> But what does that mean? It means that you are in the dying Salariat class. “At the top are a plutocracy and an elite, earning rentier incomes and wielding

> But what does that mean? It means that you are in the dying Salariat class. “At the top are a plutocracy and an elite, earning rentier incomes and wielding enormous political power. Way below them, in income terms, is a salariat, a shrinking group with employment security and an extensive array of non-wage enterprise benefits such as pensions, paid holidays and medical leave.“ [1] You write: > I will also not work in fields growing crops, neither in a call center, not even in a software service company paying me meagre ₹35 lakh/a Guy Standing’s got you: “If you are in the precariat and become unemployed, and manage to obtain benefits, you face a marginal tax rate of over 80% in taking the sort of low-wage job you are likely to be offered. It may be over 100%. Then you are called rude names if you decline to take such jobs. No member of the salariat would get out of bed if faced by such tax rates, except perhaps to take to the streets to protest. But that is what politicians have forced on the precariat.“ [2] Your comment makes sense and your view from this privileged position is common for the Salariat. If you’re interested to explore further, I love Guy’s work in ‘Plunder of the Commons‘, as well as ‘The Corruption of Capitalism: Why Rentiers Thrive and Work Doesn’t Pay’. Looking at the future, the most compassionate vision I’ve found is described (separately) by Kevin Carson, Arthur Brock and Eric Harris-Braun. They describe an open source world through Commons-based peer production. Together with Holochain currencies (mutual credit and reputation currencies [Ceptr.org]), these things make me feel incredibly inspired and hopeful. [1][2] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/precariat-global-class-rise-of-populism/ https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/11/precariat-global-clas...