text: is this odd? ['rulers living in luxury & the plebeians living in poverty']? someone says that socialism/communism hasnt worked, it always ends in the rulers living in luxury, etc -  it is true that communism hasnt worked, but communism was never, theoretically or historically, egalitarian - the theory was: take everything off everyone and give it to the state - the error was in thinking that somehow the state was not individuals, or that the state, with maximal property, would not attract criminal minds like a supermagnet is it odd because the writer criticises communism for luxury & poverty, & doesnt see any similarity to usa today? - early usa was egalitarian & therefore democratic & therefore without extreme luxury/ poverty & therefore was strong, & grew - because of the laws of the founding fathers designed to prevent unjust wealth concentration, which they knew would be the end of the republic thanks to uncontrolled rich get richer, money rakes money, etc, present usa is very similar to communism - luxury/poverty, violence, abuse of power, decay - no?  