Dear Forrest Gumpp,
'tis our pleasure that you bring a little intrigue to this "humble" thread (excluding weighty contributions from Grim, myself and one or two others).
I recently proposed a new thread dedicated to an ABC frontman carried off in chains for voyeuristic exploitation of children, but Graham Young, in his wisdom, declined to air it. It's an issue that must be rigorously and fearlessly explored.

I well remember the lugubrious goings on at the demise of Fractelle (during my noviciate), and being bowed in respectful silence (figuratively) as the mourners in turn paid their doleful respects at her passing. I hardly expected reincarnation after such a heart-felt "severing"!
Squeers was but a callow youth, of course, and now looks loftily from on high at such twee conventions as mortality.
Perfectly legitimate to shapeshift---but into an AFL hooligan!.

Poirot, that sounds quite plausible, but I'm not sure what your
point is. The figures I've seen on Australia, are a little more
evened out. Something like 40% of people own shares directly
and the majority of wealth is held by those either retired or not
far off it. Per household, it adds up to several hundreds of
thousands of $. I once saw a statistic about how many Australians
actually own more then 30 million $ and its surprisingly few.

So how can we assist those who can't help but spend more then they
earn? Shut down the pokies, we Australians blow 20 billion on
gambling and its generally not the rich spending it. Shut down
Las Vegas, I'd hate to think how many billions Americans spend there
each year.

We've seen what happens with lottery winners, some plan ahead, some
have nothing left within a short time.

Americans and Australians have some of the world's lowest savings
rates. Yet the Chinese and Japanese tend to save large % of their
salaries, even at the low wages paid in China.

I guess that shows the differance in cultures. Americans and
Australians seemingly live it up today and stuff tomorrow, not
so for those in Asia, who know about hard times and have experienced
them.

Grim - Neither Lenin or Stalin were communists,

That is a classic of denial

Tell it to those who suffered under their leadership.

So “communism” under Lenin and Stalin was not “communism”

Like I wrote previously Grim,

Collectivism, in its practiced forms (not the airy-fairy nonsense of kindergarten stories)

I notice no surge by Russians or Eastern Europeans trying to install “Real Communism” in their homelands

most of them are trying to adapt and enjoy the freedoms and benefits they now have under what is something closer to capitalism, without the Stasi creeping around trying to trap them.

Regarding “far from being jealous of the obscenely rich, actually consider them to be morally vacuous, blood sucking parasites”

how petty jealousy exudes from every touch of your keyboard –

I always recall the “terror” of the French revolution was not the inspiration for revolution but a consequence of it, where small minded, envious, cruel and morally degenerate thugs took revenge on those who they considered “morally vacuous, blood sucking parasites”.

Lenin claimed such viciousness as a virtue, probably because he, like most collectivists with power, was morally corrupt when he said

“We need the real, nation-wide terror which reinvigorates the country and through which the Great French Revolution achieved glory”

But when the butchers had murdered all the “morally vacuous, blood sucking parasites” their blood lust turned onto anyone who happened to look at them the wrong way and they had the period of the “Great Terror”

Same thing happened in the name of “collectivism” in Russia, China and Cambodia.

One point for us all to remember,

Never ever vote for someone with so much stupid arrogance that he expresses his distain of his fellow man in terms like “morally vacuous, blood sucking parasites”.-

but Grim, says the democratic process “sucks” – so he will do the Lenin revolutionary thing... and bloody his hands before he starts

You are no different to the other butchers, Grim. You will just make yourself taller by climbing on top the bones of your victims.

I trust you get my point, Grim.

Yabby “I guess that shows the differance in cultures. Americans and
Australians seemingly live it up today and stuff tomorrow, not
so for those in Asia, who know about hard times and have experienced
them.”

Yes its called the work ethic – where one expects to work and not being pandered to and pampered simply because one happened to be born

It used to exist in UK and USA – I do think you are on to something –

The consequences of when folk become obsessed with everyone being equal and nobody actually doing anything productive

Stern:
<its called the work ethic – where one expects to work and not being pandered to and pampered simply because one happened to be born>

Dear Stern,
you reveal another facet of your ideological entrapment here in your idolatry of the "work ethic", a working class stereotype that doesn't apply to the wealthy, not even to those elitists who flatter themselves as being workaholics. The work ethic of the entrepreneur is more a monomania and is predicated precisely on a quite reasonable desire to avoid a life of hard labour. Under any dispensation one should "expect to work", to "share" the labour (I share domestic duties with my wife), including the dirty work. Under our system the spoiled rich evade it utterly while the working classes treat it as a badge of honour, which they're paid a pittance for in comparison with those who lead the high life.
The moguls love blokes like you!

Forrest Gumpp, dearest.

I did indeed post upon the wrong thread - my ire was not aimed at your dear soul.

Having much hearty laughter at your thoughts believing I was vengeful. I can agree to disagree with those worthy of respect and hold no grudges towards you.

The post was intended for the "Australian Head of State" thread, where it has been both transposed and fleshed out. It's intended recipient; AlGoreIsRich aka Boaz, Polycarp and (one presumes) God, has now received the bounty of my thoughts. As for "SIGWB", if Al Gore is rich, so is George W Bush, thus emphasising the utter futility of his latest moniker.