McEconomy

[Volumnius Flush]

In my observation, there are ultimately three classes.

There is an upper class, middle class, and lower class.

There are also more specific classes to address which part (upper or lower) of each class one belongs to. There is for instance a more privileged lower class, and a less well off lower class. There is an upper middle class, but to simplify my observation, I will restrict my thesis to three main classes.

Here are my observations on each class.


Here is how I see things. The upper class overall has done a great job for the economy and nation. The upper class is producing most Harvard law graduates, the best attorneys anywhere, judges, and high-level politicians in the federal government.

They have worked to earn their lifestyle of luxury and they deserve because they have worked hard.

Now there is still an element involving the super rich and even to some extent even the lower upper class, of youth who desire nothing but lavish parties and drug use. Their parents are enablers and providers, instead of guiders.



The middle class has failed us. Our kids are some of the most ignorant youth in this world. They have a real problem with hard work and ultimately do nothing in many instances and some will even live at home into their 20's and sometimes until they are 25 or older.



This goes without saying that the lower class is even more of a collective failure than the middle class. This constitutes one of the least educated and some of the least understood in our society. They contribute next to nothing. But I intend to explain the need for this class and why it is so pertinent to our times that we keep these indigents in poverty.

Now, we have gone through the main 3 classes and the contributions of each. Now I intend to draw a conclusion from my thesis that these three classes have contributed anywhere from a great amount of good, to next to no significant contribution. But this is not to put some peoples down. This is to explain the need and the urgency involved in the current situation.

What is my point in all this? I am trying to illustrate that some of our youth, which come from all classes have been done a disservice.

Parents! You have done a disservice to your children

How dare you bring your children up in filthy luxury and not begin to teach them a lesson in hard work or a good work ethic? They will be a leach on you for the rest of your life if you allow them to be.

The middle class isn't any better. The seclusion of the suburbs and the utter lack of motivation has created a different world with these youth. Why the suburbs? Less cops = more crime. Kids in the suburbs these days are drug addicts and criminals and for the most part get away with it because the cops like to stay in the city.
And on top of this, they comprise the average of all students who are scoring behind Western European nations, East Asian nations, and many others in math and science. They are ignorant and they like it. As long as they have their weed.

The lower class or class in poverty youth, have been done a disservice in the same way the upper class has done their children a disservice.

How have they been done a disservice?

Well for one, these jobs have become more technical in the last twenty years. For many decades one could go off to work in the factories and make a decent wage. Jobs at GM in Detroit might pay 30-40 dollars an hour for some entry level positions. But these factories are being shut down quickly, and according to John McCain, they may not be coming back.

The economy is such now that the jobs that actually pay more than minimum wage for the most part require a college degree.

This is where the middle class comes in.

The middle class is known for their love of McConsumerism. They are consumerists at heart, and like it. They shop at Wal-Mart and McDonald's. They are disproportionately overweight and they drive gas-guzzling SUVs.

Why do we need a lower class? Because the middle class won't stop eating the nation out of house and home! The middle class consumes too much, period.

I was a product of a middle class home. What happend to me, is what happens to most youth. They go down a class! I am living on next to nothing. After my rent and bills, I have $30 every month for food and other expenses.

This is a problem.

The youth of this country are being left behind. We have been given the short end of the stick, and most of our parents will not pay for our educations. Youth coming from middle class families today, will almost always at some point live in poverty.

The children have been forgotten and in a McEconomy, we simply need a group of people to be held down and smothered by the weight of an impending collapse on our economy, with the expectation to work these McJobs at Wal-Mart and Burger King, so our parents will have someone to cook for them.

So when we have an underclass who lives in extreme poverty with some relief from welfare benefits, that ultimately, have a high unemployment rate, who is the next target? The youth.

The youth are tomorrow's ghettofied uneducated heathens. They will be the end of this nation as we know it.

Your parents have sold you out for the utopian quality of the McLife. Now, you will be flipping their burgers, and they will have it their way and we will be the new lower class.

The youth are being left behind and it is a direct symptom of the McEconomy.

One point to note is that even in an ideal world where we all had a college degree, there would still be the need for a lower class to perform menial tasks that the higher class of people would not perform.

This indicates that class is more of an issue controlled by outside forces such as a predisposition to education and being born into it, but also note that even in this ideal world, the people who would ultimately perform these jobs, would be those who have performed them all along, thus zeroing out the need for education for some.

The point is, this will never happen, and by all indications the only way out is through education.

