In the time it takes to print this thing a lot can change, so who even knows what’s on the go since I submitted this. But I am hot on the heels (should it be cold on the cankers in the winter?) of a an inauguration, a protest, a storm that wasn’t, and the business class of Newfoundland bickering about what kind of attitude we should have about getting drowned in the methyl-mercury-enriched bogwater that is our current state of affairs; the state of affairs for the 74% of us who make less than 50 Gs per 365 anyways (a statistic provided by the Liberals).

I mean, we are told of hardships, and how we’re all in this together, and about who feels what about it, but let’s be real about who’s noticing the price of gas and the cost of insurance right now. I’m not saying the 26% remaining don’t notice exactly, but there’s surely a difference between the two when it comes to this. The cutting of luxury as opposed to the cutting of necessity.

And it seems to me like whichever business class representatives are in the office on the hill, they make very similar decisions, the main difference seeming to be how good or bad they feel about making those same decisions (in the blue trunks we have Danny “propane fireplace” Williams, and in the red we’ve got Dwight “let’s respect where things are tonight” Ball).

But all I see is a bunch of business class executives who are making decisions that affect my day to day a hell of a lot more than theirs. I’m worried we’re going to see a lot of good people gone for good based on the philosophical approach of this current government. I know, I know, it was a different crop of business class folks who dealt it. But austerity wasn’t the only option for how to play the hand.

Our government is supposed to represent us, and I have never felt like it has. So I propose the following: seeing how 74% of us make less than 50 large, and we are 51% women and 49% men, it would be in our best interest that our government be made up of the same demographics.

So let’s elect a half-women, half-men government, three quarters of whom make the same amount of money as most of us. Let’s have a government made up of us, and see what gets taxed and what gets cut then.

They can have their 25%, no sweat. And if they object, I wonder if it’ll be because deep down they think that they’re better than us, more capable, that they know what’s good for us better than we do. In business they can do whatever they want to us, fire us, kick us out, we’re not they’re problem if they don’t want us to be; but in government we are still their problem, and it seems to me like it’s the right time to get organized about it.