National Review's moderators have a history of deep-sixing some of my more pointed comments, so here's my response to this fantastically idiotic article by Bradley Scott on NRO.
I really hate articles like this that have a distinct flavor of class envy and puritannical condemnation:
"Another way of saying that is that the cake cost 5,195 gallons of premium gasoline. But who’s counting?"
Another way of saying *that* is that the cake allowed the owner and employees of some bakery to get paid and put gas in their cars another day.
I am not aware that the Kardashians are presumed to have acquired their money by illegal means, so I find it puzzling that anyone should complain that they spend it lavishly, enriching the pocketbooks of the many small businessmen and laborers who were no doubt required to plan, prepare, supply and execute that wedding.
Why, do we call it "stimulus" when government spends the money, but when the Kardashians spend it, it is "blissfully detached from grim economic reality?"
That's the most economically illiterate thing I've ever heard. "Grim detachment from economic reality" would be if the wedding was leaving the Kardashians impoverished and indebted. In actuality, what is happening is that famous "spreading the wealth around." Why don't foolish progressives like "wealth transfer" when it isn't the government doing the transferring?
No comments:
Post a Comment