You’re right that advancement in the meritocracy is possible on an individual level. The point is that it’s a fallacy of composition to say it can be done by everyone; the shape of the pyramid limits the number of positions available at the apex. And even though effort and expenditure on education may make meritocratic advancement possibe for many, the very fact that the state promotes deskilling of labor and inflates the educational and credentially requirements for advancement, acts in practice as a sort of entry barrier that forces the average person to jump through more hoops to attain comfortable subsistence.

I’m certainly sympathetic to the idea that these are not things one should aspire TO - that is, the ranks of the New Class - but the generational poverty traps seem relegated to precisely those that our state capitalist system has attempted to “help” with state welfare. But I think that’s also your point. After all, immigrants typically HAVE that horizontal distribution of wealth and bonds of solidarity that have greatly contributed to their relative material succcess.

I remember reading Bryan Caplan (I know, Kevin) on the paradox of both upstanding personal behavior and willingness to follow the law, no matter how nonsensical or unjust, as complementary traits. That’s a shame, and explains why college educated people are physically harmless and often intellectual conversational companions, yet also more likely headed for the halls of power.

I disagree on the necessity of consumers. Money is just paper, it is useful only because of its relation to actual goods and services. What the proletariat provide is their labor.