I call this current phenomena inequality blow out. The world is now wealthy enough such that the rich truly can be so much wealthier than the poor (deserved or

I call this current phenomena inequality blow out. The world is now wealthy enough such that the rich truly can be so much wealthier than the poor (deserved or not - mostly NOT), because there is so much excess wealth already in circulation. The "have nots" in most developed nations usually have enough to not need to riot in the streets so long as their governments are doing a decent enough job. Before modern times, we generally kept inequality in check through periodic bloody revolutions, and only more recently via government enforced transfer payments. Nowadays there is no longer an upper limit to wealth accumulation since bloody revolutions have been more or less capped by social programs funded by transfer payments. The poorest in developed nations today often have access to enough food, water and shelter to live a fairly decent life (not all nations obviously, just those with high HDI coeffecients). Now, so long as this global poverty floor continues to rise through time at a decent enough pace, then societies will remain stable. However, if the rich make that rise falter with ever more aggressive tax policies (0% rates which negatively affect social programs), rent seeking behaviour (squeezing the middle class out of existence, and destroying the mass consumption/tax base), or political power grabs (Koch bros' who don't like to pay for negative externalities), they'll lose their heads. Pure and simple. As I sit here today, and watch our "ever so progressive" Syria (by Middle Eastern standards) falling apart as it goes through a horrific and bloody civil war, I really do wonder how much of a value the rich put on their heads. How far are the rich willing to go in their game of class chicken with the poor? Because as far as I can see, the poor will always win. The poor will eventually redistribute the wealth to equalize opportunity, and mitigate the catastrophic failures inherent in capital markets that allocate wealth to owners as a proxy to the actual wealth generators (engineers/scientists/workers). The question the rich should consistently be asking themselves is whether or not they'd rather bleed to death slowly by paying for orphanages and food for the poor, or quickly at the end of an orphan's machete. The past wasn't all that long ago. I can still see its shadows on the wall. Don't push your luck. /rant