Wednesday, April 12, 2006

Fighting the Great Divide?

According to an article, former Treasury secretary Robert Rubin is working with Democrats to launch an effort to identify the sources of national economic inequality and to confront those imbalances. After years of minimal improvement of the economic gap, coupled with all sorts of fiscal irresponsibility from the current administration, this probe into the economy has been long overdue.

However, there are a couple of burning questions that I have:

(1) What took them so f***ing long?! I mean, you don't have to look overseas to recognize that there is a huge divide between the rich and the poor. Hello?! Ever been to New York?! Have you ever watched E! Entertainment?!

(2) Is this the Democrats' way of maintaining their position with the poor and underclassed? If so, why haven't the Republicans followed suit?

(3) Does it take massive fiscal screw-ups like the ones conducted under Bush for us to realize how serious this problem is?

I don't presume to know the answers to any of these questions. But one thing's for sure: it'll be interesting to see where this all goes...


10 "Insiders" spoke their mind. Join in...:

thehc said...

Hey Andre,
Some easy math as to why there is, and always will be a divide in America between rich and poor and why it will get bigger. Citizen "A" makes $10,000 a year Citizen "B" makes $100,000 a year both increase their wealth by 10%, now "A" is worth $11,000, "B" is worth $110,000 although both invested with equal success "A" made $1,000 while "B" made $10,000. Math favors the rich I'm afraid. H.C.

Andre said...

Well put, HC. The problem is: we place the same conditions on every working American irrespective of their situations. To me there's something fundamentally wrong with that picture.

But what do I know? I'm just a silly college kid...

kc said...

"(2) Is this the Democrats' way of maintaining their position with the poor and underclassed? If so, why haven't the Republicans followed suit?"

I've got the simple answer for this one:

Since the GOP disenfranchises votes of people who would CLEARLY vote Democrat, they don't have to fight as much to gain the minority and poor votes.

Florida, 2000 taught us that.

Andre said...

You know KC, that's actually a terrific point.

I've noticed how, especially in the Black community, the GOP has only developed a small base of minority support; while the remaining minority folks are left to fend for themselves and become subjected to disenfranchisment. I'm sure that the Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas didn't have his name withdrawn from the voting record just because there was another Clarence Thomas who was convicted of shoplifting.

Great point! That didn't occur to me until now!

green eyed girl on planet earth said...

This photo has stuck in my head since the first time I seen it , a pic is worth a thousand words and then some , it shows such diversity in the human life and so sad that it seems normal ,it touches my heart.

Andre said...

Hi green!

You seem to bless me every time you say something.

I think that you're absolutely correct. Sometimes things that should be consider a human tragedy become so normal that we desensitize ourselves to it. When I was walking up and down Times Square, I couldn't believe how many people -- myself included -- literally stepped over homeless people.

Sad, indeed...

green eyed girl on planet earth said...

Hello again
yes it is so sad to see the most intellectual and emotional species on this planet totally feel nothing ,or are irritated by such sadness,we are all Gods children and are tested daily by lifes situations and how we react to them, what if Jesus came to us in this form and we turned our backs .! One person most likely cannot change the world alone but they can help one person,and so on and so on , even if you feed one person ,one day, that is goodness in this world and we all connect to one another in some degree.Isnt it suppose to be do onto others ................not get it all for me me me and walk over the rest.......

rhynoman said...

Nice post, Andre.

But, if you think about, Jesus said that the poor will be always be with us (Matthew 26:11). That being the case, this "great divide" makes a whole lot of sense.

Andre said...

@ Green: You're right on! I don't believe that God will EVER change the world's problems. He will NEVER remove poverty, hatred, and indifference. Rather, as you pointed out, He will only change OUR HEARTS and how we react/respond to those problems. Thanks for blessing me!

@ rhyno: I agree that Jesus did say, "The poor you will always have with you." I think that it's important, however, to note that those words were spoken in the context of a poor woman who was pouring expensive perfume on Jesus' feet. Judas was saying, "Why waste that stuff on Jesus? We could be feeding the poor!" Jesus puts him in check by pointing out out that worship and reverence to the Son of God (which includes physically ministering to the 'Son of Man') should be first in our lives, and everything else should follow that. If you read the entire verse, it says, "The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me" (Matthew 26:11)

I guess that my real issue is that when we hear "The poor you will always have with you..." some of us think of the unspoken tagline "Since we there's always going to be poor people, oh well!" But, if you look at the record of Jesus' work while here on earth, it shows that He spent much, much more time healing, feeding, and restoring "the least of these" than he did anything else. Certainly, Jesus didn't heal them all, or feed them all. But this is not to say that WE shouldn't make efforts to try.

Thanks, as always, for your comments!

nick said...

I have always understood that a primary function of democratic government is to provide for those that cannot help themselves. That's why it always blows my mind that we as a culture (at every level of government) seem to ensure that the wealthy are taken care of while the poor are often left to fend for themselves amidst the dregs and the cast-offs from "polite society."