Since we do talk about labor and money around here ...
The U.S. of A. has had great wealth disparities before: the late 1920s. The 1880s and 1890s. So the dynamic isn't exactly new.
But the late 19th century was a time of high social unrest. The haymarket riot. The Pullman strike. Little things like that. And 1929 was the front end of the Great Depression ... which saw a wee bit of unhappiness.
My point is, when there is a huge concentration of wealth, problems inevitably result. (If you're a student of history, you might recall the French revolution, yes?)
Funny how the troubles start when people are ground down and desperate.
What's a continuing mystery to me is how removing the social safety net and returning to the glory days of 1894 is better for anyone. If the Top 400 have 80% of the bread, and everyone with significant money is living large behind a walled estate, they still have to go out in the wider world from time to time.
(Won't they have to fret about getting knifed and beaten while standing in line at Starbucks? But then, the executive assistant will be fetching the coffee at Starbucks, so I guess it isn't a major concern.)
(The YouTube above is sort of a companion piece to this one.)
Friday, May 24, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
But she made a lot of money.
AND she used Medicare when she became eligible. There was a gal who knew how to work the system, if not rig it.
Post a Comment