More misrepresentation and obfuscation.... And that the real problem lies in our refusal to admit that the poor and middle class, (who WORK for a living) benefit just as much as the rich from...
You still fail to acknowledge the term as I am using it (because all you ever have is your pseudo-libertarian drum of mindless, absolute "property rights, property rights..." that you must always beat and beat as hard as you can to drown out anyone ever murmuring under their breath the fact that private property rights are invented, a special legal privilege, and we might therefore consider corresponding obligations a fraction more, the aspect of the accompanying social contract etc.).
And certainly I never suggested the poor and middle class benefit just as much as the rich from these special legal privileges, these artificial rights. Clearly they benefit only in the smallest, smallest fraction that those at the top of the chain do (though still to the disadvantage of others beneath them or after them).
Rather I acknowledged that they also have vested interests, the primary reason is to ensure the survival of the system. I mentioned it was thus a systemic problem on that basis. In a democracy, you needs must give a majority a little piece of the pie so they will continue to vote for the whole pie.
Just like how we voted in this country through 1997,2002,2007. Even if you weren't getting your large dollop of equity appreciation through owning a property, you were still being kept happy with lower tax, higher salaries, increased welfare, and so on, that was being paid for with the cream off the top of property rights and corresponding unearned income.
So those on the lower rungs of economic society may have been benefiting, the middle rung people even more so, but not nearly as much as those on the upper reaches who extracted untold financial gains through the agency of these "rights" we are discussing that they had purchased or otherwise acquired.