Texas Businesswoman's 3-Story Luxury Closet Burglarized

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
Do you think it is fair or unfair to wonder if Michael Moore is a big, fat hypocrite?

Working Class Hero Michael Moore Owns 9 Homes

Of course Moore has a right to own as many homes as he wants, but the problem is that he and his buddies want to limit that privilege to those on their team.

Their class warfare is selective hypocrisy. They have a problem when “some people” make too much money, but not when they do. They attack companies in public that, like Michael Moore, they invent in, in private.

We have a bunch of rich people attacking other rich people and claiming that they’re doing it all “in the name of the people” or in the name of income inequality. Meanwhile they’re flying around in private jets.

The ultra-liberal, anti-gun Moore has made a fortune bashing rich executives (who may indeed be subject to legitimate criticism to some degree) and others in films such as Roger and Me and Capitalism: A Love Story, but the extent of his own mogul-level wealth has now become public in a divorce proceeding.

Moore’s 10,000 square foot lakefront mansion in Michigan is only one of nine homes that he owns. Expensive improvements on that mansion property apparently was a big bone of contention for the divorcing couple.

In a CNN appearance with Piers Morgan, Moore famously denied that he was a member of the one-percent. As The Inquisitr previously noted, Moore “has fashioned a persona of being part of the 99 percent, not the evil money-hoarding, mansion-building one-percenters.”

Of course, Moore still claims to be a working class hero and not a one-percenter.

LOL

Uno
 

squarecut1

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2013
2,230
5
46
That said I would encourage her to do some self reflection. What is missing that she needs $60K bags and so much plastic surgery to try to fill?.

That is the huge hole at the core of the modern, materialistic society
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,461
996
126
What i found weird is how the Christian church begs for money yet its Bishops and such live in damn nice houses...

I dont have a problem with the houses the Catholic church has owned for many years(50-100). They werent as expensive then and used to house a whole hell of a lot more people than today. The issue are the new million homes that have been built in the last decade for singular Bishops/ArchBishops.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
Well - no, no gold leaf. But some nice brass. And I don't know about those babies - I asked why they were laughing, but they really didn't explain it very well. I suspect the Bilderburgers though.

Ah! Of course! It's *always* the damned Bilderburgers!

1385203870-alex-jones-delivers-speech-during-watford-bilderberg-protest-in-london_2133697.jpg
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,329
126
Words vs deeds. The rich guy and the camel's eye.

But that could apply to everyone. Let's look at athletes and HW elites.

Edit;lol google "fat film documentary rich guy"

Michael Moore

Rich folk solved the camel through the needle thing a long time ago. They just pay people to put the camel in a blender, add just a bit of water to get it the right consistency, and then squirt it through the eye of the needle with a syringe. Sure you gotta pay some assholes to do some bullshit non-productive crap for a few days but to the rich guy it wasn't that hard so he gets to go to heaven.
 

Joepublic2

Golden Member
Jan 22, 2005
1,097
6
76
AUGH that face.

But yeah this is why you don't leave big empty boxes for 60 inch lcd TVs outside your house on the curb or poking out of the top of your curbside can. When I lived in low income areas I'd always bring all my electronics/shit worth stealing in between 4-5am when everybody was asleep. She's showing all this shit off on local TV and doesn't have a stellar security system what did she think was going to happen?
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
The three-story space houses millions of dollars of goods: clothing, shoes, furs, bags, and jewelry — even a champagne bar.

While she and her husband had stepped out for a quick dinner, an intruder broke into a downstairs restroom and headed for the closet — stealing three bags, valued at $60,000 apiece, and filling them with jewelry, including one-of-a-kind family heirlooms. In all, Roemer estimates that $800,000 to $1,000,000 was lost.

Security cameras caught footage of the masked thief — who was in and out within 40 minutes — but authorities said there are no current suspects.

This just demonstrates that if we were to raise taxes on the haves and the have-mores that they would really suffer. Imagine having to forgo $60,000 purses and three-story luxury closets.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
This just demonstrates that if we were to raise taxes on the haves and the have-mores that they would really suffer. Imagine having to forgo $60,000 purses and three-story luxury closets.
Is that really the proper role of government in the Land of the Free, to tax people to the point of suffering and stop there?

If government has the ability to decide how much stuff you should be allowed to accumulate, then you aren't free. You are chattel.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,418
1,598
126
This just demonstrates that if we were to raise taxes on the haves and the have-mores that they would really suffer. Imagine having to forgo $60,000 purses and three-story luxury closets.

punishing success, it's the american way.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Is that really the proper role of government in the Land of the Free, to tax people to the point of suffering and stop there?

punishing success, it's the american way.

The implicit issue is whether or not the woman actually earned all of that money and how exactly she obtained it. You have to wonder whether the workers at the businesses she owns stock in are being compensated properly for the value of their labor and whether the top 1% of the population has truly earned the wealth it is receiving (off the backs of the workers).

If government has the ability to decide how much stuff you should be allowed to accumulate, then you aren't free. You are chattel.
Of course not. Likewise, if 50% of the population is impoverished and work as de facto slaves for the benefit of the top 5%, they're not exactly free either. Advocating that people should receive the value of the wealth they have actually produced is not the same as saying that the government should have the ability to decide how much stuff you should be allowed to accumulate.