Feudalism was clearly “winning” with absolutism, as power of royalty had peaked. However, the final victory of feudalism was also its gallows (or guillotine). Consolidation of power had made nobility redundant and weak, while also reducing number of people that have to be replaced so as to create republic – state officials were already being appointed, rather inheriting their positions. Sun-King had created guillotine that would behead his grandson!
And here we have the same situation: empowerment of tiny minority at the top means destruction of so-called “middle class” (which ensures that only tiny minority at the top has real incentive to defend capitalism; general population doesn’t lose anything with nationalisation of means of production, as it no longer has any). Said empowerment also requires development of administrative structures that replace small proprietors – this reduces reliance of society’s production on market economy, allowing for easier transition to planned economy.
I.e. the richer capitalists become, the more each capitalist controls, the less stability capitalism overall has. Buffett’s own wealth undermines his claim that “rich class is winning”.
The funny thing is that he meant the riches are paying less than they could and stated that poor people are paying proportionally more. Sounds like he would be fine paying s little more.
3 comments
What “winning” are we talking about here?
Feudalism was clearly “winning” with absolutism, as power of royalty had peaked. However, the final victory of feudalism was also its gallows (or guillotine). Consolidation of power had made nobility redundant and weak, while also reducing number of people that have to be replaced so as to create republic – state officials were already being appointed, rather inheriting their positions. Sun-King had created guillotine that would behead his grandson!
And here we have the same situation: empowerment of tiny minority at the top means destruction of so-called “middle class” (which ensures that only tiny minority at the top has real incentive to defend capitalism; general population doesn’t lose anything with nationalisation of means of production, as it no longer has any). Said empowerment also requires development of administrative structures that replace small proprietors – this reduces reliance of society’s production on market economy, allowing for easier transition to planned economy.
I.e. the richer capitalists become, the more each capitalist controls, the less stability capitalism overall has. Buffett’s own wealth undermines his claim that “rich class is winning”.
The funny thing is that he meant the riches are paying less than they could and stated that poor people are paying proportionally more. Sounds like he would be fine paying s little more.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-yes-warren-buffett-225700758.html
That’s exactly how the French and Russian aristocracy felt before losing power – and more
Comments are closed.