3 ms·

https://archive.md/PvZsD https://archive.md/PvZsD It's a reasonable bet to imagine society entering another aristocratic type period where we have an ultra wea

by andy99 3y ago

https://archive.md/PvZsD https://archive.md/PvZsD It's a reasonable bet to imagine society entering another aristocratic type period where we have an ultra wealthy class and a servant class like we did until WWI or so. To some extent we're already there with gig workers, but there's still more of a middle than there could be. I mean there are people who are cool paying $30 to have Starbucks delivered by people who probably barely net that in a day after gas and wear on their car.

dclowd9901 3y ago
Your inclusion of the timeline relating to WWI made me wonder how much of that war (and WWII) were about economic disparity. I found this interesting article on the topic: https://www.promarket.org/2018/01/03/inequality-imperialism-first-world-war/ https://www.promarket.org/2018/01/03/inequality-imperialism-... It seems reasonable to assume that a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it will create similar conflict both here and in space (given how many of our ultra elite are pushing into outer space for the next great fortune).
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it Neither the beginning of WWI nor today are characterised with a lack of investment opportunities. If anything, economic disparity increases when investment opportunities are aplenty because that typically characterises a period of change.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- engineer_22 3y ago
  The 19th century was a period of intense social change as a result of the mastery of steam and steel. The economies of western European economies changed incredibly fast and national identities began to solidify around the identities of the people living there. The aristocratic tradition prior to the First World War was a result of an already large change from the feudal structure of pre-industrial Europe. It's interesting to try to draw parallels to the present day, but I think it's most important to remember we are participants of history and to behave as such.
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    There was enormous opportunity as massive massive industries bad to be discovered bootstrapped and built out. And it was in an age where so many concentrated natural resources were ripe for taking. People seem to think of post-war booms as a thing, but the creation of colossal industries and their sprawling supply chains is something we have already done. Might we repeat the feat, double the scale of industry? Maybe. But expanding would bring nowhere near the prosperity & benefit that going from 0->1 brought us. It would (almost) all be owned by existing powers, versus the unplanned uncoordinated development from nothing of heavy industry we had.
- wredcoll 3y ago
  > It seems reasonable to assume that a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it will create similar conflict Germany started ww2 when it did because it (more or less) ran out of money.
- tim333 3y ago
  I think a lot of war, both that and more recent comes from the power disparity between the king or dictator running things and the ordinary people, rather than about economic disparity. Then you get situations like that in Russia/Ukraine where Putin may as well use a million Russians as cannon fodder to grab land and become Vlad the great because what are they going to do about it? WW1 was similar. Serious wars between proper democracies where the cannon fodder get to make the decisions pretty much don't happen. On the other hand if you look at neighbouring countries with unusually high Gini inequality coefficients like SA and Namibia, or the US and Mexico there is little sign of war breaking out.
Shawnj2 3y ago
Our tax system is broken, we don’t have enough taxes on the top end and too much on the bottom end. Compared to the “golden age” (if you were a white man) of the middle class, the 1950s, the effective tax rate for corporations has dropped massively while income taxes have grown.
- thfuran 3y ago
  Sure, but no tax policy is going to bring back the economic situation of the US in the '50s.
  - sam_lowry_ 3y ago
    Maybe another war?
    - thfuran 3y ago
      I think we're much too deep into globalization for another world war to be anything but economically disastrous even if it's all overseas.
      - jemmyw 3y ago
        I used to believe that but the same arguments were made about WW1 before it happened. Russia still invaded Ukraine despite the west threatening to make it economically disastrous. I think this economic dependency argument is quite weak. War will happen if those starting it think they can come out better off. For the USA/West that has meant keeping any wars away from their domestic economies, but that might not be true for other players who could spark off a global war.
        thfuran 3y ago
        I'm not saying WWWIII can't happen. I'm saying that if it happened now, it wouldn't be good for the US economy.
pydry 3y ago
This is what springs to mind whenever somebody says or implies that there's a threshold wherein people will "rise up" - e.g. pre-French Revolution levels of inequality. I don't see a middle class as becoming resurgent again until we have something similar to the battle of blair mountain (a labor uprising that presaged a new labor movement, where the brutality of the strikebreakers was off the charts) or elites who are once again living in mortal fear of domestic and foreign communists like they were in the 1950s.
- BillyTheMage 3y ago
  You can still, right now, find shell casings on Blair Mountain (and in other coal towns like Harlan, KY) where they slaughtered the strikers.
globular-toast 3y ago
Those people paying to get Starbucks delivered aren't necessarily wealthy, though. I know plenty of people who spend all their money every month and could certainly afford that despite having zero savings. I feel like this kind of behaviour is just trade between the rental class. Actual wealthy people own the Starbucks.
- bitxbitxbitcoin 3y ago
  Trade between the rental class, with a set chunk (fee) of each transaction going out of the rental class to the owners of Starbucks and whatever delivery app was used.

