Lata Mangeshkar Quotes

God help the rich, the poor can look after themselves

This society cannot go forward, the way we have been going forward, where the gap between the rich and the poor keeps growing.

The world has grown rich and refined, but chiefly by the efforts of those who themselves continue poor and ignorant.

The conspicuously wealthy turn up urging the character building values of the privation of the poor.

At the end of the day, we have an economy that works for the rich by cheating the poor, and unequal schools are the result of that, not the cause.

Few, save the poor, feel for the poor.

Whereas it has long been known and declared that the poor have no right to the property of the rich, I wish it also to be known and declared that the rich have no right to the property of the poor.

The rich don’t want the poor to get ahead of them.

Abolish plutocracy if you would abolish poverty. As millionaires increase, pauperism grows. The more millionaires, the more paupers

The central issue of our time remains the fact that the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer.

Hunger, the inseparable companion of the poor, is the offspring of the unequal distribution of the wealth and the injustices in this world. The rich do not know hunger.

Poor whites have been pitted against poor blacks to assuage the conscience of the affluent.

The rich have all the speech they want; the poor have lockjaw.

Inequality is bad for everyone, not just the middle class and the poor.

Without an advocate for the poor, without a new state of mind in America, the country lies on the brink of anarchy.

I think that there always have been and always will be at least two Americas - the poor America, the second America, tends to be in the shadows. Sometimes it's an America of people in a ghetto of color, sometimes it's an economic ghetto, but definitely there is a parallel America which people in the dominant America prefer to ignore if they can.

In a world of increasing inequality, the legitimacy of institutions that give precedence to the property rights of 'the Haves' over the human rights of 'the Have Nots' is inevitably called into serious question.

In poor countries, the rich and powerful crush the poor and powerless.

It seems that the fiction writer has a revolting attachment to the poor, for even when he writes about the rich, he is more concerned with what they lack than with what they have.

If everybody lives in the same way, there's something almost narcotizing about it, but the true misery of economic class difference is knowing that you can't have what somebody else does.

There are huge divorces and divides and chasms in black America between the have-gots and the have-nots, between the monied and the poor, between the educated and the non-educated. And there are huge and growing chasms daily. And I want to say that it's not simply about generation. It's about genre.

George W. Bush has helped those who have most, hurt those who have least and ignored everyone in between.

When the producers of 'Why Poverty?' came to me to do a film about poverty in the United States, I asked if I could do a film about wealth instead. I tend to make films about perpetrators, rather than victims.

The needs of the poor take priority over the desires of the rich

Who takes the blame: the leader who talks of poverty but lives in luxury, or the poor who choose a leader of that type?