Truth?

@EllaDisenchanted There barely is. Think of the average income of a middle class person, now compare that against the average income of the upper class. It's a fraction.

@basilfawlty89 And the income of the poor is a fraction of the middle class income.

@EllaDisenchanted exactly. But there is one big difference - property. Most of the poor and middle class do not own property or derive their wealth from the labour if others. The upper class does.

@basilfawlty89 at the sane time the land and property markets are very erratic, so paper money is better. For now.

@EllaDisenchanted Not what I mean by property. I don't mean personal property like a house or car. I mean private property in the traditional sense - factories, land, offices, etc. the means of production. The upper class makes their income using the blood and sweat of the lower classes so they don't have to work.

@basilfawlty89 That's the way it works. Life takes work. I just don't find any reason to waste time with envy.

@EllaDisenchanted It's got nothing to do with envy and every to do with a system that rewards laziness and punishes the hardest worker. The system has failed, the system must be replaced.

@basilfawlty89 No matter the replacement there will still be flaws.It's the one that works best for that group, not the one that's perfect.

@EllaDisenchanted but some systems are more flawed than others. When people in gold towers live in luxury while people 3 miles away starve, the system has failed

@basilfawlty89 True, but there is no system where that doesn't happen.

Not true. It wasn't like that in Catalonia. It wasn't like that in Free Ukraine. Rojava and the Zapatistas also don't have it.

@basilfawlty89 I can't speak of Catalonia and Ukraine with any certainty forget way. But if you mean the Zapatistas of Mexico then you will hear studied of injustices and corruption on the same level of really revolution Cuba and Che.

Also keep in mind that these more prior involved in a system the harder the system is pressed for order.

@EllaDisenchanted I have heard opposite. Also. Che and Cuba are Authoritarian socialist examples. I'm talking Anarchism

@basilfawlty89 Yes, I'm just mentioning the way I've heard it called from people who lived in Chiapas.

Either way, every system eventually find corruption somewhere and there's always some at the top while some are on the bottom.

@EllaDisenchanted Hence Anarchism. We need no people at the top. We need no leaders.

@basilfawlty89 Well, you can have it. Ill stuck with what works for me.