I owe, I owe, so off to work I go

[caroljane]

Little that is very interesting gets posted on Oonline these days. Much of OO is reblogs from Philosophy Inaction, the Objective Standard etc. But a reblog from the latter did have a catchy title, "What the Poor Owe the Rich". I admit I did not click on the video, as I usually don't, and the cutline "so-called poor" sorta put me off anyway. I suppose biddle berates people for thinking themselves poor when in fact without the rich they would be way poorer or even dead, which in a twisted way is true.

But I can't help seeing it as a question for the so-called poor, asked and answered decades ago by the immortal T.E.: Ford;

Hey poor guy, whaddya owe?

"My soul to the company store".

[anthony]

Quite, Carol. It is tough for we serfs.

Another day, another dolour.

[jts]

Ayn Rand wrote a novel based on what would happen if the rich quit "exploiting" the poor.

In a free economy, the poor gain more from the rich than the rich gain from the poor.

[BaalChatzaf]

Quite, Carol. It is tough for we serfs.

Another day, another dolour.

for -us- serfs. for is a proposition that takes an indirect object.

ba'al chatzaf

[caroljane]

I pose the proposition that it takes a direct object modified by an apposite (us), according to me (Carol)

[BaalChatzaf]

I pose the proposition that it takes a direct object modified by an apposite (us), according to me (Carol)

In any case for we is not grammatically correct. Unless "for" is used as "because" as in

for we are little lost sheep who have lost our way....

[caroljane]

I pose the proposition that it takes a direct object modified by an apposite (us), according to me (Carol)

In any case for we is not grammatically correct. Unless "for" is used as "because" as in

for we are little lost sheep who have lost our way....

[caroljane]

It's "For we like sheep have gone astra-a-a-ay"

Get It right, you bloody posthumous plagiarists!

GFH