said by Papageno:
it's more important that Bradley Moneybucks III be able to buy a couple of extra sports cars/jetskis/vacation homes per year than that government be funded properly so it can maintain services and infrastructure for everyone's use.
It's starting to remind me of Mexico. The so-called "haves" didn't feel collective allegiance to their fellow citizens. "I got mine, screw everyone else." They controlled government to preserve huge disparity in wealth and income. The result is apathy among the general population.
One of the wealthy will be kidnapped, and the police are in on it to some extent. They general population will know something about who did it, where the wealthy guy is stashed away. But, they don't say anything. The system doesn't exist for their benefit, why should they put their neck on the line?
It's gotten so bad that the wealthy are moving to the US. (You can obtain an immigration visa if you have enough assets.). They'll work the same magic here. There's already a substantial "I've got mine, screw everyone else" sentiment here (as evidenced by America's wealth/income disparity growing over the past 30 years to the point we're close to Mexico's.).
What's remarkable to me is that the people who protest the loudest about "socialism," and "tax increases" have little chance of earning more than $100k. It's like they're defending the top 1/10th percent of society who have quadrupled
their incomes over the past 30 years of deregulatory politics -- as the lower 50% of American's income lost ground.
It's like the 5% of Black Louisianans who voted for David Duke (former KKK grand wizard). I don't get it.