As of now, I am in control here, in the White House

Video || Maggie Thatcher Addresses Income Inequality

One thing I’ve wondered about the new, Obama-generated income inequality obsession: How do we know?

Whatever the statistics say, how do people without much money know how many rich people there are? Or whether they’re five percent richer than they used to be?

We all see very wealthy people tooling around in sports cars. Maybe we ride by their mansions. Are you or I suddenly going to join the proletariat in the street and storm the Trump Tower if we see one or two more well off people a year than we used to?

Why, we’ve known about rich people since at least the 1980s, when we all watched Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous. But we only know if there are more rich people if someone tells us about it. And as you’ve noticed, someone is telling us about it.

We are learning through President Obama’s rhetoric of despair. His hope to convince us that we’re a nation of resentful losers, and that the only way we can win is by bringing the successful down. He seeks to infuriate us enough that we’ll storm the polls and elect people who will seize the unfairly gotten wealth of the upper crust.

Because if there are people who are poor, it can’t be because of Obama’s policies. IT’S BECAUSE SOMEONE TOOK THEIR MONEY AND BOUGHT A FERRARI WITH IT. And Obama means to get it back.

The growth in the income gap is far less than it appears when one considers all the new welfare of the last few decades. Or is it, rather, worse, because the new welfare provides a disincentive to earn your own way?

Really, how does it hurt me if someone who is very wealthy becomes wealthier? Does anyone really think there’s not money out there to be made because the rich are hoarding it?

Do rich people keep their money under their mattresses? In a safe behind the Picasso? Buried beneath the bush beside the pool?

No, they invest it. Or they provide jobs. Every job I’ve had, from busboy to journalist, was given to me by a wealthy person. Is Obama’s jobless recovery the result of rich people taking all the jobs and working them themselves?

The real danger to society is not that a few more people might become a little wealthier. It’s that we might prevent them from becoming a little wealthier. Then we’d be less wealthy too.

But at least things would be more equal! We could be a classless, dreary, muck of sameness, and we could all suffer together. Obama would much rather that than allow some people to really, really succeed.

It is an old story. Margaret Thatcher eloquently and fearlessly told it during her last speech in the House of Commons, on November 22, 1990. Have a look, you’ll enjoy this.

18 Responses to Video || Maggie Thatcher Addresses Income Inequality

  1. “We are learning through President Obama’s rhetoric of despair. His hope to convince us that we’re a nation of resentful losers, and that the only way we can win is by bringing the successful down. ”

    as usual, Keith, you put it perfectly. the “rhetoric of despair” married to the politics of resentment = an electorate that voted for Obama twice.

    ironically, while Obama gets the base riled up over the 1%, he himself is hanging out with them: staying at their palatial estates, raking in cash at their Hollywood fundraisers, having them over to the WH to take selfies in the Sit Room.

    it must be really hard for him to put up with them, feeling as strongly about income inequality as he does.

    that last sentence was sarcasm.

  2. What a sharp mind! She could have defeated any man at the Oxford or Cambridge Unions. Loved the bit with her fingers showing the gaps.

  3. Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous? How about Million Dollar Listing, LA and NY, or the housewives? In those you get to see how petty, uninformed, nasty and greedy some people are–and surprise, they are often ugly and they still have to die. So just live your own life and don’t worry about it–it will sort out..