• Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    While the above is absolutely true, the rich are rich because of generational wealth. And if you go back far enough, that generational wealth is based on exploitation, environmental abuse, genocide, all the hits.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Pratchett mentions generational wealth as well, noting the attics full of furniture and sturdy tweeds which could be handed down, and the estate itself, which could not only house innumerable family members and friends and their servants, but also provided income from rents and food from the gardens, fields, and animal pens. It’s just more spread about, whereas the Boots Theory of Poverty is a complete thought.

    • roofuskit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s about the lock in of poverty. It’s not meant to be taken literally. It’s about the increased costs levied on the poor that make it impossible to get out once you are in.

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 days ago

        The other side of that coin is that the poor have to buy from the rich, and the rich have bigger profit margins when selling cheaper items to the poor. This is exploitation of a captive market.

    • iltoroargento@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 days ago

      Usually, it’s not even going back at all. The generational wealth kids I grew up around still had their parents stealing their workers’ wages and engaging in fucked up business practices.

      It might not be exterminating a native population kind of thing, but there’s that whole thing about the banality of evil and generally accepted insanity, so I still think it counts.