Instinctive anger at the wealthy and/or wealth contrasts

Wow. Just. Wow.

"Money doesn't buy happiness."

Nah. It don't.

Try telling that to an aching belly, though.

So, yes, I get instinctive anger about this sometimes too.

It comes down to not only the money and wealth and opportunity aspect of it.
It's about:
Respect
Caring
The horrors of apathy and indifference
Entitlement, arrogance, and safety from accountability wealth can bring

And getting angry at just plain old stupidity and ignorance.

Yes, I did, sozobe, and I asked myself: why is she judging her so
harshly in the first place?

Can a huge diamond ring create such a stereotypical reaction?

I don't wear a diamond ring, my wedding ring had cost $ 20 once upon
a time, but I honestly can admire seeing one on someone elses hand
without judging them.

I personally judge people on different criterias, money does not come into the equation at all. I can appreciate nimh's scenario where he felt more
sympathetic towards the poor couple, who wouldn't, but to find fault with
the more affluent ones just for the sake of affluence - no, that's not right.

OK, the point was not received, then.

I've said it many other times during the course of this, but I'll do it again as plainly as I can:

I often have an instinctual reaction such as nimh describes -- but I don't DO anything about it. It doesn't last more than a few seconds. Then I put it aside and open my mind and see what happens.

Sometimes the person with the huge honking diamond and the be-Botoxed brow and the designer outfit only confirms my initial "GRR" and starts spouting hateful stuff about poor people and minorities. Sometimes that person turns out to be nice, intelligent, and caring and just has what I consider to be poor taste (I never find a huge diamond aesthetically pleasing and I think Botox is awful).

It's this substance that I actually react to. First person will probably get an earful from me. Second person could well become a good friend (I have plenty of friends whose taste is different from mine).

This is the kind of comment that I find mind-boggling.... why should the money for his third yacht pay for ..."an effective work-training program for people who want to get off of welfare going for a year."?? It's HIS money, not the people on welfare.

Anyway, as Thomas will surely point out, this is not the TOPIC of this thread...

I simply don't get the instinctive anger nimh felt -- and it's not necessary that I get it. I found it an interesting perspective. As I said before, I wouldn't have been angry at either of those couples.

Yes, if anyone would be hateful towards poor people and minorities,
I could not tolerate this either, however I have found lower middle class
to be by far more prejudice and hateful, especially towards minorities
than any other group that claims ignorance in their resume.

Then again, we are defined by our surroundings. We all experience
it differently.

(Mame, you see where I talked about that further in subsequent posts right? I'm not saying that his yacht should be grabbed by the government, sold, and the resulting check presented with great fanfare to a job-training center. I'm saying the guy should pay taxes, and that the current tax system under Bush is way too cushy for the super-rich at a time when many worthy programs are feeling the financial pinch.)

CJane, the group of people I was working with in L.A. were way below lower-middle class, so I dunno. I guess I've been lower-middle class most of my life, hasn't been particularly true of the people I grew up with.

Bill Gates is someone I admire. So is Warren Buffet. The people who bring out my rather unattractive anger are those who vote for tax cuts for the rich, move their companies to poor countries and hide much of their profit in offshore accounts. It is the senseless greed and arrogance of some the wealthy which resounds and arouses my anger when poverty is mentioned.

I have a friend who visited from the east. I was describing some of the pueblo culture to her and mentioned a few American Indians we know. Her response was, "Wouldn't it be nice to have an Indian for a maid?" My anger flared because of her pitiful limosine liberalism.

Another friend was insulted when the above woman asked her to take some friends to her daughter's wedding, because the woman's maid would also be in the car. The maid!!! She probably traded in the car after the wedding.

When you've been exposed to both extreme ends of the social spectrum, anger, in my opinion, is to be expected. That same anger should immediately subside as realism sets in.

I really don't understand why that sort of anger is causing such an uproar, especially as it has been acknowledged as being irrelevant to the actual needs of society.

I don't "get" those who don't "get" the anger...

Soz, the only reason they're feeling the pinch is because all the money is going to the WAR instead of the WAR ON POVERTY. I'm sure most of us are taxed quite enough... I know I am and I make around the Cdn average.

Shakes head in agreement with Diane and Snood. Soz and Nimh and I agreed early on.

Yes, I gladly don't get the anger.

Nor do I.

I don't get judging anyone by what they wear, their age, what they look like, their apparent display of emotion, or any other outward manifestation of their 'station' in life. Wanting to slap someone because they are young, well dressed, and seemingly happy is no different than wanting to slap them because they are in rags, down-trodden, and old. Would those of you who 'get' the anger also 'get' it if he was angry at the homeless man? 2packs said it well ages ago. It doesn't matter if one is angered by the affront of facing affluence or poverty.

I simply don't 'get' being angered by a person's appearance.

Well, I do.

