https://www.oftwominds.com/blogaug23/stratification8-23.html
He's not talking about Bill Gates and other billionaires; just what's left of the "upper middle class" (although that's not what he calls them). An excerpt:
I'm not discussing the tiny class of UHNWIs here, I'm discussing the 8 million households of the top 5% and the 13 million households of the top 10% who own 70% of all assets and almost 90% of income-producing assets such as stocks, bonds, rental properties, etc. Not the uber-wealthy or hyper-wealthy, just the wealthy who own a million or two in assets not counting their primary residence.
. . . But even the path of frugality is steeper now. The rent for even the crummiest studio is sky-high, used cars cost a small fortune and wages have stagnated for 45 years, a fact I've often noted in my blog posts. Even wages in construction have stagnated.
Adjusted for inflation / purchasing power, I made more money as a 23-year old carpenter/tradecraft worker in 1976 than I've ever made since. In other words, it took fewer hours of work in 1976 to pay for basic shelter, food, utilities and transport than it does now. (See chart below of wages share of the economy: it topped in 1975.)
When the economic stratification was less pronounced and less entrenched, you might have had a spectrum of neighbors. Now the wealthy only know other wealthy people, because no one who isn't wealthy can possibly buy a home in their exclusive enclaves or enter their social circles of people wealthy enough to donate to the arts or politics.
In the bubble of the wealthy, one hears about the travails of finding people to fix pool pumps, wealthy acquaintances who scored a beachfront rental for only $7,000 a month and endless stories of jetting around. One also hears strained efforts to show how frugal they are, as if scoring discounted airline flights is the sort of frugality that will eventually build up a down payment for an insanely over-valued house in their enclave.
Extreme stratification is now the norm globally. The barrier between those who inherited wealth or who had enough help to buy assets decades ago and those without parental wealth to help them now is impermeable. Even as younger generations lobby for more housing to be built, it's still unaffordable unless it's heavily subsidized.
Here are a few links describing aspects of this impermeable stratification:
New Grads Chasing 'TikTok Lifestyles' Struggle In NYC As Rents Surge
A Tale of Paradise, Parking Lots and My Mother's Berkeley Backyard (NYT.com) NIMBYs and YIMBYs--older wealthier residents don't want new multi-story housing to change their enclaves, younger people want more housing to (hopefully) lower rents.
Majority of flights taken by a small percentage of flyers
A bit of realism and humility are in order. Yes, we worked hard, but we're not wealthy because we're so brilliant or even because we're so frugal. We're wealthy because the global economy is structured to inflate asset bubbles. Those who bought or were given assets decades ago have benefited, those entering university and the workforce now cannot afford the same things we bought with average incomes without inheriting wealth from their families.
Those inside the bubble of wealth who only associate with other wealthy people don't seem to notice the social / financial stratification or its profoundly negative consequences. Perhaps they think this is how everyone lives, fretting about finding cheap laborers and cheap flights, or they discount their own wealth as merely "comfortable." Perhaps they think "since I'm doing great, everyone's doing great."
They have lost touch with those who didn't get to buy assets on the cheap, who didn't get their university education paid for by their family, who don't have an inheritance or a down payment provided by the Bank of Mom and Dad.
History suggests such a stratified society cannot endure as a democracy.
The words you quote are from Charles Hugh Smith, the author of the article.
I'm in a similar situation to what you describe, and my family too seem like "normal people with money." That's largely, I think, because we were well-off but far from wealthy in childhood; our parents were conservative and our father was a hard-working engineer who moved often for new career opportunities and earned enough that we lived in "slightly nice" neighborhoods but were expected to do chores, to get jobs in our mid-teens if not before, and so on. We weren't coddled, and our childhood friends mostly came from lower-to-middle class homes. Most of the other folk I know with money are similar: decent, "normal" people, not clueless rich people living in wealthy enclaves. Then again, we live far from any metro area and small-town values are still typical here.
EDIT: My wife and I lived in Southern California for awhile, and we did know people in THAT area who were a lot like what Charles Hugh Smith describes.