. . . and how it will do them no good whatsoever.
The wealthy are making
bug out plans. They are buying private farms next to private air strips.
It has happened before. When the Roman Empire was falling, many of the elite and wealthy retreated to their fortified country villas. So how did that work for them? Picture this: hordes of barbarians and villas full of nice stuff. How do you think that turned out? Maybe they even had some private security. How much is bought loyalty worth when the barbarians are at the gate?
Let's just say that the territories of the former Roman Empire are not dotted with wealthy villas populated by the decedents of the original owners. Instead, the lands are covered with castles and fortifications built during the “dark” ages by folks who once were the barbarians.
Elite retreat locations have some value. If your countrymen are approaching your estate with pitchforks and torches, it might be a good idea to have a place and assets in another country. Dictators from around the world have followed this plan. It only works when the problem is localized. There has to be a nice stable place to go to. In a globalized world, those islands of stability look both small and temporary. The rich's success in bringing the world under one big umbrella will be their downfall.
Their best defense for long term survival is a fully functioning society that's fair and equitable. Of course, that might cut into short term profits, so I'm betting with the barbarians.
-Sixbears
I have privately always wondered why the wealthy in developed countries couldn't see the middle class as protection or insulation from the poor. When I look at how the wealthy have to live where the distinction between the haves-n-have nots is so profound; I have to wonder about the wealthy's sense of self-preservation in west.
ReplyDeleteUpward mobility has come to a screeching halt in the west, and that can't be good.
Deletesixbears, my comment was wiped out. this comment section should say 'sign in first before commenting'.
ReplyDeletewhat i said was that the greedy could give the rest of us enough leeway so that they themselves could remain above the fray. a population with enough needs met will be less likely to act up, although usually the scuffles never touch the haves and the lower classes do the suffering.
but greed is an obsession and the greedy can never rest until they have raked in everything for themselves.
i suppose it may eventually result in their own destruction but i have never seen it happen.
I don't mind other people being much more wealthy than me. What bothers me is when they try and take away what little I need to live.
DeleteYup, one of our clients purchased a secluded ranch in Paraguay (sp ?) a few years back. Said if the world ever turned upside down, that was where he wanted to hang his hat. Must be nice being able to afford that.
ReplyDeleteI try not to waste my time hating the rich. Really isn't constructive, envying others who have 'more than me'. I try to make the lives around me more worth living, and let the rich take care of themselves.
The 'lets soak the rich folks and tax them to death' to me is discrimination, plain and simple. Switch the phrase above with the word RICH with OLD (hey - they've had twice the time to get their money) or MINORITY (they already hate us already) and see if it changes the meaning. The poor and middle class hightaxes aren't the fault the rich - its due to the government imposing taxes on them because the government spent the money on something else and need to pay off the needy.
Sorta harsh - but thats the way I see it.
Your client has no connecting, besides money, with the local population. That might work for now, but in a SHTF situation it won't be good.
DeleteThe rich have been getting a lot more government help than the poor.
The Nazies bought South America. Same thing with super rich no difference.
DeleteOf course, a lot of them were hunted down . .
Deleteme barbarian mutt
ReplyDeleteme survive
Wildflower
Grunt!
Delete