While the rational, non-judgmental, analytical, sensible, compassionate side of me fully knows and remembers all the subtleties involved and the myriad reasons for the disparity of wealth...I cannot deny having an initial gut reaction at times to the injustice of it all. Nimh put it best...anger at the sheer inequality of it. At the mere fact that some are experiencing real hardships while others appear* to be blithely unaware of their largesse.

*Appearances can be and often are deceiving, of course, but that isn't the point. The point is our intuitive reaction to the inequality.

I applaud Nimh for the self-awareness it took to recognize that reaction in himself and the unusual ability to put it into words.

I find it very interesting that this has led to a discussion of where we place ourselves on the economic spectrum, and where we have been previously. I've been rich enough that I've worn diamonds and metallic gold eyeshadow, and I've been so poor I had to steal crackers and ketchup packets from salad bars in order to eat. I've seen both sides, like several of you. I wonder if coming to grips with our own change in status has anything to do with our reactions.

Life is not fair. We all know this, but I am not understanding the angst about it.

So Peter is rich and Andrew is poor. Andrew can do something about it, can't he? Has he got two arms and two legs? Has he got a brain? What is to be angry about? What if he's poor because he's lazy and unmotivated... would you still have this instinctive anger at the inequality of it?

Why not have instinctive anger about other issues that are unfair, say, addiction? Are we going to get upset when we see a compulsive gambler gambling his life away sitting beside someone with piles of chips? What is the difference?

Do we also have instinctive anger against the inequality of one child surviving while another dies? What are we angry at? Or whom? What good does it do? Is there anything we can do about the death? No, so the anger would be pointless.

Many people have overcome incredible odds to achieve the near-impossible. Unless you suffer from a mental illness and are unable to function in society, nobody is stopping anyone from doing the same. In that case, there is no reason for the anger. It may just be a matter of timing, or opportunity, or some event or person. Each of us can always better ourselves and seek a better life.

We all know this, just as we know life is unfair... but it's the anger of the inequality of it that I don't understand.

It's kind of pointless.

And one more thing - everybody gets the same spin at the roulette wheel in life - we all get bad things happening as well as good. Maybe that couple was on a good roll and the arguing couple was on a bad one. One never knows the travails other people have gone through. Maybe you would rejoice for them if you'd know what they'd overcome.

And never the twain shall meet, it seems.

Of course, Mame. Of course.

Very reasonable, but then I wasn't talking about reason. I was talking about a momentary reaction before reasoning sets in. No angst...the feeling doesn't last that long. Not even long enough for some people to consciously remember it. That's why I think it's rather exceptional that Nimh was so aware of it that he could verbally analyze it.

We have gut reactions to many things that we suppress for various reasons...mostly good reasons, I might add.

Perhaps "blue collar worker" wasn't the right word. I meant the small shops of craftsmen and tradesmen. These people aren't factory workers, but many of them are working class people even if they're self-employed. You'll find a lot of them in the Schleißheimer Straße, though not in the touristy streets of Schwabing. Also, the street where I live (just north of Josephsplatz) is quite affordable. One of my neighbors works at McDonalds. The Munich equivalents of FreeDuck's Buckwheat are Bogenhausen and Grünwald.

That said, you're right. Schwabing has a gentrified side, and it has expanded over the time I've lived there. If I moved to Munich again, I'd probably move to the Westend -- for exactly this reason.


That's right. And I assume that's why nimh said at the very beginning of this thread that his gut reaction was irrational. Apologies to everyone I'm annoying by repeating this, but some people don't seem to understand what they're arguing against. Nimh isn't saying he should have hated the wealthy couple. Sozobe didn't say that blondes with face-jobs in SUVs are clueless snobs. I'm not saying Bogenhausen and Buckwheat are boring to live in. All we're doing is describe gut reactions, fully aware that they can't be trusted.

I have no problem with threads digressing. I have a problem when people attack strawmen, because they don't get what the correspondents they're attacking are actually saying. You showed every sign of attacking people for positions they had not taken. Hence, I explained to you what positions your opponents had actually taken. But okay, I'll cut it out now and let those people fight for themselves. They're doing a good job at it anyway.

((((HUGS)))) to Thomas.

I never intended to get into an argument over this, but I have to say...if you, nimh, soz, snood, osso, Diane & I are all on the same wavelength....well, I'm certainly in good company!

Thanks for the support. Maybe your explanation will be more clear than mine. (I can only hope.)

Hear, hear Thomas.

...and thanks again to nimh for a thread that has ended up being instructive in a few ways. Your launch thread was a self-revelation that plainly stated a gut human reaction in a way that IMO anyone being honest should recognize. To me, it's sort of similar to what a person who struggles with weight must feel when regarding for the umpteenth time another teensy model type with another snotty attitude.

It's not a reasoned, measured response to carefully considered information. It's one kind of emotional response to a circumstance or set of circumstances. I don't think you were saying it's a preferable response, or one of which you're particularly proud, or that it was a state of mind that should be settled for, or dwelled upon - just that it was your immediate, visceral reaction. I think its totally understandable, and that a whole lot of people feel the same way, or have felt the same way, occasionally. I have.



Hoo, boy.