cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/33401670
Windsorite Susan Taylor was at Toast, ready to pay for her breakfast when she was told the bill had been covered.
“The waitress made an announcement in the restaurant that this lovely couple in the corner is paying for everyone who is in the restaurant at the time for breakfast,” Taylor told AM800’s Mornings with Mike and Meg.
“She (the donor) said that she was American, and she just wanted to apologize,” said Taylor.
“She said she knows that their president has caused a rift in what was happening between our countries, and she wanted us to know that not all Americans are bad people.”
Goofy rich behavior
At least it’s the “pay for your meal” goofy rich and not “dismantle the government” goofy rich.
if a goofy rich class concious person is willing to dismantle the government the right way, I’m all for it.
not all americans are bad. some are rich and can jet off to canada when things go sideways.
They can take the rich ones. The rich ones don’t know how to be human
Where is this line where one crosses over to rich?
Wondering if you could outline the specifics as I’m confused. Would a doctor be thought of as rich if they got a good salary and owner a house?
How do you know how much money these Americans had?
If you’re in a class where you’re using it to either control governments or appease shareholders or line your own pockets, to the detriment of citizens/workers/customers, or if you’re in a situation where you have always been able to live a life of luxury separate from actual working class people (trust fund babies, landlords through mass ownership, etc.) then this is who I think of as the “rich” when I’m shit talking the rich as a whole. No, your uncle who’s a doctor does not fall into that group unless he does those things as well.
Then I’m confused how the comment I replied to was placing the people from this story in to that category and I don’t understand how that is known to be true. They could just have enough to be comfortable and will have noticed the loss of savings in doing this act.
Well I’m not the original comment you’re replying to, that’s just where the line is generally drawn when people make those broad statements. There’s always someone who tries to frame this as a “where do you draw the line/slippery slope” argument but that’s not what it is and it’s kind of irritating to always have to state the difference.
They don’t even need to be rich. Maybe that amount of money actually meant something to them and they were just awkward and a bit lost, but in these times, who could blame them. At least they wanted to do a nice thing :)