The Problem: Poverty? Or Wealth?

Working with some others (Pinki and Brain) on our social engineering plans, it has become obvious that our simple explanation is not working. Our simple explanation is, “things are bad because we permit capitalism, which leads to people suffering all kinds of negative outcomes, like early death, and greater greater problems with greater chronic illnesses, like diabetes.”

Well, since the reign of Marilyn Monroe’s boyfriend (imagine how jealous Teddy was), we have scootched an ever-growing portion of our GDP toward those who we deem have been left adrift from this dog-eat-dog world of Big Blue Meanies.

Why? Because, the manifeto says, our capitalist system creates the  poor – it forces people to be poor – then when they are poor, they are destined to LIVE THE POOR , UNFORTUNATE LIVES OF THE POOR, SO THEY ETERNALLY NEED OUR HELP.

What, exactly, is it that they do or don’t do? NEVER MIND; it can be addressed by re-electing us, and giving us your money to spend where we see fit.

What is it that they do or don’t do?

Surprisingly, they don’t do what poor people do. In contrast, they do what wealthy people do.


What do the wealthy do? They don’t work. They have means; they have sources of income that magically appear without much effort other than perfunctory involvement. They sleep in. They have their sex life including their dalliances. They drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes, and do drugs. They dress well. They have an easy-going, jovial attitude. They socialize. All day.

Why don’t the rest of us do this? Why is this the lifestyle of the poor, the rich, but not the broad middle class?

Here is my radical idea: the poor are not poor out of the harsh capitalist system, but because they are smart enough to access tremendous wealth.

We are such a prosperous nation that we can allow a great portion of our populance to forego contribution, and be on some kind of trust fund.

The poor are under the bridges not so much because we as a capitalist society cannot support them, but because we can. They are enjoying the fruits of our labors.

They are like the wives of the hard-working entrepreneur husband. she works very little, or none, yet has [fill inthe blank] cable tv, cell phone, manicure, pedicure, a place to live, and other entitlements.

We love to exclaim: how much is enough for these capitalist pigs? A good question. Worthy of an answer? No. But worthy of a life-long self-study pursuit of poverty and wealth? Yes.

Listen: we have all worked alongside the boss’ son. He did not work hard, yet had the car, clothes, and cash. Why? The manager and distributor of the money, his dad, decided that giving the son money would be one way he should properly spread his wealth. The other way to spread the wealth is to have maybe the stockholders, or maybe just some dis-interested ppl, decide where to throw govt money.

I have thought abt this a lot lately. It is a sticky wicket. How to help the poor without giving them the life of the wealthy? I will work to post more extensive notes on this idea: the “poor” don’t suffer like the poor of days gone by; now, w have a ‘class’ of ppl who generate no wealth, but gather the tax-yields just like Levi.These recipients in some ways must be documented as “poor,” but I would also argue that their problem is having a wealthy liefstyle that cannot easily adapt to changes in the economic profile of the U.S.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s