SHARED SACRIFICE?… Define “shared”

We’re hearing a lot of talk these days from Washington about “Shared Sacrifice” and “Government Transparency” .  What we’re hearing and what we are seeing are two very different things… Just ask anyone on Main Street.

The Government’s use of the terms “shared”, “sacrifice” and “Government Transparency” seem to be contradictory.  I think they are coming from a Corporate mindset where there are shareholders and there are SHAREHOLDERS.  For example, owning one share in BP makes you a “shareholder”.  Owning millions of dollars worth of BP stock makes you a “SHAREHOLDER”.  To think the shareholder gets the same treatment as a SHAREHOLDER is folly.

So, in the spirit of “transparency in Government”,  I’ll translate what we’re hearing.  If you are a taxpayer and fall into the category of Middle Class, Senior Citizen, Poor, or to tell it like it really is, NOT RICH… you’re a shareholder.  If you are a “Special Interest” or Politician, you are a SHAREHOLDER.  (By the way, why do we refer to them as “SPECIAL” interests?  That should tell you something right there!)  Therein lies the rub.  The SHAREHOLDERS are sacrificing the shareholders.  We ALL share the consequences of decisions made by our government… just not equally.

The cartoon is a result of my perception about inequalities in the concept of “Shared Sacrifice”.  You know what the GOOD NEWS is?… If all shareholders  stood together, the SHAREHOLDERS would be powerless to make us sacrifice everything for their benefit.  WE HAVE A LOT MORE VOTES!  What kind of laws do you think would be passed if SHAREHOLDERS had to take the same benefit or penalty as everyone else?  Rather than “Shared Sacrifice”, lets demand  a “SHARED LOAD”… Corporations and people earning most of the income should be expected to share the load proportionately, instead of sacrificing the shareholders… WE, THE PEOPLE should expect nothing less.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *