Rich or Poor?

There has been quite a bit of talk (people, newspapers and blogs) about whether or not we ought to have an insanely rich president.  I read a great article about how many of our presidents in the past have been very wealthy and adjusting for inflation Mitt Romney would only be the second richest president we've ever had.

Why do people get upset over somebody rich being president?  Why didn't everyone get upset over Obama and his money, after all he is pretty rich himself?  I will attempt to answer these questions in my own little blog corner of the world because it is something I've been postulating myself.

Poor people don't like to think somebody will be in charge of shaping economic policies who doesn't understand the concerns of the average Joe.  This seems to be a well known fact, but why?  A recent article in the Deseret News by Doug Robinson said sarcastically "We need Joe Average in Washington. We need someone we can connect with, someone like our neighbor or the guy up the street who parks his car on the lawn."  After all what is wrong with somebody who's used to handling large sums of money in charge of our fiscal and political future?

After much consideration I believe I have an answer of some sort to all those questions.  You see I come from a poor family.  My opinion can literally be called a humble opinion because I have lived beneath the poverty line for the majority of my childhood and young adult life.  Because I grew up without new clothes; or fancy yogurt that wasn't about to expire....because of that background I have the slightest problem with people who come from money.  It's similar to the problems women who are struggling with infertility have with those who blink and get pregnant.  Lack of empathy lends towards making comments that are ill-timed, inappropriate and downright hurtful.  Should that mean that those who have no true empathy should not be allowed to talk to those who are hurting?  Now that would be just silly, but in a few historical cases when those in power live far beyond those they rule over it has caused....complications (to say the least).

I recently had the opportunity to go to Paris (not so poor anymore, some of you may say;-)  While there I was able to visit the incomparable Palace at Versailles.  I'm not a history buff but I was always fascinated by French Revolution.  Let's look for one instant at Marie Antoinette.  She is famous for two things.  Famously saying "Let them eat cake" when she heard the peasants were starving.  And the other thing she is famous for is getting her head cut off because the peasants were mad at her.  My husband and I walked with a crowded group of people through the King and Queen's bedroom's and other rooms.  One room used to be where the King and Queen used to eat their dinners.  The common folk were allowed to come on certain days and watch them eat.  It was quite a popular event and many would come from far and near to view the richest people in the country....eat.

It seems fairly clear to me from Marie Antoinette's experience that "being out of touch with the common man" can have some serious side effects.  When in a position of power it would be extremely important to understand how the other half of the world lives.  Whether rich or poor if you haven't seen both sides of the fence it seems like there is a possibility of not being able to assess their concerns while making very serious decisions.

Which brings me back to my aversion to those who are raised with money.  I have different feelings towards them than I do towards those who were raised poor and then through hard work have become incredibly wealthy.  It's not the money itself that makes me uncomfortable around them, it is their completely unrealistic view of the world.

This is what bothers me the most about Mitt Romney.  Now I know logically it isn't his fault his family has had serious money for generations but something within me cringes when I think of a modern day aristocracy in charge.  I don't want somebody who's never wanted for anything ever to tell the poorest of the poor that they don't deserve to have the government pay for their insurance.  I have an even bigger problem with somebody who's been a very rich CEO and who's daddy was a rich CEO tell us that we shouldn't tax the richest of the rich as much as we tax the average Joe.

It's not their money that makes people distrustful it is living one's entire life in the lap of luxury and then assuming that you know how to govern the poor slobs below you that weren't that lucky or that smart.

I don't follow politics that closely, mostly because it turns my stomach how much everybody beats up on each other.  Tearing each other down, criticizing, picking at and emphasizing each others weaknesses and bragging about your own abilities seems incredibly un-Christian.

This post is not intended to recommend that anyone not vote for Romney or for anyone to vote for Romney.  I just wanted to explore for myself why people are so against having a really rich president.  Personally I think it would be better to have a rich president who has also been poor, but that doesn't mean Romney wouldn't do a good job.  I felt (and now feel) more positively towards Obama simply because he has proven that he is smart because he came from very little and made something of himself despite his humble origins.

If you have an opposing opinion to mine and want to criticize my admittedly "humble" opinion, please be kind.  I have a hard time taking criticism myself and would appreciate hearing opposing opinions if stated kindly (not that many people read this little blog anyway, but just in case:-)