In case you needed any further proof that the left and their media water-carriers harbor absolute disdain for the average American family, here’s just the latest bit of proof: the brilliant minds over at the Washington Post, ever so graciously willing to bequeath unto us unwashed masses their wisdom and enlightened perspective, want you to know that while your bank account may be buckling under the skyrocketing price of staples like eggs, butter and meat, you’re still better off than people 130 years ago who didn't have toilets and huffed lead paint.
Feel better? Didn’t think so.
In an op-ed in the liberal rag that’s tanking so hard it’s about to lay off a crapload of people - gosh, wonder why - columnist Megan McArdle points out in a piece condescendingly entitled, "Why eggs are cheaper than you think" that while yes, eggs have shot up from less than a couple bucks a carton to well over $5 (and even $8, in some places), you shouldn’t whine about it because people during the Great Depression didn’t even eat lots of eggs and couldn’t readily get chicken. (And also, she adds, Miss Betty McPantyhose back in 1914 spent about five full work days prepping meals, which has absolutely nothing to do with the overall point of her article except to make 21st Century you feel guilty about complaining that you can’t afford food because hey, at least you have a fridge to store your big fat nothing in.)
In fact, if you’re droning on about how it’s getting harder to juggle mounting food costs with your rising electric bill, you should consider that eggs once cost more than steak, she shrewdly points out. Of course, that was back before Henry Ford rolled out the first Model T and there were plenty of living people who could still remember the Civil War, but hey – count your modern blessings and fork over that credit card, you ungrateful cheapskate.
All of which, frankly, would be like me telling the Washington Post not to fret just because they’ve lost 500,000 subscribers in two years and are about to lay off tons of employees because hey, the stock market tanked this one time about a hundred years ago and a bunch of people ended up in Hoovervilles. So shut your trap, take your pink slip, and be thankful you still have indoor plumbing.
Related: What's Joe Accomplished In Two Years? Americans Say, Not Much
A quick word to whatever editor over at the Washington Post thought a little bit of historical context would make anyone feel better about plunking down hundreds more a year for basic foodstuffs: if you’re having to reach back a century and a half to find a time when people had it a little tougher, that’s a pretty good indicator that something’s amiss. And it’s unlikely that waving the menu from a Roaring ‘20s diner in someone’s face is going to make them feel OK about coughing up an extra 45% over what they were paying just a year ago for that stick of butter.
Because, shocking as it may be to the elites over at the Washington Compost, just because the Neanderthals cooked over an open flame doesn’t make it any easier on my neighbor’s wallet when their five-burner stove goes on the fritz.
Just because pioneers beat their starched bloomers on a rock and wrung them out on a rope over a kettle fire doesn’t mean the current insanely long wait time for a new dryer is a big pile of nothing to a working mom with four kids.
Just because people used to get from A to B in a horse and buggy leaving fly-covered presents all over the street doesn’t mean the nearly unaffordable price of a new or used car doesn’t matter to a family trying to replace their 2008 Caravan that finally crapped out.
And just because this ridiculously out-of-touch, incompetent, absolute failure of a presidential administration desperately needs all the media gaslighting it can get to stay even remotely afloat doesn’t mean Americans are falling for it.
After all, it’s hard to buy bullcrap when you’ve spent all your money on eggs.