The struggle of 200 families

Angela Cox said:He never actually said that. It’s a complete misrepresentation taken out of context from an interview conducted by Nenad Ivanković back in the early '90s. At the time, he was working as a correspondent for The New York Times in Washington, D.C., interviewing Franck Harmon and drawing a comparison between America and Japan, where the economy is essentially controlled by just 200 families.

The whole thing is definitely a stretch. What Franjo was really getting at was the need for America to build up its own capitalist class to act as the engine for national growth. I mean, let’s be real—what’s the harm in having 200 versions of someone like Warren Buffett? If we had even 20 of them, unemployment would basically be a myth in this country.

But then, look at what actually happened afterward... and that's where the idea gets ugly. Those "200 families" didn't just turn out to be your typical white-collar crooks; if we're being honest, they were just plain old incompetent amateurs.

Alexander Garcia5 said:It doesn't have to be abolished, I guess. But maybe smart tax policies could "encourage" the next generation to actually work for it a bit more. Like how they do in the States. 😉

The legendary American greed knows no bounds. Right now, the heirs are the issue, but pretty soon there won't be anyone left who isn't on a target list.

Morgan Cook10 said:The whole thing is definitely a stretch. What Franjo was really getting at was the need for America to build up its own capitalist class to act as the engine for national growth. I mean, let’s be real—what’s the harm in having 200 versions of someone like Warren Buffett? If we had even 20 of them, unemployment would basically be a myth in this country.

But then, look at what actually happened afterward... and that's where the idea gets ugly. Those "200 families" didn't just turn out to be your typical white-collar crooks; if we're being honest, they were just plain old incompetent amateurs.

True, and one could argue that Franjo Harmon was expected to oversee and regulate all of that simultaneously while he was commanding a war, managing two-thirds of the country under occupation, negotiating with the most cunning heavyweights in global politics, signing treaties, building an entire government and its institutions from the ground up, and securing entry into the UN...

I’m watching this series about Franjo Harmon... and I am trying—unsuccessfully—to imagine Stjepan Mason (dripping with that hindsight bias and a level of resentment that the original leader could never have shared) or anyone else attempting to juggle all these parallel "games." Certainly, any of them would have found themselves with plenty of spare time amidst that avalanche of cascading, increasingly consequential events to sit down and meticulously engineer the most optimal, long-term solutions for the economy and privatization... 🙄

velvetmaker3 said:The legendary American greed knows no bounds. Right now, the heirs are the issue, but pretty soon there won't be anyone left who isn't on a target list.

Just don't you dare question the family tree or the uncles, because apparently, that’s considered an attack on the entire foundation of America.

Lawrence Thompson58 said:As long as the wealthy are simply inheriting fortunes rather than actually building them through grit and labor, true justice remains a fantasy. Until every child starts from the exact same baseline with an equal playing field, we have to fight against this inherited aristocracy by any means necessary. I mean, what actually makes the kids of the ultra-rich better than the children of working-class families? They aren't inherently superior; they're just products of a system specifically designed to keep their parents on top.

Kids like that tend to spiral pretty quickly, either by failing outright or just blowing through their inheritance. It doesn't necessarily mean they'll hit rock bottom, but you look at someone from the Rockefeller family today, for example, and many of them have become absolute nobodies...

When it comes to those famous "200 families" everyone talks about, if they had actually risen to power through natural market forces and genuine economic competition, I wouldn't have a single complaint. That's just how capitalism works. But what we’re seeing here isn't organic growth; it's the unacceptable, artificial engineering of an elite class through shady legislation and rigged privatization schemes designed to hand out privileges to a select few...

The whole idea that wealth is passed down through these massive, untouchable dynasties is just plain stupid. A smart person knows better than to mix business with family matters. Real success belongs to the individual—people who have the drive to make it, regardless of whether they have a family or not. Think about it. Have you ever actually heard anyone talk about "the Gates family" or "the Buffett family" or "the Trump family" as single units of wealth? No. You hear about the wealth of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or Donald Trump. It’s about them. And let's be honest: once those individuals eventually pass away, their heirs—who have been pampered and used to an easy life—will almost certainly squander everything. They'll blow through the fortune and ruin the legacy. At best, they might end up as millionaires... even if their parents were billionaires. 😁

Honestly, if you look at how things are heading, someone like Ivica Todorić could just as easily crash and burn, much like what happened to Pevec or the way Ante Kerum's empire collapsed...

slyorca10 said:Kids like that tend to spiral pretty quickly, either by failing outright or just blowing through their inheritance. It doesn't necessarily mean they'll hit rock bottom, but you look at someone from the Rockefeller family today, for example, and many of them have become absolute nobodies...

