-Leaping",

"22 Pipers Piping", "12 Drummers Drumming"),

total_cost = c(3362.16, 6600, 3187.5, 5399.64, 9960, 5040, 78749.58, 290,

33232.48, 41940, 6042.8, 3266.93)) %>%

mutate(total_cost_rounded = scales::dollar(round(total_cost)))

price$item_name_ordered <-

ordered(price$item_name, levels = price$item_name)

ggplot(price, aes(x = item_name_ordered, y = total_cost, fill = "#D6001C")) +

geom_col() +

geom_label(aes(label = total_cost_rounded),

position = position_stack(

vjust = 0.5)) +

coord_flip() +

labs(

title = "Total cost of each gift in the song \"The 12 Days of Christmas\"",

y = "Total cost of each item in the United States in 2022",

x = NULL,

caption = "Created by TrueBirch using data from PNC's Christmas Price Index.

Total cost is the unit cost multiplied by number of times a gift is given."

) +

scale_y_continuous(label = scales::dollar) +

scale_fill_manual(values = "#D6001C") +

theme(

panel.grid.major = element_line(colour = "gray60"),

panel.grid.minor = element_line(colour = NA),

panel.grid.major.y = element_blank(),

panel.background = element_rect(fill = "#599C5D"),

plot.background = element_rect(fill = "gray93"),

legend.position = "none",

plot.title = element_text(size = 17),

plot.caption = element_text(size = 11),

axis.title = element_text(size = 13),

axis.text = element_text(size = 12),

strip.text = element_text(size = 12)

)

5

cwtcap t1_izb6rpv wrote

Getting my credit card out for buying Swans!

2

CollisionCourse321 t1_izcftth wrote

lol idk anything about swan markets but anyone can beat that bid for 42 swans. You telling me I can't find a swan on the market for under 1k a swan when I'm buying at that scale??? lol - terrible, untrustworthy data.

3

SilverStar9192 t1_izcievi wrote

also they seem to be purchasing the swans and other birds, but only hiring the human dancers and such for one performance only. I would think that you could make an arrangement to rent some swans, if you looked around, so it's not really a fair comparison of one performance versus unlimited ownership.

3

TrueBirch OP t1_izcj7o8 wrote

PNC makes some judgement calls to be sure. In their defense, they use the same methodology every year, so at least the numbers are consistent year-over-year.

3

Any_Sundae_24 t1_izcltfb wrote

As someone who is intimately familiar with the trade of ornamental waterfowl I can tell you that those prices are much to high for swans and they would go for closer to 200-500 for a young bird and up to maybe 1200 for a mature breeder.

3

Fitzna t1_izd3te5 wrote

Does that include the pear tree?

3

TeenThrowaway13 t1_izd5pwi wrote

If you hired 9 women to dance 4 times it would certainly not cost 33k what the hell ? If you find them randomly off the street and paid them 250 each it would only come up to 9k? How long are they dancing for? 5 hours? Jesus

3

David_F_Pumpkins t1_izf4z2f wrote

Uh, do you get to keep the maids a milking? Because at just over seven bucks apiece…

3

TrueBirch OP t1_izfe850 wrote

PNC assumes that you pay each one minimum wage for an hour.

3

vleester t1_izft8gy wrote

I like the idea but this is unpleasant to look at.

The amount of Red and Green is a bit much.

I think this is one red/green chart where being colourblind might be advantageous.

The labels being all over the place.

Labels hiding the data!

Axis repeating the title.

3

TrueBirch OP t1_izfuaid wrote

I actually agree with you. I was going for a Christmas theme and it really didn't work out. Normally I'm very restrained in my use of color, and I think I'll go back to that aesthetic.

I also looked at it on my phone after making the post and realized it's hard to read on mobile. I could have dropped the on-bar labels without losing any data, and I could have made it narrower and longer for mobile-friendliness.

3

vleester t1_izgh59v wrote

Good luck! Try super subtle background colour, sort out the labels, no boxes needed probs, etc. I also recommend Tufte’s book on data vis!