Without education, you will certainly become the victim of the consumerist's plan for dominion and ultimate power and say in all instances.

They will control you and use you and they will leave you for dead after they have raped the life out of you.

Education is the only way to break away from the vicious cycle of consumerism.

You will either be victim to the consumerists, or you will become one. It is kind of like selling your soul to Satan. Will you be a slave to these fascists for the rest of your life? Or will you become one yourself?

I choose to become one myself and then I can make my own rules.

[Iskandar]

Is this a parody of 1984 or something

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Man, your entire world view is completely whack.

[Surtr]

Holy **** how have we not banned him yet? Again...

[Volumnius Flush]

Holy **** how have we not banned him yet? Again...

I served two years worth of bans here and now I have done nothing wrong and you still want me banned. Why?

Man, your entire world view is completely whack.

Which part?

[Independent_CA]

You've got to be kidding me if you think any of that is true. Especially the part about the upper class contributing and deserving the most. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that argument.

[Volumnius Flush]

You've got to be kidding me if you think any of that is true. Especially the part about the upper class contributing and deserving the most. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that argument.

Like I said there is an element in the upper class that is doing society a disservice and will ultimately be the end of us.

[Danish]

Your "class analysis" is quite classist...

[Der Übermensch]

So you are trying to justify your own failure at life, yes?

[Reaganista]

i agree with VF

[cobert]

I understand the concept of 'somebody needs to flip the burgers', but this is a job for stupid poor people that can't get a job in daddy's office, not just poor people. I was tempted to stop reading after you said we should keep people in poverty.

Saying the upper class deserves everything because they worked hard is implying that everyone who is below their class hasn't worked hard enough. I need to dig up the statistics, but I believe it takes, on average, at least 5 generations for a family in the lower class to move up to the middle class. That's a long time. I'm sure some of those upper class people had to wait this long to work their way up. But this statistic also demonstrates how difficult it is for somebody to move their family out of poverty. With such a high difficulty, you can't say anybody who isn't rich is slacking on heir work. Saying they make no significant contribution to society is appalling.

Obviously youths will be poor upon entering the real world, but if somebody enters this world from a rich family, I'm guessing things would be a lot easier.

[guitarded_chuck]

some will even live at home into their 20's and sometimes until they are 25 or older.
Hmm, how many 19 year olds do you know who live on their own and become successful?

20-25 year olds are generally in college with huge debt and no time to work and earn money. So how in the **** do you expect them to live on their own? Many do, but they live on residence at school and incur even more debt.

Your world views are messed.

[Volumnius Flush]

Hmm, how many 19 year olds do you know who live on their own and become successful?


Not many. It is the way they were brought up.

i agree with VF

Thank you.

So you are trying to justify your own failure at life, yes?

No Das.

Your "class analysis" is quite classist...

Classist more like classless amirite? :naughty:

[guitarded_chuck]

Not many. It is the way they were brought up.


So if a new high school graduate does not find the money to move out and become self sustaining immediately, you deem them as useless?

[Volumnius Flush]

So if a new high school graduate does not find the money to move out and become self sustaining immediately, you deem them as useless?

It really seems they have no choice but to work. If their parents want to support them that is great. But I can't see a viable reason as to why you should let your kids stay at home past maybe 22-24 at the most.

It was easy for me. I got on SSI and I just naturally have the money to live alone. But if it wasn't for that I would definitely be working. I just grew up in a family where it was customary to leave home before 18 and there weren't really any excuses for not doing so.

[guitarded_chuck]

Yeaaaah but some people like to get an education so they can eventually make more money than if they had just joined the workforce immediately without one. And if this is they're choice, and they were not so fortunate to be born to a high class family, they will not be able to afford to live on their own for a few years.

[Volumnius Flush]

Yeaaaah but some people like to get an education so they can eventually make more money than if they had just joined the workforce immediately without one. And if this is they're choice, and they were not so fortunate to be born to a high class family, they will not be able to afford to live on their own for a few years.

There is nothing wrong with working full time and going to school full time. Honestly, it's not that hard.

[Seafroggys]

There is nothing wrong with working full time and going to school full time. Honestly, it's not that hard.

Yes it is.

Life is about having fun.

That life is not fun.

So shut it.

[guitarded_chuck]

Ha

If your degree is easy as balls then perhaps not.

I'm in an Environmental Studies science degree in which I spend 35 hours a week in classes and in laboratory sessions, and even more time studying outside of that. Full time job? Yea right.

