Are you a part of the new aristocracy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Upon his election, Obama had huge momentum as well as a supermajority. He used those advantages to push aside a public option and instead pass the Heritage Foundation’s/Romney’s health care plan. Now he’s kite surfing off of Richard Branson’s private island and kicking back on Steve Allen’s megayacht. What a hero.

Trump voters are Republican chumps, whereas you’re a Democrat chump. But you’re a chump nonetheless, PP. That much is clear.

This is completely disingenuous. Dems adopted many conservative policy ideas, promoted by conservative policy entrepreneurs for years, in order to get Republican buy in and support. But, not wanting to give Obama a win, they turned their noses up at their own policy ideas. How could Dems possibly get any Republican support for single payer if they rejected their own conservative policy ideas!

Nice try at revisionist history but not everyone forgets.

+10000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Upon his election, Obama had huge momentum as well as a supermajority. He used those advantages to push aside a public option and instead pass the Heritage Foundation’s/Romney’s health care plan. Now he’s kite surfing off of Richard Branson’s private island and kicking back on Steve Allen’s megayacht. What a hero.

Trump voters are Republican chumps, whereas you’re a Democrat chump. But you’re a chump nonetheless, PP. That much is clear.

This is completely disingenuous. Dems adopted many conservative policy ideas, promoted by conservative policy entrepreneurs for years, in order to get Republican buy in and support. But, not wanting to give Obama a win, they turned their noses up at their own policy ideas. How could Dems possibly get any Republican support for single payer if they rejected their own conservative policy ideas!

Nice try at revisionist history but not everyone forgets.

+10000

Sorry but isn’t what Obama did called COMPROMISE?! In order to get something passed he had to find something ok with both parties? I know it’s a dirty word and Republicans refuse. I think that’s why a faction of them hate McCain because he will compromise to get legislation passed for the people. Or what others call “doing their job!”

[Anonymous]

Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

This will work for the Whites. Browns and Asians - no way. We have to be in the top 10% to get the life we want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

This will work for the Whites. Browns and Asians - no way. We have to be in the top 10% to get the life we want.

I agree. I am a white woman, and I have always known this is about real estate and land. The new aristocracy are the baby boomers who fled the inner cities during integration of public schools. The liberals sought to divide and conquer working class blacks and whites, men and women. Now they want their children to live in the inner cities. They want back in the inner cities they fled. There is gentrification. It's really sad and disheartening to watch our country turn into this place where there is no middle class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

This will work for the Whites. Browns and Asians - no way. We have to be in the top 10% to get the life we want.

I agree. I am a white woman, and I have always known this is about real estate and land. The new aristocracy are the baby boomers who fled the inner cities during integration of public schools. The liberals sought to divide and conquer working class blacks and whites, men and women. Now they want their children to live in the inner cities. They want back in the inner cities they fled. There is gentrification. It's really sad and disheartening to watch our country turn into this place where there is no middle class.

You do realize that schools were integrated and white flight occurred in the 1960s when most boomers would have been in their 20s or younger. It was their parents who fled the cities because of school integration.
The middle class was a post World War II phenomenon in the US and predictably short-lived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

This will work for the Whites. Browns and Asians - no way. We have to be in the top 10% to get the life we want.

I agree. I am a white woman, and I have always known this is about real estate and land. The new aristocracy are the baby boomers who fled the inner cities during integration of public schools. The liberals sought to divide and conquer working class blacks and whites, men and women. Now they want their children to live in the inner cities. They want back in the inner cities they fled. There is gentrification. It's really sad and disheartening to watch our country turn into this place where there is no middle class.

You do realize that schools were integrated and white flight occurred in the 1960s when most boomers would have been in their 20s or younger. It was their parents who fled the cities because of school integration.
The middle class was a post World War II phenomenon in the US and predictably short-lived.

This. We should also add that much of the moves to suburbia were just after World War II and in the 1950's and had nothing to do with school segregation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not mentioned in the Atlantic article is where the new aristocracy live. They most likely live in New York City and San Francisco and surrounding areas.

You don't have to be a multimillionaire or part of the 9% to live a great life in other regions of the country.

Are people in Kansas City or Minneapolis as obsessed with income inequality? No, because there aren't these starck differences and classes.

The top 9% in the coastal cities have to keep their place because the alternative to falling lower on the rung is living in a much less desirable part of town. They have such stressful lives, they need to pay extra for help. They don't have family or community nearby to help them. They need a second vacation home at Martha's Vineyard to network to keep their business contacts. They are always working and always on.

This will work for the Whites. Browns and Asians - no way. We have to be in the top 10% to get the life we want.

I agree. I am a white woman, and I have always known this is about real estate and land. The new aristocracy are the baby boomers who fled the inner cities during integration of public schools. The liberals sought to divide and conquer working class blacks and whites, men and women. Now they want their children to live in the inner cities. They want back in the inner cities they fled. There is gentrification. It's really sad and disheartening to watch our country turn into this place where there is no middle class.

You do realize that schools were integrated and white flight occurred in the 1960s when most boomers would have been in their 20s or younger. It was their parents who fled the cities because of school integration.
The middle class was a post World War II phenomenon in the US and predictably short-lived.

This. We should also add that much of the moves to suburbia were just after World War II and in the 1950's and had nothing to do with school segregation.

Not exactly.

Whole suburbs were created along with highway systems that cut off inner-city neighborhoods, for whites to flee from blacks.

Why deny the racial heritage?

Baby Boomers are absolutely responsible for turning their public suburban schools into the equivalent of private schools, and then wanting their white Millennial children to move back into the inner city. They moved the poor and black out to the suburbs, like Ferguson, Missouri.

[Anonymous]

Blockbusting began in inner cities in the 1950s, well before school segregation ended. Real estate agents brought in a black family and whites fled to the newly expanded suburbs and housing being financed through VA loans. That’s how our family left NE Washington for Silver Spring.