You have yet to explain what made these people elite. They rose to their positions through their work. Meanwhile, USSR didn’t allow generational wealth, and max pay was capped at 9x lowest pay. Politicians weren’t even the highest paid bracket. There wasn’t even much you could do with any wealth in USSR if you somehow could accumulate it. You have this nonsensical view of the country because you’re thinking of it as if it was a capitalist state which is the only lived experience you have.
Even in the US, there are limits on the difference in monetary compensation. Because of that, for the most prestigious/lucrative positions, non-monetary compensation is offered. At the lowest rungs, it was health insurance. When you start talking higher, then there are company cars and so forth. And for CEOs, you get equity in the form of stock options, personal assistants, etc.
The Soviets had all of these for the highest positions, just like everywhere else. The only thing different is that they made the pay difference limitation explicit and lower.
They rose to their positions through their work.
No. I think higher in the thread you mentioned how Brezhnev came from a family of metalworkers. When he became General Secretary, it wasn’t because he was the best metalworker at the foundry. It wasn’t because he was the best manager of metalworkers at the foundry. That wasn’t how anyone rose to high positions in the Soviet Union.
Like elsewhere, there is a social game. And people who play it well rise high, those who play it perfectly rise higher still. Those who can’t or won’t play it, those who are bad at it, or who are visibly bitter about it, don’t rise at all.
None of it has to do with anything resembling actual work.
The Soviets had all of these for the highest positions, just like everywhere else. The only thing different is that they made the pay difference limitation explicit and lower.
It’s completely absurd to argue that inequality in USSR was in any way comparable to that in US. People like Musk or Bezos simply didn’t exist.
No. I think higher in the thread you mentioned how Brezhnev came from a family of metalworkers. When he became General Secretary, it wasn’t because he was the best metalworker at the foundry.
That’s a nonsensical argument. USSR wasn’t some guild based society where children simply learned the craft of their parents. Everyone had access to the same kind of education and same opportunity. A son of a metalworker would have roughly the same opportunity as the son of the chairman of the Politburo. That’s what allowed people born in far flung regions of USSR to rise to positions of power.
Like elsewhere, there is a social game. And people who play it well rise high, those who play it perfectly rise higher still.
That’s a factually incorrect statement. Success in US can literally be determined by your zip code. Those born rich have far more opportunity available to them, and thus are far more likely to rise to positions of power.
They did. The numbers just weren’t counted, and the climb to the top was slightly different. There were people in control of comparable industries, who were in control of comparable economic force. They just didn’t have “billions in stock valuations” because the economic system didn’t actually count such things.
These people experienced a far more luxurious life experience than the common Soviet citizen, in the same way Bezos experiences a far more luxurious life experience than myself.
Everyone had access to the same kind of education
No, they didn’t. Ever heard of “coffin problems”? They were a sort of entrance exam that kept “certain people” out of the most prestigious universities while allowing others in without even bothering with the tests. Sort of like the literacy voting tests they had in the Jim Crow south. Impossible to pass if you were the wrong sort of human.
A son of a metalworker would have roughly the same opportunity as the son of the chairman of the Politburo.
Because Soviet Scientist eliminated nepotism with advanced knowledge of applied phrenology! Wtf.
You still haven’t explained what entailed in being “elite” in USSR. Tell me, in what ways were their lives significantly more comfortable than those of the average citizen. My family was pretty average, we had our own apartment and a dacha. We had access to all the same services like healthcare, transit, and education. What did these elites have that we didn’t have?
What was it that you said about majority of people living in urban centers, I love how flexible your logic is to fit your argument. Vast majority of people had access to these things, dacha coops were pretty common. You know absolutely nothing about my country, but feel qualified to debate it regardless being the clown that you are.
Thing can in fact be comparable while also being different. However, it’s important to highlight that you countered your own argument in the other thread. This just comes back to you lacking any intellectual integrity. You don’t have a consistent position, you just argue to be right.
