3 ms·

> Historically, are there periods in which the wealthy holds an abnormally high percentage of wealth like now? No. Even Roman emperors did not control this muc

by zrn900 2y ago

> Historically, are there periods in which the wealthy holds an abnormally high percentage of wealth like now? No. Even Roman emperors did not control this much wealth. Nor the patricians. In the middle ages, even less - the feudal law mandated that the serfs get 33% of the produce from the fields, church 33%, and the local lord the rest 33%.

CamperBob2 2y ago
They didn't control this much wealth because they didn't have any way to create it. "This much wealth" simply didn't exist.
- grugagag 2y ago
  We’re talking ratios here. Second, it wasn’t possible to control it so well as it is currently.
- zrn900 2y ago
  Wealth always exists, and the world's wealth is always 100% at a given point, logically. The share that groups in the society take from that wealth is the topic here as another commenter explained. If the feudal lords could find a way to get 99% of that share like the billionaires do today, they would do it. But it was not possible. It has become possible because we let it happen.
  - CamperBob2 2y ago
    Wealth always exists No, it absolutely does not. Like civilization itself, it has to be intentionally created and maintained, and it can also be destroyed. You and I live better than the Caesars did in countless ways. That's what it means to create wealth. Focus more on your own, and less on other peoples'.
    - zrn900 2y ago
      > No, it absolutely does not Of course it does. At any given point in time there is a definite amount of wealth that exists in the world. Back in the stone age at any given point in time, there was a definite value of all the wealth that was controlled by the human species. > You and I live better than the Caesars did in countless ways You are confusing the benefits of technological development with wealth. Caesars also lived better than people in the bronze age. Who in turn lived better than the people in the stone age. That does not change what percentages of the existing wealth of their time they controlled, and as a result, wealth inequality.
garciansmith 2y ago
It depends the time or place you are comparing (e.g., seventeenth century Britain was a more unequal place than modern day Britain). And in the Middle Ages, even if you just look at Western Europe, wealth distribution could be extremely variable between places and times. A peasant in eighth century Lombardy would have been subjected to totally different customs and laws than one in twelfth century Brittany, same with other segments of society. There was nothing like a universal "feudal law" anywhere. Even the concept of the "church" being a single monolithic thing that received X% of wealth makes no sense (e.g., bishops could simultaneously be lay lords with vast holdings, a monastery could be rich or poor, etc.).
- zrn900 2y ago
  Yes it varied but the main format still stood - the serfs had a sizable share of the economic value and the lords did not have 99% share like they do today. > Even the concept of the "church" being a single monolithic thing that received X% of wealth makes no sense Church's own domains and the share that the church receives from the crops of a feudal lord's domain are different.

by zrn900 2y ago

CamperBob2 2y ago

They didn't control this much wealth because they didn't have any way to create it. "This much wealth" simply didn't exist.

grugagag 2y ago
We’re talking ratios here. Second, it wasn’t possible to control it so well as it is currently.
zrn900 2y ago
Wealth always exists, and the world's wealth is always 100% at a given point, logically. The share that groups in the society take from that wealth is the topic here as another commenter explained. If the feudal lords could find a way to get 99% of that share like the billionaires do today, they would do it. But it was not possible. It has become possible because we let it happen.
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  Wealth always exists No, it absolutely does not. Like civilization itself, it has to be intentionally created and maintained, and it can also be destroyed. You and I live better than the Caesars did in countless ways. That's what it means to create wealth. Focus more on your own, and less on other peoples'.
  - zrn900 2y ago
    > No, it absolutely does not Of course it does. At any given point in time there is a definite amount of wealth that exists in the world. Back in the stone age at any given point in time, there was a definite value of all the wealth that was controlled by the human species. > You and I live better than the Caesars did in countless ways You are confusing the benefits of technological development with wealth. Caesars also lived better than people in the bronze age. Who in turn lived better than the people in the stone age. That does not change what percentages of the existing wealth of their time they controlled, and as a result, wealth inequality.

garciansmith 2y ago

It depends the time or place you are comparing (e.g., seventeenth century Britain was a more unequal place than modern day Britain). And in the Middle Ages, even if you just look at Western Europe, wealth distribution could be extremely variable between places and times. A peasant in eighth century Lombardy would have been subjected to totally different customs and laws than one in twelfth century Brittany, same with other segments of society. There was nothing like a universal "feudal law" anywhere. Even the concept of the "church" being a single monolithic thing that received X% of wealth makes no sense (e.g., bishops could simultaneously be lay lords with vast holdings, a monastery could be rich or poor, etc.).

zrn900 2y ago
Yes it varied but the main format still stood - the serfs had a sizable share of the economic value and the lords did not have 99% share like they do today. > Even the concept of the "church" being a single monolithic thing that received X% of wealth makes no sense Church's own domains and the share that the church receives from the crops of a feudal lord's domain are different.