Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiBoyz
You make an interesting argument and it is true for a country like the USA was...however, it ultimately failed because it is an artificial system. It is clear from history and from countries even today that there has always been a disbalance of wealth.
There is always a ruling class and then a class of commoners. Only 2 classes with the small group having 99% and then the rest sharing the 1% left over.
The USA is quickly equalizing to this norm. Given 50 more years (or perhaps less) this country will be functioning exactly as any relatively developed 3rd world country such as Chile for example.
The middle class is essentially nonexistent in those countries and so it will be in the USA as well.
The USA might just have been like the Roman empire and the English empire the last empire humans will know...perhaps
|
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a whiner about the 1%, I used that term because it best fits. I understand that those with more money will rise to the top of any political system. Money equals power, that's a fact of life.
The thing you don't look at is this change you speak of is actually created by the 1% and would not have come to pass if regulations were kept in place to keep this sort of imbalance from happening.
The USA has been strong and prospered due to the check and balance system that kept 1% from ruling the 99%. The country can not stay a world power if the imbalance gets too much. The 1% then suffer as well because they depend on the 99% for their creation of wealth. Making a balanced system the best option for all parties involved. No one is keeping their billions in vaults of gold or silver or whatever. It's all just numbers on a computer screen..
All the money in the world is not safe if the banking system is not stable from a bad economy. Billions can disappear just like hundreds can..