Kind of. I want to yes, but its not directly how this works or how it sounds. A large increase in poverty or loss of property is insufficient to stoke revolution on its own. The increase of poverty in favor of the rich devastates the economy for multiple reasons, such as: opportunity contraction, less spending, loss of motivation/mobility, and more. When the economy loss becomes wide spread enough, regardless of bankruptcy/poverty/homeless or whatever rates is when revolution happens.

The problem has to effect a majority of society. 12% sounds devastating (it is), but it is not a wide enough umbrella.

▲ mrguyorama 8 hours ago | parent [-]

For America specifically, it is somehow worse.

It took 25% of the nation being out of work to, not revolt, but popularly elect someone willing to to spend a little government money on healthcare and welfare.

So it will get much worse before Americans finally read a book and figure out we should maybe do something different.

	▲	exceptione 8 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		`> So it will get much worse before Americans finally read a book and figure out we should maybe do something different.` You better forget about the books. Don't count on the media either; the abolishment of the fairness doctrine and financial incentives via corporate ownership can and will distort reality in a strata-optimized way. Social media is overrun by bots and influence ops as we speak. New threat: people will ask their LLM. Journalists will source their LLM. Next question: Who trains the LLM?¹ ______ 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grokipedia
	▲	roxolotl 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I read Grapes of Wrath recently on a recommendation from a friend and it’s one of the few great books I’ve read and felt was genuinely great. It feels incredibly relevant today with both inequality and automation. Would highly recommend it.