Rich Fuckers Are Eating The World

A picture of an over-fed mouth
Fuck Off, I’m Full – No, Wait, MORE…

We live in an age of greed and obesity.  Where even ‘the poor’ are sometimes able to shovel into their gaping cake-holes far more than they could ever require for the purposes of nourishment.

So it goes with the top-tier Men and Women of Calibre, that exclusive group of super-wealthy.  The 1%, the less-than-1%, the cap of the pyramid, the cream on the cake.

I am not telling anyone anything they don’t already know.  But, for the sake of fuck, the richest of the rich are EATING THE FUCKING WORLD.  They are siphoning and leeching and slurping up everything of value that they can find.

They already have enough – more than enough – far more than they could ever need.  But they want more, and because they have already demonstrated that they CAN take what they want, god damn it, they DESERVE more.  And we are here to make sure that they get more – even if the more belongs to someone else or us.

Capitalism is a form of society that is sick because it has built new societies and an entire civilisation but now no longer wants to contribute to that in any way other than the only way they know.  Take.



Well, at the risk of coming off all ‘socialist’ like Barack Obama or something – there NEEDS to be a limit.  There needs to be a ceiling.  There needs to be a cap on how much stuff-of-value one person, family, entity can take.

I propose an income ceiling, and a de-monopolisation, and an end to collusion that destroys.  That is all.  That would fix a LOT of shit.

What would be wrong, bad, or negative about that?  Fucking nothing.


6 thoughts on “Rich Fuckers Are Eating The World

  1. Poor people are often overweight or obese because the only ‘food’ they can afford is the hyper-processed slops of whatever is left on the slaughterhouse floor. These foods are full of fat, have about as much nourishment as a cereal box, ink and all, and these foods are fattening. Fruit, vegetables, reasonably edible meat are very expensive and out of reach for many people. Two thirds of Australian university students live under the government prescribed poverty line, from which one can conclude that the stereotype of uni students living off instant noodles, frozen foods, and whatever else they can manage originated.
    Families living off frozen crap, ‘food’ designed to be microwaved, and fast food often don’t do so by choice – if healthier, tastier foods were cheaper and they could afford the time to prepare nutritious meals, I assure you, they would. No one wants of likes to live like that, and even if they do, it’s their prerogative. Unfortunately, their children are often the ones that suffer. Enlightening these people through education that doesn’t patronize them is the only way to change their contentedness (which has likely originated from the fact that they cannot monetarily afford to change) to live the way they do.
    Someone’s weight is dependent on many factors, and you simply cannot judge someone’s health, diet, socioeconomic status, exercise habits, tendencies to fall to consumerism, or greed upon their appearance as much as you cannot judge their star sign just by looking at them. There is nothing objectively wrong with being fat. To think so is to fall victim to the messages the world shoves down our throats through advertising, tropes in TV (Homer Simpson and Peter Griffin are both very fat and very stupid. Imagine if they were otherwise indistinguishable from the other characters and they were black and behaved the same way – neither show would have even aired.)
    We have the means to support everyone – we could feed the third and give them the means by which to feed themselves and to develop as a nation, but we (humans) do not. How fucked is that?
    The problem lies in the way the world’s wealth is distributed and used. America has the ability to house every single homeless person in all 50 states. The US could also afford to have a similar health benefits scheme to Canada, Britain, or Australia, but in stead their money is spent on military and murdering people ion conflicts in which they have no business sticking their noses in. All first world countries could have education systems as good as Finland’s and other Scandinavian countries’ but the concept of investing back into the countries and the poor people; those who need support is unspeakable. A common slogan used among the Liberal voters in the 2013 election campaign was ‘For the Givers not the Takers’ which turned out, on further investigation, was meant to shame anyone who was or had dependent on the government to survive, including those of AuStudy payments for uni students, anyone on maternity/paternity leave, on leave for being injured etc. and that is possibly the most fucked thing I’ve seen a bunch of politicians drill into the impressionable minds of the youths with which they have contact. The mentality that these people have grown up with often (no, not always) comes from people growing up in affluent families who have trust funds and the money has always just been there, and they have a sense of entitlement, which is absurd, because it is just as easy to be born into destitution.
    The problem lies with the rich and influential taking and taking and the poor doing the best they can.
    The whole thing is ridiculous because money is a concept created by humans. We attach semantics to a bunch of numbers which seems to not only be the root of all evil but it rules the rich, and that mentality trickles down to every last one of us.
    We are being ruled by our own inanimate creation and it is that which causes these problems.


