Cartoon shows why privileged feel self made.

Well yeah, the more intelligent ones get more responsibility.

I may not know how to wire a house like an electrician, but he doesn't know how to do a budget and projections and contract negotiations and time lines and zoning laws and homeowners rules and property taxes...

You get paid for what you know.

I don't do anything. I sit at a computer and fix other people's problems and make sure everything runs smoothly. I don't sweat. I don't get paid to. I get paid to be responsible enough to handle more complex tasks.

That doesn't mean CEO's don't work hard. They do. The rich (the ones not born into it) all work hard.

http://www.businessinsider.com/rich-people-daily-habits-2014-6

Read that list, and tell me how many of those traits apply to the poor in this country...

Then you'll know why the rich are rich and the poor are poor.

 

When I read comments like this it makes me wonder what leads one to think in such a way. Clearly social stratification is a result of upbringing and education. If one were to visit enough homes and correlate what one sees with how children turn out then they would clearly see the truth in the cartoon.

 

The purpose of the cartoon is to argue that it is "unfair" that some kids grow up with the support of a family with resources while others do not. Therefore, we need to redistribute wealth via socialism in order to attain equality. Easier to do that than to admit the left's policies have damaged families and created poverty.

 

The cartoon is true and is a testament to the fact that SOMEONE had to work hard to enhance his/her future generations. This is the reason why people work hard for their families so that future generations might prosper. BTW what is keeping that woman (in the cartoon) as a wait person? Certainly not the rich guy, he is probably responsible for PAYING the caterer she works for.

 

I've read your list. In every one of the nine things listed I would agree with those on the rich side. The article says, "The key is to get more than 50% to be rich habits." Thus, I must me really wealthy. But I make less than the 160,000 threshold of the article.. Which goes to show that most of those top so many list are more for entertainment than discerning reality.

 

True and also, it's easier to blame the so-called 'rich' than to recognize that life is not, and never has been, fair and, when one reaches adulthood the ONLY person responsible for one's success or utter failure is that person one sees in the mirror.

 

No, the cartoon does not say that. It is your ideological learnin' that is putting words and ideas into it that aren't there. As has been argued many times in this forum the children of liberals tend to be better educated and find better paying jobs than conservatives.

In any case, children tend to do as well as their upbringing allows them. Ask any educator, the most reliable indicator of how well a child will do in school and in life is to look at that child's parents. An ignorant un-educated parent isn't going to put any resources into educating his children whereas a intelligent well-educated parent is going to see that his child is likewise well educated.

 

Perhaps the arguments being made in this thread, mainly by those on the right, is the handiwork of those who have spent considerable wealth and effort to lead certain people to hold such opinions. Makes no sense to me why so many people who have no chance of ever being wealthy and who are never helped by the wealthy are so willing to support and fight for a system that skews everything ever more to the favor of those with the most.

 

Depends on the group of liberals you are referring to. Lily white "elite" liberals in rich Northeastern areas probably do have better educated children. They can afford it, and they manage to feel guilty about it. The most loyal Democrat minority voting blocs tend to lag behind in education.

No kidding. Like I said, the cartoon makes a good case for the intact nuclear family. It makes it all the more puzzling why the left decided to try and tear down that institution.

 

I think Winston Churchill said it best "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

In the context of government control, that quote is a warning. The more we try to make people equal by robbing the middle class, the more misery there will be. The truly rich will NEVER be able to pay enough. And they WON'T. They'll take their $$$$ and go somewhere else. Just like YOU would do if every time you went into a certain store they ROBBED you. You'd avoid that place like the plague.

BTW, the only way you will never stand a chance at getting wealthy or even enhancing your welfare by yourself is by living in a progressive, socialist society.

 

But not everyone is in a profitable profession. You could do all of those things and still nobody would buy your (*)(*)(*)(*) art work.

I'm just saying, those are winning habits. Those are successful habits. How many of our nations poor exhibit over half of those behaviors? Be honest and don't give me some slanted answer.

 

Apples and oranges I'm merely stating that divorce rates are higher among all classes today than they were 20 or 30 years ago. By the way poverty is the result of not getting married in the first place. This by the way is more true of women than of men

 

that's a bit sexist isn't it? I mean a single woman can easily have 3 or 4 BF's at a time giving her money

 

Some of the wealthy did and some didn't but there's no doubt you got to the bottom all by yourself.

 

Of course the OP comic strip "artist" (pretty mediocre skills imo... I could probably do better) forgot to include all the gender based affirmative action and perqs that the girl would get and the boy would not, regardless of socioeconomic class. He also forgot to include need-based financial aid that the middle class person subsidizes with higher tuition rates.

In the US and other industrialized countries, other than a very few, most people's lives are a function of their voluntary choices, not some oppressive class system. The left can't depart from its bald-faced resentment lie narratives for a second, which is why it is losing in the center among reasonable voters. Even children come to understand early on that in a world of limitless opportunity and rewards for hard work and wise choices, resentment is no way to go through life, a shame that "adult" leftists can't seem to learn this fundamental lesson.

 

the lefts 'free love' vs the rights 'make war'.... you think the right created prohibition because of the "make love not war" slogan?

 

But no one is trying to make everyone equal. That is just an exaggeration of those opposed to social spending. The goal of social welfare has always been that everyone has access to essential minimums of nutrition, health care, and shelter.

Poor people, even with public assistance, live in squalor.

 

The U.S. is the best place in the world to be poor. We have program after program to help those who are in need. Even religious organizations (Salvation Army, Catholic Charities etc.) offer help to those truly in need. We have spent literally billions on the inner-cities in this country yet we still see death rates soar in those areas.

Obviously fleecing the taxpayers even more to 'help the poor' is not going to make anything better. And yes, Socialism seeks to make everyone equally miserable because there is not enough money on Earth to fix the problems it creates in the first place. In fact, the more miserable people are, the more the socialists scream about needing more money.

Meanwhile taxes go up and up with the socialists yelling the 'rich' should pay more. When the so-called 'rich' are taxed to the hilt, then the threshold of who is 'rich' will be lowered. Pretty soon, corporations move offshore to avoid draconian anti-business government sentiment, strapped businesses stop hiring and the economy suffers.