While the sequence of events sounds like a valid sequence of events, it does not seem to be linked to the original thesis - Ie: because people aren't worth mo

While the sequence of events sounds like a valid sequence of events, it does not seem to be linked to the original thesis - Ie: because people aren't worth more Which is odd, because something obviously is worth more. The world economy has significantly grown, and keeps growing. The capital owning section of the population are able to use that to invest or own some sort of value increasing asset. IT seems more likely that there is more economic value being created - but the competitive strengths of a higher position in the decisions making hierarchy provides assymetric power. Meaning that the higher you go in terms of ownership of an organization, the more you can bring people at lower levels into conflict and drive prices down.