The increasing share of GDP going to finance & tech makes sense if you posit that the economically rational thing to do is to destroy the economy and rebuild it

The increasing share of GDP going to finance & tech makes sense if you posit that the economically rational thing to do is to destroy the economy and rebuild it. Tech is the industry focused on rebuilding it; finance is the industry focused on redirecting resources away from the old economy and into the new one. Most humans have an aversion to death and destruction: we get attached to people, institutions, ideas, employers, basically things that we can count on existing. Economics doesn't care though. If a new way of doing things is more efficient than the old, the market will select for the new way, regardless of the human suffering it causes. And since most humans are averse to causing suffering, they won't be willing to capitalize on this opportunity, which leaves large opportunities available to those who say "To hell with institutions, there's a more efficient way and I'm going to bring it to the masses." They (and the SWEs, SREs, UX, data scientists, etc. who help them) then reap large windfalls as they cannibalize large portions of the economy and throw the now-useless workers out of work. This model explains nearly everything about the past decade. The downside is that it suggests that "revolution" - rather than being an angry but illogical reaction of a few disgruntled workers - is actually an inevitable consequence of the destruction of the old society. Political systems are embedded in the economic realities that birthed them; change economic reality and the economically rational outcome is for those political systems to fall. The same thing happened as industrialization destroyed feudal empires and ushered in the era of nationalism.