    1. Thanks, ChloeMonster, for adding to this.

      You’ve captured and extrapolated on my first paragraph analogy – we live in a world of abundance, and some of that abundance has been allowed to be shared and indulged in by the working-poor, mainly in the form of crap food with little, none, or even negative nutritional value. The rest – the good stuff, the cash, the security of abundance, the illusion of power associated with possession of cash, and all that stuff that has created the framework (“money is a concept”) of our civilisation – is kept tightly in the grasp of those “rich and influential taking and taking”.

      As much as I agree with most everything you so eloquently expressed, I do maintain that there is still room for some personal responsibility in the choices that people make, and that no matter how poor or oppressed or marginalised one is, that one can still choose to avoid the worst of the shit food that one could chosse to consume. You know, adopt a raw-food diet just to stick it to the clown, and spend the fast-food money on broccoli, beans and apples. At the very least, one can always ‘work toward’ getting off the teat of the giant conglomerate food grinder-dispensers. And, while I say that, I have no right to – I’m a hypocrite… I love ice-cream. I’m addicted to sugar, and I don’t eat enough fruit, don’t drink enough water, and don’t exercise enough. So there, hang me…

      But yeah, as you said, and I guess what this post was all about, we have enough for everyone, but we don’t know how to share, and that is exactly what’s fucked up.

      It was nice typing with you! Y’all come back now…. 😉


      1. Guess who’s back, and with a blog here, now!

        Of course there’s room for personal responsibility, but that’s it, people can choose to do, or not do, what they like. People can put in, and do with their bodies what they like. Those that can barely afford the shit food with which they feed themselves and others are stereotypically time poor – I don’t think anyone want to live off that shit – but when the government has cut you off at the knees and has a noose around your neck and you’re trying to live, people easily fall in the pattern of eating like that – it requires no preparation except for driving, and when you’re living in your car, hell, you don’t even have to leave your bedroom! Being poor and tired are only two contributing factors which lead people to live off shitty food like that, and hell, a reasonably tasty and nutritious can of soup is not only tasty and nutritious, but is often cheaper, but do you really think the least fortunate of the least fortunate could generally give a shit what they’re eating as long as they are eating and it’s not completely depleting their funds? It’d be great to have programs where the less fortunate who end up living of shit food can learn how to cook and shop better and how to adapt to different situations which affect the way they eat such as the use of camping stoves and other things specific to less privileged ways of living. Jamie Oliver had a program where he sort of did that, but it’d be amazing to implement some real training here, and have it not just for TV ratings and book sales. Education is the key to betterment because as the old adage so correctly says – knowledge is power.


      2. Oh, you’re back are you?
        Well, welcome back!!
        I love having you visit. You should do it more often. And, for what it’s worth, I will usually agree with everything you are ever going to say for the rest of all the remaining eternity.
        So, now I’m going to check out your new thing that you have made. If I like it, I will let you know all about it! If I don’t, I will silently retreat to await you getting on with stuff that I will like.
        Jamie Oliver is a tool. A well-intentioned, patronising, off-with-the-fairies tool. An affable chap, with a heart of gold. Contwiboot.


    1. Odette!

      Good question. Maybe with a relatively simple answer. We have committees and audit commissions and the like that do things like set the nation’s interest rates and even the national minimum wage, so surely we could get the maximum wage sorted in a fair way.

      I’m not dissing capitalism or our model of it *entirely*. If I was very very rich, I would want to and should expect to be able to spend my money how I like. I’m not suggesting in any way that the income limit be set at $100,000/year or even $1,000,000. I’d want to be able to buy the Maserati, the boat, and work on building the impenetrable compound – all in the same tax year.

      But if it’s fair to set a minimum wage, then it’s fair to determine a maximum – and surely we can decide that once you’re bringing in a cool $20 million or something similar, then maybe it’s time to move to a 90% tax rate for all earnings above that. I know that there are lots of issues that need to be thought through and many things to take into consideration, but there is a model that would work, and there would be ways to make it work.

      Just thinking as I type – An alternative model that could work is to avoid the income ceiling totally, and just raise the minimum wage to, say, $500,000/year and artificially avoid massive inflation through some crafty economic manipulation. Just an idea…

      Hey, thanks for leaving your mark here!


Leave a Reply - if you want to...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s