It is an unempathic disconnect stating realities of the situation from her view, and the impact of things on her bank account, and the wealth of her nation, not taking into account the impact of her statements, if made reality, would have on most people.  And now, she noticed she got attention before, will continue to speak.  She will be made a darling in some circles and get adulation.  I expect her, if she continues, to be interviewed multiple times by Fox News, and possibly she even ends up with her own TV show.

Forced? No, more like 'choose to exploit impoverised communites and pay them something not even close to a living wage so wealthy executives can continue to line their pockets with countless millions.'

Might be a cynical, over-exagerration but is still closer to the truth than what she said. Look at the before and after pictures of her inheriting her father's fortune, they speack volumes. But as richardhutnik said, she is the type of person who would end up with a Fox News segment.

Quite a few sentiments on the first page I agree with, but this is the best.

No.  It's serious.  The difference is... either people are working and get welfare from the government to help them through and put them slightly above just welfare.

Or such a thing doesn't happen... and they just get welafe.

In general, at least in the USA.  It's been show there is a big difference between the poor who are on welfare and who are working even when adjusting for all other factors.

It's called relative standards of living, you fat turd.

just....why?

She's doing a damn good job of me hating her.....

This fat fuck needs to get shot up in the biggest fattest part of her rich fat ass with either a gun or a lipo-suction tube.

She needs to have her fatass dragged into the mines to see how she likes it.

Lol, these comments are too much!

I am awaiting the trifecta quote by her to come in.  Anyone have any ideas?  I am thinking it my have something to do with cake.

While I'm sure many people will not understand, she is right in a way ...

To understand why there is a basic question that you can answer, why should someone who can do the same job as you can (and is just as good as you are) get paid a different amount for doing it just because of the country they live in?

Most of the answers people will come up with are essentially circular in nature, for example that the costs of living in one part of the world are higher; but higher costs of living are often driven by increased wages driving up the cost in a region. Essentially, if you doubled the wages everyone in a city earned today you would soon see rents and property values in the area double because the same number of people would be fighting for the same amount of property but would be immediately willing to pay twice as much for it.

Now, where I disagree with her is in how this will likely come about ... As the economies of China and India continue to develop it is likely that more and more consumer goods will be demanded within these countries, and since the only countries able to manufacture goods cheap enough for the Chineese and Indian market are China and India, a feedback loop will be created that rapidly grows these economies. Over time the standard of living in China and India will match that of western developed nations, and there will be more parity in the standard of living of people doing similar jobs througout the world.