Thank you for your eloquent discussion, worthy of upvote. I'm thinking about it, I'm not convinced by your description alone, but it's a really good description

Thank you for your eloquent discussion, worthy of upvote. I'm thinking about it, I'm not convinced by your description alone, but it's a really good description. You're describing a mix of hedonic and practical matters. Hedonically, if someone is attuned to their situation appropriately, they can enjoy any economic level. Some people are probably earnestly thankful for one meal of meat or fish a week. Spending time as one chooses is noticeable. Also, in large part, where one chooses. Being able to entertain more than four guests at a time, perhaps eight, and being able to host a visiting family, requires more resources. Being able to simply own a home near family or friends requires more. Practically speaking, being able to have your local constabulary or maybe the state police take your side in disputes is only available if you work for them or have a lot of money. I'm sure you've noticed that having over USD 100mm gives you a different set of rules to play by, when you're not spending on the highest-quality interpretations of the rules. Wealth lets you influence the politicians. With Trump, ego matters a lot, but without your money or influence going towards his priorities, flattery gets you not far at all. I'm not sure how we can agree that we're not ruled by the ones with the most money- the one with the most money is definitely telling the executive departments how to run. We are not going to see this administration working for the common good of most of the citizens, of the world or of the US, and our citizens in the US have been successfully poisoned against each other. Parenthetical: I think we miss Norman Lear, Johnny Cash, Fred Rogers and Mel Brooks very much. They were relatively successful uniters. I don't see equivalents in the modern landscape.