Rich Troll Twit Tom Perkins' Latest Idea: Let Rich Buy Up Votes In Elections

Poor Tom Perkins.

Tom Perkins thinks the rich should buy up all the votes
 

By poor, I don't mean monetarily. He's a billionaire.

But in his mind, he doesn't have enough rights. In his mind, if you're rich, you should be able to buy everything. Material things like mansions, Lear jets, baubles and jewelry isn't nearly enough, oh no sir!

If you're very rich, like Perkins is, you ought to be able to buy the adoration of all the serfs under his feet.

How dare anyone have the temerity to criticize the rich!  Or say even the most slightly mean thing about them! Even to envy them!  In his mind, respect is bought, not earned.

Yes, last month, he was the guy who said that criticism of the rich amounted to Kristallnacht, that awful night in Nazi Germany when they started rounding up the Jews for extermination. Yep, mild criticism of the rich is JUST as bad as the Holocaust.

Now our buddy Perkins is back with a brand new idea. Oh, some of these rich people are full of ideas! See, in his mind, elections are another commodity. You buy as many votes as you can muster.

No "one person, one vote" crap that has kept this country running all these years.

According to CNN Money, this is what Perkins said is his great idea:

"'The Tom Perkins system is: you don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes,' Perkins said, 'But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How's that?"

Oh, perfect, Tom! Instead of this byzantine system of corporations buying off politicians through campaign contributions to do their bidding, you just buy them off directly.

Pay a few million bucks to just do whatever you want and screw the wishes of everybody else, who you think were too stupid, too undeserving to become obnoxious billionaires like yourself.

Plus, this guarantees the people with the money stay rich, and one of your serfs who has the audacity to try to get rich through talent, hard work and great ideas has no way to do so, because you've thwarted  him or her by buying the government.

 CNN Money reported that his audience at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco kind of laughed at the idea, but Perkins said he's serious, though he allowed, "I intended to be outrageous and I was."

Tom, you were right. We are outraged. I know we shouldn't even pay attention to you. You're just a troll. A moneybags troll, but a troll, and we're not supposed to feed the trolls. It encourages you.

But I'm going to pay attention to you and your ilk anyway. We serfs have to do everything we can and expose your nonsense to you don't buy off the nation for yourself even more than you already do.

Yep, people like me hope to be your Kristallnacht. Except we're not going to smash your windows, arrest you, put you in concentration camps, persecute you or otherwise hurt you. You deserve to live out your life in opulent splendor. Go for it!

Instead, us serfs need to do something that to your mind is surely much, much worse and much, much more painful.

We want to ensure that everybody, even you, Your Highness Tom Perkins, obey the same rules, laws and societal conventions as all the rest of us, including the poor you hate so much, are expected to do.    

Oh the horror!

Clueless Rich Guy's "Kristallnact" Comparison Makes Him Famous For Being Dumb

I'd never heard of Thomas Perkins until Saturday.

Thomas Perkins, a billionaire is
distraught that anyone would dare
criticize anyone who is super rich. 

Supposedly his some rich fat cat that was once married to romance novelist Danielle Steel. He thinks he's important, anyway.

Now, lots of people are hearing about him. That's because of his classic letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal that popped up in the past couple of days.

Apparently, in Perkins mind, criticism of the very rich, and income inequality and the wish among some circled to increase taxes on the rich is every bit as horrible as the Nazi persecution of Jews starting in the 1930s.

That's right, he compared the criticism of the rich to Kristallnacht, that night in the 1930s when Nazis smashed out the shop windows and attacked Jews, which was the start of the process that led to the Holocaust.

Kristallnacht was pretty extreme. More than 30,000 Jews were arrested and imprisoned that night. About 1,000 synagogues were burned. Many thousands of Jewish owned businesses were ransacked and destroyed.

In Perkin's mind, raising the taxes a bit on the rich, along with some moron who damaged a bus transporting Google workers to their job, is just as bad as the kristallnacht nightmare.

Here's what our buddy Perkins writes:

"From the Occupy movement to the demonization of the rich embedded in virtually every wordd of our local newspaper the San Francisco Chronicle, I perceive a rising tide of hatred of the successful one percent."

He goes on to complain about public protests of the buses Google uses to take technology workers from their (expensive) San Francisco homes to their jobs in Silicon Valley. He complains about people calling his ex, Danielle, a snob. He complains about complaints that the very rich are helping create rising real estate prices that are making San Francisco unaffordable for everyone except the very rich.

Perkins concludes: "This is a very dangerous drift in our American thinking. Kristallnacht was unthinkable in 1930; is its descedent "progressive" radicalism unthinkable now?"

Poor widdle Perkins got his feelings hurt. Awww...

Everybody is supposed to worship the richest 1 percent and if any particular person doesn't hold the rich in the highest esteem, then that person is apparently just as bad as a Nazi.

Uh, Perkins? Just because we don't like you doesn't mean we're going to burn down your house and throw you in a concentration camp. Take a chill pill, will ya?

So, what are you going to do to me, Perkins, for not worshipping you and your money?  Maybe you should just take a voyage on your super yacht to get over your bruised ego.

Needless to say, the rest of us, you know, the people who don't have zillions of dollars,  are pretty amazed at how wrong, clueless, tone deaf and audaciously insulting Perkins is, but what do we know? We're not wading through billions of dollars in our mansions every day.

The fumes from all that money probably really goes to your head.

Perkins is part of a continuing parade of apparently very clueless rich people who, in their zillion dollar mansions, have gotten a super inflated sense of their importance, who think because they've acquired money they need to be worshipped and the only thing we peons should do is give them more money.

