http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8798129nadinbrzezinski (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 08:19 PM
Original message
On weddings, social events and costs
during recessions and depressions.
Indeed when you have the wedding of (insert famous person here) and they are spending (insert figure here), there tends to be a lot of outrage. Especially in times of economic crisis. So was the case oh at the end of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th, when Cornelia Martin and her husband had THE PARTY of the day. It WAS the place to be, and while people starved they partied like it was 1899.
So the resentment about this (insert famous couple here) is understandable. We have had this before. It is seen as tacky, especially in a country that thinks we are all equal. It is a sign of social friction and that cold realization that no, we are not equal.
Well, I got a little different look at it. This event will produce jobs, and will keep people employed. Should they have a much smaller wedding? Perhaps would be the socially responsible thing to do... should they donate the difference to charity? Perhaps. But this envy speaks volumes about the current US... (Rumored costs for this wedding at the upper tier of society are not that high, believe it or not). We are at a similar point at what when Mrs Bradley left the country for friendlier coasts, the UK. Remember, some of our ultra rich are doing that, right now. Ah the echoes of history, aren't they fun?
Now we would not be having this conversation if this was oh insert Hollywood star here, and trust me, some of those weddings put this one to shame. So look at it this way... it is keeping people fed. And the outrage will be used by Rush and company to tell us about the latte drinking, Mercedes driving, Limo riding... Liberals...
Oh and for the story I referred to read A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America by Michael McGerr. I promise, it is a funny story, and you will quickly see the echoes.
LAGC (783 posts) Thu Jul-22-10 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm amazed how much outrage there is over trickle-down, supply-side, Reaganomics...
Until it comes to own of our own.
Pathetic.
Your time is short.
scheming daemons (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. Except this isn't "trickle down"... this is DIRECT PAYMENT to people
See?
nadinbrzezinski (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. That makes two of us
And in an ideal society we would not have these class differences. But we do, and until the paradise comes, having gone through a wedding... I know that some people rely on them to make a living. That ranges from the card maker, to the food caterer, the cake decorator, et al.
So a few people are making money on this. No this is not trickle down... it is reality. It is an economic exchange. And people are missing that, as usual.
Trickle down would be to expect that money to come to me... but in this case it is a pretty straight thing, they are paying all these people, for a service.
You are an idiot first and last.
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
16. Good points. Plus, the Clintons, unlike their critics,
would be happy to pay higher taxes to help those less fortunate.
On a much smaller scale, I have been making a point of going to a certain small restaurant a couple times a month -- something we've never done before. It's a great little place that caters to people with my food allergy and I've already seen two other restaurants I like go under in this economy. I'd like to do my little part to keep this place open.
Yep,he no doubt has a pile of old underwear to donate and claim a tax write off on.
niyad (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
19. let's see--the dress designers, the florists, the bakers, the caterers, the wait staff, etc., etc.,
Edited on Thu Jul-22-10 09:00 PM by niyad
would be getting a lot of the speculated (since none of the people guessing has any real information)
amount, wouldn't they? shouldn't that make a lot of people very happy. I mean, aren't THOSE people then going to go out and spend some of that windfall, which will enable THOSE people to go out and spend, which will enable. . . .
Pretty much what happens when you take the tax burden away.
nadinbrzezinski (1000+ posts) Thu Jul-22-10 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. +1, basic economics
But you will argue against it in a matter of time on another thread.
The wedding has brought out another wave of hysterics on the island.
As for me,I don`t care even a little bit about it.
