We’re All Just “temporarily embarrassed millionaires…”

Originally posted on a friend’s Facebook page. The italic comments are my subsequent additions. (Cooler heads prevailing? Maybe…)

Who looks out for low-income Canadians? The lawmakers? Okay, but aren’t they mostly wealthy individuals, some for many generations?

If not most, then many. After all, their salary, benefits, celebrity, and pension are enough to be financially attractive to most Canadians.

Aren’t many others “first-generation wealthy” who might see their elected membership in Parliament (and other institutions) as a handy, effective means of wealth generation and preservation? A few might be from lower income cohorts but far more (a statistical majority, in fact) are likely to be extremely rich; elites who may take the attitude that, “if the poor don’t like it, they should have made more money!”

“Extremely rich” is hyperbolic, but compared to those of average income and debt loads (who lack the opportunity to earn income after their public political life), many elected officials are financially well-off.

All those elected officials who complain that government pharmaceutical programs would be “socialist” activities are likely wealthy (and so do not fully appreciate the burden of pharmaceutical costs), likely don’t see “the poor” as a significant voting block, and are probably recipients of MP (or other gov’t position) pharma, dental, travel, etc. care plans.

The “Falk in our stars” are those who, as members of Parliament or Provincial Legislatures have a Pharma plan as part of their government pay package. If it disgusts him to the point of public displays of angry bluster, (and if I could) I would gladly take over TF’s coverage. I won’t vote for him as a result (that transaction would be illegal), but I will feel better about his election rhetoric and he will be able to point to his noble intent and superior moral character.

A better remedy than my angry rant might be to go back and read “The Grapes of Wrath” again.