He should only have one penny in that last panel, most of the people I know in the bottom rung are down to their last penny.
Margaret Thatcher responds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnOGaQX04Cs
What isnât illustrated is that a dollar is worth a whole lot less in real spending power than it was in 1980⌠so itâs almost like having a penny.
For true accuracy I think it would be more appropriate for Hollingsworth Hound to say, âBe thankful that you have something,â especially at this time of year.
Hahahaha! Itâs funny cuz itâs true! OhâŚwaitâŚ
Opens Window
âIâM AS MAD AS HELL ANDâŚâ
sees this:
-slowly closes window
Margaret Thatcher was a deluded nimrod if she didnât understand how gross income inequality is harmful to a democratic society, especially in an era when unlimited campaign contributions are a legally protected form of âfree speech.â Money isnât just a means of living in luxury, itâs a measure of oneâs power to shape the world around them.
Imagine, if you will, a scenario in which the bottom 42% of all Americans banded together to raise money for a common causeâonly to be outspent by a single ultra-rich family. Does that sound like a âfree, democratic societyâ to you?
Poor Hollingsworth Hound! Nobody cares about his Affluenza, except judges and like that.
Quickly checks to see his anonymizing software is running, then clicks âlikeâ.
Actually, the âmiddle 20%â is more like the âlower 95%â.
The gap between the top 5% or so (and really, the top 1%) and the rest of us is still pretty astounding.
Not that Iâd mind being quite a few points higher than I am now. . . it would be nice to, every once in a while, get ahead on bills, take the wife and kids out to a decent restaurant, and maybe, just maybe go on a real âHollywoodâ vacation to an actual resort. . . .as opposed to a week off at home, doing chores during a âstaycationâ. . . .
She wasnât deluded, she was just a sociopath and a liar.
Oh how I wish she was here in the room with me now. Iâd drop kick her straight in the nuts
Also likely, I was giving her the benefit of the doubt. Some sociopaths excel at self-delusion.
But hey, she invented soft ice!
Within certain definitions of âfreeâ and âdemocraticâ.
Point taken. I suppose the masses are still free to starve, or to vote for one of two corporate-financed puppets selected for them by the plutocracy.
She ravaged her country to satisfy her ego and her patrons, she consorted with torturers and mass murderers, but that is what she went to hell for.
Thatâs not an honest response to the position that government policy has shaped society to benefit the wealthiest at the cost of the poor and middle class. Behind it sheâs making the profoundly stupid claim that the order of society has to either be a bunch of poor and a handful of rich people, or all poor people. Nobody believes that, and it actually flies in the basic fact behind the criticism, which is that society has been shrinking the share of wealth of the poor and middle class in favor of the rich.
The argument presented is a non sequitur. Someone makes an effort and gets a reward. Another person makes a different effort and gets a different reward. To imply that the more successful effort diminished the other persons reward is nonsense. The presentation is based on envy.
