Years ago I was reading Anais Nin's diaries and at one point came across (paraphrased) "Alas, I am so poor. I must go to Paris." At the time, my friend Kathy and I were laughing about what our equivalent would be: "Alas, I am so poor, I must go sit on my front porch."
Which reminded me, today, of an essay by Tad Friend in this week's "New Yorker": Something about his family being so poor, that is until his dad was offered the presidency of Swarthmore College... I'm completely stunned by the ridiculousness of this guy's definition of "poor." And this from a liberal-magazine writer. There are people out there making less than $8.00 an hour and living 4 to a two-bedroom apartment and juggling their bills every month and having to eat fast food and rice while their electricity has been turned off, you idiotic asshole complaining about your Smith-graduate mother's decorating taste in your 15-room mansion. I'm completely repulsed by the ignorance.
And then there was the reality show of a couple of years ago. About designer Tommy Hilfiger's teenaged daughter and friend. At one point all were at the daddy's estate in the Bahamas or someplace, looking over a gorgeous sunset. And Tommy's daughter opined: "We must have done something really good in a past life to deserve this." (This is why I hate Hinduism.) You didn't do anything to deserve anything, you spoiled, rich shits! Your daddy earned the money! He worked the system and he earned the money, and good for him, but don't sit there and say there's something profound and spiritual about why your family now has money!
In the past two US presidential elections (2000 and 2004), a point has been made by Democrats and Republicans alike: "This is not about class warfare." Why has a living wage for the working poor become "class warfare"? Creepy, creepy corporate propaganda.