When it comes to those famous "200 families" everyone talks about, if they had actually risen to power through natural market forces and genuine economic competition, I wouldn't have a single complaint. That's just how capitalism works. But what we’re seeing here isn't organic growth; it's the unacceptable, artificial engineering of an elite class through shady legislation and rigged privatization schemes designed to hand out privileges to a select few...

The whole idea that wealth is passed down through these massive, untouchable dynasties is just plain stupid. A smart person knows better than to mix business with family matters. Real success belongs to the individual—people who have the drive to make it, regardless of whether they have a family or not. Think about it. Have you ever actually heard anyone talk about "the Gates family" or "the Buffett family" or "the Trump family" as single units of wealth? No. You hear about the wealth of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or Donald Trump. It’s about them. And let's be honest: once those individuals eventually pass away, their heirs—who have been pampered and used to an easy life—will almost certainly squander everything. They'll blow through the fortune and ruin the legacy. At best, they might end up as millionaires... even if their parents were billionaires. 😁

Honestly, if you look at how things are heading, someone like Ivica Todorić could just as easily crash and burn, much like what happened to Pevec or the way Ante Kerum's empire collapsed...

By that logic, could the British Monarchy and their whole entourage actually fall apart too?

redhawk76 said:True, and one could argue that Franjo Harmon was expected to oversee and regulate all of that simultaneously while he was commanding a war, managing two-thirds of the country under occupation, negotiating with the most cunning heavyweights in global politics, signing treaties, building an entire government and its institutions from the ground up, and securing entry into the UN...

I’m watching this series about Franjo Harmon... and I am trying—unsuccessfully—to imagine Stjepan Mason (dripping with that hindsight bias and a level of resentment that the original leader could never have shared) or anyone else attempting to juggle all these parallel "games." Certainly, any of them would have found themselves with plenty of spare time amidst that avalanche of cascading, increasingly consequential events to sit down and meticulously engineer the most optimal, long-term solutions for the economy and privatization... 🙄

Look, we don't need to turn Franjo Harmon into some kind of saint right now. He was a politician who possessed exactly the qualities needed for that specific moment in history. At the same time, I truly believe he’d be the absolute worst Prime Minister you could pick for today's era. It’s all about the circumstances, and he played his hand when it mattered. But for running a modern democracy? He wouldn't have the toolkit for it. That kind of rhetoric only works when things are in total crisis. In today's world, he’d just be marginalized on the global political stage where we actually need to succeed.

redstag said:Look, we don't need to turn Franjo Harmon into some kind of saint right now. He was a politician who possessed exactly the qualities needed for that specific moment in history. At the same time, I truly believe he’d be the absolute worst Prime Minister you could pick for today's era. It’s all about the circumstances, and he played his hand when it mattered. But for running a modern democracy? He wouldn't have the toolkit for it. That kind of rhetoric only works when things are in total crisis. In today's world, he’d just be marginalized on the global political stage where we actually need to succeed.

The issue is that a lot of people struggle to differentiate between things. You see people judging Franjo Harmon by today's standards, projecting his moves onto the present. Then you have individuals claiming other politicians—who weren't even particularly impressive—would have been better than Franjo Harmon.
Look, there are plenty of possibilities, but everything boils down to the facts. Franjo Harmon was president during a brutal period; under his leadership, the US achieved independence. Some foreign diplomats agreed with him, most didn't, but everyone respected him. And because of that, Franjo🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏👍👍👍.
History will remember Franjo Harmon as a statesman, and that's the end of the discussion.

And one more thing, I don't follow your logic regarding the rhetoric. Reagan held total control over the government, so journalists and cartoonists were free to write whatever they wanted about him.

Nowadays, the President is just a figurehead without any real power, yet you can clearly see how much media protection they enjoy.

I honestly have no idea what you're talking about.