Up with the Poor, Down with the L.A. Time

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/36 ... williamson

By Kevin D. Williamson

The Los Angeles Times is one of the great scandals in American life — that the nation’s second-largest city should have such an inept newspaper is an indictment of American journalism.

A particularly good example of that is the newspaper’s just-retracted claim that 85 individuals own nearly half of the world’s wealth, suspicious even to those of us with only English-major math to work with. The claim is — or should have been — rejected out of hand: One-half of the world’s wealth amounts to more than $100 trillion, which would mean that we would have to have 85 trillionaires walking the Earth, when in reality there are none. In fact, there is no one who is even one-tenth of the way there: Neither Bill Gates nor Carlos Slim has crossed the $100 billion mark, though it seems likely that somebody will, someday.

Agenda is much more important than the truth.

Right now the new story is wealth disparity. They want us to believe that because more people are super wealthy that other people must be suffering but actually people around the world are much better off than ever before.

FredHayek wrote: Agenda is much more important than the truth.

Right now the new story is wealth disparity. They want us to believe that because more people are super wealthy that other people must be suffering but actually people around the world are much better off than ever before.

I'm sure it's very comforting to people starving around the world to know that on the whole people are better off than ever before, if in fact they are.

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Agenda is much more important than the truth.

Right now the new story is wealth disparity. They want us to believe that because more people are super wealthy that other people must be suffering but actually people around the world are much better off than ever before.

I'm sure it's very comforting to people starving around the world to know that on the whole people are better off than ever before, if in fact they are.

Aren't you the gloomy Gus! Billions of people rising above subsistence living yet you continue to remain focused on the declining ranks of the starving.

I suppose you are the first one to trumpet 20,000 new jobs created this quarter while long term unemployment is the worst it has ever has been.

FredHayek wrote:

archer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Agenda is much more important than the truth.

Right now the new story is wealth disparity. They want us to believe that because more people are super wealthy that other people must be suffering but actually people around the world are much better off than ever before.

I'm sure it's very comforting to people starving around the world to know that on the whole people are better off than ever before, if in fact they are.

Aren't you the gloomy Gus! Billions of people rising above subsistence living yet you continue to remain focused on the declining ranks of the starving.

I suppose you are the first one to trumpet 20,000 new jobs created this quarter while long term unemployment is the worst it has ever has been.

Then you suppose wrong, I didn't mention it

Archer, seriously?

IF we got rid of all the wealthy who provide a large number of jobs there wouldn't be as many starving people around the world?

RidgeWay wrote: Archer, seriously?

IF we got rid of all the wealthy who provide a large number of jobs there wouldn't be as many starving people around the world?

Ridgeway, seriously?

Where didI say that I wanted to get rid of all the wealthy?