At least the English have the honesty to call their hereditary ruling class “royalty.” Our privileged political class is actually royalty, but we euphemistically call them “democratically elected.”
Well, lil’ Charlotte is poor in one respect: “Spare to the heir” is the nickname doing the rounds.
Elsewhere, “Billion Pound Princess” is another as it is said she is expected tol generate up to a billion pounds in extra national revenue by the time she is 7 (exactly how I’m not sure; tourist souvenirs? Do we sell that much tat? Fashion? Really…? :-| )
Still talking about Democrat $40,000 a plate dinners (which are a bargain compared to the $100,000 a plate GOP dinners) when the Kock’sare buying candidates.
Nobody should be ashamed of what they have been born into. The world is full of different kinds of people and vast diversity. I’m nowhere near ‘well-to-do’. I was born into an impoverished family, and have done well for myself. I don’t begrudge anyone who was born into wealth just like I don’t look down on anyone born into a family that had it worse than I did.
I disagree. Our “royalty” is the incumbent politicians who have way too many perks.THEY don’t have to live under the laws that they pass for us.They start out, move to DC, and stay there for their whole lives. Most don’t even retire, although the retirement perks are extravagant…way better than ours.The only thing I can say about the 1%, is at least they are using their own money from their businesses—-the politicos are pigs at the public trough.
I wondered how long it would be before we got a cartoon shaming the royals for giving their kids everything that money could buy.
Keeping up with the Jones is damn hard. If the 1% or even the 10% spend a lot of their time and money on their kids they are giving them a huge advantage over the kids from poor families with parents that can’t or won’t invest as much time in them.
Maybe we should Punish parents that help their kids do homework at night so that their kids don’t come to school ready to learn either. It makes the poor kids feel bad when their peers are succeeding and they are not. Maybe the answer isn’t in lifting all these poor kids up out of their circumstances but to shove every successful kid down to that level to make things fair.
We could take a page from the Democratic playbook and try to tax away the earnings from wealthy communities so they don’t fritter away that money on providing their kids with the best schools and opportunities available.
I’ve never really cared much about the Royals but I find this cartoon repugnant. Taken too it’s logical conclusion the Progressives will, ultimately, have to enslave the good parents to help all these kids born to unfortunate circumstances. Maybe we should require every parent with a college degree to spend at least 5 hours a week helping less fortunate kids with their homework. We could also put a limit on how much time and money they are allowed to spend on their own kids so they don’t get too far ahead.
Once again Mr. Danziger, you show that you really don’t understand the British at all. Poor little Charlotte had no chance right from the off. She and her parents are captives of a system over which they have little to no control. Birds in a gilded cage. They have very little control over their futures. They face life times of public service, under the microscope of the media, even if they voluntarily leave the system they’ll stall face life times of media intrusion (cf Edward 8th and Mrs Simpson).
For one, I prefer it when your excellent insights are focussed on things you understand, like corruption in the US.
emptc12 about 9 years ago
At least the English have the honesty to call their hereditary ruling class “royalty.” Our privileged political class is actually royalty, but we euphemistically call them “democratically elected.”
OmqR-IV.0 about 9 years ago
Well, lil’ Charlotte is poor in one respect: “Spare to the heir” is the nickname doing the rounds.
Elsewhere, “Billion Pound Princess” is another as it is said she is expected tol generate up to a billion pounds in extra national revenue by the time she is 7 (exactly how I’m not sure; tourist souvenirs? Do we sell that much tat? Fashion? Really…? :-| )
eugene57 about 9 years ago
Still talking about Democrat $40,000 a plate dinners (which are a bargain compared to the $100,000 a plate GOP dinners) when the Kock’sare buying candidates.
tryoung71 about 9 years ago
Nobody should be ashamed of what they have been born into. The world is full of different kinds of people and vast diversity. I’m nowhere near ‘well-to-do’. I was born into an impoverished family, and have done well for myself. I don’t begrudge anyone who was born into wealth just like I don’t look down on anyone born into a family that had it worse than I did.
noreenklose about 9 years ago
I disagree. Our “royalty” is the incumbent politicians who have way too many perks.THEY don’t have to live under the laws that they pass for us.They start out, move to DC, and stay there for their whole lives. Most don’t even retire, although the retirement perks are extravagant…way better than ours.The only thing I can say about the 1%, is at least they are using their own money from their businesses—-the politicos are pigs at the public trough.
Mephistopheles about 9 years ago
I wondered how long it would be before we got a cartoon shaming the royals for giving their kids everything that money could buy.
Keeping up with the Jones is damn hard. If the 1% or even the 10% spend a lot of their time and money on their kids they are giving them a huge advantage over the kids from poor families with parents that can’t or won’t invest as much time in them.
Maybe we should Punish parents that help their kids do homework at night so that their kids don’t come to school ready to learn either. It makes the poor kids feel bad when their peers are succeeding and they are not. Maybe the answer isn’t in lifting all these poor kids up out of their circumstances but to shove every successful kid down to that level to make things fair.
We could take a page from the Democratic playbook and try to tax away the earnings from wealthy communities so they don’t fritter away that money on providing their kids with the best schools and opportunities available.
I’ve never really cared much about the Royals but I find this cartoon repugnant. Taken too it’s logical conclusion the Progressives will, ultimately, have to enslave the good parents to help all these kids born to unfortunate circumstances. Maybe we should require every parent with a college degree to spend at least 5 hours a week helping less fortunate kids with their homework. We could also put a limit on how much time and money they are allowed to spend on their own kids so they don’t get too far ahead.
Snivelling_Wizard about 9 years ago
Once again Mr. Danziger, you show that you really don’t understand the British at all. Poor little Charlotte had no chance right from the off. She and her parents are captives of a system over which they have little to no control. Birds in a gilded cage. They have very little control over their futures. They face life times of public service, under the microscope of the media, even if they voluntarily leave the system they’ll stall face life times of media intrusion (cf Edward 8th and Mrs Simpson).
For one, I prefer it when your excellent insights are focussed on things you understand, like corruption in the US.