>>93
Er, how would the politicians and the business elite benefit if everyone stayed poor?
>>97
I haven't seen you use any subtle nuance, so I don't know where you're getting that from... just saying.
And we aren't exactly old england or russia or anything; you just make yourself believe that and that that's what we're doing to justify your own beliefs. Never in history has our "underclass" been more educated or in actuality, socially mobile. Who cares if that statistic (which I don't neccesarily condone or understand, I'd like to know how they calculated it) shows that people are becoming less able to get out of poverty?
For some reason, you seem to believe there's some huge conspiracy to keep the poor poor, when really things DO move in cycles. Economies rise and fall, poverty stricken populations do likewise.Really, I think the business elite would stand to benefit if everyone started becoming more affluent; they'd have more money to spend on their useless wares. You're looking at one point in recent history and deciding to go batshit over it. Or maybe it was just a nuance you just didn't pick up.