well, indeed they are, but you could say that about any two economic groups. That is, maybe the middle class is "too rich," presumably if we redistributed more of their wealth we could elevate the lowest class. Of course, I don't actually think that poverty in the US is a money problem. Or, it can't be simply fixed…

It's not about what you need or deserve, it's about what you earn. And I don't mean what you "work for" or "sweat for" or whatever, just literally what you can manage to accumulate.

Helium is the second most abundant element in the universe. We'll get ourselves some more soon enough.

You mean there's one species for which humanity is not their greatest threat? Huzzah!

sorry, I didn't realize the OP referred to a re-defining that occurred in 1983. I thought he was speaking of the standardization that occurred immediately after the French Revolution.

this change would have predated interchangeable parts that had tolerances of 0.07%. Therefore, as Thornus said, they missed a unique opportunity to redefine the meter. Now, that change would indeed be dramatic.