What critically important new trends are sweeping the overclass now in our angry, unemployed, bankrupt, two-war country?
The New York Times zooms in on: bigass aquariums costing six figures. Or as the Times calls them: “Fantasy fish tanks.”
“Not pink,” said Mrs. Wilzig, 40, an artist and a mother of two small children. “Alan, go to the turquoise.”
Her husband, Alan Wilzig, 45, a former banker who collects motorcycles and prides himself on the orange tanning bed in his basement, goes to the James Bond-like control panel in the kitchen, where a touch of a button turns the fish — which are specially bred to be colorless — a vivid blue.
We hear from Messrs. Jones and Wise, a couple who’ve spent $200,000 hanging a 700-gallon bucket of fish from the ceiling of their, ahem, $17 million West Village apartment:
Meanwhile, Mr. Wise and Mr. Jones have bought a new place nearby and are considering jellyfish for the dining room.
“We went on vacation to Fort Lauderdale and stayed at the W, and they had a tank with all jellyfish,” Mr. Jones said. “That’s like living art to me.”
Jellyfish tanks are even more expensive and difficult to build than fish tanks, said Justin Muir, owner of City Aquarium, a Brooklyn-based rival to Manhattan Aquariums. For one thing, jellyfish have to be fed live food every day.
But “some people are like, ‘O.K., $5,000 every month to take care of the tank, plus $100,000 cost of the tank — I’m cool with that,’ ” he said.
And, of course:
But the real expense of owning such a fantasy tank is the maintenance. Mr. Muir has a staff of seven technicians and biologists who make house calls. “Some clients want nothing to do with the fish tank — they don’t want to feed it, they don’t want to clean algae off the glass,” he said. And most fish should be fed at least every other day. “That’s $150 per visit right there.”
My former colleague Megan Garber jokes on Twitter: “I defy you to find a more elegant argument for communism.”
Well, let’s see about that. Turn to The Wall Street Journal’s New York section and read this story, which will probably make you see red, if not Red:
Good eye contact, a firm handshake and self confidence can pave the way to a good interview. Turns out, that’s the case even if the applicant is 4 or 5 years old.
In the frenzy to get kindergarteners into the top private schools, parents are now hiring consultants to coach their children on the art of the interview.
These places like Horace Mann watch the kids in “playdates” and judge whether or not they’re good enough for their school. The consultants are paid to try to game that, like everything else.
Like most things in New York, the sessions don’t come cheap. Aristotle Circle charges $400 for a 45-minute observation and assessment.
Don’t forget to tack on the few hundred dollars an hour you’ll be paying in therapy bills about twelve years from now.
Meantime, folks who just need to pay their rent and buy their kids some clothes at the Wal-Mart are blowing their heads off in increasing numbers because the economy is so hopeless for those not ensconced at the top.
God bless America.

From the title, I thought you were going to talk about Michelle Obama's trip to Spain.
Based on Mrs Garber's other articles I am not sure if it was a joke.
#1 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Thu 19 Aug 2010 at 06:53 PM
Google "Alan Wilzig" and "racetrack" and you'll find out just how crass this guy really is.
#2 Posted by Parkway Paul, CJR on Thu 19 Aug 2010 at 09:08 PM
Is it sad I"m not surprised such a coaching service exists?
New York public and private schools are so competitive it's a nightmare to navigate. I wouldn't mind some help figuring out the process or getting coaching for my kids....just wish it didn't come with such a high sticker price...
#3 Posted by Leslie Guyus, CJR on Fri 20 Aug 2010 at 11:08 AM
>> Jellyfish tanks are even more expensive and difficult to build than fish tanks,...
The problem with the uber-rich is that they have no real imagination or cajones. If I had tens of millions just lying around in my place I'd have a hovering waterbed, a pet albino genetically bred to be mini-tiger, a transparent "sun-roof" ceiling with a $500,000 telescope, a...
However...
>> hey don’t want to clean algae off the glass...
