Terrible analysis based on cold-war lies. The USSR for example saw a massive reduction in the wealth and power of leaders compared to what came after and what existed before:
Tell me again how Che Guevara and Rosa Luxembourg were chasing power when they sacrificed their lives for the betterment of others
Whatt your graph shows is only a reduction in percentage. The top 10% still amount to around 25% of the wealth - which is wild considering that companies that were privatly owned didn’t exist. So what equity positions are we talking about?
The top 10% still amount to around 25% of the wealth
Yes, so? Do you expect or wish a society with completely equal distribution of resources? I agree with the fundamental principle of harder working people receiving more than those who contribute less (as long as everyone’s needs are met). The top 10% by the way weren’t mostly politicians, they were highly trained workers like university professors, surgeons, media personalities, high profile artists…
Terrible analysis based on cold-war lies. The USSR for example saw a massive reduction in the wealth and power of leaders compared to what came after and what existed before:
Tell me again how Che Guevara and Rosa Luxembourg were chasing power when they sacrificed their lives for the betterment of others
Uh, your graph is missing power levels for Lenin and Stalin.
over 9000
Whatt your graph shows is only a reduction in percentage. The top 10% still amount to around 25% of the wealth - which is wild considering that companies that were privatly owned didn’t exist. So what equity positions are we talking about?
Yes, so? Do you expect or wish a society with completely equal distribution of resources? I agree with the fundamental principle of harder working people receiving more than those who contribute less (as long as everyone’s needs are met). The top 10% by the way weren’t mostly politicians, they were highly trained workers like university professors, surgeons, media personalities, high profile artists…