[sp332]

I think "elites" are people who consider themselves elite, or more specifically, any one who thinks: 1. They can make better life choices, financial decisions etc. than "other" people, and 2. Therefore they should be in charge of other people's lives.

[freyr]

This definition is entirely dependent on the internal mind state of the individual. The guy behind the counter of the local 7-Eleven may think he's smarter than everyone, and may think he should be in charge, but nobody thinks of him as an elite.

I'd guess most people today consider an elite as somebody who wields influence within a political, corporate, or other type of entity that itself is highly influential within society, and who is well connected to other people of influence.

[sp332]

Exactly, elitism is basically empire-building on a personal level. You can of course wield influence while still being strongly meritocratic. But feeling some entitlement or ambition to control aspects of other people's lives is elitist.

[freyr]

We're defining two different things here, elitists and elites. An elitist is defined by their state of mind, and how they classify themselves and others. You do not need actual power to be elitist.

Society's elites, on the other hand, have real influence (and may not even have an elitist mindset).

[Shivetya]

I think the word your looking for is politician.

Fortunately the world has shown there are solutions for them, the trouble is the country usually is in a very bad position before the populace acts on that solution.

[tomjen3]

That is nearly everyone.

[crusso]

As a Libertarian, I don't want to be in charge of your life.

There are lots of us who feel that way.

[tomjen3]

While I appreciate the belief, I didn't mean people being in power over me, directly.

Don't you ever think, If I was president I wouldn't have made X decision? Or if I had the power I would abolish the IRS, scale back the government, etc?

As a libertarian you would believe those things to be good, so you would want them, right? Supposed somebody offered you the position of power to institute them, wouldn't you accept it?

[Domenic_S]

If you're not in charge of their life, they're in charge of yours because there has to be a power gradient when money (taxes) is involved.

I don't want to be in charge of your life, but I don't want to be responsible for paying for it, either.

[sp332]

Or maybe we could agree on something?

[crusso]

If you're not in charge of their life, they're in charge of yours

No. Money does not give you control of my life.

Bill Gates can have all the money he wants, but it doesn't mean that he chooses where I can go to school, whether or not I want to risk having health insurance, whether or not I can fill a ditch on my property, whether or not I can marry my same-sex domestic partner, or even whether or not I have to use Windows8.

Government, however, controls all those things and much more. In the context of this thread, the pejorative use of the word "elites" typically refers to those who approve of using government-like power to control the lives of others. Usually, because they are members of the ruling class that has influence with the government and/or because they have plenty enough money to circumvent many of the ways that the government can control their lives.

[sp332]

No. Money does not give you control of my life.

Did you read his whole 2-sentence post? When taxes are involved, either I control you (by using your money how I like) or I control you (using my money how you like).