What is the mathematical reason why a complex social structure

>>8723500
>What is the mathematical reason why a complex social structure consisting of the richest 1% owning 80% of the planet's wealth is more stable than all the wealth being distributed equally among the people?

>he doesn't know about the populous uprising
>he doesn't know about the sky rocking number of anarcho-commies rioting in the street
>he doesn't know about typical fascist reactionary movement is getting steam due to these new anarcho-commies

Having money makes it much easier to make more money. That's what it really boils down to.

>>8723510
Except that your "mass uprising" rarely happens. Most people just suck it up and stay in their place.

File: 08171d48c3.jpg (344KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1920x1080px

>>8723510
The difference between that and the french revolution is that the french elites didn't have nuclear weapons, armored drones with machine guns and underground bunkers

>>8723510
literally most of the facist and commies wont do a revolutionary shit, they'll just go to the Internet to shitpost and complain about shit

>>8723500
Capital ain't cheap and it's put to use/manged better in the hands of those who know how to make a profit instead of losses or consuming it duh.

>>8723500
Because lots of money enables you to bribe the politicians.
This will last as long as getting elected/re-elected is expensive.

https://youtu.be/BbEaEN2mUco?t=4m40s

As long as the people have food and are entertained you can literally do anything you want.
Panem et Circensis.

>>8723510
It'll just go back to the same way it always was. Doesn't matter what they call the society

people are inherently unequal.

>>8723500
There is actually a scientific reason. It's entropy.
Are you familiar with Pareto's principle? I'd suggest you to read a bit about it, it's really interesting.
In a nutshell, a Pareto distribution offers maximal entropy to the way currencies are distributed in a market, so any financial system will naturally tend towards this type of distribution over time, unless you get involved and put energy into creating a different distribution (because entropy always increases over time).

>>8723500
You really think the queen of england runs the world? Lol she barely has anything to do with England, other than being an idol for people to worship.

It isn't more stable. It's just byproduct of centuries of a small group ruling the rest of the society, with a few people from outside that group ascending to it.

>>8723510
Except the antifa rioting in the streets are directly funded by the powers that be. If anything, the "reactionary fascists" with Trump at the helm are the revolution against the kike dynasties currently in control.

leftypol shills gtfo

>>8723500
Empirically speaking, it is less stable than equitable wealth distribution, at least as far as democracies go.

One of the best indicators for a strong democracy is a large middle class. Most of the time if a society with a large Lorenz curve is stable its because of some sort of repression

because it doesn't negatively affect other people's lives
being rich is no guarantee of survival
if the world were about to be flooded and there was only 1 more space on the ark, Joe Blogg would probably kick Barron Trump in the face and leave him for dead. When society breaks down, all that matters are survival skills, not accumulated wealth.

starve a people for a day etc.

>>8723500
>muh communism muh

>>8723500
Is that the queen of England at the top lel