>>>>>>>What position on that list would make you happy?
>>>>>
>>>>>Implicit in that question is the notion that I'm not happy.
>>>>>Is that what you mean?
>>>>
>>>I'm sorry. I must have missed your answer.
>>>Do you think that I'm not happy?
>>
>>
>>If you're happy, that's good.
>>
>>The question you asked was how should the government create wealth.
>>
>>If you're satisfied with the wealth you have, then that's good.
>>
>>If not, what would be satisfactory?
>>
>Good question, Mike, but it's not the only possibility.
>I can be satisfied with my situation but still want change.
>It's exactly because I like where I am that I want other people who are not there to have a reasonable chance to get there.
>My motives are not entirely eleemosynary (I love that word.)
>Check out the history of some modern revolutions - especially the Russian and Chinese.
>Tens of millions of people died because the proletariat's anger at the .1% (the circles of the Czar and the Emperor) was indiscriminate.
>Not a good outcome.
>It's not certain, but if the proletariat had had a better shot, things might have been different - maybe not for the ruling class, but for the rest of them.


A better shot at what?

The median income in the country is $55K.

The article points out that people making $300K-$400K (the entry level for the 1%) still consider it tough to support themselves.

So what do we want? Everybody making $750K a year?

Is that the goal?

Let's be honest about what we need.

I think if someone pays for a video game, pays for TV, pays for netflix, they are essentially handing over their money to have their time wasted. It costs them money to spend their time on what amounts to nothing.

You can do that on $55K a year. You can't afford a gold plated toilet seat, but if you're going to hand over your money to waste your time, there's no reason you should get a gold plated toilet seat subsidized.

Why should people who hand over their money to have their time wasted be given some kind of special bonus?

Do we expect them to turn off the TV and do something great?

They're just going to spend it on more TV channels.

The greatest enemy of the middle class in this country in their inability or disinterest in saving money.

The article points out that average people are unaware of and unlikely to participate in the money buffet of the financial industry.

It's not that its impossible or people are locked out. It's that some people just want to sit on their ass and watch TV.

You can't force people to be curious, motivated, or inspired.