by andy99 3y ago

dclowd9901 3y ago

Your inclusion of the timeline relating to WWI made me wonder how much of that war (and WWII) were about economic disparity. I found this interesting article on the topic: https://www.promarket.org/2018/01/03/inequality-imperialism-first-world-war/ https://www.promarket.org/2018/01/03/inequality-imperialism-... It seems reasonable to assume that a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it will create similar conflict both here and in space (given how many of our ultra elite are pushing into outer space for the next great fortune).

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it Neither the beginning of WWI nor today are characterised with a lack of investment opportunities. If anything, economic disparity increases when investment opportunities are aplenty because that typically characterises a period of change.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
engineer_22 3y ago
The 19th century was a period of intense social change as a result of the mastery of steam and steel. The economies of western European economies changed incredibly fast and national identities began to solidify around the identities of the people living there. The aristocratic tradition prior to the First World War was a result of an already large change from the feudal structure of pre-industrial Europe. It's interesting to try to draw parallels to the present day, but I think it's most important to remember we are participants of history and to behave as such.
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  There was enormous opportunity as massive massive industries bad to be discovered bootstrapped and built out. And it was in an age where so many concentrated natural resources were ripe for taking. People seem to think of post-war booms as a thing, but the creation of colossal industries and their sprawling supply chains is something we have already done. Might we repeat the feat, double the scale of industry? Maybe. But expanding would bring nowhere near the prosperity & benefit that going from 0->1 brought us. It would (almost) all be owned by existing powers, versus the unplanned uncoordinated development from nothing of heavy industry we had.
wredcoll 3y ago
> It seems reasonable to assume that a similar surplus of investable funds with no where left to spend it will create similar conflict Germany started ww2 when it did because it (more or less) ran out of money.
tim333 3y ago
I think a lot of war, both that and more recent comes from the power disparity between the king or dictator running things and the ordinary people, rather than about economic disparity. Then you get situations like that in Russia/Ukraine where Putin may as well use a million Russians as cannon fodder to grab land and become Vlad the great because what are they going to do about it? WW1 was similar. Serious wars between proper democracies where the cannon fodder get to make the decisions pretty much don't happen. On the other hand if you look at neighbouring countries with unusually high Gini inequality coefficients like SA and Namibia, or the US and Mexico there is little sign of war breaking out.

Shawnj2 3y ago

Our tax system is broken, we don’t have enough taxes on the top end and too much on the bottom end. Compared to the “golden age” (if you were a white man) of the middle class, the 1950s, the effective tax rate for corporations has dropped massively while income taxes have grown.

thfuran 3y ago
Sure, but no tax policy is going to bring back the economic situation of the US in the '50s.
- sam_lowry_ 3y ago
  Maybe another war?
  - thfuran 3y ago
    I think we're much too deep into globalization for another world war to be anything but economically disastrous even if it's all overseas.
    - jemmyw 3y ago
      I used to believe that but the same arguments were made about WW1 before it happened. Russia still invaded Ukraine despite the west threatening to make it economically disastrous. I think this economic dependency argument is quite weak. War will happen if those starting it think they can come out better off. For the USA/West that has meant keeping any wars away from their domestic economies, but that might not be true for other players who could spark off a global war.
      - thfuran 3y ago
        I'm not saying WWWIII can't happen. I'm saying that if it happened now, it wouldn't be good for the US economy.

pydry 3y ago

This is what springs to mind whenever somebody says or implies that there's a threshold wherein people will "rise up" - e.g. pre-French Revolution levels of inequality. I don't see a middle class as becoming resurgent again until we have something similar to the battle of blair mountain (a labor uprising that presaged a new labor movement, where the brutality of the strikebreakers was off the charts) or elites who are once again living in mortal fear of domestic and foreign communists like they were in the 1950s.

BillyTheMage 3y ago
You can still, right now, find shell casings on Blair Mountain (and in other coal towns like Harlan, KY) where they slaughtered the strikers.

globular-toast 3y ago

Those people paying to get Starbucks delivered aren't necessarily wealthy, though. I know plenty of people who spend all their money every month and could certainly afford that despite having zero savings. I feel like this kind of behaviour is just trade between the rental class. Actual wealthy people own the Starbucks.

bitxbitxbitcoin 3y ago
Trade between the rental class, with a set chunk (fee) of each transaction going out of the rental class to the owners of Starbucks and whatever delivery app was used.