Not to mention it is just as important to enjoy life as it is to work hard.

[Volumnius Flush]

Yes it is.

Life is about having fun.

That life is not fun.

So shut it.

Life is about warking hard and earning a living, which Americans are very good at not doing.

Ha

If your degree is easy as balls then perhaps not.

I'm in an Environmental Studies science degree in which I spend 35 hours a week in classes and in laboratory sessions, and even more time studying outside of that. Full time job? Yea right.

Not to mention it is just as important to enjoy life as it is to work hard.

I'm talking about a typical full time program of 12 hours.

[Independent_CA]

Like I said there is an element in the upper class that is doing society a disservice and will ultimately be the end of us.

Yeah an element as in a decent sized majority of it. How many members of the upper class are actually getting their hands dirty doing jack for the luxuries that they're "entitled" to? Not too many I'd imagine.

[beso negro]

nice work VF

[Volumnius Flush]

nice work VF

Thank you beso!

[Reaganista]

what who cares if they get their hands dirty

[guitarded_chuck]

Life is about warking hard and earning a living, which Americans are very good at not doing.

So you consider a life of work more attractive than a balanced life of work and play?

Play (or time spent outside of work and enjoying life) includes making friends, traveling, finding a partner, and starting a family.

edit:
If American had this frame of mind it would an even more miserable place than it already is.

[beso negro]

if you care more about having fun then working and contributing to society you probably should be poor

[Seafroggys]

Life is about warking hard and earning a living, which Americans are very good at not doing.



I'm talking about a typical full time program of 12 hours.

12 hours is not typical. I don't know what school you go to.

Consistently I take anywhere from 14 to as high as 17 credit hours a term. I might have done 12 once or twice, but it is rare.

[guitarded_chuck]

Consistently I take anywhere from 14 to as high as 17 credit hours a term. I might have done 12 once or twice, but it is rare.

I was going to say this, but I'm from Canada and wasn't sure if 12 hours was the norm in the States. But this is also the same as it is here.

Some students take 12 hour terms here, but they are not considered full time students, do not get the benefits of full time students (free gym memberships, free bus passes, etc.) and their programs are typically five years long as opposed to four.

[Volumnius Flush]

12 hours is not typical. I don't know what school you go to.

Consistently I take anywhere from 14 to as high as 17 credit hours a term. I might have done 12 once or twice, but it is rare.

12 hours is full time at my school, I realize it is different at others. But the point is it takes 4 years to graduate at the rate of 12 hours a semester so it is indeed full time.

[Seafroggys]

12 is full time. Technically. I didn't argue that. I'm saying that so many people don't do that if they're dedicated to education.

[Volumnius Flush]

12 is full time. Technically. I didn't argue that. I'm saying that so many people don't do that if they're dedicated to education.

And some people don't have the money either way.

[Against Miik!]

I'm not gonna read this right now, probably in like a half hour, but I just wanted to say right now that as far as classes go, I'm gonna have to agree with Marx in that there are really two classes, those who work, and those who own. The middle class is really a myth. What does it mean to be middle class, as compared to lower class. You have a slightly nicer car, maybe a few more square feet in the house? The ONLY difference I can see between the middle and lower classes is that the middle class has a bit more mobility, and is more diverse, depending on where you go in the country. What is middle class some places is lower class in others, and the same goes for the reverse.

[Illmatic]

Life is about warking hard and earning a living, which Americans are very good at not doing.

so what you're saying is that the entire point of life is to work hard at something you hate (not always the case, but how often do people actually enjoy their jobs) in service of the upper class.

ok great.

[Volumnius Flush]

so what you're saying is that the entire point of life is to work hard at something you hate (not always the case, but how often do people actually enjoy their jobs) in service of the upper class.

ok great.

If you want to go anywhere in life. And this is a free society, you are free to be an upper class citizen if you want to be and try hard enough.

[Illmatic]

If you want to go anywhere in life. And this is a free society, you are free to be an upper class citizen if you want to be and try hard enough.

economic success and personal fulfillment do not necessarily go hand in hand.

[Volumnius Flush]

economic success and personal fulfillment do not necessarily go hand in hand.

Then do whatever is fulfilling.

I am not going to argue a petty subject such as this.

If you want to be successful, fine. But you'll have to work.

If your priority is fun, have all the fun you can take. But it won't get you anywhere.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

So what's your excuse for being poor then? Did you not work hard enough? Is it your parents' fault for not sending you to Harvard?

edit: or are you right where you belong because you're inferior to people who have more money than you?