3

HoggingHedges t1_izbx55m wrote

Swans would be difficult in the UK, the King owns them so it’ll be a name-your-price job

2

Nannarbuns t1_izbyiiq wrote

Inflation's really hit the swan market

2

X-Bones_21 t1_izc24x4 wrote

I’m really surprised that 40 gold rings would be less than 10 grand. Wouldn’t gold cost more than that?

Let’s get some gold necklaces for those swans.

2

SilverStar9192 t1_izci1r6 wrote

I think 14carat gold plated rings can still be advertised as "gold rings." One of the properties of gold is that it can be hammered really thinly and still be useable, hence if you want to be cheap you just use a really thin layer. Edible gold leaf on desserts is a thing and actually isn't as expensive as you might guess due to the extreme thinness of the gold.

3

X-Bones_21 t1_izcsfg2 wrote

OK, that makes sense. I remember learning that some of the properties that make Gold extremely valuable are it’s high ductility and malleability…. but that also allows it to be spread very thinly across cheaper materials!

2

shortee-sama t1_izc71pq wrote

I’m not sure how a colorblind person supposed to read this chart. It’s a big grey block. Please consider those with differences when choosing colors to mix together.

2

plutopius t1_izdakcz wrote

It doesn't look any better in color, trust me.

2

drthsideous t1_izcmad4 wrote

These numbers are inflated says this Zookeeper. But I've got a swan guy, so I'm all set either way.

2

TrueBirch OP t1_izcq5tm wrote

The numbers come from PNC Bank. I used their numbers since they have a whole system put together.

2

TheSn00pster t1_izd5pyu wrote

I think you’re undershooting the cost of the top 5. Human trafficking ain’t cheap.

2

isSlowpokeReal t1_izd74o8 wrote

In my home state you’re actually allowed to kill swans on sight because they’re invasive and harmful to certain indigenous species.

2

Ribbet87 t1_izd81qc wrote

Have I missed something? Where did the number of each of the gifts (not the cost) come from? I’m confused 😭

2

JanitorKarl t1_izf44t2 wrote

Gift: partridge in pear tree.

Number of times given: 12

Total number of partridges and pear trees: 12

Gift: five golden rings

Number of times given: 8

Total number of rings: 40

2

mynameismy111 t1_izyccp3 wrote

Ladies dancing

Strip club pricing consulted?

2

Doctorthulhu t1_izcrnbt wrote

And swans cost nothing if you have the balls to catch them at the park.

1

hotdogginon t1_izctq25 wrote

Wow I thought the swan figure was bullshit until I looked it up

1

Ledge_r t1_izcytdp wrote

I learned something today that I didn’t think I would but I now know that Swans are in fact more expensive than I thought, and golden rings are cheaper than I thought.

1

absentmindedbanana t1_izd4srw wrote

Idk, this depends where you live… prices change based on location. Still a cool graph though

1

darth_nadoma t1_izd5c5y wrote

A feast with live music and dance performances. That's a really good gift.

1

sixes-sevens t1_izd7lsb wrote

Who tf knew swans were that expensive. Google the price of a swan. $5249/ a pair....

1

level1enemy t1_izda2dm wrote

This is hilarious I love it

1

Odd_Ad50 t1_izesx4b wrote

I want to call bullshit but I'm far too lazy to check these things so kudos

1

cococolson1 t1_izevgek wrote

Why the hell are swans so expensive???

1

ScaryFoal558760 t1_izf1f0v wrote

Is the partridge including the cost of a pear tree? Mature fruit trees are quite expensive

1

TrueBirch OP t1_izfnruv wrote

Good point, PNC should add that expense

1

JanitorKarl t1_izf30q8 wrote

How much are pear trees these days?

1

temp1876 t1_izf5ngd wrote

Swans are free, they are in the park and you can just take them.

Nobody will stop you

1

No-Intern-2531 t1_izf7meb wrote

Why do people count each verse as incremental to the last one? It's just a list that is getting expanded. You don't make each verse additive.

When someone sings a love song, do you think each chorus is about a different lover?

1

Popbobby1 t1_izfg8fk wrote

36 Women only costs less than 1k each? (Assuming that you're buying to own all of these)

1

bbiibbssffaa t1_j0ae766 wrote

I never thought that what the song described was 12 total partridges, etc. I just thought we were recounting the previous days.

1