Tuesday, February 24, 2009


Greetings all. I have returned to comment on an article Bryant referred me to. For those who are unacquainted with me, my name is Irwin J. McIckleson and I am a ruthless 1930s plutocrat. For those unfamiliar with the term, that means I favor having a lot of money and pushing peopl around. I am not in favor of distant planets or cartoon dogs being in charge of the mechanisms of government. Bryant has forwarded me Douglas McKinnon's latest article, in which he points out the damage caused by an entitlement mentality.
But why should anyone be "entitled" to a pension? The fact is, the vast majority of Americans have no access to a pension, do not expect one, and will never get one. And if they don't get a pension for the hard work and long hours they put in, why should a shrinking minority be "entitled" to one?
Mr. McKinnon has the wisdom of a plutocrat. But why should he stop there. In my era there are millions of workers who are receiving no pay checks, being unemployed. I understand it is much the same in your era. So why should my lazy employees demand their paychecks. Why should they hold themselves above their fellow citizens in demanding special treatment? It's un-American to give them special privileges, that many Americans do not get. And I won't stand for it in my factory; thus I am withholding paychecks from my employees until every American gets a regular paycheck.

Some might argue that this is a breach of trust or of faith; that I am required to pay my workers what I agreed to pay them. Poppycock. If we can thrust aside pension promises why not thrust aside paycheck promises, for the good of the greater economy.

1 comment:

Random Goblin said...

No way dude, you're from the 1910s.