[Illmatic]

Then do whatever is fulfilling.

I am not going to argue a petty subject such as this.

If you want to be successful, fine. But you'll have to work.

If your priority is fun, have all the fun you can take. But it won't get you anywhere.

my point is that "success" is completely subjective, and you can't say that someone "failed" just because they bring in 40 grand a year when they could theoretically be earning twice that much.

you can't expect people to argue on your terms when your terms are completely ludicrous.

[Volumnius Flush]

So what's your excuse for being poor then? Did you not work hard enough? Is it your parents' fault for not sending you to Harvard?

edit: or are you right where you belong because you're inferior to people who have more money than you?

I am poor because I don't work.

my point is that "success" is completely subjective, and you can't say that someone "failed" just because they bring in 40 grand a year when they could theoretically be earning twice that much.

you can't expect people to argue on your terms when your terms are completely ludicrous.

I wouldn't say they failed if they made 40k a year. That would be a great success in my book. Nothing extraordinary, but I consider, especially in Texas, if you make 40k a year you are doing pretty well.

[Illmatic]

I wouldn't say they failed if they made 40k a year. That would be a great success in my book. Nothing extraordinary, but I consider, especially in Texas, if you make 40k a year you are doing pretty well.

but it's not upper class, so by your definition yes they did fail.

[Volumnius Flush]

but it's not upper class, so by your definition yes they did fail.

I never said what I consider success. I consider success when you have the money to provide for a family, own your own home in a nice neighborhood, and drive a nice car, and have money to help your kids with college and a car.

[Illmatic]

I never said what I consider success. I consider success when you have the money to provide for a family, own your own home in a nice neighborhood, and drive a nice car, and have money to help your kids with college and a car.

then by those standards 40k is almost certainly not success.

[Against Miik!]

How can you take into account lifestyle choices when determining what a success is?

I find expensive cars to be a foolish waste of money, whether I have it or not. I don't want to live in the same place for more than 5-7 years if possible. That may change, but if I do that, owning a home would be a dumb thing to do. I could go on, but you get the idea.

[Volumnius Flush]

then by those standards 40k is almost certainly not success.

It is successful. You don't have to live in the nicest house. I think 200,000 is more than enough to spend on a home. I have never lived in a house that was worth more than 100,000 (I think, not sure) maybe 150k.

How can you take into account lifestyle choices when determining what a success is?

I find expensive cars to be a foolish waste of money, whether I have it or not. I don't want to live in the same place for more than 5-7 years if possible. That may change, but if I do that, owning a home would be a dumb thing to do. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Success for me.

[Illmatic]

It is successful. You don't have to live in the nicest house. I think 200,000 is more than enough to spend on a home. I have never lived in a house that was worth more than 100,000 (I think, not sure) maybe 150k.


so you feel that a 40k salary (or a median 40k salary for a household with two fulltime workers) is enough to live in a "nice" house (which is subjective) own a "nice" car (which is also subjective), provide for a family of at least 3, and put a kid through college? are you crazy?

[Against Miik!]

Well, yeah, I guess.

[Volumnius Flush]

so you feel that a 40k salary (or a median 40k salary for a household with two fulltime workers) is enough to live in a "nice" house (which is subjective) own a "nice" car (which is also subjective), provide for a family of at least 3, and put a kid through college? are you crazy?

I was referring to a couple where one makes 40k and the other makes 20-40k+ with a combined household income of 60-80k+, that is if the woman works which I think would be a good idea if the man wasn't pulling his weight.

[guitrguy]

I was referring to a couple where one makes 40k and the other makes 20-40k+ with a combined household income of 60-80k+, that is if the woman works which I think would be a good idea if the man wasn't pulling his weight.

Do you live on your own?

[Illmatic]

I was referring to a couple where one makes 40k and the other makes 20-40k+ with a combined household income of 60-80k+, that is if the woman works which I think would be a good idea if the man wasn't pulling his weight.

but do you earnestly think it's enough for a household to fulfill all the requirements you listed for success without getting pulled into debt?

[Volumnius Flush]

but do you earnestly think it's enough for a household to fulfill all the requirements you listed for success without getting pulled into debt?

Yes I do.

Do you live on your own?

I have already said that I do live alone.

[Illmatic]

Yes I do.

well feel free to return to the real world whenever you want.

[guitrguy]

Yes I do.



