Of course it had meaning in part because of constant struggle between patrician and plebeian leaders. And plebeians often got upper hand. But the successful plebeians were usually affluent so it would support your position.
Now, do you think that XX century European model where your income is not so important in getting to the political office (you get state election funds and after victory the salary sufficient to make living) is worse or not better?
Now, do you think that XX century European model where your income is not so important in getting to the political office (you get state election funds and after victory the salary sufficient to make living) is worse or not better?
I don't live under the European system, but my gut impression is that it is more efficient at producing politicians, functionaries and bureaucrats than at producing statesmen. Managers that "run the program", rather than leaders who innovate. Not that we produce many either...