Posted by 3Dee on December 3, 2017, 1:11 pm, in reply to "Re: JFK"
The question is who the takers are -- who is praised and who is villified.
I'll just keep it to one more sentence.
Only one welfare case on the other side of the fence was truly vilified as he left town --- his name is Stan Kroenke --- and that's only because his welfare package wasn't that great.
These welfare cases never seem to be mentioned, and their takings are much greater.
Kroenke makes his money work for him, and only spends it when he gets more.
It's a dicey proposition. If his money works for him, some 'trickles' into St. Louis....but if he doesn't get a return, it goes to LA, where the lams value increased overnight, and now the rat ba$+ards are winning games as salt in the wound.
The people you accuse of being takers on the other hand --- first of all, aren't the welfare kings and queens they are accused of being.
If they were even paid a fair and decent wage for the work they try to do --- so much more of that goes back into the economy. Even if they made the $15 an hour that their efforts are truly worth -- most of that goes back into the economy. They don't have the wherewithal to save it or make it work for them. It goes purely back into the economy.
This is the dirty secret that most people don't get --- this is how people who make under $250,000 a year vote against their best interest when they vote for Reaganomics or for Trump for that matter.
The people at the 'top' can afford to invest their vast amounts of wealth and simply live off the interest from the principal. That means millions or billions never hit the economy, only a tip of the iceberg goes back into the economy.
That, in essence -- keeps the exchange of goods and services from flowing -- or people in various cities and states are fighting for what little falls off the table.
Look at how Jeff Bezos is masterfully manipulating this scenario --- as cities and states are fighting for the honor of giving him more welfare, surrendering revenues, for the honor of him building an HQ2 some damn where.
So then economic development waits for someone to throw crumbs off their table. What we find in this system is few crumbs fall and the people at the table just eat more and get fatter.
Politicians focus on external factors to get people to vote against their issues --- 'Murica', Guns, 'Freedom' and things like that....or because "Jesus would would you to vote for this person (even if they are the antethesis of what he taught)"
The problem of the people at the bottom and their needs will never go away. Their needs are truly a microscope of what the real takers take away at the top -- whether it be government contracts, or wall street fraud...or pitting community against community, or state against state.
Despite what the conservative-controlled media feeds us on a daily basis --- many countries who have insured a safety net on the bottom are the ones at the pinnacle of human development indices..
I mean we hear stories of empty prisons the Netherlands....but we don't hear stories of homeless Norwegians --- and the only Violent Canadians seem to have skates and fight over a black piece of rubber.
It all really does work --- but for all those external reasons that get people fooled at each and every election --- we have to settle for what we have, and keep feeding the takers on the top... while 'Murikkka is distracted worried about what's happening at the bottom....or worried what people do during the anthem..
Stay distracted --- America....the Waltons, the Koch's, the Trumps and so many more thank you!