I have already said that I do live alone.

Then how do you have such a simple view of what it takes to live in society?

[Volumnius Flush]

Then how do you have such a simple view of what it takes to live in society?

It is very simple. Work or don't work. Pick your poison but if you want to be successful, you will have to work. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

well feel free to return to the real world whenever you want.

Ooh that really hurt. :rolleyes:

[guitrguy]

It is very simple. Work or don't work. Pick your poison but if you want to be successful, you will have to work. It doesn't get any more simple than that.

In fact it doesn't get that simple at all.

[Volumnius Flush]

In fact it doesn't get that simple at all.

Okay doctor, why don't you give me your expert assessment on the current situation?

[guitrguy]

Maybe the fact that minimum wage doesn't even come close to the minimum standard of living.

[Illmatic]

It is very simple. Work or don't work. Pick your poison but if you want to be successful, you will have to work. It doesn't get any more simple than that.


what about people who don't work and are successful.

[Reaganista]

ill consider myself a success when my lac's skating 22s

also when i have a few million dollars

[Volumnius Flush]

what about people who don't work and are successful.

I don't see how they would have found success on their own. Unless you were born into the lifestyle. Most people are self-made imo and in addition to this it is very rare that anyone is successful without working. In fact I can't think of a time when they are.

[guitrguy]

Paris Hilton certainly works her *** off.

[Illmatic]

I don't see how they would have found success on their own. Unless you were born into the lifestyle. Most people are self-made imo and in addition to this it is very rare that anyone is successful without working. In fact I can't think of a time when they are.

the children of the upper class are "successful" even if they didn't work for it.

[Reaganista]

paris hilton does work

[guitarded_chuck]

paris hilton does work

yea she was on a show with another girl once they did some jobs on it

[Volumnius Flush]

the children of the upper class are "successful" even if they didn't work for it.

They aren't successful. They were born into a successful family so unless you believe they made that choice, prior to conception, then they are not successful at all.

[guitrguy]

paris hilton does work

I didn't say she didn't. She certainly doesn't work to the extent of the money she has, nor would she have what she has without being born into it.

[Volumnius Flush]

I didn't say she didn't. She certainly doesn't work to the extent of the money she has, nor would she have what she has without being born into it.

Yeah she has like 6 million dollars, big deal.

[guitarded_chuck]

They aren't successful. They were born into a successful family so unless you believe they made that choice, prior to conception, then they are not successful at all.

Many people of the upper class essentially inherit their high earning occupation from their family. Therefore, they did not work hard to be successful.

[BridgeToSolace]

They aren't successful. They were born into a successful family so unless you believe they made that choice, prior to conception, then they are not successful at all.

Define successful, plz

[Reaganista]

I didn't say she didn't. She certainly doesn't work to the extent of the money she has, nor would she have what she has without being born into it.

actually her gramps gave most of that money away she's earned a lot of wat she has by being an amazing entertainer

[guitrguy]

Yeah she has like 6 million dollars, big deal.

that came from privilege not hard work.

[Volumnius Flush]

Define successful, plz

I already said success is being able to afford your own home, provide for a family, have a nice car, help your kids with college/cars. Having extra money for family vacations.

[guitrguy]

actually her gramps gave most of that money away wat she's earned a lot of wat she has by being an amazing entertainer

She has had that money before her gramps changed his will

[BridgeToSolace]

I already said success is being able to afford your own home, provide for a family, have a nice car, help your kids with college/cars. Having extra money for family vacations.

She has all of those, although she doesn't really have a family to provide for/kids to pay for college for. Although I'm sure she could.

So how is she not successful?

[guitarded_chuck]

I already said success is being able to afford your own home, provide for a family, have a nice car, help your kids with college/cars. Having extra money for family vacations.

Sounds like the middle class to me.

[Volumnius Flush]

So how is she not successful?

She is blessed. Not successful. As far as her acting/music career goes, I guess she could be considered successful.

Sounds like the middle class to me.

The upper middle class is successful.

[Reaganista]

She has had that money before her gramps changed his will
ur confused that's the house of wax fortune she has now

[BridgeToSolace]

She is blessed. Not successful. As far as her acting/music career goes, I guess she could be considered successful.

Again, she has and can do all the things you listed under success. So your list wasn't complete if she is not successful.

So what is she missing? One cannot have rich parents and be successful?

[Volumnius Flush]

Again, she has and can do all the things you listed under success. So your list wasn't complete if she is not successful.

