He’s not entirely off on that. Unless you’re the owner, then you qualify as a “prole”.
hmm, the docs would be closer to the bougies because they have the distinction of wealth vs labor-based income (hence the push for pensions...income for after you are out of labor for the prole)
The whole deal with the prole is that the only "possession" they have that has economic traction is their labor.
but the docs tend to be able to accumulate wealth such as a stoc portfolio
and here's the trick about it -- it's not just about being the owner of the production YOU work in. It's about ownership of production in general (one could make the argument maybe that that's the line between haute and petty bougies) - not just your jobbie job.
It can actually be a great corruption tool to launder things..diversify outside your operations
It's like, what's a congressmember make? $174,000? - that's their jobbie job...but that's not really what's driving their wealth
like a doc might work the doc job but not own the hospital or be in private practice..that can actually be a good liability shield.
but the are going to retire on , bribe their kids into (sorry "send their kids to") unis, etc based on their capital holdings.
Or evil jewish money lenders who own pure abstract capital...not actually means of production - they own liquidity
Its really an income v wealth distinction is what marx was getting at...but way easier to get people to stab oneanother if you make a brightline and say kill that guy