If the Democrats are not (electorally) washed away by a tsunami of voter outrage over Obamacare, they will no doubt seek to make “growing inequality” the principal issue in the 2014 elections. So, let’s apply a little unconventional logic to the subject of inequality.
The “Occupy Wall Street” crowd that took over New York City’s Zuccotti Park
on September 17, 2011 was protesting inequality. They seemed infuriated that
“the one percent” was so much better off than “the 99 percent.” But is this
really true?........The Occupy Guy is better off. .....And why is that? Because
the Occupy Guy is 24 and the FFHFC is 70.
Almost any 70-year-old male would gladly trade all of his worldly goods
for a healthy 24-year-old body, even if it came complete with $20,000 in
student loans. And, very few 24-year-olds would take the other end of that
deal—not even for $41.1 billion.....To Read More....
My Take - There are some points here that should be obvious to the
most casual 0bserver, but I’m going to outline them anyway. First, the “evil” 1% usually worked all their
life to accumulate their wealth. Those
OWS representing the “good” 99% only want what the 1% has and worked for
without any effort on their part and without waiting. They want what others have worked for and
they want it now. The old and ‘evil’
wealthy would be more than willing to give it to them if they would give them
their youth because they know they with their drive, intelligence, ambition and
work ethic [now enhanced by 70 years experience in life] they would have it all
back in five years. The OWS losers would
be broke in five years, demanding the rich give them back their youth and their
money.
No comments:
Post a Comment