So the r>g makes a lot of sense, but it seems to assume that fortunes only grow. In real life they tend not to. What I mean is that there are destabilizing/de

So the r>g makes a lot of sense, but it seems to assume that fortunes only grow. In real life they tend not to. What I mean is that there are destabilizing/deconcentrating forces in an economy in addition to stabilizing/concentrating ones. Like companies going bankrupt or entire industries being displaced by new ones. If you're worth $100mm it's not because you have a million hundred dollar bills in a vault, or hundreds of pounds of gold or a bank account with many zeros on it. You've got the money tied up in businesses that yield that r which is greater than g. And that SHOULD expose you to risks which could cause you to lose your money. In the last 20 or so years it seems like that exposure has been largely mitigated at least in the US which is quite unfortunate. The other thing that strikes me is it kind of makes the assumption that only the rich (or capital) can participate in the r>g phenomena. With interest rates at less than 1% (and probably negative re:inflation) it doesn't make any sense for a normal person to save money. But what if inflation is 2% and real interest rates are 6%? Can the regular folk not participate in that as well?