4 ms·

I will agree there is a degree of culpability in the general population and a preference to deflect blame on both sides. I would also agree that it is importan

I will agree there is a degree of culpability in the general population and a preference to deflect blame on both sides. I would also agree that it is important to define what "rich" means since making class distinctions and comparisons does change the emphasis and logic considerably. That said, the (ultra) wealthy tend to profit either way and prefer chaos because it puts an incredible downward pressure on the classes below them. That downward pressure minimizes the likelihood of future competition. It's a long game that only the (ultra) wealthy can afford to play. Also, leverage is an important consideration. It's easier for a billionaire to leverage 1 billion dollars compared to 1 billion people leveraging 1 dollar. There would be measurable consequences either way, but that billionaire is in a much different position by having singular command of that wealth.

Aunche 6y ago
> That said, the (ultra) wealthy tend to profit either way and prefer chaos because it puts an incredible downward pressure on the classes below them. Is there any quantified evidence that supports this hypothesis? The corporations owned by the ultra wealthy spent a lot more money on backing Hilary and Biden rather than Trump.
- meekmind 6y ago
  All that says is dumping money into an election in a constitutional republic designed specifically to put limits on authoritarian power does not guarantee victory. I'm comfortable saying there is considerable evidence to back up the argument. However, I suspect any researcher who put forth such a hypothesis might have difficulty finding a grant. Take from that what you will.