Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
The syndrome is not quite as severe in these fields. Five or ten percent of the human race have the natural talent to get good enough to make excellent money at these things if they work hard enough. And many of those who are making money in the four things you mentioned could be financially successful switching to something else. So you could say that those who are multimillionaires from those endeavors are not quite as insanely lucky.
Meanwhile your general point is correct and I think it leads some people to take with a grain of salt the concern these people are professing to have about the plight of others. Methinks it is at least partially an act in an effort to stave off the guillotine.
"Staving off the guillotines" is not a bad thing. It can be both self serving and also altruistic.
Those who amass wealth and power always have this decision to make. Not only do you not want the masses to revolt, but society as a whole, does better when the richest do not horde and share with the masses.
You have the oligarchs or current russian model that loots the country to the benefit of a select few who get enormously wealthy but then live in a country in decline where such richest cannot be utilized as freely. And long term the country is poorer so it means less wealth for everyone.
You better have a big army and iron grip if you want to hold to that model.
The US avoided that for most of its history but in the last few decades the uber rich have become content to push increasingly to an oligarch model even if it means the decline and harming of America.
The US citizens may be against armed revolt generally (off with their heads) but electing a Bernie Sanders type or in 10 years an AOC type on a platform of gutting the uber rich and confiscating their wealth won't be far fetched. And likely described as a counter to the oligarch push ongoing now.
But better to stay in the middle where both sides get well served and benefit instead of one at the expense of the other.