Why should I apologize for making lots of money?

Boston Globe ^ | Larry Paquette

[MAKnight]

Yeah, she might have gone to school in the '70s ... but look at her grades and records (and the fact that she got into college at age 15) and you'd have to be seriously deluded to believe that her grades were not on par with the highest achieving students ... of any color.

In other words, whether she had been white, yellow, blue or purple with green polka-dots, Condi Rice would have been admitted into practically any top-tier University in the country.

[joesbucks]

Agreed, a very bright young woman. Still doesn't negate her own words that she has benefited from preferace programs.

I'm not defending them. Only saying that sometimes the best would have never found their way to the top unless for some sort of preference, mentoring.....whatever.

Those who take a "I did it all myself" stance are at best delusional.

[BureaucratusMaximus]

Most people work hard and sacrifice but that does not mean they can also take "welfare" under a different name and then condemn others. That is rather sanctimonious.

Screw you...I went to a public university and just finished paying my last tab. No financial aid either. Worked all 4 years during the time I went to college as well. I took no welfare and took no handouts as well. Now I'm 28, make 75k a year and will finish paying the mortgage on my first house in 6 years...and I did it all on my own. There is no indication that the author of this article welched on anything or was a charity case. Your comment is a smack in the face to all Americans who believe that freedom, oppportunity, hard work, and integrity is what makes America great. Take your CYNICAL blabbering somewhere else...perhaps the welfare line is a good start.

[NittanyLion]

Is there any taxpayer earning less than him who can't say the same?

Actually, yes. It's a progressive tax system, ya know?

[MEGoody]

"Perhaps you're not "wealthy" because you haven't "struggled" and "sacrificed" enough. Or, perhaps you're wealthier in ways that the writer can only imagine, because you've chosen different sacrifices and struggles."

You're exactly right. We all choose what our priorities are going to be. My hubby and I are comfortable, because we've both worked very hard. We aren't rich, however, because we put our family first. I wouldn't trade that for all of Turner's money.

It seems to me that, if people choose not to work because they value sitting around on their tushies, they shouldn't expect those of us who do work to pay their bills. Not having money is the price they pay for making that particular choice.

[newgeezer]

It seems to me that, if people choose not to work because they value sitting around on their tushies, they shouldn't expect those of us who do work to pay their bills. Not having money is the price they pay for making that particular choice. (emphasis mine)

Sure, that's obvious. But, I do think the Dems and their class-envy approach make their greatest appeal to Joe Sixpack who puts in a 40-hour week, sees other people with more toys and "stuff" than he has, and is just basically unsatisfied with himself. Rather than do anything about it -- oh, maybe he sent for a get-rich-quick scheme that flopped after the first couple tries -- he exists from week to week, paycheck to paycheck, up to his ears in debt (credit cards, cars, and a big mortgage). The Dems point the finger at Joe's bosses and strike a chord with how it's "unfair that they have all the stuff you want" and it's just not "right," considering how "you're in a working family."

"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's stuff" didn't get there by accident. It's a primal urge. The Dems know it, and they're more than willing to exploit it (like everything else) to their own gain.

[Centurion2000]

bump

[joesbucks]

I agree in principle with the work hard get ahead......but there is something that is missing.......there's simply not a place for everyone at the top........so some, hard working and all, will fall.....through no fault of their own.

There are many who work as hard and as long as Limbaugh and still toil in talkradio for wages that you and I would find unbearable. But work as hard and as long, so why not similar financial sucess?

Hard work doesn't always mean sucess......but we all should work hard.

[MAKnight]

Sorry, still doesn't fly ... Like Powell and Thomas before her, she has NEVER claimed to have been the beneficiary of any preference program. Do you actually have anything about Condi claiming that she would never have gotten into college without preferences?

How does it make sense that her grades were excellent and yet she NEEDED preferences to get in? Sorry, you may not like the idea, but she made it on her own merits.

Secondly, what's up with you and cynicom and drawing outrageous equivalences? Cynicom believes that there is no difference between getting a student loan and going to school and sitting at home waiting for welfare checks. YOU draw an equivalence between being mentored and racial preferences.

That IS defending preference programs.

Did your parents encourage you to work hard and succeed? Well, that's mentoring. That means you recieved a "preference" too, doesn't it?

[MEGoody]

"But, I do think the Dems and their class-envy approach make their greatest appeal to Joe Sixpack who puts in a 40-hour week, sees other people with more toys and "stuff" than he has, and is just basically unsatisfied with himself."

I would have to agree - thus the Dems general appeal to union workers.

[joesbucks]

I seem to remember that while being interviewed that she said that she had benefited from preference.

I'm not claiming college admission and I don't remember the context of what she claimed the preference was. I just remember being amazed that she claimed that she had certain doors openned to her because of her race.

As for your other question, the gentleman who wrote the editorial wrote it in a heavy handed manner. Being in the same type of position he has, I don't make the same $$$$. I do work long hours and am well respected for the work I do. So why does he earn substantially more than I? We seem to have the same work ethic. We probably are similarily sucessful in our positions. Why the $$$ difference. His inferenc is that I must in some way be an inferior worker. I resent that.

[MAKnight]

Really? I read it thus; that he was complaining about the way he is demonized by the Left (Democrats and their media buddies) as some evil human being simply because he earns over $100,000 a year.

He is simply saying that he has worked hard and sacrificed a lot to be where he is today and that no-one should begrudge him or demonize him for that. I think that's a very fair complaint ... and not necessarily insulting to anyone who earns less.

The fact remains that no matter how little you are paid, you are rich to a lot of people who don't earn as much. Should they hate you for that?