Trickle or tinkle?
Mar 05, 2014 | 1247 views | 0 0 comments | 99 99 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Dear Editor:

If Mr. Ed Konecnik is not careful, he will dislocate his shoulder due to his non-stop personal back slapping.

Somehow his description of what to him is “freedom” is more akin to “greedom.” It is particularly ugly in our advanced, socially civilized country to approach life in a Neanderthal, every man for himself mentality. Our Liberty Lady’s green face would turn red with embarrassment.

Mr. Konecnik is constantly decrying the redistribution of his wealth to the lazy, unmotivated, lying in their hammock smoking food stamp cigars, retired and partying on with their unemployment pittance.

And yes Mr. Konecnik, you are accurate about the redistribution of wealth, but with a slight caveat. During Eisenhower’s presidency, whom I voted for, the disparity between the workers pay and that of the owner was 30 to 1. It is now greater than 300 to one.

Wealth has indeed been redistributed. It has been redistributed from the middle class worker to the coffers of his wealthy employer, 10 times greater than it had been in the ‘60s.

Perhaps it was to solve this ever-widening income disparity that induced Reagan to come up with his Trickle Down economics. There was a personification of his policy in the prologue of the 1968 film 2001: A Space Odyssey, which no doubt was the inspiration.

It was the monkey sequence. A large chimpanzee is standing on a higher branch than the rest of his smaller fellow chimps and urinating down on the helpless ones much to their consternation.

I was stunned to see how similar their Tinkle Down approach was to that of Reagan’s Trickle Down.

Sincerely,

Nicholas Zizelis

Bayside

Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet