rustig

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by rustig 7y ago

   It's not different or unique. It's their bias that makes them think it's different.
2. 2.▲
   by rustig 7y ago

   Huh? The article mentioned the gulf royals and the implication is clearly that there's something wrong with their wealth even if legal.
3. 3.▲
   by rustig 7y ago

   I don't care for despots or monarchs of any kind, but it looked like a glaring omission to me. My problem is not with the article in general but the strange decision to lump in the Gulf/Swazi royals whose wealth is no less legitim
4. 4.▲
   by rustig 7y ago

   How is that different from the Saudi Royal family or king of Swaziland? The comparison was not to looting rulers but the other royals the article strangely cites as examples without mentioning the UK Royal family who's source of wealt
5. 5.▲
   by rustig 7y ago

   Article cites gulf royals and king of Swaziland as examples of corruption but neglects to mention the UK's own royal bunch who are just as wealthy or even more so with no good explanation for how and why they're entitled to so muc