You've got to keep your perspective. I'd clean up my toys myself. If I didn't - I'd be worse than a little kid who doesn't clean up after his puppy.
#4 Posted by F. Murray Rumpelstiltskin, CJR on Fri 20 Aug 2010 at 04:38 PM
You missed the coverage of an over-hyped marriage ceremony recently . . . the daughter of a former President . . . oh, that's right. Papa was a Democrat. Maybe Ryan should concentrate his fire on the 'lifestyles of the out-of-touch super-rich who profess left-leaning values', who contribute to left-leaning causes and institutions, and so on . . . plenty of them in Hollywood and on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, I'm betting . . . For some reason I can guess, such persons are seldom the subjects of such anthropological treatment, in contrast to those weird people in flyover land who are vaguely skeptical of the government, while taking government benefits - a favorite theme our our MSM. The other shoe never drops in journalistic la-la land - possibly because upper-publishers, network anchors, etc. are themselves members of this curious social category. Now that would be something an honest left-wing writer would be interested in explaining - whether people aren't more influenced in their politics by what people do rather than what they say - if that writer had the guts. Haven't seen much in the way of real guts out of supposedly fearless MSM functionaries, though. Especially out of left-leaning journalists who work for media outfits associated with expensive private schools.
#5 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Sun 22 Aug 2010 at 08:33 AM
Are you all beginning to understand the motivations of people like Robespierre, in his time? Or Lenin and his cohorts? The whole country, at least the working class part, the other 99%, is sinking into financial abyss and the One Percenters are carrying on like Mms Antoinette. No, we shouldn't run around screaming for blood, but a fair share of the economy, which is fully dependent on the the American working class, would make some sense. Consider that the Congress has elected representatives that are seriously trying to extend the Bush era tax cuts into permanency.
#6 Posted by Jack, CJR on Sun 22 Aug 2010 at 05:32 PM
Uh, Mark--what are you talking about? Gay couple in $17 million West Village townhouse with massive fish tank doesn't scream right wing to me.
I bet there's not a Republican or conservative or even a libertarian in the bunch in either of the stories I mentioned.
#7 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Sun 22 Aug 2010 at 09:24 PM
I dunno, Ryan. That orange tanning bed in the basement just screams BOEHNER. But that's just me, I guess.
#8 Posted by James, CJR on Sun 22 Aug 2010 at 11:13 PM
Ryan, I must not have expressed myself very clearly. I was referring to the absence of such detached observations of what might be called the 'Thomas Frank question' in reverse - i.e., 'What's the Matter with Hollywood? Malibu? Martha's Vineyard? Manhattan? Enclaves all of the rich and liberal. These communities are permitted by the press to vote against their own 'economic interests', but ordinary people in Kansas, their mirror images, are not, without speculation in the press about how dumb the latter are, as opposed to the high-minded liberal rich on the coasts.
The sophisticated explanation is, of course, as in the case of those Kansans, that the liberal rich are not stupid at all - and that liberal policies, when investigated as to outcomes rather than those famous good intentions, end up shoring up the status of people who already have their pile, and are now interested in protecting themselves from competition. If the Left is supposed to get the public all in an envious lather about people with extravagant lifestyles, shouldn't it realize that having such people on their own side of the political fence severely wounds its credibility? The NY Times is certainly not going to ask. You yourself can't exactly praise a story that doesn't get written.
#9 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Mon 23 Aug 2010 at 12:02 PM
. . . or, to put a blunter point on it, I'd like to have seen the political leanings of the people in the Times story called out as an interesting element of who lets whom eat cake. My recollection is that the Times recently did run a story on hoi polloi out west who said they distrusted 'the government' but with quiet irony noted that these people liked some of the services of the federal government. The acceptance of Social Security payments by Tea Party activists were also emphasized by many reports on those people. Fair enough. It's just that the other shoe never drops in orthodox journalism.
#10 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Mon 23 Aug 2010 at 04:57 PM