Let's say that any reasonable $60 game provides at least 20 hours of entertainment.
I've been playing N64 games with my friends since middle school. We still play semi-regularly, albeit now it's a drinking game. Some games (multiplayer mostly) provide much more than 80 hrs of fun. Examples: super smash brothers, mario kart, mario party, blitz.
Interactivity is simply more engaging (more fun) than passive entertainment.
First, you'd have to get a significant amount of the population off their asses
It pains me to say that would be a revolution in and of itself. Case in point: voter turnout in the US
In our hypothetical situation, you get 30% of American workers to stop going to work
In the Great Depression, unemployment was approximately 29%, so another depression could leave us in a similar state (this would also injure the corporations, decreasing their power and influence).
and money can indeed buy almost anything
How about Happiness? Loyalty? Obedience?
As we've seen numerous times (American Revolution, Indian Independence, Viet Nam, Afghanistan, and now Iraq), the underdog (both in terms of money and technology) can often give the "superior" faction a run for their money.
I'm not a historian, but I think when a group of people initiate a revolution, it is because the current state of affairs is unacceptable to them, and they are willing to do *anything* to change it. When that happens, the majority of long-term concern goes out the window.
...that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it
-The Declaration of Independence
personally, I'm for negative voting
No UAV is capable of fighting a mannned air craft and winning yet.
there, fixed that for you
Keep the number of passes in a compiler to a minimum. -- D. Gries