Reply to Laird Wilkes: definition of rich & poor
Why does the Bulletin d’Aylmer keep printing letters from uninformed bunkmasters? “Rich” and “poor” are terms clearly defined under laws that have stood for several hundred years, never updated since confederation in 1867. And they have nothing to do with whether one has “enough” money to live on.
“Rich” is everyone who is not “poor”, and “poor” is defined as follows. Consider if, right now, you died on the spot. After all your assets had been turned into cash, all money from those who owe it to you had been collected, then all your taxes, debts and bills were paid, would the remainder be enough to pay for the most minimalist burial or cremation or your body? Basically, is there enough to pay for you to be put into a black plastic bin liner then thrown into the burner? Or would the community have to shell out to have your body removed before it starts spreading disease? If even one penny had to be billed to the community, you are “poor”, but if there was just enough left, then you are “rich”. Hence, my great grandfather was legally “rich” when he died, although he had no more than the loose change in his pocket, having also an insurance policy that covered his funeral. He died a rich man legally, worth just under $3!