I think that's what led to billionaire Kennth Langone to threaten to stop donating to the Catholic Church because the Pope made some mild criticisms about the adoration of wealth.

It's probably what led to Justin Bieber yelling at a cop, "Why the fuck are you doing this?!?!?" when said cop had the audacity to arrest the High and Mighty Bieber on suspicion of him breaking the law by drag racing in his Lamborghini while under the influence.

I know most rich people aren't like these buffoons. A lot of them got rich through hard work and talent. But some of the most priviledged and arrogant among them can't take even the mildest critcism or pay even the slightest consequences for their actions without going off the deep end.

Which tells me it's worth it to keep poking at rising income inequality, the cheaters who steal millions with the stroke of a pen, who are much worse than a guy with a gun on a street corner, the people who think they are above the law because they can throw around tons of cash.

So, no Perkins, we're not headed toward another Kristalnacht, aimed at the rich. We just want you to shut up. You're not adding any value to anything.

How the hell did you get rich anyway? You obviously didn't do it through intelligence or talent.

Rich, But Not Classy

Three people in the news this week proved there is sometimes an enormous difference between being rich and being classy.

The theory is Ethan Crouch shouldn't go
to jail for killing four people in a
drunk driving crash because he's rich.

First we go to Texas where Ethan Crouch, 16, was found guilty of a drunken driving crash that killed four people and injured nine others.

Usually, when there is an immense tragedy like this and people die becuase of the drunk driver, said drunk driver goes to jail for a long time.  As well they should.

But Crouch just got probation, not the 20 years in the slammer prosecutors wanted. See, we should feel sorry for the not-monetarily poor Crouch.

His family is rich, says television station WFAA in Dallas, and his parents never punished him for any misbehavior, thinking that wealth brought privilege and you should do anything you want.

In short, we should feel sorry for Crouch because he suffers from "affluenza"

Yeah, and I guess we shouldn't feel sorry for his victims, who apparently were too stupid to get rich and possibly somehow avoid the carnage Crouch caused.

So, Crouch will spend a couple years at most in a cushy facility where he will probably continue to be taught that since his family has money, he can literally get away with murder.

Next we move onto a guy named Greg Gopman, one of those Silicon Valley millionaires who get rich creating these weird apps or companies that are supposedly the Next Big Thing but are really worthless.

He's made something called AngelHack, which doesn't sound like anything worth spending time on.

However, Gopman has some interesting theories on the proper place of the homeless, mentally ill and poor people, according to Valleywag. 

Rich guy Greg Gopman said poor people
sould have the common courtesy of
not showing their faces in public. 

Basically, Gopman is offended when he walks through cities like San Franciso and sees people begging or sleeping on the streets. Don't they know their proper place? Shouldn't they hide away in back alleys and ghettos so we don't have to experience the aesthetic pain of seeing such unfashionable people?

They don't add value anyway, goes Gopman's thinking.

I'll bite. Just for laughs and giggles, let's indulge Gopman and evaluate people just on the basis of the "value" they bring for the rest of us.  Sure, some of the people Gopman sees are not "valuable" in that a few might be petty criminals, or just unpleasant people.

But are all of them? Aren't some of the people Gopman doesn't like interesting, have potential, are actually contributing somehow? How does Gopman know they're not.

And is Gopman valuable?  He invents these sort of time wasting apps that don't really contribute much of anything to society. And is anybody who looks down on human beings so much truly valuable? I don't think so.

So Gopman, in my view, is less valuable than most of the people he disparages. Gopman should just hide in back alleys and ghettos and give us the courtesy of not hearing from him or seeing him.

Gopman later deleted his Facebook post and apologized for his remarks, at least somewhat. But some of his buddies were offended that he took down the offensive post. Someone named Alice Zhang wrote this on his Facebook page:

"Don't apologize to those bleeding heart liberals out there. They are part of the problem because they condon parasitic behavior. I've traveled all over the world (including third world countries) and San Francisco is the only place where I've seen people (the homeless) taking a (censored) on the street. If it were up to me I'd put them all in labor camps."

Well! Congratulations Alice! You're even more worthless than Gopman. Quite an achievement!

Next, we  have Philadelphia blogger Sarah Lockard. I don't know how rich she is, but she sure is trying in the most tacky ways possible.

Sarah Lockard says she's valuable. So if you send
her an email or post on her Facebook page,
you'd better pay her $75 each time you do it.  

She's trying to sell a restaurant a favorable review, or at least some nice mentions in her blog by her if they feed her family at Christmas for free.

Worse, and I doubt anybody will ever actually pay her, but Lockard is demanding $75 for any contact to her through her blog, according to Jim Romenesko. 

"Every text, email and biz correspondence with AroundMainLine.com is billable," is her quote.

Yeah, I suppose time is money, but really. I do some freelance writing. An editor emailed me asking me to do an (easy, local) story. So should I bill her $75 just for offering me work?

Um, no. She can just pay me for doing the actual article, thanks.

I like to think that Lockard was just kidding about the $75. She deleted the post demanding the money from people who correspond with her for any reason.

However, money is tight. I certainly won't ask anyone reading this post for any money. I don't need it. But I'm afraid my budget is too small to support Sarah Lockard of Philadelphia. You'll just have to get on without me.

And maybe do us all a favor and just shut up already.

Lockard has no reason to worry I'll contact her. I wouldn't even if she paid me $75. She sounds like too much to me.

http://gawker.com/blogger-offers-restaurants-a-rave-review-in-exchange-fo-1481296911