Robert Reich is a fairly wealthy professor at Berkeley who seems to take issue with other rich people who spend their money as they so choose. Apparently, he is offended that there are people who are wealthy enough to own a pet shark.
Sounds pretty badass to us but hey, what do we know? We’re not a professor at some overrated, fancy college …
At a time when nearly 80 percent of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, some wealthy families are installing shark tanks in their homes. Instead of cutting taxes so the rich can own a pet shark, how about ensuring every family has a roof over their heads? https://t.co/hVh1CvFWQZ
— Robert Reich (@RBReich) July 31, 2018
From The Wall Street Journal:
After buying a palatial home outside Los Angeles, Elise Ingram and her husband debated what to do with a “very 70s” built-in circular seating area in the living room. They considered turning it into a wine cellar.
Instead, they opted to fill it with sharks.
Hell YEAH.
Michelle Malkin did the math and dropped the prof:
Robert Reich makes 36% more than average CEO and gets $40k for a one-hour talk vs. average worker pay of $46k/yearhttps://t.co/oJ6AEftiRB
UC Berkeley ‘income inequality’ experts earn more than $300,000 a yearhttps://t.co/lXGGsO8MM2 https://t.co/p1UdWRJgfh
— Michelle Malkin (@michellemalkin) July 31, 2018
But sharks? Surely this is somehow Trump’s fault, right?
How much of your huge salary/speaking fees are you giving away, dude? BTW, your "compassion" re: Obamacare destroyed my small business and the decades of my life I spend building it. If you had left me alone, I'd be WAY better off ensuring I continue to have a roof over my head.
— Restive Rabble (@RestiveRabble) July 31, 2018
Recommended
What a weird week, right? From Bigfoot erotica to people owning sharks …
"UC Berkeley’s ‘income inequality’ critics earn in top 2%" https://t.co/oNvaa5lspv pic.twitter.com/D4C67q4fZz
— Restive Rabble (@RestiveRabble) July 31, 2018
That makes Robert a YUGE hypocrite.
But you knew that.
https://twitter.com/colonel_potter/status/1024345747670609920
That’s what it really boils down to, yup.
Nice job on anchoring with the totally irrelevant 80% number.
I'm digging your blatant attempt to connect false numbers with homelessness.
Bravo.
— Cheesetrader (@cheesetrader1) July 31, 2018
What about the homeless sharks, man?
Ok, maybe this editor has had TOO much caffeine.
The poor are not poor because the rich are rich.
— us395 ????️ (@US395) July 31, 2018
‘Nuff said.
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member