[epgui]

Because inequality beyond a certain excess makes a system unstable, and given the chance, even wealthy people would rather be wealthy in a stable world than an unstable world.

There is not only one power distribution, there is a whole set of them.

[roenxi]

Can you refer to any evidence that inequality makes systems unstable? There is no reason that I can think of for that. OnlyFans looks pretty stable, in fact. And It doesn't make sense that a political system gets unstable when some people get wealthy. Political systems fall apart when large numbers of people can't afford food (an issue which has nothing to do with equality).

[svnpenn]

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake

[roenxi]

Inequality much more extreme than that was quite stable. Antoinette was only wealthy compared to people in the 1700s. She was basically an equal to the peasants wealth-wise compared to the inequality we've seen since after the industrial revolution.

We've probably got more poor people today than were alive then in absolute numbers, and our wealthy are orders of magnitude more wealthy. And the situation is much more stable.

[Rury]

Except that if food is plentiful, but not everyone has equal access to food, then it has everything to do with equality.

Actually, many wars and rebellions in history have been due to some kind of inequality, whether perceived or real, when individuals or groups were motivated to fight to seek redress. And wars are very much unstable.

[ad404b8a372f2b9]

I don't think it's stark. That's how the entertainment business naturally works. Footballers, youtubers, actors, etc...

Onlyfans has a very low barrier to entry and being better than a 100 other people isn't all that hard, assuming you have the body for it and the marketing chops.

I don't understand why you'd want a company doing the government's job, that's what taxes are for.

[epgui]

Did you comment on the right thing? I don’t understand how that relates to what I wrote.