Mideast-Style Revolution Impossible in US - The Poor Support the Super-Rich

[sorter]

Here's the artical
Koch: Mideast-Style Revolution Impossible in US - The Poor Support the Super-Rich
What do you think?
.

[JSB]

Originally Posted by sorter

Here's the artical
Koch: Mideast-Style Revolution Impossible in US - The Poor Support the Super-Rich
What do you think?
.

It's poorly written for satire -- no subtlety, no irony, no clever wit, but the content is a pretty accurate description of the current state of society and the economy in the US, I'm sad to say.

[SnerpGoodWord]

A 20th percentile income household in the US has a yearly income of $18,500. That's higher than the 50th percentile income in all but 20 or so countries in the world depending on how you count and how you do purchasing power adjustments. The 50th percentile income in the US is higher than the 50th percentile income in any other country in the world (excet in some years Luxembourg or other tiny oddities).

Translation: the poor here are richer than the middle class nearly anywhere else (including much of Europe). The middle class here are richer than the middle class literally anywhere else.

There's no shortage of bitching and complaining in the US, but ultimately it's clear our economic system is superior for the poor and middle class compared to all alternatives. It's also better for the rich - really, it's just better.

[LostMyMap]

meh, looks like an op-ed piece that's laden with cynicism and negativity. So much so that I don't even feel like putting any effort into sorting out possible truths from his attitude in the writing.

If that's someone's viewpoint about the way things are, that's the extent of their views, then that person wouldn't be able to effect a change, even if the opportunity fell in their laps.

I grew up as a have-not, with a father figure that was sarcastic about 'the way things are'. His frequent lament was, "The rich get richer, the poor get poorer." While I never challenged him on that notion, I came to realize eventually that it was a limiting belief. A scarcity belief pattern that only serves to keep you 'poor.' A belief pattern that looks at select evidence, which is always there, to back itself up.

But in order to leave the ranks of the employed and start my own business, I had to break out of those patterns. This is still a land of opportunity, that most let pass them by because they believe they can't, or that the system will squash them. I could never succeed as a business owner if I was focused on what was wrong. Like anything else, I have to focus on what I can control, and on what I want. And reframe my thoughts. For example, I could consider the super-rich to be the enemy that must be fought and crushed. Or I could try to figure out what kind of product or service they desire, and sell it to them. Which do you think puts more money in my pocket?

Yeah there's problems with the banking system, and the tax system, and so forth, but yet I see so many opportunities every day that the only regret is that I don't have an army of clones to act on everything. (sidebar: That's what emlployees are for. One very rich man told me the secret to his success: Always hire people that are better than you are.)

Low wage laborers have worked for, and built the wealth of wealthy people since the beginning of time. Hardly news. The difference is now, we have more opportunity than ever before to move ourselves from laborer, to business owner, and one day, wealthy. Back when my ancestors worked the land for feudal lords in England and Scotland, that couldn't happen. Sure, there's always detractors and adversity, but the people that transcend the perceived boundaries between 'us' and 'them' do so because they believe they can.

So, do you see the donut or the hole? Are you a victim of circumstance, or a controller of circumstance? Do you see nothing but crisis, or opportunity?

And you know what? No matter how you answer those questions, you're right!

[sorter]

Hmm. I didn't really care or notice much about the artical being satire or how well written it is.
(but now that you mention it, yeah, it ain't great)
The question of will the US have a "spring" has been on my mind so I like his point(s).

I basically think that if greedy bankers go too far (30% unemployeement), we could have a messy revolution.
@SnerpGoodWord - And I don't think it matters that we are relatively richer than others. A major change in our income will make us mad. We're spoiled A-merr-cans.
And unlike the "great" depression, we are much more suspicious of government and how cozy they are with the powers.
But I think the powers-that-be know that and so far have mastered the slow boil technique (like lobsters) for taking our money and freedoms.
But they could mess up. Greed could make 'em sloppy.

I certainly don't want a revolution. We could end up worse off.
But I don't see Washington making the changes we need, i.e. stop being corporate whores.
.

[Brutha]

It's poorly written for satire -- no subtlety, no irony, no clever wit, but the content is a pretty accurate description of the current state of society and the economy in the US, I'm sad to say.

I think it's probably to subtle to be understood by a lot of people.
Did you read the name of the author?
It's the key to getting the joke.

[JSB]

I know the satire was "David Koch" writing the opposite of what the real Koch believes, but I personally didn't find any irony, subtlety or dark humor in it. Satire must have humor to succeed and make its point.

Originally Posted by Brutha

I think it's probably to subtle to be understood by a lot of people.
Did you read the name of the author?
It's the key to getting the joke.