I have read a few articles implying that the middle class is capitalist, while the upper and lower classes are collectivist, and I wonder if game theory isn't at the root of it.
If you don't have and can't create wealth, it behooves you to take a collectivist approach to wealth. From each according to their ability, to each according to their need. Since you need a lot and are not able, collectivist thought works to your advantage.
If you can create wealth, then it behooves you to try to keep as much of it as you can. Enough said.
Note also that this is a continuum - so that the marginally productive still have a advantage in stealing from the hyper-productive.
The highest echelon game becomes interesting, and there have been several versions throughout history; and there are several strategies being employed now - so don't think this is the only one. Anyway ... the strategy is to sell yourself as the means of collectivism and enforce it through the power of the collective poor and elite. In other words, robin hood from the productive and give to the poor, keeping the lion's share for yourself. If you also steal from the marginally poor, IE, those who can produce enough for themselves if they are not taxed, but not if they are taxed, then give some of it back to them saying you stole it from the rich - you look magnanimous and strengthen your system. At any time you can pull strength from the poor, the marginally poor, and the collective elitist thieves to punish the productive who try to buck your system.
No comments:
Post a Comment