Originally Posted by
American Politics Journal
At financial centers around the world bankers, brokers, and “the other rich” are getting ready to handle those people who might decide that enough is enough and attack them or their edifices. This is either a sign of good thinking on their part or overreacting to the realization that the “proles”, often throughout history, get pretty worked up when they find themselves without jobs, homeless, working for slave wages, or burying their kids. Alice Schroeder wrote a significant piece at Bloomberg on the number of gun permits being issued to high rolling investment bankers...
...That aside, it appears that the boys and girls at Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and other investment houses are still not about to share much of anything with those of us who earn little or nothing in comparison. Instead they are paying fifty thousand dollars for impenetrable armored gates opening onto their pebbled driveways in Connecticut which lead to impenetrable eight thousand square foot homes, used only during the school year or less often, while the owners are away in Kitzbuhl, Bermuda, Palm Beach, or speeding along in their Rivas on Lake Como.
I once knew a man who inherited his fortune from a chemicals giant family. He was so rich that his family virtually owned land enough to form a small state in The Union. He kept a World War II tank in a barn with a collapsing side which acted as a ramp when he fired up the machine and rolled into his 8,000 acres of woodland firing the turret gun just to get his jollies while two or three hundred year old trees went down under fire. I was with him once when he did this. He was a conservative in the truest sense. He feared being poor or even middle class, but he didn’t really have a tank to hurt anyone about it. Today, I’ll bet his grandsons wish they still had that tank – for more utilitarian purposes...
...Where do those the ten thousand yachts of all sizes in Miami come from? Who could own them, what do they cost? Why doesn’t anyone use them more often? What if the same innocently poor observer knew that the interest paid on the yacht was tax deductible in the United States as interest paid on a “second home”?
And no, we can’t afford to pay a few hundred dollars each to get every American decent health insurance each year.
You might notice this week that the poorest and most liberal of us will be cheering on the Democrats who want to provide a less expensive way for people to gain health insurance, but you will also hear the richer among us cheering the Democrat President to spend a billion a year more on the war in Afghanistan.
The “least” of us want to be insured or for our poorest neighbor’s kids to be insured from treatable illness or accident. We with the “most” want the war to continue so we can continue driving our $100 thousand Porsche convertibles without fear of being blown up by a human bomb while in line at Dean & Deluca or Harrods’s Food Hall. Not only that but many of us with “the most” will profit from all this spending on war, yet not profit very much by all this spending on health...
...We have to ask the question – “How much is too much?” – and we must also answer it within the rule of law.
Most important, we have to do this together, not one against the other. It’s not the Democrats and the Republicans that can be trusted to look at some new way of being – it’s the poorest and the richest of us that must sit down and draw up a new set of rules that takes our natural greed into account and keeps that itch under control without destroying anyone’s chance to someday, by luck or not, to own that beautiful house, that wonderful car, and parent those well-educated healthy kids.
This is a tall order – but one that must be addressed, and soon.
If not, then I advise us all: Go out and arm yourselves to the teeth for the end is near.
Don’t believe me?
Well take the word of Henry “Hank” Paulson – one of the richest of us: “Henry Paulson who was the U.S. Treasury Secretary during the bailout and a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, told the Congress last year:
“People “were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system.”
Wall Street=Versalles
Unbelievable....or maybe not so much. Anyway, the writing's on the wall.
).
.
The wealthy are "getting ready"
Suck it, Californians!