So what is she missing? One cannot have rich parents and be successful?

Part of success is working for it. That goes without saying.

[BridgeToSolace]

Part of success is working for it. That goes without saying.

So two people of the same means are not similarly successful?

Rather than going without saying, it deserves explanation.

Two people are running a race. Person A is wins with little effort. Person B loses but tries really hard

Why does person A not win?

[guitrguy]

ur confused that's the house of wax fortune she has now

I guess that were the "fantastic entertainer" comes from also.

[Reaganista]

I guess that were the "fantastic entertainer" comes from also.

well that and the simple life and watever else she's done

[Volumnius Flush]

So two people of the same means are not similarly successful?

Rather than going without saying, it deserves explanation.

Two people are running a race. Person A is wins with little effort. Person B loses but tries really hard

Why does person A not win?

Think about the definition of successful. It implies that you 'tried' at something and were therefore 'successful'. If you were simply born into a rich family, you therefore are not successful unless you are self-made.

[guitarded_chuck]

I think we should agree that the term "successful" is subjective and is therefore not worth arguing about.

[Volumnius Flush]

I think we should agree that the term "successful" is subjective and is therefore not worth arguing about.

The definition of successful is objective. How it is applied is subjective. But we can argue about the definition all night. It doesn't change the meaning though.

[BridgeToSolace]

Think about the definition of successful. It implies that you 'tried' at something and were therefore 'successful'. If you were simply born into a rich family, you therefore are not successful unless you are self-made.

If you define success as effort, and thus not at all as anything that you listed, then I agree with you.

[Volumnius Flush]

If you define success as effort, and thus not at all as anything that you listed, then I agree with you.

You could potentially be successful for holding a job one day at Pizza Hut. You could be successful at making $6/hr. But my definition of success is where you meet certain requirements that prove a sustained financial security but that doesn't change that to be successful, you had to have tried to be. It's not something you inherit.

[Aaron]

Are you high?

[BridgeToSolace]

Are you good at vague, meaningless and destructive negativity?

[Aaron]

Seems so.

[Already_Taken]

Good argument, VF

[Volumnius Flush]

Are you good at vague, meaningless and destructive negativity?

Good argument, VF

Thanks.

[BridgeToSolace]

Thanks.

Please do not thank me. I do not like you and I was not defending you. It's obnoxious and it wastes space.

[RockAndRoll]

if you care more about having fun then working and contributing to society you probably should be poor
More like if you care so much about working you should be poor so that someone interesting can use your money to do wicked stuff.

[Volumnius Flush]

Please do not thank me. I do not like you and I was not defending you. It's obnoxious and it wastes space.

Oh I meant to post something under that quote but I messed it up. I lost my post.

[monkeysonmars.]

the world's been crying out for a decent class analysis. thankyou.

*throws grundrisse out the window*

[RNR]

You said that the middle class has "failed us". You are not speaking of only millions of people as if they were a single entity, but you also assume that people have a specific purpose or responsibilty.

[Volumnius Flush]

the world's been crying out for a decent class analysis. thankyou.

*throws grundrisse out the window*

Sarcasm is not tolerated on this forum. You can take it somewhere else or drop it off at the door.

You said that the middle class has "failed us". You are not speaking of only millions of people as if they were a single entity, but you also assume that people have a specific purpose or responsibilty.

C+ (your grammar and presentation were good)

As an entity they have failed us. Specifically the youth. You gave me a 'C'? That is good enough I suppose. It's passing!

[RNR]

Nah, a lot of that was good, actually. I just don't agree with that point. Not all "middle class" are like that, and many upper class are. And it places blame on older generations solely as opposed to older, younger, and the government.

[Volumnius Flush]

Nah, a lot of that was good, actually. I just don't agree with that point. Not all "middle class" are like that, and many upper class are. And it places blame on older generations solely as opposed to older, younger, and the government.

The middle class collectively I believe is why we are in the state we are in today. The upper class are somewhat responsible but generally are the ones producing the best lawyers, doctors, and representatives in the federal government.

[Iscariot]

ur confused that's the house of wax fortune she has now

house of wax and fortune are incompatible terms

[Danger Bird]

The middle class collectively I believe is why we are in the state we are in today. The upper class are somewhat responsible but generally are the ones producing the best lawyers, doctors, and representatives in the federal government.

You don't factor in the entitlement that upper class youth inherit at all. You're just living in a fantasy world where everyone starts with a blank slate and is judged on their merit alone.