Why we must lose the darn 1 percent

nypost.com ^ | 25 Oct 2011 | Frank J. Fleming

[shove_it]

The Occupy Wall Street crowd has correctly identified two distinct groups in this country: the wealthiest 1 percent and the other 99 percent, who suffer from the 1 percent’s vast wealth: The wealthiest 1 percent not only have more money than us, they have much, much more money. That’s just wrong.

[...]

[Siena Dreaming]

He is coming out with a book entitled “Obama, the Greatest President in the History of Everything”. Must be satire, right?

Yes, it is.

[Angry_White_Man_Syndrome]

I think you need to be educated in the art of satire. This would prevent you from making post that appear to be written by a third grader. Granted, it is great satire and great satire is hard for some people to detect.

[Angry_White_Man_Syndrome]

I think you need to be educated in the art of satire. This would prevent you from making post that appear to be written by a third grader. Granted, it is great satire and great satire is hard for some people to detect.

[Angry_White_Man_Syndrome]

I think you need to be educated in the art of satire. This would prevent you from making post that appear to be written by a third grader. Granted, it is great satire and great satire is hard for some people to detect.

[Le Chien Rouge]

If we woke up tomorrow morning, all wealth was wiped out, and EVERYONE started from zero, within a year NEARLY all(except for Paris Hilton and the Kennedy’s) the same rich folks would probably be wealthy again while the same people complaining about wealth fairness would be STILL complaining.

JMO...

[Huskrrrr]

Any of you unemployed been offered a job by the OWS-ers? Anyone....?

[Pan_Yan]

Aren't you supposed to be working?

(Oh wait ... that's me)

[omega4179]

When one person takes the property of another, that’s tyranny, but when lots of people get together and do it, that’s democracy. So we should legislate that the 1 percent no longer get to keep that vast wealth and must instead distribute it among the rest of us. (I should get the largest portion because it was my idea.)

[GeronL]

The OWSers will not think this is satire, they will think this columnist is on their side.

[rightwingintelligentsia]

A) That entire article (including the poor writing skills) looks like it was written by a third grader.

Um . . . I think that's the point of this satiric piece: that the mentality of the protesters is equivalent to that of a bunch of third-graders. Or less.

B) Idiot author of this piece is also the author of an upcoming book “Obama: The Greatest President in the History of Everything”

Don't tell me you thought that was serious. Really?

[hometoroost]

Frank is a conservative political humorist. Odds are pretty good (at least 99% chance) that this is satire.

[sickoflibs]

RE :” See, the wealthiest 1 percent prevent us from getting ahead because any time we improve our incomes, we spend more on businesses and services, and guess who that helps? The 1 percent. Getting ahead just isn’t worth the knowledge that the rich are getting richer.
There’s no point in working hard to try to become one of the 1 percent ourselves, because what’s the chance of that happening? One in 100? Who would play a lottery with odds that bad?
No, instead of working hard, the 99 percent can only sit and protest on Wall Street until the wealthiest 1 percent are torn down.
Here’s the thing: They’re the 1 percent, but we’re the 99 percent. Their wealth may be much more than ours, but 99 is a much bigger number than one. So we should just gang up and take their money.
After we’ve taken care of their wealth, to keep the nation happy and prosperous we should pass a law making it illegal for there to be a wealthiest 1 percent — this country should just be the normal 99 percent. “

I saw Micheal Moore on a few MSNBC shows last week who said exactly the above, no kidding. His exact words:"All money is ours owned by the 100% commonly and we the 99% should be deciding what to do with it."

Investor Jim Rogers did his part a few years back. He made his kids learn Mandarin (Chinese) and then moved with his family out of Manhattan to Singapore. All we need is more to follow. Unbelievably a few here cursed him for being unpatriotic for fleeing. But he made this country fairer by going. GO Jim!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Rogers

[JakeS]

not to sound harsh, but if all the money were taken from the one percent and divided equally amongst the 100 percent, in less than five eyars the one percent would have it all back again. With the possible exception of some of those who inherited it.

[Mozilla]

Frank, OWS thinks the 1% is really 50% of the population or so. They hate all those who work, invest, run companies and make money. They are the dead beats of society.

[Roccus]

When so many folks are unable to identify satire, is it an indictment against those folks, an indictment against the times we live in, or a testament to the lterary ability of the author?

[omega4179]

The entire piece was satire. Thanks for giving FR the reading comprehension of a third grader.

[shove_it]

Yup. That’s the money quote.

[ConservativeAtLast]

Relax, it's satire. This guy's site is really funny, he really lays it on liberal thinking.

imao.us

[Jaidyn]

Great analogy! I like my house. I have enough money to just get by, and I am pleased. I don’t need financial assistance, and wouldn’t accept it. There are millions of people better off than I am, and they are not happy with what they have, because they focus on what other people have. It’s a ‘keeping up with the Jones’ thing, and if they can’t keep up, they demand equalizers in the form of someone else’s money.

[livius]

That’s true, it’s hard to parody something that already seems like a parody.