Excellent analysis. I often remind people that every economy that has allowed the wealthy to rule unrestrained for long enough has undergone a socialist revolution, which resulted in horrible conditions. The only exception was England, which adopted a new economy invented by Smith (capitalism, the most misunderstood/misrepresented economic concept on the planet right now). We don’t have capitalism in the US, we have slid back to what it replaced, which is a class system ruled by autocracy and oligarchy.

I think people often fail to understand just what they are asking the wealthy to give up. Yes, they should give it up, and never should have gotten it. But they have the power to prevent the government from taking it away from them, and that blinds them to the dangers of revolt. For them those changes would feel similar to how the average person would feel about inviting a random homeless person into their home. Sure, most of us could make that work. We probably have the room even if it is a squeeze, and it might even benefit us if they help around the house (my parents used to take in homeless people and give them off jobs in the hotel I grew up in. They usually stayed for a few weeks to a couple of months. They paid for their room and board, gave them free meals at the restaurant next door, and an hourly wage). But most of us will never do that (including me) for a number of reasons. Same with the wealthy. They could give up their profits, they definitely have enough to never need another dime. But the concept is so abhorrent to them they will never even consider it.