This pretty much runs in line with the general anti-business sentiment we're seeing in North America.
Envy is ugly.
This whole "you didn't build that the government did" and "we all work hard so why are you rich" and "most rich people are lazy" (and so on) talk, is but a naked display of envy.
It's counter-productive to bash other people's success just like it's pointless to protect the French language at the expense of English in Quebec.
The thing I don't like is the narrative seems to point to if you have money, you're somehow crooked.
And that's not cool with me.
Consider this poor fellow Brian Pallister (spoil alert" He's an evil conservative). Rather than celebrate his success from humble beginnings, we bash success based on nothing but projections and perceptions.
"...an associate professor who says that it's 'disingenuous' for the PC leader to say success is a result of only hard work.
"For anybody who doesn't own a $2-million home, does that mean they just didn't work hard enough?" Shannon Sampert, a poli-sci professor at the University of Winnipeg said.
This is outrageous. Is this guy for real? Where exactly is it "disingenuous?" Pallister wasn't inferring that. Stop with the Obamaism. And yeah, sometimes hard work pays off for some and not for others.
Life is unfair. What can I say?
Lemme ask. Does he care, to use American examples, about the wealth on the left? Does he care what Obama does with his money? Mayor Bloomberg? The Clinton family? Gore? John Kerry? Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi ?Elizabeth Warren? George Soros?
Did he care that Paul Martin, the last Liberal PM, was worth something in the neighborhood of $225 million? Or that Justin Trudeau may become, gulp, leader with his inherited wealth?
Maybe there are people on there that gained their wealth and success the "wrong" way, but this guy isn't one of them.
As far as I'm concerned, Brian Pallister IS the North American dream story. He shouldn't have to apologize for his success and what he does with his money.
He didn't want to put it in a GIC. He put it in real estate.
Nothing remotely wrong - financially or morally - with that.
"It all comes down to who you know, who you hob-nob with, that's how you get ahead in the world. It's kind of insulting to everyone else who works hard, but lives in west Winnipeg in a $150,000 house."
What a stupid, ignorant comment.
So. Let's all live in a $149 999 house. Are people like Sampert going to be the arbitrators of what's "good" and "fair" wealth?
Again, sometimes this does happen but it sounds as though he's generalizing. Big time. It certainly doesn't apply to Pallister. Basically, you have to be sorry for your wealth because, apparently, you only amass that kind of money through "who you know?"
It's talk for losers who will get nowhere.
Furthermore, it's irrelevant and illogical to attack him on the basis that he supports "low-income families" ergo he shouldn't build such a big house?
Reminds me of a liberal friend of mine who keeps saying, "how much money does someone need?"
How many stamps does someone need? How many Slushes does someone want to drink? How many...more Mr. Speaker!
Bah.
It all boils down to this piece of advice:
Mind your own fucking businesses. Including you Sampert.
When Obama said "You didn't build that!", I was amazed. Of course they did. They owned the companies that built the roads, they paid taxes which then paid the contracts from the government that the road builders bid on, and the hired and paid the workers who did the physical labor needed. Government never built anything, it doesn't even pay for it or do any work on the infrastructure. Government owns no communications system, no television stations on which small business can advertise, no newspapers, no magazines, no anything that helps businesses sell or expand. All government does is feed off business and workers like a parasite while pretending to be a symbiont.
ReplyDeleteExcuse the rant, please.
...but apparently that ain't so anymore.
ReplyDeleteAnd that's disturbing.