General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI hear about entitlement "reform" and I just think about this guy in the Big Black Shoes...
...and all these teeny little toy soldier lookin' plastic figures holding him up.
Maybe that guy is the Pentagon budget. Maybe he's the banks that are too big to fail. Maybe it's the true 1%. I'm 40. I could come up with a dozen things that could be filling those shoes.
Nah, I don't always know who's taking a turn in the Big Black Shoes...But I do know you and I are them little plastic people holding the Mr. Big Black Shoes up.
If you make $7k a year, you're holding him up.
If you make $25k a year...$50k a year...$100k a year...you're still one of them little plastic people holding up the Big Black Shoes.
We live in a country with over five million millionaires, and all I hear is how the little folks who hold 'em up need to do a little more heavy lifting.
PB
samplegirl
(11,476 posts)how much do we have to love rich people??? Excellent Post!
Arkansas Granny
(31,515 posts)They deserve to have it all.
siligut
(12,272 posts)The protagonists from literature, they are the main character and all the other people are the supporting cast.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)There are some people in the bottom too, who get a fair amount of free shit. They aren't necessarily holding anybody up, they are being carried by other people too. Often that is because of necessity. Sometimes it is not.
Even myself. when I only worked part-time (partly by choice, I did apply for full time jobs in animal control and finance that I did not get, but chose to go from full time to part time as a janitor), clearly I was not doing as much lifting as a part-timer as I am as a full timer.
But it's not all about paying work either. Many people are volunteering a lot of time too, and doing other unpaid work that helps the community. And some perhaps aren't. Of the 11,000 people who vote Democratic in this County, less than 20 of them are volunteering their time to work as a precinct person. Many of them have never even given a dollar to help the party.
Even some people at work aren't necessarily pulling their weight. Maybe some people are posting on DU while on the clock, while the guy in the next cubicle gets the report done. I work pretty darn hard at my job. My number two guy, my supposed right-hand man, he does a fair amount of slacking.
I know it won't be popular to say this, but imagine that graphic with every fifth person sitting down. The rest will have that much more of a burden.
sangsaran
(67 posts)...maybe you should redirect your envy to Mr. Big Black Shoes, so we can all take our well-deserved rest?
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)The comment you're making is viewing things through one set of lenses, and that's fine. But the scope is very focused and (not meant as a pejorative) myopic. If you've read Fredrick Douglass' autobiography, you'll be familiar with the fact that even among the enslaved, some do more work than others. My OP is not attempting to provide some all-in-one answer to the inequality among humanity, but to show the disparity between what the great mass of citizens are expected to give up versus what the very wealthiest among them are.
PB
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Many of those people that are frequently considered lazy, or accused of not pulling their own weight, or, people who get lots of "free shit" are disabled. By this I am not referring only to obvious mental and physical disabilities, but also to those that are not generally visible. We live in a society that demonizes the poor, a society where people frequently assume that, if someone who appears "normal" is getting some kind of federal assistance (or, free shit, as you said) they must simply be lazy and gaming the system.
If every fifth person is sitting down, perhaps, rather than getting angry that they're sitting down, we should try to determine why. We live in this age of a sort of fantasy style economy. For instance, the stock market goes up, job numbers look a little better (in terms of overall employed) yet at the same time wages go down, the government, already struggling, struggles more because it is struggling to pay tax relief to corporations who actually did not pay income taxes... and so the cries for austerity. Rather than a more fair, progressive tax system, we cut so called entitlement programs, we have this completely bizarre sequester that is shutting down more business for the average people, laying off workers and draining funds from programs that are desperately needed.
People who have worked for a decade and more are losing their jobs because the government basically invented this sequester, which is simply austerity in disguise. Yet corporate profits are at an all time high, the previous elections spent ridiculous amounts of money, our tax dollars are being spent to maintain the status quo for banks and corporations that, through their greed, largely manufactured the current economic crisis.
In my experience, those of us who are receiving federal assistance, in general, greatly need it. It does not provide a lifestyle of luxury, it does not make up for a decent job with a fair wage, in many instances, it doesn't even enable one to have a home, food on the table, or heat in the winter. The more we cut these programs while praising the wealthy "job creators", the sicker we will become until eventually we reach another Great Depression. The 1920s and what happened during that era might very well be a good sign of what we should expect in the near future.
I despair at the anger directed towards the most unfortunate of us. I despair at the common misunderstandings and apathy, the notion that, if I get mine, who cares about anyone else. We built cities, Nations, unions... based on the understanding that we are stronger together than when alone.
mbperrin
(7,672 posts)ride.
My mother-in-law, who worked 45 years as a waitress and raised two daughters on her own after her husband abandoned her and the girls and was never heard from again, had saved enough money to buy a small one bedroom house with a mobile home in the back yard as a rental property.
After retiring on Social Security ($746 per month) and the proceeds from the rent trailer ($300 per month), she was diagnosed with lung cancer. A non-smoker, but lived her life among the cotton fields and gins of the Texas Panhandle. She could only qualify for at-home care by selling the mobile home, because it was an asset beyond her own home, and that is not allowed.
I would invite anyone to try living on less than $800 per month and paying the difference on prescription meds, as well as the difference between benefits and amounts billed, while bedridden. She finally passed away, but that was her reward for 70 years of living and 25 years of child-raising, long before there was anything like food stamps, TANF, or other programs. No child support from the absentee husband, she simply worked extremely hard her livelong life.
Now if anyone can justify the idea that she had too many assets to receive assistance on healthcare, I'd like to hear it. A little help raising two daughters on your own might be welcome, too, but that wasn't there.
But yes, Exxon has record profits and receives a $4 billion subsidy from the government, instead of paying taxes, and Dick Cheney's company of private prisons reports record profits while he receives the finest in healthcare at no cost to himself, ever. Grand.
Doremus
(7,261 posts)I'm very sorry for your loss. I'm sure her passing left a huge void.
Excuse my language but Fuck the Repukes who encourage the attacks on unsung heroes like your mother-in-law, who battle day in and out to do the right thing. People who would attack such people before the hordes of millionaires in this country are either too dense to know any better or so filled with self-loathing that they can only feel better about themselves by tearing down others.
mbperrin
(7,672 posts)My own mother died at 52, when I was 28, so I really just glued myself to my new mom 10 years later when I married her daughter.
I agree too well with your second paragraph as well.
And you're right - there are millions of people doing the same out there every day.
missingthebigdog
(1,233 posts)Those big black shoes don't represent the country, or your community. They represent people who do not need our support, but benefit from it anyway. We have been brainwashed into believing that supporting them benefits us, but that is so far from true. . . .
Perhaps your "slacker" co-worker understands this concept better than you do. Perhaps he sees that you don't get rewarded for your extra effort, so why not do just enough to collect a check?
Or maybe he is aspiring to be the one in those big black shoes, and is starting out by standing on you and your coworkers.
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)forestpath
(3,102 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)to improve corporate profits.
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)ya got to stop the poor from hoarding all their money.
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)PB
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)greiner3
(5,214 posts)The OP's Photoshop could have used a different photo of the outfit.
It seems as though the pants are maybe black denim or some sort of 'working' guys' attire.
Just saying.
Poll_Blind
(23,864 posts)annabanana
(52,791 posts)Now if only all the little people could start running in the same direction..Goliath would fall.