Anytime you criticize a wealthy man in this country you get accused of being jealous and wanting to take his wealth and redistribute it. Anytime it's the poor you're a racist/classist/misogonyst.

And here I sit subsidizing the rich and the poor alike. There is no good society that I admire on this Earth that doesn't have a solidly educated middle class. None.

I have always had zero interest in being rich and sure as hell no interest in being poor. But I guess I'm gonna have to accept the latter.

"The Republicans bear responsibility for this, too."

Need a little more detail, on why you hold the Republicans to blame for Obamacare.

Why do so many of those are "the haves" telling the rest of us to be happier as "have nots"?

For the economy -- and the debt.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at January 25, 2015 7:26 AM

Every part of the economy, and the doubling of the debt was controlled by a democratic majority from 2006-2014.

This majority was filibuster proof from 2008-2010, when Obamacare was passed, and the debt was doubled.

for a better understanding of the players, and responsibility for the financial crisis, I recommend "All the Devils are Here"

There are a few thousand big democratic donors, and a few hundred Republicans too who belong in jail, many of them worked for Goldman Sachs and Countrywide.

In the Savings and Loan meltdown in the eighties, hundreds of people went to jail.

Obama has protected thousands of crooks, most of them big Democratic Party donors, to keep his Ponzi scheme going.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Corzine

Remember this guy? Didn't think so.....

Why do so many of those are "the haves" telling the rest of us to be happier as "have nots"?

Because they want to make sure none of us hoi polloi actually have economic success and join them in their country clubs and other venues. That is something up with which they will not put.

The question was put to one of the founders of Home Depot (not the Falcons owner): could you replicate what you did with Home Depot today?

Answer: not a chance, too many regulations.

As people are harder pressed to feed their families they successively substitute cheaper foods. Steak -> hamburger -> chicken and so on.

When people run out of other things to eat, the last substitution will be to eat the rich.

Why do so many of those are "the haves" telling the rest of us to be happier as "have nots"?
________________________________

Because they want to make sure none of us hoi polloi actually have economic success and join them in their country clubs and other venues. That is something up with which they will not put.
_______________________________

Good points.

However, I think it's also possible that often, people who are financially secure get misquoted. What many of them are trying to say, a la Peter McWilliams (and maybe Jim Cramer as well), is that you can have anything you want; you just can't have EVERYTHING you want. This may well mean having only the basics of food, clothing and shelter plus only one or two items that aren't as essential. Those who are really good at prioritizing - and enjoying work - will be able to buy extra items.

One of the best ways to tell if I am dealing with a thinking being is whether they think only Republicans are "the rich".

That's easier than asking them about market economies, the single reason for wealth "inequality" today.