I believe Plato pointed this out in The Republic.
He thought the richest citizen needed to have no more then 5x the wealth of the poorest citizen or you would inevitably slide into oligarchy.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
I believe Plato pointed this out in The Republic.
He thought the richest citizen needed to have no more then 5x the wealth of the poorest citizen or you would inevitably slide into oligarchy.
We crossed that threshold so long ago that you can make 5x the poverty level and still not be able to afford a house.
How strange that some Texas university was recently banning a professor from teaching Plato to students because it had too much "equality" in it.
plato sounded DEI to them.
Capitalism is a threat to democracy.
But thanks for getting on nearly the same page, Oxfam.
We’ve been pointing this out ever since the concept of currency became a thing, but I’m sure we will learn our lesson this time and stop doing it. This can’t just be how it will always be until we drive ourselves to extinction stuck on this miserable rock, Right?
Structural issues make egalitarian economic systems difficult. Wealth and social influence compound once another in a virtuous cycle. Wealth has a strong hereditary bias, even in socialist economic models. And violence is historically a powerful tool for accruing wealth. Very difficult to establish universal deterrence against violence.
This isn't a question of people being smart or stupid. It's an elaborate balancing act that becomes exponentially more difficult as population size expands.
As a very wise Irishman once so eloquently said it: “People. What a bunch’a bastards.”
Hey, the rock is fine, we've made society a miserable place. The pack is calling me...
Not a very good actor, but seems like a good person and he's funny. He worked hard to be where he is so sure "the rock" is fine.
We’ve been pointing this out ever since the concept of currency became a thing, but I’m sure we will learn our lesson this time and stop doing it.
I think that this became an issue even before currency. It happened as soon as agriculture allowed for accumulation of resources, power, and wealth. I sometimes think that that was really the point when humanity took the wrong turn.
“I think human consciousness is a tragic misstep in human evolution. We became too self-aware; nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself."


He also assumed automation would be helpful for the working class because he thought it would mean we wouldn't have to work to survive. I don't think he saw billionaires just breeding the working class for wars or organ harvesting and completely replacing their labor with robots. I guess he didn't really think about how low they will always stoop.
I would say that between the concepts of reserve army of labor and the global proliferation of fictitious capital he kind of had an idea of it but yea, maybe he couldn't have imagined how depraved wealth would make them (what you mentioned + Epstein's island).
You just made me imagine Karl Marx emerging from a frozen time capsule ready to do battle against greedy capitalists in 2026, like "Ok what are we fighting against now? Aristocracy in government, labor exploitation, and wage theft?"
Then somebody "Yes, ands" him before letting him scroll through a news feed, and he promptly vomits and just shuts himself off back in his time capsule.

Now lets do another massively funded research project to figure out the next step a lot of people already know.. LOBBYING!!
Rich people use Lobbying groups to manipulate countries and ruin the sovereignty of the nation, have done so since Lobbying groups were added to Capitilism...
Who would be surprised that concentrating most resources in a few is the opposite of the common good...
Poor people: "Well I guess there's only one solution really." Gestures to unpaid taxes and clears throat.
Billionaires: "Yes..." Looks at AI and fully automated societies before clutching pocketbook closer. "One final solution."
You mean letting a small group of people consolidate power under themselves is a danger to a system designed to evenly distribute power? No way!
No shit bro for real?
No shit, Sherlock (c)
Waiting for another news. Like water is wet and education should function well
It's not that they are rich, we've always had rich people. The problem is that we now have rich people with enough wealth to compete with nations, and they are getting even stronger. They are now starting to cut their own deals with nations that benefit them personally, with no regard to the nations, and millions of people that could be harmed by that policy. We've already seen Musk manipulate Starlink to steer a war in his direction, and unleash his hacking squad to rig an American election, just so he could use the opportunity to cripple all the government agencies that were investigating his crimes.
And it will only get worse. They are approaching Trillionaire status, and will be even more powerful. How long before multiple trillionaires form an alliance, and build their own personal military?
Eventually we will reach a point where it will become impossible to reign them in, and then we will all wonder why someone didn't do something about them when it was still possible, like NOW.
There already are private military. Black Water and alike are absolutely private armies. But that could be expensive, even for trillionaires. It's a much better strategy to privatize the existing military and get it paid by the government. Watch it, it's going to happen!
Screw Idiocracy. People reference it not understanding there were positives in the negatives. This is "Don't Look Up", that nailed our current corrupt leadership and techno-corporate lunacy, as well as ignoring what is right in front of us because shiny things are more interesting.
Are we waiting to hear it from the news to believe it?
Yeah, this isn’t anything new. Literally centuries old analysis here. I guess it’s nice they updated it for the contemporary society, though.
I suspect the only time the US got close to representative government was the New Deal era. Most people just live their lives and don't think in ideological terms. The ones that do are considered "too into politics" and usually believe in reform because it requires less of them than the alternative. Anyways, how about that bread and circuses?
oh rly?
I don’t think that, the difference that these guys and not rich anymore they are filthy rich. If someone is smarter than me they should deserve to be richer than me. But have hundreds of billions and etc. this is just to much.
No, they don't deserve to be richer than you
First off, "smarter" is a really hard concept. Do you think Elmo Musk is smarter than you? He's a conman and an idiot and I guarantee you he isn't smarter than you
Then there are people that have certain specializations. They know everything about very little. This means they are very smart nonbthe subjects they know about and well, not so smart in others
There are also the true geniuses, but those usually don't end up uber rich. The theoretical physicists under us aren't known for being billionaires
Then there is just the basic question: what is smart? Somebody who mnaged to make a lot of money? Usually that's not smart, it's stepping on others backs. Musk made a lot of money but he did it by lying and scamming (and he continues to this day)
And even then... Let's assume for a second that there are objectively smarter people out there, do they deserve more than you and I, just because of good genetics? Fuck that Nazi shit.
I want a world wide wealth cap. Say, 1 million dollar (pinky pushing against corner of mouth)
We can keep capitalism as-is, all fine, but when your networth gets higher, your income taxes get higher.. when you reach 1 million, 100% goes to taxes
This way, we have the strengths of capitalism yet no more millionaires. Without millionaires, a huge amount of shit that comes with them, disappears too. Governments on the other hand get a huge tax income that they can spend on free healthcare, free education, universal basic income, you name it. Nobody will be super rich, nobody will ever be poor again.
The 1M is a random number I pulled out of my ass, but the point stands. We need to cap how much net worth a single person can have. There is no explicit right that says you should be allowed to hoard money and art and networth.
Within that limit we can allow people to do what they want. What to buy an expensive house? As long as it's under the max, sure!
Those crazy ass houses with 500 rooms from oligarchs? Convert them into hotels. Same goes for those crazy luxury ships, make small cruise ships out of them. Ban private jets unless for things where it makes sense, like medical transportation or something
We don't NEED private jets for anyone, especially not in the age of video calls
Billionaires and millionaires are the main reason why democracy is dying, why the world's environment is dying, why things are as bad as they are, today.
Ban millionaires, ban billionaires and let everybody be as "rich" as they want within the wealth cap.
Agree. I’d even go as far to say, they can get filthy rich, but not at an expense of people getting low quality product, low quality of life, and in the process messing up the environment too, but usually, when everything is said and done, that’s how they get ultra rich.
they can get filthy rich, but not at an expense of people getting low quality product, low quality of life, and in the process messing up the environment too
No they can't. Those are mutually exclusive.
Someone becoming "filthy rich" is requires the rest of the people getting low quality product, low quality of life, and messing up the environment.
I don’t disagree.
Liberty until it infringes on the liberty of others