Being a elite does not mean you come from some sort of aristocracy.
They made this mistake because it (the petro-money) allowed them to comfortably stay in power and pay off all their crownies.
You have yet to explain what made these people elite. They rose to their positions through their work. Meanwhile, USSR didn’t allow generational wealth, and max pay was capped at 9x lowest pay. Politicians weren’t even the highest paid bracket. There wasn’t even much you could do with any wealth in USSR if you somehow could accumulate it. You have this nonsensical view of the country because you’re thinking of it as if it was a capitalist state which is the only lived experience you have.
Even in the US, there are limits on the difference in monetary compensation. Because of that, for the most prestigious/lucrative positions, non-monetary compensation is offered. At the lowest rungs, it was health insurance. When you start talking higher, then there are company cars and so forth. And for CEOs, you get equity in the form of stock options, personal assistants, etc.
The Soviets had all of these for the highest positions, just like everywhere else. The only thing different is that they made the pay difference limitation explicit and lower.
No. I think higher in the thread you mentioned how Brezhnev came from a family of metalworkers. When he became General Secretary, it wasn’t because he was the best metalworker at the foundry. It wasn’t because he was the best manager of metalworkers at the foundry. That wasn’t how anyone rose to high positions in the Soviet Union.
Like elsewhere, there is a social game. And people who play it well rise high, those who play it perfectly rise higher still. Those who can’t or won’t play it, those who are bad at it, or who are visibly bitter about it, don’t rise at all.
None of it has to do with anything resembling actual work.
It’s completely absurd to argue that inequality in USSR was in any way comparable to that in US. People like Musk or Bezos simply didn’t exist.
That’s a nonsensical argument. USSR wasn’t some guild based society where children simply learned the craft of their parents. Everyone had access to the same kind of education and same opportunity. A son of a metalworker would have roughly the same opportunity as the son of the chairman of the Politburo. That’s what allowed people born in far flung regions of USSR to rise to positions of power.
That’s a factually incorrect statement. Success in US can literally be determined by your zip code. Those born rich have far more opportunity available to them, and thus are far more likely to rise to positions of power.
They did. The numbers just weren’t counted, and the climb to the top was slightly different. There were people in control of comparable industries, who were in control of comparable economic force. They just didn’t have “billions in stock valuations” because the economic system didn’t actually count such things.
These people experienced a far more luxurious life experience than the common Soviet citizen, in the same way Bezos experiences a far more luxurious life experience than myself.
No, they didn’t. Ever heard of “coffin problems”? They were a sort of entrance exam that kept “certain people” out of the most prestigious universities while allowing others in without even bothering with the tests. Sort of like the literacy voting tests they had in the Jim Crow south. Impossible to pass if you were the wrong sort of human.
Because Soviet Scientist eliminated nepotism with advanced knowledge of applied phrenology! Wtf.
They rose though the ranks of the party to reach the elite top and (by then) had very comfortable lives compared to the average citizen of the USSR.
You still haven’t explained what entailed in being “elite” in USSR. Tell me, in what ways were their lives significantly more comfortable than those of the average citizen. My family was pretty average, we had our own apartment and a dacha. We had access to all the same services like healthcare, transit, and education. What did these elites have that we didn’t have?
Nice that your family was part of the urban crownies of the vanguard party. Ask some people in Siberia about their cushy apartment and nice dacha…
What was it that you said about majority of people living in urban centers, I love how flexible your logic is to fit your argument. Vast majority of people had access to these things, dacha coops were pretty common. You know absolutely nothing about my country, but feel qualified to debate it regardless being the clown that you are.
Don’t mix up what I said about the USSR Vs. what I said about China. Those two are not comparable at all.
Thing can in fact be comparable while also being different. However, it’s important to highlight that you countered your own argument in the other thread. This just comes back to you lacking any intellectual integrity. You don’t have a consistent position, you just argue to be right.
I am starting to think you don’t even understand my argument. Ideologically blind-sighted it seems.