every shred of research, reading an analyzing history has shown me that rampant wealth inequality is fatally toxic to nations. it causes both social unrest and harms the economy its self as well. it tears nations apart and leads to a lower quality of life for their people.even setting aside the obvious moralism, it seems to me like it is just objectively bad for building and maintaining a nation or empire. the worse wealth inequality gets the more unstable a nation becomes.yet, I rarely see this issue discussed sincerely in reactionary circles. at best, reactionaries are apathetic towards wealth inequality, at worst, reactionaries actively foster it or express straight up malice against the idea of addressing itwhy do you think that is?what do you, as a non-communist reactionary, think of the issue of wealth inequality?what do you think can be done to adress it?Communism is a broken and evil ideology and is, in my opinion, counterproductive at best, and if these issues are ever going to be viably addressed, I believe it will have to come from reactionaries, because revolutionary discourse is essentially trapped in a cage of anarchism/marxism and incapable of thinking outside of those lenses
First of all reactionary is basically a slur that just means "regressively opposed to the revolution"
>>522533311It'll always be frustrating to talk about and that's by design. Sprinkle about half of the bullshit into both parties so that the problem never truly gets solved and the people go back and forth each election cycle in vain. A nationalist, populist campaign that ousts all foreign influence, shuts down the borders, and focuses on the conccerns of people who are hurting due to H1-B, mass immigration, and AI, rather than corporate greed - that would win 90% of the vote easily. Problem is, when you have all the money that goes into politics and you need their support to get into power in the first place, then you realize how fruitless it is and that nothing can really be changed because it's so entrenched in the system.
>>522533311It isn't discussed because it as massive an issue as you're saying it is. Why would any media corporations go against their shareholders interests and start enraging people about wealth in equality.I know that in the few years before WW1, the wealth was smaller than it had ever been. It's clearly a symptom of unrestricted capitalism - the US made laws against the "robber barons" a century ago and then became an economic powerhouse.There needs to be some sort of cap on individual wealth, you can set it at a couple of billion, whatever. Obviously this would be extremely hard to do.
>>522534448Pretty much this.Nobody is allowed to get into and stay in power that actually serves as a challenge to money. They'll talk a big game, but when your options are>get breakfast, lunch and dinner paid for on lobbyist dime and retire with hundreds of millions of dollarsand>get walled out of politics and the media while the people who sold out block your effortsIt seems obvious.
>(((wealth)))>the quintessential Yiddish semantical trick used to impoverish the post-literate, slave-worker goy-cattleLet me ask (You) this, plebes: If everyone had exactly US$1,000,000 to their name -- no more; no less -- who would then be rich?... A. No one. Why is that?... A. Because it is the wealth DISPARITY that makes one wealthy; not the absolute wealth itself.>cap wealth at $100M per individual, inc. assets, and arrest or plummet into the Nietzschean abyss>...or let your species fall into dissolution, today, in and environment comprising 90% inhuman niggers, jeets, chinks, and mud savages>inb4 "MUH INNOVATIONS WILL BE STIFFLEDED!!", while the chinks have caught up 300 years in less than 30
>>522534714The strongest periods of growth for the US were periods where business leaders only made about 20x to 30x the common man.While there have been periods of incredible growth spurts since those days, the newer spurts are based around economic extraction, and also almost always require forcing people to "step down" when it inevitably comes out they destroyed the company on purpose for a quick buck.But the system encourages it so it keeps happening.I think it was citigroup that 20 years ago said unless another world war happens, by 2030 99.9% of the money in the US will be in the hands of the ultra rich, so any company that wants to survive needs to stop catering to anyone who can't casually drop 500k a month on unnecessary purchases.
>>522533311things need to get 10x worse before the useful idiot nigger cattle put pressure on politicians.
>>522533311Except that the vast majority of mister 1%'s money is currently invested in businesses that keep the economy afloat. If he were to liquidate this money and distribute it to the poor it would crash the economy and send us into a massive depression
>>522533805>>522534448>>522534714>>522535720>>522536751these probems are caused by fiat money and inflation and government debtbut commies love fake money and government debtso they can never solve the issue and they end the same waya doomloop for any western nationcommies are fake opposition
>>522533311Arguably some of the greatest nations humanity has raised have had the greatest degree of inequality. Have you ever heard of slavery? Do you think the romans gave a shit about wealth equality?Your premise that wealth inequality is damaging to nations is poorly formed. It's certainly damaging to the welfare of the people - but the nation as a monolithic entity does pretty well.
>>522536935agreed thats why i reinvest my paycheck into my boss's bank account that way i can always have a gooder economy and a job it just makes sense okay
>>522536911Currently we're seeing millionaires complaining because the billionaires are starting to cuck them the way poor people have been cucked for years.Typically societal collapse occurs when the high income people start getting fucked.
>>522537010The backbone of Rome was its free citizens.As wealth inequality grew you saw the same problems we have now. Including free citizens complaining about roving gangs of foreign slaves brought to Rome by the wealthy
>>522537085youre a stupid hallucianting commieand you shit up the entire board 24/7
>>522536987Fiat money gets endlessly printed because businesses get bail outs.Inflation gets out of hand because mini recessions are not allowed.Government debt exists to encourage long term growth and investment, but has been bastardized to keep nonviable businesses afloat instead.Kill stock buy backs.Kill company bail outs.It is already guaranteed that this next recession is going to be almost great depression tier, so we might as well hit it and recover it instead of being blindsided.
>>522533311>what do you, as a non-communist reactionary, think of the issue of wealth inequality?>what do you think can be done to address it?Wealth inequality in its present form is not the result of the free market, but rather a result of state action via enforcement of intellectual property and licensing laws. It's akin to the pre-capitalist system of guilds in the middle ages, where the economy was dominated by state-enforced monopolies. The answer to fixing it is to dramatically curtail copyright and patent protection, which are not true property, but a legal fiction created to protect the interests of the elite. Also, most forms of industrial regulation should be abolished, as regulatory capture serves as a secondary form of monopolistic protection, in that it creates insurmountable barriers to entry in a given market.
>>522537365Yeah its not a problem if industrial waste gets dumped in public spaces!
