I agree.
But the point of war is coercing populations into doing what you want.
Sufficient dominance of machines and capital over guts and brains could create the dynamic described, where machines wage war and humans can't meaningfully contribute.
I'm not sure I'd want such a world, as it would probably resemble The Matrix without the comforting simulation.
Fortunately, drones seem to be winding the clock back for now!
Elon is the nearest thing to a counterexample I know.
With his just-the-right-amount-of-foreign charm and his Hollywood parties, he cajoled decision makers to open up a little space for Capitalism in two industries that had been regulatory-captured to the point of death.
And he's bright enough to understand what his staff are telling him, and even listens every once in a while. (Maybe less now than before.)
The exception that proves the rule, but doesn't justify the policies...
Would be nice! Unfortunately, this trend is far from universal, and has been running in reverse for the last two years at least...
One of my clients has a house, whose ballroom is as large as the entire house I live in.
He's never had a real job in his life, but his "productivity" as measured by taxable income is at least 5x mine.
To his credit, he got bored and started a business. It has employees, who receive 95% of their renumeration from various government programs (I helped organise that).
It has permits, because he went to school with decision makers.
There is no universe in which he is a net benefit to society. But I like the guy, and for his social class he's well above the mean.
The top and bottom 1% are net costs, absolutely.
Individual exceptions exist, but they exist despite our society's bureaucratically modified incentive structures.
Honestly, if I can't come back from a war with a herd of stolen cattle and saddle-bags full of loot, I'm not going. Patriotism is for teenagers and immigrants :-p
I think you greatly underestimate how much the rich depend on constant state action to remain that way for more than a few hours.
My country has thousands of pages of regulations and half a dozen federal agencies whose reason for existence is protecting passive corporate investors against their own hired management.
Corporations large and impersonal enough to need hired managers are a relatively recent innovation. In every industry, diseconomies of scale kick in at different levels, and function as natural limits to corporate growth; but lobbying and regulatory capture allow companies to grow well past these natural limits, and establish oligopolies that extract market rents greatly in excess of what they could by pleasing customers.
If the state and the courts ceased to recognise limited-liability corporations, the level of inequality would implode immediately. No risk-free passive investment would force wealthy parasites to get useful jobs.
Then, if we cut government spending by a good 99%...
The Russian experience defending against drones is that the best defence is an OP with an alert rifleman with a thermal scope.
I think drones have and will continue to democratise warfare far more than the reverse. Hence the tut-tutting among the political class.
Many people will always find creative reasons why they should benefit without paying. That's an argument for simplicity, not for regressive taxation.
The homeless guy benefits very little from defence and law enforcement of property rights.
The billionaire playboy passive investor does benefit.
So he should pay a great deal for it, and the homeless guy very little.
I'm okay with Poll taxes if and only if they're a voluntary alternative to jury service and military service.
Re Excise, Adam Smith described the negative consequences of tariffs better than I can.
But popular perceptions aren't wrong. If you have the infrastructure to secure cross-border movements, you have the infrastructure to tax it.
And "unfairly" discouraging imports from places whose policies you can't influence isn't always a bad idea. China's recent ban on graphite exports harms every industrial nation except Russia. Because those paranoid preppers never trusted China enough to outsource strategic materials production in the first place.
"Paying a fair price for the services you use is a matter of dignity and equality between citizens"
110% this.
Less government, more dignity.
Turning the working class into debt-serfs and well-connected rent-seeking oligarchs into aristocracy is exactly the objective of Establishment politicians across the West.
Just like in your prediction, except that the super-wealthy aren't paying their way.
This judgement won't move the needle much either way; but allowing income taxes but not wealth taxes is BS as policy.
Leveraging "international feminist organisations" is not going well for Israel.
Fake evidence too obvious, raising awkward questions about other allegations.
Stay safe everyone, and look out for each other.
It goes against what conventional wisdom tells us, but the period of greatest risk of suicide is as a person starts to recover from a major depression and can begin to make plans and be organised again.
UNFIL troops and their infrastructure get shot at all the time.
The moral is, don't be Belgian.
The bar's location's owner, who'd applied for a permit to redevelop and been knocked back?
Or somebody shorting his firm...
As a matter of law, I think they have a good case.
As a matter of public policy, income tax is an economically destructive tax on productivity. Repeal your 16th!
If defence, enforcement of crimes against property, and adjacent functions are going to be provided by government, it should be paid by wealth-holders who derive disproportionate benefit from those services.
They'd want to centralise the location of all that hashing power, mostly because government will government, but also for physical and network security, especially against insiders looking to make a buck on the side.
That centralised facility is going to need a lot of electricity. A LOT of electricity. Not that I'm suggesting anything...
Not okay!
I shall capriciously decide that this Norse symbol of Yule insensitively triggers my inherited trauma from the Great Heathen Army's invasion of 865. A Viking crime among many that normalised violence, pillaging, trial by jury, dried haddock, government by public assembly, and the use of the word "anger" as English.
Norway, if you're listening, I'm open to being bribed with good food - it worked for Eid and Diwali.