With thanks to False Economy, via #occupylsx.
And for the record, if that means I pay more tax, so be it.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Yes, if the 99%nprodiced as much wealth they’d be able to pay for 99% of the spending they vote for rather than leaving the 1% to pick up 25% of all income tax.
The politics of envy is laid raw for all to see here
This is the case all over the world, not just the UK. Wealth breeds wealth, and societies are split into the very wealthy and very poor. The rate at which this separation takes place and the ability of a community/society to have a stronger and larger ‘middle-income class’ is usually what defines its ‘economic health’. At last I think so 🙂
I think Jennifer is confusing “producing” wealth with “having” wealth.
The two are not the same.
David Cameron for example has wealth.
But he is a useless layabout who has never done a hard day’s toil in his life.
Is this a false flag attack?
It just emphasises the stupidity of the British class system. In reality, to be an aristocrat you need to be in the 1%, middle class in the 9%, and the rest of us are just ‘ordinary working people’, even if we are not working.
Yet there are people earning £50,000 living in 4-bed executive-style homes who think they are vastly superior to a single-mum in a bed-sit.
They’re not. All of us in the 90% are part of the the same lumpen proletariat.
I’ve met people who made 50K a year, yet could not afford a mortgage. Still Conservative voters, although they do agree now that owning more than two houses should be illegal…lol