She makes more money for our family than I could right now. In the past, with her schooling and job changes, it’s been the other way around. That’s how it works when you’re a team.

I take care of the house, the cars, computers, and the finances. I handle distress flares from my adult kids, do the minimum possible gardening, and cook meals. I’m good at all of it, and I have plenty of time to write books, field a small contract now and then, and annoy the gormless on the internet.

And jeeze, it’s not like she’s working in a coal mine. It’s a high-tech modern hospital, just built a few years ago.

This has happened to an entire generation of middle class white men, myself included. But I was lucky, I saw it coming and made other arrangements.

In our society an employable able-bodied male would work and would support the less abled spouse instead of the other way around.

As a white male you had an excellent opportunity for an education, and apparently got one. However, the “crunch” got you, the same “crunch” engineered by the people you endorse and admire, “earning” millions upon millions looting the country. Again. And, according to you, they deserve every penny. “Who is to say how much is too much?”

However, whatever gets you through the night.

Can you extrapolate? Are you able to follow trends? Or are you totally blind?

And the old BS about having had this conversation isn’t true. You do not answer questions, you BS all around the patch and call that an answer. Obfuscate is a superb word.

For instance: “Why do you favor a plutocracy?” Simple question, honest, direct.
Answer: “This is like having a radio conversation with somebody five light hours away.”
Pathetic, really. As a debating tactic you’d flunk. A fifth-grader would chew you up.

Your point about political power is also my point (after we’ve cleared this one).

That one percent is three million people.

And it’s not the same three million every year. New ones show up from the larger universe of 300 million Americans. Last time I looked at the numbers some years ago, about 2/3 of the Forbes 400 billionaires were entirely self-made, and only 74 had inherited their entire fortunes.

Think about just that.

How many players did your games have?

It was not accidental that the maker of the video used his graphics to project the idea of just one “person” holding this top position.

Sidebar: In the real world, concentration of political power has caused a hell of a lot more problems than concentration of privately-earned wealth.

Obviously this happens in the real world also, else the wealthiest would not be a smaller and smaller percent of the population. They are successfully playing to win. I do not (hopefully to counter more screams of “redistribution of wealth!!!!” that I hear coming) say this is a bad thing. Only that it is a fact.

I won’t even bother to put the following into the form a question, since you are incapable of answering my questions. So I will predict a belief that I think you might have:

That there is some natural limiter or regulating device to keep there from being only one winner and everyone else as beholden to the winner. Further, that this limiter is set so that there can never be too few property owners and too many peons. So that this limiter allows you (but not the rest of us, because we haven’t figured out what this limiter must be) to relax because it will always keep things from ever becoming unpleasantly extreme.

If that’s so, could you turn me on to what this limiter is so I can relax too?

It’s like having a radio conversation with somebody five light hours away.

Working on a writing career that lets me work at home, and with luck, will generate some income on its own eventually. Before that, I did contract work that also let me work at home. Things are looking up in that department lately.

If I wanted a “real” job, the unemployment rate here is less than 5 percent. We have a lot of filthy rich tech companies here making shitloads of filthy money. I’m sure if we drove them away, we’d all be doing a lot better.