Why Old Money Supports the Left

On a first glance it does not make sense why old money supports the left. In this video, we explore a counterintuitive but increasingly visible phenomenon: why "old money" elites—those with generational wealth and established influence—tend to support progressive or left-leaning causes. Diving deep into history, psychology, and economic strategy, we analyze how this alignment reflects a desire to maintain social capital, secure long-term stability, and avoid disruptive populist movements. We'll also examine the cultural shifts that have influenced this trend, including philanthropy, status signaling, and the strategic preservation of wealth. By the end, you'll have a clearer understanding of how class, influence, and ideology intersect in the political sphere.

#finance #oldmoney #socialclass

To follow more of my work find me on:

Seeking Alpha: Nicholas Pardini

Davos Macro Quick Takes and Options Corner:

Disclaimer:

Anything in this channel is for informational and educational purposes only and is not investment advice. All information contained herein is based upon information available to the public. No representation is made that it is accurate or complete. No mention of a particular security, index, derivative, or other instrument on this channel is an offer to buy or sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell the securities mentioned herein, nor does it constitute an opinion of the suitability and appropriateness of investing in any financial instrument. Please consult your investment advisor and do you own research before making any trading or investment decisions

[AFNick]

I know a lot of you have asked about what recommended books you should read to learn more in depth about the content on this channel. I made a complete reading list freely available to subscribers who join the channels mailing list. To download the reading list, click on the link below.

[EngrCo]

Most people think of the guys in the first class section of the airplane as “the rich”. Real rich people aren’t even at the same airport.

[MrEdrftgyuji]

Old money benefits most from increased government spending. They own all the "preferred contractors" that automatically win every government contract.
High taxation also benefits them as it forces out their competition. High taxes make it near impossible to become wealthy.

[Edde]

The wealthy I've met actually play both sides... donating to everyone guarantees you get preferable treatment regardless of who wins or what party is in power.

[seanjazzguitar]

When you get rich, the easiest way to stay rich is by supporting big government programs and high taxes that kill your competition. They pull the ladder up behind them by supporting a progressive nanny state.

[TBiz]

Yep. It's called "pulling the ladder up after yourself." pretty underhanded stuff

[Spinach_D]

In 2008 while debating POTUS election with a group of military officers I heard a Belgian Colonel and Noble say something that at the time was so ridiculous I couldn’t help but remember it. “The ruling class will gladly pay higher tax if it means they don’t have to compete for capital”. After making my money I now understand 100%

[miamiman]

Old money is usually insulated from the consequences of the policies that they support.

[alarriag]

First, you don’t really know who all the “old money” actually are, just some of them. If there’s something they value a lot is privacy and anonymity. Second, “old money” is multi-generational money. And they only become so by being very pragmatic and knowledgeable of how the world works. In other words, political ideology for them is a tool, not an identity. They’ll support whatever they think works best for their interests. Liberal, Conservative, Capitalist, Anarchist, whatever.

[NiceChunkofWood]

Talking with a guy connected with a major shipping company in the 1980s.. He was leaving for a trip to the state Capitol to lobby on behalf of his company.. I was in my twenties, so I blurted out the stereotypical idea of big companies working with Republicans.

He surprised me by stating that his company actually supported Democrats because they implemented so many restrictions and costs to businesses that it kept out competition. His company had the money to maintain while newer upstarts who could do the same service cheaper were unable to do so because they were overwhelmed with regulations.

He described Democrats as standing in front of people with one hand in the air declaring their devotion to the common man and their willingness to protect them from the evil big businesses. But their other hand behind their back acquiring money and/or deals from big businesses to keep the little guys out if the game. 😮

[bramzwingli]

It basically boils down to the high and low against the middle because the middle is dangerous

[Spinach_D]

After becoming rich my politics changed to: if you want get rich vote Republican, if you want to stay rich vote democrat

[jukeman]

There is a psychological phenomenon where people are fine with having less if it means that the other person/the competition gets nothing.

Just thought that was relevant.

[daviddavidson]

It's incredibly infuriating to think about how much general progress for civilization as a whole has been delayed by the short-sighted and selfish interests of people who had enough wealth and power to gum up the works.

[clopezferrer]

Venezuelan here.
Leftists would be surprised to know that my country's socialist tyranny started thanks to the support of our traditional elites, including the richest families (the two largest media empires, international trade and financial moguls, among others).... and it was the highly educated middle class (which includes most intellectuals and professionals) who voted socialist revolutionaries into power. The poor didn't vote the revolution initially. Once it was in power, the story changed, but it was the elites who put them there.
During the last quarter of the 20th century, the once successful, rich and free-market supporting Venezuelan elite changed its position from Western ally to geopolitically "neutral", and chose to brace the government to make it a a sort of wall/barrier that would prevent both foreign and internal competition from gaining too much ground as it "weakened the national soveringty".
With the excuse of "developing the national industry", the government gave them hundreds of billions of cheap petrodollars through soft loans, preferential exchange rates, direct government contracts, etc. Later, when the government ran out of money, they simply made war against reformists and supported a strongman, Hugo Chavez, that would make everybody fall in line and allow them to keep their privileges, no matter the cost.
Things went wrong for them, though. Chavez betrayed them, he was a sleeper ally of local socialist extremists, Cuba and anti-western governments who used the 2000s oil bonanza to create a new, loyal economic upper-class to substitute these traditional elites of "foolish rich".
Even the wealthiest, like the country's richest family lost 90% of its assets despite moving to Miami in the early 2000s. Nowadays, most of those families are just wannabe-rich names with upper-middle class net values, living in wealthy countries.

[dzcav]

In free-market capitalism, there is unequal prosperity. In communism/socialism, there is equal misery (except for the elite, who always exempt themselves from their own rules).

[wigletron]

"Import people who will support the ruling class"
Explains why the border is wide open

[davidekow]

The most sinister thing is that they made most people believe there isn’t a class system because everybody has a credit card and can finance things.

[arpadkovacs]

Exactly. As a result, societies with low mobility don't get the fresh blood to move up to leadership positions. The old money ruling class becomes incompetent after the third generation and beyond. The system comes down like a house of cards.

[caustinolino]

They don't always support left. They support whichever party causes maximum distraction and infighting among the non aristocratic classes.